|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0593547519
| 9780593547519
| 0593547519
| 3.67
| 21,609
| Feb 14, 2023
| Apr 16, 2024
|
None
|
Notes are private!
|
0
|
not set
|
not set
|
Feb 28, 2024
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
0812998626
| 9780812998627
| 3.30
| 77,108
| May 16, 2023
| May 16, 2023
|
liked it
|
I should have not waited so long to review this as it seems that The Guest failed to leave a lasting impression on me. It had its moments, and early o
I should have not waited so long to review this as it seems that The Guest failed to leave a lasting impression on me. It had its moments, and early on in the narrative Emma Cline’s storytelling carried echoes of authors like Shirley Jackson and Patricia Highsmith. Alex is in her twenties, and for the past few years, she has been drifting along, using people around her to make ends meet. She doesn’t want or, or doesn’t even consider, the possibility of working a job like her peers, rather she manages to get by dating older men. These transactional relationships are not a reliable source of income, as the men in question either find a younger more attractive girl or begin to see cracks in Alex’s acting. After a fall-out with an on-again-off-again boyfriend and becoming persona non grata in her shared flat, Alex jumps at the opportunity to get out of New York. She tags along her latest man who is going for a break at his place on Long Island. There Alex makes a misstep that sees her falling out of his ‘graces’. Unwilling to return to her old place and knowing that her ex is out to get her, Alex decides that she will win this latest guy over by showing up to this guy's party (was it for the 4th of july? i can't recall), which is a week away. In the meantime she drifts, insinuating herself at parties, willing to deceive whoever so she can just stay in Long Island till the following week. The premise definitely brought to mind Tom Ripley, and as I said, there were definitely some similarities not only between him and Alex but the author’s style, which at times comes across as detached, clinical even. This certainly contributes to the stories’ atmosphere of unease, as in both The Talented Mr. Ripley and The Guest we have narratives that are pervaded by ambivalence. The emptiness, alienation, and ennui experienced by Alex brought to mind authors like Shirley Jackson (especially when it came to alex being ‘expelled’ from the various places she drifts through), Danzy Senna, and Sabina Murray. Sadly, after an intriguing opening The Guest flatlines. The story unnecessarily drags on Alex’s fallout with her ex. Additionally, Alex ends up spending most of her time with this boy, who is rather sheltered and nerdy. The dynamic between them brought to mind BP, a book I abhor. Some scenes struck me as trying a bit too hard to be edgy and shocking (when i have read very similar ones in milk fed). I understand to a certain extent that the narrative is trying to reflect Alex’s worldview, her apathy, numbness, and boredom. But I found myself craving more from her and the story. I wasn’t expecting Barbara Vine's levels of psychological undercurrents but something more than this…which was very much all vibes. I wouldn’t have minded if the vibes in question were worth it. Ultimately I guess I was too aware of the various stylistic and plot devices at work in this book, so I had a hard time becoming immersed in the narrative. Alex’s girlbossing gaslighting gatekeeping was tedious. The one thing I appreciated about her is that the narrative doesn’t give her a sob backstory, as Eliza Clark does in Boy Parts, to make her ‘wickedness’ more palatable. Still, compared to Maria in Senna's New People and Katherine in Murray's A Carnivore's Inquiry, Alex just wasn't a particularly fascinating character, despite the narrative attempts to paint this ambiguous figure. Perhaps readers who haven't come across the works that I have mentioned in this review will find this novel to be more captivating than I was. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 25, 2023
|
Feb 28, 2023
|
Oct 25, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
0802117694
| 9780802117694
| 0802117694
| 3.57
| 518
| Jun 04, 2004
| Jun 04, 2004
|
really liked it
| “This is what exploration had opened up the door to. Not only widespread slaughter, but the necessary accompaniment of gorging.” Unapologetically solip “This is what exploration had opened up the door to. Not only widespread slaughter, but the necessary accompaniment of gorging.” Unapologetically solipsistic and deeply manipulative, Katherine, the central character of A Carnivore's Inquiry, makes for an awful human being and a deeply entertaining narrator. A predecessor to Ottessa Moshfegh and Mona Awad’s protagonists, and many of the young women from the 'She's Not Feeling Good at All' subgenre, Katherine is a ceaselessly sardonic and relentlessly remorseless narrator with a predilection for histories and representations of cannibalism. “I was one of those people who made up for what she lacked in talent with her father’s money.” Katherine is 23 and has arrived in New York after an extended trip to Italy. She is young, attractive, and from wealth. However, she has no interest in reconnecting with her father, a man she thinks rarely of, and never with any particular fondness. Her mother has been in and out of institutions all her life, and glimpses into Katherine’s childhood reveal just how unstable she was. But Katherine is not prone to melancholy, or at least, if she thinks of the past, it is not her past that she longs or feels for, rather, she is fascinated by tales and accounts of cannibals, cannibalism itself, and nurtures a troublesome, perverse even, admiration for colonialist and their violence and usurpation against native communities. She’s often awed by accounts of violence, of madness, and of death, recounting and reimagining many of these episodes, often adopting the point of view of the person who inflicted violence upon others, or went mad, or was put in a situation where cannibalism was the only means of survival. “I find it hard to feel bad for Hansel. It’s the witch I feel for.” Katherine sets her sights on an older man, a fairly well-off writer Boris. Her momentary interest in Boris seems a consequence of boredom and a monetary desire. Soon she grows tired of Boris, a rather pathetic yet nasty person, who makes the mistake of thinking himself cleverer than her. Katherine convinces him to buy a house in rural Maine, a town that happens to have a killer on a loose. Far from bothered by this, Katherine seems comforted by the idea of this killer. Eventually, she finds herself travelling to Mexico City, and later returning to New York where she comes across some unwelcome familiar faces. As her restlessness sees her hitting the road, she forms unlikely friendships with random men she meets on her travels. All the while, bodies keep piling up wherever she goes. “[I]n our culture there was a weird enthusiasm for cannibalism. Cannibalism was a big thrill as long as we weren’t doing it.” While we know from the start that something is off about Katherine, we don’t really know just how unreliable a narrator she is. She often says and does exactly what she wants when she wants, has no trouble striking up conversations with strangers and is not put off by people not liking her. Her disregard for social niceties and norms makes her a character that is always able to surprise you. Her blithe responses to the odd, occasionally disturbing, circumstances she finds herself in are pure gold. Yet, despite knowing and being confronted with her strangeness, she retains a hypotonic quality. Her ambiguous nature drew me in, as I found myself eager to learn what was truly going on. Who is responsible for these deaths? Why is Katherine obsessed with cannibalism? What is at the root of her ennui? “After a few hurdles, my life would achieve a stunning, appealing normalcy.” Adroit, dark, and wickedly funny, A Carnivore's Inquiry is a riveting tale. The plot, however meandering, reflects Katherine’s restlessness. Aloof, duplicitous, and hungry for experience Katherine uses those around her as she pleases, both for materialistic gain and to pass away time. The novel’s historical and artistic discourses brought to mind the work of María Gainza, as here too we are given in-depth insights into art pieces and historical figures. I found A Carnivore's Inquiry's exploration of taboos, cannibalism, and violence to be sharp and subversive. I appreciated how Sabina Murray upends traditional power dynamics and challenges notions of normalcy and likeability. Her commentary on consumerism, colonialism, power structures, the ‘elite’, NY’s art and literary scene, femininity, and privilege was sly and thrilling. “The needs of appetite justified everything.” A Carnivore's Inquiry makes for a unique read, a rare treat. Not only is A Carnivore's Inquiry rich thematically but stylistically. Murray constantly keeps her readers on their toes as she shifts from genres (gothic, thriller, satire) and tones (playful, grotesque, introspective). Katherine’s voice is the book’s strength, as readers are bound to find her both fascinating and abhorrent. Her interactions are always interesting, as they often veer into the realms of the absurd (more than once david lynch came to mind). “I seem to have touched a nerve,” said Ann. My only quibble really is in regards to the Italian (chingiale should be cinghiale, seiscento should be seicento, and then gittoni should have been gettoni). And yeah that Silvano was utterly ridiculous (of course, he is a fascist) but he ended up adding to the novel's vibe of surreality. I think this would definitely appeal to fans of Moshfegh, Awad, and Danzy Senna as well as readers who are on the lookout for novels exploring 'The Female Malaise' or that centre on alienated & alienating young women. Clever, enigmatic, and atmospheric, A Carnivore's Inquiry is a novel that I look forward to rereading. I liked this so much that I am even planning on revisiting The Human Zoo, also by Murray, which I read with little fanfare last year (hopefully this time around it will win me over). re-read: a truly ingenious novel, thematically rich and written with impressive confidence. within the novel colonialism and cannibalism are deeply intwined, the monstrous desire to conquer is presented as a hunger, one that our narrator and anti-heroine feels deeply. similarly to Guadagnino's Bones and All the novel questions inherited monstrosity, especially in a mother/daughter dynamic. i loved the hazy quality permeating much of this novel, which really adds to Katherine's ambivalence. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Mar 17, 2024
Jan 03, 2023
|
Mar 24, 2024
Jan 06, 2023
|
Oct 13, 2022
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
1951213149
| 9781951213145
| 1951213149
| 3.78
| 43,428
| Oct 31, 2019
| Dec 01, 2020
|
None
|
Notes are private!
|
0
|
not set
|
not set
|
Feb 02, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
B07G14S3NK
| 3.98
| 10,957
| Feb 08, 2022
| Feb 01, 2022
|
None
|
Notes are private!
