Chantel's Reviews > The Plastic Priest

** spoiler alert ** It is important to note that most of the themes explored in this book deal with sensitive subject matters. My review, therefore, touches on these topics as well. Many people might find the book's subject matters & those detailed in my review overwhelming. I suggest you steer clear of both if this is the case. Please note that from this point forward I will be writing about matters that contain reflections on religious extremism, sexism, bigotry, self-harm, mental illness, mania, & others.

Religion is a lingering facet of human society. There has always been a need to believe in more than the self. Alongside this comes the desire for structure. It is certainly attractive for every hour of the day to have a purpose. However, humanity’s self-motivating ability is great; Why would we need someone else to tell us what to do? What is the purpose of a system of beliefs that alter our free will?  There is hardly a straightforward answer to either of these questions. Suffice it for humanity to rest easy, contemplating the essence of a creature devout in celestial abilities whose features resemble the mirror’s reflection but whose consciousness is unbound by the valour of malice that pungently exhausts the land.

This story follows a female religious devotee; she leads a church, she reads, & she is mistaken for a follower though she is the leader. She is a devotee of the philosophy of belief; the concept of something other than herself. Her character is nearly inconsequential to the story, so it matters little whether she is of flesh & bone or small choking hazards—plastic. Rather, what is most fascinating about Kaye is the fact that she does not matter at all. She has a husband & yet this man has an entire life, fulfilled by his independent enjoyments, one is left wondering where she factors in. Her church functions independently of her sermons & one is left wondering what part of the Lord’s whispers reaches her ears at all.

While reading this book I found the time swiftly passed me by. I was not preoccupied with the length of the book, the ticking of the clock or the sun’s passage in the sky. What grabbed my attention was the premise; a woman whose faith seems utterly devoid of belief. That is not to say that Kaye has no system on which to rest but that her essence floats like moats in the summer’s sun. Readers will find in her a character that is shallow & grave like the hole whence the body lays in final tranquillity. This is not a bad thing.

In certain cases, the main character of a book is the vessel by which the reader becomes immersed in the narrative. Kaye does not offer readers the opportunity to know her, she isn’t even the person translating the story into palatable chapters. This story is told by some omniscient being, rather unlike the God Kaye has grown to believe in, the narrator understands that Kaye is a woman without much gumption. I appreciated the tertiary narration. At times, I wanted to know who was telling me the story as I felt this might have engaged me further in the rather ridiculous series of events. However, the secrecy of the recounting—the disengaged words from no one in particular—felt intimate & led the story in the direction it needed to go.

Readers who have a firm grasp of various systems of belief, of the houses that bind religions & their facets, will have a better time appreciating this story for what it is, a philosophical question on the foundation of ideology.

Though an archive of religious knowledge will be of use to readers, it is not necessary. One may lean on the narrative to appreciate the depth; Kaye is a woman in a man’s field, she is a woman hearing the word of God, she is a woman speaking the word of God—always thought to be a male entity—to communities led by male figures. Certainly, this is a simplistic view because it is easily ascertained. One need not live in the city center to understand the vast nuance of gender freedoms. However, Kaye never really questions herself in this sense. She is aware that people do not regard her as an authority figure because priests are men & Kaye is a woman.

The simplicity of this fact needs to be considered as it contributes to the downfall of the main character. Had she not met a man in the park maybe she would have been less sympathetic to his ramblings. Had she seen a homeless woman would she have bemoaned the society that led her there?

If Kaye had not been in a heterosexual relationship would God have whispered pleasantries about faith & comfort into her ear to be shared with her community? If Kaye’s mother hadn’t foretold of her daughter’s failure, would Kaye have chosen a path to success? Kaye’s father is not mentioned. Her husband is mentioned only so far as to highlight that he rumbles through life like a tumbleweed; believing in this, incorporating that, & not paying close enough attention to anything in particular to be considered devout.

What is the author trying to convey? Which of the characters is the antagonist? What I find to be a great drag is when turmoil & fear are built up to be a storm but are, instead, raindrops across a garden’s bed. That is to say; Kaye is a person who ponders the truth of her ideology. Her entire system of belief is based on the alternative—a woman priest rather than a male, a traditional church rather than the new-age bigoted lot; devotion on park benches rather than pews; prayer with hands held tight rather than palms facing the sky. Is Kaye different for the sake of being different or does she believe that this path is the right, bona fide & absolute road?

