Books:
The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt
I mentioned in a prior MR how I got so angry at this book that I DNF’ed it when I was close to being done, so I thought it would be helpful/delightful to take you into the mind of Janice to see how that happened:
I just started The Goldfinch and am finding the writing to be highly irritating, like characterless and fake. A tragic event happens, a painting of a goldfinch (drumroll) is stolen, some tough growing-up occurs. Is the story engaging enough that it's worth pushing past the annoying writing or is this a give-up-now kind of book?
Okay I'm 25% in and am enjoying it but am reserving the right to DNF if it gets boring. Another (ETA: Janice-worthy) reviewer described the book as 4 novellas only 2 of which are any good. Maybe I'll just read those 2 if I can only figure out which they are…
I'm now like 70% into The Goldfinch and have zero idea (a) why the painting is in the book at all, (b) why an 18-year-old New Yorker never heard of self storage, and (c) why anyone published this. I will plow on to the end though.
I guess not because I’m at 75% and I AM DONE! No, Donna, no more. I can handle a fair amount when it comes to shitty writing, but I cannot bear a fucking idiotic protagonist. Unlikable, fine; flat-out dumb? No. To me it's the cardinal sin of a writer, especially one writing in the first-person, to have their lead be so irredeemably stupid because who in their right mind would want to read about the choices made by a total moron? N. O. Bad Donna! NO!
American Dirt by Jeanine Cummins
This is the highly meta-controversial book from a few years ago about a Mexican woman and her child trying to illegally immigrate to America. The meta-controversy was about the fact that the author is white and was writing about Mexicans - basically she was accused of “brownsplaining” (alternatively, I just invented that word in which case feel free to mentally remove the quotes). These were the heady days of early stage cancel culture (Jeanine Cummins was cancelled after she made an appearance on Oprah to promote her book) and the - to this Janice at least - rise of the extremely bizarre notion of the offensiveness of “cultural appropriation”. Because, um, like, uh, what is culture OTHER than appropriation? In fact, we actually have phrases to describe culture in the absence of appropriation, for example “personal quirk” or “crazy person on the subway.” And cultural appropriation is also mysteriously uni-directional in that what it claims to mean - an artist from one culture wearing the drag of another - isn’t what it actually means - the phenotype of the current power dynamic producing art about those outside of said dynamic, e.g. I must have missed the cancelling of, say, daughter of Hong Kong immigrants Celeste Ng for culturally appropriating white Ohioans in her bestseller Little Fires Everywhere. To this Janice, the notion that content is bound by matching physical attributes such as skin color or eye shape or a generic concept of “heritage” - much of which is actually oppressive patriarchal impositions on women, a primo example of which being the cancelled white teen from the other year who wore a cheongsam to her prom and was accused of culturally apporpriating Chinese heritage: given that a cheongsam is basically just a Han Dynasty burqa with all the historical male control that implies, was everyone onboard with what, specifically, y’all were so enraged about being “appropriated” during that cancelling? - to the content creator is madness! MADNESS! I mean don’t you think Othello’s a good play, kinda long, but ya know, Shakespeare? Look I’m not criticizing anyone for not consuming a particular piece of content based on the creator’s identity politics - like I don’t see myself picking up a fantasy series by Putin if he ever decides to write one - but I’m making the definitive and I realize highly inflammatory statement that identity politics is not actually a valid critique of art. Take that, cancel culture!
Now where was I… oh yeah, I liked the book overall; it was a little tedious in parts as its essence is to fold a lot of research into a fiction narrative meaning the lead character is often a cipher on the receiving end of other stories. But the book was pretty decent and managed to maintain the thriller engine tension basically the whole time. My advice is read the book and then rush over to the Amazon reviews section to delight in all the rage and then the backlash to the rage and then the backlash to the backslash etc. The combo of the B book with the solid A+ review fury makes for some top-notch entertainment.
TV/Streaming:
The Bold Type (Seasons 1-4):
I know it's not good and it definitely got worse as the seasons progressed and it got more woke (which, as with much wokeness in current TV, tends to read as vaguely self-righteous media do-gooding, which is fine because frankly I think it actually does do good, but often struggles with the balance between 42 minutes of finger-wagging lecture vs keeping the show entertaining (I’m looking at you, Queen Sugar season 5!)) but it's a good background noise show about 3 millennial college grads working for a fashion mag and their loves, tribulations, etc. What can I say other than that one episode revolved entirely around a yeast infection.
Quicksand:
This is a miniseries which is apparently based on a Swedish mega-selling book about the girlfriend of a school-shooter who’s put on trial as a murderer and accessory to murder basically for having missed or willfully ignored the signs that he might have been gearing up for a mass killing. I watched it all… but it wasn’t good. Maybe the book was good? Conceptually I think it’s pretty dumb because I’m willing to go on record here and say denial and/or obliviousness aren’t crimes. I don’t know, it was a lot of teen drama and the main plot technique was having the lead character not explain her actions at all so they could slowly be revealed in later episodes. This should give you some idea of how thin the plotting is and how much of it relied on her silence to create “suspense”; I watched it but, well, only if you’re desperate.
The Flight Attendant:
Genius. This is the absolute pinnacle of straight-up, plotty, fun, kinda frothy entertainment. In a way its closest analogue is the ‘70s uber-Goldie Hawn/Chevy Chase mystery/comedy Foul Play in the sense that it revolves around a lead who should never be part of a murder mystery getting swept in way over her head and, through sheer determination and force of character (and maybe some plot convenience but I just don’t care!), staying afloat and even winning. This is peak popcorn entertainment and I seriously hope it’s the forefront of the next wave of peak TV because I’m OVER downer antiheroes.
Movies:
A Separation - this is an Iranian Oscar winner from about a decade ago, and I was completely wrong in what I thought it would be about - an attempt to flee an oppressive country - vs. what it’s actually about which I won't give away but will just note that I found the story to be simultaneously interesting and progressively more stressful as the film went on. For once I understand the critical response because this film pretty impressively shows what you can do with just a lot of dialogue and characters reacting naturally, if badly, to a situation that then spirals out of control. Worth watching IJHO if you haven't seen.
Ready or Not - okay, this movie about a woman who, in a way, marries into the wrong family is definitely not good but it is equally definitely entertaining. It’s in the fun-if-somewhat-ridiculous-horror genre with enough scares to keep it interesting and enough OTTness to keep it fun. I can think of worse ways to spend an evening (see Queen Sugar season 5 above).