anothersarah's review against another edition
5.0
Amid a (point-on) statement expressing the impossible acrobatics of dividing personal time between being a mother and creating art, I love Dederer's preemptive slam "people who say otherwise are delusional, or childless, or men"-
Yes!
It's like my thoughts and feelings were pulled from my mind and eloquently made into this book- I love that this novel exist!
The subject is well thought through, brilliantly articulated, and written with clear acknowledgment of our current time (working not to romanticize it or the past.)
Also, a special thanks to this book for helping my stumble into McSweeney's: Raymond Carver's OKCupid profile edited by Gordon Lish -so funny!
Yes!
It's like my thoughts and feelings were pulled from my mind and eloquently made into this book- I love that this novel exist!
The subject is well thought through, brilliantly articulated, and written with clear acknowledgment of our current time (working not to romanticize it or the past.)
Also, a special thanks to this book for helping my stumble into McSweeney's: Raymond Carver's OKCupid profile edited by Gordon Lish -so funny!
devonmaureen's review against another edition
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
4.75
I loved this book. It expanded the question of "can we separate the art from the artist?” in so many incredible ways. The author covered each perspective and each art/crime/concept in such a way that I needed to (in a very relaxing way) think no thoughts. Just as I started to think one argument was limited, she would completely switch tacks, showing each to be “valid," if limited, and celebrated-ly personal and subjective. There is one paragraph in this book that I genuinely want to staple to my wall; I need to read it to myself often.
In summary: INTERESTING. EXPANSIVE. HEARTFELT. SMART.
In summary: INTERESTING. EXPANSIVE. HEARTFELT. SMART.
krissy_reads's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.5
els04's review against another edition
funny
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
5.0
Monsters. Door: Claire Dederer.
Wat een boek! Een must-read voor iedereen die houdt van kunst, literatuur en of muziek. Elke cultuurliefhebber dus.
Dederer’s boek leest alsof er een vriendin tegen je praat: vlot, meeslepend, boeiend, empathisch en met veel humor. Daarnaast zijn er veel terzijdes, zijn al haar standpunten heel goed onderbouwd, heeft ze een diepmenselijk inzicht (ook in zichzelf), is ze heel intelligent en breed geïnteresseerd én neemt ze geen blad voor de mond.
Ik heb zo genoten van het lezen van Monsters, én ik heb veel bijgeleerd. Mijn hoofd tolde bij wijlen, en mijn onderlijn-potlood maakte overuren. Ook omdat het niet enkel gaat over monsters als in ‘zij’ maar ook over de monsters in ‘wij’, in ‘ik’. Ik, Dederer, de schrijver en ik, Els, de lezer.
Monsters is een levensveranderend powerboek dat me heeft geraakt in mijn hoofd, hart én buik. Mijn hersenen tintelden en mijn ogen werden meer en meer tot tranen toe gevuld. Omdat het boek bovenal over liefde gaat. De liefde die we voelen zonder dat we het willen. De liefde die diep vanbinnen onze motor voedt, of we het beseffen of niet.
Ergens doet het aan de vroege Connie Palmen denken. Zij zou ook zo een boek kunnen geschreven hebben. Ik denk dat het in ieder geval een boek is dat ze graag zal lezen. Maar aangezien het meer van nu is zou ik het ook durven vergelijken met Maggie Nelson. Ook zij heeft de gave om je als lezer te veranderen en je wereld op zijn kop te zetten.
Monsters is een moedig, krachtig, eerlijk, relevant en belangrijk boek. Het houdt je een spiegel voor én geeft je een schop onder je kont. Eén van de beste boeken van 2023!
ferris_mx's review against another edition
4.0
It was mostly an insightful look at reconciling "art" with problematic artists, but at the end the recommendation is that it's pointless to try so just enjoy the art you want and don't worry about it. That feels like a copout to me. Yes, our power is limited, but we should consider using it - or at east I am going to continue to avoid artists who are misogynistic trash.
rebeccaloosli's review against another edition
informative
reflective
fast-paced
3.0
Interesting and relevant. Was helpful to me in understanding my own thoughts. Clearly written and organized. Didn’t blow me away or but I really enjoyed being in conversation with this book.
dorothy_gale's review against another edition
5.0
4.5★: CAN WE LOVE THE WORK OF MONSTROUS CREATORS? This book took a couple of unexpected turns, but I knew at 10% that I loved it and the author’s brain. And bonus that the author is from Seattle. The TIMING IS RIPE: Post #MeToo, Mid-Cancel Culture.
Claire Dederer asks and addresses several poignant questions (some I’ve paraphrased or inferred):
★Can we separate an artist from their art, or should we?
★Is anyone ever redeemable?
★Can you feel the same about their work after you’ve learned of their monstrosities?
★Can we somehow exist between contradictions?
★Can this be solved by analysis?
