<spoiler>
<b>A Scribner Reading Group Guide</b>
<i>The Visible Man</i>

<b>Questions for Discussion</b>

<b>1. Why do you think Victoria has chosen "Y___" for her patient's pseudonym? Moreover, what "unique dilemmas" (p. 3) would the other initials that she considered using—V, K, or M—have caused?</b>

This was difficult. I actually wondered this when I read it in the text at the beginning. I imagine she wanted to avoid V___ because it may cause readers to think that this patient was in fact an alter ego for Vicky. Indeed, the thought crossed my mind despite what she eventually chose. Distance from K___ was probably a choice by Klosterman, not necessarily Vicky, to provide some space between the character being a mouthpiece for him. As the M___, I have no adequate explanation.

Regarding the choice of Y___, I had no idea until I started writing this. It could be to represent Yahweh, the name of God. Y___ is portrayed as a sort of omniscient force. As I understand it, the originally understanding of Yahweh did not necessarily entail supreme benevolence. This may reflect Y___'s claims to be detached and uncaring. Alternatively, it could represent Y___'s instances where he does intervene so that individuals can have a richer, more fulfilling life.

<b>2. In Victoria's cover letter to her editor, she asks in her fourth annotation, "How do I overcome the fact that real people inevitably behave more erratically than fictional constructions?" (p. 4). Do you agree with this suggestion? What behavior among real people have you encountered that would be unbelievable if portrayed as fiction? Who or what defines "normal" behavior?</b>

The notion is plausible. I think Y___ hits on this when he suggests that we want characters and their actions to be explicable. I know I have and continue to do things that probably seem totally irrational to some people. Perhaps they are correct. Still, had I read it in a book I might find it believable anyway. And I'm not sure what defines "normal" behavior.

<b>3. Y___ claims to be seeking Victoria's help so that he can learn to manage his "sensations of guilt" (p.22). Do you believe this is truly why he solicits Victoria's professional evaluation and guidance? Is he in fact seeking her professional guidance? Do you agree with Y___ in his assertion that feeling the sensation of guilt and feeling guilty are actually two different experiences?</b>

I think Y___ is speaking the truth when he states he wants to learn to manage his sensations. However, I also think he was looking for a friend, as I stated in my review. I think this is why Y___ seeks out therapists. For one, they provide confidentiality (in theory) and aren't allowed to discuss their patients with others, protecting his illicit actions. They also provide an atmosphere for him to openly talk about his feelings. He may not have expected an actual friendship to develop but he probably knew that he could <i>feel</i> like he had a friend.

Yes, I totally agree with his assertion that there is a difference between the sensation of guilt and feeling guitly are different. I was raised Catholic which I think instilled a lot of guilty sensations over thinks I can rationalize as perfectly okay, e.g. sexual inclinations. And as far as I can tell, this seems to be some sort of openly acknowledged facet of Catholicism, that it breeds certain sensations of guilt over various behaviors or thoughts. Feeling guilty comes with a recognition that what was done was wrong. Sensations of guilt arise when that pit in your stomach appears despite finding no moral objections to your behavior.

<b>4. The Beatles are mentioned throughout <i>The Visible Man</i>. What impact do these references have on the story? In terms of the Beatles themselves or the themes that exist in their music, why do you think Klosteman chose them as his primary music and pop-culture reference?</b>

To be honest, I don't know enough about the Beatles to give a good answer. I imagine they were chosen, as Y___ states, because they're so well known. I think he chose Rush elsewhere in the story for similar reasons.

<b>5. What similarities exist among the characters that Y___ observes? Are any of these characters particularly sympathetic or unsympathetic? Why?</b>

Each of the characters, at least the ones discussed in detail, represent a facet of American living. Or at least the contemporary American mindset. Bruce is a sort of lamenting bachelor. Val is a microcosm of vicious consumer cycles. The ultra-competitive are, well, the ultra-competitive (possibly Randian) capitalists. Dave seems to be like those in society trying to compete on an intellectual platform (kind of like the common man) but being belittled by the academic elite who can just cite more things than they can.

