It feels like we have to start with Anna. I didn’t hate her, yet so many readers seem to find her deplorable. In fact, I think I sympathize with her. I’m not running to jump in random beds, but find myself feeling protective whenever I see her characterized a certain way. I think it’s easy to let Anna’s privilege prevent us from seeing her deep depression, even though it’s clear from the novel’s start. Depression won’t skip over someone just because they live in a beautiful country with a wealthy husband who makes it unnecessary for them to work. Being depressed isn’t the same as simply feeling sad or dissatisfied and it’s not something that can always be fixed with a hobby or new friends, though we’re quick to think of those as cures.
Certainly, Anna’s privilege puts her in a better position to manage her depression than most, but that doesn’t mean it can’t have a significant impact on her life. What is it, exactly, that makes Anna unlikable for so many? Would readers be more accepting of, or able to see, her depression if she lived a less privileged life?
Agreed. I was ‘Team Anna’ from start to finish with this novel. I related to her in nearly every single way. Having suffered from depression myself it was immediately apparent that this was exactly what she was suffering from. I felt connected to all of her actions and totally felt like I understood her thoughts and motivations, between both her passivity and her actions.
Her privilege doesn’t mean much. Even fancy doctors fail her, either dismissing her (“it’s a phase” when she was a child) or, at the other extreme, putting too much burden on their patient—you can’t expect a patient who is clearly having a breakdown to have the wherewithal to call the emergency number for herself on her own. Even when she finally asks for help, nobody is fully there for her. Her family, her friend Mary, her doctor, even the priest…
So right. And it’s a great reminder that privilege can mean many different things depending on context, far beyond race or class.
You guys just hit the nail on the head here. I’m not sure exactly how to phrase it, but not having to deal with mental illness is definitely a form of privilege, it’s not one that we often talk about—because mental illness (despite one in four Americans suffering from it) still holds a terrible stigma, I think that this is demonstrated greatly through the number of readers who villainize or dislike Anna.
I’m not excusing her actions, however depression and mental illness can lead a person to do strange things—just to feel like they have some control over something. I think this, more than anything else, is what Anna’s affairs were about.
I hear what you’re all saying but I didn’t feel it at all. I had no antipathy towards Anna and when everything crashes down I felt sorry for her, but Essbaum did not make a case for sympathy for me. She was not unlikable to me. In fact, I would have liked not liking her! She generated almost no emotion for me which is probably why the ending didn’t shock me.
Also, I’m not promoting the pharmaceutical industry here, but if Anna has a lifelong battle with depression she should have been on meds. I felt that Essbaum was taking the easy way out and expecting me to feel bad for Anna with very little background.
I agree that she did not get any actual, useful help. But I didn’t get the feeling Essbaum was taking the easy way out at all, I thought the depression gave all the background necessary. Wouldn’t it be the most likely reason for her destructive behavior, her inability to “find a hobby” or to “pull herself out of it”? And this happens in real life: women with depression do get brushed off over and over again, sometimes even by professionals.
For sure! The doctor prescribed tranquilizers, so surely she could have prescribed anti-depressants to stabilize Anna. Her actions at the end of the book (in my opinion) border on malpractice. Anna described her behavior as ‘manic’—Doktor Messerli should have at the very least called emergency services for her.
I also can’t help but wonder, does the title of the book lead people to dismiss Anna’s behavior as “expat loneliness” or “domestic boredom”?
Shannon, in your review you mentioned Anna’s trajectory is somewhat “predictable.” I had a lot of possibilities in my mind, including what actually happened, yet I was still completely surprised from that one momentous event to the very end.
I absolutely did not see her son’s death coming, but I sensed fairly early how the novel would end. With that said, I don’t think predictable necessarily means bad. Like you mentioned, it was set up pretty perfectly and, though it wasn’t a happy ending, I think it was the end the book needed.
I actually found myself hoping for that particular ending, which made me feel terrible! But at the same time, I could imagine a number of paths that could have offered hope…yet none of the characters stepped up to the plate to help that happen. (Is that an unfair feeling?) I think I was swept away by Anna’s wandering hopelessness in those last pages and just wanted her to get some relief from it all.
I was completely unsurprised by the ending. I agree that it was the only way the book could have ended in a satisfying manner, however I wish it had been a little less Anna Karenina, I might have preferred a bridge. I was however—to the point of actually gasping—shocked at her son discovering her affair while at the zoo and then later by his death.
Also, I don’t think that’s unfair at all, Monika. Where was everyone when she was truly in crisis? She had just lost a child, I think her actions were predictable and Bruno turning her out of the house at that point, knowing she had little to no support system was irresponsible.
As much as I felt for Anna throughout the book, in that particular moment at the zoo when she convinces her son to stay silent…I kind of hated her then (just in that moment).
It definitely was not her finest moment, but I think that she realized that after the fact and was acting more like a cornered animal rather than a mother. By the time she realized how abhorrent her behavior towards Charles was, it was too late.
I was surprised by the zoo twist but not her response. I never had a sense that Anna cared about anyone but herself—even as a depressive. She had no remorse about her affairs or their impact on others. Which is why I feel like Essbaum was ultimately writing a morality tale. You sin and you pay the price. It wasn’t even for love, it was to self-medicate. She had to pay and by ending this way, Essbaum puts the reader on trial as much as Anna—how will you view her?
Oh, interesting! I didn’t get the sense that Essbaum was judging Anna’s morality, but I’ve read many reviews that seem to agree with you when it comes to Anna’s sense of narcissism. I’ll be curious to see where the comments fall on all of this.
As for Anna Karenina, as soon as I closed the book the parallel bothered me, too. Not so much that it was there, but I knew it would be an obvious comparison and something people would pick up from marketing or other readers before they even started the book.
Speaking of marketing: If a woman enjoys sex must we compare it to erotica? I’ve seen more than one person express their dissatisfaction with the marketing of this book, particularly the “Madame Bovary Meets 50 Shades” pitch. It’s been something sticking in my craw as well. Women have been having (gasp!) and reading about (double gasp!) sex for many years, centuries even. Why does a book wherein a woman has sexual desires have to be compared to erotica? Guess what folks, women dig sex. It’s normal. It’s not kinky, it’s not necessarily erotica. It just IS. I, for one, don’t have a problem with that and I’d wager that many other readers (female or otherwise) don’t either.
Well, that’s just stupid. And offensive to Madame Bovary! I have no issue with sex but I could see a comparison to erotica here because Essbaum uses pretty graphic language in her sex scenes. And, I’ll say it, I don’t like that. Not just here, in any media. I’m a ‘leave something to the imagination’ kind of gal.
I didn’t read a synopsis or anything before picking up this book. If I had seen that comparison, I would have skipped the book entirely!
I had heard the comparison, though not read the synopsis, which is what took me so long to pick it up.
Did the marketing team decide that people would be lured by comparisons to a sexy book? Did they think they were warning off “good girls” from reading something that might upset their delicate sensibilities? I’m not sure. I do know that if I had seen it compared to 50 Shades of Grey I wouldn’t have read it. Luckily, I picked it up long before the current marketing campaign began.
I’m most offended by the comparison because the gap in quality of writing is mindblowing, but you know they’d never attach that marketing to a comparable novel written by a man. Let me know the next time James Salter gets 50 Shades plastered on one of his books and we can throw this discussion out the window.
And that’s just it. The same seems to go for the idea of male affairs versus female affairs. I don’t feel with books about men having affairs there’s as much emphasis or, I don’t know, judgement of their motivations. Why as readers are we so quick to either judge Anna for her affairs or find a reason to ‘explain’ them away?
There’s definitely a double standard when it comes to male versus female sexuality. Maybe it all goes back to that. It doesn’t seem like there’s much of an attempt to look for a reason for male affairs, whether in books, movies, or even real life. I can’t imagine seeing comments that a man must have been “depressed” or “bored” or “lonely.”
We, and others, have spent a lot of time talking about Anna’s motivations. WHY did she have affairs? Spin that a little…what if Anna were ALAN. Would we even wonder? Would we ask ourselves so many questions? Would we be talking about his affairs at all? “Boys will be boys”, after all. I feel if this were a male character the affairs wouldn’t be center stage. We certainly wouldn’t be considering his mental state or whether or not he had a hobby to keep him from cheating on his wife.
This is interesting to me because I feel that Essbaum doesn’t play the gender game at all, so why are we? Anna states, “These men were simply the embodiment of urges she no longer wished to deny herself.” She doesn’t allude to boredom, loneliness or depression so I take it as it is written—she doesn’t care. If that’s not the case and there is a reason then, for me, Essbaum doesn’t express it well enough for me to care.
I think this is a good example of what makes the reading experience different for all of us. Some books will move us, while others may not. For me, some of the most interesting things about this novel were unsaid; the way it got me thinking about society’s expectations and perceptions, whether or not a character named “Alan” would worry if he was a “good husband, mostly.”
It’s something Anna tells herself or thinks throughout her marriage. Do we think Anna is a good wife? For that matter, is Bruno a good husband?
I think that Anna is the best wife that she can be under the circumstances. It all goes back to her untreated depression. She goes to the market, she gets out of bed, she cares for her children, and yes: she sleeps around. But at the same time she’s a stranger in a strange and unwelcoming land—struggling against her depression—struggling to control something. Sex is something she has complete control over.
