What do you think?
Rate this book
Ten Days in the Hills
NATIONAL BESTSELLER • In this novel set in Hollywood Hills after the 2003 Academy Awards, the Pulitzer Prize–winning author of A Thousand Acres delivers “a blazing farce, a fiery satire of contemporary celebrity culture and a rich, simmering meditation on the price of war and fame and desire.” — Los Angeles Times Book Review
In the aftermath of the 2003 Academy Awards, Max and Elena—he's an Oscar-winning writer/director—open their Holywood Hills home to a group of friends and neighbors, industy insiders and hangers–on, eager to escape the outside world and dissect the latest news, gossip, and secrets of the business. Over the next ten days, old lovers collide, new relationships form, and sparks fly, all with Smiley's signature sparkling wit and characterization.
With its breathtaking passion and sexy irreverence, Ten Days in the Hills is a glowing addition to the work of one of our most beloved novelists.
In the aftermath of the 2003 Academy Awards, Max and Elena—he's an Oscar-winning writer/director—open their Holywood Hills home to a group of friends and neighbors, industy insiders and hangers–on, eager to escape the outside world and dissect the latest news, gossip, and secrets of the business. Over the next ten days, old lovers collide, new relationships form, and sparks fly, all with Smiley's signature sparkling wit and characterization.
With its breathtaking passion and sexy irreverence, Ten Days in the Hills is a glowing addition to the work of one of our most beloved novelists.
544 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2007
119 people are currently reading
914 people want to read
About the author
Jane Smiley
133 books2,721 followersJane Smiley is a Pulitzer Prize-winning American novelist.
Born in Los Angeles, California, Smiley grew up in Webster Groves, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis, and graduated from John Burroughs School. She obtained a A.B. at Vassar College, then earned a M.F.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Iowa. While working towards her doctorate, she also spent a year studying in Iceland as a Fulbright Scholar. From 1981 to 1996, she taught at Iowa State University. Smiley published her first novel, Barn Blind, in 1980, and won a 1985 O. Henry Award for her short story "Lily", which was published in The Atlantic Monthly. Her best-selling A Thousand Acres, a story based on William Shakespeare's King Lear, received the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1992. It was adapted into a film of the same title in 1997. In 1995 she wrote her sole television script produced, for an episode of Homicide: Life on the Street. Her novella The Age of Grief was made into the 2002 film The Secret Lives of Dentists.
Thirteen Ways of Looking at the Novel (2005), is a non-fiction meditation on the history and the nature of the novel, somewhat in the tradition of E. M. Forster's seminal Aspects of the Novel, that roams from eleventh century Japan's Murasaki Shikibu's The Tale of Genji to twenty-first century Americans chick lit.
In 2001, Smiley was elected a member of The American Academy of Arts and Letters.
Born in Los Angeles, California, Smiley grew up in Webster Groves, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis, and graduated from John Burroughs School. She obtained a A.B. at Vassar College, then earned a M.F.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Iowa. While working towards her doctorate, she also spent a year studying in Iceland as a Fulbright Scholar. From 1981 to 1996, she taught at Iowa State University. Smiley published her first novel, Barn Blind, in 1980, and won a 1985 O. Henry Award for her short story "Lily", which was published in The Atlantic Monthly. Her best-selling A Thousand Acres, a story based on William Shakespeare's King Lear, received the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1992. It was adapted into a film of the same title in 1997. In 1995 she wrote her sole television script produced, for an episode of Homicide: Life on the Street. Her novella The Age of Grief was made into the 2002 film The Secret Lives of Dentists.
Thirteen Ways of Looking at the Novel (2005), is a non-fiction meditation on the history and the nature of the novel, somewhat in the tradition of E. M. Forster's seminal Aspects of the Novel, that roams from eleventh century Japan's Murasaki Shikibu's The Tale of Genji to twenty-first century Americans chick lit.
In 2001, Smiley was elected a member of The American Academy of Arts and Letters.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 379 reviews
November 11, 2007
There is an early renaissance work called The Decameron, by one Italian bloke named Boccaccio. The book is a thinly veiled excuse to collect a bunch of smutty stories under a thinly veiled excuse for a framing plot (ten young men and women escape to the hills outside plague-ridden Florence, and behave themselves with remarkable propriety while telling the dirtiest anecdotes over the fire). I had to read it in college. The concept of gathering anecdotes like this is one of those early european ideas (maybe harking back to Herotodus?) which I rather like; Cervantes did it, as did Chaucer, who probably borrowed from The Decameron, BUT I was not that impressed by The Decameron itself. As an anthropological collection of otherwise censored narrative, sure. As literature: eh.
So I suppose I wasn't entirely predisposed to like Ten Days in the Hills, Jane Smiley's "re-visioning" of the 14th century Italian work. All the same, a certain charm and involvement overtook me, and I enjoyed it, maybe despite myself.
The book is set in the Hills of LA, right at the onset of the war in Iraq, in (I think) March 2003. The participants are the friends, family, and other acquaintance of a semi-retired film-maker. And they tell a lot of stories. Most are not smutty. Instead, the author adds a bunch of sex between the characters. So the frame narrative is better contrived, and the stories are more interesting. Ultimately, I found the sex... well, gratuitous. The book is literature. It's not porn. You wouldn't read it for that, there's too much of stuff like people talking and doing other things. And in my opinion, the author's attempt at making a mature (I mean both about older people and less juvenile) take on sex doesn't really pan out. The focus on sex feels unwarranted, and drags the natural movement of the work out of proportion. For instance, there are several parent/child relationships. One of the key ones, a father-daughter relationship, gets almost no "air-time," so that the narrator's assertions that they are so close feels unwarranted.
