Dave Eggers uses unusual formatting tactics to present his memoir, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, including a lengthy introduction and acknowledgments section, inauthentic dialogue, personal comments, and even an unconventional copyright page. The deviation from expected norms in the memoir genre can also be highlighted through Eggers' tone as a narrator. Although the book focuses on tragedy, loss, and grief, it is often funny, uplifting, sarcastic, and disturbingly light. This unexpected twist from what one might assume would be a dark, twisted and depressing piece of literature brings much-needed authenticity to the story, revealing the truth behind often fetishized tragedies like the orphanage. The way Eggers constructs his harrowing work of staggering genius is, indeed, brilliant and lends itself quite well to the content; Unconventional forms of writing may be the only correct way to write as intended, that is, authentically, about tragically heartbreaking events. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Eggers' book can be divided into two "books," according to Elise Miller, which consist of "an autobiographical narrative about unbearable suffering and a book of critical commentary, a psychoanalysis, as it were, of the particular challenges of writing a memoir of catastrophic loss and trauma” (Miller 985-986). This division of form leads Eggers to comment on himself, leading him to self-reflection to the greatest extent guard] from the pitfalls of sincerity and authenticity in personal narrative” (Smith et. al.). The connection between reader and author becomes intimate, due to the way in which information and emotions are shared that “the. incredible diversity of self-reflexive literature […] offers rich ways of thinking about human emotional experience as a personal, social, and political phenomenon” (Abstract). This human experience is understood both separately from Eggers's overall narrative and in coexistence with it, something that some critics argue it shouldn't be done. Polvinen, however, supports the combination of the two narratives. Polvinen argues that fiction should be understood both critically and emotionally at the same time, arguing that these two reading methods can be used in conversation with each other. “In the case of fiction, the idea of ​​imaginatively and emotionally immersing ourselves in an imaginary world involves an internal perspective that changes to an external one as soon as we consider the fiction as an artifact” (Polvinen 166). In Eggers' work, this method is useful for distinguishing Eggers' meaning in both narratives: his story of events and his commentary on himself, or the external and internal narratives. It is imperative to consider Eggers' two narratives, as intended by the author, simultaneously; Dave Eggers makes his intentions for this novel incredibly clear in every aspect, outlining reading guidelines in the book's preface and displaying control-freak tendencies throughout the memoir, so a close read without considering intentionality and emotion is doing a disservice to the book and its contents. form. Eggers' form between his two narratives also shows his vulnerability. While her main story, about the tragedy of her parents' death and her way of dealing with it, shows authenticity, grit and perhaps exhibitionist tendencies, her metanarrative covers all the places she might have exposed, building a shield around herself with her commentspersonal and rebuttals. Eggers writes for several reasons beyond releasing and covering his vulnerability, and his form exemplifies them all. He writes fast and furiously, with little editing, to “spit out” his pain and avoid the dyspepsia of holding back emotions (Eggers 210); he writes to save himself. This sometimes leads to revealing an excess of information, showing the public much of his personal life - and that of his close relatives and friends. After that, however, his metanarrative comes into play in similar ways in which he covers up his vulnerability; metafictional works to eliminate the guilt that Eggers may feel for having exposed the lives of himself and his family; while his writing works to objectify his experiences to help him cope (Miller 987), it also works to demonstrate to his audience that he is compassionate, or at least worthy of sympathy or understanding. Eggers is extremely defensive of his writing and the purposes of writing; examples of this can be seen in Eggers' MTV interview section (Eggers 214-217), in the unreal dialogues with Toph and John (Eggers 272-275, 315-219), and in other instances where Eggers anticipates the negative reactions of readers and attacks them first can develop further. It seems that the metanarrative is created almost entirely for the purpose of proving Eggers' innocence to his audience. The self-aware nature of Eggers' voice speaks a truth about the writing and publishing process that cannot be seen if the metafiction is not included. , creating realistic relatability allows for an emotional connection with readers. Baer highlights this somewhat, stating, “Perhaps the most obvious way in which self-conscious narrative reflects on emotional experience is found in its emphasis on the presence, roles, and interactions of narrator and audience” (Baer 17). This interaction is essential to full understanding and immersion in any story; for this reason, the public feels included and respected. According to Brian Stonehill, “By recognizing what they are, mindful novels show honesty and respect for the reader's intelligence, which novels that pretend to be life itself do not. There is therefore an alienation of the reader from the action of the novel on one level [...] while on another level the reader, being made aware of his role as listener in front of a narrator, is attracted by a stronger bond than intimacy. " (Baer 16). Dave Eggers demonstrates his authorial skill by showing his understanding of this