American Appetites

by Joyce Carol Oates

Finally returned to print in a beautiful new trade paperback edition, American Appetites is classic Joyce Carol Oates—a suspenseful thriller in which the happy facade of an affluent suburban couple crumbles under the weight of tragedy and scandal. For twenty-six years, Ian McCullough, a demographics researcher at a social science think tank, has been happily married to Glynnis, a successful cookbook writer and a brilliant hostess. When a drunken argument about a suspected infidelity turns physical, Ian accidentally pushes Glynnis through a plate glass window—or did she fall? Now, Glynnis is dead, Ian is charged with murder, and their American dream is shattered. And soon, in a courtroom where guilt and responsibility become two very separate issues, Ian will stand trial, fighting for his life. A sophisticated, witty, and chilling novel from the incomparable Joyce Carol Oates, American Appetites explores our insatiable hunger for power, love, and success, and how comfortable, privileged lives—and the course of fate—can be dramatically transformed in an instant.

Genres: Fiction, Book Club, American, Audiobook, Literature, Novels, Womens

340 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1989

About the author

Joyce Carol Oates is an American writer. Oates published her first book in 1963, and has since published 58 novels, a number of plays and novellas, and many volumes of short stories, poetry, and nonfiction. Her novels Black Water (1992), What I Lived For (1994), and Blonde (2000), and her short story collections The Wheel of Love (1970) and Lovely, Dark, Deep: Stories (2014) were each finalists for the Pulitzer Prize. She has won many awards for her writing, including the National Book Award, for her novel Them (1969), two O. Henry Awards, the National Humanities Medal, and the Jerusalem Prize (2019).
Oates taught at Princeton University from 1978 to 2014, and is the Roger S. Berlind '52 Professor Emerita in the Humanities with the Program in Creative Writing. From 2016 to 2020, she was a visiting professor at the University of California, Berkeley, where she taught short fiction in the spring semesters. She now teaches at Rutgers University, New Brunswick.
Oates was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2016.
Pseudonyms: Rosamond Smith and Lauren Kelly.

Reviews

[Melinda · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well written, yes. Irritating, yes. A waste of my reading time, probably. I get the point, but I just didn't give a rip about the main characters, especially Ian. Supposedly such an intellectual, but what a bumbling idiot of a man. Indecisive, unwilling to own up to his own actions, oblivious to how his actions affect others, and on and on. I've enjoyed many of Oates' books, but not this one.
People who live in glass houses shouldn't push their wives through the window...

[June · Rating 5 out of 5]

Oh, how I love a compelling family tragedy! But this whole drama could have been avoided if the husband had just followed my advice--Dude, if you're going to pay for a young woman's abortion, and the young woman happens to be your wife's friend, and you are not--repeat ARE NOT having an affair with said woman, tell your wife about it. It's that simple. "Honey, guess what happened today? Remember your friend Sigrid? Well it's the damndest thing! She called me up at the office today and asked me to give her $1,000 for an abortion! And I'm not even having an affair with her!" There. Now your wife won't find a canceled check made out to her young friend and assume the worst and you won't throw her through a plate glass window and ruin your life. People are idiots...

[Banu Yıldıran Genç · Rating 3 out of 5]

yılın ilk kitabı maalesef hayal kırıklığı :)) joyce carol oates bazen böyledir. “amerikan damak zevki” de bence işleyebileceği çok farklı ve zengin yerler varken ian gibi ruhsuz ve roman boyunca tam anlayamadığımız bir adama takılı kalmış.
o kadar boşa düşüyor ki çektiği vicdan azabı, baştan beri saçma hataları… bu kadar zeki, mantık timsali bi adamın hiçbir şey yapmamışken tüm günahları ben işledim misali bir ruh haline girmesi çok garip. aynı şekilde karısı glynnis’in geçirdiği cinnet hali de öyle. len sen adamı aldatmışsın kaç kere hem de en yakın arkadaşıyla, 1000 dolarlık çek buldun diye ne bu delirmeler…
neyse yani karakterlere inanmadım. ama tabii onun dışında amerikan akademisyenlerinin tuzu kuru hayatlarını, kasabaları ele geçirmelerini, yerel halkla duvarlarını, o gösteriş kumkuması hallerini çok iyi anlatmış. ian’ın mahkemesi süresince yerli halkın nasıl da gaza gelip tüm akademi camiasını karalamaya çalışmaları, ahlaksızlıklarından, burnu havada olmalarından bahsetmeleri romanın asıl parlak yeri bence. bu arada cidden kimin eli kimin cebinde :)
bu da böyle olsun diyelim ne yapalım. bi de zaten karakterleri inandırıcı bulmamışken kızları bianca’nın sonrasında mahkemede masumiyeti kanıtlandığı gün babasına katil filan demesi. oh come on diyerek gözlerimi devirdim. evet ingilizce dedim 😂

