What do you think?
Rate this book
First Light
Hugh Welch has cared for his little sister Dorsey ever since they were children, when Dorsey looked at him as though he were a god. But when Dorsey returns to their small Michigan hometown with a successful career as an astrophysicist and a happy family life, Hugh, who has a long habit of worrying about his sister, realizes that it’s his own life he has to cure, not Dorsey’s. As they explore their complicated history over one hot Fourth of July weekend, they’ll come to terms with the experiences that put such distance between them and discover the imperfect love that ties them as siblings.
286 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1987
62 people are currently reading
1030 people want to read
About the author
Charles Baxter
94 books429 followersCharles Baxter was born in Minneapolis and graduated from Macalester College, in Saint Paul. After completing graduate work in English at the State University of New York at Buffalo, he taught for several years at Wayne State University in Detroit. In 1989, he moved to the Department of English at the University of Michigan--Ann Arbor and its MFA program. He now teaches at the University of Minnesota.
Baxter is the author of 4 novels, 4 collections of short stories, 3 collections of poems, a collection of essays on fiction and is the editor of other works. His works of fiction include Believers , The Feast of Love (nominated for the National Book Award), Saul and Patsy , and Through the Safety Net . He lives in Minneapolis.
Baxter is the author of 4 novels, 4 collections of short stories, 3 collections of poems, a collection of essays on fiction and is the editor of other works. His works of fiction include Believers , The Feast of Love (nominated for the National Book Award), Saul and Patsy , and Through the Safety Net . He lives in Minneapolis.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews
Read
June 12, 2016I originally read this book in my 20s and it had a huge impact on me. It was the first time I deeply related to a literary novel without someone saying, “What is the symbol of the red hat? This will be on the test.”
In First Light I saw—without it being explained—the ways a small detail could stand in for what a character was feeling. The novel showed me how objects could gather more and more meaning as various characters see them in different times until the physical world becomes a kind of code. It’s a concept that’s also used really well in The Tsar of Love and Techno, another of my favorites.
Anyway, I was nervous to pick up First Light again. It blazed so bright in my memory, and I didn’t want to discover that it’s just an example of how our young selves sometimes have no taste. But I loved it.
This is the story of Hugh and Dorsey, siblings from a small Michigan town. Dorsey is a brilliant astrophysicist living in California, while Hugh remained in the family home and sells Buicks, the only job he’s ever had. The novel starts when they’re in their 30s. Dorsey has brought her family for a visit, and we understand that something is wrong, but don’t know what.
The next chapter takes place a few days earlier, and the following chapter is four months before that, until we realize this novel is told in reverse chronology. The final, heartbreaking, pages give us Hugh at five years old seeing his newborn sister for the first time.
This is a quiet novel about what drives us to make the choices we do. It also looks at the vast distance between our inner selves and what other people understand about us. Here’s a fantastic quote from toward the end of the book that showcases much of what Baxter is trying to say. Hugh is in high school.
I loved this novel as much at 52 as I did at 24. It’s subtle and slippery and glowing with a sadness that indescribably beautiful.
In First Light I saw—without it being explained—the ways a small detail could stand in for what a character was feeling. The novel showed me how objects could gather more and more meaning as various characters see them in different times until the physical world becomes a kind of code. It’s a concept that’s also used really well in The Tsar of Love and Techno, another of my favorites.
Anyway, I was nervous to pick up First Light again. It blazed so bright in my memory, and I didn’t want to discover that it’s just an example of how our young selves sometimes have no taste. But I loved it.
This is the story of Hugh and Dorsey, siblings from a small Michigan town. Dorsey is a brilliant astrophysicist living in California, while Hugh remained in the family home and sells Buicks, the only job he’s ever had. The novel starts when they’re in their 30s. Dorsey has brought her family for a visit, and we understand that something is wrong, but don’t know what.
Hugh stares out through the window…“All I ever wanted,” he says, suddenly afraid of his own generalization, “was to make sure…that you were all right. You know: safe.”
“That’s sweet,” she says. “But it won’t ever work. Not for me. It hasn’t ever worked. Besides, there’s no safety in safety. .. You and I Hugh—we’ve been divorced, haven’t we? Can brothers and sisters get divorces from each other? I think they can, and I think we got one.” She gives her brother a kiss on the cheek, then goes upstairs.
The next chapter takes place a few days earlier, and the following chapter is four months before that, until we realize this novel is told in reverse chronology. The final, heartbreaking, pages give us Hugh at five years old seeing his newborn sister for the first time.
