Take a photo of a barcode or cover
218 reviews for:
Philomena (Movie Tie-In): A Mother, Her Son, and a Fifty-Year Search
Martin Sixsmith
3.49 AVERAGE
218 reviews for:
Philomena (Movie Tie-In): A Mother, Her Son, and a Fifty-Year Search
Martin Sixsmith
3.49 AVERAGE
See the movie instead. The book is all telling and no showing, not to mention heavy on the passive voice. Very dull. By the middle of the book, there's not a hint of the intriguing search portrayed in the movie.
Also, the dialog is clearly invented. Irish-/Britishisms are one thing in the narrative, but coming from the mouths of the American characters they don't ring the least bit true to an American ear.
Also, the dialog is clearly invented. Irish-/Britishisms are one thing in the narrative, but coming from the mouths of the American characters they don't ring the least bit true to an American ear.
emotional
informative
sad
slow-paced
Not me actually finishing a book at uni who is this person??!!?!?!
Well that was a depressing little book. I knew it would be but damnnnnn, how absolutely delightful the nuns at Roscrea abbey were. This is fully a tragic story that I feel like I will be thinking about for a long time to come. I truly do not know how the nuns could do that to people and the rest of the country be absolutely fine about it; organised religion for you I guess??
In terms of the writing itself, I at some points thought that Micheal's flaws were over-exaggerated or written about in too great a detail in order to create a supposedly more interesting plot-line or something I don't know. Either way thought it was a little stretched at some points of the book. Moreover, Philomena is literally not in this book. This is one hell of a catfish because I really think the last tiny chapter that actually details the actions taken by Philomena was added in at the end of the publishing process as some kind of after-thought. Very odd.
Anyway, overall a sad book that was interesting and insightful to read about the whole adoption process in Ireland, but there were several parts to the book that I felt detracted from the book a little.
Also just a picky side-note: the picture placement in my copy fully spoils what happens in the end, and it spoils it at the point where it is not completely obvious where the ending will lead.
Well that was a depressing little book. I knew it would be but damnnnnn, how absolutely delightful the nuns at Roscrea abbey were. This is fully a tragic story that I feel like I will be thinking about for a long time to come. I truly do not know how the nuns could do that to people and the rest of the country be absolutely fine about it; organised religion for you I guess??
In terms of the writing itself, I at some points thought that Micheal's flaws were over-exaggerated or written about in too great a detail in order to create a supposedly more interesting plot-line or something I don't know. Either way thought it was a little stretched at some points of the book. Moreover, Philomena is literally not in this book. This is one hell of a catfish because I really think the last tiny chapter that actually details the actions taken by Philomena was added in at the end of the publishing process as some kind of after-thought. Very odd.
Anyway, overall a sad book that was interesting and insightful to read about the whole adoption process in Ireland, but there were several parts to the book that I felt detracted from the book a little.
Also just a picky side-note: the picture placement in my copy fully spoils what happens in the end, and it spoils it at the point where it is not completely obvious where the ending will lead.
I bought the movie tie-in version and Wow was this disappointingly bad. First and foremost, it's called Philomena despite focusing only about 50 of the 450 pages on her. This is a mystifying choice since Philomena was alive and knew the author when he wrote this book, whilst Michael (the protagonist) died in 1995.
The worst part is that the Magdalene laundries and forced adoption of Irish babies is a very real, true, and traumatic part of our history and it is important we confront these narratives. But this book barely did that. It basically ignored Philomena entirely. So Michael is so scarred from his adoption into a comfortably middle-class American family that he becomes a 'sexual deviant' (the author's words, not mine. In my house we do not kinkshame.) but Philomena is just... Fine? I really would have liked to hear more about her, especially since she (at least at the time of publication) is alive and willing to speak about her story.
Even if you ignore the MANY articles written by people portrayed as characters in this book who absolutely refute the events and conversations in this book, something seems off from the beginning. How can the author be recounting exact conversations, word for word, that happened decades ago and which were shared between parties who are all deceased? I can't even remember a conversation I had last week.
