Scan barcode
lauraborkpower's review against another edition
2.0
I wanted to like this book. I heard Richard Russo talking about Groff's book on NPR, and specifically about her chutzpah in writing this story. And I like Russo's writing and trust his judgment, but his middle-aged-male-writer's patronizing of Groff really pissed me off. I wanted to read this book because she is a young woman--a "girl" to Russo--and I wanted to see if she deserved her seat at the table, regardless of her age or gender.
And I don't know it she does.
Groff's style is just so...precious. Every sentence is laden with metaphor--like she tried to jam in every single figurative detail she possibly could. And while there are some poignant bits throughout, it's just so much to wade through.
And I didn't like Lotto at all, nor did I sympathize with why Mathilde loved him so much. He was just kind of a tall, privileged asshole who stole other people's stories. And, oh, god, the summaries of Lotto's plays. The plays themselves were so pretentious; and it's not at all interesting to read someone's explanation of a work of "genius."
Thankfully, Lotto's story is over halfway through, and Mathilde's story is more interesting. But it still wasn't enough to pull me into it--because Groff's writing style doesn't let up, not for one second. A quarter through the book, Mathilde comments on something (I can't remember what), that "on and on it went, forever." And I frequently felt that way about Groff's writing.
I might have liked this more had I read a hard copy instead of listening to the audiobook, because I disliked both narrators ('Fates' was read by Will Damron and 'Furies' was read by Julia Whelan--both narrators read this like they were reading the secrets of the universe). But the long and short is that it's an overwrought story about characters whose real personas are clouded by strings and strings of metaphors. You will be exhausted.
And I don't know it she does.
Groff's style is just so...precious. Every sentence is laden with metaphor--like she tried to jam in every single figurative detail she possibly could. And while there are some poignant bits throughout, it's just so much to wade through.
And I didn't like Lotto at all, nor did I sympathize with why Mathilde loved him so much. He was just kind of a tall, privileged asshole who stole other people's stories. And, oh, god, the summaries of Lotto's plays. The plays themselves were so pretentious; and it's not at all interesting to read someone's explanation of a work of "genius."
Thankfully, Lotto's story is over halfway through, and Mathilde's story is more interesting. But it still wasn't enough to pull me into it--because Groff's writing style doesn't let up, not for one second. A quarter through the book, Mathilde comments on something (I can't remember what), that "on and on it went, forever." And I frequently felt that way about Groff's writing.
I might have liked this more had I read a hard copy instead of listening to the audiobook, because I disliked both narrators ('Fates' was read by Will Damron and 'Furies' was read by Julia Whelan--both narrators read this like they were reading the secrets of the universe). But the long and short is that it's an overwrought story about characters whose real personas are clouded by strings and strings of metaphors. You will be exhausted.
jamiecakes0522's review against another edition
1.0
Someone needs to tell this author that every single sentence does not need to be flowery. An editor maybe???? And, not to mention, how many sentence fragments can one book have??? You can't disguise this as poetic. It was terrible.
If I had to read one more word comma word comma word disguised as a sentence... 🤦
It was not profound. It was not deep. It was a so so story about two people who thought way too highly of themselves and a wife who kept secrets.
And honestly it was weird. And indulgent. And the wordy wordy poetry deep bullshit with the pedestrian plot was like putting lipstick on a pig. But like gaudy lipstick.
One of the worst books I've ever read.
I've never read anything so pretentious.
If I had to read one more word comma word comma word disguised as a sentence... 🤦
It was not profound. It was not deep. It was a so so story about two people who thought way too highly of themselves and a wife who kept secrets.
And honestly it was weird. And indulgent. And the wordy wordy poetry deep bullshit with the pedestrian plot was like putting lipstick on a pig. But like gaudy lipstick.
One of the worst books I've ever read.
I've never read anything so pretentious.
jwilding's review against another edition
4.0
Mesmerizing at times. Indulgent. “O! Playwright of the bougie.”
“Hot milk of the world, with its skin of morning fog in the window.”
Would like to reread and look more closely at Mathilde. I guess if the point is that she was that supportive wife trope all along, there may not be much more of her throughout than I think. Which is a shame. But maybe the point? Or a point?
“Hot milk of the world, with its skin of morning fog in the window.”
Would like to reread and look more closely at Mathilde. I guess if the point is that she was that supportive wife trope all along, there may not be much more of her throughout than I think. Which is a shame. But maybe the point? Or a point?
mackenzie_sitstudio's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
leafy_literature's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
Meh! Why was everyone in love with this man??? He's just a man??? It was very overly tropey. A beloved man and his mysterious, lying but beautiful and skinny wife. The writing was good, the story itself was odd.
ambergamgee's review against another edition
5.0
One of my 2021 reading goals is to be more reflective on the things that I read instead of just jumping to the next book. Keep in mind all my reviews I write for myself and not to like, convince anyone or gain some sort of audience. I am trying to write this with no spoilers though, lots of reviews on this book have spoiler warnings.
This was one of the best books I’ve read in awhile. A librarian recommended it to me after I said East of Eden is one of my favorite books, and I can see why. It goes deep into the characters back stories and what makes them who they are, so that the actions on the page actually make sense. I liked the prose, and there were moments where I had to pause and reflect on the things being said. (I listened to it on audio and I think the readers did a marvelous job.)
