You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.57 AVERAGE
3.57 AVERAGE
Everything Under by Daisy Johnson
Remix of the classic Oedipal myth? I found it an alienating, abstruse and far too tiring to become absorbed in the story. Far to often I scratched my head wondering "Which character is this now? What timeline is this happening again?" only to sigh and keep going because the whole thing is too dreary and confusing to worry too much about it.
For mine, the mix of bleak social realism with neo-classical retelling of a Greek myth just didn't work. The shifting timeline, fragmented storyline and preposterous plotline was more tiresome than energizing. There is a cold and 'deliberate' artifice that never gave me a sense that the author has just relaxed into the story. What we're left with is a self-conscious and turgid mess.
⭐ 1/2
Remix of the classic Oedipal myth? I found it an alienating, abstruse and far too tiring to become absorbed in the story. Far to often I scratched my head wondering "Which character is this now? What timeline is this happening again?" only to sigh and keep going because the whole thing is too dreary and confusing to worry too much about it.
For mine, the mix of bleak social realism with neo-classical retelling of a Greek myth just didn't work. The shifting timeline, fragmented storyline and preposterous plotline was more tiresome than energizing. There is a cold and 'deliberate' artifice that never gave me a sense that the author has just relaxed into the story. What we're left with is a self-conscious and turgid mess.
⭐ 1/2
This is a very compelling novel. It has an ancient, spiraling shape, with chapters alternatively titled “The Cottage”, “The River” and “The Hunt”. It tells an old, archetypal story, but with great intimacy and immediacy.
The main narrator is Gretel, a woman who was raised on a boat with her strange, feral mother, Sarah. Gretel has been looking for her mother for decades, ever since she was abandoned as a teenager. The story fills in gradually, moving back and forth between Gretel’s childhood, her hunt for Sarah, and their current, careful interactions, as they live together in a cottage.
The second narrator is Marcus, linked mysteriously but inexorably to Gretel and her mother. As Gretel searches for her mother, she also tries to find Marcus. She locates his family, who have been mourning him and searching for him since he ran away – although they knew him as a girl, Margot. She finds the transsexual soothsayer, Fiona, and woos her until she tells the truth about what she saw in Margot’s future. And intermittently with the search for Marcus, we also hear Marcus’ story.
The scenes on the river, when Gretel is a child, are particularly haunting. Sarah, Gretel and Marcus have their own language, shared by no one else, strange and beautiful. And they have their own monster, the Borak, who terrorizes them from under the water’s surface. As frightening as the river can be, none of the three can escape it.
The main narrator is Gretel, a woman who was raised on a boat with her strange, feral mother, Sarah. Gretel has been looking for her mother for decades, ever since she was abandoned as a teenager. The story fills in gradually, moving back and forth between Gretel’s childhood, her hunt for Sarah, and their current, careful interactions, as they live together in a cottage.
The second narrator is Marcus, linked mysteriously but inexorably to Gretel and her mother. As Gretel searches for her mother, she also tries to find Marcus. She locates his family, who have been mourning him and searching for him since he ran away – although they knew him as a girl, Margot. She finds the transsexual soothsayer, Fiona, and woos her until she tells the truth about what she saw in Margot’s future. And intermittently with the search for Marcus, we also hear Marcus’ story.
The scenes on the river, when Gretel is a child, are particularly haunting. Sarah, Gretel and Marcus have their own language, shared by no one else, strange and beautiful. And they have their own monster, the Borak, who terrorizes them from under the water’s surface. As frightening as the river can be, none of the three can escape it.
A book group read. I think we all had mixed feelings about it, loving the nature writing (Reservoir 13 and Waterland were both mentioned for comparisons) but underwhelmed by the structure and confused or annoyed by some plot elements. One person commented that one way of making characters more interesting is to give them quirks -- most of the characters here are downright bonkers!
Once I remembered she'd started out with the Oedipus myth (it is not a straight retelling though), I figured out the relationships before the big reveal. It doesn't do to take this book too literally, it has strong mythological and supernatural elements ... nevertheless we all agreed it was highly implausible that someone with no education other than a single encyclopaedia would walk into a job as a lexicographer in Oxford, however interested in words she was, and keep it despite disappearing for weeks on end. It was a rather laboured device to emphasise Gretel's love of words. I found the present-day parts narrated by Gretel the weakest part of the book. Still, no denying she's an interesting writer!
Once I remembered she'd started out with the Oedipus myth (it is not a straight retelling though), I figured out the relationships before the big reveal. It doesn't do to take this book too literally, it has strong mythological and supernatural elements ... nevertheless we all agreed it was highly implausible that someone with no education other than a single encyclopaedia would walk into a job as a lexicographer in Oxford, however interested in words she was, and keep it despite disappearing for weeks on end. It was a rather laboured device to emphasise Gretel's love of words. I found the present-day parts narrated by Gretel the weakest part of the book. Still, no denying she's an interesting writer!
I found it very confusing and the sketchily written characters were difficult to muster sympathy for. In fact, I disliked most of them.
Daisy Johnson's "Everything Under," a retelling of Oedipus set in modern-day England, is by turns beautiful and deeply weird. The details unfold out of chronological order as the cast of characters escapes to (and from) the river. Much of the story is written in the second person. Some sections feature an invented language known only to a character named Gretel and her mother, who abandoned her when she was 16. I first heard about the novel when it was named to the Man Booker Prize longlist. It was an interesting read, but ultimately pretty difficult to get into.
Where does one begin reviewing a book described as a “gender-fluid Oedipal tale?” Fluid is the defining word in this novel - time, gender, identify, emotions - they are all in a state of flux like the river that serves as the central metaphor. Because of the elusive nature of the non-linear plot and the characters’ identities, I found it tough going in the early chapters.
I know that this is supposed to be an admired novel but was never enjoyable for me. Perhaps if I could have just sat down and read it straight through then I might have enjoyed it a bit more. However, it was just an unpleasant slog. I was often confused on which character was the focus of a chapter. I often got lost within paragraphs and didn't know of whom the author was speaking. Therefore, I constantly had to stop and reread. This makes me really dislike a book. One back up and reread is ok but not repeatedly. I also felt that the book had WAY too much extra stuff and events that didn't do anything to enhance the story or characters. The only significant plot detail was based on Oedipus Rex so that was hardly revealing although I felt as if Johnson was trying to make the reader guess the terrible fate or Marcus/Margot. Why not just get this plot device out in the open in the first place and focus on the story about the characters instead? It felt overly contrived. I am very excited to move on to another book as I wasted too much time on it hoping for more from this one. I must follow George Higgins's rule - give it 40 pages and then quit it.
I tried to like this book, but it's Boring. I thought this would be I horror story, or at least a supernatural thriller. The only interesting moments is the dysfunctional relationship between Gretal and her unstable mother. I gave up around page 73, so maybe the book will get better. This is when the author starts introduing a new character out of nowhere, but at this point I stopped caring about the protagonist
This book is so different from anything I’ve ever read before. I found it completely riveting, spellbinding even. Utterly readable, desperately dark, beautifully written, it has this incredible feeling of trapping you in a whirlpool- you know that you're being sucked round and round to an inevitably awful conclusion but you can’t quite see what that is and have to keep reading. And the water analogy is deliberate since water is everywhere and essential to this story. The character building is so good and plot twists left me gasping. Read it.