Though I have appreciated learning about the
underground economy in Off the Books
so far and believe that Sudhir Venkatesh is a good writer technically, I have
been frustrated by his chapters because they feel unnecessarily long. In “Home
at Work”, for example, the author introduces a lot of information about the
daily trials of women in Maquis Park and the greater structure and mechanisms
of illicit economics in the area, but he frequently restates points that he has
previously made, as if he does not trust his readers to understand their significance
initially. Examples of this that stand out to me are his periodic repetitions
of the fairly obvious facts that women in Maquis Park usually have to supplement
their legal incomes with illegal earnings to make ends meet and that certain underground jobs, like prostitution,
are more dangerous than others.
As
I neared the end of the chapter, however, I began to wonder whether or not
these repetitions were conscious stylistic choices on Venkatesh’s part. They
reflect the intractability of the problems these women face in Maquis Park, and
the fact that no matter how many times they make money from illegal activities,
they never earn enough to achieve lasting financial stability. Has anyone else
observed a technique that Venkatesh may be using to make the struggles of his
subjects more impactful to readers?
Logan, I could not agree with you more. While trying to get through the first thirty pages alone, I also noticed what seemed to be unnecessary repetition. Venkatesh first defines licit and illicit for us on pages 8 and 9, which he needed to do. However, the fact that the words are mentioned and partially reexplained on pages 10, 13, 25, and 26 just seems excessive. The people described in this book are some of the most interesting that we have read about, yet it feels like they would be easier to identify with if Venkatesh would revise this technique and let the stories speak for themselves a little more.
ReplyDeleteYour observation about the "intractability of the problems" the women face is plausible, even if neither of us particularly enjoy it. A technique that the author may be using is a sort of push and pull. He will alternate (relatively) positive and negative comments on the lives of those in Maquis Park from paragraph to paragraph, probably to come off as unbiased as well as to make sure we see the humanity in what is clearly a difficult way of life. As soon as we are tempted to make a character judgment, Venkatesh reminds us that these women are nurturing mothers just as dedicated as any suburban soccer mom.