rosiehough's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
bunnieslikediamonds's review
5.0
Some years ago I convinced a male book club buddy to try out Siri Hustvedt, whom I adore. He trustingly went out and bought The Sorrows of an American and What I Loved. Not only did he not like them, he called them melodramatic soap operas. I choked on my wine. It's one thing not to admire them, but to categorize them as soap operas? And this from a man who loved The Unbearable Lighness of Being. Well, I didn't bother to mention gender bias, nor offer to loan him my copy of Summer Without Men. I do wonder what he would make of The Blazing World.
Hustvedt's new novel is all about perception and how people see what they expect to see. Harriet Burden is an artist convinced that it is her sex that prevents the art world from valuing her work. She hires three male artists as her beards and launches three successful shows, expecting recognition when she reveals herself as the true artist.
Oh, Harriet. Art critic Oswald Case, while being a total shithead, does have a point when dissing Harriet: "She dripped with earnestness. If there's one thing that doesn't fly in the art world, it's an excess of sincerity". Actually, he doesn't like anything about her. He is saddened by her "wailing" when discussing art, since he "only consort[s] with women who keep their tones low and dulcet", and describes her physical appearance as an unhappy combo of Mae West and Lennie (of Mice and Men). Oswald, you heartthrob you. Harriet's close friend Rachel Briefman, on the other hand, remembers her "beautiful, strong, voluptuous body", but concludes that life would have been easier had she been a boy, as "awkward brilliance in a boy is more easily categorized, and conveys no sexual threat".
Her lover Bruno finds her wondrous. Their first sleep-over gives new meaning to the art of would-you-like-to-see-my-etchings: "I will not pretend that Harry's art did not scare me a little. To be honest, that first night it gave me a voodoo feeling. I walked right under a flying cock, as in penis, not rooster, authentic-looking as hell, and there were several bodies in progress, at least five of the former spouse in miniature, and other figures that were life-size with clothes on, lying around like so many corpses."
No shrinking violet, that one.
All these voices and more are collected by mysterious editor I.V. Hess and presented in a book published after Harriet's death. I don't normally appreciate this narrative technique, but Hustvedt makes it work (because she is brilliant and can do no wrong). Harriet's daughter Maisie contributes some sharp observations, including a perfectly chilling encounter with macho artist Rune, the third beard.
Harriet herself communicates via notebooks, sometimes straightforward and sincere, sometimes cryptic and incoherent. She feels unseen and ignored, enraged by the blindness of those around her. Her one-woman struggle for acknowledgement is heartbreaking, in striking contrast to the laid back dudes posing as her. Coaching Rune during the charade, she thinks: "I don't know how much of what I say goes in. Deafness is part of his being. And it helps him, helps him assert himself as the young Wonder Man." Of her first mask, a Warhol-obsessed young man who uses the word "conceptual" a lot, she states: "Anton was not a bad kid. He was just stupendously, heartbreakingly ignorant". I can only imagine Hustvedt speaks from experience, used to being the brightest person in the room.
There is so much to say about this book, but nothing I say would do it justice. I loved it, but then I'm biased, convinced that Siri Hustvedt is a genius. I may rejoin book club to champion her.
Hustvedt's new novel is all about perception and how people see what they expect to see. Harriet Burden is an artist convinced that it is her sex that prevents the art world from valuing her work. She hires three male artists as her beards and launches three successful shows, expecting recognition when she reveals herself as the true artist.
Oh, Harriet. Art critic Oswald Case, while being a total shithead, does have a point when dissing Harriet: "She dripped with earnestness. If there's one thing that doesn't fly in the art world, it's an excess of sincerity". Actually, he doesn't like anything about her. He is saddened by her "wailing" when discussing art, since he "only consort[s] with women who keep their tones low and dulcet", and describes her physical appearance as an unhappy combo of Mae West and Lennie (of Mice and Men). Oswald, you heartthrob you. Harriet's close friend Rachel Briefman, on the other hand, remembers her "beautiful, strong, voluptuous body", but concludes that life would have been easier had she been a boy, as "awkward brilliance in a boy is more easily categorized, and conveys no sexual threat".
