![]() |
Moon river. |
April went by so fast!
This is exactly the kind of innovative and refreshing short-story that I needed to snap me out of this reading slump that has gone on for weeks. The Moon in its Flight by Gilbert Sorrentino leans heavily into the meta-narrative and self-reflexive storytelling that doesn't always work for me but somehow it all just works splendidly. It's the kind of literary magic trick that I can't quite put my finger on.
There are so many killer lines and weird, wonderful passages that it felt like I was reading the lovechild of a jazz record and a deconstructed Harlequin novel. I ended up highlighting basically the entire thing.
The self-reflexive narrator is prone to waxing poetically about the complexities of love and romantic relationships:
|"Of course this was a summer romance, but bear with me and see with what banal literary irony it all turns out — or does not turn out at all. The country bowled and spoke of Truman’s grit and spunk. How softly we had slid off the edge of civilization."|
So good.
Check out the beautiful striking imagery evoked by the narrator when describing his experience of falling in love for the first time:
|"Leaning against her father’s powder-blue Buick convertible, lost, in the indigo night, the creamy stars, sound of crickets, they kissed. They fell in love."|
There's plenty of lyrical prose mixed with bawdy humor:
|"To him that vast borough seemed a Cythera — that it could house such fantastic creatures as she! He wanted to be Jewish. He was, instead, a Roman Catholic, awash in sin and redemption. What loathing he had for the Irish girls who went to eleven o’clock Mass, legions of blushing pink and lavender spring coats, flat white straw hats, the crinkly veils over their open faces. Church clothes, under which their inviolate crotches sweetly nestled in soft hair."|
Or how about his first sexual experience with the young woman?
|"The first time he touched her breasts he cried in his shame and delight. Can all this really have taken place in America?"|
Amazing stuff right here.
The story is dripping in sentimentality but the author embraces a kind of self-aware sentimentality He leans into the clichés just to rip them apart, exposing the artifice of literary fiction. He then proceeds to builds something even more tender out of the ruins.
There’s a lot going on under the hood of that powder-blue Buick convertible—music as transformative and healing, jazz influences, Donald Barthelme-style metafiction, black pop culture nods like Amos ’n’ Andy, literary references flying all over the place. It’s like Sorrentino took a bunch of narrative puzzle pieces, shuffled them around while blindfolded, and still made something that feels weirdly coherent and emotionally sharp. Structurally, it's all over the place in the best way. Fragmented time jumps, poetic stream-of-consciousness, a narrative voice that knows it’s a narrative voice. It’s playful and experimental while dismantling the very idea of storytelling. And yet, it all works. Somehow, it works.
Then there's the powerful final line: “Art cannot rescue anybody from anything." Sorrentino’s mic drop. After inundating the reader with poetic nostalgia, romantic longing, and jazz-soaked melancholy, he ends the story in such a brutally honest and cynical fashion that is totally on-brand for the story’s whole meta-narrative vibe.
The story contains all the classic romantic tropes associated with young love through a sentimental lens before pulling the rug out. It’s like he’s saying, “You felt something? Cool. Just remember it was all made up.” This line rips the curtain down and reminds us that even the most beautiful art cannot be a perfect representation of life. Maybe I'm out to lunch here but I think that’s kind of the point: the story knows it’s a story. It seduces you with aesthetics, sentimentality, beautiful language and emotional flashbacks only to expose how artificial and performative it all is in a literary context.
By ending the story this way, Sorrentino plants himself firmly in a postmodern literary tradition that delights in pulling apart the seams of narrative itself, especially when it comes to romance, a genre that practically thrives on illusion. Romantic stories usually promise some kind of transformation: love conquers all, heartbreak leads to growth, memory redeems, etc. At the very least, they offer the feeling that something matters. But Sorrentino, ever the trickster, sidesteps all of that. He gives us the shape of a romantic story (intoxicating attraction, uncertainty, yearning, sexual anticipation, the heartbreak) only to subvert it all with that final line.
It’s a classic bait-and-switch. We think we’re being led to catharsis, or at least a poignant reflection. But instead, he hands us an anti-resolution. There is no tidy bow, no deep insight; just the quiet thud of reality. The curtain falls, and nobody’s saved. Not the lovelorn narrator, still lost in the fog of memory, and certainly not the reader, who might have been anticipating something a bit more hopeful.
But this isn’t to say that fiction is meaningless. On the contrary, Sorrentino’s point seems to be that meaning itself is slippery, constructed, and often a product of our own desire to find meaning in art. Indeed, the story doesn’t rescue us, but it shows us how badly we want to be rescued. It also shows how we attach meaning to art even when it explicitly tells us not to. That’s another underlying irony presented here: by insisting that art cannot save us, the story ends up doing something emotionally powerful anyway. It stirs us, unsettles us, makes us reflect. In denying transcendence, it delivers a kind of sideways truth that feels more honest than consolation. It highlights the fantasy of literary catharsis, and ironically reminds us of why we keep turning to stories in the first place.
You can read this story HERE.