Scan barcode
iggy_pup's review against another edition
challenging
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
ingeborg_frey's review against another edition
Tenkte hele tiden på middagsscenen i A Room with a View, når George Emerson former maten til et spørsmålstegn, og vipper tallerkenen så Lucy Honeychurch får se. Sjelen på bordet! Senere sier Mr. Emerson til Lucy, “By the side of the everlasting Why there is a Yes--a transitory Yes if you like, but a Yes.”
Sheila Hetis How Should a Person be er akkurat dette, et spørsmålstegn på en tallerken. Rundt bordet finner vi unge, blivende kunstnere. De sloss med sine demoner: perfeksjonisme, usikkerhet, mangel på tillit, dårlig selvbilde, frykt for å dumme seg ut, frykt for å ikke prestere, flauhet, skam. Løsningen på gåten, How Should a Person be? er ulik for alle gjestene. Men de forveksler egne behov og ønsker og utfordringer med hverandres, misforståelser oppstår, løses, fører til nye diskusjoner og konflikter, forsøk, utkast, forslag.
Sheila Heti sitt spørsmål er motivert av drømmen for å BLI noe. Hun har en personlig og innovervendt agenda, og det gjør at spørsmålstegnet hennes i stor grad formes av selvbevissthet og usikkerhet, så vel som nysgjerrighet og apetitt for livet. Hun er mindre interessert i WHY (som George Emerson) og mer interessert i HVORDAN kan jeg FREMSTÅ/BLI xxx. Men det fungerer likevel, for hun forsøker ikke å fremstille seg som hverken mer eller mindre enn det hun er. Hun prøver ikke å forkle selvpromoteringsønsket sitt i påstander om at hun er en filosofisk tenker med interesse for WHY, istedet er hun skamløst ærlig. Boka er rotete og umoden og klein, men også rørende og grådig morsom.
Sheila Hetis How Should a Person be er akkurat dette, et spørsmålstegn på en tallerken. Rundt bordet finner vi unge, blivende kunstnere. De sloss med sine demoner: perfeksjonisme, usikkerhet, mangel på tillit, dårlig selvbilde, frykt for å dumme seg ut, frykt for å ikke prestere, flauhet, skam. Løsningen på gåten, How Should a Person be? er ulik for alle gjestene. Men de forveksler egne behov og ønsker og utfordringer med hverandres, misforståelser oppstår, løses, fører til nye diskusjoner og konflikter, forsøk, utkast, forslag.
Sheila Heti sitt spørsmål er motivert av drømmen for å BLI noe. Hun har en personlig og innovervendt agenda, og det gjør at spørsmålstegnet hennes i stor grad formes av selvbevissthet og usikkerhet, så vel som nysgjerrighet og apetitt for livet. Hun er mindre interessert i WHY (som George Emerson) og mer interessert i HVORDAN kan jeg FREMSTÅ/BLI xxx. Men det fungerer likevel, for hun forsøker ikke å fremstille seg som hverken mer eller mindre enn det hun er. Hun prøver ikke å forkle selvpromoteringsønsket sitt i påstander om at hun er en filosofisk tenker med interesse for WHY, istedet er hun skamløst ærlig. Boka er rotete og umoden og klein, men også rørende og grådig morsom.
katieparrott12's review against another edition
challenging
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
4.0
lizawall's review against another edition
The opening of this book is basically perfect, but can I just say... this is the first book I've managed to read in a long time not explicitly by/about queer ladies, and it is just so CHOCK FULL of cock and hetero oppression. Is this how they all are? Did I forget? It's maybe not really fair to blame the book, like she is just telling her truth, but ugh.
I actually liked the part in the beginning where she talked about how 19th c had novels and our age has blowjobs, but did not expect so many literal blowjobs. Not to yuck her yum, but I just wished she would cut it out. Of course I loved the lady friend times, the title, and, like I said, the introduction. Also parts of it kind of reminded me of a lazy [a:Iris Murdoch|7287|Iris Murdoch|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1238673382p2/7287.jpg] (including, actually, the thrall to dumb dudes), which is pretty good.
I actually liked the part in the beginning where she talked about how 19th c had novels and our age has blowjobs, but did not expect so many literal blowjobs. Not to yuck her yum, but I just wished she would cut it out. Of course I loved the lady friend times, the title, and, like I said, the introduction. Also parts of it kind of reminded me of a lazy [a:Iris Murdoch|7287|Iris Murdoch|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1238673382p2/7287.jpg] (including, actually, the thrall to dumb dudes), which is pretty good.
jessicarose1's review against another edition
reflective
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
3.0
ninabruinhof's review against another edition
challenging
funny
reflective
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
3.75
sashawhite's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
inspiring
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
laurelmb's review against another edition
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- 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
millhousethecat's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
When your kid asks you to read a book they loved, you do. And so when Griffin asked me to read How Should A Person Be?, I bought a copy and read it.
The book “is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” (If I may quote Winston Churchill when discussing a situation difficult to understand.)
This book defies easy summary - it’s part play, part novel, it’s fiction mixed with non-fiction, it’s an infinite jest.
It ostensibly tells the story of the friendship between Sheila, main character and author, and Margaux (Williamson, a famous painter). A central question/premise is that Margaux and Sholem, are tasked with a competition: create the ugliest painting. Margaux avoids it for as long as she can; Sholem immediately makes his and can’t shake the feeling of being dirty and ruined because of it.
Instead of trying to give a synopsis, I think there’s more value is saying the book is inscrutable and likely so on purpose. And while it’s doubtful you’ll relate to the narcissism shown by most characters in Shelia’s life, the book remains relatable. There’s subtext and couched meaning there for the discovery.
When I asked Griff what he thought the take away was, he said, “You're trying really hard to do or accomplish something even though you don't know the rules, and whether or not you accomplish what you want is beside the point.” Exactly.
It’ll challenge you and that’s a good thing.
abbeyhar103's review against another edition
3.0
I didn't hate this, but I didn't love it either. I really did want to love it, because I haven't read a novel in a while that I've been absolutely crazy about. I liked a lot of what the protagonist/author had to say about self perception and the idea of being confused about "how you should be," but I guess I'm sort of at my limit of semi autobiographical pieces of art from twenty somethings about finding their place in the world. This book said some of the same things in a new way, but I find the overall genre to be self indulgent and repetitive and also maybe speaks to our self obsessed culture in which everyone thinks that their own story alone will be fascinating, marketable and inspiring to others. But at the same time, maybe ident want to hear about it because I'm living through similar issues? I guess id be interested to see if she could write about anything but herself.
Also I hated (HATED) the last scene. Two of the protagonist'a friends were playing a game of squash that managed to become a symbol for a 20 something's path through their early adult life. It was so cheesy. "Then finally Jon said, 'I don't think they even know the rules. I think they're just slamming the ball around.' And so they were."
Also I hated (HATED) the last scene. Two of the protagonist'a friends were playing a game of squash that managed to become a symbol for a 20 something's path through their early adult life. It was so cheesy. "Then finally Jon said, 'I don't think they even know the rules. I think they're just slamming the ball around.' And so they were."