I started this book really wanting to like it. From the jacket blurbs it looked like a book right up my alley (creative non-fiction.) Brothers&Keepers seemed like a book where the author had stretched the limits of creative nonfiction -- brought in different perspectives, used different voices, used different narrators. Overall, for me though, the book did not work. Ironically, I don't like the book for the very reason I was attracted to it. I think he went to far in adding new techniques and tricks at the expense of the story I thought he was trying to tell.
Wideman covers just about every possible combination of voice, tense, point of view, and narration. One of the old "rules" of fiction was to keep POV changes to a minimum. This is supposed to help the reader identify with a character and not have to reorient himself or herself and thus "fall out of the story." Likewise, the rules of writing discourage tense changes, hoping to keep a supple continuum going in the reader's mind. But in this book, Wideman wanders all over the place, sometimes shifting three or four times within the same page. (see page 8). Although I admire Wideman for trying this, for me as a reader, breaking the rules had exactly the effect the rulemakers fear -- I fell out of the story and became confused, disoriented, and disinterested.
But If You Must Do It, DO It.
To compound this problem, Wideman makes one more mistake in shifting realities. He doesn't keep it up. The first chapter of the book makes it seem as though we are going to get a heck of a ride, running all over the place looking for the truth. But in the last two sections, Wideman seems to fall into a reporter's notebook and never come out. Granted we do get to see Robby's words both printed and spoken, but the mishmash of thought, opinion, different tenses and voices is much quieter as the book drones on.
Many times it felt like he was showing off the fact that he was breaking the rules, rather than breaking the rules in order to tell a story that could not be told any other way. This may be because he is an academic, a professor who discusses the structure of literature all day long. He might feel a certain obligation to approach his writing from a litcrit perspective and deliberately do things in his writing that would make for good English papers.