I don’t think that Bruno is a bad husband, perhaps an unobservant one—though this theory has problems when we consider the statement that Bruno ‘knew everything’—we’re left as readers wondering how much he actually did know. Also, I think there was something of a cultural barrier between the two—even after all those years of marriage.
What makes a good wife in the first place? What kind of “good wife” is the author asking us to consider? The typical good wife, yes? The sort of wife that doesn’t have affairs, certainly. We know for sure that Anna doesn’t fit into that particular archetype.
Read Our Reviews:
Lovely Bookshelf | The Gilmore Guide | River City Reading | The Steadfast Reader
What do you think, readers? What role did the cultural differences play in Hausfrau? What if Anna was Alan—how would that have affected readers’ reactions? Did you find Anna unlikable? If so, how did that impact your reading? Is there something else about this novel that you’re dying to discuss?
Remember, you don’t have to worry about spoilers here, and we hope you’ll engage with other commenters as well!
March 25, 2015 at 12:29 am
I DID find Anna unlikable, yet completely understandable (and side bar, and enjoy an unlikable character quite a bit). I think the way her character was developed, I totally saw where she was coming from, and the motivations behind her decisions. Though not justifiable in any ways, but COMPLETELY understandable. If that makes sense.
I’ve been awake for way too many hours at this point at work, and will come back later with more coherent thoughts, but I’m LOVING the set-up here and the conversational and slightly tangential style. BRB 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:54 am
Personally I love an unlikable character. I generally find villains to be more nuanced and interesting than heroes.
But I like how you put that you didn’t like her, but understood her. I think that’s probably a better way to sum up my feelings too. She’s not someone I’d really want to have tea with or chat books (I also felt like her egocentric friend….[not Mary, the other one – I don’t have the book in front of me] was kind of a view of who Anna might have been without her depression (which was TOTALLY unlikable AND more difficult to understand) – especially if you apply Freudian dream stuff that the analyst discussed where every character *IS* you in the dream.
Is it possible that we’re meant to read every character in this book as a facet of Anna?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:06 pm
I love you so much for this little piece of genius.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 9:25 am
Does it not seem to everyone (and this is a bit off topic – sorry) that a book cannot be published today without some comparison to some other book – notably a bestseller? I am so over that. I think it sets up unrealistic expectations in some cases and perhaps encourages slight spoiler type things in others. Why can’t we just let the books stand on their own?
And I agree that depression, serious depression, can make individuals act in ways that seem unbelievable to family or friends or whomever. We have dealt with that in our family with a teenage niece. It’s heartbreaking and shocking. And yet, you find yourself asking, how did we miss this? Maybe not thinking it was depression but something else. My two cents.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:08 am
I agree that we should let books stand on their own. I rarely find them to be similar at all to the books that they are compared to.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:37 am
I’m so with you on letting books stand on their own! I think the Anna Karenina comparison was a huge spoiler, and as they discussed in the post, the 50 Shades comparison is misleading. Comparisons like that seem to serve the publisher MUCH more than the reader.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:07 pm
I think I tweeted as soon as I finished reading something like, “Hurry up and read this before people start making comparisons and ruining everything.”
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:46 pm
That was a huge spoiler! I didn’t read *anything* about the book beforehand so the connection with her name wasn’t there. Anna. Common enough. Moving on. You know?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:41 pm
I, for one, was so happy that this book was nothing like the 50 shades, and still wonder why it was even compared. If the comparison is based solely on the sexual encounters, it still isn’t a comparison in my opinion. Thankfully so.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:57 am
Completely with you on point one, Kay. Particularly when I don’t even get the comparison. Is there a book written with a female protagonist that isn’t compared to Gone Girl?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:19 am
Nothing’s off topic here! 🙂
But I totally agree that book marketing is getting totally out of hand with comparisons to certain books (notably Gone Girl), I also didn’t understand the 50 Shades comparison, just because there’s sexytime in a novel it’s automatically ‘similar to’ 50 Shades? I think that Catherine said it in the post, but I feel like that comparison is insulting to Essbaum’s excellent writing.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:49 pm
I completely agree w/ the comparison in general, and CERTAINLY with the 50 Shades comparison. It’s a bit insulting really….
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:42 pm
Sick. Sick. Sick. of the comparisons to Gone Girl and 50 Shades. I agree, Katie, that is is insulting.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:19 pm
I would NEVER have drawn any comparison between this book and 50 Shades. I find that insulting, since this book was beautifully written – every word carefully and purposefully selected – and 50 Shades was so badly written that I actually threw it across the room. Also? Just because there’s sex in a book does NOT make it erotica! I read erotica. This isn’t it.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:41 pm
Agreed! And this is a perfect example of an “unintentional spoiler” as Shannon described in her River City Reading post.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:02 am
A few notes I had that are a bit off the main topic, but were what stuck with me following a read I really enjoyed. I took someone’s advice (my memory won’t remind me who, but thank you) and listened to the audio version, which was really superbly done:
Perhaps because Anna was our protagonist and I was somewhat inured to her actions, there were four moments in the book that really stuck with me.
The first concerns Edith, when Anna asked what she would do if one of her twins died. She responded, and I’m paraphrasing here, “Well, at least I have a spare.” I was listening to the audio version and maybe that had something to do with it, because that was read as a complete straight line and I got the sense Edith wasn’t even half joking. It was one of those moments that actually took me aback, which I love. Our protag (in this story) is the “bad” actor, yet some of the things Edith did, and certainly (my second “stuck with me” moment) Bruno’s beating of Anna, were, on a sliding scale of crummy, worse. How did those of you who read rather than listened to the book interpret that line, if you even remember it?
The third moment is the main moment that struck me as an off/false note. And it was a very small moment, but I found it difficult to swallow that a woman with three children, even in Anna’s state, would turn off her cellphone while off with her lover. I’m guessing the idea is she was just that removed from being a caring, responsible person, but it just didn’t compute for me.
Her doctor “rejecting” her during that last moment when she was in need seemed a bit off as well (fourth moment). Those two bits felt a smidge like tools to move the plot to where the author wanted to go. Wouldn’t it have been just as easy to have the doctor unreachable? Maybe it would have lacked the impact.
As for the unlikable discussion, I’m not sure I found Anna unlikable as much as simply sad. I kept trying to think what I would have made of her if I’d met her, say, in German class. I think I would have found her unreachable or remote, rather than unlikable. I give Mary credit for forging the amount of friendship she was able, Anna was a tough, depressed nut to crack.
Ok, done rambling. Thanks for giving me a space to do it. 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:50 am
When I read Edith’s “at least I have a spare” line, I thought she was trying to make a little joke in order to avoid thinking about something so major and real. Edith seemed to live in a perpetual “fun” state, without time for much else. That this line was delivered straight, non-joking in the audio… wow, that would have really thrown me for a loop.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:55 am
I initially read her just as you did, Monika, and thought her a real kick, i.e., “It was no fun to have coffee with Edith, because Edith drank bourbon” (or however that line went) and thus I *was* thrown for a loop at the seeming seriousness with which that line was narrated. Now I wish I’d rewound a bit and listened again, but it really struck me at the time and totally changed my view of Edith.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:59 pm
I interpreted Edith’s character as being disingenuous to the point of rudeness and aggression. She almost goes out of her way to say the least sympathetic thing at every opportunity, challenging people to see anything likeable in her. Perhaps it’s because she doesn’t like herself, perhaps it’s because her life is so shallow that she doesn’t ever let herself feel anything deeply. Either way, I interpreted this as the type of flippant remark someone makes when they’re accustomed to not giving an honest answer to anything, and purposely going for whatever response has the most shock value.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:41 pm
That’s a great assessment, M, and one I shared by the end. You seem to have caught on to her before I did. Don’t know if that has anything to do with print v. audio or if I was just so caught up thinking about Anna that Edith seemed a bit quirky at first rather than just a callous B. I think you hit her spot on.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:58 pm
I read a print version – I also wonder if my assessment would have differed had I been listening to the story! I get the sense that HOW her lines were read could make a really huge difference in how her character comes across – deadpan, snarky, sarcastic…. her lines could come across in different ways.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 9:05 pm
That’s very true, and I often wonder how much insight a narrator gets/asks for from an author about such things. Housfrau is one of those books I wish I had time to go through in audio and print, print first, to see how such things differ, if at all. I’m guessing while there is a little less guesswork interpreting narration, even that can be interpreted differently. One person’s snark is another’s rudeness. Yet another reason I love discussing these things. It’s always fun to see differing takes, interpretations and points of view.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:31 pm
I think that because of the way this book was written (the fact that it was first person from Anna’s perspective, but also because of the amount of observation and depth that went into it) everyone will probably perceive the characters slightly differently based on which aspects of their representation strike the strongest chord. That’s what makes for such rich dialogue!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 8:17 am
Was Edith’s character there as a marker to show the difference between a truly unlikable character (Edith) compared to just a sad, remote one (Anna)?
