I wish the blurb had been more accurate.
Basically, this was a collection of artsy character-driven short stories about people who as far as I can tell the author wanted to be street smart, living off their wits types. However, these characters were so poorly written it's genuinely impossible to describe them as such. All of the characters felt completely flat and I understand that it's difficult to ensure good characterisation in a 10-page short story but god I genuinely couldn't tell these people apart- they were less like characters and more like narrators: spelling out all their motives without any attempt at subtlety. Want an example? Here you go:
'As uneasy cohabitants, they staked out separate domains.'
I don't think Jo believes that her readers have the required IQ to infer things because I'm pretty sure that if she just said 'They staked out separate domains', with the context, we'd have understood why.
Oooh here's a good one:
'He had a right to be irate, she thought; she had attacked him, after all.'
YOU DON'T SAY
Oh, and just so you know, both of those quotes were taken from the same page so I'm sure you can imagine the superfluous comment to plot ratio of this book.
And as for the foxes (which, let's be honest, were the only attribute separating this book from any other 'insightful' short story collection) , I think they were supposed to be woven into the stories in a really pseudo-intellectual, on the nose kind of a way; but in most of the stories they weren't even there at all. Maybe I just missed the brief mentions of them because I was so bored I was skim reading, but even in the stories where they were mentioned, it was just that somebody had a photo of them on their wall or something like that.
Anyway, onto a whistle-stop tour of my criticisms of each story (also I only remember two characters' names so sorry about that):
IN THE TIME OF FOXES
Actually paid attention to this one, characters lacked the nuance for me to care about them, except for the mother - my primary reason for disliking her* comes from her being a raging Townie (Townies irritate me).
*That's not to say that she has nuance though, because of course she doesn't.
THE INVITATION
The 'having an affair with the scary rich guy's wife' trope is so overused and never hits right to be honest.
JOYRIDE
Would have worked better if it was a story about perceptions of others because the narrator held a really romanticised viewpoint of the woman which made her seem very caricature-ish but I think that Jo genuinely thought that she'd written a realistic character so I don't know what was going on there. Also, what was with the random Vietnam references?
HOW IS YOUR GREAT LIFE?
Genuinely don't remember what happened in this one.
ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
One of the more interesting stories but Jo does a lot of withholding information until the end but then doesn't leave time for thought on this information which I guess is for Shock Value™ but it's not like I was invested in what was going on so it didn't work.
THE BEST LEFT IN EUROPE
I struggled to tell which cousin was which because they just read the same, and talked the same. The irony of this is at the end of the story, one cousin decided to go through some kind of personality revamp but I don't know which cousin it was so that ending was kind of nullified.
THE UNDERSTUDY
The plot of this was 'Maybe women shouldn't hate on other women so much for no reason because you never know what's going on in their lives'
Truly groundbreaking.
UNSUCCESSFUL BREAKUP
Ah yes, it's perfectly normal to invite your daughter's ex to live in your house without her knowledge, hmm yes, people would definitely do that in real life.
FOX FACE*
The cult dynamic just wasn't explained at all, like what are we talking here, are they going to hunt her down and kill her lest she spill their secrets to the world? What are the stakes!?
*This is the story the quotes I used earlier are from, by the way
CATCH AND RELEASE
What I learnt from this story:
1. If you are a lawyer, don't threaten your client because even if they've only been arrested for dealing, you never know they might actually be responsible for murder.
2. If you do threaten your client and they seem to take it badly, do not get in a car with them.
3. If you do get in a car with them, check that they do not have a knife and/or duct tape because if they do, it's likely you'll be missing the high school reunion tonight.
Also, I felt like the narrator had a backstory that seemed like it was being hinted at* but never materialised which was annoying because I was almost interested.
*For example: 'That's what people used to call him around Leyton Grange, years ago in this former life' - you can't use the phrase 'former life' and then not have an interesting backstory.
DAY ZERO
YOU CAN'T JUST RANDOMLY HAVE A STORY WITH A SCI-FI SETTING THAT CONTRIBUTES NOTHING TO THE PLOT INTO YOUR COLLECTION JUST TO MAKE IT MORE QUIRKY™ AND THEREFORE MARKETABLE*!!!!!!!
*Reading the blurb makes it sound like all the stories are going to be set in different places and time periods and we're going to be sent for a genre-hopping jape across the human psyche but in reality with the exception of this one story all the main characters are English-speaking, middle class millennials in contemporary society.
HIGH COUNTRY
Why was most of the story spent with the narrator presenting Bea as the archetypal manic-pixie-dream-girl when she was completely superfluous to the plot?
So yes, if you can't tell I detested this book and maybe that's just because being my usual psychopathic self I can never really stomach this kind of character-driven literary fiction but especially in this case where the book is so poorly written and lacking in depth. In summary, this is the kind of book that non-readers read because they think it has depth, AVOID AT ALL COSTS.