Scan barcode
A review by devourfiction
The Virgin Suicides by Jeffrey Eugenides
challenging
dark
mysterious
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
I have such conflicting feelings on this one.
Can Jeffrey Eugenides write? Yes. Are his metaphors solid, shocking, haunting? Yes, yes, yes. Is this book full of ambition? Yes. Did I enjoy it? ...
As I read I couldn't help but think to myself: what is the point of treating the subject of girls' suicide and sexuality in this way? In this book, neighbourhood boys narrate their obsession with this group of girls only to find out they were unknowable, with this knowledge spurring their growth into men. Hold on, isn't this the manic pixie dream girl again? No, surely there is more to this - the writing seems so profound. Perhaps this book's racism and ableism (with Joe the R*****), praise of statutory rape as long as it happens to a boy (Trip, anyone?), and especially its constant objectification of underage girls is more than just that - maybe they are an attempt to reveal the insidiousness of the male gaze rather than promote it (the way Nabokov's Lolita had tried to with pedophilia)?
More and more red flags appeared. I didn't want to be a lazy reader, or one who wants to make certain subjects taboo for literature. As in the case of Lolita, I stand by the fact that literature can powerfully depict immoral actions. But in this case, to what end? My inability to read the novel charitably won over at a prolonged and graphic scene of one of the boys kissing one of the girls without her consent while not wanting to actually speak with her. There, I thought, is a clear statement of the grossness of these boys' treatment of girls. Except boom! The girl actually turned out to have liked it, forms a connection with him and wants to continue the relationship. Huh? So the point is that actually it's all good now, and you can just do whatever you want because you can't ever actually get into these girls' heads anyway? There is a thin line between depicting a perspective and supporting it, and I don't think Eugenides walked it well. Over the book, few of the boys' perceptions came under any kind of resistance. In a world full of the sexualisation and objectification of girls, where does that leave us?
I had a lot of hopes for this book. I was intrigued by the ambition of using solely outside male perspectives. I was hooked by the concept, in what it could reveal about sexual relationships and mental health. I was mesmerised by the skill of Eugenides's prose. But ultimately, it came down to this: either this book is full-on promoting rape culture and the like, or its 4D chess game is so complex that it is obscuring its own point and promoting rape culture anyway. And I just can't vibe with that, not even for literature's sake.
Can Jeffrey Eugenides write? Yes. Are his metaphors solid, shocking, haunting? Yes, yes, yes. Is this book full of ambition? Yes. Did I enjoy it? ...
As I read I couldn't help but think to myself: what is the point of treating the subject of girls' suicide and sexuality in this way? In this book, neighbourhood boys narrate their obsession with this group of girls only to find out they were unknowable, with this knowledge spurring their growth into men. Hold on, isn't this the manic pixie dream girl again? No, surely there is more to this - the writing seems so profound. Perhaps this book's racism and ableism (with Joe the R*****), praise of statutory rape as long as it happens to a boy (Trip, anyone?), and especially its constant objectification of underage girls is more than just that - maybe they are an attempt to reveal the insidiousness of the male gaze rather than promote it (the way Nabokov's Lolita had tried to with pedophilia)?
More and more red flags appeared. I didn't want to be a lazy reader, or one who wants to make certain subjects taboo for literature. As in the case of Lolita, I stand by the fact that literature can powerfully depict immoral actions. But in this case, to what end? My inability to read the novel charitably won over at a prolonged and graphic scene of one of the boys kissing one of the girls without her consent while not wanting to actually speak with her. There, I thought, is a clear statement of the grossness of these boys' treatment of girls. Except boom! The girl actually turned out to have liked it, forms a connection with him and wants to continue the relationship. Huh? So the point is that actually it's all good now, and you can just do whatever you want because you can't ever actually get into these girls' heads anyway? There is a thin line between depicting a perspective and supporting it, and I don't think Eugenides walked it well. Over the book, few of the boys' perceptions came under any kind of resistance. In a world full of the sexualisation and objectification of girls, where does that leave us?
I had a lot of hopes for this book. I was intrigued by the ambition of using solely outside male perspectives. I was hooked by the concept, in what it could reveal about sexual relationships and mental health. I was mesmerised by the skill of Eugenides's prose. But ultimately, it came down to this: either this book is full-on promoting rape culture and the like, or its 4D chess game is so complex that it is obscuring its own point and promoting rape culture anyway. And I just can't vibe with that, not even for literature's sake.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual harassment, Self harm, Suicide, and Suicide attempt
Moderate: Child abuse, Racism, Rape, Sexism, and Ableism