|
There are four questionable aspects of the ending to Last of the Breed if you approach the story in a totally traditional manner, which LL did not ... and never intended to.
1) Joe is not seen arriving in the US, so we don't know if he escaped. 2) He and Natalia are not reunited. Much literature functions as a "prototypical family drama" in which a new generation can be born. That too is unresolved. 3) Though Alekhin is clearly defeated he is not seen to be defeated denying the detailed completion of the reader's violent fantasies. 4) Zamatev is not seen being physically defeated, so same as above.
Personally, I'd say that most of these issues are artistic ones, choices that allow the audience to use their imagination rather than to be force fed the story. Dad was a master at telling just enough to make the audience a "partner" in the writing/reading experience. Though considered a very detailed writer, especially when it comes to descriptions of landscapes, it is remarkable how little time LL spends describing anything! He is very frugal with his writing and really tells just enough to spark the imagination of the audience. It's shorthand aimed at creating a better reading experience through engaging the readers' own creativity. Dad learned how to do this while writing for the pulps and he did it instinctively. That instinct may have come into play on too many levels in LOTB ... but maybe not. Personally, I like the choices but think the speed he works through them at the end of the book may be a bit much.
The story STARTS with Zamatev and is told in a flashback. So Zamatev living is an absolute given. His sin is pride, the arrogance of thinking that his scheme to kidnap Joe could work. Having to LIVE with the results of those decisions, of being possibly demoted and untrusted, is his real punishment. Death would be a release. Similarly, The "message" that Alekhin is dead is also delivered in the first scene, though we don't know it, to describe a fight that ended in his death would undercut the set up of the whole book. Anyone who is unhappy with these two aspects may be right (for themselves) in their feelings but their problem isn't with the ending of the book, their problem is actually with the beginning!
I would also argue that knowing that Joe had crossed all of Siberia and could escape to Japan or Alaska is enough so we don't need to see him do it. That leaves us with the one weak spot I agree with: the fate of Natalia. Personally, and after many years of reflection, I think it would have been best to have had Alekhin kill her half way through the book. Joe and Alekhin have almost no connection or history of real enmity. They need to be emotionally set against one another to be true antagonists. This would do it.
For anyone who is interested in these kinds of ideas I would recommend reading the new Lost Treasures Postscript edition of LOTB. These subjects and others are discussed at length. I have also included the short story that could have formed the middle section of the book but, for unknown reasons, was left out.
|
