I was hesitant to read Lilac Girls, because I've read books about Nazi concentration camps before and they are horrifying by definition, but several fI was hesitant to read Lilac Girls, because I've read books about Nazi concentration camps before and they are horrifying by definition, but several friends gave it great reviews. Once again, I'm glad I ignored my initial reaction. (This does not mean I'll be reading Gone Girl, Twilight, or Fifty Shades of Grey. Ever.)
The novel begins by alternating between the perspective of three women: Caroline Ferriday, Herta Oberheuser, and Kasia Kuzmerick, a fictional composite of the Ravensbrück Rabbits. I was so absorbed by their individual stories that when a chapter ended, I would sometimes skip ahead three chapters to find out what happened next in that character's story. As their stories become interconnected (first Herta & Kasia, and then eventually Caroline & Kasia), the rotation of perspectives becomes less predictable.
While I did get absorbed in Caroline's fictional love affair with a French national, it ended up being one of the weakest parts of the novel. The actual historical material was the most fascinating.
Before Jean Taylor was the Widow, she was the Wife of accused child abductor Glen Taylor. Four years before Glen is fatally struck by a bus, little BeBefore Jean Taylor was the Widow, she was the Wife of accused child abductor Glen Taylor. Four years before Glen is fatally struck by a bus, little Bella Elliot disappeared from her front yard. Through flashbacks, we see how the police chased any possible lead, finally focusing on Glen, and then how they botched the case against him and had to let him walk free. Through all this (and as many unsavory facts about Glen were revealed), Jean stood by her man. But now that he's gone, journalist Kate Waters is hoping Jean will finally reveal secrets.
I like that Ms. Barton tried to tell this story in a different way, but it didn't entirely work for me. Alternating between the "now" (2010) timeline of Kate trying to get an exclusive interview with Jean and the "then" (2006 up to shortly before Glen's death) timeline of the investigation, the story is told mostly from the POVs of "The Widow" (Jean), "The Reporter" (Kate), and "The Detective" (Bob Sparkes, whose name I kept reading as Sparkles, so let's just call him that, even though it also makes me picture him with a rainbow clown wig), with a few scattered chapters from "The Mother" (Dawn Elliot) and "The Husband" (Glen).
For one thing, Jean is such a spineless character, like completely apathetic. She's a hairdresser by trade, because "I wasn't really fit for anything else. Didn't work at school. Mum told people I was dyslexic, but the truth is, I couldn't be bothered." Glen whisks her off her feet when she's just 17, and she can't be bothered to leave him, even as he's revealed to be a terrible person. (And it's not like they were happy before the Bella abduction.) Jean's hedgy chapters were the least interesting of the book.
Kate's chapters were only slightly more interesting, but they still just felt like filler. Bob Sparkles chapters were more interesting, but there was no real tension, because we already know he didn't get his guy. Is there a possibility that he was pursuing the wrong guy? Maybe. But is there any actual danger (which let's be honest, is the main thrill of police procedurals)? No, because we know from the "now" story line that Bob is alive & well, while Glen is dead.
And also because: [image]
The main question is whether Bella is actually still alive somewhere. And that will be revealed, but I think the journey could have been a lot more interesting.
I see that Kate is a character in Ms. Barton's new novel, The Child, which makes sense because the author is a former journalist. If she was able to work more actual suspense into this new story, it will be a lot more satisfying....more
I was hesitant to read this book, but I'm glad I did. Seeing the Syrian conflict and resulting refugee crisis from the perspective of one family and oI was hesitant to read this book, but I'm glad I did. Seeing the Syrian conflict and resulting refugee crisis from the perspective of one family and one young woman in particular, made the situation clear and more poignant. It's a story that I think everyone needs to hear.
A few things are different (I'm assuming she uncovered different information as she interviewed furthur people for her book research) and most of Doaa's personal story is not contained in the TED talk.
