Scan barcode
rosekk's review
3.0
I started reading this a while ago, but stopped after 20 pages, deciding I wasn't in the mood for it. This time I persevered, and discovered I probably won't ever really be in the mood for it.
The book did have some good qualities. The writer has a talent for creating complex webs of relationships, and considering what complex blend of emotions feeds it. The premise of the book also appealed to me: the idea of writing an imagined life for a twin that never lived, and using it to imagine a whole alternate timeline works well. And I am usually fond of unreliable narrators.
Where this fell down for me was the feel of it. I never felt much sympathy for the narrator. The best description I can think of for her is 'acidic'. She reminded me of people I've met before and struggled to get on with.
I was also not convinced by the world building in this. Since it predicts a near-future, it has the common sci-fi issue of having to build a plausible world out of the current one, and explain how the world got from A to B. In this book, the description of the new world was relatively vague (and complicated further by the unreliable narrator), and there was only a rough outline of how this new world came about. It all made enough sense that I could accept it and follow the story, and it was clear that the point of it all was more to serve as a backdrop for character drama than a proper vision of the future, but it still felt insubstantial.
The book did have some good qualities. The writer has a talent for creating complex webs of relationships, and considering what complex blend of emotions feeds it. The premise of the book also appealed to me: the idea of writing an imagined life for a twin that never lived, and using it to imagine a whole alternate timeline works well. And I am usually fond of unreliable narrators.
Where this fell down for me was the feel of it. I never felt much sympathy for the narrator. The best description I can think of for her is 'acidic'. She reminded me of people I've met before and struggled to get on with.
I was also not convinced by the world building in this. Since it predicts a near-future, it has the common sci-fi issue of having to build a plausible world out of the current one, and explain how the world got from A to B. In this book, the description of the new world was relatively vague (and complicated further by the unreliable narrator), and there was only a rough outline of how this new world came about. It all made enough sense that I could accept it and follow the story, and it was clear that the point of it all was more to serve as a backdrop for character drama than a proper vision of the future, but it still felt insubstantial.
neculara's review against another edition
Decided to dnf this one at page 80. I'm trying to get better at dnf-ing when a book feels like a chore to read. This one reminded me of Atwood, just not as good. It's not a bad book, but I am kind of a mood reader, and this just wasn't something I wanted to read just now. In addition to that, reading reviews of it gives me the impression that it's almost plotless, with a lot of side character stories that goes nowhere. More drawing up the picture of a life than anything else, and it's not a life I was interested in reading about.
The story so far: an elderly lady is sitting on the stairs with her grandson, while the authorities are banging on her door. It's a dystopian light with feminism as a prominent theme. While giving us small glimpses into what has gone wrong with society (this world is different, but recognizable in that it shows us how things could have turned out), she reminisces about her life, her family, and all her complicated relationships. If I had finished this book, I predict that I would have given it 3 stars.
The story so far: an elderly lady is sitting on the stairs with her grandson, while the authorities are banging on her door. It's a dystopian light with feminism as a prominent theme. While giving us small glimpses into what has gone wrong with society (this world is different, but recognizable in that it shows us how things could have turned out), she reminisces about her life, her family, and all her complicated relationships. If I had finished this book, I predict that I would have given it 3 stars.
thatslanguage's review
I really, really tried with this book and I still couldn't finish it. Around a third (?) of the way through there's a bit that's like 'if you aren't enjoying this book, I encouraged you to stop'. I pressed on our of spite and the decision that it wasn't that bad. a while later I admitted defeat, I never wanted to pick it up to read it, I might as well stop. maybe I'll go back to it someday, because it's not like it's badly written. it's well written, the characters interesting. it just bored me so much.
I can't find an option for stars because I pressed dnf, but 2 stars max
I can't find an option for stars because I pressed dnf, but 2 stars max
lisa_mc's review against another edition
4.0
What if events of the past few years turned out a little different? What if someone who wasn't ended up being so? How would the world be different? Fay Weldon takes on these questions and blurs the lines of perception and reality, fiction and history in the clever, engaging "Chalcot Crescent."
Frances, the narrator, is an 80-something woman in the London of the near future, where the sociologist/psychologist-run National Unity Government (or "NUG") has taken over. Not as touchy-feely as it sounds, this government has its own rules for society. But the book's not really about that; it just forms the backdrop. Frances -- a fiction writer, presented in the intro as the sister Fay lost when her mother had a miscarriage -- moves back and forth between the past and the present, detailing her lovers and friends and family history as her grandchildren plot against the NUG and she's stuck in her house on Chalcot Crescent.
What is Frances imagining and what is real? Are her children everything they seem? And what's really in National Meat Loaf since it's "suitable for vegetarians" -- or is it? Less a cautionary tale than a glimpse at what we might have to get used to, "Chalcot Crescent" is at turns wryly funny and wistful, gently and honestly exposing the various weaknesses most of us would demonstrate in the face of changes we don't fully understand.
Frances, the narrator, is an 80-something woman in the London of the near future, where the sociologist/psychologist-run National Unity Government (or "NUG") has taken over. Not as touchy-feely as it sounds, this government has its own rules for society. But the book's not really about that; it just forms the backdrop. Frances -- a fiction writer, presented in the intro as the sister Fay lost when her mother had a miscarriage -- moves back and forth between the past and the present, detailing her lovers and friends and family history as her grandchildren plot against the NUG and she's stuck in her house on Chalcot Crescent.
What is Frances imagining and what is real? Are her children everything they seem? And what's really in National Meat Loaf since it's "suitable for vegetarians" -- or is it? Less a cautionary tale than a glimpse at what we might have to get used to, "Chalcot Crescent" is at turns wryly funny and wistful, gently and honestly exposing the various weaknesses most of us would demonstrate in the face of changes we don't fully understand.
lola425's review
3.0
I enjoyed Weldon's style and was pleasantly surprised by the dystopian elements of the plot. The political climate seemed very probable.
More...