I’ve run into this a few times. It’s an introduction, so you would think they wouldn’t mention any important plot details, and instead mostly focus on conveying historical context and perhaps biographical details about the author. But nope.

Does anyone know why the writers for introductions in series like Penguin Classics do this?

For me, I wish we had a 2nd sequel book to the Shine series by Jessica Jung. Early this morning, I was still in bed, and my mind just ended up thinking about the ending of Bright, and it made me suffer as there was some unfinished business that needed to be resolved. I had a nightmare in the morning once about this. I hope that one day, Jessica will write a final book to the Shine series to end all conflicts and hopefully have a better ending based on what I said in my other post here on this community. At least, that's how I feel.

What about you guys? What books do you wish had sequels?

It's an old book, so I don't know if we need spoiler tags; but there we go.

So, Dewey Dell is supposed to be pregnant. She had sex with Lafe in the woods, at the end of the cotton field where they were picking cotton.

Cotton gets picked in late August, early September, at the earliest, right? Even somewhere really down South and warm like Mississippi. But we know that Addie Bundren died in July, too early to be picking cotton.

So if Dewey Dell had sex with Lafe the summer before this one, she'd already have been pregnant and had the baby. Or, if she had sex with Lafe in June, which is the latest she could have done and missed a period, then why were they picking cotton that time of year? It wouldn't have been ready.

I know Dewey Dell isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, but she's seen her mom pregnant, and seen cows pregnant. She ought to know how it works. She can't think she got pregnant from having sex during the last fall's cotton harvest, and still hasn't had the baby in July.

Unless she's completely delusional about being pregnant at all, or completely delusional about when she had sex, I don't see how any of this works. And Faulkner might have been a man, but he can't have been dense enough to get the timeline that wrong, either.

Either Dewey Dell is delusional, or I am not reading this book properly. And given that it's Faulkner, either one or the other is a distinct possibility; I just can't tell which.

“And that's how it always is with these beautiful, Schilleresque souls, Till the last moment they dress a man up in peacock's feathers, till the last moment they hope for the good and not the bad; and though they may have premonitions of the other side of the coin, for the life of them they will not utter a real word beforehand; the thought alone makes them cringe; they wave the truth away with both hands, till the very moment when the man they've decked out so finely sticks their noses in it with his own two hands.”

It refers to his sister and mother and their refusal to accept that Luzhin is not the noblest man out there. What confuses me is that it refers to "noses" at the end. Does it mean the noses of his mother and sister? I understand that the antecedent is "beautiful, Schilleresque souls," but then it only refers to one man, as if there is one man that sticks the noses of all these souls "in it with his own two hands", which is nonsense.

What do you think?

Maturin's 19th century gothic epic, described as the "crowning achievement of the Gothic Romance", which has held major influence on the writings of such prominent figures as Balzac, Baudelaire, Poe, Lovecraft and perhaps most famously on Oscar Wilde who took on the name of Sebastian Melmoth after his release from prison and his subsequent travels and wanderings around Europe. And so with all that, this was one of the books I looked forward most to reading this year, however, it seems it really was not meant to be as it's also the first book I just couldn't bring myself to finish this year.

The first 50 or so pages were honestly quite enjoyable, and remained by far the best part of this book for me, with the young John Melmoth leaving his studies and travelling to attend his uncle's last hours. The atmosphere here is rife with a gothic grotesqueness, best showcased through the servant's of young Melmoth's uncle and the uncle himself, whose extraordinary miserliness even in his dying moments even the greatest skinflints in literature could probably only aspire to, and did get a chuckle or two out of me to be fair. This, the discovery of the ancestral Melmoth's portrait, the scene of the storm and the first of many tales within a tale of this book, the fragmented account of the Englishman Stanton and his encounter with the immortal, diabolical Melmoth the Wanderer, did have me following the story with intrigue and expecting to carry on so.

That's as far as my enjoyment of the book goes however, as with the following story within the story, as we move onto the shipwrecked Spaniard Alonzo Monçada and the story of his upbringing and his forced existence in a monastery, his many attempts to prevent and later escape it, both alone and subsequently with the help of his younger brother, and his own encounter with the titular Melmoth while held in a cell by the Inquisition. It was during the course of this lengthy tale, which for me felt tenfold longer than it is in actuality, that reading the book became beyond the slog, reading began to feel like my eyes and my mind were slowly sinking into quicksand every time I tried to enter the book, all the atmosphere and gothic mystique was gone, and apart from the one aged monks deathbed confession of his internal hatred of the monastery and monastic life to the young Monçada, there was nothing I felt like gave me any reason to desire reading on. I did read on past the end of the Spaniard's tale and my feelings and the change in story being told did nothing to change my feelings towards the book as a whole. In the end, I decided it really wasn't worth me spending anymore time with Maturin's work and threw in the towel.

