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 be detected even through Eggers' tone as narrator. Although the book focuses on tragedy, loss, and grief, it is often funny, uplifting, sarcastic, and disturbingly light-hearted. This unexpected twist from what one might think is a dark, twisted, and depressing piece of literature brings a much-needed authenticity to the story, revealing the truth behind often fetishized tragedies like the orphanage. The way in which Eggers constructs his heartbreaking work of astonishing genius is, in fact, brilliant and lends itself quite well to the content; Unconventional forms of writing may be the only appropriate way to write as intended, that is, authentically, about tragic and heartbreaking events. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned"? Get the original essay Eggers' book can be divided into two "books", according to Elise Miller, which consist of "an autobiographical account of unbearable suffering, and a book of critical commentary, a psychoanalysis, as it were, of the particular challenges of writing a memoir about catastrophic loss and trauma” (Miller 985-986). This division of form leads Eggers into a commentary with himself, leading to a self-reflection at the highest point. This self-reflection “both [draws] readers in and [warns] of the pitfalls of sincerity and authenticity in personal narrative” (Smith et. al.). The connection between reader and author becomes intimate, through the way information and emotions are shared. Baer argues that “the incredible diversity of self-reflective 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 and in coexistence with Eggers' overall narrative, something some critics argue should not be done. Polvinen, however, advocates the combination of the two narratives. Polvinen argues that fiction must be understood both critically and emotionally, arguing that these two methods of reading can be used in conversation with each other. “In the case of fiction, the idea of ​​immersing ourselves imaginatively and emotionally in a fictional world involves an internal perspective that transforms into an external perspective as soon as we view the fiction as an artifact” (Polvinen 166). In Eggers' work, this method is useful for distinguishing Eggers' meaning in the two narratives – his account of events and his commentary on himself, or the external and internal narratives. It is imperative to consider Eggers' two stories at the same time, as the author intends; Dave Eggers makes his intentions for this novel incredibly clear in every aspect, establishing guidelines for reading in the book's preface and displaying control freak-like tendencies throughout the memoir, such close reading without considering the he intentionality and emotion does a disservice to the book and its The form of Eggers between his two stories also shows his vulnerability. While his main story, about the tragedy of his parents' death and how he copes with it, shows authenticity, seriousness and perhaps trendsexhibitionists, his metanarrative covers all the places he could have exposed, building a shield around himself from his personal comments and rebuttals. Eggers writes for several reasons besides releasing and covering one's vulnerability and his form illustrates them all. He writes fast and furious, with little editing, in order to “spit out” his pain to avoid the dyspepsia of keeping his emotions inside (Eggers 210); he writes to save himself. This sometimes leads to revealing too much information, showing the public much of his personal life – as well as that of his close family and friends. After that, however, his meta-narrative comes into play in the same way by covering his vulnerability; the metanarrative aims to eliminate the guilt Eggers may feel for exposing his life and that of his family; while his writing aims to objectify his experiences to help him cope (Miller 987), it also serves to prove to his audience that he is compassionate, or at least worthy of sympathy or understanding. Eggers is extremely defensive about his writing and the purposes of his writing; examples of this can be seen in Eggers' interview section on MTV (Eggers 214-217), in the unreal dialogues with Toph and John (Eggers 272-275, 315-219) and in other instances in which Eggers anticipates negative reader reactions and attacks them before they can develop further. It seems that the meta-narrative was 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 meta-narrative is not included. , creating realistic relatability allows for an emotional connection with readers. Baer emphasizes this a bit, saying: "Perhaps the most obvious way in which self-aware storytelling reflects on emotional experience is in its emphasis on the presence, roles, and interactions of storyteller and audience » (Baer 17). This interaction is essential for complete understanding and immersion in any story; thanks to this, the public feels included and respected. According to Brian Stonehill, "By recognizing what they are, self-aware novels show an honesty and respect for the reader's intelligence that novels that pretend to be life itself do not." There is thus at a certain level an alienation of the reader in relation to the action of the novel [...] while at another level the reader, by becoming aware of his role as listener to the storyteller, is drawn into a stronger bond of intimacy. » (Baer 16). Dave Eggers demonstrates his prowess as an author by showing his understanding