[Hoora · Rating 2 out of 5]

کلیت کتاب خوب بود. به نظرم تمرکز نویسنده بر روابط بین شخصیت ها و تأثیرات ناخواسته این روابط بر آدم های قصه بود. نگاه و پردازش نویسنده را دوست داشتم.
تنها عیب این کتاب پایان لوس و سرسری داستان است.
اشتهای آمریکایی، جویس کرول اوتس، سهیل سمی، نشر ققنوس، چاپ اول، زمستان نود و یک


1399/1/30

[Jennifer · Rating 3 out of 5]

American Appetites is about people in glass houses but it is far from transparent. The fact that the couple lives in a contemporary-style house with many large windows and it's on one of those wall-size windows which the tragedy turns is not coincidental. The question is whether there's even more to the book than, "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones," or not. The telling of the story feels overly long, though very rich with detail, while the meaning seems to hang in spaces that are not clearly defined. A line or two casually thrown in can turn everything on its head and make you wonder, "did I really read what I think I just read."

The fact that the protagonist is the type of person who lives in his own mind gives one the feeling of seeing everything through a fog. Though his history and childhood are only very lightly touched on, not highlighted, I felt like that was the key to understanding the book.

What is Joyce saying about gender roles, about men's appetites vs. women's? I'm not sure I like what she's saying but I'm also not sure WHAT she's saying, if anything at all. This novel is fraught with themes of guilt and fidelity with an undercurrent of, "can one ever really know another person," which is quite disconcerting at times. Other reviewers seem to have mostly read this book at the surface level and, while the tale is well-told, it's not all that interesting. However it's the undercurrent that fascinates, yet repels me and I still haven't made up my mind yet. I imagine it does say something for Oates that I've spent a lot of time after reading the book trying to figure it out though.

[Tina Tamman · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am often in my judgement of a book swayed by its cover. Publishers seem to think covers are essential for impulse buying to catch the eye, but these days I buy mostly online and am always baffled by the numerous editions and different cover illustrations. However, with this particular book I loved the cover immediately and now, having finished it, I think it adds to the story (as I think a cover should), makes me think of Edward Hopper's tantalising paintings.
Oates never ceases to amaze me because she does not repeat her themes, goes for something different each time. Most recently I could not finish her "The Gravedigger's Daughter" because it was so grim and hopeless, while "American Appetites" came my way quite accidentally and reads pretty much like a thriller (I had not expected that). It is an excellent story about a group of friends on the east coast, aged about 50, well off and seemingly happily married, who are shocked by a sudden event (on the cover this is depicted as a flash of lightning) that changes their lives.
Oates writes well, there is enough description and characterisation, even surprise. So why not five stars? I just felt the trial lost some of the tension as it was drawing to a close. It regained it perhaps in the epilogue. However, I will definitely read another book by Oates. She has published so much.

[Larry Bassett · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a relatively ancient Joyce Carol Oates book, by the author who just keeps on writing and writing and writing. It was published in 1992 and I listened to it in the Audible version with the assist of Kindle. Possibly the most notable part of the book to me was the surprise ending.

This book is a whole collection of character studies of relatively intellectual people in the Hudson River, New York area in the late 1980s. They work for a think tank and they socialize together as well as philosophizing and dining and fucking. Not to put too fine a point on it. Or at least a little friendly lusting.

JCO hardly ever totally disappoints. I especially like her short stories. This book is decidedly not short, but it was easy to keep on moving through it being impressed repeatedly by a particularly notable sentence or paragraph or thought.

[Raine · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really like Joyce Carol Oates' books and how the characters are so wonderfully studied. AMERICAN APPETITES is no exception. These characters are all upper class 1980's types, who live in upstate New York, and participate in liberal type careers like social demographics and college professors. Of course, they drink like fish and sleep with each other!

A mysterious woman, Sigrid Hunt, infiltrates the social group when Ian and Glynnis McCullough are central characters. The first half of the book is a study of Ian and Glynnis' marriage, marred with misunderstandings and secrets. A tragic accident happens, and then we move on from there.

The only reason I gave this book 3 stars instead of 4 is because this book seems to have no direction. Life can change in an instant, but what Ian does with the second part of his life is confusing. Also, there is one sentence toward the end of the book that really confused me, and I thought, "is he really going to do THAT?"

I'll still read books by Oates because I'm a big fan. Some are excellent and some are just good. You can usually tell from the first few chapters if it is something that you want to finish. Even though this book was just "good", I finished it a couple days ago and it is still with me!

