Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Secret Life of Violet Grant: Fierce Women or, I accidentally read a bestseller

I don’t normally read New York Times Bestsellers in the pulp fiction category. I’m normally a “literary fiction” type who occasionally dabbles in poetry and short stories. That is to say, I’m normally a book snob. During my year reading a 100 books I read some bestsellers and non-fiction, but even then I remained committed to my choice-genre. So when I discovered Beatriz Williams was a NYT bestseller of the pulp fiction variety, I began reading The Secret Life of Violet Grant with an arrogant determination that it would be a “trashy” read. It’s a hard thing to admit, this book snobbery; a harder thing still to confess: I enjoyed, really enjoyed, The Secret Life of Violet Grant. Not just for its heady romance and historic atmosphere (though *blush* I did enjoy the heady romance), but for its exploration of what it means to be a fierce woman who both knows what she wants and is brave enough to demand it.

The twinned chronology that follows the titular Violet Grant and her great-niece Vivian, offers two perspectives on fierce women. The plot of the novel turns on a mysterious suitcase that arrives in Vivian’s possession, belonging – she discovers – to her great-Aunt Violet, who is known, in family lore, to have murdered her husband and run off with her lover in the days before the outbreak of WW1. While Vivian investigates – in the 1960s – the circumstances of this supposed murder – all with the intention of returning the suitcase, if she can – she carries on her own tortured romance with a dashing, but complicated, Dr. Paul.

It really does sound like a pulp mystery and romance. And in some ways it is: there’s intrigue, chapters that end with an echoing “dun dun dun,” there are violent encounters and dashed hopes, tearful reunions (of unexpected kinds) and, of course, comas. These dramatic elements, however, do more than make this an entirely enjoyable read (and they do that quite well), they also underpin the complex questions about what it means to be a woman, more importantly, what it means to be a fierce woman in a society that has expectations of passivity and subjugation.

Of course these are not simply historical questions; and, like all good historical fiction, the novel lets the reader consider these questions in ahistorical ways. By having Violet and Vivian (their ‘V’ names are no accident) mirror one another in decisions, tricks of fate and personality types, the reader can’t help but hear the echoes of the 1914 and 1964 tales, respectively, in the contemporary moment. How do patriarchal institutions like marriage, the university/education, and inheritence limit not only what women can achieve, but what they can imagine as possible? When women do find ways to imagine alternatives, how do we collectively punish women for their desires when they step outside convention? How do we regulate what it means to be a woman in codes of dress, behaviour, interest and desire?

This then is a question to ask myself: what is my expectation of my reading desires that I skirt an enjoyment of historical romance? We’ll save that question for another day, as I do believe The Secret life of Violet Grant is much more than simple historical romance: it’s an exploration of what it means to be a strong, smart, fierce woman. Kinda like me. Just saying.

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Popular and the Literary

In writing about and reading Donna Tartt’s The Goldfinch I had the opportunity to talk to a few people about what shapes their decision to read a book. Quite a few people raised that in some cases they purposely *avoid* reading something when it gets too much popular attention (think Harry Potter) while others suggested that they read almost exclusively those books recommended from critics “top” lists. I suppose I’m interested in a couple of things: how do you choose what to read? how does popular/critical opinion shape your reaction to a book?

Feel free to discuss (please do!) or to contact me directly with your thoughts.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Stanley Park: Great on Food; Poor on Plot

         So Timothy Taylor’s *Stanley Park* was on the list of books recommended to me when I moved to Vancouver. Not surprising, perhaps, as the book spends a lot of time describing the city: the disparity between rich and poor, the exceptional natural beauty, the pretension of the foodie-hipsters who live here and then, in great detail, the landscape of the largest park (and biggest tourist attraction), Stanley Park. 

The protagonist, Jeremy, is an idealistic young chef who owns a hip restaurant and cooks (magnificent) locally sourced meals. The plot thickens as his restaurant struggles to maintain financial solvency, and thickens further as the plot detours to follow Jeremy’s father, “The Professor” who lives IN Stanley Park as part of an ethnographic study of homeless folks who live in the park AND investigating a cold case murder of two children. 

I suppose there are some ways in which these two plot lines intersect: Jeremy visits his father in the woods, thematic parallels around local food and local/post-national belonging. But for this reader it felt very much like two plot lines jammed together without the necessary exposition making it clear why a murder mystery and foodie romance belong together. Indeed, even with careful reading I’m still unsure about who/how the murder was committed, why it was significant for Jeremy and what implications it had for The Professor. 