Her lover Bruno finds her wondrous. Their first sleep-over gives new meaning to the art of would-you-like-to-see-my-etchings: "I will not pretend that Harry's art did not scare me a little. To be honest, that first night it gave me a voodoo feeling. I walked right under a flying cock, as in penis, not rooster, authentic-looking as hell, and there were several bodies in progress, at least five of the former spouse in miniature, and other figures that were life-size with clothes on, lying around like so many corpses."
No shrinking violet, that one.
All these voices and more are collected by mysterious editor I.V. Hess and presented in a book published after Harriet's death. I don't normally appreciate this narrative technique, but Hustvedt makes it work (because she is brilliant and can do no wrong). Harriet's daughter Maisie contributes some sharp observations, including a perfectly chilling encounter with macho artist Rune, the third beard.
Harriet herself communicates via notebooks, sometimes straightforward and sincere, sometimes cryptic and incoherent. She feels unseen and ignored, enraged by the blindness of those around her. Her one-woman struggle for acknowledgement is heartbreaking, in striking contrast to the laid back dudes posing as her. Coaching Rune during the charade, she thinks: "I don't know how much of what I say goes in. Deafness is part of his being. And it helps him, helps him assert himself as the young Wonder Man." Of her first mask, a Warhol-obsessed young man who uses the word "conceptual" a lot, she states: "Anton was not a bad kid. He was just stupendously, heartbreakingly ignorant". I can only imagine Hustvedt speaks from experience, used to being the brightest person in the room.
There is so much to say about this book, but nothing I say would do it justice. I loved it, but then I'm biased, convinced that Siri Hustvedt is a genius. I may rejoin book club to champion her.
susanw's review
4.0
A grand book with far reaching goals, which it truly does achieve. Extremely well written. There are many great things I can write about this book, a fantastic premise, one worthy of a real life experiment. The fact it's told through, letters and interviews (who doesn't love an epistolary novel?). The one downfall for me, the diary entries of Harriet, the main character. Her entries put me off, they were over the top, with multiple references to all types of psychology and philosophy, art, and literature, enough that the 'author' of the book needed many, many footnotes to explain her meaning. Her theories and ideas became cumbersome to read, and maybe this is my fault because I, even after reading the footnote, sometimes still didn't grasp/understand what she was going for. I realize this was her main problem in life, not being understood or recognized, she was too smart for most people. The rest of the book though was a delight to read. We really saw the character brought out in other people accounts of her through their relationships. Everyone is someone different to different people. I think I would guardedly recommend this one.
etrot28's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
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
5.0
coldxperience's review
3.0
L1 English major university reading.
The description of a new world :: an utopian kingdom in another world, another solar system, a world with other rules -> political satire
“We project our feelings onto other people, but there is always a dynamic that creates those inventions. The fantasies are made between people, and the ideas about those people live inside us ...
And, even after they die, they are still there. I am made of the dead.”
The description of a new world :: an utopian kingdom in another world, another solar system, a world with other rules -> political satire
“We project our feelings onto other people, but there is always a dynamic that creates those inventions. The fantasies are made between people, and the ideas about those people live inside us ...
And, even after they die, they are still there. I am made of the dead.”
hollydunndesign's review against another edition
4.0
One from the Man Booker Longlist this year, this book is about an artist, Harriet, who feels that her work is underexposed because she is a woman. She therefore decides to take on three male pseudonyms, using real artists to pretend that their work is hers. All of this goes terribly wrong, as very few people believe her when she comes to reveal herself. The whole thing comes to a head with a man’s bizzare death. The whole story is told through letters, and interviews of people who knew the artists, and also from Harriet’s own diaries which were discovered posthumously. In this way it feels more like an non-fiction book, and indeed the whole thing does feel very academic. My guess is that this academic tone is why it wasn’t shortlisted for the Man Booker. If you don’t know a lot about contemporary art then this could be a little alienating, or it could be a great opportunity to learn some new things (I certainly did). At its core though, there is a very human story and a fight for justice that transcends gender.
sweddy65's review
3.0
I went back and forth on my like/dislike for this book. I wanted to like it much more than I did. After all, what's not to like about a novel disguised as a scholarly work, complete with footnotes? What's not to like about the story of a female artist raging against the lack of recognition for her and other women's work?