This is a quiet novel about what drives us to make the choices we do. It also looks at the vast distance between our inner selves and what other people understand about us. Here’s a fantastic quote from toward the end of the book that showcases much of what Baxter is trying to say. Hugh is in high school.
His father looks Hugh in the eyes. “Listen to me,” he says. “Everything on earth is what it is and something else. Everything gives off a signal. Most people never hear any of it. Their ears are closed. You have to listen with your whole body, everything in your soul, to even this old, ugly drop-forged hammer”—he holds it up—“and to this wood. And everyone you know. And all objects, everywhere. You can break your soul, trying to hear. But some people have a talent. Your mother does. She’s better at hearing the world than I am. It’s like music, but it isn’t music, it’s an overtone. Dorsey hears it. It’s an order. Do you know what I mean?”
Hugh says he does, but he doesn’t and he’s angry again because his father has included everyone in the family in this lucky group of listeners except his own son, Hugh himself, dull, reliable, strong, and deaf.”
I loved this novel as much at 52 as I did at 24. It’s subtle and slippery and glowing with a sadness that indescribably beautiful.
November 1, 2019
At it's heart, this is a novel about the relationship between a brother and sister. But also physics, and time, and energy. I really enjoyed the structure of the novel in particular.
January 6, 2010
I finished this book at 11 o'clock at night, and as a result I couldn't sleep without medication.
I mean this as an ultimate compliment, this book stuck with me in a way I haven't experienced in years. The narrative continually works backward, which shifts the focus of the book away from the plot (we know how it ends) to the characters. Beautiful story.
Do yourself a favor and read this book.
I mean this as an ultimate compliment, this book stuck with me in a way I haven't experienced in years. The narrative continually works backward, which shifts the focus of the book away from the plot (we know how it ends) to the characters. Beautiful story.
Do yourself a favor and read this book.
November 25, 2023
A tender yet bracing novel that examines the decades-long nuanced difficulties of a sibling relationship. There's gorgeous detail here about how family relationships can structure our lives, stretching and molding us in unexpected ways, all told subtly and unpretentiously. The book is from 1987, so sometimes the portrayals of the social world felt clumsy to me - some descriptions of Dorsey's experience stretch plausibility, although I'll admit it's difficult for me to pinpoint exactly what. I want to reread this book, and I also want to recommend it to my friends to see what they'll think.
------
I feel a little giddy writing this review because I truly stumbled upon this book by accident while looking for books on sibling relationships. Compared to romantic, platonic, or parental love, I haven't read much literature that focuses on the sibling relationship in and of itself; while many novels feature characters that are siblings, the focus is typically a generic theme of "family", or the sibling connection is used as a means to further narrative tension, not an object of examination in and of itself.
This book was far more tender and beautiful than I expected, and I was surprised that a book written in 1987 could carry so much resonance for me - a reader in 2023 who shares very few demographic characteristics with the main characters. As someone who has been immersed in mostly AsAm lit for a couple years, this book was a pleasant reminder that I have not become unable to sympathize beyond my immediate social group.
I'm quite excited to continue reading Baxter - his keen observations of life really struck a chord for me.
------
I feel a little giddy writing this review because I truly stumbled upon this book by accident while looking for books on sibling relationships. Compared to romantic, platonic, or parental love, I haven't read much literature that focuses on the sibling relationship in and of itself; while many novels feature characters that are siblings, the focus is typically a generic theme of "family", or the sibling connection is used as a means to further narrative tension, not an object of examination in and of itself.
This book was far more tender and beautiful than I expected, and I was surprised that a book written in 1987 could carry so much resonance for me - a reader in 2023 who shares very few demographic characteristics with the main characters. As someone who has been immersed in mostly AsAm lit for a couple years, this book was a pleasant reminder that I have not become unable to sympathize beyond my immediate social group.
I'm quite excited to continue reading Baxter - his keen observations of life really struck a chord for me.
December 26, 2024
A veces es increíble cómo 370 páginas se sienten como si fuesen 3700. O 37000.
Me costó un huevo terminar este libro, sencillamente porque NO HAY NINGÚN CONFLICTO.
A ver, la cosa es así. Es que la novela va de atrás para adelante; empieza con la familia de Dorsey que va a visitar a su hermano Hugh a pasar el 4 de julio. Se quieren pero están distanciados pero se cuidan pero ya no se hablan tan seguido, no sé, esas cosas que pasan entre los hermanos. Y de ahí cada capítulo va hacia atrás, terminando en la mañana en que Hugh conoce a su hermana recién nacida.