|
0
|
not set
|
not set
|
Jan 10, 2022
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||||
1910312649
| 9781910312643
| 1910312649
| 3.77
| 52,808
| Jul 23, 2020
| Jul 23, 2020
|
did not like it
|
disclaimer: i did not like this book. the opinions and impressions i will express in this review are entirely subjective and i am not in fact stating
disclaimer: i did not like this book. the opinions and impressions i will express in this review are entirely subjective and i am not in fact stating ‘irrefutable facts’. it has come to my attention that this author has a history of going on twitter to ‘bemoan’ reviewers who have given her book a negative review...which has never been a win in my books. so i will attempt to write this review with a death of the author approach. please do not confuse my negative review of this book as a personal attack on the author or as an estimation of the author herself as i do not know her in any capacity whatsoever. if you are incensed by reviewers expressing an opinion that differs from your own one, you are better off skipping this review (this includes you too eliza…). vague and not so vague spoilers below I am befuddled by the ratings and reviews singing this book’s praises. This is one of those cases where I am forced to ask myself: did I read the same book as everybody else? And before you @ me, no, I did not dislike this book because it is work of satire centred on an (exaggeratedly) intentionally unlikeable main character. Some of my favorite books focus on people who are varying degrees of horrible or 'messy' (my year of rest and relaxation, luster, madame bovary, sula, pretend i’m dead, you exist too much, apartment, symptomatic, these violent delights, and a lot of the stuff written by authors such as shirley jackson, danzy senna, and joyce carol oates). I also like characters like Hannibal or Villanelle. I read Lolita and while it did repulse me (as intended) I didn’t hate it because it was from the pov of a p*dophile. And I am fond of the 'she’s not feeling too good' subgenre, contemporary books that are characterized by a caustic tone and explore the lives of women who are, you guessed it, not feeling too good and are depicted as alienated and self-sabotaging … I also do not have a problem with books combining dark humor with violence, My Sister the Serial Killer is a fave of mine. And a few months ago I was enthralled and disturbed by Titane directed by Julia Ducournau (who actually gets a mention in boy parts). All of this to say is that I can deal with and even appreciate characters who for whatever reason do, think, or say things that are ‘frowned’ upon or downright evil. I would go as far as to say that I prefer flawed characters over flawless/uber-likeable characters (very edgy of me, i know). My only caveat is that I have to find said unlikable characters interesting: Emma Bovary, for instance, is not a particularly clever character, you could say she is quite the opposite. She’s naive, pathetic, obnoxious, solipsistic, cruel, and superficial…but I found her acts of self-dramatization to be both fascinating and a source of great amusement. Ottessa Moshfregh’s narrator in MYORAR is nasty (she is awful to her supposed best friend, callous, narcissistic, morbid, and says/thinks offensive things about many groups of people). Did I condone her actions in the novel? No. Did I find her f*cked up sense of humor to be highly addictive? Yes. This is all to say that Irina being a stronza who engages in ‘bad’ behaviour, is not why I didn’t like this book. The reason why I did not like this book has less to do with her being an unlikable c*nt and more to do with her being boring as f*ck. Her internal monologue is repetitive, but not even in a realistic navel-gazey way, like Selin’s narration is in The Idiot, but in an incredibly affected way that just comes across as the book desperately trying to present this character as some counter-culture edgelady, who repeatedly ‘transgresses’ accepted norms of behaviours and—shock horror—flips the ‘male gaze’ on its head by being the one behind the camera. Maybe if this book had come out in the 80s, I would be more inclined to forgive or accept its many shortcomings, but since it was published in 2020 I have a harder time reconciling myself with its unimaginative and superficial exploration of female sexuality, the male gaze, and female rage. There is nothing clever about the way the narrative represents and discusses these themes. The narrative is very much all flash, no substance (tutto fumo e niente arrosto) as it not only mistakes shock value for real horror but it operates under the false assumption that gratuitous or otherwise sensationalistic content is subversive and thought-provoking. If this book had actually been disturbing maybe then I could have overlooked its pulpy and overt storyline…but it isn’t. Funnily enough the story’s numerous floundering attempts at edginess, but these feel dated and painfully affected, on the lines of Awad's Bunny or Mariana Enríquez who at least do not settle for mid-tier levels of offensive but f*cking commit. Boy Parts reads like a short story that has been stretched beyond its expiry date. The ‘hook’, that of a ‘pervy’ female photographer, had potential for the first 30% of the narrative. Then things just get messy, and not a good kind of messy where I am enthralled by our mc’s unreliable and increasingly disconcerting narrative, but messy in a poorly executed kind of way. The writing changes slightly, but not in a believably organic way that reflects the main character’s spiralling mental health. The book’s satire is devoid of substance or bite. The caricatures populating this narrative are neither amusing nor particularly provocative. Some characters come across as heavy-handed attempts at capturing a certain type of person, while either serve no function other than to exist so the narrator can prove to the readers how nasty she is. The story could have been a lot more effective if the tone had been camped up, so we could have something along the lines of Jennifer’s Body (which is by no means a perfect film but at least it's entertaining and self-aware). Or maybe if the book had gone for a more elliptical stream-of-consciousness type of storytelling, a la Clarice Lispector, maybe then I would have liked it more. But what we got just did not work for me at all. There was something profoundly simplistic about the way these themes are explored and the narrator is one of the dullest galls I have ever had the misfortune to read about. Being a tall and sexy white Northern who thinks she’s the f*cking hardcore because she likes to take kinky photos of men she deems ‘beta’...yeah. The way the book satirizes England's art scene is banal, we get unfunny lines about identity politics and artists such as Tracey Emin. The narrative doesn’t convey Irina’s creative process in a convincing way, in fact, I was left with the impression that—and here i must briefly break from my death of the author approach and acknowledge the existence of the author—whoever was behind the story was either not particularly familiar with photography or not interested in going into detail about it (as i said this an impression i formed, not a fact). As examinations of female creativity go, this one is derivative and unsatisfying. I mean, compared to We Play Ourselves, Self-Portrait with Boy, and Generation Loss (all of whom happen to focus on queer young women who are not portrayed as exclusively interested in men and in replicating tired dom/sub dynamics) Boy Parts just doesn’t go much into depth when it comes to Irina and her changing relationship to her photography. I didn’t feel that she actually felt passionate about these photos, rather, we are told what she did at a school, and she relates the art she produced in that period in a very meh way, and now she gets horny when she tells men to pose in vanilla sub positions, while she occasionally plays the dom role (stepping on them and sh*t). Like, wow. How edgy. And you might say that the narrative is less concerned about mapping out the creative process preceding these photos than with over-emphasising what the photos themselves signify. Male gaze who? Uhm. Sure. Thing is, this kind of obvious ‘appropriation’ of the male gaze and the misogyny often underlining said gaze is not new nor thought-provoking. Quite the opposite in fact. I found the logic at play in the narrative to be highly sus: Irina experiences misogyny and is objectified by the male gaze; Irina perpetuates misogyny + misandry and objectifies men, her models in particular. Irina has a sexual encounter where the partner doesn’t listen to her when she says she wants to be on top. He ignores and demands her to scream for him, yanking her hair. She says that since he is going to ignore her he ‘could put his back into it’. He takes this as a confirmation that she ‘likes it rough’. Quelle surprise, she later has sex with someone she deems weak who asks her to slap him she starts hitting him until he starts crying and this leads to the classic ‘victim becomes abuser’ kind of observation that doesn’t really go deeper than that. If anything it is annoying that we get that scene just so the mc can have this dark eureka moment. Early in the story, Irina goes to a party where she is meeting up with a guy who is there to make fun of the ‘I’m a Nice Guy Really’ type of men who claim they are feminists while trying to wrangle themselves out of being accused of SA. Anyway, she goes to this party with her spineless friend who reminds her that even if she acts all hardcore she is a vulnerable woman. Our mc makes a joke about being raped by the guys she’s hanging out with and what later follows is an intentionally unclear scene where it seems that this guy the mc went to see tried to r*pe her while she was passed out or was otherwise incapacitated and therefore not being able to give consent. I really hated how timed this whole thing was. It was rather tasteless. I have come across other books that punish female characters who are confident in their sexuality or sexually active by resulting in scenes where they are SA or need a man to ‘save’ them. And here…this whole r*pe subplot seems just there for shock value and nothing else. The narrative seems to forget about it, more intent on emphasizing how edgy and obscene the mc is. F*cking hell. Can we not?! I am not saying that I want every story to include r*pe or SA to be serious and to exclusively revolve around this. However, the way the narrative meanders about without any real direction or without the kind of piercing commentary that makes up for vacuous storylines…I am left wondering why, why, why did we get this scene? Especially when the narrative seems confused about the kind of character Irina is. It seemed we were meant to perceive her as a vile character. Not quite a Humbert Humbert type of figure but someone who is working their way towards being the female equivalent of Patrick Bateman. She’s apathetic, has an inflated sense of self, experiences moments of dissociation where she observes the people around her with a mixture of superiority and detachment seems to categorize men in a way that is all the rage in the manosphere, and makes no compunction about transgressing accept norms of behaviour, engaging in sadistic behaviour, or deriving pleasure from what her society deems taboo (r*pe fantasies etc.). She can also perform certain roles, such as that of the Manic Pixie Girl, to her advantage, for example when she wants to attract the kind of men who would be into that type of girl. Irina, so far, seems a satirical take on the femme fatale. Yet, we also get so many instances that go against what this kind of characterization is trying to establish. For instance, she forgets that she has to perform a certain role and says whatever the f*ck comes to her because she’s such a girlboss. Sometimes she would make observations or remarks that would be believable if they originated from someone ‘normal’ or who was not shown to have psychopathic traits. For example, after that guy forces himself on her…she wonders about whether she really wanted rough sex and why do women feel that they have to say yes to rough sex etc…which is a valid af point but I did not believe that someone like Irina would even bother to have such thoughts. She should have been annoyed that someone of no consequence had physically overpowered her. Previously her response to being SA at the party was to be annoyed that that non-entity guy had the gall to try to r*pe her. But then we are meant to believe that she was in fact traumatized by this so much so that now she herself is subjecting others to the type of trauma she was victim to. Like…what is going on. And don’t get me started on how large chunks of the narrative make her abuse of men seem so f*cking transgressive and hardcore when it was anything but. There is a storyline involving, you guessed it, ‘boy parts’ that was just a rip off from American Psycho (in that we are meant to question the veracity of irina’s recollection of these violent events). Anyhow, the man who Irina abuses most happens to be a lot younger than her and, unlike her, despite the story's initial attempts at painting her as a struggling artist, her name is known in artsy circles and she can afford her living expense and the type of materials required to print out her edgy photos, he works at Tesco. Additionally, he is mixed-race, possibly queer, and was involved with someone abusive (emotional abuse is still abuse fellas). So, did I find Irina's SA him, gaslighting him, humiliating him, mistreating him, etc, empowering? Not really. Sure, the narrative shows us just how ‘pathetic’ and ‘sad’ he is about his messed up relationship with Irina but his experiences bear no real weight on Irina’s narrative. He serves as a plot device through which Irina, a character who is supposed to be very much beyond caring, can inflict the trauma she herself was subjected to. Also, for someone who goes on scathing takes about ‘white people’ who pretend they are not ‘white’ but dance to The Smiths in this 'post-racist-Morrissey’ era and expresses frustration about the misogyny and classism rampant in her day-to-day life…it seemed weird that she would think sh*t like this ("I know I’m white, but there’s just a lot of white people White People-ing in a very small area, like it’s just some very, very densely packed mayo, you know? Densely packed mayo, jiggling about, doesn’t know what to do with its arms, doesn’t know what to do with its feet, undulating loosely, barely in time to the rhythm.") but actually says sh*t like this to the mixed-race boy she is toying around with (‘It’s fine for you being out in this heat; you tan. You’re always tan. You look like you’ve just been on holiday or something,’) or this (Japenese/Korean girls being the 'same thing'). It would have made more sense if she’d said that first thing out loud, to impress her peers with how comfortably she can talk about whiteness and make them feel inadequate and less savvy (after all wasn't she supposed to enjoy feeling superior to others?), and to ‘merely’ think the other two as to say them out loud in front of someone who is not white, and who she had identified as ‘sensitive’, and risk that he would see her for who she truly was. She, later on, writes a transphobic email to someone trans which again, was just gratuitous yet seemed included for laughs, and made me question why she would do that if this person could use that to prove to others that she is in fact awful. Why bother with all that gaslighting of your acquaintances if you then don’t give a sh*t about being exposed...? We are previously told that she is manipulative AF. She fools men and has her pathetic bff convinced they are friends to start with. Although she wants to transgress accepted norms of behaviour she knows these norms are there to begin with so in certain spaces she comports herself in a certain way, her art is the only indicator that she is into some smutty kinky stuff. I did not find her inconsistencies to be realistic or to result in a nuanced character. It seemed that the story didn’t really know what kind of character it wanted us to read about so it went all over the place. I wish that the story had committed to paint her as a morally reprehensible character we were meant not to like. The other characters are one-note and just as unrealistic. They would not be out of place in an episode of Family Guy or Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction. Speaking of Tarantino if you thought that Uma Thurman's character in that or Kill Bill have some merit…well, you might like Boy Parts after all. This book radiates the kind of feminist energy that Cara Delevingne wearing that ‘peg the patriarchy’ outfit at the met gala gives. Trying to be provoking in a puerile way. And I can forgive a lack of intersectionality and dimension if say this, like Plath's Bell Jar, had been published in the 1960s. But it wasn't so…anche no. Anyway, the side characters are just as boring as Irina herself. Some of them are downright insulting. We have someone who exists to be the transman who is the butt of the joke for many comments made by Irina. He makes two or possibly three appearances where she makes comments about his height, barbs that are meant to make him feel inadequate and not masculine enough, and later on writes that disgusting email to him where she goes on about identity politics and claims that he is solely drawing upon his personal experiences to produce art (when she is doing that very same thing…get it? ah! ). Flo (i had to check her name, that's how memorable she is) is a rip off of Reva from MYORAR who exists to be the classic female friend in love with our female protagonist who does not and will not ever reciprocate her feelings. I am so f*cking tired of books that make the mc bisexual because it’s edgy and ‘different’ but then proceed to have said character almost exclusively engage in sexual/romantic relationships with men. This character will rarely if ever acknowledge or indicate that she finds people who are not men attractive. She will have a friend who is a lesbian or in this case a bi friend, who is in love with her. The narrative will mention towards the very start or the very end that she did have a relationship with a woman once and call it a day. They don't even try to explore the mc's internalised homophobia/biphobia. Here we have a line about Irina preferring men to women and that's kind of it. [review continued in comment section due to word count] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 11, 2022
|
May 12, 2022
|
Sep 09, 2021
|
ebook
| |||||||||||||||
194602225X
| 9781946022257
| 194602225X
| 3.89
| 659
| 1962
| Feb 08, 2022
|
liked it
|
Published in the early 60s Han Suyin's Winter Love is an overlooked lesbian classic. Taking place in 1944 London, Winter Love is the type of unromanti
Published in the early 60s Han Suyin's Winter Love is an overlooked lesbian classic. Taking place in 1944 London, Winter Love is the type of unromantic love story that will definitely appeal to fans of Giovanni's Room and Madame Bovary. There was something about our narrator’s aloof, slightly disdainful, worldview that brought to mind Fleur Jaeggy and Magda Szabó. Whereas Suyin’s ability to render time and place brought to mind authors like Mary Renault and Kazuo Ishiguro. Like them, Suyin’s narrative hones in on indoor spaces, but the intimacy created by these enclosed spaces is ultimately stultifying, bringing to the fore unpleasant feelings and thoughts. Permeated by unease, Winter Love is a tale exploring desire and obsession set against the backdrop of a bitterly cold winter in 1944 London. Our narrator Red is a college student who is well versed in the jealousies and crushes that are bound to occur in all female environments. But she readily dispatches her bosom friends in favor of pursuing her new classmate Mara, who happens to be married. Red seems exasperated and slightly irritated by Mara’s naive attitude, especially when it comes to her husband and money matters. Yet before long the two are spending most of their time together, with Mara often staying over at Red’s place. We know from the start that their brief and volatile affair is doomed and that Red goes on to marry a man whom she’d on-and-off frequented (often she gives in to his advances to comply with social expectations). Red and Mara bypass the honeymoon phase and find themselves locked in a fraught stalemate. Red’s attitude towards Mara is awful. Red is the one who pursues Mara, knowing fully well that the latter is married, and even so, she guilt-trips Mara about it, she then seems to want Mara gone or for the husband to take responsibility for her and is forever short with her. Red is incredibly jealous, possessive, and obsessive towards Mara. Her behavior towards Mara (and other people in general) skated close to the emotionally abusive, making Red into a rather detestable character. She’s cold, mean, and mercurial, and Mara often finds herself apologizing over nothing (perceived slights and so on). Mara herself was rather pitiable, mocked by her arrogant husband, and mistreated by her lover. They manage to get away from London, but their stay away brings about the end of their doomed affair. Winter Love is a very unflattering and unforgiving portrait of a love affair, but the author’s ability to hone in on and describe her narrator’s darkest and most ambiguous feelings and thoughts is certainly impressive. I found the writing incisive, and the characters’ back-and-forths to have very realistic rhythms. Permeated by doubt and contempt, Winter Love reads like an antithesis to love. Red desires Mara, but the nature of this desire often seems akin to the desire to ‘have’ something. Yet, once she has her, Red seems bored and irked by Mara, especially when it comes to discussions around money and their living situations. Suyin's crisp storytelling and Red's dreary outlook complement the novel's winter setting. The novel succeeds in making readers aware of the pressures shouldered by Red and her classmates, and the short-lived freedom from social norms and gender expectations they find in each other. But in the real world, against the humdrum of everyday life, these relationships stand little chance of a happy ending. Not the ideal read for those who are looking for a melancholic, soft, sapphic love story. This novel is all hard edges. Strikingly ambivalent Winter Love is a deeply evocative yet uncomfortable read. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 03, 2024
|
Jan 05, 2024
|
Aug 27, 2021
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0735241201
| 9780735241206
| 0735241201
| 3.74
| 25,208
| Aug 03, 2021
| Aug 03, 2021
|
liked it
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ re-read: i liked certain aspects more this time around but the repetition does sometimes feel ❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ re-read: i liked certain aspects more this time around but the repetition does sometimes feel OTP & that final sequence is a wee bit overlong…still, the author definitely captures how chronic pain in women is often dismissed or attributed to an ‘inherently female’ emotional imbalance…if you haven’t read this you should definitely add it to your TBR pile 3 ¼ stars “I thought tests led to something. A diagnosis led to a plan, a cure. But tests, I know now, never lead us anywhere. Tests are dark roads with no destinations, just leading to more dark.” All's Well makes for an entertaining if somewhat flawed romp. The novel is narrated by Miranda, a theatre professor in her later thirties, who is not doing so well. After falling off a stage during her early acting career Miranda has been left in a state of perpetual pain. Bad surgeries, failed recoveries, inept physiotherapists have all left their mark on her body and Miranda now struggles to even move her right leg and suffers from chronic pain (her back, hip). She's divorced and has no friends left. “I was always busy. Doing what? Grace would ask. Getting divorced. Seeing another surgeon, another wellness charlatan. Gazing into the void of my life.” Not only are her colleagues disbelieving of her pain but even her doctors treat Miranda's 'failed' attempts to improve as something she ought to be blamed for. She decides that her class should stage Shakespeare's All's Well That Ends Well since not only did she herself act in that play years previously (giving a brilliant performance) but elements within its story (such as helena's 'cure') appeal to her given her current situation. Alas, her students are not so keen, wanting instead to stage Macbeth. Briana, who always gets parts not because she is talented but because her parents' generous donations to the college, seems particularly intent on making Miranda's life difficult. When Briana’s ‘mutiny' succeeds Miranda is equal parts furious and despairing. Not only does she have to deal with her body being in constant pain but now she feels that her life has reached its lowest point, with no one believing her about her chronic pain or even respecting her. At the local pub, she comes across three mysterious men in suits who not only know all about her professional and personal life but they also seem eager to help her. One golden drink later and Miranda blacks out. Wondering whether she is really losing it Miranda goes to rehearsals where after an 'altercation' with Briana she finds herself feeling increasingly better. Not only is her pain gone but she can once again move her body with ease. And, it just so happens that she can stage All's Well That Ends Well after all. So what if Briana has fallen gravely ill? Not all gifts have to come at a price....right? “Still sick, so we hear. So sad. We are all terribly sad about it, turly. Truly, truly.” In a similar fashion to Bunny, All's Well present its readers with an increasingly surreal narrative. From the start, Miranda's voice is characterised by a note of hysteria, and as the story's events unfold, her narration becomes increasingly frenzied. She's paranoid and obsessive, one could even say unhinged. Yet, even after she's crossed, leapt over even, the line I found myself still rooting for Miranda. I loved that detail about her 'asides' being overheard by others. The latter half of the novel does fall into the same pitfalls as Bunny. The language gets repetitive, the weirdness feels contrived, and we get this surreal sequence that could have been cut short (a joke that goes on for too long ends up being not all that funny). The narrative's dark, sometimes offensive, humor brought to mind Ottessa Moshfegh, Jen Beagin, and Melissa Broder. The side characters were a bit unmemorable, Miranda's colleagues in particular, and I wish more time had spent on getting to know the students (we only learn a bit about three of them) or to see them rehearsing the play. My favourite scenes were the ones with the three suited men, I really loved the way they are presented to us. They gave some serious David Lynch and Shirley Jackson vibes. I wish that Miranda's visit to that sadistic doctor could have been left out of the novel as they felt a bit heavy-handed. Then again, this not a nuanced or complex novel. It is absurd, occasionally funny, and mostly entertaining. The novel's exploration of chronic pain did not feel particularly thought-provoking but there were instances that I could relate to (i happen to suffer from a seasonal autoimmune disease and i've had to put up with patronising doctors dismissing the severity of my symptoms). It seemed a bit weird that no one believed Miranda (or that crutches and walking sticks do not exist in this universe so characters are constantly 'hobbling' with their leg dragging behind them). Still, we do get spot-on passages like this: “But not too much pain, am I right? Not too much, never too much. If it was too much, you wouldn't know what to do with me, would you? Too much would make you uncomfortable. Bored. My crying would leave a bad taste. That would just be bad theatre, wouldn't it? A bad show. You want a good show. They all do. A few pretty tears on my cheeks that you can brush away. Just a delicate little bit of ouch so you know there's someone in there. So you don't get too scared of me, am I right? So you know I'm still a vulnerable thing. That I can be brought down if I need be.” I appreciate Miranda's journey, from being the who is wronged to being the one who wrongs others, and I liked her hectic OTT narration. Yes, Awad's style has this sticky extra quality to it that I am still not 100% fond of but here I found myself buying into it more. If unlike me, you were a fan ofBunny you will probably find All's Well to be a pretty entertaining read. Those who weren't keen on Bunny may be better off sampling a few pages before committing to All's Well (some may find it irritating or unpleasant: "all of them gazing up at my body, lump foul of deformity"). Personally, I found All's Well to be far more well-executed than Bunny and Miranda makes for a fascinating protagonist. Side note: I don't want to nitpick but Italians use 'primavera' to say 'spring' (if you want to argue about the etymology of 'primavera' 'first spring' would not be incorrect but Awad does not make that distinction so...). ARC provided by the publisher in exchange for an honest review. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Jun 24, 2022
Apr 18, 2021
|
Jun 27, 2022
Apr 20, 2021
|
Feb 13, 2021
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0698172469
| B01N9B9YKO
| 3.24
| 6,264
| Aug 01, 2017
| Aug 01, 2017
|
liked it