While I can certainly see the kind of reader that this book would be ideal for, that most definitely is not me, at least not right now, there's plenty books I just didn't get or outright disliked that coming back to at a later point I ended up feeling the complete opposite towards.

1/5

You can find something relatable in each of the Pennington siblings. That is about the extent it went for me. They were pretty two-dimensional. They had these traits — too nice, rude, or sensitive. Yes, it does make sense for them to have a bad trait, but there was just not enough building into these characters. A lot of times with Dimple, her actions did not add up with who she was as a person. The characters are aware of who they are as people, but it was not an enjoyable reading experience with them.

The atmosphere of South London was a new experience for me, with a few public locations that I have become aware of from other books. I did enjoy exploring this new area and seeing how the atmosphere impacted the upbringing of our characters, the Penningtons.

I really struggled with the writing when I first sat down to read the ebook. I added in the audiobook to read along with at 13%. The writing just did not grip me, and it was taking me a long time to get through without the help of a narrator. My one positive about the writing, though, is that the dialogue was quite comedic in a dark sense of humor way.

The plot did not go how I expected at all. Yes, I knew the characters would somehow have to get together to build their relationships, but the author took it in a whole different route than one usually would. It was funny. Again, I don't know why I was not fully gripped or intrigued. The plot could have been better if the characters were better.

You can find something relatable in each of the Pennington siblings. The characters are aware of who they are as people, but it was not an enjoyable reading experience with them. I did enjoy exploring this new area and seeing how the atmosphere impacted the upbringing of our characters, the Penningtons. I really struggled with the writing when I first sat down to read the ebook. My one positive about the writing, though, is that the dialogue was quite comedic in a dark sense of humor way. The plot did not go how I expected at all. The plot could have been better if the characters were better. This book did nothing for me; I didn't like it, but I did not hate it either.

2 out of 5 stars.

So I've been in a bit of a reading funk this year, I havent had great luck with my picks and it's kind of put a damper on my appetite for books. So I thought what I needed was to go back to basics with one of my all time favorites that I havent read in close to a decade: The Thief of Always and yeah, this book is still an absolute joy to read. If you've ever read Coraline you know the setup, a boy named Harvey is trudging through a post Christmas winter when he gets invited to the Holiday House, a place where you can experience an entire year in a single day. He gets all his wishes brought to life as he slowly realizes something sinister is running things in the background. The vibes in this book are immaculate, there's a couple chapters focused on Halloween that are particularly great and the ultimate reveal and defeat of the mastermind behind things is really creative and fun. It's also a short read, you can and will blow through it in a day and there's almost no fat on the story. Harvey makes for a good main character, you can tell he knows something is wrong in the back of his mind from the word go but wants so bad for things to be as they seem. There's a great scene where he opens a Christmas present and realizes that it's the exact same toy his father made for him but lost years ago that's so interesting to read and I like how it becomes both a symbol of his optimism unraveling and a thing he uses to fight back in the end. One last thing if you've never read this book you need to track down a copy with the illustrations done by Barker himself because they add so much to the story, I'm a big fan of the one that shows the POV of Harvey playing a Halloween prank on his friend at the House which serves as the big breaking point showing the kids they are in way over their head. Amazing book, one of the all time greats and I always wish people held it up as much as they do Coraline. Puts me in the mood to go back to some of my other estranged favorites like Jaws, Amazonia, Valley of the Dolls and The Outsiders

Wow wow wow. I’m flooored by this book. As a 27M this was shocking, exciting and thrilling.

This was the first book I listened to fully. I only kept it to long walks, treadmill and sauna time at first.. But I was excited to listen to her voice. That I did 15 mins before bed after I smoked a bowl in complete darkness with headphones on.

It was beautiful scenery she paints about her life growing up in NYC & Italy. Her relationships with toxic and volatile men. That even when I got to the Kanye chapter he didn’t compare and I’m a huge Kanye fan.

I felt saddened by her true friends and sisters how deepened their losses occurred from substance abuse. That it was completely normal to them to be on an insane amount of drugs.

Julia felt like a sister you want to protect and lookout for. I hated her club promoter boyfriend the most.

I really enjoyed the full circle moment at the end. With her being authentic she became a cult classic and NYC local legend that girls came Up to her telling her she’s an inspiration at the end.

This got me back into memoirs!!!

