Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.96 AVERAGE
3.96 AVERAGE
[Someone on Twitter asked if this book (that won a Pulitzer) was any good, and this response was too long for Twitter, so here it is here; my next GoodReads post will come in 2018]
If a choice made by an author seems unsuccessful to me I spend a lot of time trying to figure out why the choice was made / what the author was trying to do and “forcing” the book to “work” on an assumption that the book was intended to be flawed as part of a superstructure, the way unfinished Romantic poems use the fact that they are “unfinished” to enhance the Romanticness of themselves. That’s probably a dumb way to read!
The Goldfinch was not the book I wanted it to be: the horrificness of the museum scene in the opening and then the journey to a magical Village where Theo meets people literally named “Hobie” and “Pippa” felt like the start to a possibly Great Book (it felt like it might be able to do exactly what Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close failed to do; that book was hollow like a goddamn chocolate bunny and I don’t think anyone would say that Goldfinch has that problem).
But this first part in Manhattan is interrupted by another part about Las Vegas that for me never made a case for its inclusion. That’s on me: I miss New York and wanted the book to be about how New York is both horrible and magical (It is! (themoreyouknow.gif)). Then there is a bus ride part, then a More New York part, with an uglier version of the city than the first time (they go to the outer boroughs!!), then an Amsterdam part (..?) – these were all disconnected for me; maybe they’re all novellas and supposed to feel different in tone/purpose? Maybe it’s like a David Mitchell thing? But Mitchell lets you know from the outset it’s going to be contrived and fake; after Tartt’s The Little Friend, which I liked a great deal although I had to make myself acknowledge and “forgive” its flaw, I was expecting more.
Tartt “styles” her “prose” well – there are a lot of scenes that are pretty marvelous, like you could actually marvel at them if you had the time, but also more than one candle is seen “guttering” (which, come on); she uses the escape key and ctrl-alt-delete for the same metaphor in the same paragraph; at one point it felt like 100 pages went by without mentioning the painting and then Theo says something like, “but of course at the forefront of my mind was the painting,” and it’s hard not to feel like that was stuck in there during a final read-through.
There’s also a scene where a person who has died shows up on television: it’s a startling moment for Theo and it’s a startling thing IRL that is only a fairly recent possibility, but it was also a startling moment when it happened in The Secret History. If a startling moment has happened in 67% of your novels, maybe it’s not startling anymore? But these probably stuck out because a lot of the rest of it is great.
Oh also: my mother-in-law said she didn’t like all the drug stuff. I kind of didn’t either (again, because it wasn’t the book I wanted to read), but it’s well-written. Tartt’s written matter-of-factly and interestingly in every book about some kind of “drug stuff”: she is our generation’s William Burroughs or something.
Oh, wait, another thing I found odd: there are one hundred hints throughout the book that seem to be daring the reader to correctly guess the True Sexuality of several major characters, but then this is (consciously I assume) never resolved in any case. Thought that was interesting enough to put in its own paragraph, which is the paragraph you just read!
So: “prosody” (blehh) aside, the disconnectedness of the different parts made the book not work 100% as a story for me. Now, here is someone to tell me, “Of course, why would it? The narrator is not reliable! That trick!” (It’s me, I’m the one saying this to myself. I am alone in the house this week, and all I’ve eaten today is salami and donuts, and I’m talking to myself a lot.)
I mean, there are a lot of ways to make this book “work” if you want to force it. However, I’m getting less interested in a book justifying its sloppy structure with the fact that a sloppy structure “reinforces” the “themes”. I often google “jennifer egan terrible” just to not feel alone, and in general, it would be nice not to have a constant sinking feeling. While noting that it’s not Tartt’s fault that she didn’t write the book I had assumed she was going to write, though, I also haven’t come up with a good reason for a lot of the choices she made here.
In conclusion, you probably already know if you’re going to like this book, so choose accordingly, and also, Jennifer Egan also won a Pulitzer, though, so what the fuck do I know?
If a choice made by an author seems unsuccessful to me I spend a lot of time trying to figure out why the choice was made / what the author was trying to do and “forcing” the book to “work” on an assumption that the book was intended to be flawed as part of a superstructure, the way unfinished Romantic poems use the fact that they are “unfinished” to enhance the Romanticness of themselves. That’s probably a dumb way to read!