Supongo que la idea del autor era escribir algo como que todo lo que nos ocurre ahora es consecuencia de todo lo que pasó antes, pero por favor, no necesitás 37000000 páginas para eso. Porque el problema principal de la novela no es la falta de conflicto porque ya está todo resuelto de antemano.
El problema es que tiene hojas y hojas y hojas y hojas de situaciones absolutamente intrascendentes. Por ejemplo, cuando Dorsey está en la universidad hablando con un profesor en un pasillo, se acercan Chun Lee Hu y Aspartamo Teglefoni, dos estudiantes de posgrado que están trabajando en una teoría revolucionaria sobre cómo los fotones de la luz atraviesan el plomo en zig zag y no en forma de bucle; Dorsey y el profesor los saludan y los dos estudiantes se van por el pasillo.
Por supuesto me inventé los nombres y la cosa que estudian, pero hay una página entera que narra eso, y ninguno de esos dos estudiantes vuelve a aparecer NUNCA en todo el libro, y el hecho de que se los cruzase en el pasillo no tiene NADA que ver con la trama.
Así, con todo.
Hugh le vende un auto a un fulano. Ocho páginas.
Dorsey habla con la vecina. Tres capítulos.
Hugh juega al hockey. Un capítulo entero.
Dorsey se enoja con alguien que tiene un negocio. Cuatro páginas.
Y todo ese gastadero de pulpa de papel y tinta negra es para contar algo que ya sabemos que ni pincha ni corta.
No sé por qué es la segunda estrella, voy a ser sincero. Como experimento, falla; como novela, es intrascendente. Supongo que la segunda estrella me la pongo a mí mismo por haber leído el libro completo.
Me costó un huevo terminar este libro, sencillamente porque NO HAY NINGÚN CONFLICTO.
A ver, la cosa es así. Es que la novela va de atrás para adelante; empieza con la familia de Dorsey que va a visitar a su hermano Hugh a pasar el 4 de julio. Se quieren pero están distanciados pero se cuidan pero ya no se hablan tan seguido, no sé, esas cosas que pasan entre los hermanos. Y de ahí cada capítulo va hacia atrás, terminando en la mañana en que Hugh conoce a su hermana recién nacida.
Supongo que la idea del autor era escribir algo como que todo lo que nos ocurre ahora es consecuencia de todo lo que pasó antes, pero por favor, no necesitás 37000000 páginas para eso. Porque el problema principal de la novela no es la falta de conflicto porque ya está todo resuelto de antemano.
El problema es que tiene hojas y hojas y hojas y hojas de situaciones absolutamente intrascendentes. Por ejemplo, cuando Dorsey está en la universidad hablando con un profesor en un pasillo, se acercan Chun Lee Hu y Aspartamo Teglefoni, dos estudiantes de posgrado que están trabajando en una teoría revolucionaria sobre cómo los fotones de la luz atraviesan el plomo en zig zag y no en forma de bucle; Dorsey y el profesor los saludan y los dos estudiantes se van por el pasillo.
Por supuesto me inventé los nombres y la cosa que estudian, pero hay una página entera que narra eso, y ninguno de esos dos estudiantes vuelve a aparecer NUNCA en todo el libro, y el hecho de que se los cruzase en el pasillo no tiene NADA que ver con la trama.
Así, con todo.
Hugh le vende un auto a un fulano. Ocho páginas.
Dorsey habla con la vecina. Tres capítulos.
Hugh juega al hockey. Un capítulo entero.
Dorsey se enoja con alguien que tiene un negocio. Cuatro páginas.
Y todo ese gastadero de pulpa de papel y tinta negra es para contar algo que ya sabemos que ni pincha ni corta.
No sé por qué es la segunda estrella, voy a ser sincero. Como experimento, falla; como novela, es intrascendente. Supongo que la segunda estrella me la pongo a mí mismo por haber leído el libro completo.
September 25, 2011
Everything on earth is what it is and something else. Everything gives off a signal. Most people never hear any of it. Their ears are closed. You have to listen with your whole body, everything in your soul...and to everyone you know, and all objects, everywhere. You can break your soul trying to hear.
I was struck by this quote near the end of Charles Baxter's first novel, First Light. In the scene, one of the protagonists, Hugh, is offered advice by his father after accusing him of being distant and aloof, always day-dreaming and not being near enough to him as a son. It concludes with his father claiming that Hugh's mother and sister (Dorsey) are good at "hearing" the world as he described, but not necessarily Hugh himself. It is a poignant moment in a novel filled with "signals" of past and present, specifically how one sibling relates to another from childhood to adulthood.
