Posts tagged ‘literature’

June 15, 2011

Book Review: The Ambassadors

The AmbassadorsThe Ambassadors by Henry James

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I’m sure Henry James is a genius and all, but untangling his prose is like trying to talk to a verbose, over-educated person who’s drunk off his ass but refuses to pass out. For example, he might start off with “The effect of the man’s speech was as if he were a tippler who…” then meanders here, there, and over there to the other bar, and then wanders back toward you, but veering off at the last second, borrows several drinks (by which I mean to imply words) off surrounding tables (by which I mean, words that ought to belong to other sentences entirely), and then, seeing the end of the sentence approaching (which, by continuation of our metaphor, would be meant to suggest the end of the night, or bed, or the end of drinking festivities, which drunk would prefer at all accounts to avoid and so stalls to keep off at a distance), he throws any number of adverbs, barstools, prepositions, gerunds and the like in between himself and that end, and once you are fully convinced he has lost all sight of his aim in telling you the original anecdote he had introduced, he sometimes arrives back at that point, but other times, he does not, and if you were to map his meanderings, it would take a smarter person than most readers nowadays to derive any sense from it, and at that point, the other woman whirled right out of the room, and the first, though not affected by the same thing to the same degree of the latter, or rather, it was the same thing, but she did not derive from it the same intent, but was nevertheless affected in a different way of her own, said, “My word, what a lot of…” but then hung fire.

So, that’s what reading The Ambassadors is like all the way through. The other problem with the book is that it was written in a time when Americans had a hard time believing anybody on Earth was actually fucking, since nobody in America was. The premise of the book is that the narrator has been sent to bring back his fiancé’s son, who is having an illicit affair with a married (she’s permanently separated from her abusive husband) woman in Paris, but when he gets there, he really likes the woman and he really likes Paris, and he really likes the son more than he did before, and so he decides the son might be better off there. But he convinces himself (somewhat) that maybe the son’s relationship with the married woman isn’t technically sexual, and then (spoiler alert…?) at the end, he has this big realization when he can’t pretend anymore that it isn’t. Except, being a modern young woman, I didn’t get that AT ALL, and read the whole thing assuming that he knew they were a full-fledged couple, but that he didn’t, in these particular circumstances, think it was immoral. So then, when his grand realization came, I was all, “Oh, wait, hold on. This was a thing? Oh, I guess it was THE thing. Where have I been?”

JUST SAY WHAT YOU MEAN, HENRY JAMES!! Actually, this is a really hilarious novel when looked at in hindsight, but as you’re thwacking through the jungle of it, it’s pretty tiresome, and also, I think I am far too stupid to understand this book.

View all my reviews

January 19, 2011

Loving by Henry Green

LovingLoving by Henry Green

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Henry Green’s most beloved novel focuses on the complicated relationships between the servants of an Irish country house during World War II. At the time of the novel, Ireland is neutral territory, remote from the escalating conflict and mostly abandoned by the English gentry who own homes there. The servants are left alone with their employers’ children, and thus free, they fight, love, ally, steal and work.

Green is a master at painting beautiful pastoral settings and then focusing on the myriad, nagging daily stresses of the people living in them – both in this novel, and in my personal favorite of his novels, Concluding. While the servants at the Tennants’ manor are removed from the horrible war and mostly left alone to do their chores and mind their own affairs, every character in Loving is plagued by innumerable stresses. These are not carefree people. They worry about putting away enough for retirement, they worry about their families back in England, they throw themselves into power struggles, they lie, they steal, they torment each other. They fall ill, they throw tantrums, they emotionally blackmail each other. They deliberate about enlisting, moving, staying put, escaping. They fear the Germans, they fear the IRA.

