Today, to my surprise, a very late but welcome review of The Forever Marriage was published in the Washington Post.
I’m not being coy when I say I was surprised. I knew the Post was considering my novel but reviews typically happen—if they’re going to—within four to six weeks of publication. The Forever Marriage has been out nearly eight. I checked the Post pages avidly for a while, only giving up a few days ago.
And the review is welcome not only because it will bring attention to my book, but because it’s an honest, somewhat brazen analysis by a novelist and writing instructor I do not know. It’s likely Lisa Zeidner had never heard of me before she was given this assignment. We have no relationship and move in completely different circles. Given the buzz last week, about writers stroking other writers in order to boost their own careers, I’m happier than I can say to have a searing and objective assessment of my book—imperfect bits and all.
There is something validating, on a professional level, about being held to account. Why wasn’t Carmen’s relationship with her daughter better drawn in my novel? Well, I, too, asked that question as I wrote. And I struggled. At one point, I brought Siena firmly into the plot with a huge dramatic crisis that I later decided was ridiculous. If Zeidner wondered why the girl was flimsy, she had reason to: I wondered the same myself.
But most extraordinary, especially after my post the other day about infinity and love, was Zeidner’s appreciation for the mathematical puzzle my characters work out. In the best sentence of this (or any other) review she said: “This part of the plot is scintillating, like a modern update of A.S. Byatt’s Possession. The hypothesis proves what Carmen grows to understand about her bad luck, as her oncologist explains about the odds of surviving cancer: ‘Groups are consistent; individuals are random. You are but one point in a set of millions. Your course is not determined.’”
It’s interesting to me that the very qualities in my book many Goodreads reviewers find “depressing” or “stupid” actually made the Washington Post take notice. Far from hating my flawed protagonist, Zeidner said “one of the novel’s chief strengths is that its heroine is so sharp and unsentimental.” There is a real difference between the recreational reader, who wants a safe and pleasant carousel ride, and the serious reader who wants to be unsettled and provoked.
Some authors write to become famous or make money but I don’t write for either of these reasons (thank God—I’d be so disappointed!). I write to solve real questions and hope that my work is respected. This review confirmed for me that thoughtful people are listening, and I’m at least on the right track.
*You’ll find the full text of Lisa Zeidner’s review of The Forever Marriage here.
I am thrilled for you on this review. I’m about 1/3 into the novel, and can without reservation say that it deserves abundant attention and interest. Kudos.
Wow! What a great review. Am thrilled for you. All kudos well-deserved.
Hello, Ann, we don’t know each other, but we have Kit Naylor in common (she and I graduated together from Carleton). I saw your site in one of her posts, and thought I’d give you a try. Since then I’ve been captivated by your writings which are honest, painful, and inspiring.
I was very glad to read the very positive (and un-back-scratchy) review of your book in the Washington Post, especially after your heart-felt post on the false niceness and behind-the-scenes nastiness of book reviewers and others.
I have also written a blog about my year of living in England. Last September I moved to England with my two American daughters (I am the child of two English people from the same village in the north of England and have spent many year in England)–and the result have been quite interesting. I also, along the way, write about Cambridge, my parents’ village, and farming (we come from a farming family). If you have a spare moment or two, please go to theyearoflivingenglishly.wordpress.com or The Year of Living Englishly. If you have any reactions, I’d love to hear them. In the meantime and always, I will keep reading what you write! All best, Ginnie
Again I fret because I was unable to write such a wonderful review for you. I do continue to spread the word and hope it helps in some small way to get the story to more people. I’d hate for them to miss it.
Oh, but I loved your review, Gayle, because it was honest. You’re not a woman who gladhands or kisses up. You say what you think. That’s what makes a review “real” for me.
Well, my dear, you certainly have a way of provoking conversation, don’t you!!! Congrats on getting the attention of the Washington Post. And Congrats on your ability to thoughtfully explore the critique.