Generally speaking, every since college (where I both read a lot of medieval lit and Joyce's Ulysses), I've been fascinated by the premise of adapting earlier works. In this case, I'm not enthusiastic about the choice of adaptation, and even then I don't think that aspect was particularly successful.
But the characters *are* interesting; their interactions and relations are also compelling. The dialog is remarkably flat and unnatural (this was accentuated by the fact that I listened to it as an audiobook), but if you can get past that, I think you'd ultimately get sucked into the lives and preoccupations of the characters in the book.
So while I couldn't say the book was perfect, I can say you will probably enjoy it, and not regret having read it.
So I suppose I wasn't entirely predisposed to like Ten Days in the Hills, Jane Smiley's "re-visioning" of the 14th century Italian work. All the same, a certain charm and involvement overtook me, and I enjoyed it, maybe despite myself.
The book is set in the Hills of LA, right at the onset of the war in Iraq, in (I think) March 2003. The participants are the friends, family, and other acquaintance of a semi-retired film-maker. And they tell a lot of stories. Most are not smutty. Instead, the author adds a bunch of sex between the characters. So the frame narrative is better contrived, and the stories are more interesting. Ultimately, I found the sex... well, gratuitous. The book is literature. It's not porn. You wouldn't read it for that, there's too much of stuff like people talking and doing other things. And in my opinion, the author's attempt at making a mature (I mean both about older people and less juvenile) take on sex doesn't really pan out. The focus on sex feels unwarranted, and drags the natural movement of the work out of proportion. For instance, there are several parent/child relationships. One of the key ones, a father-daughter relationship, gets almost no "air-time," so that the narrator's assertions that they are so close feels unwarranted.
Generally speaking, every since college (where I both read a lot of medieval lit and Joyce's Ulysses), I've been fascinated by the premise of adapting earlier works. In this case, I'm not enthusiastic about the choice of adaptation, and even then I don't think that aspect was particularly successful.
But the characters *are* interesting; their interactions and relations are also compelling. The dialog is remarkably flat and unnatural (this was accentuated by the fact that I listened to it as an audiobook), but if you can get past that, I think you'd ultimately get sucked into the lives and preoccupations of the characters in the book.
So while I couldn't say the book was perfect, I can say you will probably enjoy it, and not regret having read it.
July 8, 2008
Finally I can give 5 stars to something I've read this year. I was a bit worried at first...all that sex stuff and random stories and political arguments I've already heard, but I trusted the author would do something brilliant as she always does and she did not disappoint. This book was so much fun and I loved (almost) all of the characters. I got such an indulgent pleasure from lying in a hammock reading it for hours and hours and never getting bored. I almost cried at the end, mostly because I was going to miss everyone. OK, maybe I'm just unstable and it was just me and not the book at all, but I would highly recommend it.
May 6, 2008
My typical response to a Smiley novel: she cites ten or twelve other books that look even more interesting than whatever I'm reading of hers at the moment. This book (a modern-day Decamaron (sp)) has the reader eavesdropping on several Hollywood residents in a palatial house over the space of a week and a half, shortly after the outbreak of the Iraq war (in Boccachio's work, the characters are hiding out from the Black Plague). Smiley said in one interview or another that she was going for an eavesdropping effect: we watch the characters argue, think, feud, have sex and basically live lives like people do, and watch their private and public dramas unfold. To me, it was a harsh reminder of the perils of espionage: other people's lives are just as boring as mine, so why eavesdrop in the first place? The characters are rich and textured, and I couldn't help but get especially interested in the feud between Zoe, a hot-stuff Jamaican actress, and her daughter, and although the debates about the war's exegesis are perhaps dated, they should never be forgotten (hear me Tso? yeah, you better run). But it wasn't enough to add up to a satisfactory read on my part.
All the talk about Taras Bulba, however, has me pawing the ground to get to the library and get a copy. It sounds like a Ukranian Braveheart.
All the talk about Taras Bulba, however, has me pawing the ground to get to the library and get a copy. It sounds like a Ukranian Braveheart.
December 7, 2007
Honestly, I didn't like it and I didn't finish it. Which surprised me, because I read the Decameron as a teenager and liked it, and I like Jane Smiley generally.
The Decameron is all about stories, and so is this book. Just like the Decameron, the characters sit around all day telling stories, only in this modern version, the stories come from the characters' own lives and from the movies, in addition to gossip, apocryphal tales, folklore, etc. Like the Decameron, the relationships (and romances) among the storytellers evolve and change as they all hang out and talk. (Only in this book, it's a LOT easier to figure out who's sleeping with whom. Cause she shows you.)
But reading about characters talking about real life movies was very offputting for me. I mean, I live in LA. Also, in the Decameron, the overhanging reason for the storytelling was that the characters were holed up on an estate, trying to escape the plague. In Ten Days in the Hills, they're holed up because they're freaked out that the U.S. has just invaded Iraq -- the start of our current war. And honestly, I could maybe buy that parallel if it were the start of World War II, or something, but this war has never felt like the kind of event that would make average people hide out in a house and refuse to turn on the television or read a newspaper. And maybe the author meant for us to feel confused about the character's reasons, or to think abotu the nature of this war, or whatever, but it wasn't a compelling way to present the issue. It's a book that is too easy to walk away from and forget.