[Judi · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ugh! Love Oates, didnt like this book at all. I had it in my possession for the longest time, kept trying to read it and just couldnt get into it. Finally I decided to "just do it" and I am glad I got it out of the way but was very disappointed. The story centers on Ian and Glynnis, who have this enviable relationship but I simply dont understand it. Glynnis has had several affairs, Ian is recently impotent and their relationship is torn apart and she dies because she thinks he is having an affair. The rest of the book, to me, is a mess of friends who arent really your friend, of marriages that arent partnerships at all...I dont know, I found it all boring.

[Liz Estrada · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not my favorite JCO novel, but still a page turner. Excellent writing as usual, with complicated characters. These were quite annoying with their rich white privilege, but that was part of the point. Didn't know who to root for, if anyone. But as she does so magisterially well, Oates brings out the ugly side of America; be it greed for money, food, sex or power.

[Deacon Tom (Feeling Better) · Rating 3 out of 5]

I selected this book because of the reputation of Joyce Carol Oates. Overall, it was a very enjoyable book, but I did have a few problems with the plot.

it seemed to stray in the middle. However, the end was spectacular and I really enjoyed that portion of the book.

so I gave it three stars, which sort of translates to 2 for the first half and 4 for the second.

In the end, a good book.

[Holly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ian and Glynnis McCullough have it all, the American Dream: a big, beautiful, special, glass-walled house; careers with prestige, autonomy and creativity; a slew of interesting friends; a well-adjusted, college-age daughter; health and beauty. However, not everything is as it appears.

Oates overtly juxtaposes the McCullough's approach to food and dining to their class and stature in society. Eating is for sustenance but is also for pleasure; what one eats is a complex summary of what one values. As Glynnis and Ian's friends (intellectually) discuss, are meals a time to be with family and friends, a social ritual? Is food consciously healthy, thereby a statement about the value of life, health, longevity? Is there guilt associated with other food - its carbon footprint, the suffering of the animal, the cholesterol and fat and caloric levels? Is food a statement or practice of religion, the body and blood of Christ, sacrifices for the gods? Is food a status symbol? It is all of this, and this is Oates literary structure for "American Appetites."

This is a book about the unsettling nature of success, especially from an aging perspective. Some, like Glynnis, appear to wear success easily and suffer no guilt, waste no time looking back, wondering whether things could be different. Ian, on the other hand, at his fiftieth year, IS unsettled, uneasy, guilty, critical of his current state. Oates has written that his climatic violence (pg 95 of 340) is his response to his life. He interprets Glynnis's rage regarding his supposed infidelity as self-hate, but I don't see jealousy and self-hate as the same; Glynnis was desperate for love, despite being surrounded by it; she saw Ian love as something slipping away from her. In fact, the question of Ian's innocence is the subject of the second two thirds of the book. This is also a book about actions and consequences. There is no higher authority in the sphere of the McCullough's - punishment must be dolled out by the justice system in our American reality.

The further I get from this book, the more jarring the ending.

[Aviva · Rating 3 out of 5]

I haven't read any other JCO that I can recall, so I don't know if she usually writes about 1980s affluent white suburban toxic monogamy (see: Anne Tyler, John Updike, Wifey by Judy Bloom). But I suspect she's making fun of the genre.

This book appears to be the story of good ol' boy Dr. Ian McBumblepants (who might or might not actually be the "author"). However, he is barely a person; even his lawyer says so. His reluctant, tardy, half-assed actions dimly reflect the doings of the book's real protagonists: women who are far more interesting and engaged in the world than he is, and who become protagonists only after their deaths or stage exits, because they aren't allowed to be the protagonists in their own lives.

Sure it's a painful, cringey read, but there's a lot potentially going on here. Is she calling out the Book of Job, The Great Gatsby, Medea? (Explicitly the last one, anyway.) This book may be about the bumbling naivete of affluent white suburbanites with respect to law enforcement and criminal justice, and about what White Man's Justice looks like. (She reminds you near the end what Black Man's Justice looks like, in case you forgot.)

I'm still annoyed that my name appears in this book. No, old man, I am not named after "the Greek goddess of shame." Feh.

[Emi Yoshida · Rating 3 out of 5]

Disturbing story about the popular and successful McCulloughs. Ian is a highly respected demographics expert and his wife Glynnis is a writer of cookbooks, a cuisine column in the NY Times, etc; an invite to a soirée at the McCulloughs was what any social climber aspired to, in the enclave of Hazelton.

And then it all fell apart. Twenty-six years of marital bliss, a lifetime of building good will and reputation, gone in the course of a violent argument based on misconceptions.
I liked the twistiness.

I'm still wondering though, who sent the rosebuds?