The best scenes in the novel are those which Green describes carefully in close focus, and where the events occurring are so closely wedded to the setting that one relies entirely on the other – the dovecoat where the children play and the lovers meet, the cavernous gallery where Edith and her charges play a game of blind man’s buff, the eccentric lampman’s saddleroom with the window into the peacocks’ shed where the maids are caught snooping by the butler. The central figures of the novel – the butler, Charley Raunce, and the housemaid, Edith – are clearly made for each other. Both dim and conniving, they negotiate an ever-changing workaday morality all their own – skimming off the top of the house’s finances is only smart, but stealing property is over the line…mostly. Raunce is constant in his affections, but produces a never-ending torrent of unnecessary falsehoods whenever he feels himself cornered or disrespected, and is often suspected of more cunning than he possesses. Edith is ever careful of the feelings of the staff, but tucks away information on them for when she might need it. Innocent and easily scandalized on the surface, she is in fact a master of manipulation, sexual and otherwise. Loving is a novel overshadowed by a great war and made up of many small ones, and in the end, we know that Edith, at any rate, will be among the survivors. And that is as it should be, because in Green’s Britain, the manor is but the playground of the servants.

View all my reviews

January 5, 2011

A Breakdown of the Books I Read In 2010

I read 52 books this year. Here’s how they break down across various categories:

Rating:

I loved 12 of the books I read this year. By loved, I mean both that I thought they were brilliant, and also that I really enjoyed reading them – that I read them quickly and without effort, and that I responded to them emotionally. My favorite books are generally satires and dark comedies, and many of these books fit into that category:

Castle by J. Robert Lennon
The Birthday of the World by Ursula K. Le Guin
Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov
The Stories of Breece D’J Pancake by Breece D’J Pancake
The Columnist by Jeffrey Frank
God Knows by Joseph Heller
On the Nature of Human Romantic Interaction by Karl Iagnemma
Novel About My Wife by Emily Perkins
The Debt to Pleasure by John Lanchester
Concluding by Henry Green
Room by Emma Donaghue

I thought 10 of the books I read this year were very good. Very good means that I thought they were just that – very good – but they were maybe less enjoyable and easy to read, either because they were a little dry, or they were about disturbing or upsetting things. Or they were involving enough, but they just weren’t quite as amazing as the books listed above, or maybe I intellectually appreciated them more than viscerally loved them. These were:

Malone Dies by Samuel Beckett
We Tell Ourselves Stories In Order to Live by Joan Didion
Stories by Anton Chekhov
Pnin by Vladimir Nabokov
Blue Angel by Francine Prose
An Intimate History of Killing by Joanna Bourke
Fat City by Leonard Gardner
An Exact Replica of a Figment of My Imagination by Elizabeth McCracken
To the Castle and Back by Vaclav Havel
The Best American Short Stories 2010

I thought 13 books were good, but not amazing, or they weren’t my sort of thing or didn’t make a huge, lasting impression on me, but I could appreciate that they were well-written, intelligent books, or even that I really enjoyed them but not quite as much as those listed above:

The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin
Disquiet by Julia Leigh
The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson
Notes From No Man’s Land by Eula Biss
Where the God of Love Hangs Out by Amy Bloom
Telex From Cuba by Rachel Kushner
Operating Instructions: A Journal of My Son’s First Year by Anne Lamott
Prague by Arthur Phillips
Doting by Henry Green
The Hole We’re In by Gabrielle Zevin
Nothing by Henry Green
Dzanc Books Best of the Web 2010
The Dew Breaker by Edwidge Danticat

I thought 11 books were ok, which means they were sort of meh, or that maybe they were good and all, but didn’t reach me personally or I wasn’t in the right mood or place to receive them, or that they weren’t bad but I would just as soon not have read them, or they were original but seemed half-baked, or they had one or two really great elements, but as a whole weren’t that impressive:

The Funeral Party by Ludmila Ulitskaya
Slippage by Harlon Ellison
Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse
The Children’s Hospital by Chris Adrian
Heir to the Glimmering World by Cynthia Ozick
The Messiah of Stockholm by Cynthia Ozick
Miles From Nowhere by Nami Mun
The Hidden Life of Deer by Elizabeth Marshall Thomas
Flying to America: 45 More Stories by Donald Barthelme
Krik? Krak! by Edwidge Danticat
Likewise by Ariel Schrag