The Decameron is all about stories, and so is this book. Just like the Decameron, the characters sit around all day telling stories, only in this modern version, the stories come from the characters' own lives and from the movies, in addition to gossip, apocryphal tales, folklore, etc. Like the Decameron, the relationships (and romances) among the storytellers evolve and change as they all hang out and talk. (Only in this book, it's a LOT easier to figure out who's sleeping with whom. Cause she shows you.)
But reading about characters talking about real life movies was very offputting for me. I mean, I live in LA. Also, in the Decameron, the overhanging reason for the storytelling was that the characters were holed up on an estate, trying to escape the plague. In Ten Days in the Hills, they're holed up because they're freaked out that the U.S. has just invaded Iraq -- the start of our current war. And honestly, I could maybe buy that parallel if it were the start of World War II, or something, but this war has never felt like the kind of event that would make average people hide out in a house and refuse to turn on the television or read a newspaper. And maybe the author meant for us to feel confused about the character's reasons, or to think abotu the nature of this war, or whatever, but it wasn't a compelling way to present the issue. It's a book that is too easy to walk away from and forget.
October 14, 2015
A deeply bad book in which none of the characters convince and all of them talk and think like upper-middle-class white ladies.
June 30, 2008
Who knew sex, storytelling and Hollywood insiderism could be so incredibly boring? Normally I love Smiley but this was a total slog. I should have just reread The Decameron.
May 13, 2008
I just started this, I'm hoping for some Laurel Canyon-like Hollywood shenanigans combined with Smiley's usual sharp and devastating observations.
I just finished this. It was so much better than I thought it would be. I thought it would be good, but not great, and maybe a little boring or contrived or strident at times. It's very hard to write about contemporary events and have the story not feel dated or irrelevant by the time it makes it way to publication. Maybe that's the reason Smiley chose the Decameron as her inspiration. It's a formula that stands the test of time.
The first few chapters were kind of boring, with too much sex described with too much anatomical precision. But then all the guests start to arrive at the house and the book becomes all-absorbing in the way of the best novels . Whenever I put it down I was always a little surprised to find myself in my little cottage in San Francisco and not at the Hollywood Hills home of a famous movie director. They spend a lot of time talking about the war, arguing about the war, worrying about the war, and I got all worked up about it again as if it was 2003 and not 2008. Remember when anger and outrage at the Bush administration felt so new and fresh and urgent, instead of a chronic condition that you start to forget you have until it flares up again, but then goes away? That's how 10 Days in the Hills made me feel. But it also made me marvel at the complexity of relationships---family, friendships, romantic love. How do we manage to communicate with each other at all? Or rather, isn't it amazing that we're able to communicate despite everything we're missing or misinterpreting or are too busy to notice? Smiley is a master of the complexity of the domestic world, and by domestic I don't mean writing about women. I mean the complex fabric of daily life, how it's interwoven with the big and the public and the momentous sweep of historical events and the small and the private and the quotidian. For some reason it's so hard to write about war and what to have for dinner at the same time and make it believable, even though we all have to do that every day in our own lives, think about the war and decide what to have for dinner.
And make it funny. This book is funny.
I just finished this. It was so much better than I thought it would be. I thought it would be good, but not great, and maybe a little boring or contrived or strident at times. It's very hard to write about contemporary events and have the story not feel dated or irrelevant by the time it makes it way to publication. Maybe that's the reason Smiley chose the Decameron as her inspiration. It's a formula that stands the test of time.
The first few chapters were kind of boring, with too much sex described with too much anatomical precision. But then all the guests start to arrive at the house and the book becomes all-absorbing in the way of the best novels . Whenever I put it down I was always a little surprised to find myself in my little cottage in San Francisco and not at the Hollywood Hills home of a famous movie director. They spend a lot of time talking about the war, arguing about the war, worrying about the war, and I got all worked up about it again as if it was 2003 and not 2008. Remember when anger and outrage at the Bush administration felt so new and fresh and urgent, instead of a chronic condition that you start to forget you have until it flares up again, but then goes away? That's how 10 Days in the Hills made me feel. But it also made me marvel at the complexity of relationships---family, friendships, romantic love. How do we manage to communicate with each other at all? Or rather, isn't it amazing that we're able to communicate despite everything we're missing or misinterpreting or are too busy to notice? Smiley is a master of the complexity of the domestic world, and by domestic I don't mean writing about women. I mean the complex fabric of daily life, how it's interwoven with the big and the public and the momentous sweep of historical events and the small and the private and the quotidian. For some reason it's so hard to write about war and what to have for dinner at the same time and make it believable, even though we all have to do that every day in our own lives, think about the war and decide what to have for dinner.
And make it funny. This book is funny.
August 1, 2008
This is one of those books that you don’t know whether to love or hate. How you feel when you finish reading it may not be how you’ll feel days or months later. The strength of the book is not what has been pushed as the book’s most outstanding feature. It all makes for a confusing situation in knowing whether to recommend the book or pan it because no two people seem to have the same take on it. I just spent a good hour reading people’s reviews of the book on Good Reads, and I am no more certain of my own feelings toward the book than I was before I read them.
Loosely following the format of a 14th century Italian book, “Decameron,” the book is intended to be a collection of stories that the characters share with each other about sex. (The Italian book is set outside Florence and the people are holed up in a villa, entertaining each other with these stories, during the days of the plague.) In Smiley’s book, there are 10 individuals cooped up in the mansion of a washed-up Hollywood director following the Academy Awards. They include the director and his girlfriend, his ex-wife (a half-Jamaican movie starlet) and her guru boyfriend, his daughter and his manager, a visiting friend who appears to be the only Conservative in the group, the ex-wife’s mother (who lives in his guest house), his girlfriend’s college-aged son (an aspiring movie maker), and his neighbor.