The writing is not amazing, but then Ms. Fleming is a humanitarian, not a professional writer. The passage of time was often unclear to me, especially during Doaa's teenage years living in Egypt. And sometimes the phrasing was confusing and/or overdramatic. But with a book like this, the writing isn't really the point....more
I'd heard of Glennon Doyle Melton -- mostly through Facebook reposts -- and some of her pieces in this book sounded really familiar, but I've not readI'd heard of Glennon Doyle Melton -- mostly through Facebook reposts -- and some of her pieces in this book sounded really familiar, but I've not read her blog and I'm definitely not a Monkee. But it was recommended (nominated for my new book club) by a woman I really like and respect, so I read it and overall, I liked it, but it wasn't as life-changing for me as it apparently is for some readers.
The Good: Parts of this are really funny, in a self-deprecating sort of way that I enjoy. (Especially hilarious is a story about taking her children to the dentist and...through a long story...all the other moms thinking she's drunk.) I like her message of being real, of self-acceptance, of universal acceptance, of open-mindedness, and love. I'm not religious, but my favorite religious people of this ilk.
The Bad: I think most of this material comes from her blog and it feels that way. She's grouped essays topically, rather than chronologically, so it feels very choppy. Certain topics, like adoption, her past, etc., come up here and there, but it's often confusing. In general, this trend of turning blogs into books doesn't work for me. Like Anne Lamott, I like her general philosophy, but she's too religious for me.
The Ugly: She comes off as pretty narcissistic and has a bit of a savior complex. I get that she's done some great things to help orphans and moms in crisis, but she's not someone I'd want to meet in real life. She would drive me batshit crazy. (I feel mean saying that, but it's my truth.)
The Memory Box is all over the place. After a weird little intro, we jump into the life of Caroline, uptight suburban mom who maWhat did I just read?
The Memory Box is all over the place. After a weird little intro, we jump into the life of Caroline, uptight suburban mom who makes herself daily to-do lists and obsesses about every calorie. In the wake of a bitchy mom clique who gossip about Google results, Caroline Googles herself and finds results that send her into a horrifying tailspin of sweating, binging, and ridiculous injuries. While her husband, daughters (who are supposed to be 3rd graders, but often act more like middle schoolers), and supposed friends vaguely notice that she's coming undone, no one actually does anything about her increasingly bizarre behavior. I never got a grip on who Caroline was, apparently because she doesn't have a grip on who she really is. The more she Googles, the more she realizes that she's been suppressing memories.
Except...(view spoiler)[in the end, it's revealed that the main story is just Caroline's fictionalized novel -- based on the crimes and deception that she's fully remembered the entire time. (hide spoiler)] Which to me is akin to the whole "then I woke up and it was all a dream" plot, a convenient way to explain away all the plot holes that make absolutely no sense....more
First, a little cover love for all these variations:
[image]
[image]
[image]
In the wake of The Snow Child, Ms. Ivey's second novel was an automatic additFirst, a little cover love for all these variations:
[image]
[image]
[image]
In the wake of The Snow Child, Ms. Ivey's second novel was an automatic addition to my "must read" list, and while this was very different from her debut, I was not disappointed.
Told in the form of diaries and letters, news articles, and other documents, the primary story is that of Colonel Allen Forrester as he leads an 1885 expedition to explore the Wolverine River in the Alaska Territory. He keeps a journal and writes to his newly pregnant wife Sophie, left behind at the Vancouver Barracks, who writes her own journal and letters. With the rather formal writing style employed, the narrative built speed very slowly. I warmed to the characters, though, and the plot developed in interesting and often unexpected ways. (The mysterious, magical elements from Snow Child show up here, too, but with more of a focus on Native American mythology.)
“I can find no means to account for all that we have witnessed, except to say that I am no longer certain of the boundaries between man & beast, of the living & the dead. All that I have taken for granted, what I have known as real & true, has been called into question.”
Framing this tale of love and adventure from the past, is a modern correspondance between Allen's aging great-nephew and the young man (with some Native ancestory) who runs the small museum along the Wolverine. They develop an unusual, heartwarming friendship as they write back and forth, negotiating the donation of the surviving documents and making connections between all the original sources....more
Loading...