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 12:22 pm
Definitely possible. I also kind of felt like she was there to underline Anna’s isolation – before Mary, she was Anna’s closest friend, but she wasn’t any kind of friend at all.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:03 pm
I also read it as joking, or a deflection of sorts.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:05 pm
The doctor rejection scene struck me as well. Plot device? Probably 😉 I definitely felt frustrated on Anna’s behalf during that bit though.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:13 pm
I hear you, I was frustrated as well. Query whether the author needed to make the doctor seem uncaring or irresponsible. Would Anna’s fate have been any different if the doc had just been unavailable rather than rejecting? I don’t think so. And I’ve now probably picked this nit more than enough. 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Oh, I love your response about her being sad instead of “unlikable”…it’s so true. I may have to quote it for our discussion on unlikable characters next week 😉
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:28 am
I read this not knowing anything about it except the blurb that said, for people that loved The Woman Upstairs, which I did. I think it is a pretty fair comparison. Both are sad books, with strong, but flawed female leads. And both audiences are probably similar. And the writing in both, wonderful. Rebecca at Book Riot, often compares Hausfrau to Dept. Of Speculation, which I would never have seen but once pointed out, seems obvious.
I felt Anna’s actions and thought process very real, and although I didn’t predict the ending early in the book, it was a realistic end for her.
The thought that this book is in anyway is getting mentioned, let alone compared to 50 Shades is so, not right!
And although each book should stand alone, it’s difficult not to compare when trying to describe it to other people. It’s great, just read it, as a recommendation, only works for a small group people. Unfortunately too many people need to know everything about it before they will read it.
Also I want to say thank you for setting up this type of forum/conversation! It’s great hearing others people’s thoughts and ideas and being able to interact with them.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:11 pm
I hadn’t seen the comparison to Dept. of Speculation. That’s interesting and makes me want to re-read Dept. of Spec. Hmm.
The comparison to 50 Shades makes me feel stabby. STABBY. 😀
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:12 pm
STABBY INDEED!!! 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:10 pm
I think we need to throw Dept. of Speculation in the Salon because I want to re-read it again, too. And it’s one with some serious love/hate.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:34 am
I always find it strange when reviews focus on whether the reader “liked” the main character; isn’t that beside the point? Who wants to read about someone who is a perfect wife and mother? Complicated characters like Anna are so much more interesting because they feel real and help us develop empathy for people whose experiences are different from our own. Anna put me into the head of someone who suffers from depression, feels isolated in a foreign country, and is largely ignored by her husband. Yes, she made some bad decisions — but who hasn’t?
I really loved this book up until it reached the end that I saw coming from a mile away. I’m pretty angry at whoever chose to publicize a blurb calling Hausfrau a “modern-day Anna Karenina,” because it effectively spoiled the ending for me. Borrowing themes from classic novels is all well and good, but it could have been done a bit more subtly. Naming the main character Anna and having her jump in front of a train just felt too obvious and on-the-nose.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:50 am
I kind of feel like, in this case, it is supposed to be obvious. Maybe we are meant to focus on all the events leading up to the end, all the while knowing how it is going to end? What bothers me about it, though, is that there is not much else in the story that is actually the same as Anna K. Anna from Hausfrau has a long history of depression, rather than becoming depressed as a result of her situation, she does not leave her husband for another man, or even fall in love with another man, and she does not become an outcast, except maybe in her own mind. No one else even knows about Anna’s affairs.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 10:59 am
Yes, aside from the name, affair, and suicide, she doesn’t have much in common with Anna K. Their social circumstances and the consequences of their affairs are totally different. And I think that ties into why I was frustrated by the ending. This story is set in 2006, not the 1800s. Shouldn’t we have moved on from the “woman has affair, kills herself” story line? Catherine said Hausfrau felt like an old-fashioned morality tale, and I definitely see her point.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:37 pm
I think the major difference is that Anna K’s ending was one rooted in passion, shame, etc. where Hausfrau’s suicide comes at the end of a deep depression…they’re actually quite different stories. As dark as it sounds, I see Essbaum as empathizing with Anna rather than shaming her.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:07 pm
You and I have very similar thoughts on the whole unlikeable character thing. Who cares if she’s likeable? How boring would the world (and books!) be if we liked everyone? Anna was a woman like any other. A woman who made good decisions, bad decisions, mediocre decisions…just like any other person.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:03 pm
Agreed, agreed, agreed! And we’re going to jump into this more next week.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:05 pm
Wait… I don’t remember her jumping in front of a train at the end. I guess I’ve got some rereading to do!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:34 pm
The description was so subtle it gave me chills. Remember at the beginning of the book she talks about the only time that Swiss trains don’t run on time is if someone jumps in front of them? The book ends with her at the train platform and something like, “For the rest of the day the trains didn’t run on time.”
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 4:04 pm
Oh, me too. And then I yelled because it was so perfect and horrible and anger-inducing all at the same time.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:16 pm
I totally missed that… Definitely going back to reread asap.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:31 pm
I missed it, too. LOVE all the layers!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:54 pm
Oh god, I LOVED the ending. It was literary perfection. And I also, had chills from head to toe.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:36 pm
This also coincides with the portions of Roland’s German lessons. “Only in the present tense is the subject married to its very. The action — all action, past and future — comes at the end. At the very end, when there is nothing left to do but act.” BRILLIANT!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:39 pm
OMG. You’re right. Essbaum really did some magical things with language in this book.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:17 pm
I loved how the language lessons were used to underline themes in the book. And how the therapist sessions were used to provide an outside viewpoint on Anna’s actions since the book was written from her perspective. I thought those literary tricks added so much depth and I was in awe of the creative leaps Essbaum took with these connections!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:24 pm
YES! So good.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:59 pm
Oh. That *is* brilliant. Good catch, Kathy. 😀
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 11:02 am
Oh my goodness, I didn’t catch that, but it’s perfect!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:57 pm
Holy cats. I had forgotten just how that was worded. That just gave me goosebumps!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:54 pm
I LOVE an unlikable character, and find them IMMENSELY more satisfying to read about. I find as long as the character is well developed, relateable in some way, and interesting I’m all about it. In contrast (and maybe this is food for thought next week) – Theo from The Goldfinch – although an unlikable character, I found him so despicable and also so BORING, that I could not get on board with him, was rooting against him, and ultimately caused me to really dislike the book…. so what’s the difference?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:15 pm
I know you and I have had discussions about the unlikable character, and the more I’ve thought about it, the more I’ve come to the conclusion that how a character is written matters so much more to me than whether they’re “good” or “nice.” Like someone said (I think April?) villains are often just so much more interesting than the good guys! I like layers in my characters, I like depths to plumb, and I like surprises (as long as they’re believable).
Another thing that occurred to me as I was reading all the comments about other characters is that I didn’t actually like ANY of the characters in this book. Anna, obviously, is a difficult person, her husband is largely gruff and absent, her mother-in-law makes no effort to connect with or help her outside of the children, Edith is a self-centred bitch (sorry, there’s really no other word that quite fits how I felt about her), the doctor frustrated me and the Mary character was so naive that I found her irritating, as much as I thought she was good for Anna.
And yet…. I still thought this book was very good, because the characters were at the very least interesting. They kept me guessing, and they had layers. Their interactions revealed different facets of their personalities, and the writing was poetic (I was not at all surprised to learn that Essbaum is also a poet). That, for me at least, is the difference.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:22 pm
This is SO spot on! The interesting thing to me is that very few people who dislike Anna so much seem to mention these issues with the other characters. I find Edith’s attitude/behavior much more off-putting than Anna’s, personally.
We’re going to be talking about the idea of “unlikable” characters and how that ties into enjoying books next week, so I hope you bring all these great thoughts 😉
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:56 pm
Ooooh, looking forward to it! Katie got me thinking about it a lot, because my knee-jerk reaction to books I didn’t like that had “unlikable” characters was to blame the characters. But when I really stop to think about it, it’s more complicated than that, and there are several books I really enjoyed that feature unlikable protagonists. I do find that it’s a bit more challenging to read books that focus on these characters (like this and Gone Girl), but that it’s also very much worth it in the end!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 9:08 pm
I agree that several of the characters are unlikable, even more so than just Anna. At least Anna, I could understand where she was coming from, as well as understand she is clearly suffering from depression.
You’re right, Edith was a biotch for sure. And really, what was Bruno’s problem exactly? I’m inclined to REALLY dislike him, which stays settled on simple dislike because I don’t really know anything else about him. And OH! – This reminds me… did anyone else think it was a little out of character when he beat the sh*t out of Anna, if he had never previously even laid a hand on her that way before? I mean, he definitely seemed to like to dominate in the bedroom, but so what. I don’t think that necessarily means he’s inclined to be a violent person otherwise. I could see if he had just slapped her once as like a reflex or in a burst of rage, but he really went for it, and I thought it just seemed a little…. odd? extreme? something?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:02 pm
Yeah, I kind of read Bruno as just being very… Swiss. It seemed like there was a cultural disconnect there, exacerbated by him just not being a really effusive guy. Whether this was partly due to him having suspicions about his wife’s infidelity the whole time or if he was just always like that, either way, I don’t think that made him horrible. Either he was just like that, and she knew that when she married him, or he was like that because of her actions.
I also found it a stretch when he beat her up. I could understand if he was upset having just been confronted by not only her infidelity, but the fact that his daughter wasn’t actually his (previous suspicions and denial or not) and had tried to leave, maybe she’d tried to grab him and he pushed her and she fell. That I would seem plausible. But not actually hitting her. The plot lost me a little bit at that point.