In Smiley’s book, the plague is replaced by the onset of the Iraq War, and this becomes a bone of contention and much argument throughout the novel. Movies are watched, and discussed. People argue about what to eat. They relocate to a Russian-owned mansion even bigger than the one owned by the director. And everyone has a lot of sex. The sex is supposed to be what sets Smiley’s book apart and makes it so daring, but I found much of it just boring and certainly no reason to recommend it.
What Smiley does do well is give us some real insight into the lives of these folks, who they are, how they got there, and what makes them tick. The relationships among the characters are fascinating and raise the book to a higher level than anything promised by the allusion to 14th century Italy. The characters talk and argue, and it is so real that at times, I found myself wanting to join in their conversations and make my own point to these people. Smiley also brilliantly bridges the gap between the mundane in our lives and the history that is being carried out all around us. These things make the writing and message of “Ten Days in the Hills” extraordinary.
I have to say that once I’d finished the book, I was disappointed, but as time has marched on, I’ve thought about it more and like the book better. So where does that leave the person who wants to know whether to read this book or not? I’m afraid you are on your own.
Loosely following the format of a 14th century Italian book, “Decameron,” the book is intended to be a collection of stories that the characters share with each other about sex. (The Italian book is set outside Florence and the people are holed up in a villa, entertaining each other with these stories, during the days of the plague.) In Smiley’s book, there are 10 individuals cooped up in the mansion of a washed-up Hollywood director following the Academy Awards. They include the director and his girlfriend, his ex-wife (a half-Jamaican movie starlet) and her guru boyfriend, his daughter and his manager, a visiting friend who appears to be the only Conservative in the group, the ex-wife’s mother (who lives in his guest house), his girlfriend’s college-aged son (an aspiring movie maker), and his neighbor.
In Smiley’s book, the plague is replaced by the onset of the Iraq War, and this becomes a bone of contention and much argument throughout the novel. Movies are watched, and discussed. People argue about what to eat. They relocate to a Russian-owned mansion even bigger than the one owned by the director. And everyone has a lot of sex. The sex is supposed to be what sets Smiley’s book apart and makes it so daring, but I found much of it just boring and certainly no reason to recommend it.
What Smiley does do well is give us some real insight into the lives of these folks, who they are, how they got there, and what makes them tick. The relationships among the characters are fascinating and raise the book to a higher level than anything promised by the allusion to 14th century Italy. The characters talk and argue, and it is so real that at times, I found myself wanting to join in their conversations and make my own point to these people. Smiley also brilliantly bridges the gap between the mundane in our lives and the history that is being carried out all around us. These things make the writing and message of “Ten Days in the Hills” extraordinary.
I have to say that once I’d finished the book, I was disappointed, but as time has marched on, I’ve thought about it more and like the book better. So where does that leave the person who wants to know whether to read this book or not? I’m afraid you are on your own.
February 13, 2013
Having not been able to get through "The Greenlanders" but having memories of having enjoyed "Moo" long ago, I was ready for this to go in either direction. Moo had struck a chord because I also have experience with being a faculty member at a land-grant school in the Upper Midwest. "Ten Days" resonates with me because I grew up in the Hollywood Hills. (Hm, maybe my problem with "The Greenlanders" is that I've never spent ten years huddling around a fire saying things like, "Bah! Woman! Tell Grimkorn and Høffelstådsdottir it is time for our evening meat.") Ethnographically, she is eerily accurate, even down to the incessant talking about fitness regimens, performative orthorexia, alternative religions, and the ritual recitation of one's exact driving routes (just like in the Saturday Night Live skit "The Californians," incidentally). I enjoyed it quite a bit, but, as in "Moo," I didn't feel that she really was getting behind any of the characters. Not that one has to do so—far from it; in fact, the best comic novels resolutely refuse to—but there was not that lusty amorality either that the best comedies of manners have. I even felt, perhaps, that Smiley was tossing this book out there hoping that someone would turn it into a movie? If so, let's hope she didn't offend any possible suitors by portraying them too realistically in this book.
Also, the set-up was contrived but self-consciously so: a disparate group of people, including uneasy in-laws, steps, and other semi-kin, tossed together in an isolated mansion for ten days. Their hosts, for part of it, are some elusive, mysterious Russian billionaires. I kept waiting for the dénouement, when one finally finds out what the Russians' deal is, but instead they simply evaporate one day. Which is fine, though. Life is like that. Some Russians just evaporate.
Also, the set-up was contrived but self-consciously so: a disparate group of people, including uneasy in-laws, steps, and other semi-kin, tossed together in an isolated mansion for ten days. Their hosts, for part of it, are some elusive, mysterious Russian billionaires. I kept waiting for the dénouement, when one finally finds out what the Russians' deal is, but instead they simply evaporate one day. Which is fine, though. Life is like that. Some Russians just evaporate.
May 2, 2020
The extended family and friends of Max, a successful Hollywood screenwriter, accidentally spend ten days together, in relative isolation, during the time of the US invasion of Iraq. On the one hand, little happens, aside from sex (presented directly, unromanticized, with no embarrassment). On the other hand, the conversational interactions among hosts and guests lead them to discover aspects of one another and themselves, and you get quickly drawn into the lives, concerns, passions, and relationships of these diverse people.