I thought 6 books were bad, in that they were stupid or unoriginal or poorly written or pointless (also, I suspect I just don’t really care for mysteries):

Woman On the Edge of Time by Marge Piercy (note: I’m aware this book is kind of a feminist darling, but I’m sorry – as much as I agree with Piercy’s Utopian vision, the book is really poorly written)
Don’t Look Back by Karin Fossum
Cost by Roxana Robinson
The Good Parents by Joan London
A Thousand Cuts by Simon Lelic
A Clubbable Woman by Reginald Hill

Type of Book:

I read 30 novels (3 of which were mysteries), 4 novellas, 10 volumes of short stories, 2 volumes of essays, 3 memoirs, 2 nonfiction books and 1 graphic novel.

Author Diversity:

I read multiple books by the same author, and a few story collections that were by various authors, so not counting those, I read 43 authors this year. Of those, 24 were women and 19 men. If you count repeat authors, I read 27 books by women and 23 by men. I read 9 dead authors, and 34 living. Only 4 of the books I read were translated works. Fourteen of the authors I read were white women from the US, 10 were white men from the US. I read one biracial woman, one Korean-American and one Haitian-American, all from the US. I read one each Irish man and woman, and four men from the UK (all 6 white). I read one woman from Russia and two Russian men, one German man, one Czech man and one Norwegian woman, and two each white women from Australia and New Zealand. All of which means, I did not do so hot with diversity in my reading this year.

Overall, my favorite novels that I read this year were God Knows by Joseph Heller and Room by Emma Donaghue. My favorite story collection was On the Nature of Human Romantic Interaction by Karl Iagnemma, and my favorite memoir was An Exact Replica of a Figment of My Imagination by Elizabeth McCracken.

June 15, 2010

May Books

 

Cost by Roxana Robinson: This novel, about a family’s upheaval when it becomes apparent that one of its grown sons has become addicted to heroin, reads like a Lifetime movie complete with clunkily interwoven PSA information about heroin. Robinson devotes a good chunk of the novel’s beginning to introducing multiple interesting characters, but the novel drifts away from their concerns and never fully returns. Much of the novel is repetitive. Not recommended.

 

 

 

 

Blue Angel by Francine Prose: A creative writing teacher at a small, less-than-impressive liberal arts college becomes enamored of a student’s work, with disastrous results. Prose is tartly hilarious on many levels here, from the pricelessly dreadful short stories the writing students submit for workshop, to her protagonist’s own self-delusional mental whining. Many of the reviews I’ve read on this novel make the mistake of assuming Prose shares her protagonist’s point of view. But while the novel is undoubtedly an indictment of college campus PC police, Prose is far too careful and interesting a writer to stop at so simple a message. She is an emphatic champion of close reading, and a close read of Blue Angel doesn’t let the teacher off so easily. Highly recommended.

 

 

The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson: What happens when a sacrificial lamb is sent to spend a few weeks summering in a haunted house? Three guesses. A psychological thriller set in a wonderfully bizarre mansion (clearly inspired by the Winchester Mystery House, name-checked in the novel), Jackson’s novel is deeply unsettling and thoroughly absorbing. Highly recommended.

 

 

 

 

 

Notes From No Man’s Land by Eula Biss: Eula Biss’s debut book of essays, winner of the Graywolf Press Nonfiction Prize. Biss is chiefly concerned with race in America, and has much of interest to say on the subject; as far as style, she has palpably modeled herself on Joan Didion, as of course, any aspiring young essayist should. She is at her best when focusing on large themes and research, made personal by her own life experiences. In “Relations” (which I’ve linked to before), she draws from her own mixed heritage to explore race as social construct. In “Land Mines”, she relates her experiences teaching in New York public schools, and bravely indicts public education as a tool of social control. In “Is This Kansas”, Biss is gobsmacked by the utter lack of social conscience or awareness of privilege in her students at University of Iowa (I particularly enjoyed this piece, having gone to a similar state school myself). In “No Man’s Land”, Biss meditates on America’s pioneer heritage (specifically Laura Ingalls Wilder and her family’s experiences with Indians), and how this history relates to current American fear, territoriality, racism and paranoia.