Baxter is adept at taking his readers on journeys of pained reality, his characters known for being at times jarringly human. With this novel, he tells the story in reverse, starting with Hugh and Dorsey and their families spending a July 4th weekend together and then moving backwards to their childhood years in Five Oaks, Michigan. To me, what really made the novel work was in fact this narrative device combined with his ability to show the burdens that both Hugh and Dorsey are trying to work through, not always succeeding but nevertheless facing them over time until we find them at a young age. Gradually, we see why Hugh thinks much less of himself than he should and how Dorsey lets her work stunt her emotions and quest for relational happiness; we also, eventually, see how these struggles combine and gain momentum the further back Baxter takes them. The result is quite stirring, again partly because of the plodding movement into the past and of course for what is actually revealed through this "tunnel of memory."
It's easy to appreciate Charles Baxter. He writes with the brevity of a short story writer no matter which type of fiction he's engaged in. I know I (and others) have used Chekhov when speaking of him, perhaps because of his compassionate intelligence, never wordy but always full of human wisdom. If you are looking for a novel to slowly get lost in, I highly recommend you take your time with this one and enjoy it for the gem that it is.
I was struck by this quote near the end of Charles Baxter's first novel, First Light. In the scene, one of the protagonists, Hugh, is offered advice by his father after accusing him of being distant and aloof, always day-dreaming and not being near enough to him as a son. It concludes with his father claiming that Hugh's mother and sister (Dorsey) are good at "hearing" the world as he described, but not necessarily Hugh himself. It is a poignant moment in a novel filled with "signals" of past and present, specifically how one sibling relates to another from childhood to adulthood.
Baxter is adept at taking his readers on journeys of pained reality, his characters known for being at times jarringly human. With this novel, he tells the story in reverse, starting with Hugh and Dorsey and their families spending a July 4th weekend together and then moving backwards to their childhood years in Five Oaks, Michigan. To me, what really made the novel work was in fact this narrative device combined with his ability to show the burdens that both Hugh and Dorsey are trying to work through, not always succeeding but nevertheless facing them over time until we find them at a young age. Gradually, we see why Hugh thinks much less of himself than he should and how Dorsey lets her work stunt her emotions and quest for relational happiness; we also, eventually, see how these struggles combine and gain momentum the further back Baxter takes them. The result is quite stirring, again partly because of the plodding movement into the past and of course for what is actually revealed through this "tunnel of memory."
It's easy to appreciate Charles Baxter. He writes with the brevity of a short story writer no matter which type of fiction he's engaged in. I know I (and others) have used Chekhov when speaking of him, perhaps because of his compassionate intelligence, never wordy but always full of human wisdom. If you are looking for a novel to slowly get lost in, I highly recommend you take your time with this one and enjoy it for the gem that it is.
June 18, 2025
Esta es la historia de Hugh, que trabaja vendiendo autos, y su hermana Dorsey, que es astrofísica. Es la historia sobre la distancia que creció entre ellos. Uno se quedó en la casa familiar, la otra dejó la ciudad para estudiar en la universidad. Uno fue apagándose poco a poco. La otra intenta escapar de la oscuridad que la envolvió. Podría ser una historia familiar como cualquier otra, pero su particularidad —y en lo que radica su fuerza— es que avanza yendo hacia atrás.
Su estructura es brillante. Cada capítulo retrocede en el tiempo, saltando de Hugh a Dorsey, apoyándose en la ironía dramática para generar tensión emocional. Sabemos lo que están viviendo y, poco a poco, vamos entendiendo las razones y todos sus matices.
Así, sentimos la tristeza de descubrir los sueños a los que renunciaron, de ver sus cuerpos cuando no estaban manchados, sus ilusiones cuando el futuro todavía era un país lejano. Porque hemos visto ese futuro, desgranándolo poco a poco, siempre hacia atrás. Con el amargo placer de descubrir las causas secretas y los detalles que pasaron desapercibidos, pero también las actitudes y las cosas pequeñas que son importantes porque sobrevivieron al tiempo o porque están cargadas de él.
Sentimos la nostalgia que sentirían ellos si pudieran verse como Baxter nos los muestra. Dejando de lado la tristeza inicial a medida que retrocedemos más y más, hasta alcanzar la calidez de los primeros recuerdos, de la ternura inicial con que comenzó todo, el día en que un niño conoció a su hermana recién nacida.