[Camille · Rating 3 out of 5]

prime example of an author unnecessarily sacrificing a books enjoyablility for its deeper meaning

[Alex-Mot-à-Mots · Rating 5 out of 5]

J’ai dévoré ce long roman sur l’histoire d’un cinquantenaire qui, lors d’une dispute, projette sa femme à travers la baie vitrée, ce qui la tue après quelques jours de coma.

J’ai aimé que l’autrice rende son personnage masculin Ian attachant, un intellectuel un peu perdu, sans réelles attaches avec la vraie vie.

J’ai eu de la peine pour lui, projeté dans les rouages de la Justice qu’il ne fait rien pour comprendre.

J’ai fini par le détester de ne s’attacher qu’aux pieds nous des femmes ou à leur chevelure dans le vent (quels clichés….)

J’ai aimé découvrir l’agôn : le conflit intérieur entre le désir et l’impossibilité de l’avoir.

J’ai aimé le questionnement sur l’âme de Ian qui cherche où elle se loge.

J’ai aimé que le titre du roman de l’autrice soit également celui du livre de recettes qu’est en train d’écrire la femme de Ian Glynnis.

J’ai trouvé leur fille Bianchi étrange, qui met tout le monde mal à l’aise quand elle parle en société.

J’ai eu pitié de Ian qui cherche parmi son cercle d’amis celui qui a pu être l’avant de sa femme, sans jamais le trouver.

J’ai aimé la petite ville de Hazelton et ses cancans.

J’ai aimé les leitmotivs : dire au revoir aux invités en faisant signe sur le pas de sa porte, les pieds et les jambes nues des femmes, les reflets dans leur chevelure au vent…

J’ai aimé que ma lecture oscille entre la raison et les sentiments éprouvés pour Ian.

Quelques citations :

Pourquoi Ian croit-il que son univers à lui, en raison de son caractère abstrait, est naturellement supérieur à celui de sa femme, qui est physique, tactile… qui est alimentaire ? (p.48)

A propos de la Cour de Justice : Oui, ceux qui entraient ici étaient des nains, mais ceux qui résidaient en ce lieu, à ses échelons les plus élevés, étaient des géants. Un microcosme américain, se suffisant à lui-même, où les femmes assuraient les basses besognes subalternes tandis que les hommes faisaient régner l’ordre. (p.319)

L’image que je retiendrai :

Celle de la partie de squash qui est soit jouée, soit utilisée comme comparaison dans une phrase.

https://alexmotamots.fr/le-gout-de-la...

[Paweł · Rating 2 out of 5]

Przerost formy nad treścią :(

[Halle]

the woman at twice sold tales said the dead guy who previously owned it had hidden $600 inside so obviously I had to buy it.

[ahmad · Rating 2 out of 5]

