Scan barcode
lazygal's review against another edition
3.0
Anyone who read the hype and is looking for a late-life sex manual will be disappointed as this book dwells more on the emotional side of sex than on the physical (although there's some of that, too). Juska explores her relationships with men (including the men she teaches at San Quentin) rather bravely, perhaps born out of her years in therapy, while glossing over the rest of her life. It's an interesting book for those inching ever older, particularly if you're female and single: beware - this may become you.
lpm100's review against another edition
3.0
A Portrait of the Headcase as an Old Woman
Reviewed in the United States on May 12, 2020
I came across this book as a result of a New York times article that I read. If I didn't know that the New York times was the Alpha and Omega of stupid ideas, then I would after reading this book that was reviewed by them.
Something is wrong with this woman.
If reading an autobiography is to live a possible life, then this is one life that you want to be certain *not* to live.
The distinct impression that I get of this woman all throughout her story is of someone who:
1. Doesn't know who she is. (Is she the mother to her brothers? Or the wife to her father? A feminist? An alcoholic?)
2. Will not allow herself to be happy. (She is interested in men, and then when she lands herself a husband who is "built like Adonis" she just ignores him until the marriage crumbles. She ends up having a son and taking him away from the father, but then acts like she doesn't half want to raise him.)
And if you can help it, make sure you don't raise any offspringin a way that is similar to the way that this woman was raised / the way that she raised her only offspring.
I can see half a dozen types of people reading this book.
1. Someone with morbid curiosity, such as the present reviewer.
What to learn:
--Sexual abuse can damage people (like Juska) in such a way that they don't function properly even six decades after the fact.
--If you see someone who is unable to function for an entire life time, it may be as a result of being sexually abused. (I had several cousins that were crackheads all the way until the end of their lives-- their late 60s.)
2. A lady who might be in her sixties and is not sure whether or not "that" part of life is over. And wants to know if there is another person who ran that experiment.
What to learn: No, it's not necessarily over. And, there is a small subset of men out there who like older women.
3. A young girl that is silly and hesitant in ONLY the way that young girls can be.
What to learn:
--The reality is that with increasing age, there is progressively less to choose from-- and this is true much more so for women than it is men. So, for maximum choice (sexual, martial, etc) younger is better.
-- For intimacy, the best bet is to choose the time when the blood is running hottest--and that way, you don't live a life of regret at foregone opportunities.
And that's because it's all downhill all the rest of the way. (I will point out that this author was flying from California to New York to meet sexual partners. And normal places at which she might meet men--a reading club, etc--had women out-numbering men 3:1. And most of her exploits were wildly unsuccessful)
4. Maybe I could see a teacher reading this book.
What to learn:
--It can give you an idea of what classroom life was like several decades ago.
--It can give you an idea of exactly what you should not say if you don't want to go on a sex offender registry. (p.146) The teacher talked with her 9th graders about: condoms/penis/breasts. (At their behest!)
Thank God my kids go to private school.
5. Maybe a person who is a perpetual-advice-giver/counselor could read this book.
What to learn:
--We've already known that people who like to counsel other people are frequently ones with their own issues.
--And that really was quite clear when the author was teaching a class about dating and women's issues, without herself having an active sex life for a period of 37 (!) years.
********
In early stages of the book, Juska comes across as a slightly loopy woman who is trying to find herself. By the end, I get the impression that she's frankly insane.
1. Because she is intelligent and writes well, and high intelligence and insanity are frequently in cahoots.
2. Because she put a book like this out there, and NOT anonymously.
3. Because she spent many years in psychotherapy (even though I thought that everybody knew that psychotherapy was a hoax).
4. Because she spent 30 years in a celibacy dungeon before she got out of it, even though it would not have been too late to rebuild at the age of her divorce.
5. (p.172) "That's a nice kind of sex, when it just comes at you and you let it.....Not all the sex between me and my father was so pleasant." I don't think there was anything sexual that actually happened. And that the author was just speaking metaphorically. But, yeeeesh.
6. Because her son turned out normal-- once he was able to get out of her field of gravity.
*********
Ok. We get it. The author is (or was) left wing.
-Lots of snarky comments. (p.215): ".....I flew to Madison, in Wisconsin, where I would live if I didn't live in Berkeley. Let Berkeley, Madison is full of Democrats in a couple of Republicans who are also smart." (Traveling from one end of the country to another defined men that she doesn't really even know well for sex are not actions that I would describe as "smart.")
-She (proudly) mentions countless times that she is an abortion escort.
-(p.99): "San Quentin State Prison is a formidable monument to society's failure."
*********
At the end, I really wonder whether or not Graham existed. (How many "prodigiously affixed" 33 year olds are interested in 67 year olds? And why? And if he really existed and was as she said, when did the other shoe drop?)
*********
Of the book: 273 pages of prose out of 19 chapters works out to about 14 and a half pages per chapter. The whole book is probably two or three afternoons worth of reading time.
Prose is quite good--and even though all of it was good, I would have to say that the best phrase of the whole book was (p. 136): "Q: What do you teach?/ A: Sustained Ambiguity."
Verdict: Recommended at the second hand price, but not worth the reread.
I meet enough frankly insane people in my everyday life to not have to invest time to read more about them.
Reviewed in the United States on May 12, 2020
I came across this book as a result of a New York times article that I read. If I didn't know that the New York times was the Alpha and Omega of stupid ideas, then I would after reading this book that was reviewed by them.
Something is wrong with this woman.
If reading an autobiography is to live a possible life, then this is one life that you want to be certain *not* to live.