Su estructura es brillante. Cada capítulo retrocede en el tiempo, saltando de Hugh a Dorsey, apoyándose en la ironía dramática para generar tensión emocional. Sabemos lo que están viviendo y, poco a poco, vamos entendiendo las razones y todos sus matices.
Así, sentimos la tristeza de descubrir los sueños a los que renunciaron, de ver sus cuerpos cuando no estaban manchados, sus ilusiones cuando el futuro todavía era un país lejano. Porque hemos visto ese futuro, desgranándolo poco a poco, siempre hacia atrás. Con el amargo placer de descubrir las causas secretas y los detalles que pasaron desapercibidos, pero también las actitudes y las cosas pequeñas que son importantes porque sobrevivieron al tiempo o porque están cargadas de él.
Sentimos la nostalgia que sentirían ellos si pudieran verse como Baxter nos los muestra. Dejando de lado la tristeza inicial a medida que retrocedemos más y más, hasta alcanzar la calidez de los primeros recuerdos, de la ternura inicial con que comenzó todo, el día en que un niño conoció a su hermana recién nacida.
February 18, 2007
El estilo de este autor, sencillo y plácido aunque con una narración hacia atrás en el tiempo muy curiosa, en esta novela se centra en la relación entre hermanos con todo lo que eso implica. Muy recomendable
June 11, 2022
Es un libro que me pareció lento y se detiene en descripciones largas que para mi no aportaban a la historia. Aún después de la mitad del libro sentía que aún no había comenzado la sustancia del libro…. ¿Sera que lo bueno pasa solo al final? Pues qué lastima….
July 20, 2020
I am currently enjoying this book as much as any in recent years -- it is a rare spot. First Light has an intelligence on par with Rachel Cusk's Outline, and the same nimble narration, often peppered with staggeringly deep human insights. I'm in awe of Baxter; its hard to imagine being such a good writer. I have about half the book left.
July 6, 2012
Came to this novel because it was on Jodi Picoult's reading recommendations and I'm always interested in books that another author recommends. The main big deal about this book is that it is written in reverse and that made me curious.
This was the author's first novel; pior to this he was known for his short stories and each one of the chapters in this book could really be a short story in itself. The first chapter is actually the end - it is the present day when the brother (Hugh) and sister (Dorsey) have a reunion on the fourth of July after about 10 years of not seeing each other. Each chapter then goes back in time until we get to when Dorsey was born and Hugh was about 7 years old. It is about a brother who is handsome and popular but not overly intelligent who was charged by his parents to always take care of his very smart sister who doesn't seem to make friends very easily. At one point her father says to her-"You know I was smart too. It's not enough to to be smart. You have to be tough. An upstart. You have to learn how to wait. Sooner or later the odds change so that they're in your favor...The good news is that the rest of your life isn't going to be like high school." She didn't believe him; she thought the rest of her life would be like high school.
There is sweetness in Hugh wanting to keep her safe in the later chapters but the first chapter reads as if no one really likes anyone else very much. I liked the book the more in went into the past.
An interesting and original read.
This was the author's first novel; pior to this he was known for his short stories and each one of the chapters in this book could really be a short story in itself. The first chapter is actually the end - it is the present day when the brother (Hugh) and sister (Dorsey) have a reunion on the fourth of July after about 10 years of not seeing each other. Each chapter then goes back in time until we get to when Dorsey was born and Hugh was about 7 years old. It is about a brother who is handsome and popular but not overly intelligent who was charged by his parents to always take care of his very smart sister who doesn't seem to make friends very easily. At one point her father says to her-"You know I was smart too. It's not enough to to be smart. You have to be tough. An upstart. You have to learn how to wait. Sooner or later the odds change so that they're in your favor...The good news is that the rest of your life isn't going to be like high school." She didn't believe him; she thought the rest of her life would be like high school.
There is sweetness in Hugh wanting to keep her safe in the later chapters but the first chapter reads as if no one really likes anyone else very much. I liked the book the more in went into the past.
An interesting and original read.
September 27, 2020
No one writes about love like Charles Baxter. He writes about inexplicable love...perfectly. He writes about what it is to love someone, about how we try to figure out *why* we love the ones we love when in fact it is mysterious even to ourselves. He writes about love that isn't logical. Imagine if only perfect people were loved? Where would that leave the rest of us? Baxter's books are those that make you feel that maybe we humans have a chance after all; maybe we aren't doomed to selfish annihilation.
