foggy_rosamund's review against another edition
2.0
There are some aspects of the writing that make this book seem very naive: first, there is the use of rhyming couplets at the beginning of sections to summarise events that have occurred or will occur. Second, the author doesn't divide the into chapters, instead she begins sections of two or three pages with a question or statement, such as "What We Said to Fiamma" or "Miss G's story", which tell us what will happen in the section. Both of these seem clumsy, the first seems like something a beginning writer would think was clever, and should be gently talked out of by a friend or writer's group, and the second makes the novel seem like it's trying to model itself on a textbook or case-study, but this falls completely flat.
Ignoring these unfortunate devices, some of the prose is really successful. Descriptions of the girls' intimate friendships, the heat and intensity of their lives in a wild countryside, and the image of swimming in the cool water under the African sun, are all beautiful. I read this having seen the film, and I disagree with some other reviews that suggest this book is worse than the film: some aspects are not as strong, but others are stronger. I think the book gives us a better portrait of the individual girls, and of Fiamma, the unlucky girl whose demise shadows the book. I also think Fiamma's ending is more interesting and more complexly explored.
However, the character of Mrs G doesn't get as much space in the book as she is allowed in the film, and her actions seem more flat, and it's harder to understand why the girls find her so compelling and why they are so willing to excuse her actions. I found that the book felt unbalanced: some moments the writing was clear and compelling and I was interested in the characters, and other times it felt like a rough sketch. This feels like a book that could have used a lot of editing, but at the same time, I found a lot of things to enjoy.
Ignoring these unfortunate devices, some of the prose is really successful. Descriptions of the girls' intimate friendships, the heat and intensity of their lives in a wild countryside, and the image of swimming in the cool water under the African sun, are all beautiful. I read this having seen the film, and I disagree with some other reviews that suggest this book is worse than the film: some aspects are not as strong, but others are stronger. I think the book gives us a better portrait of the individual girls, and of Fiamma, the unlucky girl whose demise shadows the book. I also think Fiamma's ending is more interesting and more complexly explored.
However, the character of Mrs G doesn't get as much space in the book as she is allowed in the film, and her actions seem more flat, and it's harder to understand why the girls find her so compelling and why they are so willing to excuse her actions. I found that the book felt unbalanced: some moments the writing was clear and compelling and I was interested in the characters, and other times it felt like a rough sketch. This feels like a book that could have used a lot of editing, but at the same time, I found a lot of things to enjoy.
beautyistruth's review against another edition
2.0
Lightly written but strange as heck (which may be how it's most interesting for me) and I really, really wanted to have some background or psychological depth given for the teacher Miss G. in it. It feels like a children's book or fairy-tale but with homoerotic adult themes. Tries unsuccessfully to be like Golding's Lord of the Flies but is too shallow or lacks the necessary dark force and build up to pull that off.
bella_donna's review
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Sexual assault, Sexual violence, Toxic relationship, Death, Pedophilia, Rape, Emotional abuse, Adult/minor relationship, Bullying, and Child death
Moderate: Alcohol, Domestic abuse, Child abuse, Deportation, and Fatphobia
juliwi's review against another edition
4.0
There seems to be an unspoken rule amongst readers that you should always try to read a book before you see the film, to the point where you miss out on seeing a film in the cinema because you haven't finished the book yet. But what happens when you see a great film and then realise it was based on a book? Quite often what happens is magic! Something you enjoyed has more to give because a book always has more. That's what happened with me and Cracks.
On her website Sheila Kohler writes that after her sister's violent death in Apartheid South-Africa, she wanted to explore 'the reasons for violence within intimate relationships, in particular, the abuse of power and privilege' through writing. In Cracks she does exactly that, showing the reader how power dynamics establish themselves, how they change, get manipulated, and never truly die. Teenage girls provide endlessly interesting material to authors because we are so involved with each other and ourselves. There is a fascination which we as a society have with the strange mix between power and vulnerability, sexuality and innocence, and desire to be loved and anger at everything which signifies teenage girls in fiction. To what extent it is representative of actual teenage girls is different question but also a wrong one because it feels true. The cloying closeness of teenagers finds its best expression in boarding school narratives, where teenagers are removed from society and only have themselves.
If you liked the film I can't necessarily say you will like the novel, but Kohler's Cracks is an absolutely stunning novel! It is enticing and fascinating, both abhorrent and beautiful. I'd recommend it to fans of Psychological Thrillers and Mystery.
For full review: http://universeinwords.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/review-cracks-by-sheila-kohler.html
On her website Sheila Kohler writes that after her sister's violent death in Apartheid South-Africa, she wanted to explore 'the reasons for violence within intimate relationships, in particular, the abuse of power and privilege' through writing. In Cracks she does exactly that, showing the reader how power dynamics establish themselves, how they change, get manipulated, and never truly die. Teenage girls provide endlessly interesting material to authors because we are so involved with each other and ourselves. There is a fascination which we as a society have with the strange mix between power and vulnerability, sexuality and innocence, and desire to be loved and anger at everything which signifies teenage girls in fiction. To what extent it is representative of actual teenage girls is different question but also a wrong one because it feels true. The cloying closeness of teenagers finds its best expression in boarding school narratives, where teenagers are removed from society and only have themselves.
If you liked the film I can't necessarily say you will like the novel, but Kohler's Cracks is an absolutely stunning novel! It is enticing and fascinating, both abhorrent and beautiful. I'd recommend it to fans of Psychological Thrillers and Mystery.
For full review: http://universeinwords.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/review-cracks-by-sheila-kohler.html
tiffyboomboom's review against another edition
4.0
I think this book had some interesting elements I hadn't really seen before in a book. Also the details were really good.
The only down point was some of how the structure of the book was made up but it wasn't too distracting overall.
The only down point was some of how the structure of the book was made up but it wasn't too distracting overall.
_kairhone_'s review
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship and Rape
liralen's review against another edition
2.0
Note: Spoilers are tagged, but they are significant.
There's something of an [b:And Then There Were None|16299|And Then There Were None|Agatha Christie|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1391120695s/16299.jpg|3038872] flair to Cracks: A group of women are called together in middle age; it is, to an extent, a reckoning with their past. (If the comparison seems odd, it's because I'm thinking less of And Then There Were None and more of [b:The Body in the Ivy|129676|The Body in the Ivy (Faith Fairchild, #16)|Katherine Hall Page|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1387668571s/129676.jpg|124896], which is an homage to Christie and rather closer in plot to Cracks.)
The bulk of the story, though, is in the past. These girls were in school in South Africa in the 60s or thereabouts (though certain major aspects of SA at the time—e.g., apartheid—are all but invisible). They were the 'special' ones, the ones chosen to be on the swim team. One of them disappeared.
The story is told in first-person plural—'we'—with no particular character breaking through to leave an impression. Indeed, by the end of the book I could identify only one or two attributes and/or personality traits of each girl: There's the Catholic one whose father is abusive; the twins who are orphans; etc. And there's Sheila. Sheila Kohler. Whose defining characteristic is that she's an aspiring writer (and, in adulthood, published writer):
Sheila frowns. Perhaps she is thinking of her work. She wanted to be a writer like Alan Paton, and write a sentence like his about all the roads leading to Johannesburg, but she has only written thrillers, all of them about murdered girls. (98)
Sheila, who once signed her letters "From an undiscovered genius," has perhaps just had an idea for another book she always wanted to write, for she says, to no one in particular, "I have my work. I do have my work, you know." (102)
Sheila was putting it all down in her head. (161)
My understanding is that Kohler put a version of herself in here to make the book seem more realistic, but, oh gosh. That is: At least she didn't write herself in as a particularly 'good' character; the fictional Sheila Kohler is as culpable as the rest of them. But authors writing characters named after themselves into their books is a conceit that I've cringed at ever since I read [b:A Gift of Magic|244585|A Gift of Magic|Lois Duncan|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1173077780s/244585.jpg|46740], and I cringed here. (Exception: Authorial self-insertion worked in [b:The Abortion|160588|The Abortion|Richard Brautigan|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1215361162s/160588.jpg|691235], in large part because Brautigan made his point and then got out.) What does a reader do with an author-named character who, alongside her peers,?
There's a lot going on here. Being on the swim team is supposed to be a privilege, something special in this school, although it's hard to understand how that plays out because we never see any characters who aren't on the swim team and Miss G only cares about Fiamma (the girl who disappears) anyway. 'Cares about' is misleading—Miss G, a grown woman, is. The rest of the girls are petty, ignorant creatures who hate Fiamma in no small part because she's the one receiving all Miss G's attention.
Fiamma disappears, and it's treated as a mystery, but it's a mystery only to the reader. The girls, they all know. It seems the teachers know as well. Yet even as the tension of the school story comes to a head, nothing happens in the characters-in-middle-age sections. (Well. I suppose they're being quasi-blackmailed. But nothing comes of it.)
Weirdly, there are a lot more comparisons to my own boarding-school experience than is the case in most of the boarding-school books I've read. (Leaving aside the part, mind.) If that were the only weird thing about the book, I might be on board with it.
There's something of an [b:And Then There Were None|16299|And Then There Were None|Agatha Christie|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1391120695s/16299.jpg|3038872] flair to Cracks: A group of women are called together in middle age; it is, to an extent, a reckoning with their past. (If the comparison seems odd, it's because I'm thinking less of And Then There Were None and more of [b:The Body in the Ivy|129676|The Body in the Ivy (Faith Fairchild, #16)|Katherine Hall Page|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1387668571s/129676.jpg|124896], which is an homage to Christie and rather closer in plot to Cracks.)
The bulk of the story, though, is in the past. These girls were in school in South Africa in the 60s or thereabouts (though certain major aspects of SA at the time—e.g., apartheid—are all but invisible). They were the 'special' ones, the ones chosen to be on the swim team. One of them disappeared.
The story is told in first-person plural—'we'—with no particular character breaking through to leave an impression. Indeed, by the end of the book I could identify only one or two attributes and/or personality traits of each girl: There's the Catholic one whose father is abusive; the twins who are orphans; etc. And there's Sheila. Sheila Kohler. Whose defining characteristic is that she's an aspiring writer (and, in adulthood, published writer):
Sheila frowns. Perhaps she is thinking of her work. She wanted to be a writer like Alan Paton, and write a sentence like his about all the roads leading to Johannesburg, but she has only written thrillers, all of them about murdered girls. (98)
Sheila, who once signed her letters "From an undiscovered genius," has perhaps just had an idea for another book she always wanted to write, for she says, to no one in particular, "I have my work. I do have my work, you know." (102)
Sheila was putting it all down in her head. (161)
My understanding is that Kohler put a version of herself in here to make the book seem more realistic, but, oh gosh. That is: At least she didn't write herself in as a particularly 'good' character; the fictional Sheila Kohler is as culpable as the rest of them. But authors writing characters named after themselves into their books is a conceit that I've cringed at ever since I read [b:A Gift of Magic|244585|A Gift of Magic|Lois Duncan|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1173077780s/244585.jpg|46740], and I cringed here. (Exception: Authorial self-insertion worked in [b:The Abortion|160588|The Abortion|Richard Brautigan|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1215361162s/160588.jpg|691235], in large part because Brautigan made his point and then got out.) What does a reader do with an author-named character who, alongside her peers,
Spoiler
rapes and murders a classmateThere's a lot going on here. Being on the swim team is supposed to be a privilege, something special in this school, although it's hard to understand how that plays out because we never see any characters who aren't on the swim team and Miss G only cares about Fiamma (the girl who disappears) anyway. 'Cares about' is misleading—Miss G, a grown woman, is
Spoiler
sexually obsessed with Fiamma and goes further and further in her harassment and abuse as the book goes onFiamma disappears, and it's treated as a mystery, but it's a mystery only to the reader. The girls, they all know. It seems the teachers know as well. Yet even as the tension of the school story comes to a head, nothing happens in the characters-in-middle-age sections. (Well. I suppose they're being quasi-blackmailed. But nothing comes of it.)
Weirdly, there are a lot more comparisons to my own boarding-school experience than is the case in most of the boarding-school books I've read. (Leaving aside the
Spoiler
rape and murdereditrix's review against another edition
This is a good read-alike if you enjoyed “Picnic at Hanging Rock” (similar plot) and “The Virgin Suicides” (similar tone). It’s not quite as literary as it thinks it is (I can’t tell if the bad poetry was bad on purpose), and the ending was a little sensationalist, but if you like derivative stories (this feels very much like it was written to fit in with a tradition—the all-girls school with a strong undercurrent of sexual tension—rather than to do something new), this is a quick, tight read.