The Societal Love for Trauma
TW: abuse, self-harm
Spoilers for A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara
What makes a “good” book?
Is it the ones that are beautifully written? Is it the ones that leave the readers with a lingering thought? One might argue that a good book is one that leaves you with an overwhelming emotion.
In the case of the 2015 bestselling novel A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara, many critics and readers raved about the tragic story and its impact on its audience. To anyone who has or had interest in modern literature, this title is not an unfamiliar one. As a winner of the Kirkus Prize and finalist for the National Book Award and the Man Booker Prize, A Little Life recently reemerged as one of the most recommended and popularised books on platforms like Bookstagram and Booktok. With its great popularity, one stands to wonder what makes this book so appealing to its readers.
At first glance, this book appears to be a typical coming of age novel, described on Goodreads as a story about four college classmates moving to New York full of "friendship and ambition." But its reviews and long list of trigger warnings says otherwise.
While the book is indeed about friendship, another central–perhaps more engrossing–theme is abuse. Even with its long list of trigger warnings that include sexual abuse, child abuse, verbal abuse, psychological manipulation, kidnapping/imprisonment, self-harm, violence, drug usage, and addiction, it fails to properly warn readers what they are heading into.
Within its 814 pages, Jude St. Francis, the central protagonist, goes through an unimaginable amount of trauma. In an interview, Hanya Yanagihara explains that she wanted to explore “a character who never gets better” and a plot that had “an exaggeration of everything… of pity, of horror… everything turned up a little too high.” She continues, expanding on how the book had become a “parable of adulthood” which she describes as: “In the end you are really left on your own. If you look at the friends who come in and out of Jude’s life and how they are not able to really save him–that part is, I think, an accurate reflection of my adult life, and no doubt of a lot of people’s.”
In another interview, Yanagihara expands on the book’s message. She clarifies how the idea “that there is a level of trauma from which a person simply can’t recover” fascinated her to write this book. Reflecting on this idea, Yanagihara wrote an “inevitable” tragic end to her protagonist, claiming Jude was “too damaged to ever truly be repaired”.
While the depressive plot is most frequently mentioned when recommended, it isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. To Daniel Mendelsohn, a literary critic from New York Review of Books, the abuse Jude goes through is “neither from just a human point of view nor necessary from an artistic one.” He posits how the “preposterous excess of humiliation and suffering[...]dupe[s]” the readers while also defying verisimilitude. He extends his argument, contending how Yanagihara’s extreme depiction of trauma, addiction, and abuse is “crude and inartistic way of wringing emotion from the reader,” and even has “an assaultive repetitiveness.”
Mendelsohn isn’t the only one who felt this way. Parul Sehgal, another literary critic located in New York, describes this book to be an example of “trauma plot” which utilises a traumatic backstory as plot or a narrative. She elucidates how while emotionally impactful the bits of self-harm and abuse may be at first, “[by] the 600th time, you wish he would aim.” She finishes her review with this statement: “This is not sadism; it is closer to Muncahusen by proxy.”
That still leaves the question why this book is so popular. Is Jude’s tragic end what makes the book so adored? Is the feeling of despair that the reader is left with when he finally dies what makes them so enthralled with this story? If so, what does this say about society as a whole? Why do so many of us relate to this depressive message?
Perhaps readers are not attracted to this book because of the sadness it evokes, but because it reflects what the society currently desires: pain. One might strongly disagree with this statement; how can one possibly desire pain? But societal trends might prove otherwise.
With mental illness becoming less of a taboo topic, a side effect of this overdue recognition is the glorification of mental illness and trauma. The utilisation of these qualities as plot devices or shock factor in different content increased along with awareness. Without proper recognition of the significance of mental illnesses and trauma, the representation of these issues often lacked the proper reflection of its wide range and its repercussions. Terms such as PTSD, ADHD, anxiety, depression, or OCD began being generalised to a specific image or “trend” that lacked its actual depth.
Mendelsohn connects this trend best with A Little Life. He describes how the novel “reveals itself as a very twenty-first century tale indeed: abuse, victimisation, self-loathing, generalised sense of helplessness, and acute anxiety [that] have become the norm.” He references an article from Chronicle of Higher Education, explaining, “Young people are increasingly encouraged to see themselves not as agents in life but as potential victims: of their dates, their roommates, their professors, of institutions and history in general… To such readers, the ugliness of this author’s subject must bring a kind of pleasure, confirming their pre-existing view of the world as a site of victimisation and little else.” While the book itself may not glorify pain or trauma, the societal responses certainly have. Many exploit the fact that these topics of mental illnesses and trauma are “trending” and “desired” to recommend this book to a wider audience.
A Little Life is not the only example of this tactic. Shows like Euphoria glamorise drug usage although its content still depict the harsh realities of it while Riverdale fully neglects the repercussions of drug usage.
But hold onto your matches and pitchforks because although problematic, this doesn’t mean we should go burning books and censoring media. As Dr. John Briere, an associate professor of psychiatry and psychology at the University of Southern California and director of the Psychological Trauma Program, stated, ''Trauma is a huge issue in society right now, and no doubt it is sometimes misapplied or overused.. [but] it is a valid cultural response to a profound sense of insecurity in our society, as well as representing a growing awareness of the real effects of violence on its victims.'' It would be impossible to stop all future glorification of these topics. But it is possible to recognise the issue and bring awareness to the truth. And perhaps then we can finally let go of our love for trauma.