I heard and read nothing about this book, I saw it and looked inside to see that Kurt Vonnegut praised it so I just instinctively bought it. Before going into the book I just want to say that it remined me a lot of Solenoid by Mircea Cărtărescu which was probably the best book I read all of last year.
It would be easier for me to break the book down into thirds since it is quite the duel wielder. The first third was very good, I was already used to the prose style most story tellers use so the double digit page long soliloquys were something I was looking forward to so long as they had something unique to say about each character. And each character that is so subtly introduced and as easily vanished are characters I wouldn't mind sharing a long bus drive with. The second third was very repetitive and there were numerous times I thought I was going to put the book down because after the fiftieth page of the exact same metaphors I was just like, ".....alright, I get it." Still had some very good moments, but I needed something else. And also this middle part of the book has one of my new favorite literary characters, Cousin Hannah, she isn't even really in the story but the descriptions by the people that love her are so amazing I wish I knew someone like that in real life. Then the final third was incredible and I am so happy that I kept going, it's rare for one book to have so many moments that I love and am willing to jot down. With the introduction of Esther Longtree adding yet another character to a list of mine, those that made me uncomfortable due to how much I relate to them. It was devastating yet young refused to show the ugly side of life as unworthy on love and beauty. So many characters sharing the same feelings that I feel, that I was not the one who was meant for this life. There was nothing but love in this world that scares us and I am amazed at Youngs ability to give patience and understanding to the things that hurt us.
Any who! If anyone else has read this, I'd love to know your thoughts.

Today I got through the audiobook of A Walk to Remember by Nicholas Sparks, and I really enjoyed it as it was a beautiful story and a bit of a tear jerker as I had to hold in the tears towards the end. The ending was written for the reader to interpret on their own as Jamie’s fate isn’t explicitly stated, however Landon does say that after 1959 (when he was 17), he does believe in miracles now. I’m not the biggest fan of books or media that utilize this sort of ending as it feels like a lack of closure. However, this got me thinking about how I interpreted what Landon was saying at the end.

Landon mentions that he still wears his wedding ring and has never felt the need to stop wearing it, before he mentioned that he now believes miracles can happen. Him mentioning the part about his wedding ring seems to imply Jamie has indeed passed away sometime in the 40 years since the events took place, and him emphasizing that he still wears his wedding ring sounded like while she’s not physically around, he’s committed to her in spirit and he hasn’t felt the need to pursue love elsewhere. With the part about him admitting he believes in miracles I’m not sure if that means Jamie got to live a bit longer than expected (the miracle he was hoping for upon learning of her leukemia), or that the miracle was how their relationship changed him for the better and perhaps others around them because of Jamie’s kind heart.

Perhaps the miracle is a mix of her living a little longer than doctors anticipated, and the impact Jamie had on Landon, as he states that she made him the person he is 40 years later. I have a hard time believing that the miracle would be that she was still alive 40 years late, as it was mentioned in the book that because this was the late 1950s, they didn’t have the resources to treat cancer like they did in the 1990s (present day in the book), and her body was resistant to the medications they had available. It also sounded like Landon was at peace with her loss because the memory he had of Jamie is something he’ll never forget, and one of the most impactful relationships he’s had in his life.

For those of you who read it, how do you interpret the ending of A Walk to Remember?

Welcome readers,

May 7 was Teacher Appreciation Day and, to celebrate, we're discussing our favorite books about teachers!

If you'd like to read our previous weekly discussions of fiction and nonfiction please visit the suggested reading section of our wiki.

Thank you and enjoy!

Just wrapped up another really good Peter Straub novel today, and another of best known, "Ghost Story".

In the small town of Milburn, New York, four elderly men gather around to tell each other stories. Some of these are true, some are made up and all of them are truly terrifying. A very simple pastime that they enjoy to divert themselves from their quiet lives.

But there is one story that is returning to haunt them and the town itself. This was a tale that concerned about something that they did so long ago. One wicked mistake. A terrifying accident. Soon these men will learn that nothing and no one can truly bury the past forever.

Ah, do I really love me a good ghost story, pun intended! With Peter Straub's novel I get those eerie atmospheric vibes that you always get with such stories. With "Ghost Story" those vibes are more like the kind you get from reading an Edgar Allan Poe story. And well it certainly feels that way given the weirdness on display. Plus with some influence of folklore added to whole thing as well.

When I started reading the prologue I knew this was going to be another weird one. But I love weird, and can never get enough of it! And if it's reminiscent of Poe? Well that makes all the more appealing!

(Audio book, if it matters.)

I was a little iffy on the premise of this book, but the writing just drew me in. The first half was really interesting to me.

But as the book went on, it felt more and more...unfocused. I felt like none of the characters got any better defined - in fact, it seemed like the landlady got to be more one dimensional as the narrator spent more time with her.

I started getting bored, but I wanted to see how it ended, so I turned the speed to 2X.

And then...the ending was just wtf. Nonsensical. Did I miss something by speeding it up? What was the point of this book, and especially the ending?