★If we don’t reject the work of male monsters, can we still be ‘good’ feminists?
★What do we do when the art is truly great? When they're a genius?
★If they are a genius, does their art transcend them out of the bounds of normal human behavior?
★Who decides what has value, what is good?
★Should we express our ethics through what we consume?
★Is the “we” in this corrupt?
★How is the individual artist’s responsibility balanced with the systems and institutions that aided and abetted in their monstrosities?
While the male monstrosities include (but are not limited to) rape, incest, pedophilia, and grooming — our culture seems to have ruled that the bar for females begins at being insufficiently maternal. Which I feel is annoyingly accurate. She defines monster, and discusses several candidates (although cautions against equivalencies):
And while her thoughts about monstrous artists are fascinating, the best insights emerge with questions about the audience:
★What does it mean to be a fan?
★How much of a person’s fandom is tied to their identity?
★What do we do when creations integral to who we are become stained by the artists’ monstrous acts?
★What is it to love someone awful?
★What if the monster is you?
When the author mentioned the possibility of Woody Allen grooming his audiences in Manhattan, a movie in which he plays a 42-year-old man dating a 17-year-old high school student, I felt icky and I haven’t even watched it! Then I wondered about Elvis’ grooming of Priscilla and how the world just accepted it! [note that Elvis is NOT mentioned in this book].
Part memoir/journey, part inquiry/reflection, many parts monster. Ultimately, this is a book about the subjective experience of each audience member. Dederer balances both facts and feelings, and doesn’t tell us where our line should be. This book is being added to my Favorites list as #13 (of 710 read total).
And my two favorite quotes from the book are a bit of a spoiler for how she wraps it up...
“Love is not reliant on judgment, but on a decision to set judgment aside. Love is anarchy. Love is chaos. We don’t love the deserving. We love flawed and imperfect human beings. In an emotional logic that belongs to an entirely different weather system than the chilly climate of reason” —Claire Dederer
Claire Dederer asks and addresses several poignant questions (some I’ve paraphrased or inferred):
★Can we separate an artist from their art, or should we?
★Is anyone ever redeemable?
★Can you feel the same about their work after you’ve learned of their monstrosities?
★Can we somehow exist between contradictions?
★Can this be solved by analysis?
★If we don’t reject the work of male monsters, can we still be ‘good’ feminists?
★What do we do when the art is truly great? When they're a genius?
★If they are a genius, does their art transcend them out of the bounds of normal human behavior?
★Who decides what has value, what is good?
★Should we express our ethics through what we consume?
★Is the “we” in this corrupt?
★How is the individual artist’s responsibility balanced with the systems and institutions that aided and abetted in their monstrosities?
While the male monstrosities include (but are not limited to) rape, incest, pedophilia, and grooming — our culture seems to have ruled that the bar for females begins at being insufficiently maternal. Which I feel is annoyingly accurate. She defines monster, and discusses several candidates (although cautions against equivalencies):
➼Woody Allen
➼Virginia Wolff
➼Roman Polanski
➼Doris Lessing
➼Richard Wagner
➼Joni Mitchell
➼Picasso
➼JK Rowling
➼Nabokov via Lolita
➼Trump
➼Michael Jackson
➼Bill Cosby
➼R. Kelly
➼David Bowie
➼Hemingway
➼Louis C.K.
➼Kevin Spacey
➼Harvey Weinstein
➼Kanye West
➼John Lennon
➼Lou Reed
And while her thoughts about monstrous artists are fascinating, the best insights emerge with questions about the audience:
★What does it mean to be a fan?
★How much of a person’s fandom is tied to their identity?
★What do we do when creations integral to who we are become stained by the artists’ monstrous acts?
★What is it to love someone awful?
★What if the monster is you?
When the author mentioned the possibility of Woody Allen grooming his audiences in Manhattan, a movie in which he plays a 42-year-old man dating a 17-year-old high school student, I felt icky and I haven’t even watched it! Then I wondered about Elvis’ grooming of Priscilla and how the world just accepted it! [note that Elvis is NOT mentioned in this book].
Part memoir/journey, part inquiry/reflection, many parts monster. Ultimately, this is a book about the subjective experience of each audience member. Dederer balances both facts and feelings, and doesn’t tell us where our line should be. This book is being added to my Favorites list as #13 (of 710 read total).
And my two favorite quotes from the book are a bit of a spoiler for how she wraps it up...
Spoiler
“There is no democracy in any love relation — only mercy” — Gillian Rose“Love is not reliant on judgment, but on a decision to set judgment aside. Love is anarchy. Love is chaos. We don’t love the deserving. We love flawed and imperfect human beings. In an emotional logic that belongs to an entirely different weather system than the chilly climate of reason” —Claire Dederer
zamyatins_fears's review against another edition
5.0
Definitely will be rereading this one and thinking about it, but the author does voice some of my own thoughts in a much better way than I could.