Scan barcode
A review by porgyreads
Flowers in the Attic by V.C. Andrews
3.75
I thought I was prepared for this book going in but I was not prepared at all.
I inhaled flowers in the attic in a matter of hours staying up late to finish it because I had to know how it ended/how they escaped but fear god did it cost me more than just sleep and my eyesight. Despite sleeping on it, I still can’t tell of V.C. Andrews deserves more or less credit than she’s been given for this as a debut.
Were some of the language choices (see Golly gosh x 1000) silly and suburban? yes, was there a good deal of hyperbole from the prophetic dreams to the downward slope of the final few chapters reveals? sure. But I cant say i wasn’t repulsed and enthralled in equal measure throughout.
The romantic description used as Cathy details all of her siblings especially Chris ramps up as we get more and more of their time in the attic and it is horrific to read but horror is also the point. I said “oh dear” aloud about 100 times in the first half because I knew what was on its way. The story and the stylistic choices cast this shuddering net over you and you cannot get out of it.
Was it melodramatic? Of course, but Cathy also explicitly refers to the events she’s lived out as of off a “soap opera.” V.C. Andrews understands the world being crafted hinges on drama because it was written and marketed as a thriller.
I was so easily hooked by the first lines of the book: the metaphor of the paper flowers and the hatred and vitriol from Cathy (before we even know who she is) pointed at mother we don’t understand and never come to, is so compelling and miss andrews manages to keep this the entire way through (even if events veer towards campy at times.)
I was also rattled by everything that happens to the childrenafter the tarring. I had tears in my eyes and couldn’t read at points. The empathy you feel for them in this ridiculous and harrowing circumstance is so so palpable and yet, never excusing. The twins suffer from lack in one way and Chris and Cathy in another, both are heartbreaking.
I cant decide if it’s hit me more as an adult because I understand the full scope or if I would’ve been just as affected (if not more) had I read it as a teenager as many did when it was released.
Again, I don’t know if I reading too much into it, or not enough or just right, but I would love to read any critique written on the dollangangers. They’re presented immediately as this picturesque modern American family, aryan in looks, talented and charming and then they suffer a series of misfortunes that are so intimately intertwined with the concept of original sin it made my skin tingle. The way the nuclear family to blown to hell in this is so clever. The threads woven regarding generational traumas are so interesting, especially how the grandmother has recreated the same prison of the doll house she experienced for her daughter and her daughters children. The cycle of abuse has no end and you watch Cathy struggle against the history of her parents and grandparents in despair, not wanting to make the same mistakes but making them anyway. V.C.Andrew’s depiction of fate is equivalent to that of a Greek tragedy, it is another prison from which you wonder and hope the children will find a way to escape.
Is there something inherently evil and wrong about the dollanganger blood? Arguably yes, but it seems that multiple generations of dollangangers find themselves victims to extreme circumstance, religious fanaticism and violence. Which shapes which is hard to say… incest isn’t the only taboo, neglect of the mother, patricide, and filicide are also just as raw and grating.
Though evil as it’s presented in the grandmother serves its purpose it’s the mother and her neglect that truly causes discomfort. The questions of how long is too long, and what sort of reward is worthy of the time the children spend in the attic fascinated me.
Ultimately the story is almost a fable and I read it as a critique on capitalism and greed. Andrews presents us with two repeated sins: incest and moral sacrifice for capital gain. Both societal and then juxtaposes the two in how the characters are treated for indulging in either.
Would it have landed better had she only prodded us to consider the two rather than slapping us over the head with it? Again, sure. But I don’t think the lack of subtly in flowers in the attic completely detracts from the point.
Other plus points: There are some passages on suffering that are so universal and the inner monologue of Cathy gaining her agency is hard won but necessary.
Even more interesting to me is whether her intended audience was children or adults? It’s categorised as YA but it was also banned because of its content. And intended audience, marketed audience and the audience that grows off of word of mouth can all be very different.
The story in itself allows for confrontation of many horrors of adolescence, lack of privacy, confinement, sexuality, one’s place in society, the model familial home and the consequences of fracture of that, death, grief, the halo effect I could go on. It is not always perfectly written and very indicative of gender roles of it’s time period but it challenges the audience at whatever age.
Have to give her props because these characters will likely never leave me, I am desperate to understand how they manage in the outside world and whether the ghost of the attic can ever truly be shoved from their minds after escape.
I inhaled flowers in the attic in a matter of hours staying up late to finish it because I had to know how it ended/how they escaped but fear god did it cost me more than just sleep and my eyesight. Despite sleeping on it, I still can’t tell of V.C. Andrews deserves more or less credit than she’s been given for this as a debut.
Were some of the language choices (see Golly gosh x 1000) silly and suburban? yes, was there a good deal of hyperbole from the prophetic dreams to the downward slope of the final few chapters reveals? sure. But I cant say i wasn’t repulsed and enthralled in equal measure throughout.
The romantic description used as Cathy details all of her siblings especially Chris ramps up as we get more and more of their time in the attic and it is horrific to read but horror is also the point. I said “oh dear” aloud about 100 times in the first half because I knew what was on its way. The story and the stylistic choices cast this shuddering net over you and you cannot get out of it.
Was it melodramatic? Of course, but Cathy also explicitly refers to the events she’s lived out as of off a “soap opera.” V.C. Andrews understands the world being crafted hinges on drama because it was written and marketed as a thriller.
I was so easily hooked by the first lines of the book: the metaphor of the paper flowers and the hatred and vitriol from Cathy (before we even know who she is) pointed at mother we don’t understand and never come to, is so compelling and miss andrews manages to keep this the entire way through (even if events veer towards campy at times.)
I was also rattled by everything that happens to the children
I cant decide if it’s hit me more as an adult because I understand the full scope or if I would’ve been just as affected (if not more) had I read it as a teenager as many did when it was released.
Again, I don’t know if I reading too much into it, or not enough or just right, but I would love to read any critique written on the dollangangers. They’re presented immediately as this picturesque modern American family, aryan in looks, talented and charming and then they suffer a series of misfortunes that are so intimately intertwined with the concept of original sin it made my skin tingle. The way the nuclear family to blown to hell in this is so clever. The threads woven regarding generational traumas are so interesting,
Is there something inherently evil and wrong about the dollanganger blood?
Though evil as it’s presented in the grandmother serves its purpose it’s the mother and her neglect that truly causes discomfort. The questions of how long is too long, and what sort of reward is worthy of the time the children spend in the attic fascinated me.
Ultimately the story is almost a fable and I read it as a critique on capitalism and greed. Andrews presents us with two repeated sins: incest and moral sacrifice for capital gain. Both societal and then juxtaposes the two in how the characters are treated for indulging in either.
Would it have landed better had she only prodded us to consider the two rather than slapping us over the head with it? Again, sure. But I don’t think the lack of subtly in flowers in the attic completely detracts from the point.
Other plus points: There are some passages on suffering that are so universal and the inner monologue of Cathy gaining her agency is hard won but necessary.
Even more interesting to me is whether her intended audience was children or adults? It’s categorised as YA but it was also banned because of its content. And intended audience, marketed audience and the audience that grows off of word of mouth can all be very different.
The story in itself allows for confrontation of many horrors of adolescence, lack of privacy, confinement, sexuality, one’s place in society, the model familial home and the consequences of fracture of that, death, grief, the halo effect I could go on. It is not always perfectly written and very indicative of gender roles of it’s time period but it challenges the audience at whatever age.
Have to give her props because these characters will likely never leave me, I am desperate to understand how they manage in the outside world and whether the ghost of the attic can ever truly be shoved from their minds after escape.