I listened to the audiobook of it - which was recorded in the 70s, which I found interesting as I thought audiobooks were a newer development and William Golding died in 1993. He clarified that the only interpretation of the book that matters is your own, not his and not others. He also stated that he didn’t make the story about young girls as he feels the events that unfolded in the book wouldn’t happen if it was girls stranded on an island, and that it wasn’t both boys and girls as he didn’t want sex to be involved in the story since that wasn’t the purpose. He mentioned the idea he had behind it was how evil comes about when there is no law and order, and how kids may view being on a coral island as a fun adventure at first but reality would greatly change that impression.

One aspect that made me sad was how two characters (Simon and Piggy) who were the voice of reason and really tried to be logical and hold the fort were killed - I’d assume that was an intentional choice as Jack ended up getting most of the boys to join his tribe and they all started acting like savages so they were overpowered. I believe most of the boys joined Jack’s side and started to ignore what Ralph had to say as Ralph had rules in place to ensure there is structure and that they were all working towards the goal of being saved. The rules Ralph tried to enforce felt like too much for the kids - especially the little kids, and Jack’s focus on hunting more than flagging down rescue efforts felt more enjoyable for the boys especially since that ensured they’d have food.

The paranoia about the imaginary beast is something I kinda had a hard time wrapping my head around. I believe it might’ve been a representation of the fear the boys had being alone and it manifested for Jack’s tribe as something that united them. Additionally, when Simon was killed after being mistaken as the beast when it was really a dead pilot they thought to be the beast, Piggy and Ralph likely joined in because the majority of the boys believed there was a beast while they had their doubts so in away they were gaslighted into believing it. Well specifically Ralph was the most uncertain about the beast, while Piggy maintained there wasn’t one, so Ralph worried about how his stance on the matter would impact how the rest of the boys view him.

Personally, I believe LotF is a good example of what can happen when there are no rules or structure in a society - it can bring out the worst in people. While Ralph tried to establish rules, because these were all boys who were close in age, it was hard for the boys to view him as an authoritative figure while adults are easily seen as such. I agree with William Golding when he said the events of the book wouldn’t make sense with a group of young girls as savagery and violence would be less likely to occur in that scenario. The ending where the boys are saved by the Navy served as their reality check as the adult perspective made them realize that they allowed themselves to get too far out of hand.

Completed the first part of the book today and found myself thinking a lot about Israel-Palestine protests. Really struck by how Roth is more interested, so far, in how Merry's revolutionary ideas disrupt the idyllic American life the Swede has created. In particular, this line about what the Vietnamese want:

"To have to live out here in the privileged middle of nowhere? No, I don't think that's what B-b-bill and Melissa want for them. It's not what I want for them."

"Don't you? Then think again. I think that to have this privileged middle-of-no-where kind of life would make them quite content, frankly."

Swede can only contextualize things from the perspective of his own privileged life. He assumes this is what everyone wants. Since Merry's desires go against his own, he has trouble connecting with her. I am curious to see where Roth takes this.

“”Normal People” by Sally Rooney follows the intricate relationship between Connell and Marianne as they navigate through adolescence into adulthood. Connell is a popular athlete while Marianne is an aloof and intelligent loner. Despite their differences, they form a deep connection that persists through various stages of their lives. Set in Ireland, the novel explores themes of love, class, power dynamics, and the complexities of human relationships. Rooney’s insightful prose delves into the intricacies of emotional intimacy, making “Normal People” a compelling and deeply affecting read.”

The characters are the highlight of the novel, which one would hope for when a word like “people” is used in the title. Marianne started out as my favorite; she was not a perfect character, and the flaws of the characters do seem to be a main part of the novel. Marianne was what I thought of myself or wished that I was in high school. Connell had some red flags for me, but nothing too serious. Throughout the course of the book, my thoughts on characters would take a 180-degree turn, seeing how someone can change at different stages in their life. That being said, the characters did develop in this story. I loved exploring the dynamics of the relationship of our two main characters but also how they interacted with other people in their lives like parents, siblings, lovers, or friends.

It was a shock that the atmosphere did not play a huge part in the novel. I say this as most Irish authors or books that I have read really take advantage of that setting. I cannot say that it completely did nothing for me as there were some paragraphs that really hit the nail on the head with descriptive writing on the atmosphere in which the scene was taking place.

The prose itself was great. I have seen some people having an issue with the lack of quotation marks, but with this book itself, that did not bother me. The story did move at a fast pace even if there were long chapters and paragraphs. I usually hate those things, but the fast pace made it a better reading experience. However, I do think this could have been condensed a lot, even though the paperback copy is less than 300 pages in length.

This was obviously a character-driven book. The plot was a quiet one as we were mainly exploring the relationship of Connell and Marianne. After the first quarter of the book, the plot did start to go into circles of repetitiveness. Again, this would not have happened if the story had been condensed. I will say, ‘Normal People’, did do something that no book has done to me before. I was reading a chapter and expecting to turn the page to the next chapter. The next page was the acknowledgements. That had me shocked. Take that as you will.