The narrative lacks consistency. When I speak of torrential rain it is in line with what the novel attempts to promise. The scene in the park & the ultimate loss—homelessness—are represented as small dandelions in a field of green, nearly indistinguishable in the grand scheme. Kaye’s reliance on published works might lead readers to conclude that her beliefs are rather seeded in the English language; it does not matter what is written so long as she can read it, consume it, speak it, & live it to be true. When she meets the man who claims to be a planet, a star; a nucleus of the Gods; Kaye poses no objections.

Who is Janus? Due to the nature of this story, one that poses itself as a rather sour satire, I found the answer to this question invisible to my eyes. What would have led Kaye to believe a man she met in the park? What was it about his speech that brought to light the providence of what he foresaw? In ancient Rome, Janus was the God of Doors; he saw what was coming down the line & how it tied into the current state of being. His ability to gauge time allowed him to act as a clairvoyant. His status in ancient Roman religions & mythology declared him as the God of gateways, change, transition; the beginnings, ends; & archways.

Picture yourself standing in a public park in the middle of the rain. A stranger approaches you; a person with perfect teeth but no home. This person offers you a sermon, stating that you have made the wrong decision & you should change course immediately. What do you do? If you live in a boisterous city, this situation has probably happened to you before. I have stood in grocery stores & had similar experiences while contemplating the cracker selection. This makes Kaye’s mental turmoil difficult to understand. She loses her way after a rapid-fire conversation that offers little in terms of morsels of nourishment; Janus says little to Kaye & yet she is consumed by a mania that was triggered by the invisible.

Can the reader conclude that this stranger—Janus—spoke worry into her broken mind? Was Kaye’s temperament likely to crack, regardless of the person who visited her in the park? What made Janus claim that Kaye’s future would need to be altered for her well-being? What part of her lax & rather unburdened existence posed cause for worry?

As I am not the God of Doorways, I am perhaps poorly placed to ask such questions. Yet, the reality is that this story took place in our world, in our day & age with a person who was viscerally integrated into the casualty of modern-day society. Why did she believe a prophet in the park? One can understand reading books & believing the words they share; this happens all the time—this is part of the reason that drives book bans; people have very little critical thinking ability & so become immersed in whatever fiction or fancy is presented to them (think: the Bible).

What I am saying is that the author was unintentional with their premise. It is fine & dandy to have a character fall head over heels for ludicrous stanzas, but this scene felt foggy in the worst way; it was incomplete. There is no motive behind anything that happens. The free will of each individual in the exchange reads as cloistered behind the mind of the author. This plays well into the premise, that God is playing dolls with humanity or that the Prophet—whichever one you believe existed—is a spoilt child longing to alter the narrative of their plastic toys. However, one still needs to ask why.

When one is sitting in a religious institution one is not waiting for mystery. One listens to a speaker who has punctuation to add to folly. One is present & attentive waiting for the parable that will nestle their worries. For Janus to appear in the church after Kaye experiences fever-induced mania does not read as the miracle of prophecy. Rather, this scene feels like a manic episode. One is left feeling rather sad for Kaye as she sinks further into the mud of her mind.

Perhaps this is the point. Is religion a muddy stream seeking to sink anyone who steps foot in its waters? Does it matter that Janus came to Kaye rather than her God manifesting himself in Gabriel or the burning bush? Is the essence of all-encompassing ideology that one loses oneself in their philosophy? What would have become of Aristotle if he had wandered the streets of another city? What if walking across the water was a metaphor for performing that which feels impossible? What if no one hears God because he does not have a voice?

The eclipse of methodology encourages this story to nestle firmly in the absurd. Kaye becomes the familiar face of every person you might know which leaves her disappearance an impossible case to close. Was Kaye a real person to begin with or was she simply a metaphor for the cosmic domesticity of humanity’s insecurity? Is the story’s narrator the author or another omniscient being intent on grotesque exposition in an attempt to instil the bedtime story with a proverbial warning; hold steady to your beliefs or any droplet of rain is likely to turn your life into a monsoon; beware the aimless roamer; hasten your scripture or the pages of your life with slice you to pieces.

Ultimately, the reader may select their interpretation. Religion is a personal philosophy. One may wish to believe that they are unique in their care for the land or their tenderness of a stranger’s well-being yet, cultivated in the woods & within the sewer ways are the gathering of these same drowning foes. Making their way into the cerebellum from the gentle nerves behind our skin; ideology is that which we are better off ignorant of understating least we opt for the drowning vessel carrying feet that can neither part the seas nor walk through waves to safety.

Thank you to NetGalley, Cemetery Dance Publications, & Nicole Cushing for the free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review!