Do Smartphones Belong in Fiction?
The novel has long mirrored technological shifts, from railways to factories, shaping narrative form and human perception. Yet the internet’s ubiquity presents a singular challenge: how to render its seamless integration into daily life without reducing it to a gimmick or a barrier. Ankur Thakkar’s Blow Yourself Up confronts this dilemma by treating smartphones not as external devices but as extensions of consciousness, forcing fiction to grapple with the blurred line between digital and embodied experience.
How does Thakkar argue that smartphones should be represented in fiction, and what does he reject?
Thakkar advocates for an unadorned portrayal of digital interactions, treating them as intrinsic to characters’ interiority rather than as distinct, visual markers like chat bubbles or timestamps. He rejects approaches that create a hard distinction between 'real life' and 'screen life,' arguing that the internet’s integration into cognition should feel ordinary, not theatrical or segmented.
What narrative techniques does Thakkar contrast with his own approach in Blow Yourself Up?
Thakkar contrasts his traditional prose format with experimental techniques such as Calvin Kasulke’s Several People Are Typing, composed entirely of Slack messages, or Jennifer Egan’s 'Black Box,' delivered via tweets. He also notes the influence of writers like Patricia Lockwood and Jenny Offill, whose prose mimics online fragmentation without relying on digital artifacts.
What scene in Blow Yourself Up exemplifies the tension between digital and embodied reality?
In one scene, the protagonist Payal, on a date, receives a notification that her video has gone viral. As she navigates the influx of likes and comments, she remains physically present at the dinner table, creating a stark contrast between her digital immersion and her date’s obliviousness to the spectacle unfolding around her.
Why does Thakkar emphasize 'embodied reality' despite integrating digital ephemera into his novel?
Thakkar clarifies that he values embodied reality—such as the difference between viewing a painting in a museum versus on a phone—but insists that digital interactions are equally formative in shaping perception. His goal is to reflect how these experiences coexist in modern cognition, not to diminish the significance of physical presence.
Ce que ça pourrait changer
Thakkar’s approach suggests that fiction may need to evolve beyond visual or structural gimmicks to capture the internet’s role in shaping identity and experience. If successful, this could redefine narrative conventions, encouraging writers to treat digital phenomena as intrinsic to character and plot rather than as peripheral or ornamental. Conversely, failure to strike this balance risks reducing technology to a superficial backdrop, undermining fiction’s capacity to interrogate its cultural impact.
