Qwints brought up some excellent points that I really wanted to expound upon...
I think people not getting the ending has a lot to do with the idea of an untrustworthy narrator. The narrator is literally incapable of evaluating the possible consequences of sharing the method because she is programmed to defend it at all costs. Her walking away from the house and her method is exactly the same psychologically as a mother abandoning her children. The narrator's ability to do so rationally, is a great step forward.
This is a very adroit observation and, in fact, is a remarkable element of the story that was so expertly woven into the action and dialog, that I didn't even notice it. Very subtle meaning in a very overt tale. Indeed, since we are told this story through "The Boss'" eyes and experiences, it is sometimes hard to remember that this lens is just as cracked and injured as any of the other Elites living in the house. Her decision to walk away, for better or for worse, shows a step in healing that is probably the real point of the story.
Thank you, Qwints, for bringing my attention to this point!
I have two problems with this story. First, as has been said, there is really too much exposition for an audio form.
That the story had too much exposition has been stated several times and not just by Qwints.
In this, I respectfully disagree.
To my way of thinking, liking or disliking the amount of exposition is more of a personal choice on the part of the reader as well as an inherent part of the voice of the author. For me, the exposition enhanced rather than distracted from the circumstances of The Elites and, therefore, only served as a pacing tool. It slowed what was an inherently fast-paced concept down to an intimate crawl.
In this case, the abundance of exposition brought me into the headspace of people I can honestly say I've never experienced. It slowed my introduction as well by providing me with long, emotion-laden passages that helped me connect with them, first, and see them in my mind's eye, later.
But, as I said before, this is largely an individual bias. I can certainly see why readers might think that the amount of exposition was too much.
I wonder, though, if we can guide our minds into a story in different ways to allow ourselves to enjoy different types of storytelling that we might otherwise not enjoy? I don't know if this is possible or even a good thing, but it would be interesting to see.
Certainly, when seeing a movie I know that my mood can radically impact how I experience the story. I've seen "What Dreams May Come" three times in my life. The first time, I developed a stomach illness during the film. I really found it too long and laborious; it made me uncomfortable and annoyed. The second time, owing to a recognition that my mental state when I first saw it was influenced by illness, I really found it engaging and noticed things I hadn't the first time through; it was creative and beautifully melancholy. The third time was just after my father died. It was heartbreaking and sad-without-hope.
In a similar way, I have to ask if reading or listening to "The Elites" with an eye for the amount of exposition being a narrative tool to bring us into the mind of the narrator, would make those who think it "too much" enjoy the story more.
I don't know but it's interesting to think about.
Yours,
Sylvan (Dave)