I’m not a romance reader, and there was a little too much sex for me, but I would not call this a romance. I was not actually convinced of a true emotional, mutual love until the end (ironically, when Mathilde lists things she can’t stand about Lotto.) I loved the complexity and layers of their relationship that seems at face value to be shallow, about sex, and never going to last.
I thought it was beautiful and well done. The complaints I saw in negative reviews: the prose is pretentious. Sure, I could see how someone would think that. I don’t like flowery language that doesn’t contribute to a story either. I felt that the flowery language contributed to this story. It informed the reader about emotion states, especially. The other negative thing I saw mentioned in a couple reviews was that this ...fictional book...was...too...fictional...? What a weird complaint to have about a novel. If you cannot understand that fictional books use fictional stories to tell truths about the human condition, maybe stick to non fiction?
Anyways. I thought it was a beautiful book. I can see how it wouldn’t be for everyone.
TW: sexual assault
This was one of the best books I’ve read in awhile. A librarian recommended it to me after I said East of Eden is one of my favorite books, and I can see why. It goes deep into the characters back stories and what makes them who they are, so that the actions on the page actually make sense. I liked the prose, and there were moments where I had to pause and reflect on the things being said. (I listened to it on audio and I think the readers did a marvelous job.)
I’m not a romance reader, and there was a little too much sex for me, but I would not call this a romance. I was not actually convinced of a true emotional, mutual love until the end (ironically, when Mathilde lists things she can’t stand about Lotto.) I loved the complexity and layers of their relationship that seems at face value to be shallow, about sex, and never going to last.
I thought it was beautiful and well done. The complaints I saw in negative reviews: the prose is pretentious. Sure, I could see how someone would think that. I don’t like flowery language that doesn’t contribute to a story either. I felt that the flowery language contributed to this story. It informed the reader about emotion states, especially. The other negative thing I saw mentioned in a couple reviews was that this ...fictional book...was...too...fictional...? What a weird complaint to have about a novel. If you cannot understand that fictional books use fictional stories to tell truths about the human condition, maybe stick to non fiction?
Anyways. I thought it was a beautiful book. I can see how it wouldn’t be for everyone.
TW: sexual assault
nellvin's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
3.5
Fates and Furies is a beautifully-spun epic, drawing inspiration from Shakespeare, Greek tragedy, and ancient mythology. The luscious descriptions are a delight to the senses, with a strong caveat that the descriptions of people's bodies (specifically fat bodies) were so distracting and upsetting to the point that I might otherwise be giving this book a higher rating. Groff's details and rich characters are so undermined by her apparent obsession with body weight and her tired associations. In an otherwise complex, vibrant world we are still limited by the outdated symbolism that skininess represents goodness and purity and fatness represents immorality and gluttony. I can handle edgy, I can handle politically-incorrect to certain degrees, but the constant reminder of this binary became more than a minor, ignorable annoyance. Still, the writing was otherwise beautiful, unique, challenging, and I was sucked into the world of these characters, their love, their struggles. I've seen a few reviews that her other books do not have this issue, so maybe I'll give her another chance.
bookworm91's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
dunnadam's review against another edition
1.0
I really didn't like this book and can't BELIEVE Amazon picked it as the best fiction book of 2015. I see this story as the Emperor's New Clothes, and for some reason others don't seem to be able to tell that he's really naked and there's nothing there.
The book is pompous and over-written with no likeable characters. All the characters have ridiculous names like Professor Murgatroyd, Mathilde, Chollie, Muvva, Gawain, etc. This is by no means an exhaustive list. Every time I read the name Muvva I was reminded of the Seinfeld episode of the woman whose name rhymes with a female body part.
The action stops at one point for the following observation preceded and followed by section breaks:
"[MATHILDE'S PRAYER: Let me be the wave. And if I cannot be the wave, let me be the rupture at the bottom. Let me be that terrible first rift in the dark.]"
Anyone have any idea what this means?
I started to get into the book a little when they were writing the opera only to then be confronted later with the opera itself, 20 pages or so of an opera stuck in the middle of the book. I didn't read it. I can't think of anyone who would.
The story makes no sense, the book bears no resemblance to Gone Girl despite reports, the people are all bitter and evil. Other reviews said the second half is better and it is in that it is easier to read but I would not say better.
I kept thinking I should put the book down while I was reading and really wish I had.
The book is pompous and over-written with no likeable characters. All the characters have ridiculous names like Professor Murgatroyd, Mathilde, Chollie, Muvva, Gawain, etc. This is by no means an exhaustive list. Every time I read the name Muvva I was reminded of the Seinfeld episode of the woman whose name rhymes with a female body part.
The action stops at one point for the following observation preceded and followed by section breaks:
"[MATHILDE'S PRAYER: Let me be the wave. And if I cannot be the wave, let me be the rupture at the bottom. Let me be that terrible first rift in the dark.]"
Anyone have any idea what this means?
I started to get into the book a little when they were writing the opera only to then be confronted later with the opera itself, 20 pages or so of an opera stuck in the middle of the book. I didn't read it. I can't think of anyone who would.
The story makes no sense, the book bears no resemblance to Gone Girl despite reports, the people are all bitter and evil. Other reviews said the second half is better and it is in that it is easier to read but I would not say better.
I kept thinking I should put the book down while I was reading and really wish I had.