I completely can relate to the “not needing or wanting to read the content that would make me laugh” part. Love it in tv but I’m also always drawn away from those things in my reading preferences.
I also enjoyed the memory police! that book is actually why I got into the bookstore podcast because I wanted to listen to a podcast episode about it lol. I read nightbitch last month too and I loved it as well! the Copenhagen trilogy covers is super beautiful, sucks that it was boring. the bluest eye was my first and favorite Morrison so far. I finished Samantha schweblin's little eyes recently too, and I love short story collections so I need to pick mouthful of birds soon. I loved beautiful world where are you a lotttt. sucks that you didnt enjoy the only good Indians!! I enjoyed it but I get what you mean when it says that it has super masculine energy
Nitchbitch just moved up on my TBR! Sounds fantastic. I also read The only good Indians recently and didn’t vibe with the writing at all. Some scenes were super good but for the most part I was confused or uninterested. It really confused me to see that all the Goodreads ratings seemed so high… I tried an SGJ novella after and liked it a little better, so maybe if you want to give him another shot try one of those. (Although honestly, it was just fun escapism and nothing stimulating for the mind haha)
i agree with you, i also don't need to read books that make me laugh. but i do love when a dark or serious book has unexpected moments of levity or wit. love how you described the memory police by saying it's not a dystopian book like the giver. i never liked that book!
With re: to The Only Good Indians, I totally agree. I did finish the book, but I think the trouble I had with the writing style is that SGJ was straddling too many lines in terms of the narrative style of horror vs. mystery vs. oral tradition, in a way that didn't quite work. So there was this weird energy in that the people whose heads we were living in KNEW what was going on, the readers KNEW that they knew, but no one was saying anything, and it was all rather opaque even though all the information was there, and there was this assumption that it was all rooted in this cultural conflict that was at the heart of the story that Everyone Should Have Been Told but we, the readers, mostly did not know yet. And I had the same thoughts about the very strong machismo of the book. In my review, I said something along the lines of: "Also had some thoughts about the violence against women in this particular novel, especially surrounding the wives/partners of the four men. I wonder if that is intentional on SGJ's part or if that was something that happened subconsciously. I realize that the cop and his son also got injured, but they were more collateral damage rather than intended targets for violence to hurt these men. I also really wonder what that says about women suffering for the mistakes of the men in their lives too. Would you count this as fridging?" Women were just very much part of the collateral damage in a way I did not like/could not engage with. Wary of his other books, even though I know women are the main characters of those, so will have to see if I pick them up.
First, thank you for such a thought-provoking comment. I think the villainization and violence against women, at the hands of frenzied, guilt-ridden, paranoid men, was too blatant to be a subconscious choice by SGJ, but who really knows. If I am being honest, I had to look up the term "fridging" (so thank you for teaching me something new). It did feel like violence against women was used to "develop" males characters - which doesn't sit right. Whether or not this violence "made sense" for the plot (by tying to original crime), it made it all but impossible for me to engage with this book. That, in conjunction with the writing style, made this book NOT for me. Thank you!
Saaaame on The Only Good Indians! A rare DNF for me for the exact same reason - so damn confusing lol. The Copenhagen Trilogy is still on my TBR - I attempted it but wasn’t in the mood at the time. I have seen both RAVE reviews and some more average so I’m curious to see where I’ll fall
That writing was unnecessary messy!! Hated that. Also, I was surprised that I didn’t like The Copenhagen Trilogy but the writing so detached - I couldn’t connect.
I completely can relate to the “not needing or wanting to read the content that would make me laugh” part. Love it in tv but I’m also always drawn away from those things in my reading preferences.
You get me
I'm with you on David Sedaris and books like his.
I also enjoyed the memory police! that book is actually why I got into the bookstore podcast because I wanted to listen to a podcast episode about it lol. I read nightbitch last month too and I loved it as well! the Copenhagen trilogy covers is super beautiful, sucks that it was boring. the bluest eye was my first and favorite Morrison so far. I finished Samantha schweblin's little eyes recently too, and I love short story collections so I need to pick mouthful of birds soon. I loved beautiful world where are you a lotttt. sucks that you didnt enjoy the only good Indians!! I enjoyed it but I get what you mean when it says that it has super masculine energy
It appears we are reading soul mates. The memory police was stunning. I love that it lead you to podcasting.
Nitchbitch just moved up on my TBR! Sounds fantastic. I also read The only good Indians recently and didn’t vibe with the writing at all. Some scenes were super good but for the most part I was confused or uninterested. It really confused me to see that all the Goodreads ratings seemed so high… I tried an SGJ novella after and liked it a little better, so maybe if you want to give him another shot try one of those. (Although honestly, it was just fun escapism and nothing stimulating for the mind haha)
Yes - Goodreads can be misleading. I don't think SGJ is for me. Nightbitch on the other hand - Loved it.
i agree with you, i also don't need to read books that make me laugh. but i do love when a dark or serious book has unexpected moments of levity or wit. love how you described the memory police by saying it's not a dystopian book like the giver. i never liked that book!
I agree! thank you :)
With re: to The Only Good Indians, I totally agree. I did finish the book, but I think the trouble I had with the writing style is that SGJ was straddling too many lines in terms of the narrative style of horror vs. mystery vs. oral tradition, in a way that didn't quite work. So there was this weird energy in that the people whose heads we were living in KNEW what was going on, the readers KNEW that they knew, but no one was saying anything, and it was all rather opaque even though all the information was there, and there was this assumption that it was all rooted in this cultural conflict that was at the heart of the story that Everyone Should Have Been Told but we, the readers, mostly did not know yet.
And I had the same thoughts about the very strong machismo of the book. In my review, I said something along the lines of: "Also had some thoughts about the violence against women in this particular novel, especially surrounding the wives/partners of the four men. I wonder if that is intentional on SGJ's part or if that was something that happened subconsciously. I realize that the cop and his son also got injured, but they were more collateral damage rather than intended targets for violence to hurt these men. I also really wonder what that says about women suffering for the mistakes of the men in their lives too. Would you count this as fridging?"
Women were just very much part of the collateral damage in a way I did not like/could not engage with. Wary of his other books, even though I know women are the main characters of those, so will have to see if I pick them up.
First, thank you for such a thought-provoking comment.
I think the villainization and violence against women, at the hands of frenzied, guilt-ridden, paranoid men, was too blatant to be a subconscious choice by SGJ, but who really knows.
If I am being honest, I had to look up the term "fridging" (so thank you for teaching me something new). It did feel like violence against women was used to "develop" males characters - which doesn't sit right. Whether or not this violence "made sense" for the plot (by tying to original crime), it made it all but impossible for me to engage with this book.
That, in conjunction with the writing style, made this book NOT for me.
Thank you!
Saaaame on The Only Good Indians! A rare DNF for me for the exact same reason - so damn confusing lol. The Copenhagen Trilogy is still on my TBR - I attempted it but wasn’t in the mood at the time. I have seen both RAVE reviews and some more average so I’m curious to see where I’ll fall
That writing was unnecessary messy!! Hated that. Also, I was surprised that I didn’t like The Copenhagen Trilogy but the writing so detached - I couldn’t connect.