In thinking about why the author decided to write the scene that way, I think maybe she was purposely leveling out the playing field so that there’s no obvious “good guy.” In doing so, she makes the reader have to face the ugly side of every character with less summary judgment. But still – I wish she’d gone a more subtle route with that one!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:28 pm
I didn’t think about it much as I was reading either, because I was so focused on Anna. I think Anna and Edith were really similar: both very self-centred, both unhappy, both having affairs with little regard for their husbands. Edith is just outwardly selfish and obvious about it, and her personality is more abrasive. But when you come down to it, that was really all that set them apart. I can’t say I’d really want either of them to be my best friend!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 12:31 pm
This was my comment (you’ve obviously copied and pasted). See above.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 3:29 pm
Unfortunately, we had to delete your comment because it was a double post from another user. Please let us know if you need help using Disqus and we’d be happy to help you navigate the system – we’d love to hear your thoughts on the book.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:35 am
I didn’t find Anna to be unlikable, I just felt sorry for her. I feel sympathy for anyone who is unable to feel happy. And, I think she definitely had depression and wasn’t getting the help she needed, either because she wasn’t trying hard enough, no one else was noticing how dire her situation was, or she just didn’t care enough about herself anymore. Some people, maybe, just can’t ever get better.
What I am hoping can be discussed a little is the character of Mary. How she compares to Anna, and what her purpose was in the book. Did she get written in as a contrast to Anna’s behavior, or to show that Anna was beyond even being able to properly be friends with someone, or to show how well Anna was able to hide her real life even from someone who was showing such a big interest in her? In fact, Mary sometimes seemed pushy in her need for a friend. There was at least one instance that Anna almost told Mary one of her secrets. It seemed like a sign of life from Anna that she wanted tell someone. But, then, not surprisingly, she didn’t. What stopped her? Was she afraid of being judged, or was she afraid of reaching out and trying to come back from the brink? Any thoughts on Mary?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:29 am
I have some differing thoughts on Mary, I think that she was an extremely interesting character especially considering the juxtaposition that she made next to Anna. She was the polar opposite. After the comment that I made above this morning I found myself wondering if Mary was would Anna was supposed to have been if she was a ‘good wife’.
But beside that I found Mary to be pushy for a friend too, she got on my nerves a bit. (Ironic, I know.) After Mary told the story of burning down the shed(?) and bullying the girl to changing schools in high school I thought that for sure Anna could admit a few measly affairs and possibly bring herself back to redemption. But I think that the fact that Mary was SO INVESTED (and in love) with her husband may have been part of what stopped her… I’m rambling. Someone else chime in with a little more clarity. 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:33 pm
Maybe it has to do with the “mask” Running ‘N’ Reading referred to above?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:58 pm
I initially found Mary to be pretty boring, and perfect “wifey,” if you know what I mean. But when she shared the shed burning/bullying story, she immediately became more interesting. I think her perfect perfect always happy doting wife thing was partially, her trying to make up for what she did. Especially if she never admitted it, there’s no chance for forgiveness or atonement of any kind, so she’s stuck feeling guilty, and trying to make up for it in other ways. Maybe….?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:03 pm
I think that could be a fair interpretation of Mary – especially considering how pained and regretful she seemed when she related the story to Anna maybe her attempt at perfection is a way to try and make amends.
But she’s also been with her husband since high school – which leave me suspicious of her too. 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:38 pm
I didn’t like Mary in the beginning…too much of that cookie cutter wife type, but loved how she took charge of things in her life towards the end. I ended up being proud of her! She did what Anna ultimately couldn’t do. And – I wonder if Charles hadn’t been killed, would Anna have been able to take a different path? Could she have found the road to recovery?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:00 pm
“She did what Anna ultimately couldn’t do.” I think you’re right here, and why April may be on track with the idea that the women could be reflecting different facets of Anna. Perhaps Mary is Anna without her depression?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Interesting. A glimpse of what Anna’s life could have been like without depression, with the ability to make different choices.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 3:09 pm
I love this! I also thought that wanderer/adventurer friend (I think it was Nancy?) was clearly supposed to be a contrast to both Anna and Mary. And – I think Mary and Anna shared certain personality traits – like having a hard time branching out in the world, etc.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:57 am
Been working my way through the comments dying to discuss Mary – I think she was actually a cleverly masked antagonist… Especially appreciating the Jung theory. She’d cottoned onto Anna’s affair with Archie – a reader of erotic romances did she see this through rose-tinted but green eyes? jealous because she’d only known her husband – was living the societal expected life … I think she definetly played a part manipulsting & orchastrating Anna’s downfall – not that I’m saying Anna was an innocent
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 8:25 am
Interesting… I hadn’t thought of it like that. I was assuming that she did everything unknowingly, but maybe she knew exactly what she was doing. But, is jealousy a big enough motivator for something like that? What does she get out of it? She did give us that story about how she bullied a girl in high school. But, what kind of person would think Anna was someone to be jealous of? It seems as if Mary was either a very naïve character, or quite the opposite. I wish I could ask the author what her purpose was!!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 8:47 am
Wouldn’t that be great… I definitely think she wasn’t merely naive… Given the reference to Jung theory the ‘goodness’ felt like a mask – the societal expected perfect behaviour – her past proved she had it in her to be wicked
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:46 am
Very interesting discussion! Here is what I have been dying to discuss about Hausfrau: I find the novel to be a rather old-fashioned, moralistic story of a woman who makes mistakes and then must be severely punished. I feel like I’ve read this basic tale in a number of 19th century novels (Madame Bovary, Anna Karenina)–and that plot makes some sense in the context of their time period. A present-day update of this story, for me, needs a re-imagined ending. I kept waiting and hoping that Essbaum would find an intriguing way to turn the plot on its head, and to let Anna find a way to pull herself out of her terrible situation. That, to me, would have been worthwhile and interesting.
I love the new blog–I have certainly grown tired of the review format of most blogs (including my own!). A community site in which we can all discuss a particular book sounds like a very welcome innovation.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:38 am
Leslie, I agree! Even as I read the last lines, I still held the thought that she didn’t kill herself but that she left- on a train and that Essbaum’s final line was metaphorical. I don’t think that’s the case but it’s what I wanted to happen.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:55 am
Oh, I like that!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:03 pm
I like that too! That’s what I’ll be believing from now on 😀
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:35 pm
Ok, I’m going with it! She’s riding the train, off to see her other two children and take them on a fun outing . . . and she has some good anti-depressants!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:43 pm
…and a doctor on speed dial that ALWAYS answers 😉
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:47 pm
Right! And she’s not going to try to speak any more German, ’cause screw it!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:32 pm
Thank you. You just brought me out of my post-book sadness with that. I’m going to tell myself that’s what happened. Yep.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 3:30 pm
Sorry, we had to delete your comment because it was a double post from another user. Please let us know if you need help using Disqus and we’d be happy to help you navigate the system – we’d love to hear your thoughts on the book.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:44 am
Leila, I agree! Even as I read the last lines, I still held the thought that she didn’t kill herself but that she left- on a train and that Essbaum’s final line was metaphorical. I don’t think that’s the case but it’s what I wanted to happen.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:09 pm
Catherine–that’s what I thought at first, too! And then I re-read it and realized, nope . . . Essbaum threw this woman off the platform. And you know what, it made me mad! I realize that depression is heartbreakingly real and yes, of course, there are suicides every day. But again, why tell this same story? Why not give Anna some agency in the end and allow her to re-write the ending?
LikeLike
April 13, 2015 at 1:03 pm
Yep, she definitely jumped: the first paragraph was a setup for it.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:57 am
I did feel a little let down by the book, but hadn’t really been able to put my finger on why. I felt like something was missing, and you just might have figured it out for me. What do you think Essbaum could have done for Anna instead of killing her?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:33 pm
Great question! Hmm, maybe a scene in which Anna has a major epiphany and realizes that she does, in fact, have options and can rebuild her life. And then Essbaum could have put her on the train for the final scene–remembering her son’s death and his love of trains, yet riding, perhaps, to her new apartment with a renewed sense of purpose and hope. Maybe it still wouldn’t have worked for me; hard to know. But, as it’s written, the plot is, essentially, A Bad Woman Must Suffer. I feel like I’ve read that one a few too many times.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:40 pm
I think if it had ended that way, we would be complaining about an ‘happily ever after’ ending and how that is cliche and unreal. I believe endings are a real problem for authors, – hello Donna Tartt and Goldfinch – they can never satisfy everyone. Although in this case I didn’t see Anna as a bad woman, she was definitely troubled and depressed, and made many wrong and bad choices but bad woman, makes it seem like they were done as vengeful acts with the purpose of hurting others, which I didn’t really think was the case.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:56 pm
This is my feeling exactly. I don’t think I would have been satisfied with another ending, even though I predicted this one. I didn’t “want” it to end this way for any moral reason, but I just think it was right for the story.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:56 pm
It’s true–endings can be so troublesome! There are always readers out there to second-guess them! I guess, in this case, only a different ending could have salvaged my feelings about the novel as a whole.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:13 pm
I completely agree with you, Susan; I think anything else would have seem forced/fake to me, given the rest of the novel. I think Essbaum was being true to Anna’s circumstances – she had no other way out.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:30 pm
I totally agree. As much as I WANTED a different ending, it would have been hard for me to believe another one… unless the book were another 100 pages or so! And I don’t think a happy ending could have come from Anna all by herself.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:37 pm
Leila!! I’ve been wondering where you were!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:58 pm
Ah, perhaps waiting for a conversational salon just like this!!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:20 pm
Yeah, the whole “woman cheats and dies” was contrived to me.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 12:36 pm
Wow – awesome discussion – and am so excited about this blog and the whole concept! Great work, girls! How to comment in an organized way to so many different points…hmm.
