A Novel Bookstore
鈥淲ho should we see at the police to denounce attacks against literature?鈥 Such is the question that two bookstore owners—one an elegant heiress, the other a self-educated, solitary, bohemian bookseller—solemnly pose at the opening of French author Laurence Coss茅鈥檚 satirical biblio-thriller, A Novel Bookstore. Both avid and opinionated readers, Francesca Aldo-Valbelli and Ivan (Van) Georg embarked on an entirely idealistic enterprise—to open The Good Novel, 鈥渁 perfect bookstore, the kind where you鈥檇 sell nothing but good novels.鈥 Their inventory selection process was complex and clandestine: a panel of eight unidentified novelists—each with their own code name, such as 鈥淨uinoa鈥 and 鈥淪trait-laced,鈥 or 鈥淭he Red鈥 and 鈥淕reen Pea鈥—would generate lists of titles to be stocked. Books on hand would be old and new, from countries worldwide. However, The Good Novel would not fall prey to current publishing trends, and would not depend on forthcoming novels or best sellers—鈥渂ooks not worth bothering with鈥—to make a profit.
The Good Novel had a fabulous debut, but its unfettered success was not to last. Shortly after its opening, the store faced a sudden onslaught of attacks. Vitriolic opinion pieces declaring the store鈥檚 mission to sell only good books as 鈥渢otalitarian鈥 were published in newspapers. Malicious customers arrived in hordes, ordering Danielle Steele books they never planned to pay for. Most shocking, three of the members of the secret selection committee were not only identified, but violently attacked by mysterious strangers who pointedly taunted them: 鈥淚t鈥檚 like being in a bad crime novel, huh. . . . ? With vulgar characters and a stupid plot . . . So this isn鈥檛 a good novel, huh?鈥
While the novel flirts with the mystery genre, it ultimately defies such classification. Starting much like a thriller, A Novel Bookstore quickly steps back, exploring—in great detail—Francesca and Van鈥檚 first meeting, their histories, and their debates on everything from Pierre Michon to whether the store鈥檚 inventory should be organized alphabetically, chronologically, or geographically (they opt for combination of the three). Coss茅 also playfully manipulates the narration, starting the story in third person, and then revealing an unnamed first person narrator who is actually a character in the story as well.
Each character is precisely articulated, with personalized quirks and gestures and even wardrobes. Coss茅 observes the smallest details—such as a hole in the elbow of a favorite sweater—and imbues them with meaning. These characterizations, combined with such explicit details about preparations to open the bookstore, immerse one in a world that feels entirely real. The thriller aspect of the novel falls to the wayside, with its eventual explanation feeling almost irrelevant to the real meat of the book. Reveling in minutia, occasionally overwrought declarations of literary superiority (Cormac McCarthy is consistently touted the greatest living writer), and piquant asides on the state of literary criticism in France, Coss茅 seems to have created an ideal shaggy dog story: it鈥檚 not really a matter of what 鈥渉appens鈥 or doesn鈥檛, as the case may be, but simply immersing oneself among these characters.
As the novel progresses, however, this verisimilitude gives way to a much more fictional fiction—a plot-driven, theatrical d茅nouement that feels strangely out of step with the rest of the novel. Suspicions that The Good Novel is the victim of a greater 鈥渃onspiracy鈥—wrought by members of the greater (very cynical) literary community—are actually well founded. And as the trials and tribulations faced by the bookstore and its denizens become more and more dramatic and outlandish, so do the characters鈥 responses. 鈥淲ith all due allowance, something happened here that is comparable to what happened with Al Qaeda and its consequences,鈥 the policeman investigating The Good Novel attacks remarks.
It seems clear that the dramatic shift in tone at the end of the novel is intended to symbolically illustrate Coss茅鈥檚 pet moral: that mainstream society only has a literary appetite for banal bestsellers, and that 鈥渓azy and frivolous鈥 critics and journalists are in great part to blame for this mediocre taste.鈥淭hey heap praise on books that are nothing but fluff, and in the rush they overlook real jewels,鈥 we鈥檙e told. But maybe there is a bit of a wink in the self-righteous exclamations of the downtrodden booksellers. Coss茅 is, after all, a journalist herself. In the end, perhaps the greatest strength of A Novel Bookstore is to simply compel readers to consider their own literary preferences more consciously. For as Van says, 鈥渙ne of the most fortunate purposes of literature is to bring like-minded people together and get them talking.鈥

Leave a Reply