Today, we’re looking into fungi, obsession, and translation in The Extinction of Irena Rey by Jennifer Croft. As a prolific translator herself, having won the International Booker Prize in 2018, Croft takes us deep into this niche world within literature, allowing us to grapple with our understanding of translation.
Move over dark academia, it’s time for fever dream author’s summit.
I think what makes the novel wholly original and truly shine is how language and translation are used. Being an extremely meta novel of a novel, where the original accounts were written in Polish by a native Argentine Spanish-speaking translator, we the audience, are reading that story’s English translation by the American translator. This felt more like a shared POV, rather than dual narration.
Also, this is not the first work of Croft’s I’ve encountered—I read her novel, Homesick, after it was longlisted for the 2023 Women’s Prize for Fiction.
Before moving on, this is your sign to turn back now if you don’t want any spoilers, but this one is very light on spoilers (the ending is not spoiled at all). But still save this so you can return to if, if you’re wanting to go into the novel a complete blank slate. And this discussion is for anyone to enjoy, not just people who have read it (maybe you have no intention to read it but are curious what it’s about!).
Disclaimers:
All thoughts are my own and this is unsponsored and not in collaboration with any publisher or company mentioned.
This contains affiliate links from Bookshop.org, where I will earn a commission from qualifying purchases (at no additional cost to you).
Please use The StoryGraph to check Content Warnings.
Background
This was published on March 5, 2024, as a Frontlist title for Bloomsbury Publishing in the U.S. It’s hardcover copy is 320 pages and is a 12 hour and 1 minute audiobook, narrated by Lanessa Tremblett. I read it as an audiobook from my library, via Libby, at the end of March.
Synopses
“Eight translators arrive at a house in a primeval Polish forest on the border of Belarus. It belongs to the world-renowned author Irena Rey, and they are there to translate her magnum opus, Gray Eminence. But within days of their arrival, Irena disappears without a trace.
The translators, who hail from eight different countries but share the same reverence for their beloved author, begin to investigate where she may have gone while proceeding with work on her masterpiece. They explore this ancient wooded refuge with its intoxicating slime molds and lichens and study her exotic belongings and layered texts for clues. But doing so reveals secrets-and deceptions-of Irena Rey's that they are utterly unprepared for. Forced to face their differences as they grow increasingly paranoid in this fever dream of isolation and obsession, soon the translators are tangled up in a web of rivalries and desire, threatening not only their work but the fate of their beloved author herself.
This hilarious, thought-provoking debut novel is a brilliant examination of art, celebrity, the natural world, and the power of language. It is an unforgettable, unputdownable adventure with a small but global cast of characters shaken by the shocks of love, destruction, and creation in one of Europe's last great wildernesses.”
Notes
Emilia wrote the ‘original’ story in Polish (not her native language) and she is the Spanish translator of Irena’s works.
The novel we are reading is from Alexis’ translation of Emilia’s work, from Polish into English.
So while we are ‘officially’ reading from Emilia’s first-person POV, we also get bits of Alexis’ first-person POV when she breaks the fourth wall throughout with footnotes.
Irena Rey’s eight translators in attendance are: Czech, English (an American), French, German, Serbian, Slovenia, Spanish (an Argentinian), and Swedish. (I personally found in interesting how we followed the non-European characters.)
The Białowieża (Bee-Owl-Vasia) Forest is a UNESCO World Heritage Site:
“The Białowieża Forest World Heritage site, on the border between Poland and Belarus, is an immense range of primary forest including both conifers and broadleaved trees covering a total area of 141,885 hectares. Situated on the watershed of the Baltic Sea and Black Sea, this transboundary property is exceptional for the opportunities it offers for biodiversity conservation. It is home to the largest population of the property’s iconic species, the European bison.” -UNESCO
“Białowieża Forest is the best preserved forest ecosystem and the last low-land deciduous and mixed old-growth forest in Europe. It is home to Europe’s largest bison population.” -WWF EU
I would also recommend listening to Croft’s interview on Book of the Day by NPR, which I reference a few times throughout the guide.