 On the other hand, Biss is at her weakest when attempting to extrapolate her own experiences into some broader, universal meaning, as in “Goodbye to All That”, in which Biss tries to flesh out her own post-college loneliness into some statement about New York City, or in “Letter to Mexico”, in which Biss’s own self-consciousness as a traveler eclipses whatever she is attempting to say about her subject. Still, far more winners here than otherwise. Recommended (and several of the best are available to read in full online; click through links above).

 

An Intimate History of Killing by Joanna Bourke: This book is about violence in warfare – specifically, how different people think about, experience, and react to the actual act of killing. Bourke doesn’t even attempt to discuss war itself as a moral good or ill; her focus is strictly on how men and women experience combat. A fascinating look into a rarely broached topic. Highly recommended.

May 16, 2009

Chick Lit

Elaine Showalter’s A Jury of Her Peers sounds right on:

She has insisted that themes central to women’s lives — marriage, motherhood, the tension between family and individual aspirations — constitute subject matter as “serious” and significant as traditionally masculine motifs like war and travel. Yet she rejects the preference of many feminist literary scholars for emphasizing “culture importance rather than aesthetic distinction,” and she doesn’t hesitate to describe some of the writers discussed in “A Jury of Her Peers” as artistically limited, if historically interesting.

She also offers an interesting explanation as to why there were great female authors in 19th century England, but not so much in America.

I think that books by, about and concerning women are certainly unfairly trivialized, but I also think that, in service to some mistaken idea of diversity, insignificant works do tend to be dredged up to represent women’s voices during historical periods when women were mostly silenced. Historical revisionism is no help to feminism – if women were uneducated and unliberated, and so unable to write literature or compose music, or do anything other than work, breed and die, we shouldn’t pretend it wasn’t so.

I did feel alienated all through school by reading novel after novel that portrayed women as clingy, irrational, two-dimensional fools – either virgins who sucked the lifeblood out of the protagonist, or predatory ho-bags who first enticed and then suffocated him. I think teachers understand how tiresome this is and want to provide a brief respite, and, while that is important, the solution is not to elevate something substandard just to provide an alternate point of view, because that further convinces those already convinced that all points of view other than theirs are substandard.

August 22, 2008

I’ve Been Reading: Then We Came To the End and Remainder

Regular readers of this blog will know that I am no fan of superstars. I resent the hell out of anything beloved by all. But sometimes somebody will deserve every last lick of praise they get, and Joshua Ferris is one of those people. I can’t even hate. TWCTTE is a fantastic novel – hilarious, relevant, charitable to everybody, and well-written. Go read it now, because no matter who you are, you’ll enjoy it. Damn it.

Remainder, on the other hand, is a whole bunch of nothing. I can’t believe I finished it. I got about thirty pages in, and thought, ‘Ah, this is very interesting. I think it’s going to go in one of several directions, and can’t wait to see which.’ Twenty pages further in, I thought, ‘Huh. It hasn’t gone anywhere yet.’ Twenty pages further in, ‘Still in the same place.’ And when I finally finished it, ‘Well. That really was just about that. All the way through.’

Wow, those are some slight reviews. So, here are some cool things this week:

Scientists got blood from stem cells:

Scientists have used embryonic stem cells to generate blood — a feat that could eventually lead to endless supplies of type O-negative blood, a rare blood type prized by doctors for its versatility.

Computer scientists thought of a good way to make use of those text boxes you have to fill out online all the time:

You may be deciphering a word from a decaying old book, helping to transform a historic text into a new digital file.

