The design and UX isn't done, Rob and Abbie, okkurrrr! 😌
emilyusuallyreading's review against another edition
2.0
What I Liked
Eudora Welty brings depth and characterization to her African-American characters, while many other authors of this time period used their black characters as a way to reflect something about their white characters.
I appreciated the realistic family structure in Delta Wedding and the significance of each member of the family, blood relative or not.
What I Didn't Like
It is a struggle to find a plot structure within Delta Wedding. It's slow-paced and light-hearted. While Eudora Welty can write beautiful words, I was never able to get into the story and could barely make it through to the end.
Eudora Welty brings depth and characterization to her African-American characters, while many other authors of this time period used their black characters as a way to reflect something about their white characters.
I appreciated the realistic family structure in Delta Wedding and the significance of each member of the family, blood relative or not.
What I Didn't Like
It is a struggle to find a plot structure within Delta Wedding. It's slow-paced and light-hearted. While Eudora Welty can write beautiful words, I was never able to get into the story and could barely make it through to the end.
tombomp's review against another edition
3.0
Had a dreamy quality that I enjoyed. The atmosphere was kind of beautiful and the descriptions were great and the scenes felt real. I liked it.
Weird/bad points: there was pretty much no conflict involved in the book even though quite a bit was set up, which was bizarre. For example, there are constant references to Troy's seeming unsuitability as a husband but nothing comes of it - and there's not really much explanation of WHY people talk about him as unsuitable. There are a couple other similar scenes, which presumably have deeper implications or ones which aren't the obvious but aren't referenced again and don't seem to have an impact - There are several times the author seems to be describing some sort of romantic tension between George and other people but maybe I'm reading too much into it. Every character is prone to going into deep reflection at every opportunity, which is pretty ridiculous but adds to the dream like quality of the book and really wasn't bad. There are a lot of named characters that it's impossible to keep track of and don't really have a point.
Bigger things: I note an event re: violence above - violence is treated as tainting someone in this one case. Yet Battle beating children happens often and is treated incredibly casually. He also threatens extreme violence casually and the one reference to this plays it off as a "oh haha our Battle!!" thing.
None of the Fairchilds are ever shown engaging in any work. Yet at the end of the book several describe how "draining" and "tiring" the wedding has been. The disconnect between words and experience is noticeable. The only reason I can see Troy being unsuitable, in fact, is in his job as an overseer - in doing their work, the work of the plantation owner running their lands, he's somehow "unclean". His presence impinges on the "paradise" of the Fairchilds' life - they have no experience of the reality of where their (obviously absolutely massive) income comes from. The thing is, this theme is hardly developed and shows mostly in omission, making me curious how the author felt about this.
The black workers have very little presence, even though they should be a constant presence around the house as domestic servants. The scenes that feature them show them as personality-less - they just obey orders happily - with 2 exceptions. Right at the end of the book, one says they don't like roses. This upsets Ellen, although we're not given much more than that. One character is visited at her house to ask about something lost and the Fairchilds who visited treat her vaguely dramatic searching as malicious - the one example of personality is shunned and considered bad.
In fact, I could think of only two other instances of things being treated as malicious or wrong in the book - the first is the mentally disabled preteen Maureen (who is referred to in rude terms) and the other is George's wife Robbie, who is again considered "unsuitable" but especially for leaving him when she feels hurt. Their real crime seems to be that they disturbed in some way the Fairchilds' untroubled existence.
I don't know if my view of the Fairchilds as horrible people who live an incredibly happy life merely by ignoring or shunning things that disturb it is an unreasonable one, but to me it was the only one that made sense and still let me enjoy the book.
Weird/bad points: there was pretty much no conflict involved in the book even though quite a bit was set up, which was bizarre. For example, there are constant references to Troy's seeming unsuitability as a husband but nothing comes of it - and there's not really much explanation of WHY people talk about him as unsuitable.
Spoiler
Near the end, Shelley witnesses him apparently shooting a black worker who's threatening him with a knife. The scene lasts maybe a page and she says it shows some sort of extreme unsuitability, but the event is never referenced again and Shelley makes no further comments about Troy, in thought or otherwise. The event itself is incredibly confusing and I have no idea what went on. Weird.Spoiler
George talking about "sleeping with" the vagrant girl Ellen finds in the woods - Ellen seems shocked but again nothing else happens, it doesn't affect their relationship and the girl is referenced once again in an ambiguous context.Bigger things: I note an event re: violence above - violence is treated as tainting someone in this one case. Yet Battle beating children happens often and is treated incredibly casually. He also threatens extreme violence casually and the one reference to this plays it off as a "oh haha our Battle!!" thing.