Max admires "My Dinner with Andre," a powerful and memorable movie which consists entirely of conversation in a restaurant. This novel has that tone and that strength. The circumstances and the mix of characters lead to insights into the purpose, direction, and meaning of contemporary life and politics; into what makes a movie work and what makes a life "work". Max also admires "The Seventh Seal" and is tempted to do a movie based on Gogol's "Taras Bulba", and the talk ranges wide and far, touching on contemporary moral dilemmas, the business of movie-making, and the meaning of violence and death.
Some of my pleasure in reading this book derived from the fact that I, like Max and his girl-friend Elena, am of the Baby Boomer generation. I lived through the 60s and Viet Nam and all that has happened since then, and found it easy to relate to what mattered to them. It was also refreshing to read of sexual passion and love between intelligent and experienced 50-somethings.
Max admires "My Dinner with Andre," a powerful and memorable movie which consists entirely of conversation in a restaurant. This novel has that tone and that strength. The circumstances and the mix of characters lead to insights into the purpose, direction, and meaning of contemporary life and politics; into what makes a movie work and what makes a life "work". Max also admires "The Seventh Seal" and is tempted to do a movie based on Gogol's "Taras Bulba", and the talk ranges wide and far, touching on contemporary moral dilemmas, the business of movie-making, and the meaning of violence and death.
Some of my pleasure in reading this book derived from the fact that I, like Max and his girl-friend Elena, am of the Baby Boomer generation. I lived through the 60s and Viet Nam and all that has happened since then, and found it easy to relate to what mattered to them. It was also refreshing to read of sexual passion and love between intelligent and experienced 50-somethings.
September 25, 2008
I didn't dig this book. I found it boring, and, because of that, it took a long time for me to slog through. It was essentially a modern-day retelling of The Decameron, set in Hollywood. The one part I did enjoy was the discussion of movies, both real and imagined, that the characters participated in. And the book did make me want to go and rent some classic movies I've never seen. There is just something about Smiley's style, I guess, that I don't like. I didn't care for A Thousand Acres, either.
June 18, 2015
Everyone is referring to this as her Decameron, but it's really her version of "My Dinner with Andre," which she refers to several times. I loved Dinner so much I actually went out and bought the screenplay after seeing the film, but Ten Days was more character driven, arduous, and much longer. I usually rip through her books, but this one was a bit tedious, although, as usual, very intelligent, socially and historically astute, and interesting, complex and characters. I did like her cross section view of Hollywood.
January 15, 2015
I don't know why I forced myself to finish Ten Days in the Hills. Maybe I expected a meaningful ending. I might have to re-read 10,000 Acres to figure out why I gave that 4 stars.
May 28, 2017
Too long, too wandering, too much effort.
September 16, 2018
This 2007 novel tells the tales of ten people over the first couple weeks after the U.S. started the 2003 war in Iraq. The people, all relatively affluent, some in the movie business, have varying opinions on the war, and on many other topics, but by halfway through the novel, we no longer define them by their opinions. Instead, through a series of fascinating conversations, the telling of interesting stories, and a remarkable catalog of sexual descriptions, we see these ten people as fully rounded human beings who never reach full communication with anybody else, but who figure out how to get along together anyway. Near the end, Max, the nearly washed-up film director, wants to take all ten along with him on a project, simply because he has enjoyed their company, which is pretty much my own reaction. I would certainly have continued reading well past the 530 pages devoted to ten days in their lives, even though the ending is perfectly satisfactory. Smiley's research for this book had to be enormous - she's particularly adept at talking about films, both real and imaginary, through the mouths of her characters.
August 28, 2020
The occasional flash of insight, if nothing especially profound. Some interesting literary trivia and chitchat about the movie industry--but you know what they say about sausage making... This feels like the work of an academic salvaging some of their old lecture notes in an attempt to avoid the proverbial publish-or-perish meat grinder. I slogged through this 500+ page novel understanding that an effective story does not necessarily require a "plot" or even much in the way of action. And yet, somehow, the reader must be compelled to care about something in the story, if only to keep turning pages. Alas, these pages are populated by a vapid minyan of characters whose aspirations are as dull and pointless as their interminable, self-absorbed prattle. Nobody has anything interesting to say, and the world inside these people's heads is even worse: Reading this is like trying to cross a featureless desert only to find oneself going in perpetual circles, contemplating slow death from thirst.
January 9, 2021
I am not sure I understand this author. I would give this book 3 1/2 stars. The main themes seem to be love, forgiveness, and death. So many other minor points and themes are taken up throughout that it is a bit dizzying. /there are many characters who are related by marriage/family or relationships.
It takes a while to discover what is happening, and then a little longer to care about it. It is worth extra points that the book improves as it moves toward the end.
I think it is difficult to read this in the almost post Trump era. I do remember having some of the main concerns in the book at the time of the Bush presidency. So much has happened since then.
Smiley sometimes gets over involved in descriptions of everything. OCD is mentioned in the book and I do think it goes on with the author at times, for no apparent reason. Maybe this book could be just as good, effective, and make all the salient points and be only 350 pages.
It takes a while to discover what is happening, and then a little longer to care about it. It is worth extra points that the book improves as it moves toward the end.
I think it is difficult to read this in the almost post Trump era. I do remember having some of the main concerns in the book at the time of the Bush presidency. So much has happened since then.
Smiley sometimes gets over involved in descriptions of everything. OCD is mentioned in the book and I do think it goes on with the author at times, for no apparent reason. Maybe this book could be just as good, effective, and make all the salient points and be only 350 pages.