This entertainer found a way to use cicada shells to adorn herself (via CP). If you’ve never experienced the weird joy that is picking cicada shells off a tree, you should probably do that at some point. When I was a little kid visiting my grandparents in Mississippi, my Granddaddy and I used to pick grocery sackfuls of cicada shells off the trees in the front yard. We had no real object in this harvesting – I don’t know exactly what happened to the sacks full of bug shells, but it’s far more likely my Grandmother threw them out than that she wove them into her hair.

Also, this NY Times article proclaiming that coffee is nothing but good in every possible way, and even overconsumption of coffee works nothing but good effects on your body is the best news possible, and makes me feel utterly vindicated. I’m sure it’s unreliable and probably the studies behind it were funded by giant, evil coffee cartels, but I don’t care. I choose to believe it, because it is what I want to hear. Now all I need is an article saying that a cake-based diet prevents cancer.

July 25, 2008

I’ve Been Reading: The Accidental and The Double

Ali Smith’s The Accidental has a freaking form poem flight thing in the middle of it. No book ever has the right to priss about being cute with the layout of text on page – I hate that. If there were a gimmicky little concrete poem in the middle of the greatest book ever written, I’d detest it. Short sentences, run-ons, overlapping dialogue – fine. I love me some DFW footnotes. But any actual text effects belong on motivational posters or in powerpoint presentations, not in the middle of a novel I am trying to read. I can’t stand gimmicks.

I took a poetry class in college wherein the professor went on and on about the way poems looked on the page, the shape of the thing. What were we, calligraphers? If you have something to say and you’re a painter, show it to me visually. But if you’re a writer, freaking write it! Don’t put a precious little fucking flipbook in the middle of your novel, don’t put one word on each page for a time, don’t make the paragraph look like a cat when you turn the book to the side. How trite and cute can you be? I can’t believe real critics have any patience for this kind of nonsense, but sickeningly, it seems to be increasing every year. What’s next? Music boxes that play when you flip the pages? A small hologram? A scavenger hunt? A free toy in a hollowed-out space in the middle? A plush bunny on the cover with a squeak in its tail? Come the fuck on! If you can’t blow my mind with your prose, you won’t make up for it in doodles. And the hell with you for wasting my time.

And yes, I liked House of Leaves (although I don’t consider it revelatory or anything), but it is the exception that proves the rule. And I realize graphic novels are growing in importance and popularity, and eventually there might be bleedover and to enforce a stern boundary between novel-novels and graphic-novels will be pointlessly rigid and fusty. But I’ll adjust my ideas about that when I see it. Meanwhile, I don’t want to read the free verse horridness painters from a decade back were fond of scrawling across their canvasses in metallic gold paint pens, and likewise, I don’t want a toy or a bauble in text form from a writer.

And lest I be misunderstood, my issue with all this is not its novelty, but its meaninglessness.

Ahem. Even beyond the alienating concrete poem bit of stuff in the middle of The Accidental, I didn’t particularly care for the book. I just felt it tread over a lot of really familiar territory without adding anything much. I didn’t take away any truth or insight into the human condition. But apparently, people loved this book. It was short-listed for the Booker and had mostly good reviews.

I did really enjoy the passages in Astrid’s point of view, the family’s 12-year-old girl. The family is staying in a rental house, and at the beginning of the novel, Astrid spends a lot of time trying not to touch any of the surfaces of the house, or anything in it, because she’s disgusted by the idea of all the people who have used the house before them. She arranges a sheet over the bed before lounging on it, she tears bread from the middle of a loaf rather than use a knife and so forth. I can attest to the accuracy of this portrayal; I spent a ton of time in childhood trying not to touch anything. And actually, I never really grew out of it. Even as I backpacked across Asia, I had my rituals.

