To be sure, I found the book to be highly personal from Rosales’s perspective. If the introduction is to be believed (my knowledge of Rosales comes from that and the brief information from New Directions), the narrator of The Halfway House was a standin for Rosales, who not only was disillusioned by the Cuban Revolution but also spent quite a bit of time in halfway houses. I do believe this book is an introspective.

However, I think the structure lends itself to a broader perspective too. It seemed that Rosales is casting this character as a type of casualty of the revolution. He’s not dead, but he feels dead. At first inspired by the ideas of the revolution, this character joined only to be warped by it. In that regard, I don’t think it is limited to Cuba’s revolution. Here is a type that is inspired by an idea which eventually consumes the very things the idea was supposed to bring about. In pursuing the idea, this type justifies actions that destroy not only the basis for the idea (the state of being the ideal was supposed to usher in) but also the type’s very nature, leaving only a shell of a human being who observes the utter destruction of society rather than the raising up. And, as showcased here, the individual finds himself or herself (another reason I don’t think it was meant to be entirely personal is the inclusion of Frances) complicit in the scheme, the pursuit of which led to his destruction as a human being.

I can see where my answer here can still be personal to several individuals and might not speak to a greater societal connection. But I think a society living under such a crushing realization and then under the totalitarian fist can also feel empty and hopeless. Certainly I can see, at the very least, a sense of submission not only to the regime but also to the inner-violence it fostered.

This may be a cop-out answer, but at this time of night, it’s all I’ve got! It’s more of an off-the-cuff defense than a well thought-out idea. I’d love to elaborate more and perhaps could do so better in a dialogue with other readers who can bat some of these issues around. I’d love to see where this takes us and our interpretation of The Halfway House.

I also have a problem with rave reviews because of their potential to really change the reading situation. When I read it, no one had said it was good, and I’m sure some of the joy I had in it was the joy of it exceeding what I expected.

Still, I very much enjoyed this book. Even thinking back on it now I find myself a bit amazed at how well I thought it was realized.

By the way, yesterday I began the first volume of Your Face Tomorrow. I find it strange that I enjoyed the lengthy discussion on telling and keeping silent. I also see what you mean that I might have to stop in a few pages to think about what I’m digging into.