Fight ClubPosted by John Woodington on May 17th, 2010
I finished reading Fight Club not long ago, and thought I’d share a few brief words about it here. I liked the style of the writing for the fact that I could read it very fast. I flew through this book. I didn’t like the writing style because I felt it lacked a certain depth. The prose was strong (fierce, some would say) and the descriptions were overly vivid. What really made me happy about this book was the little afterward chapter at the end, where Chuck talks about how he first wrote Fight Club as a short story while wallowing through a boring day at work. He doe say something in this little afterward, however, that I don’t agree with.
“The whole idea of a fight club wasn’t important. It was arbitrary. But the eight rules had to apply to something, so why not a club where you could ask someone to fight? The way you’d ask for a dance at a disco. The fighting wasn’t the important part of the story. What I needed were the rules….It could’ve been ‘Barn-Raising Club’ or ‘Golf Club’ and it would’ve probably sold a lot more books.” (emphasis is Palahniuk’s)
I think that’s a bunch of bull. I know I wouldn’t have felt the deeper, animal attachment that I did to a fight club scenario if that scenario were changed to a barn-raising scenario. Yes, the rules of fight club were important for Palahniuk in structuring the novel, but I think he would’ve lost a lot of emphasis within the narrative had he used a subject for his club other than fighting. Part of the whole reading of the story is discovering the emasculation of the modern man, of which the main character is the culmination: he lives in an apartment completely furnished by IKEA, and his life is so boring that he can’t distinguish one day from the next, and develops insomnia to the point that his personality splits into himself while he is awake, and his alter ego, Tyler Durden, when he is asleep.
Tyler, of course, is the opposite. Completely masculine, a fighting, screwing machine. He is everything that the main character is not, and is therefore a perfect foil. Hard to think of a perfect foil for the modern, emasculated male as someone who invents barn-raising club. Fighting is a great subject for this novel because there really is no need to fight hand to hand anymore. If someone punches you, you call the cops. If you punch someone, they call the cops and you go to jail for assault. But in Fight Club, two people agree to a fight, and they slug it out, and they get beat up, and they feel much better for it. Every guy wonders how he’d do in a fist fight. I’ve never been in one (that I recall) but I could see how this would be very revealing of your own character. Would you give up easily? Could you take a beating? Could you dish out a beating? Would you cry like a little girl? We all like to think we could throw down if need be, but there never be a need, matey. Not in the present day. Building a society of underground fighting is the perfect way to convey this lost masculinity, and Palahniuk does it well.
The fighting’s the main ingredient for the subtext of the novel, I say. The rules provide the bones, but the fighting provides all that bloody meat. That’s what we’re left chewing on when we’re done reading Fight Club, not the bones, but the beat up, black and blue, hole-in-the-cheek, open wounds, missing teeth, wet-gum-sockets meat.