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ “When she was just a kid, Gloria told her never to trust a group of happy, smiling multiracia❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ “When she was just a kid, Gloria told her never to trust a group of happy, smiling multiracial people. Never trust races when they get along, she said. If you see different races of people just standing around, smiling at one another, run for the hills, kid. Take cover. They’ll break your heart.” A disquieting yet hypnotic novel New People makes for a quick but far from forgettable read. Set in the 1990s in New York the story follows Maria, a twenty-something woman who, alongside her fiancee, Khalil, will star in a documentary called 'New People' which focuses on biracial and multiracial young people in NY. Maria's pale skin often leads others to assume that she is white or Mexican, a fact that has always made her feel on the outskirts of her Black community (even if her adoptive mother was Black). Maria and Khalil met in college and everyone seems to think that they are perfect for each other: “Their skin is the same shade of beige. Together, they look like the end of a story”. Maria, however, grows infatuated with a Black poet (we never learn his name, he is referred to as 'the poet') and seems to believe that he reciprocates her feelings. Believing that they share a connection Maria engages in some creepy and stalkerish behavior that sees her crossing all sorts of lines. As the narrative progresses we learn more of Maria's past, and what we learn is not particularly pretty (that 'prank' she pulls on Khalil...yeah). We also see her previous relationship, many with white boys, the latest of whom reinvented himself as Chicano. Maria's uneasy feelings towards racial identity are rendered in stark detail. Senna touches upon the 'tragic mulatto' trope by providing a far more modern and relevant commentary on multiracial identity. Senna also captures with uncomfortable clarity Maria's frame of mind: obsession, delusion, anger, repulsion, despair. While readers are not meant to like her they will feel some degree of sympathy towards her (no doubt to Maria's own discontent). The narrative has a feverish quality to it, one that really emphasizes Maria's downwards spiral. Shrewd and occasionally scathing the novel explores subjects such as race, identity, belonging, hatred, obsession, and alienation without providing easy answers. The questions and discussions that emerge in New People brought to mind the ones in Nella Larsen's work, particularly Quicksand. I do wish some things had been handled differently. I would have liked more of Khalil and his sisters and less of Greg. And, although I did appreciate the narrative's foray into hysterical realism I did find some of the guys to be too cartoonish (such as Khalil's friend who apparently speaks in clichés:“I love Khalil like a brother. Okay? So if you hurt him, you are going to have to contend with me.”). I wouldn't recommend this book to a lot of readers. Maria is a character who exhibits some perturbing behavior and the narrative doesn't paint anyone in a good light. The story seems in fact intent on showing how hypocritical and performative people are (and in making you freak out about what Maria is getting up to). The ending lessened also my overall appreciation as it felt both weak and predictable. Yet, I do think that the author told, for the most part, a unique story with a real edge to it. If you are into novels about self-destructive and alienated young women such as My Year of Rest and Relaxation, Luster, and Pizza Girl you should give New People a try. PS: The book has no quotation marks which is why I opted for the audiobook. re-read: while not as emotionally encompassing as Caucasia or as incisive as Symptomatic, this book is a really accomplished character study and should definitely appeal to fans of the “she’s not feeling so good” subgenre. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Apr 30, 2022
Jan 09, 2021
|
May 03, 2022
Jan 10, 2021
|
Dec 13, 2020
|
Kindle Edition
| ||||||||||||||||
3.55
| 32,407
| Nov 03, 2020
| Nov 03, 2020
|
really liked it
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ 4 ½ stars Ivy Lin gives characters like Madame Bovary, Becky Sharp, and Lily Bart a run for the ❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ 4 ½ stars Ivy Lin gives characters like Madame Bovary, Becky Sharp, and Lily Bart a run for their money. She's terrible (and I loved her). “She never got too greedy. She never got sloppy. And most important, she never got caught.” White Ivy is an addictive and razor-sharp debut novel. Susie Yang has spun a deliciously dark and deeply beguiling story, one that presents its readers with a piercing examination of class, gender, and culture. Part coming-of-age part psychological thriller White Ivy makes for a subversive and layered character study. The novel's adroit commentary on privilege and powers is as unsettling as it is gripping. Yang's taut storytelling not only amps up the tension between her characters but makes White Ivy into an edge-of-your-seat read. Fans of Patricia Highsmith and Barbara Vine/Ruth Rendell should definitely consider picking this up. The novel’s very first line functions as a warning of sorts: “Ivy Lin was a thief but you would never know it to look at her.” Ivy is indeed a thief. After spending her early years in the care of her grandmother, who would later provide her with an invaluable (if unorthodox) education in shoplifting, Ivy is reunited with her parents in America. Over the course of her childhood Ivy begins to despise her family and everything they stand for. By the time she’s a teenager, Ivy feels little other than loathing toward them. Her distorted sense of self and dubious worldview has been shaped by the books she read as a child. In a manner very reminiscent of Madame Bovary, Ivy’s attitude towards others and herself is irrevocably shaped by these fictions. While Emma read medieval romances that made her long for poetry-reciting-knights-in-shining-armour, Ivy’s imagination is populated by half-formed images of wealth, beauty, and whiteness. Ivy’s self-loathing, her internalised racism, and her contempt towards the poor and the working class are not easy to read. Yet, for the life of me, I could not bring myself to judge or condemn her. As the story progresses we see just how intent she is on attaining the riches and ‘class’ she so idealizes. Growing up in suburban Massachusetts Ivy tries to fit in with her American peers. Ivy is ashamed of her Chinese immigrant parents and their low-income, finding them wanting of those ‘all-American’ qualities she has so come to yearn for. Although Ivy forges a temporary friendship of sorts with Roux Roman, a fellow outsider who shares some of her criminal inclinations. Ivy’s object of devotion is Gideon Speyer, the classic ‘golden boy’ who comes from a hideously wealthy family. Ivy longs both to be with Gideon and to have what he has. After Ivy’s forced vacation in China, she returns to America to discover that her parents have moved so she loses touch with both Roux and Gideon. Years later, after Ivy has moved out and gone to university, Ivy comes across Gideon’s sisters and quickly inserts herself into Gideon’s life. All of a sudden her dreams seem to have been made into her reality. Not only is she socialising with the so-called upper-crust, spending her time in fancy mansions and eating at luxury restaurants but something may be happening between her and Gideon. Her social-climbing is thwarted by a ‘ghost’ from her past, someone who knows that Ivy isn’t the kind and friendly woman she is pretending to be with Gideon and his family. Ivy shares quite a few similarities with classic anti-heroines who are determined to improve their circumstances, be it through lies or clever manipulations. Ivy also reminded me of Tom Ripley. Like him, Ivy is hungry for something more. She believes that wealth and Gideon will fill the hole within her but nothing seems able to satisfy her hunger. Gideon is not flawless, he is a rather remote and undecipherable figure. Unwilling to upset or break the idealized vision that she has of him, Ivy leaves much of his behaviour unchallenged. Of course, their dynamic had a 'who's using who' angle to it that makes for some captivating reading material. Roux, for better or worst, is far less opaque. Similarly to Ivy herself, I felt rather conflicted towards him, unsure whether I should despise him or root for him. Speaking of rooting, I was rooting for Ivy. She's vain, selfish, manipulative, and yet, I thought she was a truly fascinating character. As I said, she shares quite a lot in common with Tom Ripley so being on her side sometimes made me question my own judgement. But, given that every character in White Ivy is flawed or downright nasty, it wasn't all that hard to be on team Ivy. Yang's prose is both elegant and astute. Her interrogation of class and privilege, which had some strong The Great Gatsby vibes (especially in contrasting old vs new money), is both unsparing and sophisticated. The world she portrays is as glamorous as it is terrible. Those who have always had money are disconnected from the everyday difficulties and realities experienced by those like Ivy, while those who do not but want to have that glittery lifestyle are almost blindsided by their wants. I wish the ending could have been different as I found myself wanting more closure from the story and some of the characters. I also probably would have preferred it if Roux hadn't been Romanian. Hear me out, I come from a country with a strong anti-Romanian attitude so I am quite susceptible when it comes to how Romanian characters are presented (and making them criminals and/or violent risks fuelling already existing harmful stereotypes). White Ivy is a riveting debut novel. Ivy was a fascinating character, Yang's prose is truly phenomenal, and the suspense is something else. Yang has spun an exceptional tale about love, obsession, lies, and betrayals. If you don't mind reading about alienated characters whose moral compass is more than a little off, well look no further. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 03, 2021
|
May 05, 2021
|
Nov 03, 2020
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||||
9780375758133
| 3.93
| 67,138
| Apr 01, 1929
| May 28, 2002
|
really liked it
|
| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “It’s funny about ‘passing.’ We disapprove of it and at the same time condone it. It excites our contempt and yet we ra| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “It’s funny about ‘passing.’ We disapprove of it and at the same time condone it. It excites our contempt and yet we rather admire it. We shy away from it with an odd kind of revulsion, but we protect it.” At once alluring and disquieting Nella Larsen's Passing presents its readers with a piercing examination of the interplay of race, gender, and class in 1920s New York. Clare and Irene, the women at the centre of this novel, grew up in the same Black neighborhood. Both are light-skinned and can 'pass' for white but whereas Irene now lives with her husband, who is a doctor, and two sons in Harlem, and seems to enjoy a respectable middle-class existence, Clare left their community and rumour has it that she is now passing for white. Irene has never paid much attention to the talk surrounding Clare's 'disappearance' from their neighbourhood. A chance encounter in Chicago reunites the two women. Clare, now living as a white woman and married to a white supremacist, views Irene as a link bank to the Black community and culture that she abandoned. While she's clearly made the most of the privileges that come with being white, Clare feels a lure towards her 'old' identity. Irene too may be more dissatisfied than she'd liked to believe and begrudgingly rekindles her friendship with Clare. The fraught dynamic between Clare and Irene brought to mind that between Sula Peace and Nel Wright (from Toni Morrison's Sula). Both sets of women used to be childhood friends, Clare and Sula leave their community only to return years later. Their beauty and insouciant attitude arouse jealousy and envy in their old friends. While Clare is using Irene as her ticket to re-enter and re-connect with her Black community, she does seem to be genuinely happy to be spending time with Irene. Irene, on the other hand, grows resentful of Clare's careless vacillation between a white and Black identity. When Irene perceives a new strain in her relationship with her husband she attributes this to the 'change' brought by Clare reappearance in her life. “There were things that she wanted to ask Clare Kendry. She wished to find out about this hazardous business of “passing,” this breaking away from all that was familiar and friendly to take one’s chance in another environment, not entirely strange, perhaps, but certainly not entirely friendly. What, for example, one did about background, how one accounted for oneself.” Desire and jealousy cloud Irene and Clare judgments. They seem drawn to each other, perhaps because they are in many ways polar opposites. There is an intensity to how Irene thinks about Clare and to how Clare looks at Irene that seemed almost sexual (or maybe that's just me). Yet, underlining this mutual attraction is something closer to animosity. Irene judges Clare for passing and for having married a white supremacist, while Clare, in her unrelenting efforts to latch onto Irene and her lifestyle, is much harder to pin down. Much about her remains a mystery to us. Irene's growing hostility towards Clare could also be seen as a defence mechanism, as in this instance aversion may be preferable to attraction. Her repressed desire mutates in something ugly, something that is part hatred part lust. One could also see them as doubles of sorts: they can both pass but only one of them chooses to do so 'permanently'. Larsen's naturalist approach to her characters' behaviours and feelings reminded me of Edith Wharton (“Brought to the edge of distasteful reality, her fastidious nature did not recoil. Better, far better, to share him than to lose him completely. Oh, she could close her eyes, if need be. She could bear it. She could bear anything.”) . Larsen, similarly to Wharton, can be incredibly perceptive—in her social commentaries, in her honing on the subtleties of certain feelings, impressions, and thoughts—while also allowing for a certain opaqueness to surround her characters, their motivations and actions. This sense of ambiguity, although present from the novel's opening scene, soon seems to dominate the narrative, so that the more I read, the more uneasy I felt towards the characters. Larsen's disillusioned portrayal of marriage and domesticity also made me think of Wharton's (the two also have a penchant for tragedies). The oppressive unease permeating Irene's story called to mind authors such as Patricia Highsmith and Danzy Senna. Larsen doesn't lose herself in the ethics of passing, rather she portrays the system of white supremacy which seeks to control and undermine people of colour (regardless of their class). As Larsen navigates themes of race, gender, and identity, she brings to life 1920s New York from its norms to its social hierarchies. Larsen's commentary on race feels modern and all-too relevant to today's society. “The social, psychological, and economic motivations for passing, they also perform acts of literary trespass in exposing the cultural and legal fiction of race.” Through her elegant and contemplative writing, Larsen captures the discordance between self and society. The tension between Irene and Clare results in a fraught atmosphere, one that makes Passing into a work of psychological suspense. If you are looking for a novel about transformation, liberation, jealousy, and betrayal, you need not look further. The only 'downfall' of this novel is that Larsen employs the dreaded 'tragic mulatta' trope... Read more reviews on my blog / / / View all my reviews on Goodreads ...more |
Notes are private!
