Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.13 AVERAGE
4.13 AVERAGE
"The Door" by Magda Szabo drops us into a deep well of dysfunction. The two main characters, Magda and Emerence, don't seem to have any real affection or empathy for each other and yet they seem to have some sort of weird bond. Their relationship is marked by power struggles and emotional distance rather than genuine connection and did not make sense to me.
Not to mention the poor dog!
Not to mention the poor dog!
challenging
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
emotional
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
As I began reading The Door, I thought it was going to be a book about an unusual relationship between a successful writer and the quirky older woman who cares for her flat and the homes of others around the neighborhoods of Budapest. I was captivated at the beginning, intrigued by Emerence, the tough, older woman with near-super human strength who was only happy when she was working -- and only worked on her own terms.
What this book ended up being about was an enmeshed, co-dependent relationship between these women and a few of the people in their lives. The narrator (the successful writer) spoke of trust and love between her and Emerence, when they treated each other with such disdain and anger (especially Emerence) I could not for the life of me imagine how these two extremely unlikeable people stayed connected.
This book is about power and control; about treating people (and animals -- content warning) as awfully as you can and still daring them to love you. But that's not love at all, it's Stockholm Syndrome and, in the end, an unhealthy relationship.
Magda Szabo is an amazing writer, and the translation was extremely well done, which is the only reason I gave this any stars at all. But I'm sad to say, I kept asking myself throughout, "Why am I still reading this?" Do not recommend.
What this book ended up being about was an enmeshed, co-dependent relationship between these women and a few of the people in their lives. The narrator (the successful writer) spoke of trust and love between her and Emerence, when they treated each other with such disdain and anger (especially Emerence) I could not for the life of me imagine how these two extremely unlikeable people stayed connected.
This book is about power and control; about treating people (and animals -- content warning) as awfully as you can and still daring them to love you. But that's not love at all, it's Stockholm Syndrome and, in the end, an unhealthy relationship.
Magda Szabo is an amazing writer, and the translation was extremely well done, which is the only reason I gave this any stars at all. But I'm sad to say, I kept asking myself throughout, "Why am I still reading this?" Do not recommend.
No energy for a review today, simply to say that this was a very gripping novel and I'm pleased to have read it.
I think I liked this. The treatment of the dog was offensive, but the emotional story was good, even tho I feel I missed some of the context of culture. When I finished it I discovered it was a movie with Helen Mirren (who semes perfect) but I haven't decided if I want to see that or not. :-)
There are chapters and conversations that pulled me in so intensely. And then there are chapters and conversations that made me fully space out.
I don't know what I just read. I guess some literary fiction just isn't for me. The prose is fabulous, so well done to both the author and the translator. The narrator was superb, as well. But the story and the characterizations left me cold. What was this book trying to tell us? That as long as you're hard-working and supposedly indispensable, you can be a cruel, rude curmudgeon and still get away with it?
The book is about the unnamed protagonist, ostensibly the author Magda herself, and Emerence, her housekeeper. Emerence takes care of the author's home, but she's honestly horrible to the author, and moody and opinionated. The character made sense because there are definitely people like Emerence, but the author's constant forgiveness of her didn't. No housekeeper is worth the pain and headache that is Emerence. She knows nothing beyond the confines of her world, refuses to learn about anything, and yet has the gall to berate the author for doing better for herself. Anyone who calls a person stupid that many times should be shown the door (see what I did there?).
Emerence also keeps beating the author's dog, and at one point broke the dog's rib. I'm sorry, but in what day and age was that ever acceptable? We're supposed to like the character after that?
In the end, the old woman dies mostly due to her own negligence and she blames the author. Every good or exciting occasion/achievement that the author in the book faces is ruined by Emerence, either by something she says or some stupidity she gets up to. And yet the author is supposedly the bad guy for trying to get the woman help and make it to her professional engagements at the same time.
I'm lost as to what this book's true meaning was. It's a surreal tale that delves into the world of domestic work and gives us a fascinating look at a country's history, but from a character and story standpoint, it simply was impossible to be invested in the book because of the histrionics. An unlikeable character propelling the story forward didn't help.
Hard pass, despite the elegant prose.
The book is about the unnamed protagonist, ostensibly the author Magda herself, and Emerence, her housekeeper. Emerence takes care of the author's home, but she's honestly horrible to the author, and moody and opinionated. The character made sense because there are definitely people like Emerence, but the author's constant forgiveness of her didn't. No housekeeper is worth the pain and headache that is Emerence. She knows nothing beyond the confines of her world, refuses to learn about anything, and yet has the gall to berate the author for doing better for herself. Anyone who calls a person stupid that many times should be shown the door (see what I did there?).
Emerence also keeps beating the author's dog, and at one point broke the dog's rib. I'm sorry, but in what day and age was that ever acceptable? We're supposed to like the character after that?
In the end, the old woman dies mostly due to her own negligence and she blames the author. Every good or exciting occasion/achievement that the author in the book faces is ruined by Emerence, either by something she says or some stupidity she gets up to. And yet the author is supposedly the bad guy for trying to get the woman help and make it to her professional engagements at the same time.
I'm lost as to what this book's true meaning was. It's a surreal tale that delves into the world of domestic work and gives us a fascinating look at a country's history, but from a character and story standpoint, it simply was impossible to be invested in the book because of the histrionics. An unlikeable character propelling the story forward didn't help.
Hard pass, despite the elegant prose.