element and using it to its fullest extent. Eggers' structure and form, including metafiction, have often been misunderstood, according to Baer. “The misunderstanding of metafiction as unnecessarily complex and obscure reflects the way in which the category has often been misunderstood and dismissed” (Baer 4). world's largest and most important, but this is not always the case. "Although some critics may argue that an 'obsession' with interiority indicates a narcissism disengaged from broader social conditions, a look at the metafictional works selected for this project indicates that self-reflexive literature can be, and often is, a means by which readers can further recognize the relationships that exist not only between fiction and empirical experience, but also between the individual and the social, the emotional and the cognitive” ( Baer 17). Indeed, the self-referential metanarrative of Eggers' memoir highlights great significance. According to Baer, ​​self-awareness in fiction often harks back to significant historical moments, as that is when this pattern in writing often emerges over time (6). As a postmodern style, writingself-referential draws attention to world events through a unique perspective, drawing information about the outside within. “Metafiction […], by drawing attention to human experience, social and personal, engages in questions about how we make sense of those experiences, especially through affect” (Baer 7). Eggers heavily uses his unique perspective to comment on 1990s American culture, parenting and social climate, and family issues. As Carusi says, “The reader comes to know Eggers not for the events he experienced but for the way he constructs those events through his narrative” (3). Without the subjective inclusion of his present self in the writing one would have a much less personal view of a highly personal situation. This personal meaning has an effect on the reader, but the author also draws certain results from this element. The affective nature of Eggers' story carries as much weight as many other pieces in the genre of grief literature. Dawn Carusi does interesting research on orphan narrators in her “Narratives of Orphaned Adults: Journey to Restoration.” She suggests that particular forms are consistent across stories of grief, like Eggers', as the balance between guilt and innocence. She provides an interesting perspective regarding Eggers and the climate of loss, providing examples from her work to demonstrate her role in grief. “Eggers is applauded for his painfully honest account of the mistakes he makes in caring for and grieving his parents. The ironic and conscious forms of his writings work by allowing him to share the most unpleasant details of his story", says Carusi, "it has a function that goes beyond its aesthetics. Eggers (2001) writes that putting aside this narrative is a tool to stop time, collapse time, reclaim one's self-worth, exploit and exalt one's parents. Eggers, like all of us, builds his world through the story he tells” (Carusi 2-3). Carusi explains many of the peculiarities of Eggers' writing through his explanation of grief writing and its patterns. First, Carusi argues that Eggers writes because, “Without the opportunity to reveal himself and create a story, the aspiring storyteller may suffer from a lack of catharsis” (7). While this is true, and Eggers appears to use his memoirs as an outlet for grief and closure, there are myriad other reasons Eggers writes, including commemorating his parents, creating a new order and meaning ( Carusi addresses this: “An individual's story provides a method for bringing order among the disordered characters, events, and central incidents in an interrupted experience” (Carusi 34).), and saving oneself from dyspepsia. Miller argues, “if he wants to avoid his mother's fate, Eggers must use writing as a way to release the aggression, guilt, and revulsion he avoids digesting” (998). Carusi sheds light on the idea of ​​saving oneself through storytelling, as Eggers does; according to her, it's a fairly common need of orphan narrators. “For many adult children, the role of caregiver is fraught with anxiety. Since death is inevitable, the child in his care is destined to fail in one sense or another” (Carusi 77). This sense of doom must be overcome somehow, and thus becomes embedded in the need for self-preservation. “Narrators see illness as something to be overcome,” if not by parents, then at least by themselves, “so that the body can be restored to its original condition” (Carusi 34). However, Carusi does not consider the need to commemorate the deceased and, instead, arguably groups Eggers into the category of those experiencing complicated grief, as defined by Carusi: “TheComplicated grief can occur when certain high-risk factors are present in the grieving person's experience. with loss […] in all forms of complicated grief, there are attempts to do two things: 1) deny, repress or avoid aspects of the loss, its grief and the full realization of its implications for the bereaved person, and 2) hold and avoid abandoning the lost loved one" (Carusi 17). These two passages can be interpreted in Eggers' form in different ways. They can be seen as related to the two “books” or narratives of Eggers' memoirs, linking the maintenance of the primary narrative and the avoidance of loss with the metanarrative. They can also be considered in Eggers' own story, starting with avoidance and denial and ending with holding back or acknowledging the lasting importance of his parents, particularly in the last scene where Eggers scatters his mother's ashes. While Carusi makes valid points regarding Eggers and orphan fiction, there remain several holes that distinguish Eggers from the canon, demonstrating its uniqueness in style, form, and intention. Eggers displays a desire for celebrity and fame throughout his memoir, from the compliments he gives himself ("Can I sing or what" (48)?) to