Scan barcode
A review by loverofeels
The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo by Taylor Jenkins Reid
dark
emotional
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
i'll start with the positive: i started and finished this book in a day, which hasn't happened in a hot sec, so the least i can say is that this plot grips you and doesn't let you go. (well, maybe a little during the rex north chapter. and during most of monique's chapters, especially the ones about her godforsaken divorce.)
a lot of this book is an ode to friendship, and those parts (AKA evelyn's friendship with harry) were fantastic.
also, as a former current and future "it's rotten work" "not to me. not if it's you" stan, the line "If you are intolerable, let me be the one to tolerate you" in ch 24 DID HIT as did several of the other lines between evelyn and celia. they are so flawed but i wanted them to be together so bad <3
TJR's prose isn't horrendous, although it isn't anything to write home about either. i found this compulsively readable, but there were definitely sections that stuck out to me as inelegant. in particular, the vivant article at the end sticks out to me; i simply cannot believe that garbage was supposed to be an excerpt from a book by a talented author. it read like a celebrity social media post.
i... really did not like this as historical lesbian/bisexual rep. i don't know that it was necessarily bad or inaccurate (except for the line "insiders are saying the two are quite a pair of... thespians" in ch 26. good lord). i'm having difficulty distinguishing between what was meant to be flaws in the characters and what was just flaws in the writing, but all i can say for now is that many of the parts that discuss celia and evelyn's interactions with the homophobic world in which they live / the LGBT community at large feel like they were written with the bare minimum of research.
for example: "i'll never forget the morning after the stonewall riots... celia... believed everything was going to change after that night. she believed that because gay people had announced themselves, had been proud enough to admit who they were and strong enough to stand up, attitudes were going to change." (ch 37)
some questions i have from the paragraph above: does celia, a character who has many short and long term relationships with other women, think that the stonewall riots were the first incident in which gay people protested? is she aware of gay rights organizations that started in the early/mid 1950s and lasted through the 1960s, such as the mattachine society (headquartered in her hometown, LA) or the daughters of bilitis (lesbian org headquartered in SF)? does she know about SF's compton's cafeteria rights of 1966? what about the raids of gay bars across the country that resulted in demonstrations and protest? how can celia think this is the first time that gay people have been visible and stood up for themselves?
it is also very frustrating to read about two highly privileged and feminine-presenting / straight-passing women talking about how gay people finally being visible would change everything. for many/most of the people who were actually at stonewall and similar protests, the problem was not that they were invisible—it was that they had no choice but to render themselves highly visible in a way that made the world want to kill them. their choice to do that and to participate in riots was, of course, still incredibly courageous, strong, and important, but it felt somewhat ignorant for celia/evelyn to reducing their experience to announcing themselves and being proud. their experience is just so, so far removed from that of the gnc working class people they praise—and maybe that's the point! but considering that TJR only mentions stonewall and the aids epidemic, it felt like a very shallow take on historical sapphics. there is a general sentiment throughout the story that it would be easier for them to be together if they were less rich and famous which i just really don't know about...
evelyn's peculiar description of luisa, her "help," is similarly uncomfortable. evelyn "envied how secure she was in her own skin. how unafraid she was to be her true self. she was proud to be luisa jimenez." luisa is one of the very few other latine characters, and we are told she is someone who evelyn deeply cares for, but she is only mentioned in the scene i quoted from, where she is from introduced, and then briefly when evelyn moves to spain and luisa disappears for the rest of the narrative. weird!
in conclusion: i liked the seven husbands of evelyn hugo! but it's not a literary masterpiece by any means, and it is deeply flawed in ways that make me hesitant to recommend it to anybody.
a lot of this book is an ode to friendship, and those parts (AKA evelyn's friendship with harry) were fantastic.
also, as a former current and future "it's rotten work" "not to me. not if it's you" stan, the line "If you are intolerable, let me be the one to tolerate you" in ch 24 DID HIT as did several of the other lines between evelyn and celia. they are so flawed but i wanted them to be together so bad <3
TJR's prose isn't horrendous, although it isn't anything to write home about either. i found this compulsively readable, but there were definitely sections that stuck out to me as inelegant. in particular, the vivant article at the end sticks out to me; i simply cannot believe that garbage was supposed to be an excerpt from a book by a talented author. it read like a celebrity social media post.
i... really did not like this as historical lesbian/bisexual rep. i don't know that it was necessarily bad or inaccurate (except for the line "insiders are saying the two are quite a pair of... thespians" in ch 26. good lord). i'm having difficulty distinguishing between what was meant to be flaws in the characters and what was just flaws in the writing, but all i can say for now is that many of the parts that discuss celia and evelyn's interactions with the homophobic world in which they live / the LGBT community at large feel like they were written with the bare minimum of research.
for example: "i'll never forget the morning after the stonewall riots... celia... believed everything was going to change after that night. she believed that because gay people had announced themselves, had been proud enough to admit who they were and strong enough to stand up, attitudes were going to change." (ch 37)
some questions i have from the paragraph above: does celia, a character who has many short and long term relationships with other women, think that the stonewall riots were the first incident in which gay people protested? is she aware of gay rights organizations that started in the early/mid 1950s and lasted through the 1960s, such as the mattachine society (headquartered in her hometown, LA) or the daughters of bilitis (lesbian org headquartered in SF)? does she know about SF's compton's cafeteria rights of 1966? what about the raids of gay bars across the country that resulted in demonstrations and protest? how can celia think this is the first time that gay people have been visible and stood up for themselves?
it is also very frustrating to read about two highly privileged and feminine-presenting / straight-passing women talking about how gay people finally being visible would change everything. for many/most of the people who were actually at stonewall and similar protests, the problem was not that they were invisible—it was that they had no choice but to render themselves highly visible in a way that made the world want to kill them. their choice to do that and to participate in riots was, of course, still incredibly courageous, strong, and important, but it felt somewhat ignorant for celia/evelyn to reducing their experience to announcing themselves and being proud. their experience is just so, so far removed from that of the gnc working class people they praise—and maybe that's the point! but considering that TJR only mentions stonewall and the aids epidemic, it felt like a very shallow take on historical sapphics. there is a general sentiment throughout the story that it would be easier for them to be together if they were less rich and famous which i just really don't know about...
evelyn's peculiar description of luisa, her "help," is similarly uncomfortable. evelyn "envied how secure she was in her own skin. how unafraid she was to be her true self. she was proud to be luisa jimenez." luisa is one of the very few other latine characters, and we are told she is someone who evelyn deeply cares for, but she is only mentioned in the scene i quoted from, where she is from introduced, and then briefly when evelyn moves to spain and luisa disappears for the rest of the narrative. weird!
in conclusion: i liked the seven husbands of evelyn hugo! but it's not a literary masterpiece by any means, and it is deeply flawed in ways that make me hesitant to recommend it to anybody.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Domestic abuse, Grief, Sexual assault, and Physical abuse
Moderate: Suicide, Cancer, Biphobia, Alcohol, Outing, Sexual content, and Car accident
Minor: Death of parent, Infidelity, and Fatphobia