I was especially sympathetic toward Val and Bruce. I saw a younger version of myself in Bruce, possibly even my current self. Likewise with Val, going to constant cycles of binging and purging, stuck trying to achieve some ideal society tells her she should obtain. As hinted at in my review, I probably found the ultra-competitive unsympathetic because their portrayal defies actual meritocracy, at least in my humble opinion.

<b>6. Is Y___'s pursuit to observe and monitor the behavior of people who are alone a worthy one? Do you believe, as he consistently reminds Victoria, that this endeavor is scientific? What has Y___ gleaned from his observations? Does he learn more about other people or himself?</b>

Hoo boy. Tricky question. Yes, it's a worthy pursuit. People's behavior do change when they believe they're observed. Is his own interest in the endeavor scientific? Probably not. I mean, partially it seems to be the case. But as I stated above I think Y___ wanted to connect with somebody. At first he probably believed that this would allow him to do so. But as he observed, he likely learned more about himself than others. Y___ seems to think people are largely uninteresting when they're by themselves, but he continues to do it and says he will continue to do it for the rest of his adult life. Why? It's redundant at this point, but I honestly think because it was the only connection he had aside from Vicky. Watching people allowed him to feel sympathetic. It allowed him to care about other people. He wouldn't admit it, but I imagine Y___ learned that he actually does care about people. And he learned that his feelings deviate from him alleged thoughts.

<b>7. Y___ asserts that his ventures are not driven by voyeurism. Given the direction his relationship with Victoria takes, do you believe this claim? Why do you think people might derive pleasure not just specifically through the act of voyeurism but through observing people in general?</b>

Does voyeurism necessarily entail perversion? It's clear that Y___ finds a lot of enrichment in observing people, but it's never in a sexual way. Like I said, I don't think it's purely scientific (if at all), but there's not merely some dick-pumping eroticism involved.

I have people-watched, alone and with friends. In public or through the venues of the internet. It's interesting stuff. I think more joy is to be had in doing it with a friend, to talk about your own observations. Admittedly, there is a certain value in sort of gossiping about what you're seeing. I think this is sort of why reality TV took off. The revulsion, the commentary among friends in the audience about the absurdities before them is what keeps it aloft, not the content itself; people acknowledge how seemingly phony it is.

<b>8. Why does the revelation of Y___'s invisibility suit become such a turning point in his and Victoria's relationship? Why does Victoria then become so all-consumed by her interaction with Y___? Does she fall in love with him? If so, why?</b>

The revelation of Y___'s suit elevates him from normal crazy dude to unique rockstar. If I tell you I am Napoleon Bonaparte, you tell me I'm insane. But if I whip out demonstrable proof that I'm indeed Napoleon, you become my captive audience. You see me as special. You see me as not so mundane and ordinary. I become unique, and you want to witness what I can do. Victoria's feelings echo those of the fangirl to the celebrity. Likewise, she doesn't fall in love with the celebrity, but becomes enamored with her <i>idea</i> of that celebrity, the notion of specialness. He can do things that we cannot and he is good in our minds. It's only when his human tendencies surface that she realizes he is not so decent as she thinks.

<b>9. Under what circumstances is Y___ compelled to make attempts to help his subjects? What does this reveal about his character? Are these efforts consistent with the other characteristics or behavior that Y___ displays?</b>

Y___ seems to intervene when he believes circumstances demean an individual's existence. Val was stuck in her cycle and he could not imagine it as truly fulfilling for her. The dead woman's undiscovered death and his ogling seemed disrespectful. Dave's abuse seemed humiliating. I think I've elaborated on this already, as well as the fact that these actions are inconsistent with what he states.

<b>10. <i>The Visible Man</I> is told from Victoria's perspective. She frequently offers the caveat that she did not record her sessions with Y___ and recounts much from memory. Is she a reliable narrator? What impact does the telling of the story through a character's manuscript have on you as the reader?</b>

Vicky is not a reliable narrator, but she's more reliable than many unreliable narrators. She frequently admits her own indiscretions and flaws. She's open to her errors and willing to accept criticism. This question also ignores the fact that many events were indeed recorded, just not many of the initial events.