(Plot twist: by all accounts he just straight up made these up)
The author has a weird fixation on Michael's sexuality and interest in BDSM which borders on moral panic at times. He seems to imply that Michael contracting HIV/AIDS is his fault because he happens to be into leather play and has a biker gang fetish. All this, in the context of the fact that Michael died of AIDS in 1995 really makes the whole thing seem very exploitative, insensitive, and honestly kind of disgusting. He's so quick to point out Michael's internalised homophobia and the contradictions of his political life with his personal life, but let's just remember this was the 1980s in America and being gay would at best make you a pariah and at worst get you killed. And maybe, just maybe, it's the combination of weird fascination and disgust - like that which the author CLEARLY exhibits - that makes LGBT people even today want to hide their identities.
I frankly don't understand why he didn't just write a fiction book based on Michael's life and change all the names. It probably still would have been terrible, but it at least wouldn't have been morally reprehensible.
TLDR: If anyone wrote a book like this about one of my loved ones after they died, you can bet I'd be suing for everything they're worth. If it was about me, I'd be haunting their ass for the next 10 generations.
The worst part is that the Magdalene laundries and forced adoption of Irish babies is a very real, true, and traumatic part of our history and it is important we confront these narratives. But this book barely did that. It basically ignored Philomena entirely. So Michael is so scarred from his adoption into a comfortably middle-class American family that he becomes a 'sexual deviant' (the author's words, not mine. In my house we do not kinkshame.) but Philomena is just... Fine? I really would have liked to hear more about her, especially since she (at least at the time of publication) is alive and willing to speak about her story.
Even if you ignore the MANY articles written by people portrayed as characters in this book who absolutely refute the events and conversations in this book, something seems off from the beginning. How can the author be recounting exact conversations, word for word, that happened decades ago and which were shared between parties who are all deceased? I can't even remember a conversation I had last week.
(Plot twist: by all accounts he just straight up made these up)
The author has a weird fixation on Michael's sexuality and interest in BDSM which borders on moral panic at times. He seems to imply that Michael contracting HIV/AIDS is his fault because he happens to be into leather play and has a biker gang fetish. All this, in the context of the fact that Michael died of AIDS in 1995 really makes the whole thing seem very exploitative, insensitive, and honestly kind of disgusting. He's so quick to point out Michael's internalised homophobia and the contradictions of his political life with his personal life, but let's just remember this was the 1980s in America and being gay would at best make you a pariah and at worst get you killed. And maybe, just maybe, it's the combination of weird fascination and disgust - like that which the author CLEARLY exhibits - that makes LGBT people even today want to hide their identities.
I frankly don't understand why he didn't just write a fiction book based on Michael's life and change all the names. It probably still would have been terrible, but it at least wouldn't have been morally reprehensible.
TLDR: If anyone wrote a book like this about one of my loved ones after they died, you can bet I'd be suing for everything they're worth. If it was about me, I'd be haunting their ass for the next 10 generations.
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Truly one of the saddest books I have ever read. My heart breaks for both Philomena and Michael.
dark
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
Unlike the movie in that the book primarily focuses on the life of the son, mostly through re-imaginings of various parts of his life. Interesting in that it addresses some issues that the movie almost entirely glossed over-- what *was* life like as a semi-closeted gay man working for the Republican party during the height of the AIDS epidemic?-- but I didn't quite care for the invented dialogue. I also ended up getting distracted by questioning the source material for each section. By process of elimination based on who was still alive when Sixsmith was researching the book, for example, the bulk of the childhood material must have come from his sister, Mary; college years from his (ex)lover Mark, etc., which leads to inevitable questions about how much those people's biases colored our view of Mike/Anthony during those years.
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
This is the true and remarkable story of a man's search for his identity and a mother's search for the son she gave up for adoption when he was three years old. This book is a lovely reminder of the fact that the ties of biology will always be strong, be they felt daily in their presence or in the hollowness of their absence.