The Flamethrowers: Beacuse, and in order to ....

About a third of the way through Rachel Kushner's intriguing but puzzling The Flamethrowers I find myself asking: what is a plot? Why does this novel, that has such vivid scenes and clearly delineated characters and so much "action" feel as if it has no plot at all? I could go on for quite a while setting out the events of this novel - see yesterday's post for a partial list - and yes plenty happens - and in the section read last night even more: we go back to see the narrator after her bike crash - contrary to the grim expectations in which we last saw her blown off her bike at 80 mph - who didn't think that perhaps this novel was being narrated by a quadriplegic or even by a ghost? - she seems fine, broken ankle, still able to try to send a female land speed record in a rocket-propelled car - and we also see her back in nyc and get the back story about how she met boyfriend and mature artist and scion of leading Italian auto company (an Italian Michelin, sorta) Valera - and also she learns that the mysterious guy she had a one-night hookup with is Valera's best friend - and the 3 from a little cohort, though the sexual history apparently kept a secret. Yes. Many events and complications - and yet - why does this novel feel formless? To me, a plot means more than many things that happen to or around a narrator or protagonist; the protagonist must have a problem or conflict that he or she must face or endure, must have a goal, must take action to achieve this goal, must succeed or fail as a result of his/her action(s). This, in other words, is the arc of a story; long ago I had a professor (Lionel Abel) who taught a course on tragedy, in which he famously and repeatedly said: In order to a be a properly motivated tragic hero, you have to have two kinds of motivation: a motivation because, and in order to. We used to laugh at this formulaic view - and even more so because of the almost comical way in which Abel delivered his proclamations - but he was right. The character in a novel has to be trying to do something (because) and to achieve something (in order to): save a marriage, win the girl, win freedom, commit suicide, save the child, beat the system, make a match, learn his origin, and so forth. I don't see any because/in order to in The Flamethrowers, at least not yet; I have to admit I have been cited for the same flaw, unjustly I thought, but there is a danger for all writers in just accumulating incident, scene, mood, peculiarity. In a great novel, even in a good novel, all this detail must serve a purpose, must move the story along, must advance our knowledge and understanding of the characters and their world.