داستان فوق العاده کلیشه ایست، ماجرای مردی که عاشق زنش است، مادری که با دخترش مشکل دارد ودختر بعد از مرگ مادرش متوجه می شود که چه گوهری را از دست داده است و تازه او را می شناسد، مردی که به زنش خیانت می کند، زنی که با برداشت اشتباه و حساسیت و حسادت مقدمات نابودی خود و زندگی عزیزانش را فراهم می کند، زنی زیبا که با اغواگری اش باعث نابودی چندین زندگی میشود. همه و همه کلیشه هاییست که بارها و بارها در داستان های دیگر شاهد آنها بوده ایم. البته وجود کلیشه ها به خودی خود باعث بد بودن اثر نیست بلکه استفاده ی ناشیانه از این کلیشه هاست که باعث چنین اتفاقی می شود.
شخصیت ها به درستی پردازش نشده اند و این برای نویسنده ی وسواسی مانند خانم اوتس بسیار عجیب است. شاید این کارکرد و حربه ی او باشد اما باعث شده است داستان کسل کننده باشد. شخصیت زیگریت هانت که قرار بود شخصی مرموز باشد بسیار بد پردازش شده بود. همینطور سایر شخصیت ها به گونه ای بودند که هیچگونه همزاد پنداری با آنها نمیتوان کرد. البته مورد آخر به تنهایی بد نیست اما نه برای داستان کلیشه ای مانند اشتهای آمریکایی.
نویسنده هرچند در میان داستان سعی در بازگو کردن چندین پیام اخلاقی دارد و شاید تا حدودی موفق هم شده باشد اما پیام اصلی داستان تا اواخر داستان تقریبا نامشخص و نامعلوم است. تا اینکه به یکباره زیگریت هانت، زن اغواگر و مرموز پیدا میشود و پرده از راز این داستان برمیدارد. وی میگوید که حسادت تنها دلیل وی بوده است، حسادت به زن زیبا و همه چی تمام ایان، گلینیس، حسادت به خانه ی زیبای آنها، حسادت به جایگاه اجتماعی آنها، حسادت به زندگی شاد آنها و اینکه همواره در مهمانی و شادی به سر میبرند. میگوید که میخواست توجه ایان را جلب کند اما ناتوان بود، ایان عاشق همسرش بود و این وی را بیش از پیش آزرده میکرد. به هرحال نه ایان نه زیگریت هرگز دچار خطایی نشدند اما آیا این باعث می شود که تصور کنیم هردوی آنها بیگناه بودند؟ آیا این باعث میشود که تصور کنیم مرگ گلینیس تقصیر هیچکدام نبود و فقط یک حادثه بود؟
در پس پرده ی داستان، اشتهای آمریکایی روایت شکاف طبقه ی به اصطلاح نخبگان آمریکا با مردم عادی است. طبقه ی نخبه که زندگی مرفه و شاد، تفریحات بسیار جذاب، مهمانی های شلوغ و پر زرق و برق، آسایش و آرامشی بهشتی و همینطور جایگاه اجتماعی بالا دارند در مقابل قشر متوسط و رو به پایین جامعه و حسادتی که آن زندگی مرفه در افراد فرودست ایجاد میکند. زیگریت هانت و گلینیس مک کالخ قربانی همین شکاف طبقاتی بودند. زیگریت هانت به زندگی آنها حسادت میکرد و همین حسادت طی یک سری وقایع ناخواسته باعث مرگ گلینیس شد. مرگی که تقصیر زیگریت نبود ولی در عین حال او در آن مرگ نقش داشت. البته تنها حسادت طبقه ی فرودست نسبت به طبقه ی نخبگان نیست که این دو طبقه را از یکدیگر جدا میکند بلکه تکبر جامعه ی نخبه نیز به این احساسات دامن میزند. جایی که ایان برای آموزش به سیاه پوستان و فقرا داوطلبانه شبها به مکانی می رود که به آنها آموزش بدهد ولی همفکران و هم کیشانش وی را شماتت میکنند که چرا چنین کاری میکند، آنها سیاه و خطرناک هستند.
البته داستان نکات مثبتی نیز دارد. ریزه کاری های بسیار خوبی از داستان گفته شده است و نویسنده قسمت هایی را در داستان مشخص کرده است که بدون آنها هم می توان داستان را متوجه شد ولی با خواندن آنها داستان همراه با جزئیات بیشتری خواهد بود که این از نبوغ خانم اوتس سرچشمه میگیرد. همینطور شیوه ی روایی بدیعی در داستان به کار رفته که تصور میکنم امضای خانم اوتس باشد همینطور ترجمه ی روان و بسیار خوب آقای سهیل سمی که به خوبی از پس این رمان روانشناختی و نسبتا پیچیده برآمده بود.
در پایان باید بگویم اگر دنبال داستانی جذاب با تعلیق های خوب هستید رمان اشتهای آمریکایی نمیتواند انتخاب مناسبی باشد. اما اگر به دنبال داستانی سراسر تشبیهات ادبی با رویکردی روانشناختی و اخلاقی هستید این داستان میتواند تا حدود زیادی این حس شما را ارضا کند. هرچند به شخصه معتقدم این رمان مخصوص جامعه ی آمریکاست تا جوامع دیگر.

[Ron Christiansen · Rating 4 out of 5]

American Appetities is about, not surprisingly, many appetites--good food, sex, power, position. Ian and Glynnis, the central family in the narrative, hold a prime social position as they hold big parties and serve up Glynnis's amazing food. But one phone call from Sigrid, a former friend, really just an aqcuaintaince, changes everything. Ian rushes to help Sigrid, an innocent gesture of kindness on the surface, yet a gesture which ripples through to the very end of the narrative.

From one angle the novel seems to be a critique of men, as Bianca, the main character's (Ian) daughter, insists "you men who run the world, you stick together...you cover up for one another's crimes" while they wait for her mother to regain consciousness after an accident precipitated by the revelation of Sigrid in Ian's life. And many of the men, we come to find out, in the high brow university/Institute crowd are having affairs. Most devastating in the last chapters, Sigrid Hunt a social climber, the woman who Glynnis thought Ian was having an affair with, has become tamed, accepted into her role as server of food, of wetting powerful men's appetites.

Yet it's more than simply a gender critique. Glynnis's anger at Ian's possible infedelities bring to light her own various infedelities. The book is also a meditation on the meaning of the soul. This theme comes earlier before any action in the plot during a conversation at dinner. Here it is philosophical: if you have a soul then it is "something other than you, since you have it" and later "At least, if one is neither a soul nor possesses a soul... one
No can't lose his soul." Much later Ian, now on trial for murder, counters Spinoza's notion that the first endeavor of the mind is to affirm the existence of the body: "come off it friend, The body is all that's there."

