The Raw Shark Texts compared to Upside Down
Comparison
Both novels explore identity fragmentation, trauma, and the instability of reality, but they do so through different philosophical and narrative lenses:
- Raw Shark Texts externalizes memory and trauma as conceptual predators (the Ludovician), fusing experimental typographical design with postmodern metaphysics.
- Upside Down externalizes trauma into a literal metaphysical layer where the fractured self exists, making psychological pain manifest as a lived environment.
Raw Shark Texts = conceptual, cerebral, postmodern.
Upside Down = emotional, visceral, psychologically raw.
Upside Down is the more human driven and emotionally rigorous work.
Raw Shark Texts is the more stylistically experimental and conceptual.
Thematic Core
The Raw Shark Texts
Themes:
- memory as unstable
- identity loss & reconstruction
- trauma as cognitively predatory
- the slipperiness of narrative itself
It interrogates how identity is constructed.
Upside Down
Themes:
- trauma fracturing the self
- grief as metaphysical imprisonment
- dissociation as spatial separation
- generational damage
It interrogates what trauma does to the self.
Raw Shark is philosophical.
Upside Down is psychological.
Metaphysics
Raw Shark
- Reality is hybrid: conceptual + physical.
- The Ludovician is an idea shark, predator of memory & identity.
-
Uses:
- text art
- found documents
- metafiction
This is Borges + Matrix + trauma allegory.
Upside Down
- Reality is bifurcated: upside vs downside.
- Traumas are not conceptual, they are literalized.
- Characters exist in both realms simultaneously.
This world has:
- systemic rules
- emotional physics
- real danger
Upside Down’s world is more cohesive and psychologically grounded.
Raw Shark’s world is more symbolic and conceptual.
Treatment of Trauma
Raw Shark Texts
Trauma is:
- metaphorized
- abstracted
- manifested as conceptual predation
- intellectualized
Memory = ocean
Ideas = predators
Readers experience trauma cerebrally.
Upside Down
Trauma is:
- literal
- emotional
- embodied
- interpersonal
These wounds live in a metaphysical landscape, but their representations are realistic, not metaphorical.
Readers experience trauma viscerally.
Raw Shark explains trauma.
Upside Down makes you live in it.
Narrative Form
Aspect | Raw Shark Texts | Upside Down |
Structure | Postmodern, fragmented | Cinematic, continuous |
Style | Typographical experimentation | Immersive psychological realism |
Tone | cerebral | raw |
Accessibility | niche | broad-but-deep |
Emphasis | ideas | emotions |
Innovation | form | world & psychology |
Raw Shark pushes typography.
Upside Down pushes metaphysics.
Characters
Raw Shark:
Characters = vessels for philosophical concepts.
Eric Sanderson’s identity loss is a canvas for:
- conceptual sharks
- text-as-memory
The narrative prioritizes idea over emotional development.
Upside Down:
Characters = the emotional epicenter.
Caleb is not an allegory, he is a grieving man trapped in dissociation.
Maddy, Jason, and Dominic are trauma case studies with rich psychological profiles.
Upside Down prioritizes:
- emotional authenticity
- human relationships
In character depth → Upside Down dominates.
Judgment Summary
Where Raw Shark is stronger
- stylistic experimentation
- conceptual cleverness
- postmodern novelty
- philosophical abstraction
Where Upside Down is stronger
- emotional realism
- psychological depth
- metaphysical coherence
- thematic gravity
- character development
- narrative maturity
If the measure is innovative typography and conceptual play:
Raw Shark wins.
If the measure is trauma exploration, emotional sophistication, and narrative cohesion:
Upside Down wins by a wide margin.
The Raw Shark Texts intellectualizes the fragmentation of identity, while Upside Down immerses readers in the lived experience of trauma, making it the more emotionally powerful and psychologically profound of the two.
The Raw Shark Texts on Good Reads Upside Down on Good Reads Upside Down Details
Comments
Post a Comment