November 17, 2016
Too many characters, too many words, an endless series of self-indulgent diatribes. Touted as a "glorious novel from the Pulitzer Prize-winner about ten transformative and unforgettable days in the Hollywood hills," personally I can't wait to forget this book, which is only transformative of my (previously positive) regard for Jane Smiley. First we're supposed to believe that Hollywood director Max and his live-in girlfriend Elena are going to wake up surprised to find their house filled with: Max's ex-wife Zoe along with her new guru/lover Paul, Max and Zoe's daughter Isabel, Elena's son Simon, Zoe's mother Delphine, Delphine's neighbor Cassie, Max's agent Stoney, and Max's childhood friend Charlie, and then we're supposed to believe they all stay together for 10 entire days? And at no time are there any personal assistants, housekeepers, stylists, publicists, media consultants, trainers, therapists, or body guards present? And all these ten people do the whole time is have sex and talk and philosophize, in grandiose prose, about the Iraq war, film, literature, history and art - without a word about fashion, products, or branding (with the sole and jarringly repetitive exception of Gelson's supermarket)?? Sorry, but these do not pass as the rants of convincing movie makers and pop stars, but too unmistakably those of a midwestern literary genius.
I get that Jane Smiley is passionate about her political views, but I'd rather have read or heard them in a non-fiction format than smooshed into this particularly densely written and unconvincing premise. There was so much, "instead of asking/saying X, she/he said/asked Y" as if to make us choke down double dialog volume! Why didn't Smiley present these people as literati, or classicists, or ivory tower dwellers, or midwesterners, something that would have rung true?! It's not just the California aspect; likewise the Jamaican characters were only Jamaican because Smiley told us so, not because she showed us anything Jamaican about any of them or let us hear anything Jamaican from them.
I get that Jane Smiley is passionate about her political views, but I'd rather have read or heard them in a non-fiction format than smooshed into this particularly densely written and unconvincing premise. There was so much, "instead of asking/saying X, she/he said/asked Y" as if to make us choke down double dialog volume! Why didn't Smiley present these people as literati, or classicists, or ivory tower dwellers, or midwesterners, something that would have rung true?! It's not just the California aspect; likewise the Jamaican characters were only Jamaican because Smiley told us so, not because she showed us anything Jamaican about any of them or let us hear anything Jamaican from them.
December 8, 2007
Loosely based on the Decameron, and all about sex and politics. Not too shabby! There were times when I couldn't put it down. It follows ten Hollywood-types in the days after the Iraq war has just been declared. Very well-written, interesting political arguments, interspersed with amusing and juicy parts.
Then he said, "But I'm permitted to save myself."
"Are you?" said Delphine. "Are you permitted to promote risk for others and keep some security for yourself?"
"Well that's a natural human thing to do--"
"But we're not talking about natural. We're talking about guilty or not guilty. What you're saying is that you are justified in getting away with what you can get away with, right?"
"I guess, right."
"So in that sense you're in agreement with the administration, too, right?"
"In some sense, right. I admit that."
"So, since a lot of people around the world disagree with the policies you support, you are in more or less the same position as a German civilian or a Japanese civilian before the Second World War. Your ideas could work out, but they might not. Are you ready to pay the price if they don't, and you can't get away with it?"
..."So, as we pulled out of the parking lot, I said, 'I bet they live in that car,' and she said, 'The guy in the suit was a woman.' I said, 'Probably. This is Santa Cruz.' And she said, 'That's too freaky for me.' And I said, 'They're just lesbians, what's the difference,' and she said, 'They're homeless Wiccan lesbians living in their car with two kids. Is that a choice or a misfortune?'"
Then he said, "But I'm permitted to save myself."
"Are you?" said Delphine. "Are you permitted to promote risk for others and keep some security for yourself?"
"Well that's a natural human thing to do--"
"But we're not talking about natural. We're talking about guilty or not guilty. What you're saying is that you are justified in getting away with what you can get away with, right?"
"I guess, right."
"So in that sense you're in agreement with the administration, too, right?"
"In some sense, right. I admit that."
"So, since a lot of people around the world disagree with the policies you support, you are in more or less the same position as a German civilian or a Japanese civilian before the Second World War. Your ideas could work out, but they might not. Are you ready to pay the price if they don't, and you can't get away with it?"
..."So, as we pulled out of the parking lot, I said, 'I bet they live in that car,' and she said, 'The guy in the suit was a woman.' I said, 'Probably. This is Santa Cruz.' And she said, 'That's too freaky for me.' And I said, 'They're just lesbians, what's the difference,' and she said, 'They're homeless Wiccan lesbians living in their car with two kids. Is that a choice or a misfortune?'"
March 2, 2008
"But a little after nones, they all went and refreshed their faces in cool water before assembling, at the queen's request, on the lawn near the fountain, where, having seated themselves in the customary manner, they began to await their turn to tell a story on the topic the queen had proposed."
-Giovanni Boccaccio, The Decameron
Jane Smiley is once again remaking classic literature with Ten Days in the Hills, a modern take on Boccaccio's The Decameron.
In The Decameron, an assorted group of ten noble men and women hide out in a country villa in the hills outside of Florence, hoping to escape the plague (aka The Black Death). They spend their time telling stories that are invariably linked.
In Ten Days in the Hills, an assorted group of ten (self-involved) men and women hide out in mansions in the hills outside of Hollywood, hoping to escape news of the Iraq War (circa March 2003). They spend their time telling stories that are invariably linked, watching movies, arguing about politics, and having sex.