his desire to be on The Real World ("Of course I wanted to be invited to do audition, I wanted them to see everything there is to see in me […]" (183)) with every important, self-referential comment he makes about himself. His self-importance, or desire, plays hugely into the shape of his narrative, taking over the metanarrative and the course of major events, circling the organization of the story around the parts of his life that could lead to eminence . and reproachful, as well as the popular culture of the nineties, of which he claims to be well informed. He makes sure to teach Toph important cultural knowledge of the time, explaining, "Though he has often been resistant - children so rarely know what is good for them - I have taught him to appreciate all the innovative musicians of our time" (Eggers 49). Although this self-assertion and arrogance of cultural superiority may seem unpleasant, Carusi argues that “people tend to identify with their cultural background during life crises more than at any other time” (19). According to her, “culture shapes what and how we feel, as well as how we communicate what and how we feel […] socially constructed notions of appropriate emotions determine our expression of those emotions” (21). This may explain Eggers' intention to drown Toph - and himself - with music, quips, and quips rather than complete grief and despair. Eggers' reaction to his parents' death is entirely appropriate given the situation he finds himself in as his brother's guardian. He attempts to provide normality through the culture he knows, abandoning his needs and becoming what Carusi calls a "disenfranchised grier" (7). It is because of Eggers' role as a "disenfranchised griever" that some of his reactions may actually seem inappropriate. to the reader, and why Eggers might feel the need to include his own metanarrative to defend himself from this lashing. Eggers finds himself in a difficult position “because we construct the loss of a parent as an experience of low grief” (Carusi 7). Eggers is expected to carry on appropriately, as an adult in the position of raising a child, yet he is still in his early twenties, a child at heart and an infant in the real world, and he is also expected to cry heavily. He has no choice but to choose his own path, first burying his pain in the writing seen in his book, AHeartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, due to the lack of another grieving mechanism and chained to the facade he must put on for Toph, then finally properly commemorating his parents, through the completion of writing and eventual publication of his book, as well as finally commemorating his mother with her ashes. These roles help divide the memoir into the two halves that are constructed, creating a messy breakdown of sometimes polarizing, sometimes harmonizing sides. Says Smith et. al., "Eggers is acutely aware that the contradictions of his multiple identities pose a dilemma for the orderly journalist." Eggers' goal is not to create a perfectly organized memoir; according to Miller, Eggers even refrained from editing the book in many places. However, the way Eggers organizes the memoir tells of his purposes and the effects they have on his and the reader's psyche. Eggers is awkward but courageous, risk-taking but tired, a control freak but a disorganized mess; these opposing sides should not surprise the reader, especially when observing the grieving process of the author writing the book. Eggers' bizarre and eccentric approach to the subject is what gives him popularity, celebrity and attention, which he seems to crave, rather than submit to the reign of the "Anonymous". Memorial number 4001." However, not only this forms him gives interest; he also achieves his goal of adequately commemorating his parents and the events of his life through realistic events. His parents are not put on a pedestal, because this would be an inauthentic homage to their memories at arm's length and carefully examined, preserved through every wrinkled collar and missing belt loop, as well as every perfect detail; indeed, Eggers examines himself and his construction of this narrative in the same way, carefully commenting on his own place in the narrative, even when held aloft, in “earned” fanfare; this only points to his sincere and arrogant shortcomings. Eggers states that [the author] intends to be clearly, obviously aware of his own self-consciousness of self-referentiality. Furthermore, he is fully aware, far ahead of you, in terms of knowledge and full admission of the gimmicks inherent in all of this, and will preempt your claim of the book's irrelevance due to said gimmicks by saying that the gimmick is simply a gimmick , a defense, to obscure the black, blinding, murderous rage and pain at the heart of this whole story, which is at once too black and blinding to look at – avert…your…eyes! – but nevertheless useful, at least for the author, even in a caricatured or condensed form, because telling it to as many people as possible helps, according to him, to dilute the pain and bitterness and therefore facilitate its elimination from his soul […] (Eggers Acknowledgments). Demonstrating his cunning and intelligence, Eggers pushes the reader into whatever interpretation they may wish to take. He admits his ultimate goals in writing and the ultimate themes of loss and sadness, and yet also demonstrates the usefulness of lighter "gimmicks" as a defense, both for Eggers and the reader. Yet this is where Eggers and I differ. The term “gimmick” doesn't seem to fit the device used at all. It's an appropriate and well-used narrative structure that protects, yes, but also helps get at the truth of the narrative. There is more truth in shadows than just darkness, because shadows are cast by light. Eggers finds pieces of light and puts them together, just enough to cast shadows over the necessary events. To understand the shadows and darkness, the reader must.