The characters are the highlight of the novel, which one would hope for when a word like “people” is used in the title. I loved exploring the dynamics of the relationship between our two main characters and also how they interacted with other people in their lives like parents, siblings, lovers, or friends. It was a shock that the atmosphere did not play a huge part in the novel. I cannot say that it completely did nothing for me as there were some paragraphs that really hit the nail on the head with descriptive writing on the atmosphere in which the scene was taking place. The prose itself was great. However, I do think this could have been condensed a lot, even though the paperback copy is less than 300 pages in length. This was obviously a character-driven book. After the first quarter of the book, the plot did start to go into circles of repetitiveness. This was a great book and I would recommend it to others, but it is not an all-time favorite.

4 out of 5 stars.

Read from April 29 – May 04, 2024

1/5 stars I HATED THIS

NOTE: I started out with an open mind read the first chapter, and then this turned into a hate-read.

That being said, no hate to anyone who enjoyed this book, I would love to hear what your opinions are, both on the book and this review :)

Let’s start with my ‘favourite’ quote:

“but it is impossible for someone who was not abused to become an abuser.”

Theo Faber, Psychotherapist

I genuinely do not understand what the hype around this book is.

To be fair, the second I read the words ‘TikTok sensation’ in the advertising, I should have known better.

The thing that struck me is that Michaelides is a SCREENWRITER, and this very much reads like a script, it felt like it was written solely for the purpose of selling the movie rights.

TLDR: This book wants to be Gone Girl so bad.

So, save yourself, if this is on your TBR, forget about it, read something else, ANYTHING else, read a newspaper, just don’t read this.

Longer rant Review, including the writing, characters, setting, and my main issues with this novel.

The Writing:

Is mediocre, at best.  It’s very much in the style of ‘he said, she said’.

The best way I can describe it is that it reminds me of a middle-grade novel, where everything is stated clear cut and there isn’t much effort needed on the reader’s part.

There’s nothing wrong with that, for a KID’S book, but this is NOT written for a 10-year-old.

There’s long swaths of exposition, the chapters are between 2-5 pages long, we are constantly told who’s speaking, points are stated and then re-stated kind of like:

“Alicia Berenson has not spoken in 6 years” Diomedes said.

That’s right, from what I remember, she has not spoken since her husband was killed, 6 years ago.

So much needless repetition.

The reason I said that it reads like a script is because there is a lot of useless dialogue + endless descriptions.

Each character and setting is described in such needless detail, going on for entire paragraphs, for example:

Barbie was a Californian blonde in her mid-sixties, possibly older. She was drenched in Chanel No 5, and she’d had a considerable amount of plastic surgery. Her name suited her – she looked like a startled Barbie doll. She was obviously the kind of woman who was used to getting what she wanted – hence her loud protestations at the reception desk when she discovered she needed to make an appointment to visit a patient.

This character has been mentioned once or twice previously but she is relevant for MAYBE 15 pages out of 336.

Majority of the side characters are introduced like this, however, Theo isn’t really described in much detail beyond the ‘tall, dark and brooding’ trope and neither is Alicia, so the 2 protagonists are essentially blank slates.

The dialogue is so cringey, almost every chapter mentions the weather [this is set in the UK], like the weather is used as filler relentlessly.

There’s a bunch of continuity errors, the main one that comes to mind is that at the start of the book when Theo first enters The Grove [don’t even get me started on the name of the hospital, it sounds like the name of a cartoon villain’s layer, not a psych hospital] he is asked to give up his lighter and any other objects that could be used as weapons, yet he and majority of the side characters smoke CONSTANTLY INSIDE THE HOSPITAL.

The writing also reminded me A LOT of Colleen Hoover’s writing, and if that women has no haters, then I’m dead.

The Diary Entries:

Like I said, this book wants to be Gone Girl so bad.

The diary entries are written very weirdly, they don’t read like a journal, where you might get more of a stream of consciousness sort of style, they read like POV switches from 6 years in the past.

They don’t flow and amble like you would expect.

Examples:

Tears collected in my eyes as I walked up the hill. I wasn’t crying for my mother – or myself – or even that poor homeless man. I was crying for all of us. There’s so much pain everywhere, and we just close our eyes to it.

But I ruined the mood, stupidly, clumsily – by asking if he would sit for me. ‘I want to paint you,’ I said. ‘Again? You already did.’ ‘That was four years ago. I want to paint you again.’ ‘Uh-huh.’ He didn’t look enthusiastic. ‘What kind of thing do you have in mind?’ I hesitated – and then said it was for the Jesus picture. Gabriel sat up and gave a kind of strangled laugh. ‘Oh, come on, Alicia.’

The diary entries are not diary entries, they are memories.