1) Anna’s Likability: I’m with Catherine on this one. I didn’t particularly like Anna, but I definitely don’t need (and lots of times would rather not) to “like” the character to like the book. For me, Anna generated no emotion in me whatsoever. And that translated to not caring where the story went. For example, when it first became apparent that Bruno was catching to Anna (at the Gilberts house when Mary mentioned Archie having a crush on Anna) and Anna left to pick up Polly after they got home, I didn’t even care what would happen when she returned to the house to face Bruno. That’s when I put the book down for awhile (I obviously eventually finished it).
2) Anna’s Depression: Granted, I have not struggled with mental illness, though I am close to people who do. But, I never got the sense she was depressed until Charles was killed. I just thought she was cold, narcissistic, lonely, and dithering (i.e. couldn’t figure out what she wanted out of life, if anything). I did obviously think she fell into depression when Charles was killed. And, by that point, the book had definitely picked up for me (but not enough to make me like it overall).
3) The Comparisons: I’ve never read Anna Karenina (I know, bad Sarah!), so I didn’t see the ending coming for that reason, but it was definitely not surprising and I think it was fitting….making the story a cautionary tale ultimately. I also think the comparison to 50 Shades was ridiculous. The sex in Hausfrau was nothing remotely close to 50 Shades….nor was the book similar in any other way. It’s like the marketing people saw 1 graphic sex scene and unthinkingly slapped the 50 Shades comparison on based on just that.
4) Lastly, I do empathize with the isolation and tediousness that can come along with being a stay at home mom…and I imagine it’s much worse as an expat. But, there are things you do to get through it…like writing a book blog – ha!! Just finding one thing that you can manage along with your mom duties to help you feel fulfilled is so helpful!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:19 pm
What about Monika’s question with the title? Do you think it led you to shift your focus toward her isolation as a housewife rather than thinking of her as depressed? It just seemed so clear to me, right away, that she was suffering from depression, so I’m curious how some of us ended up seeing it so differently.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 3:03 pm
I absolutely think that played a part in it…I was expecting a book about a bored housewife. Also – I’m a housewife (I guess, but I really hate that term!), so maybe that side of Anna’s issues was what I most related to?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:21 pm
I don’t remember the exact moment that I picked up on her depression. I think I felt it throughout. I recognized it in her obsessiveness, in her passive ways, in her almost willful ignorance.
Oh that comparison makes me the most crazy. Pshaw!
If Anna had only written a book blog… 😉
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:11 pm
First of all, I loved this book from start to finish. In addition, I had to study several “personality theorists” during my training as a clinical chaplain and I love the interchanges between Anna and her therapist; I’m also fascinated with Anna’s state of mind and felt highly entertained by the inner struggle that is brilliantly described by Essbaum. In my opinion, this has nothing to do with gender; I think, like Shannon and April mentioned, that she’s functioning in the best way she can considering the state of her mental health. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to shuffle off to another country, raise children all day and have no sense of self-worth other than what I could conjure up on my own. Good grief. This is a great examination of what happens when people either do not know how to ask for what they need or are not capable of doing so; she’s at the end of her rope and struggling to survive.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:43 pm
You probably have some unique insight here. I’ve been wondering: Is the way Doktor Messerli treated Anna typical of someone in that profession?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:50 pm
Monika, Anna’s therapist mentions “Jung” to her and she, in turn, mentioned Jung at some point in the book. Carl Jung was a famous Swiss personality theorist; he studied (as many of them did then) under Freud, which is where all of that dream talk comes from! The general idea of psychotherapy, for Jung, was to create a safe, secure space for patients to work out their own problems. Interestingly, though, he also believed that people needed to create a sort of “mask” to bridge the gap between a person’s true nature and that of what society expects them to be…a “presentable” identity, if you will. Definitely applies in Anna’s case, right?!? Essbaum did her homework…
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 1:54 pm
I know very, very surface level information about this topic so this is fascinating. And now my brain is spinning with how this impacted the story, wow. Thanks for explaining this!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:09 pm
I love delving into these things; I’m such a nerd!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:13 pm
Welcome. You are among friends. 😉
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:19 pm
HA! I’m so glad! I feel like I actually fit in when I’m among a group of thoughtful readers; so excited y’all are doing this!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:18 pm
I’m so glad to have read your thoughts! #nerdsunite
I like Jung’s style and it absolutely fits Anna. Her presentable identity..ooh I like that!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:36 pm
OooOoo. I LIKE it!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:44 am
Agree… Knowing this is fascinating & clarifies the depth of research & consideration I suspected Essabaum went to in creating this story
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:01 pm
1. I loooooved this type of discussion! So many points of view ladies, and all so well phrased.
2. My experience with Anna was similar to what I gather from Catherine, is not that I didn’t like her, is that I didn’t care much for her, I didn’t enjoy her as a character. It was an ok book (for me) but nothing that made me go crazy about it. I did love the author’s style, and I love the environment she painted.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:34 pm
This makes me curious where you’ll fall when we talk about “unlikable” characters/how characters impact your reading next week.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 2:17 pm
I’m stuck at “What Catherine said!” Working on my thoughts and will get back to y’all! Looking forward to reading through what others think as well!
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 10:26 pm
Hey, a familiar face! 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 5:58 pm
So many great points going on here so I don’t want to repeat anything. I never saw Anna as anything other than sad and depressed. On the second page she admits to having thoughts of suicide and asks Bruno a few pages in what would he do if she “went away and never came back”. He never said he’d miss her or the kids would be upset, but simply “you need me”. So from the get-go, I knew I was going to read a bleak story about a woman on the verge. Also early on she admits to the “passivity” of her life in all aspects, even as a child. Not bored but indifferent. And delusional. When she realized Stephen didn’t even think about her in the end it was like a veil was lifted. She lived in this delusional state about him for so long. Even though much of the story was depressing, the writing was clever and poetic. So many layers interwoven with dissection of language, dream analysis, talks about fire with Stephen, the different comparisons of women (mentioned earlier), her pillow talk was so needy and deep and the priest with the domino analogy…soo much! I think this would have some great book club debates! And YES, I agree to all the comments about crappy comparisons to other books. I’ve never read Anna Karenina so it didn’t apply but 50 Shades? Please!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:14 pm
I found her to be incredibly sad as well. And heck yes to the passivity of her life. She seemed to LET things happen rather than MAKE things happen.
I have to say, that moment when she realized that Stephen wasn’t the love of her life as she had supposed I felt so sorry for her. Not in a pitying way but it was as if I completely related to her in that very moment. I’ve been there. Probably a lot of us have.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:25 pm
Ugh, Steven was the wooooooooorst! She had that romance built up so high in her mind and was like, “Yeah, we had fun.”
Her passivity made me want to shake her!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:56 pm
He turned out to be a boob, didn’t he? Throughout I kept thinking that they had a great romance and that she lost the love of her life. NOPE. He viewed it as a fling and once he was done he was done.
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 1:09 pm
I think I always had an inkling that the affair with Stephen wasn’t all that and a bag of chips and Anna had just blown it out of proportion in her own head. It sometimes seemed like the only meaningful thing in her life was the one thing not at her fingertips… and when it turned out to not mean anything, it shattered her. In some ways, I feel like Anna was Stephen in every other relationship in her life. It came out most starkly with Mary, who at least once compared her to a sister, but Anna just couldn’t be bothered.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:07 pm
Maybe this has been brought up, and I just missed it somewhere… but what about all of Anna’s attempts to quantify “love.” She said so many times that she loved Richard (right? that was his name), but then retracted it to say “some version of love.” Yet when she talked about her children, she truly did LOVE them. However, actions speak louder than words, right? And she often would leave her children for long periods of time, and prioritize time with Richard OVER her children… so what’s up with that.
Also, this plays into her discussion of how her and Bruno got together, and ended up marrying. Kind of like, well I guess I love him, or sort of do… and he’s probably the best I’ll ever get… and at least he’s interesting. It seems she wanted attention, and wanted him to want her… but fully admits to not completely loving him, but assuming nothing better would ever come along. Again, some “form of love” situation.
Ok, end ramble
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 6:29 pm
Oo. Great points Katie. Do you mean Stephen? The guy visiting from MIT? (I had to look up the name 🙂 ) — even with him though she quantifies the love, she’s unsure of it. But you’re right – with her children there is NEVER that quantification.
I don’t think that having an affair with Stephen showed that she loved her kids less… it was just something that was separate for her.
I also agree she ‘settled’ for Bruno. Bad move. 🙂
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:09 pm
Ooops, yes Stephen. I don’t know why I thought his name was Richard.