During the first 100 or so pages Oates creates characters who have, while troubled, souls, substance, meaning. But as the story continues nog only do the men's souls--their friendships, their positions--crumble into wisps of fabric, so do the women's, so does the narrative. One might, as one reviewer stated, begin to feel disconnected from the characters, but one might also view this as Oate's unveiling: there is nothing more than appetites and body, at least in these peoples' lives.

The last scene is about food with friends, but friends Ian knows he will not see again, a scene where the background character of Sigrid comes full circle to take up a position in society, to not feel offended, serving another piece of kiwi pie, eerily ending on a simple mundane question, "Won't you all have just a little more?"

[Namita Krishnamurthy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm frankly baffled by any negative review of this novel. Joyce Carol Oates (and this is my first book of hers, more to come soon I'm sure) has so splendidly captured the American dream and its voracious appetite in more metaphors than can easily be spotted. In this deliberate "anti-pastoral", Oates introduces us to men and women who are as committed to destroying their own lives as much as the fabricated society they frequently hold accountable for their undoing. Ian McCullough reads highly parallel to Sherman McCoy of "The Bonfire of the Vanities" - both men bumbling, delusional, bearing grandiose visions of their glasshouses, and incorrigibly, incorrigibly stupid. It's so endearing that sometimes I had this urge to club him really hard in the head so as to put him out of his (self-inflicted) misery. And that is something I absolutely loved about Oates' writing: the tonality of it, which was at once preemptively fatalistic (may I add also fantastic?) while holding the characters undeniably accountable for every wrong turn. Do we drive ourselves to destruction? Or is it the very nature of the American dream to tire us out, to have us throw our wives out of glass windows, to will destruction as it is willed by a larger fabric of truth? Oates kept me thinking this through every act, every page and it is something I graciously thank her for.

It is fitting that a novel so preoccupied with undoing begins with the "Creation of the World" - the honeymoon of the McCulloughs, clearly setting up for the "fall" of Man and Woman. However, in the American dream, even their prelapsarian joy is clearly corrupted by sin: gluttony, vanity, lust. So it doesn't feel strange for us to preempt the "fall"; the illusion shatters neatly. Through the course of the novel (which we mostly see through Ian's largely unreliable eyes) everything muddles in Hazelton-on-Hudson. Almost every happily married couple Ian and Glynnis host dissolve into disease or tragedy by the end of the novel, including the *SPOILER BEGINS* newly wed Ian himself. *SPOILER ENDS* What remains constant from the beginning to the end, is the metaphor (Ian is always finding metaphors in the book, which I found rather clever too) - or is it even metaphor at this point - of appetite itself; constant, adaptive, and definitively "American".

[Freesiab BookishReview · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book didn't have JCO's signature writing style but was excellent. It's less of a thriller and more of a look at a man because you already know the crime. The beginning is a bit confusing but it takes the reader through the crime, trial and beyond. At times I would think it was slow but I'd realize I had read 100 pages. I also thought the end was satisfying.

[Cathryn Conroy · Rating 5 out of 5]

It was an accident, right? Ian truly loved Glynnis! Married for more than two decades with a college-aged daughter, they were so happy. But then there was that quarrel and then it got violent…and then Glynnis died. But was it murder? It was an accident, right?

Have you ever imagined what it would feel like to be on trial for your very life? Author (and in my opinion, national treasure) Joyce Carol Oates superbly weaves this tale, focusing on the underbelly of the affluent intelligentsia. Ian and Glynnis live in a large suburban home in Hudson-on-Hazelton, New York, have many friends and attend many parties. They are important, wealthy people. Their lives are perfect--from the outside, at least. But Ian's life after the accident/murder is a living nightmare, and the reader gets to crawl into that creepy, nightmarish space with him.

Filled with suspense, surprise and shocks, as well as the minutia of everyday life (and, yes, they work spookily well together), this book will fill your thoughts during the day and your dreams at night.

[Amy Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Book reminded me in many ways and themes of Rabbit is Rich by John Updike, a chronicle of a mid-life coming apart beyond the seams. Oates does a great job writing from the point of view of the main character, Dr. Ian McCullough. And really does seem to deeply understand his internal conflicts, his breathtaking naivete, and dissocation.

It might be that this book was written in and about the 80's but much of it felt, not forced, just odd. The rampant cheating by nearly (if not all) of the couples, and the nonchalance of starting and ending these relationships was strange to me. But for all my having come of age in the 80s, I was still a teen and likely really had no idea what the life of upper-middle class professionals was like.

As always, and especially notable here given the main character and point of view, Oates shines a sympathetic but bright light on the lives of women--the choices they are given, the choices witheld from them, the little powers that they wield and how, and the emptiness all of that leaves.