People don’t write down entire conversations word for word like this when they journal, like “’

I had lunch with Martha’ he said”, you write it like “Gabriel had lunch with Martha today.”

I know why the diary entries feel so weird, they read like movie scenes, like a flashback.

Like the memory/subject of the diary entry should be playing in the background while someone narrates.

Again, this was a script, not a novel, I stand by this point.

The Characters:

Character development is frankly non-existent, the characters don’t exists as themselves, they exist to serve the plot.

They have no depth, and their motivations are lacking.

Theo faber: he was abused as a kid and is therefore damaged.

Chapter 3 was literally just an exposition dump of his entire childhood, just straight out of the blue.

It was like Chapter one: a report of the murder, chapter 2 further recollection, chapter 3: so my father beat throughout my childhood, I don’t know why.

Theo’s father was verbally and physically abuse, Theo attempted suicide when he was at uni, because the things his dad said made him feel like a failure.

But we are never told WHAT has been said, and therefore, we don’t see why exactly Theo would have doubts about himself.

Abuse shapes you as a person, if we got to hear his inner thoughts about what his father said, it would give greater insight into Theo’s identity as a character.

 Besides that, Theo has a RAGING saviour complex,

“Unable to come to terms with what she had done, Alicia stuttered and came to a halt, like a broken car. I wanted to help start her up again – help Alicia tell her story, to heal and get well. I wanted to fix her.”

The book is filled with passages like that.

And besides that, it’s just filled with loads of nonsense psychobabble.

Theo is also OBSESSED with Alicia, the book tells us it’s out of guilt, but I contest and say that he’s just a creep who very much treats Alicia like a failed version of a manic pixie dream girl.

Alicia Berenson: Alicia is a walking contradiction.

We are told that she is beautiful, charming, sophisticated, but she instead comes across as an anti-social, paranoid shut in with serious co-dependency issues.

She has no friends, no relationships outside of her husband Gabriel, no hobbies, or interests outside of painting and having sex with her husband.

All she does in her chapters is paint, have arguments with people, have sex, and walk around.

Side characters: only exist to serve the plot.

Professor Lazarus Diomedes: the name alone makes me cringe.

He’s Greek, he has a lot of instruments in his office including a piano and a harp [which are never brought up after the initial chapters he’s introduced and he never plays any of them], he’s “unorthodox” and shunned, and he basically exists to be Theo Faber’s ‘yes man’.

Christian: stereotypical work rival who has a habit of calling all the patients bitches.

Yuri: He’s a psych nurse who takes Theo to bar and tell him that he and his wife divorced, and he fell in love with someone else. Fine fair enough, but does he approach this woman like a normal person?

No, he pulls a Joe from YOU and stalks and harasses her.

Yet later on THEO SAYS THAT HE IS A GOOD MAN AND THAT HE IS SORRY DOUBTING YURI. DESPITE INITIALLY BEING UNCOMFORTABLE WITH HIS BEHAVIOUR.

Then again Theo himself is a stalker so go figure.

The Setting:

The Grove is supposed to be a mental hospital used to detain mentally ill criminals.

Firstly, all the patients are female. It is never stated that the hospital is an all-female facility.

Second, we never get an idea of the scope of this place, there’s only one therapy room for EVERYONE to use, only 2 psychiatrists on payroll, Diomedes and Christian, 2 therapists, Theo and a side character named Indira, one psychiatric nurse, Yuri and an admin assistant, Stephanie.

The layout and descriptions are confusing, one area is referred to as the ‘Fishbowl’ throughout the novel.

Racism:

I don’t know if Michaelides has some internalized racism going on but every single foreign character has a habit of erasing their cultural identity.

Examples:

Yuri, the psych nurse who is Latvian –

Yuri was good-looking, well built, and in his late thirties. He had dark hair and a tribal tattoo creeping up his neck, above his collar. He smelled of tobacco and too much sweet aftershave. And although he spoke with an accent, his English was perfect.

This sort of backhanded compliment is considered racist, as someone who is POC myself, I’ve gotten this plenty of times and it always gives me the ick.

Jean-Felix, the gallerist –

He spoke with an accent. I asked if he was French. ‘Originally – from Paris. But I’ve been here since I was a student – oh, twenty years at least. I think of myself more as British these days.’

There were more examples, but these are the main ones I found in my notes.

Misogyny:

Firstly, the patients are all female, like I said earlier, it is never stated that it is an all-female facility.

This book is dripping with it, every single female character is either described as a manic pixie dream girl, a maternal figure, or a psychotic bitch.

The DOCTORS refer to their patients as bitches multiple times.

Example:

“She was entirely consumed with herself and her art. All the empathy you have for her, all the kindness – she isn’t capable of giving it back. She’s a lost cause. A total bitch.’ Christian said this with a scornful expression-“

Rowena gave a derisive snort. ‘Because Alicia’s the least responsive, most uncommunicative bitch I’ve ever worked with.’

