I really wanted to like this book, I found the concept very intriguing when I first came across it online, and when I read the book I thought that the writing was beautiful, the symbolism was so vivid, the ideas were depicted in such a visceral and multi-dimensional way that they really encompassed me to where I felt nearly overwhelmed.
But the misogyny hit me straight from the start, where I became acutely aware the writer was trying to get me to empathize with a guy who was essentially cheating on his wife. Like he was almost making a point that certainly you, the reader, are above lingering on such superficial things as the morality of it when "the very nature of man is that he would leave his wife for a younger one halfway through his life." The description of woman as presumably being enamored by childbearing to the point of excess, which is subversively implied to somehow "justify" why a married man would be exhausted with monogamy; the repeated descriptions of women "holding men captive" by use of marriage; and the perspective of heterosexual life solely from the man's point of view, as though women had no desires or feelings of their own-- it left such a bitter taste in my mouth, and in particular where you were meant to feel empathy for Alexandre, who was suffering from society's prejudice against homosexuality, but who all the while spoke derogatorily of women without qualms.
Which brings me to another important point: while almost every description or summary you find about this book speaks of the twins, in actuality in the book you don't even get to any in-depth discussion of the twins until about 120 pages in. Before that there's a long discussion about Alexandre (their uncle), which then once more continues after a single chapter about the twins. And what I found really exhausting about the way that the book is written is that instead of telling a story it kind of gives abstract, philosophical musings on part of the author, one after the next, for countless pages-- while here and there including discrete examples from the characters' lives-- not necessarily in chronological order-- as to demonstrate his ideas. It's something that would be beautiful if it was included in the writing now and again, but after you read 400+ pages written this way, then unless you had come into this expecting to read a book on philosophy it leaves you feeling a little drained and a little cheated.
And the thing is, even though different parts of the book are told from different characters' perspectives, because all of the parts are written in that same rambling, philosophically musing way, it doesn't really feel like you're reading different characters. It feels like you're reading one character throughout the whole book, and it's Tournier.
The novel's summary probably inspired in you anticipation to read about a deep brotherly bond which transcends the conventional idea of love-- but you don't get that, either. When at long last the book does get to a discussion of the twins, it's introduced in retrospect through one brother's awareness that twinship is generally perceived as monstrous: you never really read about the part of their lives where they mutually experienced the beauty of their bond.
Is it a worthwhile read? Apart from the misogyny, yes; the writing itself is fantastic and the ideas are thought-provoking, it will not be a waste of your time. But I think you ought to know what you're in for.
Genre: General Fiction
But the misogyny hit me straight from the start, where I became acutely aware the writer was trying to get me to empathize with a guy who was essentially cheating on his wife. Like he was almost making a point that certainly you, the reader, are above lingering on such superficial things as the morality of it when "the very nature of man is that he would leave his wife for a younger one halfway through his life." The description of woman as presumably being enamored by childbearing to the point of excess, which is subversively implied to somehow "justify" why a married man would be exhausted with monogamy; the repeated descriptions of women "holding men captive" by use of marriage; and the perspective of heterosexual life solely from the man's point of view, as though women had no desires or feelings of their own-- it left such a bitter taste in my mouth, and in particular where you were meant to feel empathy for Alexandre, who was suffering from society's prejudice against homosexuality, but who all the while spoke derogatorily of women without qualms.
Which brings me to another important point: while almost every description or summary you find about this book speaks of the twins, in actuality in the book you don't even get to any in-depth discussion of the twins until about 120 pages in. Before that there's a long discussion about Alexandre (their uncle), which then once more continues after a single chapter about the twins. And what I found really exhausting about the way that the book is written is that instead of telling a story it kind of gives abstract, philosophical musings on part of the author, one after the next, for countless pages-- while here and there including discrete examples from the characters' lives-- not necessarily in chronological order-- as to demonstrate his ideas. It's something that would be beautiful if it was included in the writing now and again, but after you read 400+ pages written this way, then unless you had come into this expecting to read a book on philosophy it leaves you feeling a little drained and a little cheated.
And the thing is, even though different parts of the book are told from different characters' perspectives, because all of the parts are written in that same rambling, philosophically musing way, it doesn't really feel like you're reading different characters. It feels like you're reading one character throughout the whole book, and it's Tournier.
The novel's summary probably inspired in you anticipation to read about a deep brotherly bond which transcends the conventional idea of love-- but you don't get that, either. When at long last the book does get to a discussion of the twins, it's introduced in retrospect through one brother's awareness that twinship is generally perceived as monstrous: you never really read about the part of their lives where they mutually experienced the beauty of their bond.
Is it a worthwhile read? Apart from the misogyny, yes; the writing itself is fantastic and the ideas are thought-provoking, it will not be a waste of your time. But I think you ought to know what you're in for.
Genre: General Fiction
Visitors also looked at these books
Used availability for Michel Tournier's Gemini