Dorsey and Hugh are siblings who grew up in Five Oaks, Michigan. The book starts in the present and moves back in time. Hugh is the older brother. He adores his sister, cares what she thinks, tries to take care of her, worries about her. Dorsey is super-smart - she is an astrophysicist who seems to spend most of her professional life thinking. Dorsey was always special, and so Hugh was always trying to protect her, which is a habit that he finds difficult to shed, even as it becomes clear that Dorsey is OK, is happy, has love in her life, whereas Hugh is adrift.
This book was Baxter's first (successful) novel. He apparently wrote three terrible novels that everyone hated. He almost decided not to write, but then tried the short story form,which won him some attention. He is incredible; "Feast of Love" was my first of his books and it is beautiful.
Maybe one of the worst book covers, however.
Dorsey and Hugh are siblings who grew up in Five Oaks, Michigan. The book starts in the present and moves back in time. Hugh is the older brother. He adores his sister, cares what she thinks, tries to take care of her, worries about her. Dorsey is super-smart - she is an astrophysicist who seems to spend most of her professional life thinking. Dorsey was always special, and so Hugh was always trying to protect her, which is a habit that he finds difficult to shed, even as it becomes clear that Dorsey is OK, is happy, has love in her life, whereas Hugh is adrift.
This book was Baxter's first (successful) novel. He apparently wrote three terrible novels that everyone hated. He almost decided not to write, but then tried the short story form,which won him some attention. He is incredible; "Feast of Love" was my first of his books and it is beautiful.
Maybe one of the worst book covers, however.
February 9, 2011
Dorsy, her son Noah, and her husband Simon (who doesn’t like to use maps) are driving from Buffalo, New York to visit Dorsy’s brother Hugh, who lives with his family in their parent’s old house in Five Oaks, Michigan. Dorsy moved to California and became a successful astrophysicist while Hugh remained in the same town his whole life and became a car salesman.
Charles Baxter goes back in time with each chapter of this novel to show how very different the lives of siblings Hugh and Dorsy can be…from their reunion on the Fourth of July to pick up fireworks from a woman who has known them since they were children, all the way back to when Hugh’s father tells him that he has a sister now and that he will have to love and take care of her.
Charles Baxter goes back in time with each chapter of this novel to show how very different the lives of siblings Hugh and Dorsy can be…from their reunion on the Fourth of July to pick up fireworks from a woman who has known them since they were children, all the way back to when Hugh’s father tells him that he has a sister now and that he will have to love and take care of her.
December 26, 2008
The first chapter of this book introduces you to a brother and a sister in their forties who are celebrating the Fourth of July together, along with their families. There is some tension between the siblings, but they also obviously have a lot of affection for each other. The secret of that tension and affection is revealed in chapters that unfold in reverse chronological order. So, the second chapter is about the sister and brother just days before they meet for the Fourth of July. It follows the same reverse sequence until you meet them as young adults, teenagers, and children. I loved the simple story about their relationship, and the reverse chronological order worked beautifully.
December 22, 2015
This book wasn't hard to get through, but it did absolutely nothing for me.
November 15, 2019
Baxter is a good writer, and this book works up through the middle. Unfortunately, the second half of the book feels almost unnecessary. I eagerly read a story about a brother-sister relationship that traced how their lives had followed different paths but still had similarities that seemed to have roots in how they were raised and what they were raised to expect. The brother, Hugh, lives in the same tiny hometown they were raised in, selling cars and cheating on his cold wife. The sister, Dorsey, has shown all the family brilliance, went off to school and became an astrophysicist and academic. She's married to an actor who also cheats on her, but she doesn't mind, and she has a young son who is deaf. By the middle of the book, it's revealed that the child is the result of an affair she had with an elderly (and very creepy) mentor/professor. Up to that point, the book is a great read, but after that it traces Hugh and Dorsey back to Dorsey's birth and becomes plain old boring.
It's partly a problem with the reverse chronology in which the book is told--an interesting strategy that works well for a while. There are multiple hints about how Hugh has been warned by their parents to always watch out for and take care of Dorsey, and there's a sense that something terrible happened to her in childhood that influences everything that comes after. Maybe I missed something huge, but the only thing that really seems as though it might fit the terrible bill is an incident described in one chapter. Dorsey has been longing for a pet, or perhaps a horse, when she and her parents, caught in a rainstorm when driving through the country, pull off next to a farm and witness a horse struck and killed by lightning. But it's a completely deus ex machina moment, and it doesn't relate to anything else in the novel--she hasn't shown an aversion to horses or even animals; animals have basically not been mentioned anywhere else, so if that affected Dorsey in some terrible way, we never really see it or hear about it. And the rest of Hugh and Dorsey's childhoods just seem like average small-town childhoods. Kinda boring. Which is too bad because the adult characters were interesting.