That’s true – she did have a statement in the book (I can’t remember the direct quote), but something along the lines of having separate lives, and don’t we all do that a little bit?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:25 pm
I’m not a parent, so I don’t really know, but I feel like when you have kids, there will always be separation in your life between what you share with them and as a family, and what is private “adult” time. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to sometimes have time away, as long as you know someone you trust is taking care of them and they’re safe. A few hours when you’re not “on call” or even when you’re unreachable, particularly when 90% of the time you’re the primary caregiver … is that really something you can’t do as a parent? (sincere question – I don’t know if that’s really so out there and unacceptable??) I mean, I’d assume Bruno isn’t reachable all the time at work, either. (This is totally ignoring WHAT she was doing when she was unreachable, which is a whole different discussion.)
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 9:02 pm
I completely agree with you – also currently being childless. I would imagine everyone is allowed some “off duty” time as a general rule. I guess my beef is the WAY she was using her time, and at least the way the story was told was that she was often running late or not where she had previously said she would be, in lieu of spending time with Stephen.
I don’t doubt she loved her children, but I DO think her choices speak back to her as a selfish person, sad person, depressed person, and so on. Not suffering from depression myself, but having many around me in my life who do, I know it affects one’s decision making process, as well as the dynamic of not only self, but everyone close around them, and that is portrayed here.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:45 pm
I completely agree when it comes to what she was doing with her time, how she was prioritizing, and your overview of her motivations and situation. Her decisions were completely flawed. I get what you mean, she was running late a lot… but at the same time, would we feel that it was THAT bad if she was at work? Or even if she was a single mom and was on a date? It was irritating for the grandmother who was taking care of the kids, but I don’t think it speaks to not caring about her kids enough – it’s not like she had to pick them up from school and left them sitting outside in the cold alone. Inconsiderate to the grandma, yes, but I don’t think that made her a bad mum….
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:19 pm
Thank you for hosting this thought-provoking discussion! I’ll look forward to your salon on A Little Life…. Soon, I hope (but not TOO soon, since I just started it!).
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:23 pm
I think it will be at least a few weeks! I’m so glad to see you back and chatting.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 7:43 pm
First of all, I am absolutely LOVING this idea! It’s such a relief to be able to discuss a book (and this book in particular) without having to worry about spoilers. Because so much of the “good” stuff (discussion-wise) is spoilery! So thank you guys for hosting this discussion.
I found this book challenging to read, but worth the effort. There are a few things I wanted to throw into the discussion, so here goes!
One of the things I struggled with throughout the book and discussion of it was Anna’s betrayal of her marriage. I agree that she was suffering and most likely clinically depressed. I understand how she was feeling (trapped, lonely, not in control of her life) and I get how her affairs gave her a distraction, something to look forward to, a life away from the family that often felt like it was confining her in a role she wasn’t happy in, and some control over some small part of her life. However I still find it inexcusable.
Now here’s where I am struggling to find the right words, so please don’t take this the wrong way. I’m not trying to say that depression isn’t real, serious, or incredibly devastating to deal with. But I still had a really hard time with the decisions Anna made. As much as she was suffering, her choices were hurtful to the people around her – most notably to her husband and children. And while I agree that she needed help and support and that Bruno wasn’t the best husband, the decisions she made had a deep and long-lasting effect on her family as well. There’s a element to her that was quite selfish. Even her decision to kill herself at the end – her husband has now lost a son, found out his daughter isn’t his and how has to deal with the guilt of feeling like he caused his wife’s death. Her remaining son has lost a brother and mother all in the course of a few weeks. Her daughter will never know her brother or mother. This isn’t to say that Anna didn’t deserve more understanding and help and support than she got, but the reality is that at some point, she was going to have to deal with the consequences her own actions caused, and her decision to kill herself created even more pain for those she left behind. What about them?
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:16 pm
I think the ideal solution would have been for her to tell her therapist what she was doing and that she didn’t know why she was doing it and ask her to help. If the doctor was any good, she would have found a way of helping Anna explain it to her husband and get her into rehab (maybe?). I don’t think Anna was doing it just for fun, but how could she ever tell her husband, without completely destroying her marriage, on her own? I don’t think she could.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:21 pm
I think the reality of a situation like that is that her marriage might have been destroyed, no matter who/how Bruno found out. But he still deserved to know the truth, and Anna needed to face up to what she had done in order to deal with it and figure out what came next. Even if it meant finding her own life completely separate from her husband. That might have actually made both of them happier in the long-run!
It also seemed to me like Anna was playing with fire, almost wanting to get caught. If you really want to keep your affairs secret, you don’t sleep with a friend of your husbands, or create overlapping social circles that will increase the chances of your secret being revealed. I agree that talking honestly with the therapist would have been an important first step, and had she done that instead of bringing her affairs closer and closer to home, maybe things could have ended very differently.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:23 pm
I’m going to have to disagree with Anna’s actions being selfish. I know that sounds weird. 🙂 But the fact is that her decisions kind of DID take place in a vacuum. The vacuum of depression. As far as the suicide goes – most of the time when people commit suicide they are so entrenched in their depression that they actually feel like they’re doing their family and friends a service and that their lives will be better without them. So, no I can’t see the suicide as selfish because suicidal people aren’t being selfish about it.
As far as the affairs, I think that all goes back to the depression too – sure it was hurting her husband/kids – but I really think that she was so depressed that she wasn’t thinking like a healthy person would about how her actions would affect others – not because she was selfish – but because she was just struggling to survive day to day. The affairs allowed her to do that.
Now I’m rambling again. 🙂 I hope this made something resembling sense. 🙂
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:04 pm
Perhaps selfish is the wrong word, as it implies a willful disregard for others. Let me try to clarify what I meant. From her perspective, no, her actions weren’t selfish in that way. Like you said she did what helped her get from one day to the next and survive. Her behaviour can be explained by her depression, as can her suicide. I do think, though, that even those suffering from depression have choices. Maybe not many, and maybe they don’t even see them at the time, but I don’t think depression excuses EVERYTHING, even if it explains it. And I think the fact remains that there are still consequences for actions that will, at some point, need to be faced, even if they were unintended consequences, and even if the person whose actions caused them was suffering from a condition that influenced or even drove their decisions.
But I get that not everyone will share that perspective, and that for many who have suffered as Anna seemed to, it may not be this simple. I guess what I was really trying to bring up for discussion was that as readers, and in much of this discussion, we’ve talked about Anna’s depression and how it manifested and the effect that had on her life and mental state. But there has been very little discussion of the fallout. I think it’s like anyone with any illness – it’s horrible for them, and there are things that happen because of it that they can’t help, but there is always a ripple effect that impacts those around them, and I think that’s at least worth discussing. I kind of look at it like how alcoholics need treatment and they have AA – but there’s also al-anon (I think that’s the right term? Correct me if I’m wrong!) for family members because their lives are impacted by the disease in negative ways as well.
This isn’t to say she could have/should have done anything else at that point in time. I don’t think suicide is something someone does if they can see any other way out of it. I’m not trying to belittle that. But moving past that event, I would like to talk about what comes after. She left behind two children who no longer have a mother and a husband who, despite not being the nicest guy or best partner, will now most likely spend the rest of his life wondering if he could have done something differently and blaming himself for her death.
There’s a difference between placing blame on someone who, as you said, was entrenched in depression and unable to find a way out of it, and ignoring the effects their disease had on other people around them. I don’t think she was selfish in a flippant, conscious sense. Just that her behaviour and actions extended beyond her, and that that is important as well.
Also hoping that this makes some semblance of sense as well and clarifies what I was trying to say. It’s hard to find the right words to express, and I know it’s going to be controversial as it might come across as blaming the victim, which is NOT what I’m trying to do!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:13 pm
Ah… I see, that does make more sense.
That IS a completely different discussion. 🙂 You’re right that every disease is going to manifest itself and affect the people around the person afflicted in different ways. It’s tragic and awful the price that her family had to pay for her depression. But you’re right her actions were going to be paid for eventually, in some way or another.
I have a hard time pulling a lot of sympathy for Bruno, maybe it’s because of his extreme reaction AND the fact that I think he was irresponsible for kicking her out of the house when he did – regardless of how justified his anger was.
Also, you’re totally correct on the AA/Al-Anon terms. 🙂
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:38 pm
It’s hard to know about Bruno. We only really “met” him after the daughter was born, and based on his reaction when paternity was broached, it seemed like he’d wondered himself. So it’s possible part of his gruff, standoffish, rude attitude was because he had suspicions throughout the book. Whether that was the case or he was just a dick, he definitely didn’t come across as cuddly and lovable!
And of course his physical reaction to the final revelation of Anna’s infidelity was inexcusable. That’s never, EVER okay. So I’m not in any way saying he’s some great guy who didn’t make any mistakes of his own. I also agree that the way he kicked her out, particularly knowing that she had so few friends wasn’t great. He could have walked a couple of blocks and stayed with his mom for a few days – plus that would have been less disruptive to the kids.
But maybe he didn’t realize just how badly she was doing? It doesn’t seem like she talked to him at all, and the main “symptom” of her mental state was her affairs and her solitary walks. She didn’t really cry or express her sadness in front of him, and I think he knew she wasn’t happy, but thought she was getting help from her therapist and that her German class was a good sign that she was improving. It’s really hard to know, sometimes, just how bad depression is, even in someone you live with.
Ugh, what a mess, hey? I think both of them needed help, and I honestly think that they may have been better off going their separate ways!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 8:08 pm
Oh for sure they would have been better off without each other.
