Scan barcode
mariebrunelm's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
In the quiet English countryside, the children of two families grow side by side. On one side of the hedge is Judith, an only child longing for connection, and on the other are the Fyfe children, four boys and a girl who are often happy to invite Judith to play with them. As they grow older, the dynamics of the group keep shifting, and when feelings come into play, things are bound to get complicated.
I had this book on my radar for the longest time, as I was drawn to its supposedly elegant prose and English-countryside setting. It lived up to this part of the bargain, and added the even better perks of a Cambridge section when the main character goes to university, and queer vibes. It is indeed quite clear that the heroin is bisexual. Even with the flowery 1920s prose, there is little doubt, which made things a lot more interesting than I'd anticipated. That being said, I didn’t find the book thrilling. It is quite elegant and contemplative, yes, but it deals heavily with the main character's inner turmoils and psychology. Though I praise the book for it, it’s not a type of literature I'm particularly fond of. I loved the setting and the queerness, but of course the book remained a product of its time and there were a couple of uncomfortable paragraphs (just a couple, fortunately. But oh boy you’d better not be anything other than pretty or you’ll be the scum of society). All in all, it was a very slow book, with exquisite descriptions of atmosphere but little plot.
Bonus point for a vintage copy that smells just like the books at my grandparents’ house.
I had this book on my radar for the longest time, as I was drawn to its supposedly elegant prose and English-countryside setting. It lived up to this part of the bargain, and added the even better perks of a Cambridge section when the main character goes to university, and queer vibes. It is indeed quite clear that the heroin is bisexual. Even with the flowery 1920s prose, there is little doubt, which made things a lot more interesting than I'd anticipated. That being said, I didn’t find the book thrilling. It is quite elegant and contemplative, yes, but it deals heavily with the main character's inner turmoils and psychology. Though I praise the book for it, it’s not a type of literature I'm particularly fond of. I loved the setting and the queerness, but of course the book remained a product of its time and there were a couple of uncomfortable paragraphs (just a couple, fortunately. But oh boy you’d better not be anything other than pretty or you’ll be the scum of society). All in all, it was a very slow book, with exquisite descriptions of atmosphere but little plot.
Bonus point for a vintage copy that smells just like the books at my grandparents’ house.
ishbelalice's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
relaxing
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
cimorene1558's review against another edition
5.0
Lovely book, a beautifully written growing up story (I'm on my third Rosamond Lehmann, and I'm thinking that's her specialty).
josefina_na's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
_ifwewerevillains's review against another edition
4.0
it’s like little women from laurie’s point of view. and they’re all awful.
kristinana's review against another edition
2.0
maybe it's just the pandemic talking, but I just could not get into this story about bitchy rich beautiful people with no apparent inner lives and all the time, money, and privilege in the world. None of the characters really seemed like characters, and I had no understanding at all why Judith was so fascinated by the cousins. I wanted to like it so much, especially because there were definitely some interesting parts to it -- Judith's attraction to both men and women, for example, and the really nonchalant attitude toward same-sex love (at least in the beginning). And the prose was very beautiful. But I just couldn't listen to them being upset over nothing anymore, so I couldn't finish it.
bethanye92's review against another edition
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
laura_sonja's review against another edition
4.0
i love an early 20th century novel that deals with infatuation and romantic disappointments, particularly if at least one of those failed romances is a lesbian one!
evelyn261999's review against another edition
4.0
While reading ‘Dusty Answer’, it is remarkable how well Lehmann seems to prefigure contemporary #depression humour. Most major characters profess some kind of suicidal impulse (‘Heavenly, heavenly annihilation’), while Judith herself goes around thinking things like ‘one did not commit suicide in other people’s houses: that was the ultimate error of taste’ and ‘Oh, to slip into the water and become something minute and non-sentient, a sort of fresh water amoeba’. This comedy relies on Lehmann’s rendering of the experience of mental illness in ways uncannily familiar (to my experiences at least).
There are also moments where Judith’s overt awareness of her construction of her own memories into a narrative (particularly in her explication of the already symbolically heavy-handed recurrence of a rabbit’s death) is so ridiculous that I can only take it as comedic. Further, ‘Dusty Answer’ often reads like a satire of the Gothic: there’s the house beset by memories, the use of night as a site of revelation (which Judith again draws explicit attention to), the madness (aforementioned), the destabilisation (mockery) of institutions like Cambridge and the Church, even the incest.
This last also forms part of a troublingly fascistic streak through some of Judith’s thoughts, as her romantic entanglements centre on the genetically insular Fyfe family, who, not incidentally, are repeatedly described as tall and pale. Judith herself is conspicuously obsessed by beauty and physical prowess, and explicitly finds deviation from this, especially in the character of the disabled, ugly lesbian Mabel, absolutely repulsive. While Judith herself is sympathetically portrayed as bisexual, Mabel’s rejection of men precludes her from reproduction in ways that make her useless to an Aryan ethnostate. Likewise, Julian is portrayed as acceptable to Judith, because he manages to 'overcome' his asthma in order to play tennis with Judith. Through this lens, Lehmann’s seemingly constant listing of British flora becomes sinister. While Judith is not directly challenged on her views, the degree to which we are clearly meant to read Judith as unreliable and self-serious, makes it unlikely that Lehmann (a writer with Jewish heritage who would go on to be an antifascist advocate) could have gone further in her critique without breaking the immersion of Judith’s viewpoint, upon which ‘Dusty Answer’ is totally reliant. Further, the implication of British/European literature and culture being rooted in the same elements that would give rise, in their worst iteration, to Nazism is compelling.
Despite its surface simplicity, Lehmann’s writing skilfully operates on seemingly divergent registers and 'Dusty Answer' reveals itself to be amenable to various readings.
There are also moments where Judith’s overt awareness of her construction of her own memories into a narrative (particularly in her explication of the already symbolically heavy-handed recurrence of a rabbit’s death) is so ridiculous that I can only take it as comedic. Further, ‘Dusty Answer’ often reads like a satire of the Gothic: there’s the house beset by memories, the use of night as a site of revelation (which Judith again draws explicit attention to), the madness (aforementioned), the destabilisation (mockery) of institutions like Cambridge and the Church, even the incest.
This last also forms part of a troublingly fascistic streak through some of Judith’s thoughts, as her romantic entanglements centre on the genetically insular Fyfe family, who, not incidentally, are repeatedly described as tall and pale. Judith herself is conspicuously obsessed by beauty and physical prowess, and explicitly finds deviation from this, especially in the character of the disabled, ugly lesbian Mabel, absolutely repulsive. While Judith herself is sympathetically portrayed as bisexual, Mabel’s rejection of men precludes her from reproduction in ways that make her useless to an Aryan ethnostate. Likewise, Julian is portrayed as acceptable to Judith, because he manages to 'overcome' his asthma in order to play tennis with Judith. Through this lens, Lehmann’s seemingly constant listing of British flora becomes sinister. While Judith is not directly challenged on her views, the degree to which we are clearly meant to read Judith as unreliable and self-serious, makes it unlikely that Lehmann (a writer with Jewish heritage who would go on to be an antifascist advocate) could have gone further in her critique without breaking the immersion of Judith’s viewpoint, upon which ‘Dusty Answer’ is totally reliant. Further, the implication of British/European literature and culture being rooted in the same elements that would give rise, in their worst iteration, to Nazism is compelling.
Despite its surface simplicity, Lehmann’s writing skilfully operates on seemingly divergent registers and 'Dusty Answer' reveals itself to be amenable to various readings.
nicsteinberg's review against another edition
4.75
i want to reread this book which is not a sensation i usually have