None of the Fairchilds are ever shown engaging in any work. Yet at the end of the book several describe how "draining" and "tiring" the wedding has been. The disconnect between words and experience is noticeable. The only reason I can see Troy being unsuitable, in fact, is in his job as an overseer - in doing their work, the work of the plantation owner running their lands, he's somehow "unclean". His presence impinges on the "paradise" of the Fairchilds' life - they have no experience of the reality of where their (obviously absolutely massive) income comes from. The thing is, this theme is hardly developed and shows mostly in omission, making me curious how the author felt about this.
The black workers have very little presence, even though they should be a constant presence around the house as domestic servants. The scenes that feature them show them as personality-less - they just obey orders happily - with 2 exceptions. Right at the end of the book, one says they don't like roses. This upsets Ellen, although we're not given much more than that. One character is visited at her house to ask about something lost and the Fairchilds who visited treat her vaguely dramatic searching as malicious - the one example of personality is shunned and considered bad.
In fact, I could think of only two other instances of things being treated as malicious or wrong in the book - the first is the mentally disabled preteen Maureen (who is referred to in rude terms) and the other is George's wife Robbie, who is again considered "unsuitable" but especially for leaving him when she feels hurt. Their real crime seems to be that they disturbed in some way the Fairchilds' untroubled existence.
I don't know if my view of the Fairchilds as horrible people who live an incredibly happy life merely by ignoring or shunning things that disturb it is an unreasonable one, but to me it was the only one that made sense and still let me enjoy the book.
habeasopus's review against another edition
emotional
funny
hopeful
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.5
marianatole's review against another edition
2.0
Such a slog to get through!!!!! I love Eudora Welty’s short stories, but I didn’t enjoy this. The descriptions of characters personalities and motivations were so oblique and grandiose.
honeydewfelon's review against another edition
5.0
This book was pure delight to read (or listen to). Welty's lyrical prose comes to life in descriptions of the Delta, the trees and flowers, the food--oh, the food: Great Aunt Mashula's coconut cake with rosewater almond paste and fresh shaved coconut, cold fried chicken, and cheese straws, and pickled peaches. (Anne Romines has a fantastic article on "reading" and baking Welty's cakes, including Mashula's coconut.) Delta Wedding is a comedy--Welty wrote it with Austen's Pride & Prejudice in mind--but there are darker themes at play, deeper questions the story tugs at. Why do we cling to arbitrary traditions and class distinctions, and how does that play out? What does it mean to be a man? A wife? A mother?
Shelley's thoughts as she watches Troy assert dominance over a Black field hand, stood out to me as a surprisingly modern questioning of the role of masculinity: "Suppose, the behavior of all men were actually no more than this--imitation of other men. ... (Suppose her father imitated...oh, not he!) Then all men could not know any too well what they were doing. ... She felt again, but differently, that men were no better than little children. She ran across the grass toward the house. Women, she was glad to think, did know a little better--though everything they knew they would have to keep to themselves...oh forever!" (CN, 286) Interestingly, we only see into the minds of the women in this book. The narrative flows between little nine-year-old Laura, to Ellen, Shelley, Dabney, and Robbie and back. (And how well Welty is able to write children, as if her consciousness retained part of the wonder, confusion, and curiosity of childhood.)
I like Welty's longer stories and novels because she has room to sprawl out. Her language can stretch its legs, move in all directions. Delta Wedding will be a book that I return to.
Shelley's thoughts as she watches Troy assert dominance over a Black field hand, stood out to me as a surprisingly modern questioning of the role of masculinity: "Suppose, the behavior of all men were actually no more than this--imitation of other men. ... (Suppose her father imitated...oh, not he!) Then all men could not know any too well what they were doing. ... She felt again, but differently, that men were no better than little children. She ran across the grass toward the house. Women, she was glad to think, did know a little better--though everything they knew they would have to keep to themselves...oh forever!" (CN, 286) Interestingly, we only see into the minds of the women in this book. The narrative flows between little nine-year-old Laura, to Ellen, Shelley, Dabney, and Robbie and back. (And how well Welty is able to write children, as if her consciousness retained part of the wonder, confusion, and curiosity of childhood.)
I like Welty's longer stories and novels because she has room to sprawl out. Her language can stretch its legs, move in all directions. Delta Wedding will be a book that I return to.