It's partly a problem with the reverse chronology in which the book is told--an interesting strategy that works well for a while. There are multiple hints about how Hugh has been warned by their parents to always watch out for and take care of Dorsey, and there's a sense that something terrible happened to her in childhood that influences everything that comes after. Maybe I missed something huge, but the only thing that really seems as though it might fit the terrible bill is an incident described in one chapter. Dorsey has been longing for a pet, or perhaps a horse, when she and her parents, caught in a rainstorm when driving through the country, pull off next to a farm and witness a horse struck and killed by lightning. But it's a completely deus ex machina moment, and it doesn't relate to anything else in the novel--she hasn't shown an aversion to horses or even animals; animals have basically not been mentioned anywhere else, so if that affected Dorsey in some terrible way, we never really see it or hear about it. And the rest of Hugh and Dorsey's childhoods just seem like average small-town childhoods. Kinda boring. Which is too bad because the adult characters were interesting.
July 11, 2024
Claramente Baxtter no falla al hacer un relato de lo cotidiano, en donde es simplemente eso, lo que ocurre en el día a día de dos hermanos, contado desde el presente hacia el pasado. Sin duda, en un comienzo los protagonistas tienen actitudes que hay que leer entre líneas, en donde el relato está lleno de sutilezas muy ricas en el análisis. pero a medida que avanzamos en el tiempo esas sutilizas desaparecen, los personajes ya no nos causan misterio ni nos generan interrogantes, porque a medida que se hacen más jóvenes ya no tienen nada que esconder. Creo que esa es la genialidad del libro, ir desmenuzando a los personajes, hasta una simplificación máxima. Así llegado el final de la historia comprendemos las actitudes de cada uno de ellos y por qué toleran o no ciertas situaciones, o mismo por qué no hacen nada para cambiarlo. Son personajes que están relegados a lo que son, abatidos por un mundo cotidiano en el que ya no les aguarda ninguna sorpresa, porque nunca estuvo ese factor.
Cuando alguien me preguntaba de qué trataba el libro simplemente decía que no tenía trama, porque es verdad, no la tiene. Sin embargo creo que el autor fue perdiendo la poética en su narrativa tan característica del comienzo del relato. Quizás sea una falencia, o quizás un acto intencionado ya que la complejidad de nuestros pensamientos es muy distinta en las diferentes etapas de nuestra vida; por lo que esa simplificación puede ser un reflejo de eso, aunque creo que si así lo fue, el relato perdió el único elemento clave que hacía de esta obra un libro espectacular.
Cuando alguien me preguntaba de qué trataba el libro simplemente decía que no tenía trama, porque es verdad, no la tiene. Sin embargo creo que el autor fue perdiendo la poética en su narrativa tan característica del comienzo del relato. Quizás sea una falencia, o quizás un acto intencionado ya que la complejidad de nuestros pensamientos es muy distinta en las diferentes etapas de nuestra vida; por lo que esa simplificación puede ser un reflejo de eso, aunque creo que si así lo fue, el relato perdió el único elemento clave que hacía de esta obra un libro espectacular.
January 4, 2023
Claramente Baxtter no falla al hacer un relato de lo cotidiano, en donde es simplemente eso, lo que ocurre en el día a día de dos hermanos, contado desde el presente hacia el pasado. Sin duda, en un comienzo los protagonistas tienen actitudes que hay que leer entre líneas, en donde el relato está lleno de sutilezas muy ricas en el análisis. pero a medida que avanzamos en el tiempo esas sutilizas desaparecen, los personajes ya no nos causan misterio ni nos generan interrogantes, porque a medida que se hacen más jóvenes ya no tienen nada que esconder. Creo que esa es la genialidad del libro, ir desmenuzando a los personajes, hasta una simplificación máxima. Así llegado el final de la historia comprendemos las actitudes de cada uno de ellos y por qué toleran o no ciertas situaciones, o mismo por qué no hacen nada para cambiarlo. Son personajes que están relegados a lo que son, abatidos por un mundo cotidiano en el que ya no les aguarda ninguna sorpresa, porque nunca estuvo ese factor.