Discussion Guide
The questions from the publisher’s official guide can be found, here.
1. The novel begins with a “warning” note from the translator, who we learn is also a character in the book. In this warning, Alexis writes, “Trust is crucial to every stage of the translation process” (1). In Alexis’s footnotes, Emilia is represented throughout the novel as an unreliable narrator. But how would you classify the reliability of Alexis’s translation—does she earn our trust as readers? Why or why not?
I think it plays on the concept of ‘there’s three sides to every story—yours, mine, and the truth’. In this case there are 8+ truths, but we zoom in on two. I think Alexis’ translation is reliable to her truth, but by giving concessions in the authors note(s) (i.e. acknowledging her perceived beauty), she gains our trust by showing Emilia’s story isn’t perfect. We still don’t fully trust Alexis, but we can rely on her to show her discrepancies. She guides us away from the idea that Emilia’s POV is law.
2. Relatedly, how does this framing set your expectations for the reading experience? Are those expectations subverted at all by the novel’s end?
I’m really glad the meta narrative expectation is set right away, and not at any other time throughout the book. It gave me a more removed, ‘on the outside looking in’ experience, rather than solely trying to see the story from the main first-person POV. I also think it allowed me to be fully aware of the power of translation, almost personifying it to feel like a lurking third character to accompany Emilia and Alexis’ stories.
3. The novel begins in a collective narration, and then breaks off into the first-person voice of Emilia. What effect does this have?
It creates a disjointed narrative that parallels the circumstances and relationships as they progress, or digress, throughout the novel. They used to see themselves as a group with a common goal, but it slowly unravels to become every person for themselves. They no longer have Irena to be their uniting force, and their own lives and egos come to the forefront.
4. “We Worshipped Our Author” (5), the novel begins, the figure of Irena upheld to a nearly divine status for most of what follows. How might the novel be commenting on the concept of celebrity, literary and otherwise?
I already love discussing the concept of Celebrity, but I’m so glad it was also a theme in this novel. I think the idolization of anything can very easily become toxic obsession, to the point where common sense and reality is blurred. The whole time it felt like they were a literary cult with how they viewed Irena as an author (thinking her work is perfect), her role in the literary world (above constructive criticism), and their roles as the select few to translate her work (elite and ‘chosen’).
It also plays on the Idea of someone vs. reality. Is your fantasy of who that person is actually how they are? Most of the time, no. So then, what is the point of that obsessive desire?
Also, just because you’re important to an author, doesn’t mean you’re important on a general level. Emilia feels like they are borderline God-chosen, but it feels a little silly when looking at the role they play on a larger scale. The Average Joe would have no idea as to what the heck she does or why it’s important…so is it?
As the novel goes on, we start to see that, maybe, only certain characters worshipped Irena, and one individual’s feelings, do not speak for the entire collective.
5. How do Białowieżan and the Białowieża Forest function as settings in the novel? What might they be working to represent?
We know the forest is rare, so we also know the forest clearly represents the threat and reality of climate change. The forest is a cautionary tale in relation to the story happening in the novel: the immediate gratification of greed and desire, and the world’s resource exploitation and capitalist mentality.
There is a disappearance thus ‘extinction’ of the author, which seems to be a distraction to the larger biodiversity extinction happening.
6. “Each of this book’s original sentences is like a tiny haunted house,” writes Alexis in her introductory translator’s note (1). How else does the idea of haunting appear in the novel? What role do ghosts and the paranormal play?
This remote town and the forest itself establish an eerie, creepy, ‘removed from society’ setting. The forest is considered primeval, which connotes a haunted feeling. To me, the paranormal feelings represent the forest as a Climate Big Brother of sorts. Mixed with Irena being missing and the structure of the story, it really does feel like someone is always watching. I think the characters themselves get caught up in the atmospheric setting, too, which we see when Emilia becomes jumpy and feeling like she’s seeing things.
