You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.8 AVERAGE
3.8 AVERAGE
Atwood is a very good novelist with an impressive use of language. In this novel, she creates three very well rounded and interesting characters, with complex and engaging backstories, and one character who is intriguing and compelling. However, I find myself wondering if the exercise of writing this novel was not more fulfilling and entertaining for her than it can be for anyone who reads it. My verdict is that it is undoubtedly clever, but almost certainly indulgently overwritten.
I also find it hard to get past the clumsy use of AIDS as shock factor, and some homophobic and potentially anti-feminist sentiments that could be written of as being true to their time and/or the thoughts of the narrators, but that strike me - perhaps with a modern sensibility - as below the standard of decency.
I also find it hard to get past the clumsy use of AIDS as shock factor, and some homophobic and potentially anti-feminist sentiments that could be written of as being true to their time and/or the thoughts of the narrators, but that strike me - perhaps with a modern sensibility - as below the standard of decency.
My second time around with this book. A favorite of mine from the wonderful Margaret Atwood. I think this would be an interesting book group title. One step less cruel than Cat's Eye. A fascinating look at women's relationships and choices we make.
Ik twijfelde heel erg tussen drie en vier sterren, want het is een interessant verhaal met veel leuke intertekst (ik ben groot fan van sprookjes metaforen en verwijzingen), maar het plot en dergelijke vond ik niet extreem pakkend of bijzonder. Leuk boek, maar in vergelijking met Atwood's andere werk is dit niet de geweldigste roman.
i was interested enough in the chaos Zenia sowed into these three women's lives to power through the audiobook but my god i got umay so many times. the format of the book is like this:
this would have been fine had Margaret Atwood not gone into so much detail. i genuinely got irritated when, after you the reader have witnessed one of the mains' full story with Zenia, that same character explains her story with Zenia to another character in the text. as in, instead of "X explained it to Y" you get paragraphs of X recounting the bullet points of Zenia's machinations
on another note, and this is not a knock on the book: i could tell this was written in the 90s. there's a couple of mildly transphobic jokes, cautious gay rep, nods to racism (which Atwood may not have felt it was her place to discuss), and feministic thoughts that are basic to us now but may have been pretty groundbreaking for its time
and lastly, about Zenia:
2.5/5 rounded down because this was over 20 hours long and it felt it
1. Tony's morning up to them seeing Zenia alive at The Toxique
2. Charis' morning up to them seeing Zenia alive at The Toxique
3. Roz' morning up to them seeing Zenia alive at The Toxique
4. Tony in the immediate aftermath of seeing Zenia alive, her life story, and her personal experience with Zenia
5. Charis in the immediate aftermath ... and so on
this would have been fine had Margaret Atwood not gone into so much detail. i genuinely got irritated when, after you the reader have witnessed one of the mains' full story with Zenia, that same character explains her story with Zenia to another character in the text. as in, instead of "X explained it to Y" you get paragraphs of X recounting the bullet points of Zenia's machinations
on another note, and this is not a knock on the book: i could tell this was written in the 90s. there's a couple of mildly transphobic jokes, cautious gay rep, nods to racism (which Atwood may not have felt it was her place to discuss), and feministic thoughts that are basic to us now but may have been pretty groundbreaking for its time
and lastly, about Zenia:
Spoiler
i think the key to enjoying life is letting some mysteries stay mysteries, so the fact we got to know barely anything about her by the end was a good call. i do like though that she is consistently self-interested, chaotic, and disdainful of men as she uses them. it's terrible she has to fuck over other women in the process of living her best life and she does seem to have some ghost of regret about it (a vague "what a shame"), but that's why she's the most interesting character in the book with Charis' grandmother not far behind2.5/5 rounded down because this was over 20 hours long and it felt it
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This book is always on my "favourites!"-shelf. The description of the 3 female characters who get entangled on some point of their life with the mysterious fourth woman, Xenia, the detailed personal background that every one of them possesses together with the biting irony and yes, wisdom, that Atwood employs makes this book one of my all-time favourites.
dark
funny
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Don't want to write too much here in advance of our book club discussion next week, but I'm pretty impressed by what Margaret Atwood did with the story. Also, she is a genius with words. Because of that, I think she can get away with doing things in fiction that would, in the hands of another author, ring hideously false or contrived. This is a bizarre story in many ways, almost verging on magical realism, but I think she makes it work.
Also, I got chills from this passage:
“Male fantasies, male fantasies, is everything run by male fantasies? Up on a pedestal or down on your knees, it's all a male fantasy: that you're strong enough to take what they dish out, or else too weak to do anything about it. Even pretending you aren't catering to male fantasies is a male fantasy: pretending you're unseen, pretending you have a life of your own, that you can wash your feet and comb your hair unconscious of the ever-present watcher peering through the keyhole, peering through the keyhole in your own head, if nowhere else. You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.”
I am a woman with a man inside watching a woman. /shiver
Also, I got chills from this passage:
“Male fantasies, male fantasies, is everything run by male fantasies? Up on a pedestal or down on your knees, it's all a male fantasy: that you're strong enough to take what they dish out, or else too weak to do anything about it. Even pretending you aren't catering to male fantasies is a male fantasy: pretending you're unseen, pretending you have a life of your own, that you can wash your feet and comb your hair unconscious of the ever-present watcher peering through the keyhole, peering through the keyhole in your own head, if nowhere else. You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.”
I am a woman with a man inside watching a woman. /shiver
My least favorite of the Atwood novels I have read. Three adult women (all of whom are supposedly intelligent and have histories that, one would think, would have led them to develop a bit of backbone and resiliency) cower in fear of the woman who stole their men. Just listen to "Jolene" instead instead of reading this bloated book--it will take only three minutes, and you'll be able to enjoy Dolly Parton's gorgeous vocals at the same time.