63 pages • 2 hours read
Jonathan FranzenA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Character Analysis
Themes
Symbols & Motifs
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Crossroads is split into two parts that correspond to events on the Christian calendar: “Advent” and “Easter.” Advent is the month-long season preceding Christmas that always begins on the fourth Sunday before Christmas and ends on Christmas Eve. Easter is only one day, but it is the culmination of the 40-day season of Lent. Advent anticipates the birth of Jesus, whereas Lent leads up to Good Friday, the day on which Jesus’s crucifixion is memorialized, and Easter, the day his resurrection is celebrated. To observing Christians, Christmas is important because it prefigures Easter; in other words, Jesus’ birth in human form makes possible his eventual death and resurrection, by which humans can find redemption from sin.
For the Hildebrandts, too, events from the novel’s “Advent” section inevitably result in the events of the “Easter” section. From Russ and Marion’s growing disdain for each other and extramarital interests; to Perry’s alienation, spiritual emptiness, and drug exploration—these events make possible Perry’s life-altering crisis in Arizona. The parallels to the Christian Easter celebration in the novel’s “Easter” section are not exact; no one dies in the Hildebrandt family, even though Perry does attempt suicide. However, the family as it previously existed has died, set on a new trajectory by Perry. They are now driven by financial need, as his arrest and arson create overwhelming debt. Russ and Marion are now Perry’s primary caretakers, as his psychological treatment and battles with drug relapse leave him weak and foggy, unable to care for himself without supervision. The bright future his intelligence might have granted him in college and beyond is gone, at least temporarily. Moreover, the family is irrevocably split, with Becky on one side and Russ, Marion, and Perry on the other. Judson—young enough not to understand all the nuances of the adult family members’ dynamics but not so young he is not aware of the change—is left in the middle. The same is true of Clem, who does not want to choose between Becky and the rest of his family but decides to at the end of the novel.
Nevertheless, hope remains that the events of “Easter” may lead to redemption for the Hildebrandts. There are signs of possible resolution ahead. Russ and Marion recommit to each other and devote themselves to being there for Perry as they were not before. Clem is capable of seeing both his parents’ and Becky’s side of the disagreement. Becky’s husband, Tanner, is a kind and gentle man who undoubtedly does not want tension with his in-laws. While Franzen offers no guarantees, he signals that just as the past version of the Hildebrandt family has died, so too might it one day come into a new, better life.
The $13,000 that Marion’s sister, Aunt Shirley, wills to Becky is a symbol that recurs throughout the novel and underlines several of its key ideas. First, it highlights the existence of inherently unfair circumstances in life. In the novel, some characters perceive themselves as either “chosen” or “not chosen.” Becky is one of the chosen; things come very easily to her, seemingly through no special quality except her beauty. There is no indication that Becky’s brothers did anything rude or cruel to Aunt Shirley; she just prefers Becky because Becky is a beautiful girl who appreciates Aunt Shirley’s glamorous life. Similarly, Russ feels that God chose Rick Ambrose to be a talented leader and did not choose Russ. He compares his circumstance to the biblical story of Joseph: The Bible says that God favored Joseph over his brothers but does not specify why. Russ does not think that Rick is a better person than him, but he thinks God chose him anyway, and for this reason he hates Rick as much as Joseph’s brothers hated Joseph. Perry too feels a rankling sense of un-chosen-ness. As he says during his outburst at the Haefles’ party, he feels as if everyone around him conceives of themselves as saved and him as damned. The designation feels unfair, as he tries to be good and devotes much thought to what it means to be good.
In addition to inherent unfairness, the money also evokes the common human experience of wanting conflicts to be obvious, with one clearly right party and one clearly wrong party, only to find endless conflicts that are more complicated. When Russ and Marion take Becky’s portion of Aunt Shirley’s inheritance to pay part of their new legal bills, two reasonable people could disagree on the rightness of their action. On the one hand, taking the money is not resigning Becky to doom. She still has options for her future, even if they are not the exact ones she wants, whereas the family’s financial situation is much more dire. On the other hand, Aunt Shirley gave the money to Becky, and Becky played no part in Perry’s bad choices. Arguably, she was less responsible than Russ and Marion themselves, who failed to intervene with their son sooner. Both sides have valid arguments, and the money symbolizes the difficulty of such conflicts, especially for people like Clem and Judson who are caught in the middle of them.
The white characters’ interactions with Indigenous culture form a motif throughout the novel. They are a perfect example of faults and virtues colliding, and of the frequent mismatch between intentions and actions. When Russ first seeks out the Navajo reservation as a young man during World War II, he goes out of a genuine interest in the culture. He has no intention to play the “white savior” role; he just wants to work and live with them for a few months. However, later in his life, he comes to realize that maybe the people there did not particularly like him, and that maybe he was oblivious to how one-sided the “friendship” was. He got something from the experience but gave little or nothing in return.
This question is underlined further by the annual Crossroads trips to the Navajo reservation. These trips have enormous significance. One such trip lays the groundwork for Russ’s ousting from the group, which haunts him in the novel’s present and provides much of the resentment that fuels his bad decisions. The trip that takes place in the present in 1972 could arguably be called the climax of the book; it is where Russ finally has sex with Frances Cottrell, his goal since the novel’s opening page, only to find that Perry has changed the family’s lives forever with his thievery, arson, arrest, and suicide attempt.
What is notably missing from these significant moments in the Arizona trips is any interaction with Navajo people themselves. The trips are more of a theater where various Crossroads-related dramas play out than a meaningful experience with Navajo culture. Nothing better exemplifies this than Russ’s brief conversation with Clyde when he recovers the two guitars Clyde stole from some Crossroads members. Russ essentially steamrolls Clyde while thinking he is being an ally, continuously pressing him to come talk to the Crossroads teens about his family’s hardships—as if Clyde would get anything out of parading his hardships in front of a group of religious tourists who will go back to their more comfortable lives in a week. Clyde is forced to explain to Russ his enormous frustration that a cavalcade of institutions are set up to keep his family poor, no matter how many church groups swing by for annual trips to “help.” Rather than being sobered by this message, Frances leaves the interaction in a state of sexual arousal over how “well” Russ handled the situation, leading to Russ and Frances having sex for the first time.
Franzen does not attempt a deep look into Native culture—probably wisely, given that he has no personal experience or intimate knowledge of it. But he does offer enough glimpses into it to make readers question the effects of the Crossroads group trips more deeply than the Crossroads group members themselves think about them. While most members of the group consider themselves part of the liberal, progressive, countercultural wave of the 1960s and 1970s, few of them stop to reflect on the extent to which they make Native culture a prop in their stories. They use the annual trips to make themselves feel helpful, not to learn about the Navajo.
By Jonathan Franzen