Before Charles died I totally agree that he had no idea how badly she was doing – but he kicked her out after Charles’ death — and I think it was really clear she was in no state to be alone at that point.
But you’re right that it’s impossible to know how bad depression is even when you live with someone because oftentimes (in my experience) in the worst of my depressive states I would do everything I could to make thing look ‘normal’ to my husband – so he couldn’t know the depth of the despair that I was experiencing.
I think that this is another place that we could discuss the impact of cultural differences on our reading of Bruno, how would a SWISS reader see Bruno? (I have no idea.) I’ve known Germans, but no Swiss. 🙂
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 8:35 pm
You know what? You’re totally right. Charles dying, I think, was the final straw for her – and I feel like it wasn’t the time for any big changes. I can’t even imagine how losing a child would impact someone who was already so emotionally vulnerable.
I wondered, too, if it wouldn’t have been better if she’d been found out before losing Charles. Maybe Bruno wouldn’t have snapped the way he did, maybe she would have been able to hang on longer and get help… I mean, you never know, but I do wonder about that.
I’ve known a few Swiss people, not enough to make generalizations, but the ones I knew tended towards the gruff and reserved on the surface, but were also really loyal and kind once you got to know them. I would be fascinated to hear from someone who has better knowledge of Swiss culture and temperament, though!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 8:11 pm
I have been thinking about this all day and I have thoughts! I was someone who said she should get friends and hobbies, etc but not in a dismissive way. I was a SAHM and I know how isolating it can be. Having somewhere else to go and something to have your mind on is important. Not only that but it would have given Anna another lifeline, like how at the end she ran out of people to call pretty quickly. Just having someone to talk to earlier on might have alerted someone to the path she was heading down. I also wondered if the cause of her depression was situational: her isolation (the cultural differences definitely would have had a role in this case). Or if she was heart broken. It wasn’t until later that there were some signs that she had this illness since she was a kid. I do think that the author was all over the place in nailing that down for the reader.
Can I just say that doctor was the worst? Maybe it’s because I’m from North “We got a pill for that” America, but is it so different in Europe? This was 2006, not 1950. A modern doctor should recognize a fairly common illness and prescribe something. It’s not just, “Oh the housewives are sad here in the 1950s.” If Anna had been on something and it didn’t work, I think that would have more believable for me. This doctor just liked hearing herself speak and was not much help. The end when she dismissed Anna, I didn’t find believable. A woman who barely speaks comes pounding on the door? I think that’s enough of a odd situation to investigate or at least call 911 herself. I feel like I was cheated by the author. It just didn’t ring true.
The men Anna sleeps with: Ugh. Especially her husband’s “friend.” Not one of them cared about her a bit. They were just getting theirs. I didn’t find any of these encounters “erotic” just sad. She doesn’t even to appear to enjoy them all that much. They’re like drugs to her. I still would have disliked what “Alan” did as much as Anna, maybe more so because Alan would be cheating on his wife. I wouldn’t have as much sympathy for Bruno as I would for “Brunette.”
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:26 pm
Ah yes, the stay at home mom life. Isolating and mind numbing at times. I think that’s exactly why I picked up the book in the first place. The title spoke to me. Hausfrau…it’s the diminutive little term I have used to describe myself over the years. It’s not a fair way to use that word and I shouldn’t have diminished myself that way…but wow, that’s a whole other topic!
Now I’m wondering if her depression was situational. At first it seems so, right? Then you learn more about her past and see that she might be clinically depressed. That doctor. Hmph. I did smell a little plot device there with the doctor dismissing Anna that way. She was fairly useless.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 2:39 pm
Maybe it was both? Maybe the situation exacerbated what was already there?
LikeLike
April 3, 2015 at 10:53 am
Yes, I think so, especially since we here that things hadn’t been easy since childhood.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:15 pm
I think Monika’s probably right in that it may have been both – that her underlying depression was exacerbated by her situation. I’ve definitely been there.
As far as friends, hobbies, other lifelines – when you’re in the midst of a depression like that I think it’s nearly impossible to do – somedays it’s nearly impossible to get out of bed – so while it sounds good for her to ‘get herself out there’ in a healthy way – I totally understand why she probably couldn’t.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:17 pm
It’s interesting how our different experiences influence our interpretation of what we read. When my daughter was a baby, I had some kind of PPD that made me too anxious to leave the house. All I can see when I read Anna’s story is a version of what might have happened to me if I hadn’t forced myself to go out and interact with people. Some days it was really hard. Would that isolation caused me to become depressed? I think it would have. It’s very difficult to explain what it was that happened to me and I rarely talk about it. Not having been depressed, I can’t imagine it, but I can imagine the isolation so it’s what I’ve fixated on in this book.
I don’t know, something was up with Anna but I don’t think the author convinced me what it was. It always felt like I was about to figure it out, but it slipped out of my grasp.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:21 pm
PS- I’m loving these discussions! I haven’t had one like this since my book club broke up.
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 10:55 pm
Loved the discussion!! THANK YOU, Jennifer for addressing the comparisons to 50 Shades and bringing up the whole discussion of labeling books erotica. It’s a turn off for me (no pun intended), when a book is compared to 50 Shades, just like books are compared to Twilight, Hunger Games, etc. I didn’t see comparisons to Harry Potter, which makes me wonder- does the book industry feel women/girls need somethimg to compare to, whereas boys/men just need to know the book rocks?!?! Interesting dialogue!!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:03 pm
When I saw that comparison I wanted to pull my hair out as I imagined the untold masses running in the other direction. Ugh! I’m so, SO glad that I read it before that particular campaign got going. I can guarantee you that I wouldn’t have read it if I thought it was erotica. And btw, everyone? It is NOT.
You bring up a good point about how books are marketed to women vs. men. I’m going to be eyeing that now!
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:08 pm
Now that I know there are issues of mental health and that it’s not all sex, I’m buying it. I just feel when a book is labeled erotica, it sends this message of ” a lot of skin, not a lot of depth”. Loving the comments I’ve been reading, spoilers and all!! My ears perked up with April discussing the depression and mental illness, as anything to do with mental health is something I naturally gravitate towards:)
LikeLike
March 25, 2015 at 11:18 pm
Oh you haven’t read it! You’re so brave to wade in here with all of the spoilers! I avoid those like the plague, ha ha. It’s adult, but it’s not erotica. It’s a mature book about grown ass people. Sex is involved, lol. I’ll be very interested in your thoughts!
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 10:24 pm
Hausfrau is pretty much what I expected when I requested it, and whether or not I enjoy a literary fiction author’s writing style is hit or miss. This is feeling like a miss so far, but I’m giving it more time given how the comments lead me to believe there will be more psychoanalysis and less navel-gazing and metaphor-slinging before long. I enjoy the periods of exposition much more than the real-time introspection, so I guess we’ll see what wins out.
LikeLike
March 30, 2015 at 12:12 am
Kirsten, you’ll have to come back to let us know what you thought about it all in the end!
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:37 am
I swear, this book is like one of those movies that you catch something different each time you watch it. I want to reread this book just to see what I missed during the first go around. I know I will find something different each time.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 10:07 pm
It really is!! I’m blown away reading these comments, by the things people noticed that I missed.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 7:24 am
Well done ladies. Brilliant idea & opportunity to really discuss a book without fear of spoilers! Such fascinating comments and pov’s… Definitely agree with Kathy it’s a book to be reread and examined closely to appreciate fully what lies within
There were three key elements that gripped me:
first Essabaum’s style and how she structured the novel – the interwoven German lessons & Dokter sessions added clarity, depth but also a narrative way to explore what was actually happening outside of Anna’s point of view – they made me think of reason & consequence as well as learning what actually happened – very clever & well executed
I can’t say I liked Anna – nor her actions & lack of accountability; she hid behind ‘it happened to me I merely relented’ – yet I really cared for her and was routing for her to find someway to avoid the inevitable… How does Essabaum get me to care?
The one person I felt I should have like Mary I hated – I see her as manipulative and orchestrated Anna’s downfall – mentioning Archie, bringing him into Annas home with the unwanted surprise party, suspicion over Polly’s parentage… I’ve commented elsewhere of her potential jealousy
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 2:37 pm
I absolutely loved the German lessons and sessions with her doctor. The way Essbaum played with language made the book for me…and even though I’m not much of an audiobook person, I’m tempted to pick this one up and give it a shot that way, just to hear how it all plays out in that format.
LikeLike
March 26, 2015 at 6:12 pm
I really loved the format too – also I kind of agree with you about Mary to an extent – at times it seems like she was almost passive aggressive in bringing things up (like the Archie thing…)
LikeLike
April 2, 2015 at 7:46 pm
Completely with you on the format! I thought it was a great way for the author to comment on the story and make me think without being too intrusive
I’m not sure about Mary. I also wondered how much she was clueless and how much of the awkwardness she caused was intentional.
LikeLike
March 28, 2015 at 1:44 pm
The way she bookended this was just stunning. I finished it seconds ago and just needed to share that with someone.
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 10:38 am
Agreed! There’s a little chat about that somewhere down in the thread…most of us loved it, too!
LikeLike
July 9, 2015 at 2:57 pm
What are your thoughts on this ending? I was dumbfounded. I wanted more. Maybe i missed something!?