[Denise · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am giving this novel 3 stars because it's Joyce Carol Oates; a great American author. This book was supposedly a thriller about a upper-middle class, very liberal, professorial demographer who is accused of a terrible crime. The problem is that the story was not thrilling. Also, the lead character is somewhat of an introvert and there were maybe too many internal conversations. I did not like him or his ultra swank circle of friends. They speak in a affected manner which is probably supposed to be an indicator of their class, but I found it annoying. The surprises and turns in the plot were presented in a very low key manner. It's not the kind of book you would stay up late at night to finish.

[Lexy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Listening to this was more like listening to a play, not a book. Each character had a different narrator and there was noise in the background as if there was an audience present. My least favorite JCO book.

[Kyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Joyce Carol Oates is just incredible. What a fantastic writer. The content was not my favorite, but the writing is superb.

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

"American Appetites" is a nearly excellent novel that is well written, includes great characterization, irony and ambivalence. The allegorically implied idea of all of the characters suffering punishment for their sins of overindulgence in lust, greed, power, food, drink and materialism (among other similar things) is a brilliant one. Another great nuance of this text is that different characters overindulge in these sins immoderately in their own specific ways. For example, Ian runs the race too fast from one end of the spectrum to the other. Glynnis is too emotional and jumps to conclusions too hastily. Denis, who is victimized in the worst way, simply falls out of love with his wife, Roberta, and vice versa, sees the slowly kindling flame of their marriage dying out, but either does not know how to and/or does not want to, do anything to try to fix it. Everyone in this text is a tragic hero--some are just more tragic than others.

Although this text is very realistic, there are minor points in the text that seem too fantastical. For example, when Ian is speaking to Meika for the last few times and they both agree not to see each other again for a while (in their sexual affair), Ian says in their next phone call that he wants to marry Meika. Breaking off their affair to proposing marriage within two phone calls is MORE than running the race way too fast. When Sigrid Hunt testifies in the trial, basically talking really to Ian more than to the jury and court and revealing her heart and soul to him, she and Ian make love on the night of the "not guilty" verdict. Some time does elapse between Sigrid's testimony and the end of the trial. However, nothing in the text shows that Ian and Sigrid even go out on one date between her testimony and their lovemaking. This affair between them happens in too unrealistically abrupt a manner.

Of all the characters in the text, Glynnis is the most hypocritical and malicious of them all. It is understandable that she is lividly angry when she finds Ian's $1000 check to Sigrid Hunt. However, she rashly, nastily and accusingly questions Roberta about Sigrid's relationship with Ian and soon thereafter attacks Ian with a knife over it. Sigrid is a woman that Glynnis befriended before Ian did--Glynnis brought Sigrid into both hers and Ian's social circle of friends. If Glynnis is going to physically attack Ian with a deadly weapon over this evidence she found regarding him and Sigrid, she at least owes Ian an explanation and apology for betraying him in the same type of way with her extramarital affair with Denis. That is only fair. Unlike Glynnis in her attempted murder of Ian, it is Bianca's right not to forgive her father for killing her mom and calling Ian a murderer.

Despite them all being tragic heroes, to me, none of the characters, even Glynnis, are truly sympathetic. They all deserve the punishment that they suffer. However, one great positive in this text, it seems, is that they all learn from the negative consequences of their respective life choices. Hopefully Bianca will forgive her father before he decides to blow his brains out and this will make him, just like Sigrid's testimony in the trial, decide to want to live. Ambivalently, if not, and Ian blows his brains out, he is the captain of his own soul and, by the end of the text, Ian is living as prosperous and happy a life as he wants to feasibly create for himself. Therefore, at this point in the text, if Ian cannot and has not learned to be satisfied and "full enough" from and with this DELICIOUS meal, perhaps suicide is not so terrible an option FOR HIM. This is because IN HIS EYES (which are the most important in which to perceive HIS LIFE) perhaps the life he is seeking for himself and/or wants is impossible to find, choose or create. For Ian, suicide is better than more unnecessary worry and suffering.

[Donovan Richards · Rating 3 out of 5]

See You in Court

The courtroom drama only has a minuscule amount of end games. Between guilty, not guilty, and possibly a hung jury, a story has little room to shock or surprise. And yet, legal theater draws much interest. Why?

I’m no psychologist but if I had to hazard a guess, I would put money on the stakes. In truth and fiction, the stories that take hold often rest on the fate of the accused. With a murder as the baseline, the defendant usually faces life in prison, or lethal injection. Such a fate adds drama to the courtroom. And, let’s not forget the search for justice for the victim. Put those elements together and it makes sense we—as a society—want to consume legal stories.