When I was describing it to a friend, mid-book, I said, "It's too clever." Now, I _like_ clever. I like word play. I like multiple voices telling the same story from different points of view. I like the mystery of "what really happened?". I'm an academic, so I like seeing references to other works. I couldn't quite tell her what I meant by that, but I think this is what I meant: the story got so caught up in its own cleverness (as Harry Burden did sometimes) that it grated.
By the end of the book, I was back to liking it a lot, but I lost interest in the middle somewhere and began to skim.
When I was describing it to a friend, mid-book, I said, "It's too clever." Now, I _like_ clever. I like word play. I like multiple voices telling the same story from different points of view. I like the mystery of "what really happened?". I'm an academic, so I like seeing references to other works. I couldn't quite tell her what I meant by that, but I think this is what I meant: the story got so caught up in its own cleverness (as Harry Burden did sometimes) that it grated.
By the end of the book, I was back to liking it a lot, but I lost interest in the middle somewhere and began to skim.
sde's review
3.0
Hustvedt is a good writer, and I got sucked into this book early on. However, as the story progressed, it didn't seem like much was happening. I kept waiting for a great reveal or denouement, but it never came. The same thing kept being discussed from different points of view, which I generally liked, but after a while the various points of view seemed to be kind of the same.
I very much liked the relationship between Harry and Bruno. Here were two old people whose relationship wasn't sentimentalized, condescended to, nor made unrealistically romantic. It was real.
The questions the book brought up about how much the perception of art is affected by context and what we think we know about the creator were very interesting and got me thinking. However, I felt like the author was a bit like the character Rune in the book - kept referencing outside works with no real in-depth understanding or for no good reason. Maybe that was the point, a sort of parody within the book, but I was too stupid to really get it.
I very much liked the relationship between Harry and Bruno. Here were two old people whose relationship wasn't sentimentalized, condescended to, nor made unrealistically romantic. It was real.
The questions the book brought up about how much the perception of art is affected by context and what we think we know about the creator were very interesting and got me thinking. However, I felt like the author was a bit like the character Rune in the book - kept referencing outside works with no real in-depth understanding or for no good reason. Maybe that was the point, a sort of parody within the book, but I was too stupid to really get it.
corinnreads's review
3.0
I devoured Hustvedt’s hit What I Loved in a weekend, taken by her empathetic study of motivation and mannerism, and I was optimistic that I’d find a similar quality in The Blazing World.
While I admire the innovative structure of this novel as a creative feat, it was this very form that made the book’s characters less accessible to me. Because the story is told as compiled fragments of fictional diaries, essays, and interviews, I struggled to form a meaningful connection to any character (even the main character) because the accounts of their lives were so disparate. Paradoxically, although Hustvedt varied the voices of these fictional authors expertly, I found the content of their excerpts exhaustively repetitive, returning on nearly every page to the novel’s central conflict.
Despite my overall disappointment, I pushed through and finished the book, because it is inarguably well-written and explores fascinating themes of consciousness, perception, and feminism.
I’m hopeful I’ll find another Hustvedt work that enraptures me, but this one was not it!
While I admire the innovative structure of this novel as a creative feat, it was this very form that made the book’s characters less accessible to me. Because the story is told as compiled fragments of fictional diaries, essays, and interviews, I struggled to form a meaningful connection to any character (even the main character) because the accounts of their lives were so disparate. Paradoxically, although Hustvedt varied the voices of these fictional authors expertly, I found the content of their excerpts exhaustively repetitive, returning on nearly every page to the novel’s central conflict.
Despite my overall disappointment, I pushed through and finished the book, because it is inarguably well-written and explores fascinating themes of consciousness, perception, and feminism.
I’m hopeful I’ll find another Hustvedt work that enraptures me, but this one was not it!
laurasheerin's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0