|
3
|
Jan 20, 2022
May 03, 2021
Jun 16, 2020
|
Jan 21, 2022
May 04, 2021
Jun 18, 2020
|
Jun 16, 2020
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
0684825880
| 9780684825885
| 4.06
| 14,313
| 1913
| Jun 2022
|
really liked it
|
| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | Step aside, Becky Sharp. Move over, Scarlett O'Hara...make way for Undine Spragg, the most unscrupulous anti-heroine I | | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | Step aside, Becky Sharp. Move over, Scarlett O'Hara...make way for Undine Spragg, the most unscrupulous anti-heroine I have ever encountered. “[S]he could not conceive that any one could tire of her of whom she had not first tired.” Wharton once again focuses her narrative on a young woman’s unrelenting attempts at social climbing. While Wharton does inject her depiction of Undine Spragg's ‘trials’ with a dose of satire she nevertheless is able to carry out an incisive commentary regarding New York’s ‘high society’. Through her piercing insights into privilege Wharton is able to render a detailed and engaging examination of the intricate customs that prevailed among America’s ‘elite’ society, exemplifying the discordance between their values and their behaviour. Wharton emphasises their sense of entitlement and their idleness. While they often believe themselves to possess the most impeccable manners, readers know just how cut-throat they truly are. Armed with gossip or ready to form conniving schemes, most of them will hesitate at nothing in order to augment their wealth and reputation (ideally ruining someone's life in the process). Marriages are business manoeuvres and one makes friends on the basis of whether they might be later on be put to good use (‘networking’ is everything for these people). By bringing together these different themes and subjects—marriage, divorce, class, wealth—Wharton is able to present her readers with a nuanced and in-depth examination of New York's upper crust. As a character in the novel observes, Undine Spragg is the “monstrously perfect result of the system: the completest proof of its triumph”. Undine, who was raised by two loving parents who spoiled her from a young age, possesses a solipsistic worldview and her values are exceedingly materialistic. Undine is an appalling protagonist. She is Lily Bart's monstrous little sister. We first ‘meet’ Undine when she still seems to be a simple, if pampered, ‘country’ girl. Soon however we begin to see that in spite of her simplicity (she definitely lacks Miss Bart's charisma and acumen) Undine Spragg is entirely egocentric and lacks both self-awareness and empathy. “It never occurred to her that other people's lives went on when they were out of her range of vision.” As noted by the narrative and the various characters, Undine's conceitedness, as well as her perpetual sense of boredom, may be the likely result of her upbringing. Her parents' leniency definitely played its role in making Undine feel as if she should only be concerned with her own happiness, and to be truly happy she has to marry well. Undine believes that as long as can enjoy an extravagant lifestyle and be favoured within certain circles, she won't be bored. As much as I loathed Undine—for her selfishness, her lack of creativity, and for her frivolous tastes—I was always aware that she did grow up in a society that values appearances. Undine was never made to feel as if she needed to cultivate any real interest. Her main concern are her own beauty and reputation, the two means through which she will be able to find a satisfactory match. It shouldn't be surprising then that Undine becomes a woman who is thoroughly disinterested in the lives of others. She sees no reason why she should be preoccupied with her husband's ‘menial’ work. She is unable to see why she should be held accountable for other people's misery. There was something oddly compelling about Undine's determination not to allow her desires to be comprised by anyone or anything. She is more than willing to have affairs, lie, drive her husband(s) and family into debt, and blackmail and manipulate others. While the narrative definitely accentuates Undine’s cherubic appearance (from her creamy complexion to her beautiful golden locks) readers are made aware of what lies beneath her rosy surface: Undine's vision of happiness is rather limited. She lacks imagination, so much so that she often merely tries to emulate the women around her. “Her entrances were always triumphs; but they had no sequel.” And while I certainly thought her to be a horrible person (her behaviour is reprehensible) there was a part of me that found her egocentrism and cruelty to be strangely compelling. Whether she is merely a product of environment or innately selfish, her total self-absorption was transfixing. Wharton portrays a scathing picture of her society: were “the average American looks down on his wife”, were women's sense of self is dictated by a cult of aspiration, were marriages are entirely transactional, and were young individuals are trapped by old traditions and customs. In spite of Undine's many romances, there is little if any love to be found within the pages of The Custom of the Country. And maybe that's for the best given that Undine is no heroine. While I certainly didn't find this novel to be as moving as Wharton's The Age of Innocence, and Undine's misadventures lack the poignancy of Lily's ones in The House of Mirth, I would still recommend this. Wharton's percipient prose, her sophisticated use of satire, vividly renders the customs and values of New York's high class. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 21, 2019
|
Nov 23, 2019
|
Nov 21, 2019
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||
0593099346
| 9780593099346
| 0593099346
| 3.44
| 753
| Jul 09, 2020
| Jun 09, 2020
|
None
|
Notes are private!
|
0
|
not set
|
not set
|
Nov 18, 2019
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
0141391987
| 9780141391984
| 0141391987
| 3.77
| 8,822
| 1951
| Dec 05, 2013
|
it was amazing
|
| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “Dearest dearest darling most important dearest darling Natalie—this is me talking, your own priceless own Natalie.” Al | | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “Dearest dearest darling most important dearest darling Natalie—this is me talking, your own priceless own Natalie.” Alice in Wonderland meets The Bell Jar in Shirley Jackson's much overlooked Hangsaman. The first time I read this exceedingly perplexing novel I felt confused. Although Hangsaman shares many similarities with Jackson’s more well known novels (yet again we have a disaffected, hypersensitive, and alienated heroine), this is her most elusive work. A second and third reading however made me much more appreciative of this peculiar anti-bildungsroman. What I previously thought of as being a confounding narrative with an unclear storyline became a clever take of the three-acts typical of a monomyth. Hangsaman focuses on Natalie Waite, a troubling young woman whose intolerance towards others makes her retreat into a series of disturbing fantasies. The narrative chronicles Natalie’s attempts to navigate the murky waters of adulthood. However, Natalie’s journey into adulthood is not only essentially negative but concludes ambiguously. Readers will find Natalie’s self-alienation, which dictates her behaviour and thoughts as well as shaping her worldview and imagination, alienating, as we are left wondering just how unreliable a narrator she is. At the age of seventeen, Natalie believes that “she had been truly conscious only since she was about fifteen” and lives “in an odd corner of a world of sound and sight past the daily voices of her father and mother and their incomprehensible actions”. Forced into daily tête-à-têtes with her pompous writer-father—who enjoys disparaging Natalie’s creative writing—and made to listen to her neurotic and alcoholic mother’s diatribes against marriage, Natalie’s relationship with herself and others is already mired in ambivalence. In order to please her father Natalie has spent most of her life pretending to be someone she is not, and her self-alienation partly stems from this forced concealment of her ‘real self’ The disjunction—or split—between Natalie’s “inner” self and her outer “personality” causes her to feel divorced from her own experiences and leads to her self-alienation, forcing her to create a provisional ‘new’ personality. On campus, Natalie’s only connection to her father is through their correspondence, and in these letters she glamorizes her college experience. In reality, college is not the ‘new start’ Natalie had hoped for. As she is constantly in the presence of other girls, Natalie struggles to maintain a ‘personality’ akin to those whom she regards “trivial people” and “mediocre” . Her self-alienation induces her to view her own personality as ‘alien’, permeating her the way she thinks, perceives, feels, and behaves with a sense of unrealness. No longer under her father’s watchful eye, Natalie’s unease increases and her unfixed personality distorts her worldview, leading her to speculate whether her name is truly Natalie or if she as appropriate another girl’s identity. She is scornful of sororities, rejects offers of friendships, and regards with contempt the books, subjects, and theories that she is meant to be studying. In an attempt to find and assert her own individuality, she seeks refuge in her own writing, deriving strength from this process, and in her make-believe magic. Although she becomes briefly involved in the domestic life of one of her professors (this particularly rocky marriage seemed rather autobiographical) it is only when she meets the mysterious and alluring Tony that Natalie is able to connect to someone. The confounding narrative of Hangsaman is peppered by odd interactions and monologues that are often as amusing as they are bizarre. The storyline begins with an extended scene in which Natalie’s parents are hosting a party at their house. The party is not a fun affair, and Natalie is involved in an incident that may or may not have actually happened (yeah, I know). The details around this episode remain blurry, and readers will have to draw their own conclusions. Although at college Natalie becomes increasingly divorced from her self—unsure of her name, qualities, and her very existence—it is this very act of self-doubting which drives Natalie’s quest for a suitable identity. As she grows contemptuous of the people she interacts with—students and professors alike—she attains self-validation through her own writing and imagination where she can contemplate grandiose visions of her self. Since Natalie, similarly to Jackson herself, equates normalcy with a loss of individuality, in her imaginary worlds she examines the depths of her own awareness and identity by endowing herself with magical gifts and powerful personalities (she is a ‘mercenary’, ‘gladiator’ and ‘creator’). The subversive components of her fantasies, which often build upon her fears—such as dying—and desires—such as being revered—enable her to exorcise personalities and futures that do not resonate with her. Natalie’s exploration of her self, and of the different realities that may or may not be attainable, is spurred by her self-alienation. Within these narratives, Natalie confronts the dangerous and alluring world of maturity alternating between being a victim and the perpetrator of violence. By proving to herself—and the readers—that she has the strength to defy, resist and even harm others, Natalie can finally become enfranchised from her controlling father and depressed mother. Jackson’s narrative, fraught with ambivalence, culminates ominously, leaving readers wondering what was real and what wasn’t. In spite of the many disquieting and or perplexing moments/scenes in this novel, Jackson's offbeat humour makes for a truly entertaining read. Note: the first time I read this I gave it 3 stars. This third time around I am giving it 5 stars. While I now consider it an all time favourite, I did not know what to make of it the first time I read it….so perhaps you should approach this novel with caution. Although it has many Jacksonesque motifs (female doubles, themes of alienation and paranoia, dark humour, misanthropic characters, witchcraft) it is a far more slippery creature than her more well-known works. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
5
|
Oct 15, 2023
Oct 21, 2021
Oct 08, 2020
Sep 18, 2018
Sep 2017
|
Oct 20, 2023
Oct 25, 2021
Oct 11, 2020
Sep 24, 2018
Sep 2017
|
Sep 18, 2018
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
B000TWUTY6
| 4.03
| 102,676
| 1973
| Jul 24, 2007
|
really liked it