So here’s how I take it:

The restaurant plot and Jeremy is great. The writing is decent, the descriptions of food and cooking are great and the questions around independent/small business v conglomerate are interesting and worth exploring.

The Stanley Park plot is terrible. The descriptions try so hard to be literary and poetic that it’s entirely unclear to this reader what is happening, to whom and why. More importantly, I still don’t know why I should care about this plot line. What does it have to do with the local food? with food security? 

Hmm. I’ve been telling folks this is a great read (and it did help me past my “Let The Great World Spin” hangover) but in writing this I’m not sure its great so much as the one strand of the novel is great. Can part of a novel be great and the other part terrible and the sum be something like average? I don’t think so. I think it’s still worth reading for the gorgeous food bits, just don’t be surprised if you’re reading and wondering what the hell this Czech guy is doing living on Lion’s Gate Bridge. And maybe also don’t be surprised if you’re a little annoyed with the editor of this book who failed Taylor in not telling him that you can’t just jam two plot flavours together and hope for a satisfying read. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Canadian Literature, Fiction, Uncategorized

On Reading

I read novels as a way to think about my responsibilities without having to think about my responsibilities. I read novels about characters who create new identities for themselves, or who question the dangers of too much compromise, or who contemplate the brevity of life and the challenge of making meaning in a world of such surplus and scarcity, a world of such disparity. While reading these novels I think that I understand the questions the author is asking. I pause after a poignant paragraph, I write essays on completion of the novel that summarize my impressions of the narrative, I emphatically recommend books to anyone who will listen and enthusiastically agree with the declaration that such and such a book is just incredible. I don’t do these things without sincerity; in each moment I attend to the narrative itself I am committed to being with and in the narrative.

I tell people – family, friends, colleagues – that the value of reading Literature is its capacity for changing perceptions, for inviting questions, for provocation, challenge and for altering the way readers look at everyday life. I passionately argue for an engaged readership that sees novels as a way to explore societal ills and potential solutions, as a space to wrestle with historical and contemporary grievances and injuries, and as a conversation about who we are as people, what we value and what defines us as (ir)rational, meaning-making, meaning-seeking beings.

Any regular reader will know that what I’ve written so far can only be followed by a “but,” because this is not an era of sincerity and we are not inclined to the optimistic observations about simplistic goods. My but is not dependent on an admission of the failings of fiction, far from it; I remain earnest in my stated beliefs about the power of novels. But. For all my acclamation of beauty, power and potential, I, myself, refuse these opportunities for sustained reflection. I make routine resolutions to sit quietly with my thoughts and to ask myself what I value, what my purpose might be, what makes for a meaningful relationship. I run, I swim, I cycle and each moment I’m engaged in these expressions of body – these intense experiences of breath, heat, movement – I remind myself that I should be thinking about the Big Questions (and that I should be writing my own novel while I’m at it). In the moments on transit when each rider fills the car with their separate, silent dialogues I think I should be thinking right now. I see my days as moments when I should be thinking about myself and my community, but I instead fill my mental landscape with headphone music, cellphone conversations, internet television, food, radio, sex and sleep. This admission is not intended as an indictment of “modern society” and its ills of isolation; this admission is meant only as confession.

I confess that I do not know how to spend time with my own thoughts. I do not want to ask the questions I read in novels. I do not want to know how little substance I have available to shape an answer. I will avoid the risk of inevitable silence by cramming my mental space with all manner of other distractions, not the least of which are novels.

I read because I do not want to think about myself, my complicity in inequality, my failure to meet my own expectations of citizen engagement, my frustration with my friends, family and colleagues, my dissatisfaction with the promises made and undelivered, my hurt and loneliness, my secret belief that I’m destined for great things.

Am I sad? Do I want to quit my job? Do I love my partner enough? What are my responsibilities to my family? What do I owe my community? Why do I get paid as well as I do? How can I live in a country that denies health care to refugees and exploits the environment for economic gain? I can’t answer these questions because I won’t answer them. I won’t give up the mental real estate required to be sad. To be hurt by injustice, by my selfishness, by exclusion. Instead I’ll read stories that let me feel just a little bit, just enough to assure myself that I’m engaged and that I’m politically active. I will read novels that grant me the self-assurance to say “oh this is an important question” and to flag it as such when I present the story to someone else. As if I can take credit for the thematic heft by identifying its existence. As if I can claim depth by knowing where the deep end lies.

I read, still. I love reading because I love feeling like I’m doing something.  I’m asking the questions, but only to you. After I finish this sentence I’ll close my thoughts, pick up a book, and let someone else take responsibility for giving the answers.

Leave a comment

Filed under Erin's Favourite Books, Uncategorized