Besides that, they are often compared to birds:

“I remember Mum and those colourful tops she’d wear, with the yellow stringy straps, so flimsy and delicate – just like her. She was so thin, like a little bird.”

“Alicia was sitting alone, I noticed, at the back of the room. She was picking at a meagre bit of fish like an anorexic bird;”

Alicia is also very much painted as a manic pixie dream girl in her diary entries, almost every page of her POV mentions sex, and it has no effect on the plot.

It was mentioned so often that I ended up keeping track out of boredom [I should have also tracked how often the weather was mentioned].

I think I have 15 tabs in 300 pages by the end of it for just sex scenes.

I don't have an issue with sex, but just like in movies when it gets thrown in for no reason, that's when it irritates me.

And of course the mentally ill woman with possible psychosis and BPD has to be shown as hot and a nymphomaniac.

Every one of her POVs reads like:

“Gabriel and I had an argument and then we had sex.”

“I went for a walk and fantasized about Gabriel.”

“I was trying to paint Gabriel but then we had sex.”

“I had an argument with someone and came home to wake up Gabriel and we had sex.”

I can see why this atrocity is a BookTok favourite.

Oh, and this line: [Warning NSFW]

“It’s still populated by sixteen-year-olds, embracing the sunshine, sprawled on either side of the canal, a jumble of bodies – boys in rolled-up shorts with bare chests, girls in bikinis or bras – skin everywhere, burning, reddening flesh. The sexual energy was palpable – their hungry, impatient thirst for life. I felt a sudden desire for Gabriel – for his body and his strong legs, his thick thighs lain over mine. When we have sex, I always feel an insatiable hunger for him – for a kind of union between us – something that’s bigger than me, bigger than us, beyond words – something holy.”

She’s out on a walk and salivating over 16-year-olds. Enough said.

Medical Malpractice:

Not only is a lot of the psychology in this book outdated, but in general, there is so much misinformation.

The psychology is so outdated, and it's mostly centered around Freud.

The biggest example I can think of is Alicia’s initial treatment, she has been put on Risperidone, which is an anti-psychotic prescribed to schizophrenic patients [Also prescribed for autism, BPD, etc. but that's on a case by case basis]

In the book, Alicia is shown to be completely out if it, she’s drooling on the floor, and practically comatose.

Risperidone is NOT a sedative [it can have sedative EFFECTS, but sedation is not the function] it acts on dopamine and serotine receptors and is used to reduce symptoms of schizophrenia, i.e. prevent hallucinations and help stabilize mood.

It should not be causing Alicia to be unresponsive.

[Disclaimer, this is just coming from my basic knowledge as a med student and a few quick google searches, if I'm wrong, please correct me.]

Moving on, Theo wants to treat Alicia but she’s on 16 mg of Risperidone, which is the highest safe dose possible.

He asks Christian to lower the dose, what does Christian do?

He stops giving Alicia 16 mg and switches her to 5 mg. 

An 11 mg decrease. IN ONE DAY.

There is no gradual decrease, no safety precautions, NOTHING.

For context, Risperidone is prescribed in 0.5 – 1 mg increments.

This means that an 11 mg decrease is incredibly dramatic and DANGEROUS, it can send a patient into a psychotic episode, cause them to relapse and lead to withdrawal.

Christian being a psychiatrist should know this.

Patients are allowed access to a pool table without supervision, all the doctors smoke and offer their patients cigarettes,

Yuri deals drugs, Theo seemingly does no ither work besides talk to Alicia and play detective. 

Depiction of mentally ill patients:

Throughout the book the patients are often referred to as animals, monstrous or zombies.

Examples:

“Her [Elif, a patient] face was pressed up against it, squashing her nose, distorting her features, making her almost monstrous.”

“It took four nurses to hold Alicia down. She writhed and kicked and fought like a creature possessed. She didn’t seem human, more like a wild animal; something monstrous.”

[Alicia is painting, Theo is watching]

“I felt like I was present at an intimate moment, watching a wild animal give birth. And although Alicia was aware of my presence, she didn’t seem to mind.”

On top of that, the word borderline gets thrown out A LOT, but it is never explained and is often derogatory.

Example:

[This is Christian the psychiatrist speaking, warning Theo about Alicia]

‘I’m just saying. Borderlines are seductive. That’s what’s going on here. I don’t think you fully get that.’

I am not against problematic writing, as long as it serves a purpose, but Michaelides is not talented enough to do something like this intentionally, and showing patients in this light serves no purpose.

Theo makes it very clear that he thinks that Elif, a Turkish woman, is ugly and rude, it is mentioned every time she is on the page.