of this element and using it to its fullest extent. Eggers' structure and form, including metanarrative, have often been misunderstood, according to Baer. “The misunderstanding that metafiction is unnecessarily complex and obscure reflects the way in which this category has often been misunderstood and dismissed” (Baer 4). The inward-looking nature of works like Eggers' may seem trivial to some critics, distracting from larger, more important global issues, but this is not always the case. "While 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 medium through Readers will thus be able to 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). In fact, the self-referential metanarrative of Eggers' memoir is of great importance. According to Baer,self-awareness in narrative often points to significant historical moments, because that is when this pattern of writing often emerges in time (6). As a postmodern style, self-referential writing draws attention to world events through a unique perspective, calling within oneself for information about the outside. “Metafiction […], by drawing attention to human experience, social and personal, engages with questions about how we make sense of these experiences, particularly through affect” (Baer 7 ). Eggers uses his unique perspective extensively to comment on 1990s American culture, parental and social climate, and his family issues. As Carusi says: "The reader knows Eggers not for the events he experienced but for the way he constructs these events through his narrative" (3). Without subjective insertions of one's present self in the writing, one would have a much less personal vision of a highly personal situation. This personal meaning has an effect on the reader, but the author also derives certain results from this element. The emotional nature of Eggers' story carries the same weight as that of many other pieces in the genre of grief literature. Dawn Carusi does some interesting research on orphan storytellers in her “Narratives of Orphaned Adults: Journey to Restoration.” She suggests that particular forms are consistent among stories of grief, like Eggers', such as the balance between guilt and innocence. She offers an interesting perspective on Eggers and the climate of loss, providing examples from her own work to prove its role in grief. “Eggers is applauded for the painfully honest account of the mistakes he makes in caring for and grieving the loss of his parents. The self-consciously ironic forms of his writing work by allowing him to share the most unsavory details of his story,” Carusi asserts, “they serve a function beyond his aesthetic. Eggers (2001) writes that putting this narrative into writing is a tool to stop time, collapse it, claim one's self-worth, exploit and exalt one's parents. Eggers, like all of us, constructs his world through the story he tells” (Carusi 2-3). Carusi explains many of the quirks 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 would-be narrator might suffer from a lack of catharsis” (7). While this is true, and Eggers appears to use his memoir as a means of mourning and closure, there are a plethora of other reasons why Eggers also writes, including memorializing his parents, creating a new order and new meaning (Carusi addresses this: "A story of the individual provides a method for bringing order to the characters, events, and disordered happenings at the heart of a disturbed experience" (Carusi 34).), and save yourself from dyspepsia. Miller states, “If he is to avoid his mother's fate, Eggers must use writing as a means of expressing the aggression, guilt, and revulsion that he is avoiding processing” (998). Carusi highlights the idea of ​​saving oneself through narrative, as does Eggers; according to her, this is a fairly common desire among orphan storytellers. “For many adult children, the caregiving role is fraught with anxiety. Since death is inevitable, the child who cares for him is doomed to failure in one sense or another” (Carusi 77). This sense of doom must be overcome somehow, andit is therefore integrated with the need for self-preservation. “The narrators see illness as something to be overcome, if not by their parents, then by themselves, “so that the body can return to its original state” (Carusi 34). Yet Carusi does not take into account the need to commemorate the deceased and, instead, likely lumps Eggers into the category of complicated grief, as defined by Carusi: "Complicated grief may occur when certain high-risk factors are present in the experience of the bereaved person. 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 pain and the full realization of its implications for the person experiencing mourning, and 2) holding on to and avoiding abandoning the lost loved one” (Carusi 17). These two stages can be interpreted in different ways in the form of Eggers. They can be seen as linked to the two "books" or narratives of Eggers' memoir, linking the maintenance of the primary narrative and the avoidance of loss to the metanarrative. They can also be factored into Eggers' story itself, beginning with avoidance and denial and ending with withholding or recognizing the enduring importance of her parents, particularly in the last scene of Eggers scattering his mother's ashes. While Carus makes valid arguments regarding Eggers and the orphan narrative, there remain several holes that set Eggers apart from the canon, proving his uniqueness in style, form, and intent. Eggers