In my first foray into the waves of Joyce Carol Oates fiction, American Appetites unveils a courtroom narrative but with a surprising twist.

Upstate Affluence

Set in the mid-80s, American Appetites embodies Upstate New York affluence. The key characters around which the story proceeds operate as a married couple. Ian McCullough is a social scientist studying demographics at a local Think Tank.

“Ian McCullough had become a world-renowned figure in charting the courses of populations, in many cases of countries he had never visited, populations he’d never seen; thus any paper delivered by him must be ‘seminal,’ if not ‘definitive’ or ‘ground-breaking.’ Outside the airplane’s rather smeared windows there were clouds gusting about, and patches of blue bright and terrible as fissures in the skull. If the plane does not crash I will have done my work, Ian told himself, with his usual pragmatic equanimity. If it crushes, it will not matter” (86-87).

His wife, Glynnis authors cookbooks.

“Glynnis’s current project is a book tentatively titled American Appetites: Regional American Cooking from Alaska to Hawaii, at which she has been working, with varying degrees of inspiration and frustration, for the past year” (34).

Together, the couple hosts lavish parties for the well-to-do of Hazelton-on-Hudson.

The Other Woman

Much loved and respected in the community, the fissures in the marriage begin to show when Glynnis introduces Ian to a new friend of hers—an ingenue named Sigrid Hunt.

With the memory of Sigrid stuck in his craw, Ian immediately heads to her flat upon a random call from Sigurd a few months later. During this visit, Ian discovers Sigrid has encountered an unwanted pregnancy. Even though Ian entertains infidelity, he ultimately writes a check for Sigrid to get an abortion and thinks nothing of it.

“Ian had perceived early on that of course the vain young woman did not really want to have a baby; but she did, no doubt, want the struggle, the agon, of wanting it and being denied it: or, rather, of being compelled (out of her own magnanimity, for instance) to sacrifice it to necessity. She was wain, but she was also tractable: far more tractable than Glynnis” (26).

And yet, the check’s paper trail fractures his marriage. A contentious fight after too much to drink leaves the family in shambles and piques the interest of the police.

Once the reader encounters the courtroom in Act 3, the characters face a no-win situation. Guilt means an extended stay in prison and acquittal will never solve the irreparable fracture. And in this plot structure, American Appetites, provides a unique take on the legal drama.

While American Appetites is not a popular Joyce Carol Oates novel, it opened a window into her style and has encouraged me to read more of her work.

Originally published at http://www.wherepenmeetspaper.com

[Eric · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty average for JCO novel. The story and its themes are interesting enough, if sometimes melodramatic (Was she doing a little parody of the style or just falling victim to it? I couldn't tell.), with the characters being mainly well-fleshed out. Ian isn't exactly likable, nor are Glynnis, Bianca, or, well, most people. That's okay, I don't need to like characters to enjoy a novel.

And, for the most part, I did enjoy this book. JCO is too good a writer to produce trash. Each line is carefully crafted, the mood is sustained, people act according to their characters, and the story moves swiftly and logically. The quickness with which Ian finds himself in a sudden trap of his own idiotic devising is cleverly accomplished, and JCO's bait-and-switch mostly works.

However, it doesn't feel like she really gave enough time to explore what the story means, its impact, and the overall point. It's a fairly short novel in which a lot happens. But the actual impact and the point seem only slightly explored in a way that doesn't feel like JCO is hitting on all cylinders, like usual. There are definitely themes bubbling up here throughout the book.

The battle between the sexes, their needs and desires (sexually and romantically), and the meaninglessness of success in the post-80s world are all great concepts well worth discussing, especially as the 80s transmogrified into the 90s. However, these ideas are glanced at quickly or just mentioned without a full study. Of course, we don't need a dissertation, but a bit more is needed.

Furthermore, the theme of "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" is a tad too literal here, which makes it feel a little more facile than necessary. The fact that the compelling act literally involves the partial breaking of a glasshouse (no spoilers) makes it even more on-the-nose than necessary. JCO is usually a far subtler writer than she shows off here.

That said, there are many wonderful scenes staged beautifully throughout. The sometimes unbelievable banality of the social action and conversations reinforces many of her themes. As one reviewer pointed out on the back of the novel, it has a Henry Jamesian ability to pile on domestic details, one by one, to create not only a believable scene but to highlight themes, psychological traumas, and other elements that make seemingly dull moments exciting and engaging.

That said, I understand why this novel rarely shows up in any "best of" lists regarding JCO. It comes, it goes, it's entertaining, even shocking, but ultimately it doesn't live up to her lofty reputation. I'm glad I read it because I want to read all her books, but it's one that I'm going to struggle to remember reading in about two months.