The distinct impression that I get of this woman all throughout her story is of someone who:
1. Doesn't know who she is. (Is she the mother to her brothers? Or the wife to her father? A feminist? An alcoholic?)
2. Will not allow herself to be happy. (She is interested in men, and then when she lands herself a husband who is "built like Adonis" she just ignores him until the marriage crumbles. She ends up having a son and taking him away from the father, but then acts like she doesn't half want to raise him.)
And if you can help it, make sure you don't raise any offspringin a way that is similar to the way that this woman was raised / the way that she raised her only offspring.
I can see half a dozen types of people reading this book.
1. Someone with morbid curiosity, such as the present reviewer.
What to learn:
--Sexual abuse can damage people (like Juska) in such a way that they don't function properly even six decades after the fact.
--If you see someone who is unable to function for an entire life time, it may be as a result of being sexually abused. (I had several cousins that were crackheads all the way until the end of their lives-- their late 60s.)
2. A lady who might be in her sixties and is not sure whether or not "that" part of life is over. And wants to know if there is another person who ran that experiment.
What to learn: No, it's not necessarily over. And, there is a small subset of men out there who like older women.
3. A young girl that is silly and hesitant in ONLY the way that young girls can be.
What to learn:
--The reality is that with increasing age, there is progressively less to choose from-- and this is true much more so for women than it is men. So, for maximum choice (sexual, martial, etc) younger is better.
-- For intimacy, the best bet is to choose the time when the blood is running hottest--and that way, you don't live a life of regret at foregone opportunities.
And that's because it's all downhill all the rest of the way. (I will point out that this author was flying from California to New York to meet sexual partners. And normal places at which she might meet men--a reading club, etc--had women out-numbering men 3:1. And most of her exploits were wildly unsuccessful)
4. Maybe I could see a teacher reading this book.
What to learn:
--It can give you an idea of what classroom life was like several decades ago.
--It can give you an idea of exactly what you should not say if you don't want to go on a sex offender registry. (p.146) The teacher talked with her 9th graders about: condoms/penis/breasts. (At their behest!)
Thank God my kids go to private school.
5. Maybe a person who is a perpetual-advice-giver/counselor could read this book.
What to learn:
--We've already known that people who like to counsel other people are frequently ones with their own issues.
--And that really was quite clear when the author was teaching a class about dating and women's issues, without herself having an active sex life for a period of 37 (!) years.
********
In early stages of the book, Juska comes across as a slightly loopy woman who is trying to find herself. By the end, I get the impression that she's frankly insane.
1. Because she is intelligent and writes well, and high intelligence and insanity are frequently in cahoots.
2. Because she put a book like this out there, and NOT anonymously.
3. Because she spent many years in psychotherapy (even though I thought that everybody knew that psychotherapy was a hoax).
4. Because she spent 30 years in a celibacy dungeon before she got out of it, even though it would not have been too late to rebuild at the age of her divorce.
5. (p.172) "That's a nice kind of sex, when it just comes at you and you let it.....Not all the sex between me and my father was so pleasant." I don't think there was anything sexual that actually happened. And that the author was just speaking metaphorically. But, yeeeesh.
6. Because her son turned out normal-- once he was able to get out of her field of gravity.
*********
Ok. We get it. The author is (or was) left wing.
-Lots of snarky comments. (p.215): ".....I flew to Madison, in Wisconsin, where I would live if I didn't live in Berkeley. Let Berkeley, Madison is full of Democrats in a couple of Republicans who are also smart." (Traveling from one end of the country to another defined men that she doesn't really even know well for sex are not actions that I would describe as "smart.")
-She (proudly) mentions countless times that she is an abortion escort.
-(p.99): "San Quentin State Prison is a formidable monument to society's failure."
*********
At the end, I really wonder whether or not Graham existed. (How many "prodigiously affixed" 33 year olds are interested in 67 year olds? And why? And if he really existed and was as she said, when did the other shoe drop?)
*********
Of the book: 273 pages of prose out of 19 chapters works out to about 14 and a half pages per chapter. The whole book is probably two or three afternoons worth of reading time.
Prose is quite good--and even though all of it was good, I would have to say that the best phrase of the whole book was (p. 136): "Q: What do you teach?/ A: Sustained Ambiguity."
Verdict: Recommended at the second hand price, but not worth the reread.
I meet enough frankly insane people in my everyday life to not have to invest time to read more about them.
jcm's review against another edition
2.0
DNF. I expect d so much more because the premise was captivating. Alas, it was the author herself that made this a trip in despair. She had rigidly high standards, was egotistical, and fairly shallow. Disappointing.
mkat303's review against another edition
2.0
It was ok. Good enough that I'm going to read her sequel. I liked the narrator, partly because I enjoy reading about other women who live in Berkeley. But the book kind of went all over the place, and I wound up skimming parts.
jpustka's review against another edition
3.0
As much as I wanted to like the book and did like the author, I found some parts of the book slow moving. I admire her passion for life and honest story telling.
jaeclectic's review against another edition
4.0
I decided to read this after seeing the play (of the same name, based on the book). A lot of the story was familiar from the play, but you can see where certain things were simplified, omitted, or amplified for the stage.
It's a good read and an easy one, for the most part fairly light although with some quite dark moments (for instance, a description of child sex abuse that is graphic, but not lingered over).
For myself, I find Jane Juska's story rather inspirational, and although I thought the play was fabulous, I'm glad I took the extra time to get the truest version of it.
It's a good read and an easy one, for the most part fairly light although with some quite dark moments (for instance, a description of child sex abuse that is graphic, but not lingered over).
For myself, I find Jane Juska's story rather inspirational, and although I thought the play was fabulous, I'm glad I took the extra time to get the truest version of it.