Alexander Meves

I forbid you from making my five stars a conveyor belt for your TBR list. Buy a random book loser.

Not all 3 stars are created equal

This review assumes you have read the book

This book, for me, is an example of why numerical values are not always appropriate for ranking a book. I believe if the last 30 pages were removed, I would rank this book at 4 stars. There is a finality to the words "Molly, I love you forever" that invalidates all that comes after. The writing is mediocre. It could've been better edited, especially in the parts after Molly's suicide. Quotes are misplaced and poorly timed. It's clear Butler is more used to novels driven by plot, as his attempts to approach any poetic language is often awkward. It is really odd that his best worded observations are about Molly and how she feels rather than his own. I've seen some describe this as Butler's autobiography, but it's not really about his life. The book is more about her in many ways rather than himself, but really it is about her as she is seen through his eyes . It is frankly shocking he fails to reflect on this book (much less his life) as he discovers things about her that leave him crumbled. Perhaps his view of his own is not as clear as he thought.If the book was fiction, I would have given this book 5 stars. It perfectly balances the realism of a flawed and unreliable narrator: a dumber, albeit non-parodied Humbert Humbert (no child attraction included in this comparison of course). I would've considered this book a masterpiece in its ability to withhold and make the reader decide the impact of the narrator's actions left unsaid. But the book is real. It is about real people. Molly Brodak did kill herself. She really did that. And her husband is truly the author. So the narrator's flaws are of a real person's flaws. The feeling we get that he is not telling the whole story, is because it is not being told. So I am left questioning if the author's flaws and his inability to reflect on them (and the impact they had on Molly) is a "minus-star" quality. His mistakes, when mentioned, are objective and factual. They happened. But the facts are never paired with an emphatic thought of how they might have affected the namesake of the book who has killed herself. When you cheat on someone that has the self-esteem of dirt, what do you think that does to them? Meanwhile, Molly's mistakes are psychoanalyzed. Her manipulative behavior is a result of her abandoning father. Her deep hatred of herself a result of her uncaring mother. Observations like this are plentiful, but the truth of the matter is Molly is not here to defend herself. A book by her husband should not make her feel like she needs to be defended. I don't want to diminish Butler's feelings about Molly's discovered behavior. Yes, she cheated on him also systematically and consistently. She manipulated his feelings and also emotionally abused him. That's not too far to say. But refusing to acknowledge the relationship as a potentially hazardous one where anger and depression and trauma and substance abuses feed off of each other is irresponsible. And the worst memoir, is a dishonest one.

Wow wow wow

Review assumes you have read the book.

Howrey has a writing style constantly approaching subtly, but the words almost never engage with it. Faraway phrases have an imitation of wisdom, but their meaning is plain. The repetition of phrases (“What's bred in the bone”, “All this wastage”) with clear meaning in the context of the novel counters the wispy style and weighs it down needlessly. This is definitely a trend in modern literary fiction. It is an attempt at integrating poetic qualities in clearer narrative form. But there is a reason poetry is difficult and the unpracticed often come off as trite.

Nevertheless, the plot is compelling. Carlisle switching between victim and evildoer within the main conflict is frustrating as a reader, but ultimately realistic. Family drama is complicated. Everyone can be in the wrong at different amounts, and familial relations can still be plagued by sins more commonly recognized in other connections - pride, greed, lust for example. Although, for someone who is profoundly affected by her ‘banishment' it seems unlikely Carlisle wouldn't put in the effort to contact her father. To give his wanted ‘explanation' before his death. I suppose there are two of the novel's themes in this regard. The first being the influence of others on ourselves. Carlisle is a mix of her father and James. The second is failure. Sometimes we choose to fail, to not resolve a twenty -year fight. And we often refuse to accept our choice of failure, denying reality.

A decent novel. All the ends are tied just not in the way you might want them to be. Unsatisfactory for us and Carlisle, but not necessarily unhappy.

This review assumes you have read the book.

Today is Jan 8 and this is the third five star review of my year. I feel like I don't want to do it purely because I enjoy feeling like a selective rater; my praise must be earned.

But I know I have to gladly give it here. Because I will be haunted by this book for the rest of my life. It is the most frightening book I have ever read. I feel mortified to share a species with the man. To those who say the author was “trying to show both sides, why she stayed, but did a bad job” - you're an idiot. The entire point is he's dismissive from the get go. It's supposed to be imbalanced because she stays in the marriage like I imagine many other women do: with increased patience, because men will be men, because she cannot make money, because she has a kid, because he can be kind, because it could be worse, because it would be hard.

He is egotistical and lazy and uncaring. But he is not evil. To make him evil would be a cop out, it would other him. His flaws are banal in the way that they are for all men. He is (half literally) a stand-in for any other man – a John Doe.

And that is the fear. My fear is that I might commit a single one of these infractions towards my partner, or anyone. In fact, I found myself reading with absolute horror an exact scenario I have lived out. I thought “When I did this was I also being like him? Could I be like this person in other ways?” Of course it's not predetermined, but all the agency and control in the world will never prevent me from the paranoia of seeing this character as a reflection of me.