I was talking to a friend about this the other day. My friend was saying something about hygienic restaurant conditions, or something to do with food. And I said that I have no squeamishness about food and don’t really stress about the conditions in which it was prepared, because, even though I know that people not washing their hands and then handling food transfers diarrhea around (hence traveler’s tummy), and even though that’s disgusting if you actually think about it…well, really, all that happens is you maybe get a little sick for a day.

I said that I really have more worries in the tactile realm – that I don’t like to touch surfaces.

And then I suddenly realized how freaking crazy that is. I mean, I always knew that my obsession over not touching anything wasn’t rooted in any actual germaphobia, and had no real base at all – that it was rather just a general feeling of squirmy discomfort. It’s just that some things you have to touch are gross, the way you find some foods gross – it’s not that you think they’re dangerous; it’s just that you don’t like them. But I never thought about how nuts it is to put any old thing inside my body, but obsess about things touching the outside of my skin. Not to put too fine a point on it, but apparently, I would rather eat feces than sit in them.

Not that the realization did away with my baseless phobia, but I thought it was worth remarking on.

Jose Saramago’s The Double did not annoy me with any gimmicks, and I did walk away from it with, I felt, greater insight into the human condition. It’s commonly advised that, if you’re not “into” a novel by 100 pages in, you should put it down and start another. I have read quite a few books, however, where I wasn’t sure if I liked it or not until I finished the very last page. Perhaps these are books that don’t so much reflect how I see the world, as explain in a complete and compelling way how the world appears to someone else (the author). So, while I don’t hook into them immediately, by the time I come to the end, I feel satisfied. The Double is one of those books for me. And the same books that I can’t figure out if I like them or not until I finish the last words are generally those about which I cannot articulate what I liked, so I have nothing else to say about this.

July 6, 2007

A Literary Correspondence

Dear Rick,

How are things at school? Your mom tells me you’ve decided to major in literature, and I think that’s fine. I used to be a great reader, but as I got older and had children, I just got too busy. I suppose I have plenty of time to read now, though – I don’t know why I don’t! If you read anything good, tell me. I’ll read it.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I took your suggestion, and read Slaughterhouse Five. I always meant to read something by Vonnegut, as he was so popular, but I must admit, I did not enjoy this one. Perhaps I misread it, but is this book meant to be funny? Let me tell you, I lived through that war, and there was nothing funny about it. Maybe suggest something lighter next time!

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

Thank you for sending me The Corrections. I thought it was interesting. I felt terribly sorry for those people, all being so horrible all the time. Aren’t you lucky that you come from a family where everyone isn’t nasty to each other?

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I do not appreciate your mailing me a copy of Chicken Soup for the Soul. I get it, young man, but just because I don’t love everything you do does not mean I am only interested in pabulum. I used to adore Steinbeck, and in one of his books, a lady throws her baby right into the river, and then she breastfeeds a homeless man.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

Did this Middlesex really win the Pulitzer? I declare, write something really filthy, and everyone calls it art.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I very much enjoyed American Pastoral. Tell you what, though, if I’d been the Swede, I’d have hogtied that girl and taken her to a hut in the woods, and there we would have stayed until she saw reason. But men always let their daughters get away with murder.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

Thanks for sending me The Color Purple, but sadly, I’ve seen the movie, so I already know how this one ends.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I do not agree when you say that plots are not so important. You know who says that? Authors who cannot come up with good plots. And thus, I did not enjoy To the Lighthouse. I like novels. This book is a very long, dull poem.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

John Irving? You’re smarter than that, Rick.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I appreciate your paying for the postage to send me Infinite Jest, but I’m retired and even I do not have time to read a 1000-page novel, much less one that I can’t make heads nor tails of. Are you really reading these things? If so, I must conclude that you’re neglecting the rest of your coursework.

Love,
Grandma

Dear Rick,

I take back what I said about the long books. I burned through Anna Karenina in what felt like no time. What a great read! That Anna sure got what was coming to her, don’t you think?

Love,
Grandma

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 60 other followers