shows a desire for fame and fame throughout his memoir, from the compliments he gives himself. ("Can I sing or something" (48)?) to his desire to be on The Real World ("Of course I wanted to be asked to audition, I wanted them to see everything that 'there is something to see in me […]' (183)) with each important and self-referential comment he makes about himself. His personal importance, or his desire for it, plays a considerable role in the shape of his narrative, taking over the meta-narrative and the course of the main events, circling the organization of the story around the parts of his life which could lead to eminence. and reprimand, as well as the popular culture of the 1990s, of which he claims to be well informed. He assures that he taught Toph important cultural knowledge of the time, explaining, "Even though he was often resistant – children so rarely know what's good for them – I taught him to appreciate all creators revolutionary music of our time” (Eggers 49). Although this self-assertion and arrogance of cultural superiority may seem distasteful, Carusi states that "people tend to identify with their cultural background more during life crises than at any other time" (19). According to her, “culture shapes what we feel and how we feel, as well as how we communicate what we feel 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, jokes, and jokes rather than complete sorrow and despair. Eggers' reaction to his parents' deaths is entirely appropriate given the situation he finds himself in as his brother's guardian. He attempts to bring some normalcy through the culture he knows, abandoning his needs and becoming what Carusi calls a "disenfranchised mourner" (7). It is because of Eggers' role as a "disenfranchised mourner" that some of his reactions may actually seem inappropriate. to the reader, andwhy Eggers may feel he must include his meta-narrative to defend against this whiplash. Eggers finds himself in a difficult position “because we regard the loss of a parent as an experience without great sorrow” (Carusi 7). Eggers is expected to develop appropriately, as an adult tasked with raising a child, but he is still in his twenties, a child at heart and a baby in the real world, and should also cry heavily. He has no choice but to choose his own path, first burying his grief in the writing we see in his book, A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, due to the absence of another mourning mechanism and chained to the facade he must put in place to achieve this. Toph, then finally commemorating her parents properly, through the completion of the writing and final publication of her book, as well as finally memorializing her mother with her ashes. These roles contribute to dividing the memoir into two halves which are constructed, thus creating a disorderly rupture of sometimes polarizing, sometimes harmonizing sides. Said Smith and. al., “Eggers is keenly aware that the contradictions of his multiple identities pose a dilemma for the tidy memoirist. » It is not Eggers' goal to create perfectly organized memoirs; according to Miller, Eggers even refrained from editing the book in many places. Yet the way Eggers organizes his memoir tells of his goals and the effects they have on his and the reader's psyche. Eggers is self-conscious but courageous, risk-taking but tired, a control freak but a disorganized mess; These opposing sides should come as no surprise to the reader, especially considering the grieving process of the author writing the book. Eggers' quirky and eccentric approach to his subject is what gives him the popularity, fame and attention he seems to desire, rather than submitting to the realm of "Anonymous" Memoir Number 4001. But not only does this form interest him; this also achieves his goal of properly memorizing his parents and life events through realistic events. His parents are not put on pedestals, because that would be an inauthentic tribute to their memory. Instead, they are held at arm's length and examined carefully, being preserved down to every wrinkled collar and missed belt buckle, as well as every perfect detail; in fact, Eggers examines himself and his construction of this narrative in the same way, carefully commenting on his own place in the narrative, even as he stands high, in a "deserving" fanfare; it only highlights his truthful and arrogant flaws. Eggers asserts that [the author] plans to be clearly, obviously aware of his knowledge of his self-awareness of self-referentiality. Moreover, he is fully aware, long before you, of the fact that he knows and fully admits the gimmick inherent in it all, and will anticipate your assertion about the irrelevance of the book due to said gimmick by saying that the gimmick is simply a device, a defense, to obscure the dark, blinding, murderous rage and sorrow at the heart of this whole story, which is both too black and blinding to look at – turn away… your… eyes! – but nevertheless useful, at least for the author, even in caricatured or condensed form, because talking about it to as many people as possible helps, he thinks, to dilute the pain and bitterness and thus facilitate its evacuation from his soul […] (Eggers Acknowledgments). Proving his cunning and intelligence, Eggers forestalls the reader to any interpretation they might wish to take. He admits his ultimate goals in writing and the ultimate themes of loss and sadness, and yet he also proves the usefulness of lighter "gimmickry" like.