The Goldfinch was not the book I wanted it to be: the horrificness of the museum scene in the opening and then the journey to a magical Village where Theo meets people literally named “Hobie” and “Pippa” felt like the start to a possibly Great Book (it felt like it might be able to do exactly what Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close failed to do; that book was hollow like a goddamn chocolate bunny and I don’t think anyone would say that Goldfinch has that problem).
But this first part in Manhattan is interrupted by another part about Las Vegas that for me never made a case for its inclusion. That’s on me: I miss New York and wanted the book to be about how New York is both horrible and magical (It is! (themoreyouknow.gif)). Then there is a bus ride part, then a More New York part, with an uglier version of the city than the first time (they go to the outer boroughs!!), then an Amsterdam part (..?) – these were all disconnected for me; maybe they’re all novellas and supposed to feel different in tone/purpose? Maybe it’s like a David Mitchell thing? But Mitchell lets you know from the outset it’s going to be contrived and fake; after Tartt’s The Little Friend, which I liked a great deal although I had to make myself acknowledge and “forgive” its flaw, I was expecting more.
Tartt “styles” her “prose” well – there are a lot of scenes that are pretty marvelous, like you could actually marvel at them if you had the time, but also more than one candle is seen “guttering” (which, come on); she uses the escape key and ctrl-alt-delete for the same metaphor in the same paragraph; at one point it felt like 100 pages went by without mentioning the painting and then Theo says something like, “but of course at the forefront of my mind was the painting,” and it’s hard not to feel like that was stuck in there during a final read-through.
There’s also a scene where a person who has died shows up on television: it’s a startling moment for Theo and it’s a startling thing IRL that is only a fairly recent possibility, but it was also a startling moment when it happened in The Secret History. If a startling moment has happened in 67% of your novels, maybe it’s not startling anymore? But these probably stuck out because a lot of the rest of it is great.
Oh also: my mother-in-law said she didn’t like all the drug stuff. I kind of didn’t either (again, because it wasn’t the book I wanted to read), but it’s well-written. Tartt’s written matter-of-factly and interestingly in every book about some kind of “drug stuff”: she is our generation’s William Burroughs or something.
Oh, wait, another thing I found odd: there are one hundred hints throughout the book that seem to be daring the reader to correctly guess the True Sexuality of several major characters, but then this is (consciously I assume) never resolved in any case. Thought that was interesting enough to put in its own paragraph, which is the paragraph you just read!
So: “prosody” (blehh) aside, the disconnectedness of the different parts made the book not work 100% as a story for me. Now, here is someone to tell me, “Of course, why would it? The narrator is not reliable! That trick!” (It’s me, I’m the one saying this to myself. I am alone in the house this week, and all I’ve eaten today is salami and donuts, and I’m talking to myself a lot.)
I mean, there are a lot of ways to make this book “work” if you want to force it. However, I’m getting less interested in a book justifying its sloppy structure with the fact that a sloppy structure “reinforces” the “themes”. I often google “jennifer egan terrible” just to not feel alone, and in general, it would be nice not to have a constant sinking feeling. While noting that it’s not Tartt’s fault that she didn’t write the book I had assumed she was going to write, though, I also haven’t come up with a good reason for a lot of the choices she made here.
In conclusion, you probably already know if you’re going to like this book, so choose accordingly, and also, Jennifer Egan also won a Pulitzer, though, so what the fuck do I know?
Listened to the audiobook and it was one of the best audiobook readings I've heard. The reader created really distinct voices for each character and kept them consistent throughout the story. The story is slow but very engaging, and I felt really connected to all of the characters. Lots of tension and intrigue and a powerful central symbol. Lots of ideas and well worth a look
challenging
dark
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
dark
emotional
inspiring
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
I think I died reading this and will have to read it forever...
I loved Theo from the very beginning.
I found the core of the story interesting but...there are 500 useless pages in this book.
I can't believe the same person wrote this and The Secret History which is one of my favourites.
I loved Theo from the very beginning.
I found the core of the story interesting but...there are 500 useless pages in this book.
I can't believe the same person wrote this and The Secret History which is one of my favourites.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
favourite book of ALL TIME amazing beautiful thought provoking amazinf
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The last ~5% of The Goldfinch (particularly with Theo's conversations with Boris and Hobie) made the whole thing. Reading those same conversations without the whole story behind it would likely have fallen flat. It was an overall great journey along the way, but it did feel like it dragged at bits. I am definitely interested in reading more by this author.