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Toni Morrison’s Sula revolves around the eponymous and fraught character of Sula Peace. Within ❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Toni Morrison’s Sula revolves around the eponymous and fraught character of Sula Peace. Within the novel, Morrison interrogates themes of race, gender and class in the Black neighborhood known as the Bottom, in the fictional town of Medallion. The narrative’s discourse on good and evil, expressed in the Bottom’s demonization of Sula, and its subversion of binary thinking, will force readers to re-evaluate presumptions that arise from labelling people and places as being either good or evil. The name of the neighborhood at the heart of Sula is an oxymoron since the Bottom is located ‘in the hills above the valley town of Medallion’ (a white farmer tricked his former slave by giving this land and claiming it was ‘fertile bottomland’). The story then introduces Shadrack, who after fighting in WWI returns to the Bottom with PTSD. He creates the 'National Suicide Day' and spends his days insulting people on the streets, refusing and or unable to fit in with the people of the Bottom. The narrative then takes us to the 1920s where we are introduced to Nel Wright and Sula Peace, the novel's central characters. While Nel is raised to be obedient and polite, Sula is brought up in her grandmother’s hectic boarding house, ‘a house with women who thought all men available’. Nel and Sula become fast friends, an inseparable unit. After one of their stunts goes terribly wrong cracks begin to appear in their relationship but it is Nel's marriage and Sula leaving for college that ultimately drives the two apart. Ten years later Sula returns to her hometown, ‘accompanied by a plague of robins’. Because of this bizarre phenomenon, Sula’s arrival is seen as inauspicious by the people of the Bottom. That their mistrust is aggravated by Sula’s physical appearance—which is made striking because of a birthmark over her eye—and her behaviour—her clear disregard of social norms—seals her fate in the eyes of her community. They demonize Sula, seeing her as an outsider, the 'other'. Not only do old rumours about Sula resurface, but that she puts her elderly grandmother in a nursing house, sleeps with married men, and is said to have slept with white men, further antagonizes the people of the Bottom against her. Nel seems the only one happy to be reunited with Sula but their friendship is destroyed after one betrays the other. Sula becomes the scapegoat for Bottom whose inhabitants are convinced that ‘Sula’s evil changed them in accountable yet mysterious ways. Once the source of their personal misfortune was identified, they had leave to protect and love one another’. They are empowered by Sula’s refusal to behave in accordance with their social norms, banding ‘together against the devil in their midst'. Yet they refuse to ‘destroy’ Sula, since however ‘ungodly’ she may be, to drive her out of town or to ‘mob kill’ would be to them both ‘unnatural’ and ‘undignified’. In creating the ‘evil one’ – Sula – they are creating the ‘good one’ – themselves. Sula is by no means an easy read. The story is punctuated by poverty, addiction, shame, jealousy, hatred. Characters kill their loved ones or seem unmoved by tragic and horrific events. Yet, Morrison herself never condemns Sula or the inhabitants of the Bottom. She forces her readers to question whether Sula is the way she is because of 'nature' or 'nurture', and even then she reminds us that although Sula's actions cause others' pain, she is not an evil person. Morrison demonstrates how distorting and transforming someone into a devil or a monster is dangerous: the author, unlike her characters, passes no judgements on Sula’s 'transgressions’, and makes readers aware of the way in which the people of the Bottom enjoy and profit from condemning Sula as ‘evil’. By contrasting the characters of Sula and Nel, Morrison is also able to question the validity of labels such as ‘evil’ and ‘good’ since the two friends are often described as being one and the same, able to find ‘in each other’s eyes the intimacy they were looking for’, yet Nel is seen as 'good' and Sula as 'bad'. The bond between Sula and Nel remains at the fore of the narrative, and I loved how deep it ran. Sula makes for a bleak, brutal even, read. Morrison is unflinching in her depictions of racism, violence, abuse, and illness. Her prose is simply terrific as she slips with ease between different point of views, never elevating any one's character perspective. In spite of its brevity Sula packs a punch. It will upset you, anger you, and possibly depress you....but it is a stunning piece of fiction, one that I find myself often thinking about. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
May 10, 2021
Dec 04, 2018
|
May 12, 2021
Dec 04, 2018
|
Aug 01, 2018
|
Kindle Edition
| |||||||||||||||||
0811229033
| 9780811229036
| 0811229033
| 3.65
| 6,467
| 1989
| Oct 29, 2019
|
it was amazing
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Sweet Days of Discipline is a slim dagger of a novel. Written in a prose so sharp it will cut y ❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Sweet Days of Discipline is a slim dagger of a novel. Written in a prose so sharp it will cut you, Sweet Days of Discipline is a work of startling and enigmatic beauty, a study in contradictions: order and chaos, sublimity and abjection, clarity and obfuscation, illusion and reality. Fleur Jaeggy is in absolute command of her craft so that not a word is wasted or out-of-place. Jaeggy exercises formidable control over her language, which is restrained to the point of severity. By turns glacial and melancholic, Jaeggy’s epigrammatic style is dauntingly ascetic. Yet, her direct and crisp prose belies the complexity of her subject. I struggle to pinpoint what this book is even about. Our narrator is consumed by desire but the way she expresses and articulates said desire is certainly atypical. Even upon a second reading, I find myself enthralled by her mysterious and perplexing relationship with Frédérique. Ultimately, it is the obscure nature of their bond that makes me all the more eager to revisit this novel once more. Our unnamed narrator's recounting of her schooldays is pervaded by a dream-like quality. Torpor seems to reign supreme at Bausler Institut, an all-girls boarding school in the Appenzell. While the girls’ days are in fact dictated by routine, a sense of idleness prevails. Our narrator, who has spent most of her youth in boarding school, coldly observes the people around her. Her detachment and contempt towards her peers and the rarefied world she’s part of perfectly complement the staccato rhythm of Jaeggy’s prose. When Frédérique is enrolled in her school, she finds herself captivated by her. Her infatuation with Frédérique however doesn’t lead to happiness. Our narrator wants to best Frédérique, to ‘conquer’ her. She is both in awe and jealous of Frédérique’s apathy towards the students, the teachers, and their surroundings. The two eventually begin spending time together but our narrator cannot or is unwilling to express her feelings. What follows is a taut tale of juxtaposition. The orderly world of the school is contrasted with the inner turmoil of youth. The narrator’s clipped commentary is at once hyperreal and unearthly. While the narrator does try to control her feelings, she’s at times overcome by their sheer intensity. Her love for Frédérique is also inexorably entwined with hatred, as she finds the idea of being bested, of being under anyone’s thumb, unbearable. Our narrator is unforgiving in her detailed recollection, her harshness and cruelty did at times take me by surprise. Yet, her longing for Frédérique and her unwillingness to bend for that love made her into a compelling character. As the narrative progresses she and Frédérique begin to lose sight of one another, and as adolescence gives way to adulthood one of them spirals out of control. The English translation is superb. I’ve read this both in the original Italian and in English and I have to say that I don’t prefer one over the other. If anything Tim Parks, the translator, got rid of some rather outdated and insensitive terms in the original. The prose in the Italian version is also, to my ears at least, even more, stringent and stark than its English counterpart (maybe this is due to a combination of the slightly old-fashioned italian + my being so used to reading in english that books in italian will inevitably make for a more exacting reading experience). Sweet Days of Discipline makes for a lethal read. Jaeggy’s austere prose is a study in perfectionism. Yet, despite her unyielding language and her aloof, occasionally menacing, narrator, Sweet Days of Discipline is by no means a boring or emotionless read. The intensity of our narrator’s, often unexpressed, feelings and desires result in a thrilling and evocative read. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Sep 02, 2021
Jul 08, 2018
|
Sep 03, 2021
Jul 09, 2018
|
Jul 08, 2018
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1594206627
| 9781594206627
| 1594206627
| 3.58
| 102,508
| Aug 18, 2015
| Aug 18, 2015
|
liked it
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Compared to My Year of Rest and Relaxation, Eileen just ain't it. “I was like Joan of Arc, or❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ Compared to My Year of Rest and Relaxation, Eileen just ain't it. “I was like Joan of Arc, or Hamlet, but born into the wrong life—the life of a nobody, a waif, invisible. There’s no better way to say it: I was not myself back then. I was someone else. I was Eileen.” Vile, vulgar, grotesque, sensationalistic, morbid, dismal, gratuitous, self-indulgent. These are some of the words that come to mind when I think of Eileen. The first I read it was back in 2018 I wasn’t particularly impressed by it, and in my original review I wrote that I found many elements within its story ‘excessive’ and that overall I found the narrative ‘flat’. I picked Eileen up again hoping that, as was the case with other novels that I originally ‘didn’t really get’ (an example would be hangsaman, a book i consider to be an all-time fave now), a re-read would improve my opinion of it. Alas, in this instance, a re-read failed to make me a fan of Eileen. Maybe it’s because I can’t help but compare this unfavourably to Ottessa Moshfegh’s My Year of Rest of Relaxation. Now that one slaps. Eileen, does not. Here Moshfegh is much too heavy-handed when it comes to the ‘gross’ stuff, and every paragraph, or so it seemed, tried to be as repulsive and ‘shocking’ as possible. But I did not find Eileen’s obsession with bodily fluids, her abject view of her body (and those around her), her stalking and OTT creepiness to be that disturbing. Sure, her abhorrent behaviour and thoughts are ‘subversive’ because she’s a woman. How very refreshing. I’m sure gross girls are feeling very seen by this novel. While I found the dark humor in My Year of Rest and Relaxation to be funny, here, it seems non-existent. Is Eileen’s insanity supposed to amuse me? Her narration, compared to that of the nameless protagonist of MYORAR, drags. She’s so bloody repetitive and her various speculations, which quite clearly point to her solipsistic view of the world and paranoia, seemed not only predictable and uninteresting but very derivative of the ones had by Shirley Jackson’s heroines (they usually begin describing a what-if scenario that is wholly ridiculous in minute detail, seem to believe that the people around them are very interested in them, perform puzzling 'little' every-day rituals, equate normalcy with dullness, and have a hard time interacting with others). The novel’s inciting incident, Eileen’s meeting of Rebecca, happens far too late in the narrative, around the 35% mark. Before that it’s just Eileen being her gross-ass self, peeping on underage boy encroached at the prison where she works, perving on a prison guard, and enabling her alcoholic father who is as repulsive as she is. Most of the narrative is dedicated to Eileen’s navel-gazing. Her dysmorphic view of her body has led her to severe food restriction and the use of laxatives. While the story is set in winter in 1964 Massachusetts, the setting feels more often than not generically historical. The use of certain old-fashioned words seemed to be the author’s greatest attempt at rendering her setting That and the way the prison is run. Eileen begins her tale a week before her last Christmas in her hometown, before she ‘disappeared’. Now, as she often likes to remind us, she’s an ‘old’ woman. ‘Back then’ she repeats time and again, things were different. Anyway, the narrative is all about how gross and disgusting and alienated Eileen is. Her house is dank too and her father is a mean alcoholic. Is it nurture or nature that has made Eileen into such a myopic & maladaptive individual? I for one, do not care. As I said, Eileen struck me as a far less compelling character than MYORAR or, for that matter, Jackson’s anti-heroine. She eventually meets Rebecca who is, of course, beautiful but a cypher. The two supposedly feel a connection, or Eileen is made to feel as if they are connected, and then the event that finally pushes Eileen into driving off from her life & hometown happens. And boy did it lack oomph. It seemed as if Moshfegh had thought of this ‘incident’ on the spot. Which made it rather anticlimactic and not at all convincing. Other than the occasionally effective line (that is just the right amount of fucked up), I found Eileen a chore to re-read. Eileen was a simplistic character whose horrid inner-monologue wasn't particularly captivating or ultimately subversive, the language was often repetitive ("back then"/"old woman"/"you see"), side characters were one-note caricatures (the portrayal of eileen's "drunken" father left a lot to be desired...), and the relationship between Eileen & Rebecca was a flop. If you are interested in reading something by Moshfegh I recommend you bypass Eileen in favour of MYORAR. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Dec 2021
Apr 29, 2018
|
Dec 03, 2021
Apr 29, 2018
|
Apr 11, 2018
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0517572524
| 9780517572528
| 0517572524
| 3.78
| 3,674
| Jan 01, 1988
| Apr 13, 1989
|
it was amazing
|
❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ “There is no time in our lives when we are so conspicuously without mercy as in adolescence.” ❀ blog ❀ thestorygraph ❀ letterboxd ❀ tumblr ❀ ko-fi ❀ “There is no time in our lives when we are so conspicuously without mercy as in adolescence.” I don't think I would ever picked up this 'obscure' and forgotten novel if it hadn't been for the 'crime fiction' module I took during my second year of uni. Thanks to that module, which was in every other respect a huge waste of time (lecturer on Tom Ripley: "he does bad things because he wants more stuff"...truly illuminating), I was able to 'discover' Barbara Vine's work. Since then I've read a few other novels by Vine (which happens to Ruth Rendell's nom de plume) and while I can safely say that she is an excellent writer, The House of Stairs remains my favourite of hers. Perhaps it is because of its sapphic undertones, or maybe I'm just a sucker for unrequited love stories. “It felt like a passion, it felt like being in love, it was being in love, it was the kind of thing you delude yourself that, if all goes well, will last a lifetime. Things, of course, didn't go well. When do they?” The House of Stairs tells a dizzying tale of tale of psychological suspense. Like other novels by Vine it employ two timelines and explores the haunting effects of the past on the present. ‘The present’ features characters whose lives have been altered by an often unspecified accident and or crime. The second timeline, narrated from the retrospective, focuses on their past, and in particular on the events leading to that ‘one big event’. Vine does not limit herself to recounting past occurrences, instead she allows her characters to re-examine their own actions, as well as attempting to understand the motivations behind those of others. The past and present flow into each other, and throughout her narratives Vine traces both a crime’s roots and its subsequent ramifications. Set in London The House of Stairs London opens in 1980s when Elizabeth—protagonist and narrator—glimpses Bell, a woman who has been recently released from prison. Seeing Bell is the catalyst that makes Elizabeth recount her story (transporting us to the late 60s and early 70s) but even if she knows the identity of Bell’s victim she does not share the details of this fateful event with the readers, preferring instead to play her cards close to her chest. This dual storyline creates an apparent juxtaposition of past and present. We can hazard guesses through brief glimpses of her present, her ambiguous remarks, such as ‘Bell’s motive for asking those questions was outside the bounds of my imagings’ and ‘[A]s they wished me to do, I was seeing everything inside-out’, and through her carefully paced recounting of those events. By re-living that particular time of her life, Elizabeth—alongside the reader—acquires a better understanding of the circumstances that lead Bell to commit murder. Her narration is a far from passive relay of what happened for Elizabeth in the present seems actively involved in this scrutiny of past events. “It is interesting how such reputations are built. They come about through confusing the two kinds of truth telling: the declaration of opinion and principle and the recounting of history.” One of Vine’s motifs is in fact to include a house which is the locus of her story, functioning as a Gothic element within her storylines. In this novel the house (nicknamed—you guessed it—'the house of stairs') is purchased by Cosette—a relation of Elizabeth's—soon after the death of her husband, and becomes home to a group of bohemians, hippies, and outsiders of sorts. The house become an experimental ground: it is an escape from traditional social norms, a possibility for Cosette to make her own makeshift family. The house creates an almost disquieting atmosphere: those who live there are exploiting Cosette, and tensions gradually emerge between its tenants. The house can be a place of secrecy—doors shut, people do not leave their rooms, stairs creak—and of jealousy, for Elizabeth comes to view the other guests as depriving her of Cosette’s affection. Elizabeth, plagued by the possibility of having inherited a family disease, finds comfort in Bell, a beautiful and alluring woman. Elizabeth comes to idolize Bell (comparisons to the portrait of Lucrezia Panciatichi abound), and finds herself increasingly obsessed by her. Bell's arrival into the house, however, will have violent consequences. As Elizabeth is examining this time in her life, she, once again, finds herself falling under Bell's spell. “I found her exciting in a disturbing way, a soul-shacking way, without knowing in the least what I wanted of her.” Like many other Vine novels The House of Stairs is a deeply intertextual work. Henry James, in particular, plays a significant role in Elizabeth's narration. Guilt, culpability, love, obsession, desire, greed, past tragedies, and family legacies are recurring themes in Elizabeth's story. Vine, however, doesn't offer an easy answer as she problematises notions of normalcy and evil. There are many reasons why I love this novel so much: Vine's elegantly discerning prose, her examination of class and gender roles in the 1960s-70s, the way she renders Elizabeth's yearning for Bell...while I can see that some readers my age may find this novel to be a bit outdated, I would definitely recommend it to those who enjoy reading authors such as Donna Tartt, Sarah Waters, Kazuo Ishiguro, Tana French, James Baldwin (particularly, Giovanni's Room), and Magda Szabó. re-re-read: weirdly enough i have come to think of this novel as a comfort read, i say weirdly because there is little comfort to be had in these pages. an atmosphere of unease permeates the narrative, and most of the dynamics at the heart of this story are characterised by a certain ambivalence. still, vine's writing is utterly enthralling. now, even if i do consider this book an my all-time-favourite, i recognise that certain phrases, observations, and or lines of dialogue are decidedly representative of both of the time in which the story is set in (60s/70s england, a lot of white middle-class or otherwise well-off characters) and the time in which it was written (80s). understandably some of these off-handed yet nevertheless offensive lines might alienate contemporary readers (whether our narrator is making a negative remark about certain neighbourhoods in london, or discussing her sexuality using outdated terms or in a dualistic way), so i recommend that if you do pick this book you prepare yourself to encounter content you might frown upon. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
3
|
Jul 13, 2022
Jul 10, 2020
Mar 13, 2018
|
Jul 16, 2022
Jul 13, 2020
Mar 14, 2018
|
Mar 13, 2018
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
1846141044
| 9781846141041
| 1846141044
| 3.70
| 339,459
| Dec 15, 1856
| Dec 21, 2010
|
it was amazing
|
| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | Emma Bovary has become the epitome of desperate housewife, the archetypal unfaithful wife, the ultimate daydreamer whos | | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | Emma Bovary has become the epitome of desperate housewife, the archetypal unfaithful wife, the ultimate daydreamer whose fantasies lead to a premature self-destruction. “She wished she could stop living, or sleep all the time.” Madame Bovary follows the ‘provincial ways’ of the petite bourgeoisie. Charles Bovary is a so-so doctor, married to an older woman, and is ordinary in every which way. Similarly to Prince Myshkin his naïveté and kind-heartedness are perceived by those around him as weaknesses or signs of stupidity. He falls in love with Emma, the daughter of one of his patients, and lucky for him his wife just ups and dies (as she is hanging the wash she exclaims “Oh, my God!” sighs, loses consciousness and dies: “She was dead! How astonishing it was!”). Charles makes the most of this tragedy and asks Emma’s father for her hand in marriage. After an incredibly ornate wedding the two settle into married life. Or Charles does. He is exuberant, he adores Emma, lavishing her with affection. Emma, on the other hand, finds her husband suffocating and grows increasingly resentful towards him. She craves the “passion” and “intoxication” promised to her in her favourite books (in this she reminds me of Catherine from Northanger Abbey who obsesses over Gothic books, so much so that she ends up viewing the world through Gothic-tinted glasses). In the following chapter (which happens to be my favourite one) the narrative describes Emma’s childhood and education at a convent. It is there that Emma becomes enthralled by the world of popular romances. She feels “an ardent veneration for illustrious or ill-fated women” such as Joan of Arc, Mary Stuart or the nun Héloïse. Emma is captivated by the regalia worn by the hero of a novel rather than by the hero himself. We find this same attitude towards many things in her life: “She loved the sea only for its storms, and greenery only when it grew up here and there among ruins”. Likewise, while at the convent she seems to more attracted to the trappings of religion rather than feeling a genuine devotion: she focuses on the appearance of the “white-faced” nuns, the rosaries, the copper crucifixes, “the perfumes of the altar, the coolness of the fonts, and the glow of the candles”. She does not pay attention to the Mass, gazing instead “in her book at the holy pictures with their azure edges”. Emma Rouault loves “the church for its flowers, music for the words of its songs, and literature for its power to stir the passions”. Emma Bovary strongly resembles her maiden self. She is disappointed by her marriage, for she considers Charles to be a man who “taught her nothing, knew nothing, wished for nothing”. She thinks him dull and unambitious, the very opposite of an ideal husband. Emma is equally let down by her experience of motherhood, which is quite unlike the one she envisioned. Finally, her love affairs—with Rodolphe and Léon—seem to offer merely a pretext for her to exchange keepsakes and letters with another person. Emma goes through the motions of being in love without feeling any real love; it is the opportunity of wearing a new riding habit that causes her to embark upon her first affair. It is unsurprising then that she soon grows weary of both her lovers: “[Emma] was rediscovering in adultery all the platitudes of marriage”. As Emma’s appetite for luxurious material goods increases, she grows more disillusioned with her life, and since the happiness those extravagant items give her is merely temporary, she is unable to fight ennui. Her mounting debt to Lheureux, the man who sells her the material goods she so desperately craves, and her failed love affairs contribute to bringing about Emma’s own demise. Even before marrying Charles, Emma had fallen prey to ennui: soon after leaving the convent “she considered herself to be thoroughly disillusioned, with nothing more to learn, nothing more to feel”. Whereas boredom is a ‘response to the immediate’, ennui ‘belongs to those with a sense of sublime potential, those who feel themselves superior to their environment’. And indeed, Emma feels a sense of superiority to what surrounds her: her dull husband, her mother-in-law, her servants, the uncouth villagers, the “tiresome countryside, the idiotic petits bourgeois, the mediocrity of life”. Emma is adamant that she has been cast in the wrong role, that of a petit-bourgeois woman, believing that she deserves to live as a heroine in a romance does, married to Prince Charming and surrounded by beauty. A pattern gradually emerges: time and again Emma is disappointed by her attempts to reconstruct the world portrayed in her romantic novels. At the same time, it is almost as if Emma is unconsciously not really interested in satisfying her desire or making her daydreams reality; what she seems to truly enjoy is the act of desiring itself. After all, it is only in her fantasies, and by apotheosizing her past experiences, that Emma can envision herself experiencing a form of pure sensation and heightened emotion. And perhaps it is the very act of fantasizing that enables her to feel something akin to jouissance, which in Lacanian theory is a form of ‘backhanded enjoyment’, an excessive pleasure that ‘[b]egins with a tickle and ends with blaze of petrol’. The pleasure that Emma feels by longing – by the very act of daydreaming – is similar to the ecstatic feeling experienced by her dream self. Yet, the enjoyment that she derives from yearning is accompanied by a feeling of pain since Emma is only able to long because she is missing something. Paradoxically, then, Emma can find fulfilment in the perpetuation of her non-fulfilment given that ‘every form of fulfilment necessarily brings an end to the desired state of longing, it is only the infinite deferral of satisfaction that keeps desire alive’. There is the tendency to believe that Emma’s mania, her depression and her subsequent suicide result from her clumsy attempts at upward mobility. Flaubert makes Emma’s desires and her unhappiness quite clear to us: she wishes to live like the heroines in her beloved romances, yearns for an impossible glittery lifestyle but, try as she might, never really succeeds in replicating the feelings or experiences she has read of. Certainly, there are many instances where readers will find Emma’s dissatisfactions to be risible. But, however small-minded and solipsistic Emma Flaubert articulates her sense of entrapment and addiction to longing (for sublimity, love, completion, meaning) in such a way as to challenge easy dismissals of her desires (as being petty or superficial). There are so many things that made me love this book. Flaubert's prose (or Lydia Davis’ impeccable), his attention to the minute details that constitute provincial life, his irony, his absurd characters....the list goes on. Flaubert excels at depicting the contradictory nature of people, the fleeting moments of irritation, boredom, hate, passion...there are many scenes which seem to ridicule his characters’ worries, but he never directly pokes fun at his characters (his readers will do that for him). And while a certain sardonic humor prevails there are also episodes that will certainly elicit our sympathies. Although this novel is often labelled as a romance or a tragedy, Madame Bovary reads like an anti-romance. We have characters such Emma and Léon, idealists, self-proclaimed romantics, who are trapped in a realist narrative. Yet, Flaubert is also making fun of realism. There are so many descriptions of what the characters are wearing, of the smells or objects, houses, streets, you name it. Then juxtaposing these lavish or picturesque descriptions we have scenes detailing Charles’ operating on the stable boy’s club foot, and these scenes make for some nausea-inducing reading material. Nevertheless this remains a beautifully crafted novel. Flaubert’s acuity, his striking prose, his vibrant characters, make for an unforgettable read. One should not approach this novel hoping for something in the realms of Anna Karenina. Although one could describe Emma as the ‘heroine’ of this novel, she possesses mostly qualities that will make readers hate her. There were many instances in which I disliked her (just read of the way she treats her servants or her daughter or even Charles). But Flaubert is a deft writer, and Emma cannot be simply be labelled as 'unlikable'. In many ways she reminds of the alienated women who star in recent fiction such as the narrator in My Year of Rest and Relaxation. Emma is like them bored, self-destructive, prone to bouts of depression, and finds pleasure only in daydreams. The first time I picked up this novel I struggled to make it past the first chapter. I then ended up listening to the audiobook (narrated by Juliet Stevenson who gives an impeccable performance) and, just like that, I was transfixed. This second time around I read it myself (I own a very stylish penguin classics edition) and I was once again enthralled by Flaubert narrative. I was particularly intrigued by the seamless way in which he shifts perspectives. This time I was also able to truly savour Flaubert's prose as I already knew how the storyline would unfold. Next time I may try reading the Italian translation and maybe who knows, one day I will be able to read the original French (okay, that's quite unlikely but you never know...). Anyway, I could probably go on and on about this novel. I would not recommend it to those who have a low tolerance for irony and kind of detestable characters. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Oct 21, 2020
