To Paradise

Book 2 opens almost exactly 100 years after the opening of Book 1: October 1993. The setting is a beautiful New York mansion in Washington Square, which could be the very mansion where the Bingham family lived in Book 1. All of the characters in Book 2 share names with characters from Book 1, but their identities don’t necessarily align. For example, in both Books, the characters named Charles Griffith are wealthy, older, gay men; however, Charles in Book 1 is meek and gentle, while Charles in Book 2 is confident and even brash. While David Bingham in Book 1 is the pampered heir of a wealthy old New York family, David Bingham in Book 2 is a young Hawaiian man who is estranged from his family and financially reliant on his wealthy boyfriend.

The relationship between David and Charles in Book 2 in some ways imagines an alternative resolution to the conundrum in Book 1; part of why David Bingham fears marrying Charles Griffith is his belief that he would become essentially a trophy husband forced into a premature middle age. David of Book 1 rejects this fate, while David of Book 2 is living through this experience and feels ambivalent about it. David wonders, “Was it Charles’s wealth, or his age, or his race that made David feel so often helpless and inferior? Would he be more purposeful, less passive, if things between him and his boyfriend were more equitable?” (213). This quotation shows that characters often experience ambivalence and doubt about romantic relationships, no matter what choices they make; it also foreshadows some of the challenges Dr. Charles Griffith will face in his marriage in Book 3, in which Nathaniel longs for a life of greater luxury than Charles can provide.

In Book 2, class and wealth continue to stratify characters and society. In Book 1, David and Edward meet by chance because they would never normally find themselves in the same place or social setting; 100 years later, in a society that appears much less rigid, corporate culture has continued to enforce social hierarchies. For example, David and Charles meet when David uses a washroom reserved for individuals with higher status in the law firm. Their relationship represents a breach of class and income expectations much as Edward and David’s relationship does in Book 1; David notes the “absurdity of there being separate bathrooms in the law firm based upon its employees’ rank” (194). The racial and age difference between David and Charles in Book 2 creates further dynamics of inequity within their relationship, and these are reinforced by David leaving Charles’s assumptions unchallenged. David begins to see himself through Charles’s ideas, reflecting that, “he was poor. He hadn’t had a fancy education. He was naïve” (198). Still, David’s education gives him agency in Charles’s world while James, the waiter, can only be in the same rooms as a servant. Others, like David’s friend Eden, end up excluded entirely.

The motif of illness is presented with greater specificity and threat in Book 2; David Bingham’s “disease” in Book 1 was mostly melancholy and loneliness, while Book 2 explores the reality of the gay community during the height of the AIDS epidemic. David describes the reality of “spen[ding] his twenties going to memorial services instead of plotting his own future” (223), juxtaposing living with the shadow of death and the kind of youthful hope that would be more typical of his life stage. The motif of illness is tied to themes of community and interconnection; HIV is contagious, but the novel also depicts characters experiencing a sense of solidarity. This response to the epidemic contrasts strongly with Book 3, where individuals rapidly turn against each other to prioritize their own survival.

Yanagihara foregrounds death in this section by having the party take place to mark the end of Peter’s life; while Peter is dying of cancer, not AIDS, his end-of-life celebration carries additional weight because of the constant impending loss experienced by Charles, David, and their friends. Disease is contextualized within class and income structures. Peter has access to palliative care that most do not; he can fly to Switzerland and opt for euthanasia, a choice he believes gives him dignity in death. Likewise, Charles and the men in his social circle still suffer and die, but they can afford medical treatment to prolong their lives and be as comfortable as possible. On the other hand, young people in David’s social circle are forced to accept the possibility of impending death because they have limited options for treatment or care: “[T]hey didn’t have money, and who knew how long they would have life?” (214). Regardless of class, there is a strong social stigma against HIV/AIDS, leading to individuals hiding their diagnoses. One of Charles’s friends, who is HIV positive, strives to keep his status secret because “he was afraid he’d get fired if the company’s owners found out” (204). This stigmatization and shame mirror how, in Book 1, David’s illness is an illicit secret that he tries to keep from everyone.

The plot events of Book 2, Part 1 take place in a tightly compressed time frame, spanning the day leading up to the party, the party itself, and the morning afterward. Information about David’s past and the history of his relationship with Charles is revealed through his memories and reflections. This context develops David’s character as someone ambivalent and torn between multiple identities. While David Bingham in Book 1 felt oppressed by the weight of his family identity and ultimately chose to break free from it, David in Book 2 feels isolated and adrift without connections to his cultural heritage and family of origin. David feels regret and confusion as he reflects that, “he was living in New York with a man, with a white man. He never spoke of his family, or his ancestors. He never chanted the songs he had been taught to chant, he never danced the stories he had been taught to dance” (230). This shows that David carries a sense of loss, guilt, and shame about abandoning his cultural heritage.

The people David intuitively connects with, such as Eden and James, are other young people of color struggling to survive in an expensive world. While David’s story in Book 2 in some ways offers an alternate fate for Book 1’s David, David in Book 2 also shares significant similarities with Edward Bishop of Book 1. Both are scrappy, intelligent young men, largely alone in the world and displaced from their place of origin. By exploring David’s psychological ambivalence as the less wealthy and influential partner in a romantic relationship, Book 2 provides a counterbalance to Book 1’s focus on David Bingham’s doubts and debate over whether to abandon his privilege.

David’s decision in Book 2 to hide much of his past from Charles hints that in Book 1, Edward may have been concealing his past from David Bingham, and the dossier may have been accurate. In Book 1, Edward insists that his father was an honest and upstanding man, contrary to the information the detective relayed. In Book 2, David is unable to accept the reality of who his father is and prefers to construct a narrative in which his father is dead. David does not want to tell the story to anyone because he doesn’t know “how could he make Lipo-wao-nahele sound like something different, something better, something saner than what it was” (255). David never shares this vulnerable truth with Charles, and Charles only finds out by reading the letter, which becomes a parallel to the detective’s dossier in Book 1 and Charlie finding her husband’s secret notes in Book 3.

The lack of full trust between David and Charles shows that the differences between the two men make it impossible for them to fully relate to one another, even though they do love one another. The quiet resignation of the two beginning their morning together provides a counterpoint to the romantic and rebellious ending of Book 1; in Book 2, lovers from very different worlds find a way to be together but also have to accept the limitations that their differences impose. However, the conclusion of David and Charles as “two people in love, and they were making themselves something to eat, and there was plenty of food” (256) provides a rare moment of peace and security in the novel.