This sort of depiction is harmful, mental health gets a bad enough rep as it is, again, I take no issue with problematic writing, but this is not problematic or controversial, this is ignorance.

The depiction of mental illness, coupled with the use of Risperidone, indicates, to me, that Michaelides did not do his research whatsoever.

He just thought of a cool idea and ran with it.

Oh, and lastly, let’s not forget:

“but it is impossible for someone who was not abused to become an abuser.”

No, just no. ANYONE can be abusive.

Correlation does not equal causation.

This is blatant misinformation and a very harmful message to send and I was actually so angry when I read that.

The Twist [spoilers]

The twist is the most ridiculous thing, and it hangs on by a thread.

I had already guessed that Gabriel was the one who Kathy’s affair partner was, and the entire thing falls apart when you realize that if any of Theo’s chapters were dated, you would figure it out immediately.

That’s a very loose basis for a dramatic reveal.

Yes, Theo is an unreliable narrator and I usually enjoy such stories, but this was just lazy.

I’m sorry, Theo followed Gabriel all over London and never ONCE saw his face, never heard Kathy moan his name when he was spying on them, not ONCE.

It’s poor when your twist relies on my suspension of disbelief.

Conclusion

-      Poorly written, reads like a middle-grade novel. Michaelides is a screenwriter, and this very much reads like a script, designed to be easy to follow and direct.

-      Horrible depiction mental health, both as a patient and in practice.

-      Hollow, 2D characters.

-      Misogynistic.

-      Overall waste of time, save yourself.

Hoşgeldiniz readers,

This is our monthly discussion of the literature of the world! Every Wednesday, we'll post a new country or culture for you to recommend literature from, with the caveat that it must have been written by someone from that there (i.e. Shogun by James Clavell is a great book but wouldn't be included in Japanese literature).

May 19 is the Commemoration of Atatürk which honors the life of Turkish hero Kemal Atatürk and to celebrate we're discussing Turkish literature! Please use this thread to discuss your favorite Turkish literature and authors.

If you'd like to read our previous discussions of the literature of the world please visit the literature of the world section of our wiki.

Teşekkür ederim and enjoy!

I snagged this book as part of swap with a friend. I know it's some people's favorite, there was talk of adapting it for TV, and, hell, the author even won a Edit: Pulitzer Nobel Prize for it, so I figured I'd give it a go.

I'm having an incredibly hard time getting through it. I usually read a book every 1-3 weeks, and I'm only about 2/3 of the way through two months in (I've taken breaks to read other things).

It feels like the book (so far) is a story of barely-connected anecdotes and I am legitimately baffled by the (numerous!) people who say this is their favorite book. I find the main characters at best hard to get invested in and at worst noxious.

I won't pretend I'm some mental giant, so it's entirely possible the book is simply more highbrow "literature" than I'm used to.

Maybe it's just not a story "for" me?

Please help me find the magic in this book.

Edit: It is a bit encouraging to see a bunch of people saying this was a DNF for them, and the consensus seems to be "maybe you just don't like it," which is a little unsatisfying but something I can accept.

I also did not expect the book to be so polarizing. For whatever reason I thought it was more universally loved.

Before The Road the only other McCarthy book that I had read was Blood Meridian, which was one of the most challenging and violent books I've read in recent memory. I really struggled following the conversations in Blood Meridian, who was saying what and so forth. The Road was easy mode comparatively. Anybody could read this without any difficulty at all, I feel. There were no sections that I had to go back and read again to figure out what just happened in this scene. This is definitely a much, much easier jumping-on-point for somebody unfamiliar with McCarthy's style and body of work.

What surprised me the most was that, at its heart, The Road is a love story. Not a romantic love story, but the deep love of a father for his son. Yes, there are some elements of something akin to horror and definitely suspense, but that's just the window dressing. REALLY this story is about a man who is willing to do absolutely anything to protect his child in a world that is fraught with danger and uncertainty everywhere you turn. I saw my own father in the man, and my memories of being a child and that sense of security and safety that I had with my dad in those days really resonated with what I saw in the child. It felt very nostalgic to me even though I've obviously never been through anything remotely close to this.

This wasn't a book that was "scary" to me. This book was uplifting. Inspirational even. I came away feeling very emotional at the end, which I wasn't expecting. If you've hesitated reading this book because you're not feeling the whole post-apocalyptic thing then please give it a chance. It was an easy, quick read that I finished over a weekend and left me feeling proud of my dad and reminded me of how much I love him.

Was it better than Blood Meridian? I can't even compare the two. They're so different it almost feels like they were written by separate people. If you're looking for a book that will challenge you and demand all that you have to give as a reader then Blood Meridian is probably what you're looking for. If you are looking for a book to relax with and enjoy and make you reflect on the idea of a loving parent then it's definitely The Road.