Cuando alguien me preguntaba de qué trataba el libro simplemente decía que no tenía trama, porque es verdad, no la tiene. Sin embargo creo que el autor fue perdiendo la poética en su narrativa tan característica del comienzo del relato. Quizás sea una falencia, o quizás un acto intencionado ya que la complejidad de nuestros pensamientos es muy distinta en las diferentes etapas de nuestra vida; por lo que esa simplificación puede ser un reflejo de eso, aunque creo que si así lo fue, el relato perdió el único elemento clave que hacía de esta obra un libro espectacular.
Cuando alguien me preguntaba de qué trataba el libro simplemente decía que no tenía trama, porque es verdad, no la tiene. Sin embargo creo que el autor fue perdiendo la poética en su narrativa tan característica del comienzo del relato. Quizás sea una falencia, o quizás un acto intencionado ya que la complejidad de nuestros pensamientos es muy distinta en las diferentes etapas de nuestra vida; por lo que esa simplificación puede ser un reflejo de eso, aunque creo que si así lo fue, el relato perdió el único elemento clave que hacía de esta obra un libro espectacular.
November 8, 2024
I was mesmerized by this book. The epigram for the book is from Kierkegaard: "Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards." The novel begins with brother and sister, in their 30s, out to purchase illegal fireworks to celebrate July 4th. Hugh sells Buicks and lives in the family home in a small Michigan town with his wife, a librarian, and their two daughters. Dorsey, a few years younger, is an astrophysicist who lives with her 1-year-old deaf son and her husband, an actor, in Buffalo, New York. They are visiting Hugh and his family for the holiday. Hugh and Dorsey's lives are told in reverse. At the end of the novel 4-year-old Hugh meets his infant sister, Dorsey, shortly after her birth. By the end of the novel you have a good understanding of how and why Hugh and Dorsey became the people at the 4th of July party at the beginning of the book.
June 29, 2021
I think if I wasn't so scientifically illiterate, I'd have enjoyed this more. As it was I found this story of a family, mostly a brother and sister, told backwards, from present to past, very moving. With Baxter, it's all the little details that add up to more than the sum, every believable, quotidian moment and the recognizable vibe of the midwest setting. It's when he leaves this that he gets on shaky ground - here the character of the brilliant but troubled physics professor that I never quite believed in.
I'd bump this down a half star, if that were possible.
I'd bump this down a half star, if that were possible.
September 1, 2022
I really loved this book a decade ago when I first read it. As an academic myself, I'm fascinated by other academic's experiences.
The book was written in 1987. What originally seemed like a creepy and inappropriate relationship between professor and student now reads as much worse. It's a view in to a very foreign time-- and a good argument for why even consensual relationships between professor and graduate students should be out of bounds.
The book was written in 1987. What originally seemed like a creepy and inappropriate relationship between professor and student now reads as much worse. It's a view in to a very foreign time-- and a good argument for why even consensual relationships between professor and graduate students should be out of bounds.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 21, 2018
I read this book because it was one of Jodi Picoults favorites. ( I saw this in the a Sunday Parade newspaper ). My initial thought is that it was just an ok read. When I give it a bit more thought I can see how a first born child can be affected by being the older sibling and feel it is their duty to always look out for their younger sibling. I as the first born was never made to feel this way.
August 27, 2017
Another beautifully written novel by Charles Baxter. His gift is in exploring relationships without sugar coating. I really enjoyed the format he chose to tell the story, moving backward in time instead of forward, giving us the back story on his characters.
October 24, 2019
Author lives in A2. Weird storyline of Welsh family, super smart sister Dorsey had deaf son w/ old college professor and she then married a sleep-around actor. Brother Hugh, who never measured up to sister but always was told to take care of her. - - was this live IR hate ???
November 20, 2020
This is, kind of, a book about nothing. Nothing really happens except life. Ultimately it is about a brother and sister and how their relationship changes from early childhood to middle age. Using beautiful prose and intricate detail, the story is told in reverse chronological order.
October 13, 2021
Thought the writing was stellar. The book went back in time chapter-by-chapter which I found interesting. It's about the connection between brother & sister. Not sure I liked the story all that well and was not enamored with the characters but others may feel differently. Probably a 3.5.
April 19, 2024
I like Baxter’s writing but I find his stories feel incomplete to me. I’m not sure why. I keep waiting for one of these to hit me harder but at the end I always think “that was good” but only to a point.
March 20, 2020
I don’t get it.
September 19, 2021
Hermoso! Un canto al amor de hermanos, con sus luces y sombras.
September 21, 2021
Aburrido
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews