kelsalohop's review against another edition
emotional
funny
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
wenwe's review against another edition
5.0
Wow! The way this author puts words together and flows from thought to thought is phenomenal. I found myself laughing at the meals and descriptions, tasting the words of conversations, and tangentially getting to the point as we do in conversations. I want to be friends with Linda and Kelly.
steveatwaywords's review against another edition
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
I want very much to like this book more than I did, because there is so much that Truong does which is powerful, original, necessary. Others have written that this is a book of immersion, that a reader has to settle into the world and move along with the characters, enjoying them and discovering the tensions (and scandals) along the way. True; and combined with an unreliable narrator (Truong says it's an unreliable reader, but see below) who works candidly and sincerely with a form of synesthesia, who grows up with a family largely distanced and ever antagonistic towards her in the small-town American South, we want to understand her better, to discover along with her the "story."
All of this, during exposition and development in the first half of the novel, is almost compelling. Some will then say that the plot has twists and surprises; the blurb on the book suggests a secret past. But there is a difference between a character or narrator who discovers something to which she was blind and a narrator (or in this case, author) who deliberately withholds information in order to shock the reader. Truong's "twists," I think, lean far too heavily--even awkwardly--in this latter area. No plot-level, character-level or even larger thematic level of reason exists for this withholding; we learn nothing meaningfully significant from the twist nor does the character, because she has always known this information. Truong became, I think, too enamored of the idea of "surprising the reader" to recognize that her character had no reason to do so. Truong speaks in interviews of creating an "unreliable reader" and narrative "blank spaces" for us to fill in: it's a curious idea, and one certainly worth investigating narratively. Unfortunately, at its worst, it feels more like a badly-written M. Night Shyamalan script. Surprise for the sake of surprise only pollutes the rest of the story, as it largely did for me in the second half of the novel. I no longer even liked the characters.
Enough on that. If you like big "twists" simply for the fun of them, you need not find any of this a bad thing. Fortunately, the second half of the novel works hard to enrich some of the characters and strengthen the links between protagonist and a number of historical and literary themes (Virginia Dare, Wright brothers, etc.) along the way.
Finally, however, the final "twist" or secret past is only just this: a story withheld from the protagonist that she learns. Okay. Good for her, she heard it. But once again, there is little for the characters to grow from or that feeds the earlier challenges faced. What we do get as readers, satisfying enough, is an understanding of family and the narratives we inexpertly craft for them. This alone is reason enough to recommend the book, but with the caveats above. Truong makes it difficult on herself, I think: she deliberately offers us Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird as a model, but then falls far short of it herself.
All of this, during exposition and development in the first half of the novel, is almost compelling. Some will then say that the plot has twists and surprises; the blurb on the book suggests a secret past. But there is a difference between a character or narrator who discovers something to which she was blind and a narrator (or in this case, author) who deliberately withholds information in order to shock the reader. Truong's "twists," I think, lean far too heavily--even awkwardly--in this latter area. No plot-level, character-level or even larger thematic level of reason exists for this withholding; we learn nothing meaningfully significant from the twist nor does the character, because she has always known this information. Truong became, I think, too enamored of the idea of "surprising the reader" to recognize that her character had no reason to do so. Truong speaks in interviews of creating an "unreliable reader" and narrative "blank spaces" for us to fill in: it's a curious idea, and one certainly worth investigating narratively. Unfortunately, at its worst, it feels more like a badly-written M. Night Shyamalan script. Surprise for the sake of surprise only pollutes the rest of the story, as it largely did for me in the second half of the novel. I no longer even liked the characters.
Enough on that. If you like big "twists" simply for the fun of them, you need not find any of this a bad thing. Fortunately, the second half of the novel works hard to enrich some of the characters and strengthen the links between protagonist and a number of historical and literary themes (Virginia Dare, Wright brothers, etc.) along the way.
Finally, however, the final "twist" or secret past is only just this: a story withheld from the protagonist that she learns. Okay. Good for her, she heard it. But once again, there is little for the characters to grow from or that feeds the earlier challenges faced. What we do get as readers, satisfying enough, is an understanding of family and the narratives we inexpertly craft for them. This alone is reason enough to recommend the book, but with the caveats above. Truong makes it difficult on herself, I think: she deliberately offers us Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird as a model, but then falls far short of it herself.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Sexual content, Racial slurs, Grief, Death of parent, Alcohol, Toxic relationship, and Bullying
kdhanda's review against another edition
3.0
I really wanted to like this book. It was funny, smart, derisive and wry. The writing, in parts, is excellent. However, it left me dizzy as the book went back and forth in time without a link. I was rattled by her usage of the food tastes in the middle of sentences. This really got on to my nerves until I was skipping sentences entirely. Good read about family dysfunction in the South but do not expect too much.
rencordings's review against another edition
3.0
I appreciate this book, but I don't love it. That is, I recognize the ambiguities that it leaves as potential sites for diverse interpretations and reconsideration of master narratives about family and Vietnamese adoptees (among many others - but these are the two that stand out to me). At the same time, I don't think the narrator lives up to the climax she promises, and rather than thirsting for more, I feel betrayed/disappointed.
In addition to the first-person narrative, Linda's lexical-gustatory synesthesia dominates, or rather, dictates, the way the story is told. So in addition to being a stream of consciousness, the narrative also reads like a postmodern fever stream of consciousness. Linda tells many stories, recounts endless significant events in her life, remembers the most insignificant of details of the people around her, but I don't feel any personality coming out from her at all. If her detachment is due to her fixation on retelling her world through her synesthesia and her fear of being misunderstood or outright rejected should she reveal her condition, then the more I am disappointed about the closure she gets regarding her synesthesia. I'm still not sure how big of a role it plays in her life; it seems that she reacts very strongly to being misunderstood as well as to the discovery of people with similar synesthesias, and at the same time, she also seems to live with her condition well enough. Except for her emotional development - which I also think is lackluster. She seems like a precocious kid, and when she talks about her past self, the hindsight remarks weaved in the narrative makes it even more as if she is born Yale-smart. Throughout the book she doesn't change at all. Still the same Murakami-esque prose and sensibility, the same represison, the same "I don't say what I want to say" level of maturity. The biggest revelation was probably her backstory, and even that doesn't have anything to do with her condition, her reconciliation with DeAnne, or her self-image. It's as if the entire novel is packed with red herrings that end up nowhere, with the ending randomly tying two threads together for that postmodern effect.
To be clear, I love the premise. I love every story thread in this book. I love the narrative voice, and the writing style. I just don't love the way they go together and unroll away from each other. Linda is too complicated, too smart, too self-aware for such an ambivalent ending.
In addition to the first-person narrative, Linda's lexical-gustatory synesthesia dominates, or rather, dictates, the way the story is told. So in addition to being a stream of consciousness, the narrative also reads like a postmodern fever stream of consciousness. Linda tells many stories, recounts endless significant events in her life, remembers the most insignificant of details of the people around her, but I don't feel any personality coming out from her at all. If her detachment is due to her fixation on retelling her world through her synesthesia and her fear of being misunderstood or outright rejected should she reveal her condition, then the more I am disappointed about the closure she gets regarding her synesthesia. I'm still not sure how big of a role it plays in her life; it seems that she reacts very strongly to being misunderstood as well as to the discovery of people with similar synesthesias, and at the same time, she also seems to live with her condition well enough. Except for her emotional development - which I also think is lackluster. She seems like a precocious kid, and when she talks about her past self, the hindsight remarks weaved in the narrative makes it even more as if she is born Yale-smart. Throughout the book she doesn't change at all. Still the same Murakami-esque prose and sensibility, the same represison, the same "I don't say what I want to say" level of maturity. The biggest revelation was probably her backstory, and even that doesn't have anything to do with her condition, her reconciliation with DeAnne, or her self-image. It's as if the entire novel is packed with red herrings that end up nowhere, with the ending randomly tying two threads together for that postmodern effect.
To be clear, I love the premise. I love every story thread in this book. I love the narrative voice, and the writing style. I just don't love the way they go together and unroll away from each other. Linda is too complicated, too smart, too self-aware for such an ambivalent ending.
gr8reader's review against another edition
4.0
Just as I found myself getting bored.......BAM....that last part!!!
ebstern's review against another edition
challenging
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
Interesting premise, tried to do too much in too little time.
ericgaryanderson's review against another edition
5.0
Fabulous! Really looking forward to Monique Truong's reading at the 2014 biennial conference of the Society for the Study of Southern Literature, which I'm organizing and hosting. See southernlit.org for more info!
sb631's review against another edition
1.0
I was really excited that I won this from Goodreads(Thank You!) But this book was not good at all. The description of the book sounded pretty interesting, so that's why I entered the giveaway. But it just did not hold my interest. I am about halfway done with the book but I have not picked it up since October so I decided to finally just write a review. I do plan on finishing it eventually but I'm really not interested in finishing it at the moment. I hate not finishing a book though, but I just can't get into this one.
I was really interested about the fact that Linda can "taste words". I was curious about why and how this would play out, but the way it was written was so confusing. Every time she would speak, the words would have food/tastes attached to them so it made it a little harder to read and a bit confusing. There also was not much dialog going on in the book. Also, everything I read did not seem important to the story and it was just all over the place. It just jumped from one story about her past to another. I didn't see where it was going and how it fit all together to the story. Her style of writing was just not my cup of tea. I know that maybe it would fit all together in the end, but it just did not hold my interest enough for me to even care to finish it.
I hate to give a book 1 star, but, for me, this book was not interesting or could hold my attention. But that's just me, because I did see some really good reviews about this book, which is great.
I was really interested about the fact that Linda can "taste words". I was curious about why and how this would play out, but the way it was written was so confusing. Every time she would speak, the words would have food/tastes attached to them so it made it a little harder to read and a bit confusing. There also was not much dialog going on in the book. Also, everything I read did not seem important to the story and it was just all over the place. It just jumped from one story about her past to another. I didn't see where it was going and how it fit all together to the story. Her style of writing was just not my cup of tea. I know that maybe it would fit all together in the end, but it just did not hold my interest enough for me to even care to finish it.
I hate to give a book 1 star, but, for me, this book was not interesting or could hold my attention. But that's just me, because I did see some really good reviews about this book, which is great.
oanh_1's review against another edition
4.0
Thoroughly excellent. About family and belonging and self. And sort of but not really about synaesthesia.