7. “Alexis blew her candle out, as if to make herself invisible, as if someone like her could ever escape anyone’s notice,” writes Emilia (60). In what other ways do the characters of Alexis and Emilia enact, or subvert, the stereotypes of translator and author as described in the novel?
I think this is one of my favorite questions in this Discussion Guide, but because I could write so much about it and think it’s the true essence of the novel, I’ll try to keep it concise.
Ultimately, when it comes to what they represent as translator and author, it’s power. The power of translation. The power of who gets to tell a story. The power of sharing said story. The power of narrative control. The power of English on the world stage. And further, it shows that biases can’t not come out—intentionally or otherwise—in translation. Seldom does any record get fully and accurately depicted (and personally that’s a concept that’s still sitting with me after finishing my reading).
But in the story, it feels like there’s a one-sided imagined reality of Alexis as someone ‘superior’, which leads Emilia to be jealous, envious, bitter, and self-conscious. We know Alexis doesn’t hold herself in the regard that Emilia seems to, but could it be the small fish always hating the larger predator?
8. “If there is one thing in the world that actually interests Irena, it’s fungi” (123). Discuss the role of fungi in the novel. What does it represent?
While I think the forest represents climate control, the fungi seems to represent extinction itself. Both also represent humanity’s effect on nature.
In her interview with NPR’s Book of the Day, Croft goes onto explain how she wanted to take something humble and make it beautiful, by showing the fungi to be a symbiosis of translation. She also utilized the ‘shapeshifting’ nature of fungi to show how the translators do that to Irena (taking over her space, food, and items). I think those are subtle details I missed when reading, but I also don’t hold fungi in the same regard. Good to know now, but didn’t pick up on when reading (looking back, I see Croft’s intention and it’d be even more evident upon a reread).
9. “How could everything be amadou now? Or had everything always been amadou and I had simply never noticed it before?” (111). Likewise, what do you believe to be the significance of the elusive amadou?
Amadou is the dangerous fungal material Irena left behind. It’s flammable, mysterious, and they need to be careful when handling it. With this focus on amadou, it kind of reminded me how Swifties can justify any lyric conspiracy theory if they look or try hard enough. This substance became a manifestation of mystery and obsession, trying to find any hidden meaning, but instead of pop Eater Eggs, it’s yet another wild goose chase to alter their concept of reality. Are they unearthing secrets because not all is as it seems? Or is it truly just a smoke screen?
I did like how amadou was a product, just as translation is, too.
10. “Notwithstanding that this is obviously fiction, I nonetheless remember this differently,” Alexis writes in one footnote (63). How might the novel relate to conversations about perspective and memory in a post-truth era?
Alexis to Emilia:
But in terms of perspective and memory, we should be increasing our critical thinking of what we encounter, not always believing the first thing we come across to be the full truth or without faults. It seems like common sense, but too many people fall into the trap of not fact checking or being risk-averse to voicing criticism.
Ultimately, I’d argue we’re all biased, unreliable narrators to some degree. And again, every story has three sides.
11. “There’s no such thing as death. Nothing ends. Everything only transforms” (85). Consider this statement in accordance with the plot of the novel in its entirety. What transformations take place?
Almost every aspect in this novel transforms in some way: evolution of selves, shifting dynamics, disillusion of their group, waking up from a trance of obsession. There are personal and ecological evolutions happening literally and conceptually, but I felt the most clear-defined example of transformation was when the characters are no longer being addressed and referred to as their language, but as their names. These people aren’t just the translation they complete, but have their own identities outside of these Irena Rey summits. That realization transforms the group’s reality.
There is also a major tone shift from the first half to the second half.
12. “Consider Alexis’s reference to Robert Frost’s assertion that “poetry is what gets lost in translation,” and her understanding of its meaning: “To me, poetry is concision, refinement—the effect of considerable loss,” (268). Do you agree with her interpretation? What is your own understanding of Frost’s quotation?
