Espy
I think this is the type of Duras book only Duras fans will like…and like I did!! Definitely one to re-read because the different narratives lost me a bit, but beautiful prose throughout.
I accidentally bought this book for an unassuming $27 dollars (100 pages, paperback...you see what I mean) but it was well worth it! Duras, what a treasure
Okay I want to talk about this more. There is obviously some outdated language in regard to gender that I feel doesn't match my modern-day views (published in 1977, for reference), but besides the clear gender binary of “it is only women who inhabit places, not men”, this statement is so profound if we think about it the way Duras intended and not in the domestic, conjugal sense. Because yes, women (any non-man, really) create spaces they call their own rather than simply “use” them; houses, rooms, etc., and not just in the decorating sense (though that is a part of it)...and I know in the year 2025 this is probably so, “well duh”, but idk it's fascinating to see Duras be a pioneer for this topic of conversation almost 50 years ago. Really ahead of her time.
4.5
Many thoughts. I think it's quite amazing how enamored Duras' writing made me feel even though this is (technically) a script; the notes Duras adds shook me out of the trance I was in to remind me of that. I think I liked this/ read this not for more context of “the North China Lover” but because I wanted to read more about Duras. I was so fascinated by the life she's led, the different society she knew compared to the one I know. I wanted to read “The Lover” without the prose and fluff. This book was very honest and I much appreciated that.
4.5
I took a class freshman year of college about women and “madness” throughout history and had plenty of discussions regarding Charcot and his patients/practices he and other male neurologist/ doctors of the time would use. And while I liked this ‘refresher' of topics I've learned about (I think Wells did it better than the author of our textbook Mad, Bad, and Sad), I find that I would've liked to read more fleshed-out experiences Wells had with her illness (I'm okay with not having answers; I just wanted more of what she was already giving us)
Great, great, great!
3.5
I cannot say I “enjoy” Penelope Mortimer because her stories are not meant to be. Mortimer is a great writer and I find myself feeling so bleak after her books. This novel, much like “The Pumpkin Eater” feels like danger, a fever dream. “Daddy's Gone A-Huntin” is the encapsulation of my worst nightmare, and Mortimer writes it as such. Fragmented narration, changing perspectives–she does not want you on your feet. Penelope Mortimer wants you, much like her female protagonists, disoriented and unable to BE. You are not in control; like the men in her novels, Mortimer will not allow you, reader, that mercy.
I'm actually so ashamed that I only found about Julia Fox through her relationship with Kanye West. What a disservice I was to Julia's artistic legacy
2.5
A lot of the short stories here are missing the story element, I fear. It reminds me of how I would first start writing: all prose, no direction.
The Mouse, The Labyrinth, and Hejda are the stand-outs for me
It's so easy for me to relate to Liliana—her want of freedom, her ambition, her hopes, her love. To be 20 years old (the age I currently am) and to have it all taken away from you, for what? Her voice is so profound and beautiful you feel enraged and saddened that you're only finding out about her because of her murder and not (as I'd like) her poetry, or her work, her architecture. I can't help but feel like I know Liliana; I want to be her friend. The profound sense of loss I felt after finishing this shocked me, I too felt like I lost Liliana (and I guess I did, we all did). How different am I from Liliana? How would my story have looked if my grandmother stayed in Mexico, and by extension, me too? I guess what I'm trying to say is this: like how Rivera herself says, “the only difference between my sister and me is that I never came across a murderer”
I had the privilege of hearing Cristina Rivera Garza discuss this book at the 2024 Texas Book Festival, and she was great. She specifically used the term “Femicider” (rather than, say, “murderer”) which peaked my interest and furthered my agreement with the idea that language is powerful and we must directly name the violent actions made against women. “Crime of passion” is bullshit, “murdered her because she is a woman” does not absolve the man of fault. We must use language to express the gravity of what is being done to our women around the world.
Yeah, okay. Berger made a good point here, and the visuals were pleasing to the eye...I'll give them that
4.2
This book is very lucky it was the first of the “older, rich, (though, for once not white. It's hard to read about them complaining when they're wealthy) woman living in New York, and has SOME form of mental illness/ decay” is the first I've read in a while...and the fact that it's more interesting because the MC isn't white?? Okay yeah, this ate. I was on hold for like 4 (6?) months at the library, and I'd say it was worth the wait! I usually don't like when books use obvious, obnoxious symbolism (“white police offer greets the black woman police officer; and they hug” the quote goes something like that) but I think Zaher does it well and in a much more interesting way. Also very good writing.
I've always had a hard time describing history/time and the way it moves; the best I can do is always “it blends together.” Here, Ernaux transforms my 2D “it blends together” into 3D.
When I first wanted to get into Annie Ernaux, articles online would recommend future readers to start their Ernaux journey with “The Years” as it's her magnum opus. While I agree it's her magnum opus, I disagree with starting with this book to get into Ernaux. One of the reasons why I enjoyed this book as much as I did is BECAUSE I was so connected with what I've read of Ernaux's life already—if I didn't it'd feel like an awkward meeting with a stranger.
Anyways, this was great!
could not finish. wade watts is annoying, and the way cline wrote some characters is really insensitive?? like huh? i couldn't finish and probably never will.
mmmm conflicted with this one. there were a lot of hits as there were misses.
loved how fleshed out Jamie's character was as well as Claire's wittiness and her intelligence.
HOWEVER.
found it conflicting how Claire accepted time travel so easy??? also, the whole “punishment” thing made me cringe.
overall? four stars, but the whole punishment thing knocked one down for me.
the beating scene is gross and disgusting, and I hope the show handles this better than the book.
good book if you want to forget about the real world.