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 1:24 pm
So I’ve seen some chatter below about how Bruno definitely isn’t an ideal husband but might not be the worst. While he definitely had his nuances and wasn’t just a caricature of “bad husband,” I found him deplorable in a lot of ways.
The first words we hear from him are that he’s sick of “Anna’s moods” and that she should “go fix” herself. Um, not really the best way to help your spouse out, dude. The beating? Absolutely unacceptable, regardless of his justifiable anger at finding out about his wife’s infidelity. The fact that, in response to his wife asking what would happen if he left, his only response is that she NEEDS him? These are all huge red flags that point toward an abusive, neglectful partner.
Could Anna have asked for more attention, more support? Perhaps, but I really don’t think it would have happened. He seemed entirely unwilling to be available to Anna in ways that were inconvenient or unseemly for him. In the Anna Karenina comparison vein, he smacks intensely of Anna Karenina’s husband, Alexei Karenin (though at least Alexei never beat her).
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 5:52 pm
Oh goooood point about all those red flags. I hadn’t even thought about Bruno telling her to ‘fix herself’ but you’re right – that’s a totally crappy way to treat your wife, not really conducive to helping her get better.
While it seems like through most of their marriage we wasn’t physically abusive I do think that you’re right and he may have been emotionally abusive (or at least neglectful).
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 6:16 pm
Great points about Bruno. I wonder if his statements helped convince some readers that she wasn’t really depressed or was just feeling the general “moodiness” of being a lonely expat wife.
LikeLike
April 2, 2015 at 7:44 pm
Other than the beating, I’m not sure about Bruno. The beating is obviously unacceptable. Bruno also seems condescending to me, not just to Anna, but with everyone. But I also get the impression that he and Anna may have withdrawn from each other. I’m not sure the lack of emotional connection, at least, is entirely his fault. Also, if he suspected her affair earlier, that might explain his lack of emotional investment.
LikeLike
April 3, 2015 at 10:53 am
These are valid points, but I just can’t really sympathize with a husband who tells his spouse to “go fix herself” when she’s depressed. I guess it’s somewhat unclear how long she was feeling *that* bad in their relationship, and perhaps his patience had run out, but… I don’t know. Just not on Team Bruno.
LikeLike
March 29, 2015 at 10:10 pm
Commenting to follow the discussion and come back when I either DNF or have more to say. As of now, I’m really struggling with an indifference toward Anna, as Catherine mentioned above, as well as actually making faces at the page because of the writing style. Overwhelming use of metaphor, stuttering sentence fragments followed by run-ons, flashbacks or shifts of awareness that take me too far away to remember where we were – I couldn’t get caught up, as much as I wanted to.
I also absolutely agree with Jennifer re: sexuality in books: that Ally Sheedy/Breakfast Club gif is spot on. I didn’t realize how many people were aghast at the candid discussion of sex in this book, which serves as a reminder of how fortunate I am to have learned and surrounded myself with sex-positivity at a relatively early age.
LikeLike
March 30, 2015 at 7:27 pm
I just read the first bit that made me cheer all Team Anna style: when she isn’t embarrassed about getting her period while having sex with Archie, and doesn’t understand why he’d think she was. I mean, it’s unfortunate that this might be intended, and read, as an indicator that she’s not living in the real world due to mental health issues, but I’d like to pretend for now at least that it’s just a woman thinking, why on earth would this embarrass me? Happens every month. Deal with it.
LikeLike
March 30, 2015 at 7:49 pm
I’m with you re: the sex. I didn’t find it shocking or dirty, nor would I have skipped the book if I had known it was there. I did find the 50 Shades comparison to be a turn-off, just because I think it it’s a cheap parallel that doesn’t really ring true. Curious to see what you’ll think as you finish up!
LikeLike
March 31, 2015 at 6:41 am
I wasn’t sure about the ending, but you all confirmed it here for me. So so sad that it came to this.
LikeLike
April 2, 2015 at 7:39 pm
I agree with Catherine’s first point. I wish I had found Anna unlikable, but she just didn’t inspire that much emotion for me! She was so apathetic, I had a hard time caring about her. I shared your surprise about the events with her son, but did find her suicide predictable. I felt as though the earlier discussion of the trains was foreshadowing and honestly, I was hoping the author wouldn’t go there, because for me, the extreme parallels turned this into a subpar version of Anna Karenina. Same story, less emotional investment.
I didn’t feel like the author was ever judgy about Anna’s affairs. I wouldn’t be surprised if the marketing does reflect the fact that some people still think it’s kinky for a woman to want to have casual sex a lot, but I don’t think that’s something inherent to the book. I didn’t get that reading it anyway. I thought the author did an almost weirdly clinical job of describing the sex. It felt very real to me, like something that might happen in everyday life, not like a sex scene being presented in an overblown way to titillate the reader. It was different from anything else I’d read, which I appreciate.
I also have to agree with you about her doctor failing her! Completely useless.
LikeLike
April 4, 2015 at 3:53 pm
I’ve been wondering if I’d read AK, how much that would have influenced my feelings about the book. A lot of people seem to share your feeling that it’s too much of a parallel, and not nearly as good.
LikeLike
April 3, 2015 at 6:39 pm
I love all of the different view points on the book! Thank you for sharing these at the #SmallVictoriesSundayLinkup!
LikeLike
April 13, 2015 at 11:01 am
I said I’d be back when I finished, so here I am! It’s funny, but very shortly after I last commented, the book really picked up for me. I feel like the narration shifted away from the stilted, jagged, almost stream-of-consciousness to an actual narrative, with a broader picture and more lyrical connection of the pieces. I see now that there was an arc that brought us full circle with how Anna’s mind works, but it was tough going for the first 50p or so.
Re: the way the therapist responded to Anna – I wasn’t surprised at all. First, the “fury” the Doktor was exhibiting was seen through the lens of Anna’s crisis, so it may have been inflated, but even if not, it was a complete violation of boundaries, not only for the practitioner, but for the client she was with at the time. My best friend has been an LCSW for 20+ years and said she’d have done the same thing. AND that this is a prime example of why it’s a bad idea to work out of your home.
I found the use of metaphor to be much better executed later in the novel, again, the buildup of the metaphor and wordplay granted through the plot device of the language class was seen through to its end. However, in the end, the entire book felt a bit like a linking up of plot devices. Catalyst after catalyst, and propelling Anna toward the inevitable end.
LikeLike
April 13, 2015 at 12:50 pm
Oooo, that’s such a great point about the therapist! I hadn’t thought about it being inflated by Anna, but it makes so much more sense that way.
LikeLike
April 18, 2015 at 9:43 am
Great discussion. One of the reasons I didn’t like the book was because of the way her depression was dealt with. I suffer from depression and have all my life. I could feel her depression so acutely, and it took me to a place i didn’t want to go. I also felt like the self-destructive sex was a bit of a cop out. Sex and self-hate in modern media seems to be an overdone trope to me.
Comparisons to 50 Shades initially turned me off the novel, until i realized that from now on anything with graphic sex is going to be compared to 50 Shades. The thing is, Essbaum can write. There were sections that i absolutely adored. Overall the story didn’t work for me, but I will definitely read whatever she comes up with next.
LikeLike
April 18, 2015 at 6:12 pm
We’re actually going to be talking about reasons why we will/will not pick up books from authors after disliking previous novels on Monday, so your last statement is pretty timely! I agree about the writing…I fell into it right away and loved the way she played with language.
LikeLike
May 1, 2015 at 11:20 am
Oh, boy. I just finished this last night and if I’m going to get fairly personal I can say I truly relate to Anna. I think that’s why I felt such a dislike for her. I saw myself in her actions–fueled by sadness and a need to be wanted but also still manipulative enough to get her way. I’ve been there. Not knowing what you’re looking for but hoping someone else can tell you if they see you naked enough. But physically naked isn’t the same as mentally naked and it’s still easy to hide how you feel and nobody is a mind reader.
This book pushed buttons for me. I’ve felt that sadness and felt trapped in another place with my partner (one where they are at ease and I am the foreigner) and felt neglected. It was all too familiar. But the doctor and psychology in this book angered me. Jungian analysis is just not done the way it used to be. It’s not healthy to the patient and I agree that the doctor could have provided more help. I’m sad to say I saw the ending coming as soon as the bags were packed. Anna was not one to make empowering decisions for herself. She didn’t think she could, in my opinion. She felt helpless and everyone failed her in a time of need. As much as I would have liked her to lift her head up, demand some help, find better friends and make an attempt at a better life I just don’t think she had it in her. Perhaps if she’d had better therapy it would have been possible.
LikeLike
May 1, 2015 at 5:49 pm
“I can say I truly relate to Anna. I think that’s why I felt such a dislike for her.” That’s such a clear observation that I don’t think many people are willing to make, and definitely not willing to state. I think you really get at why it’s easier for many people to dislike her than it is to empathize, , maybe out of fear of understanding or forgiving her (yourself) too much.
LikeLike
September 27, 2015 at 10:58 pm
did anyone else think that Mary was actually not as innocent and disingenuous as she seemed. Twice she brought up issues to Bruno and the last one causing the final rift. Did she, even unknowingly, dislike Anna and ant her to get caught? I think her secret story hinted at that. She seemed jealous of Anna.
LikeLike