I think presenting it as a manuscript, upon reflection, helps. It shows us that this is unedited. This is before everything is chopped out by the publishing house's editor. This is Vicky, as is. This is her story, preserved, about a remarkable man she encountered and her experiences (and more objective reflections) after the fact. Does this mean she is free from bias or tainting her story? Of course not. But the only thing we have to go on is what Vicky claims that Y___ claims. We're a third party.

<b>11. <i>The Visible Man</i> explores the assumption that you are your true self only when you're alone. Discuss with the group whether or not you agree with this notion.</b>

I agree, to an extent. For the most part, I do believe we shape ourselves in the eyes of others. When we are alone, the social mold melts away leaving what is truly and most honestly ourselves. However, other people can be incorporated into our concept of self. From my own experience, the dear friend that has given this book to me, she has largely been incorporated into how I view myself, how I conceive of being alone. I may not completely be myself when I spend time with her, but many of the inhibitions I had when I met her long, long ago have faded away. There is no other person that I am uniquely Kyle around than her, and I imagine it won't be long before I simply am wholly myself.

That sounds deceptive but it's not meant to be that way. I suppose it's more so that I still recognize that there are facets of myself that I fear would drive her away or make her scared. Loud snoring, frequent farting, and incessant moping haven't done so yet. So I imagine I will progressively shed the few layers of the "public" Kyle that remain with time.

<b>12. Discuss the title of the book. What is the significance of <i>Visible</i> as opposed to <i>Invisible</i>?</b>

I didn't really have a good answer for this until I was halfway through my review. I think there's a couple possible connotations.

First, Vicky thinks of Y___ as invisible for most of the book. But he becomes visible in that climactic final encounter. I suspect this is a reflection that she sees him as he truly is, as opposed to her idealization, at that moment. She now sees the crazed, self-absorbed man she had been explaining away all along. The details of this are sketched out in literal terms, with his silhouette and his elongated shadow being seen in the home.

The second possible connotation, especially given Y___'s hatred for the term "invisible," is his desire <i>to be seen</i>, or to at least feel like he is. I won't go through the "looking for a connection thing" again. I will note that Y___ stated explicitly that he wanted to become visible.

<b>Enhance Your Book Club</b>

<b>1. If you had the ability to become invisible, what would you do? Use this question to learn more about your fellow book club members and to test how much you think you know about them. Write your answer to this question on a scrap of paper. Collect the answers in a hat and draw each one at a time. Take turns guessing the owner of the answer and repeat until all answers have been revealed.</b>

I won't lie. I would probably spy on friends, see what they do in their free time. See if they're as happy as they try to appear externally. Probably check out a few naked bodies. No crimes, just curiosity. I might spook a few enemies though.

<b>2. Read H. G. Wells's <i>The Invisible Man</I> as a companion text. What prominent themes or motifs exist in both novels? Do you think <i>The Visible Man</i> is a modernized retelling of Wells's novel?</b>

It's been so long since I've read that that I cannot adequately answer that. I will have to read it and come back to this question when I can.

<b>3. If you have read any of Klosterman's previous nonfiction books, which include <i>Fargo Rock City</i>; <i>Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs</i>; <i>Killing Yourself to Live</i>; and <i>Chuck Klosterman IV</i>, how do they compare to this novel?</b>

Well, I've discussed how I think <i>I Wear the Black Hat</i> is related. <i>Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs</i> is snippets of pop culture, dissected and analyzed. Probably the most relatable essay there is the one about the PC game The Sims. But in that book, that essay seems to be about power and simulated reality, tying it in a little bit with reality TV. This novel seems largely about the pure aspect of observation. Klosterman uses this as a way to put out some thoughts about culture and lifestyle, but he's more limited here because Y___'s character is designed such that he can only observe particular things and in a particular manner. The reins are tighter in this novel; in the nonfiction he can run more freely.</spoiler>