Feb 03, 2018
|
Oct 23, 2020
Feb 07, 2018
|
Feb 03, 2018
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0143039970
| 9780143039976
| 0143039970
| 3.93
| 234,795
| Sep 21, 1962
| Oct 31, 2006
|
it was amazing
|
| | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “Bow all your heads to our adored Mary Katherine.” In recent years Shirley Jackson has experienced a kind of renascence | | blog | tumblr | ko-fi | | “Bow all your heads to our adored Mary Katherine.” In recent years Shirley Jackson has experienced a kind of renascence. Perhaps it is because of Netflix's adaptation of The Haunting of Hill House or possibly it is due to contemporary authors-such as Donna Tartt, Neil Gaiman, and Stephen King-who have credited Jackson as their inspiration, enhancing her reputation and prompting a reappraisal of her work. The fact that the Gothic and Horror genres—long regarded as cheap and sensational—are no longer considered ‘lowbrow’ fiction has also contributed to this reassessment of Jackson’s oeuvre. Modern readers now regard Jackson as a central figure of the America Gothic as much of her fiction paints a fascinating—if not disturbing—portrait of postwar America . Yet, I find it difficult to pigeonhole Jackson as a Horror writer. While her narratives do tend to focus on emotionally disturbed women, they also present us with rather Kafkaesque realities. Time and again Jackson magnifies the way in which traditions and societal expectations pose a threat to one's individuality and creativity. Indeed, most of her stories follow a woman's 'quest' to find or maintain her identify. The 'horror' within Jackson's stories is often psychological and it is experienced by her main characters. It is because most of her protagonists are labelled as 'different' that they are made vulnerable. Their vulnerability makes them afraid of the world around them. Yet, readers will often find that all of Jackson's characters behave in an eccentric, if not downright disturbing, manner (there are whole towns and communities populated by weird people...a bit a la A Series Of Unfortunate Events). In spite of this, this normalised weirdness, our protagonists are still singled out. Perhaps this is because they seem more interested in practicing their personal brand of witchcraft than of engaging with the rest of their world. Or perhaps it is their fear, often tinged with horror, of others that makes them stand out, even amongst other ‘eccentrics’. As Jackson demonstrates time and again, the horror experienced by her heroine seems an almost an inevitable reaction to their terrible realities. And other people should indeed be feared. Madness and evil pervade Jackson’s writing to the extent that even her depictions of everyday occurrences are riddled with human weaknesses, fears, and cruelties. In We Have Always Lived in the Castle evil takes many forms, and our heroine has every reason to hate and fear the rest of the world. The protagonist of We Have Always Lived in the Castle—which happens to be Jackson’s last published novel—has no interest in personal growth. Mary Katherine, who goes by the nickname of Merricat (quite fitting given that she often behaves like her closest companion, a black cat named Jonas), is an untame and defiant tomboy whose apparent ingenuousness hides a razor-alert mind. Six years before the events of the narrative—at the age of twelve—Merricat's mother, father, aunt, and younger brother died after eating sugar laced with arsenic. Constance, Merricat’s older sister, is accused and acquitted of the crime. Ostracised from their village, Merricat and Constance have become completely estranged from society. At the age of eighteen—free from her parents’ rules—Merricat has fashioned Blackwood Manor into her own private and idyllic world. The two sisters and Uncle Julian—who survived the poisoning but is now wheelchair-bound and increasingly senile—lead a life that is relatively quiet and governed by the daily chores and the ritual of mealtimes. Constance is in charge of the cooking and spends most of her days looking after Uncle Julian and completing household chores with Merricat, whom she treats with loving indulgence, often condoning Merricat’s disturbing behaviour by saying “silly Merricat”. When Constance voices her desire to go outside of the property, Merricat fear of this begins to manifests itself in her surroundings, skewing the way she perceives her reality so that she views ordinary things as ‘omens’ that “spoke of change.” Merricat attempts to regain control of the situation through her witchcraft and by breaking objects but with cousin Charles’ unannounced visit, Merricat is forced to take more drastic approaches to self-preservation. A There are many different layers to We Have Always Lived in the Castle. One the one hand, it is exactly what its reputation promises it to be: an incredibly eerie and compelling short novel. On the other hand, it also delves into many challenging and unsettling subjects, such as paranoia, persecution and violence. Shirley Jackson does not shy away from portraying the darker corners of human nature, in fact, she delves right into the darkest parts of the human psyche. On the surface, Merricat’s alienation is debilitating yet a closer look suggests that her estrangement from her society is an act of self-preservation, one that is both empowering and subversive, allowing them to defy the societal norms and expectations of their time. Throughout the course of her narrative she attempts—for better or worse—to shape and maintain her own identities, refusing the role thrust upon her by her society. In Jackson’s novels, a world of fantasy is preferable to the ‘real’ world, which is populated by people who perform acts of cruelty, physical brutality and or psychological violence against those they perceive as ‘outsiders’. Merricat, who embodies the feared ‘other’ through her unwillingness, if not outright refusal, to adhere to established social conventions, is the ideal scapegoats of her community. Merricat’s megalomania shows itself through her desire to exact punishments and for designating things and people as either “good” or “bad”. Her dichotomous view of the world causes her to behave in extremes: she varies between acting like a feral child, a sulky adolescent, and a seemingly Cassandra-like individual. Merricat obeys her childish impulses, and readily resorts to violence when not getting her way. Although Merricat sounds much younger than her eighteen years, her naivety is misleading, and her fantasies can easily move between those of a child (“I really only want a winged horse, anyway. We could fly you to the moon and back, my horse and I”) and those of a far more ruthless and dangerous person. Her sadistic fantasies, her manipulation and subordination of Constance, and her desire to frighten others (“I always thought about rot when I came toward the row of stores; I thought about burning black painful rot that ate away from inside, hurting dreadfully. I wished it on the village.” ) reveal Merricat’s cunning awareness. Readers might find her charming, yet warped perspective jarring, especially since she avoids explaining her most malevolent deeds. Merricat’s surreal inner world is conveyed through her first-person narration and readers are granted a unique insight into some of her mental strategies that she uses to feel protected from world around her’. To an outsider like her cousin Charles, many of Merricat’s actions seem to be unwarranted temper tantrums. Readers, on the other hand, know that Merricat always attributes a meaning—however absurd or far-fetched it may appear—to her every action and word. We are aware that she deliberately smashes objects in an effort to regain control over her life. Merricat’s tendency to let her fantasies dictate her behaviour, turning her imagination into reality, distances herself from the ever-present threat of reality. She attempts to change and control aspects of her life through magical charms and fantasies, with little direct engagement with the outside world. Merricat’s need of control could possibly stems from her ‘fear of change’ which in turn causes her to perceive anything outside her and Constance’s established routine, such as the arrival of uninvited guests, as a threat to their wellbeing. Merricat tries to deflect ‘change’ through her own unique brand of witchcraft, which consists in the performance of various magical rituals, the burying of various ‘safeguards’, unspoken ‘spells’, and even the occasional“‘offering of jewellery out of gratitude”. Merricat draws strength from her belief in magic. What Charles—and presumably the rest of society—would see as childish games, Merricat views as the means to safeguard her future and protect her from the outside. It is up to Merricat to fashion her home, Blackwood Manor, into a ‘castle’—a stronghold—which she can protect through various magical rituals and wards, and Merricat believes that nothing—and no one—can prevent her from projecting her fantastical and solipsistic view of the world onto her reality. Shirley Jackson's style is perfectly attuned to Merricat's unnerving mind. Her obsessive and impulsive nature is fluidly conveyed by Jackson's repetitive and rhythmical writing. Jackson also evokes a surrealisms reminiscent of fairy tales through the Merricat's childlike urges and morbid fascination. Merricat is a beguiling narrator. Her playful fantasies are juxtaposed against the most violent and bizarre thoughts. Her devotion to her sister borders on the obsessive yet it is through this puzzling relationship that we see a more genuine side to Merricat's character. In spite of her selfish nature, her palpable fears and unique worldview make her into a fascinating protagonist. Once the stability of the sisters' purposely reclusive existence is threatened, Merricat survives through her active fantasy. She retreats into the deepest parts of her made-up world. And it is her increasingly desperate attempts to retain control over both Constance's and her own life that make her into such a brilliant character. Even in those instances where she 'simply' observes others, Merricat is always 'there', her presence unmissable to the readers. Her sister Constance also demonstrates worrying behaviour. She too is initially in complete denial over the family's status. She is in some things, rather controlling, while in other instances, she seemed...on another planet. While Constance remains a cypher of sorts, we see why Merricat needs her. Uncle Julian ramblings were endearing and his sharp remarks provided much entertainment. Much of the story's humour springs from his character. Merricat perceives cousin Charles a threat right from the start. The scenes featuring him are brimming with tension: Merricat's apprehension is all too real, and I found myself viewing him as an 'enemy', just as she does. Merricat's descriptions of him often present him as something not quite human, a ghost or some such creature. While we can see that some of his criticisms towards Constance and Merricat may have some 'merit', we will also see him as an intruder (given that we see him through Merricat's perspective) and I definitely wanted him to get his comeuppance. The underlying suspense, the growing unease, make this uncanny tale hard to put down.The vivid descriptions are simply tantalising, the surreal quality of the characters' conversations is darkly amusing and the atmospheric setting is almost tangible. We Have Always Lived in the Castle makes for a lush and macabre read, one that will probably strike you as weird yet ultimately compelling. It could be read as a fairy-tale of sorts, an alternative to folklore narratives, or as a story that sets otherness against 'herd' mentality. Recently there has been a film adaptation of this novel (you can watch the trailer for it here) which, in spite of some alterations, brings to life Jackson's story. It doesn't quite succeed in conveying the novel's unapologetic weirdness, its idiosyncrasies, and its black humour but it isn't a terrible adaptation. I would actually loved it if Laika (the studio that did Coraline) had adapted this. If you happen to love (or like) the film Stoker you might want to give this book a read as the two share quite a few similarities (a relative called Charles breaks the 'harmony' in the protagonist's household, the mcs are morbid/creepy teenagers with some disturbing habits). The first page of this novel perfectly encapsulates its style and tone. If you are uncertain whether this is the kind of story for you, I recommend you read its opening paragraph: “My name is Mary Katherine Blackwood. I am eighteen years old, and I live with my sister Constance. I have often thought that with any luck at all I could have been born a werewolf, because the two middle fingers on both my hands are the same length, but I have had to be content with what I had. I dislike washing myself, and dogs, and noise. I like my sister Constance, and Richard Plantagenet, and Amanita phalloides, the deathcup mushroom. Everyone else in my family is dead.”...more |
Notes are private!
|
6
|
Oct 08, 2021
Oct 31, 2020
Oct 28, 2019
Dec 31, 2018
Jan 15, 2018
Jan 09, 2017
|
Oct 08, 2021
Nov 2020
Oct 31, 2019
Dec 31, 2018
Jan 16, 2018
Jan 09, 2017
|
Jan 15, 2018
|
Paperback
|
Loading...
20 of 20 loaded