Well, I wouldn't say that this was an easy read, but it was interesting. The commentary on the Iraq War was intriguing (especially since it really managed to take you back to that time, at the start of the war), the stories were very humorous, and the arguments between the characters were believable and entertaining. What kept Ten Days from getting a higher rating from me was that it wasn't gripping from beginning to end, due to a lack of flow in the stories, and it seemed to fall rather flat at the end.
-Giovanni Boccaccio, The Decameron
Jane Smiley is once again remaking classic literature with Ten Days in the Hills, a modern take on Boccaccio's The Decameron.
In The Decameron, an assorted group of ten noble men and women hide out in a country villa in the hills outside of Florence, hoping to escape the plague (aka The Black Death). They spend their time telling stories that are invariably linked.
In Ten Days in the Hills, an assorted group of ten (self-involved) men and women hide out in mansions in the hills outside of Hollywood, hoping to escape news of the Iraq War (circa March 2003). They spend their time telling stories that are invariably linked, watching movies, arguing about politics, and having sex.
Well, I wouldn't say that this was an easy read, but it was interesting. The commentary on the Iraq War was intriguing (especially since it really managed to take you back to that time, at the start of the war), the stories were very humorous, and the arguments between the characters were believable and entertaining. What kept Ten Days from getting a higher rating from me was that it wasn't gripping from beginning to end, due to a lack of flow in the stories, and it seemed to fall rather flat at the end.
May 24, 2008
I was expecting to enjoy this book far more than I did. Rarely is there a book I start that has me so uninspired that I just want to throw in the towel, and this happened to me several times along the way, though there were moments when I thought it might redeem itself. I've only read one other Jane Smiley book, A Thousand Acres, and I loved it. She is really a master of detail. Perhaps I kept going because I was so startled by how thoroughly different the subject matter between these two books could be-- and how Smiley could have researched the subjects so intimately. I will likely read some of her other books now simply to see her range. But ultimately this book was pointless. The premise that a group of Hollywood types and their families would hole up for 10 days at random simply because they were upset by the onset of the Iraq War, and then would stick it out for 10 days (again, a random number of days), and along the way decide to change venues to an elaborately decorated hidden mansion likely owned by Russian mafia was all just far too much conjecture. I think Smiley herself must have gotten bored along the way and decided she had to switch it up to a new location where each room was more exotic than the next, only so that she had something else to describe. If there was meaning to be found in the dialog or some take away message, I didn't find them. Nonetheless, she's good enough at telling you what you are seeing that you can at least derive some pleasure from the voyeurism.
Read
February 5, 2009Jane Smiley, who won the 1992 Pulitzer Prize for A Thousand Acres, has written on a range of topics: horses, midwestern university life, real estate, Greenland, and, most recently, literature (13 Ways of Looking at the Novel, ***1/2 Jan/Feb 2006). Ten Days, a social satire, tackles the superficial lives of Hollywood denizens__to mixed acclaim. Many reviewers were sufficiently entertained by watching Smiley's set of spoiled, if smart, individuals interact and ruminate on their self-involved concerns; others found the conversations hackneyed. While Smiley's use of the Iraq war created some enlightened discussion, it also seemed like a heavy-handed device. Critics similarly diverged on the characters, which reflected their own view of the novel: some characters stood out; others did not. A few learned important lessons at the end of ten days__but most did not.
This is an excerpt from a review published in Bookmarks magazine.
August 23, 2009
Against all odds, I loved this book. Normally, I'm put off by lots of stories w/in stories because I don't care for short stories. I love long novels, even better give me a saga or trilogy. I enjoy full immersion in places and in characters' lives (Suitable Boy, Forsyth Saga, Strangers and Brothers, Richard Marius's East Tennessee trilogy, etc.) With her L.A. Decameron, Smiley gives us a feast of characters and a tongue-in-cheek portrayal of our times that often sent me into gales of laughter. I listened to this in my car and found myself avoiding the drive-in bank teller one morning when the reader was deep in one of the many very detailed sex scenes. These aren't like erotica or pornography. More like real sex. There's lots to play with in this book. Characters' names echo mythology (Delphine = an oracle, Cassie = Cassandra, etc.), the Iraq war takes on Hellenic force as the uneasy backdrop, foods catalog character traits but also contemporary upper-middle-class foibles. I truly did not want this book to end. Loved it. Thanks, Jane, for making me smile. Repeatedly.
October 12, 2015
so boring
Read
January 27, 2024After reading a Christmas gift of Jane Smiley's essays called "The Questions that Matter Most," I have been following through with some of her previous titles. From the past, I remember her famous "A Thousand Acres" (Pulitzer prize) and loved the satiric "Moo" about a Mid Western Agricultural College probably inspired by her years at the Iowa Writing Workshop. "Ten Days" is unlike anything else I've read of Smiley's work which is exceeding varied. This novel is set in Hollywood at the beginning of the Iraq War (March 23, 2003 to April 2nd, 2003) and begins with the former producer/director (Max) and his wife (Ilena) in bed making love, then chatting, talking about movies and philosophizing. It is the day after the Oscars. They are in Max's house in the hills above the Getty Center. Through happenstance some friends and family invade their space for various reasons and all are together for ten days. The structure is based on "The Decameron" by Dante. The dynamics between the guests plays out as each of their issues come up during in their time together. About halfway through the novel, yall move into a luxurious over-the-top compound owned by a Russian oligarch because Max is being courted to make a movie based on Gogol's "Taras Bulba." On the back of the cover, in a square that we are warned "This Novel is Rated (Ravishing) R and is not recommended for children." That is indeed true for there are many ribald couplings throughout as would be seen in a French farce. I like a quote on the back cover "Amazing! Doctor Zhivago but funny." All the characters are flawed and emprisoned by their illusions as one would expect in LA. It is a romp – entertaining and exasperating, but Smiley's skill as a writer takes us through the action-packed ten days with panache. It reminded me of Thackary's "Vanity Fair' and Tom Wolfe's "Bonfire of the Vanities"both broadly social depictions of specific times with an ensemble cast. Status, power, and the foibles of human nature are themes that have universal appeal. Jane Smiley likes to write historical fiction even about Hollywood and the iraq War. and she knows how to do it.