My understanding of the quote is that poetry has the ability capture elements that get lost in translation, but might not always. Specifically, if we’re looking at a sterile textbook, poetry can bridge the gap to provide the humanity and emotional context that is lost, but if looking from a positive experience, the subjective poetry might embellish reality (like purple prose).
I think Alexis’ interpretation is a little morbid and inaccurate. I think it ultimately depends on the author—feelings can absolutely be fully captured within the refinement of poetry. Whether five words or 500, it just depends. I also don’t see poetry as inherently sad, which I pulled from the connotation of ‘considerable loss’.
13. “Every original work of literature is a Pasiphaë that bathes the world in light. Yet cursed with an insuperable desire for the Reader, a white bull, the text is doomed to engender a Minotaur, over and over again. I am Ariadne falling to her knees on Naxos, stricken by the folly of my kindness,” Irena allegedly writes to her translators (278). Consider further exploring these myths with your book club—what deeper connections to the novel can you draw from them? Discuss.
As I’m a Book Club of One, I’m skipping this question.
14. “Painting, sculpture, literature—even language itself, a system of abstractions intended to stand in for the real world. That was the key: every creation that served as a substitute for what was given in nature was art” (145). Do you agree with this assessment? Do you believe art to be natural or unnatural? Discuss.
R.e. the quote—yes and no. I do love the first sentence, but I don’t fully agree with the second sentence as it depends on how language is being used. I think there are Practical (unintentional) vs. Artistic (intentional) uses of language. For example, my toddler asking for water vs. poetry.
And yes, I do believe art to be natural and creativity is inherent to humanity.
15. What hat do you imagine a reverse translation of the novel might look like, in which Emilia translates Alexis’s narration?
I don’t think a proper ‘reverse translation’ would actually come to fruition as Emilia is too insecure, too bitter, and too resentful to be ‘objective with subjective footnotes’ like Alexis. I think because Emilia had such an identity crisis throughout the novel, she would either: be unable to complete the translation, or would create a subjective companion novel from her POV.
16. Consider Roland Barthes’s “Death of the Author” theory, which argues that the meaning of a literary work is to be interpreted and thus created by its readers, rather than by the author and their own intentions for the text. How might this theory apply to the metanarrative of the novel, and the plight of the translators? How do you imagine they each might feel about Barthes’s theory?
I think this theory applies to the meta narrative because anything, especially art, is up for critique. For Emilia specifically, I would imagine her to see it as a loss of self, even more so than the events that took place. Her enemy is translating her truth, and we know things get lost.
But ultimately, I think the quote show Intent vs. Impact. Just because an author has an idea for something, doesn’t mean that’s what’s going to come across or what people will take away from it. We all have our own unique perspectives and experiences when encountering art, literature, etc., so it is guaranteed for everything to be interpreted differently.
In Summation
I thought this book was very well-written, but while the plot lost me by the end (going completely off-the-rails to the point where it felt disjointed), the concept of translation and how it was used is something I keep going back to. It was fresh, inventive, and makes you take a deeper, philosophical take on literature outside of this forest and ‘summer camp gone wild’.
I gave this book four out of five stars. I do think I’ll read more from Croft in the future, but I don’t think it’d ever be ‘high priority’. There is an objective ‘good’ quality to her novels, but I just don’t think I’m a reader who will ever rate something of hers five stars (though, I’d love to be proven wrong).
And in terms of the tone shift, going back to her Book of the Day interview, Croft concedes to the unnerved feeling because this mirrored her own lived experience of being pregnant with twins during the writing process.
If you’d like to see a full review from someone who writes more profoundly than I do, I’d recommend reading Elizabeth McNeill’s review from Chicago Review of Books.
If you read this novel, what did you think? What did you rate it? Are there any details from these questions missed? Would love to know!
ICYMI
Thank you for supporting me and this newsletter. For more frequent happenings, you can find me on Instagram and StoryGraph. To shop my book recommendations and support this publication at no additional cost to you, visit my Bookshop affiliate profile (earns commission).