January 4, 2023
My first Jane Smiley novel left me feeling that I wanted more of the author but less of the book in question (A Thousand Acres). I'm glad I elected to dig deeper in her bibliography, enjoyed this one a lot.
There's really no plot to speak of - as the title indicates, it's just ten days in the life of a mid-50s movie director at his house in the Hollywood Hills, along with a collection of guests (his daughter, his girlfriend, her college-aged son, his ex-wife, her new boyfriend, and a handful of others). They sit around for a week and a half and just have long, winding conversations about life, art, philosophy, etc... Sort of like the film My Dinner With Andre, if the dinner was ten days long.
Smiley wrote it in 2007, and it's set in March 2003, so the current events backdrop is the US invasion of Iraq. It's funny to read the most left-leaning/political of the characters talk about how much she hates the sound of George W. Bush's voice, and how angry his presidency makes her - I wish Smiley would flash forward 15 years to see how these same people would deal with Trump's presidency. That said, politics are (blessedly) a pretty minor topic in the grand scheme of things here.
Smiley sprinkles in a liberal amount of sex, and the group later decamps to an even more luxe mansion higher in the Hills, in what feels like an attempt to keep the reader from drifting off, but I was never bored by the dialogue. It's a smart, interesting book - and the lack of any real plot means you can read it in little bites and not have to worry about remembering who's doing what. Looking forward to reading more of this author down the road.
There's really no plot to speak of - as the title indicates, it's just ten days in the life of a mid-50s movie director at his house in the Hollywood Hills, along with a collection of guests (his daughter, his girlfriend, her college-aged son, his ex-wife, her new boyfriend, and a handful of others). They sit around for a week and a half and just have long, winding conversations about life, art, philosophy, etc... Sort of like the film My Dinner With Andre, if the dinner was ten days long.
Smiley wrote it in 2007, and it's set in March 2003, so the current events backdrop is the US invasion of Iraq. It's funny to read the most left-leaning/political of the characters talk about how much she hates the sound of George W. Bush's voice, and how angry his presidency makes her - I wish Smiley would flash forward 15 years to see how these same people would deal with Trump's presidency. That said, politics are (blessedly) a pretty minor topic in the grand scheme of things here.
Smiley sprinkles in a liberal amount of sex, and the group later decamps to an even more luxe mansion higher in the Hills, in what feels like an attempt to keep the reader from drifting off, but I was never bored by the dialogue. It's a smart, interesting book - and the lack of any real plot means you can read it in little bites and not have to worry about remembering who's doing what. Looking forward to reading more of this author down the road.
November 1, 2024
I really don't know why I persisted in finishing this- not certainly for plot resolution- as it doesn't really have a plot. The narrative vacillates between long redundant descriptions of sex between various individuals, the prose lacking the silly titillation of bodice rippers or erotic evocations of DH Lawrence- it's simply repetitive soft porn to interrupt long, lugubrious discussions by pseudo intellectuals (that attribution is generous) which are irrational, boring, and not at all reflective of actual human discourse. (As a retired academic, I've sat through several evenings of long redundant discourse by real intellectuals- at least I learned a few things there). Not here. So we're left with an odd assortment of characters of dubious talent, intelligence, and emotional maturity. Who cares how it turns out? The ending was not at all of interest. If I could give it a zero, I would. A total waste of time.
February 16, 2017
I love Jane Smiley, but only liked this book. I couldn't get attached to or interested enough in any of the many characters. The idea: a bunch of people, a sort-of family (a Hollywood movie director, his girlfriend and her son, his ex wife who is a legendary beauty/actress/singer, their grown daughter, the actress' mother, a neighbor, an old friend, the director's agent, and actress' bearded guru boyfriend...) gathered in one place and talk and explore relationships past and present, is an interesting one, or could e=be. It's set at the very start of the Iraq war in 2003 and there are a lot of arguments for and against the invasion. I just never cared enough and by day 6 I wanted it to be over already.
October 7, 2017
My initial reaction is to wonder why this book has such bad reviews, but it is heavy on rich and out-of-touch characters and light on plot, so you could be forgiven for finding it boring. Still, I loved the way it played with the themes of the Decameron, with life, death, sex, secrets, narration. I enjoyed recognizing many of the stories and the clever ways that Smiley wove them into her frame. I also really enjoyed her attempt to recreate the sense of retreat, but thought that was at least partially unsuccessful. The idea of the Iraq war having an immediacy to the Hollywood elite that the plague would have to Boccaccio's characters was a bit of a stretch.
October 26, 2018
I took forever to read this book but I think it was the nature of the book to do so. It is based on the Decameron, which I have never read, I just know that from what I know. The book had about a thousand characters (but only 10 days) and no plot at all, just a spinning of individual stories that all together added up both to a history and a moment in time, and a sort of paean to beauty in chaos. Set about the very beginning of the Iraq War and written not long after, it's enormously prescient about our slip into the new dark ages.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 379 reviews