What do you think?
Rate this book
Open: An Uncensored Memoir of Love, Liberation, and Non-Monogamy
An award-winning journalist delves into the growing trend toward relationships—including her own—that push love beyond the familiar borders of monogamy.
When Rachel Krantz met and fell for Adam, he told her that he was looking for a committed partnership—just one that did not include exclusivity. Excited and a little trepidatious, Rachel set out to see whether love and a serious partnership with Adam could coexist alongside the freedom to explore relationships with other people. Their relationship was designed to strike an exquisite balance between intimacy and independence, calibrated to fan desire for the long haul.
Armed with her instincts from her career as a journalist, Rachel not only put her own heart on the line, she also kept detailed journals, interviewed experts and therapists, immersed herself in the polyamory community, and relentlessly interrogated her own emotions. Now, in her debut memoir, she chronicles her dive into non-monogamy—from debilitating anxiety spirals to heart-opening connections with the men and women she dates—with an unflinching eye, fly-on-the-wall detail, and extraordinary perceptiveness. Through page-turning storytelling, she takes us inside the Brooklyn parties where Rachel first dips her toes in the water of non-monogamy; into the wider swinger and polyamory community where they search for a relationship style that suits them; and into her private moments with Adam and their other lovers. As she and Adam attempt to write a new plot for their love story, she also runs up against miscommunications, ancient power dynamics, and seeming betrayals that threaten the foundation of their love. Rachel breaks new ground in confronting the unique ways coercion and gaslighting manifest in open relationships, and finds herself wondering what liberation really looks like.
Casting new light on universal experiences like jealousy, restlessness, and love, Open explores the seemingly endless range of relationships couples have created to answer their desires, and ultimately probes the questions: Can we have both freedom and love? How can we reconcile comfort and lust? Is a relationship ever equal? And is the pleasure worth the pain?
When Rachel Krantz met and fell for Adam, he told her that he was looking for a committed partnership—just one that did not include exclusivity. Excited and a little trepidatious, Rachel set out to see whether love and a serious partnership with Adam could coexist alongside the freedom to explore relationships with other people. Their relationship was designed to strike an exquisite balance between intimacy and independence, calibrated to fan desire for the long haul.
Armed with her instincts from her career as a journalist, Rachel not only put her own heart on the line, she also kept detailed journals, interviewed experts and therapists, immersed herself in the polyamory community, and relentlessly interrogated her own emotions. Now, in her debut memoir, she chronicles her dive into non-monogamy—from debilitating anxiety spirals to heart-opening connections with the men and women she dates—with an unflinching eye, fly-on-the-wall detail, and extraordinary perceptiveness. Through page-turning storytelling, she takes us inside the Brooklyn parties where Rachel first dips her toes in the water of non-monogamy; into the wider swinger and polyamory community where they search for a relationship style that suits them; and into her private moments with Adam and their other lovers. As she and Adam attempt to write a new plot for their love story, she also runs up against miscommunications, ancient power dynamics, and seeming betrayals that threaten the foundation of their love. Rachel breaks new ground in confronting the unique ways coercion and gaslighting manifest in open relationships, and finds herself wondering what liberation really looks like.
Casting new light on universal experiences like jealousy, restlessness, and love, Open explores the seemingly endless range of relationships couples have created to answer their desires, and ultimately probes the questions: Can we have both freedom and love? How can we reconcile comfort and lust? Is a relationship ever equal? And is the pleasure worth the pain?
11 pages, Audiobook
First published January 25, 2022
182 people are currently reading
7973 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 314 reviews
Read
January 7, 2022I have not given this book a star rating because I have no idea how to rate it. It is a unique memoir, taking an unusual approach, and there was a lot about that approach that I liked or at least found interesting. Krantz is engaging and I probably could have read it in a single sitting if I'd had the time. But there is one major issue: this is not a book about nonmonogamy. Krantz thinks it is, and certainly the title and all the publicity around it say it is, but it absolutely is not. Nonmonogamy happens in this book, but it's not a book I would give people to learn about nonmonogamy or one I'd recommend for nonmonogamous people who want to see more representation of themselves. And that puts my review in a weird spot. This book is something but it sure isn't selling what it says you're buying.
I have been thinking about how to review this book for a long time. It's difficult because to really get into the meat of my review involves making bare the whole structure of the book, which (despite the fact that this is a memoir) feels like I am giving spoilers? It's weird. But I'm going to do my best to review in such a way that I keep it to a minimum.
If you follow my reviews you'll know that I primarily find one repeating critique in memoir, especially memoir written by relatively young writers: there is not enough distance between the person and the events for them to understand what the story is. This can create this very weird dynamic where as a reader, you realize that you are seeing more clearly than the memoirist. It creates a distrust and a disconnect and it's never a great experience for me. It has taken me several years to really process and understand the kind of tumult and reframing in my own life that Krantz goes through in this book, but she is turning around and sharing it with us almost right away. And, as is often the case, she kind of has it all wrong. The story Krantz says she's telling, a story of "love, liberation, and non-monogamy" starts at the end. Everything that's come before is just how she got there, and I certainly wouldn't call those events liberating.
So if this isn't a book about nonmonogamy, what is it about? It is about one relationship. In that relationship, "Adam" explains that he does not want to be monogamous. And, as a good internet writer in the age of the women-tell-all internet, Krantz decides that she is going to write about this. To do so, she keeps a detailed diary and often records conversations to make sure she is as accurate as possible. For the first half of the book we follow Rachel and Adam through many ups and downs as they try to make their relationship work in this nontraditional way. The second half of the book shifts and starts to consider their relationship from more of an analytical one, bringing in therapists and experts. (There is one argument portrayed in great detail with therapist commentary that, I have to say, was truly fascinating to read. I think for a lot of people who have struggled with the particular issues involved, it will be either too horrifying to get through or very validating. Imagine having a difficult argument transcribed and then analyzed by mental health experts!)
But the main issue here is not non-monogamy. This is Adam's line, and much of what Krantz writes about, that Rachel is struggling with it. But Adam cannot fool me. I have been nonmonogamous for several years. I have seen people practice it in a wide variety of forms, and I have seen people use it for positive and negative ends. And this is where we start getting into potentially spoilery territory. Because, to me, even within the first chapter the red flags were piling up and they never stopped. I even started texting one of my partners because I felt like I was losing my mind a little bit because so many things sounded absolutely bananas but on the page were treated as perfectly reasonable. (My partner, happily, confirmed that it was all absolutely bananas.) This relationship does not have a non-monogamy problem. And Rachel never really gets a chance to decide what she wants from non-monogamy, or make choices about how she wants to practice it. This relationship has a whole pile of other problems, but non-monogamy makes a convenient scapegoat to a particular kind of partner who insists that everything would be fine if you could just get past your own issues.
It's also worth noting that as non-monogamy goes, their version of it is pretty weird! Some of it goes back to the red flag stuff, some of it is because Krantz is an internet writer and so can use that to get into "fun" things to write about like sex parties and swingers clubs, and I guess some of it is supposed to be presented to us as research. Swinging is where they end up much of the time, which is pretty uncommon for a millennial (it's more common with boomers), but also there are lots of homophobic and transphobic issues that come up in swinging that were really unpleasant, and surprising given Krantz's longing to build more of a queer community for herself.
If I hadn't had this big overwhelming problem with the book I would spend more time nitpicking Krantz's approach. Sometimes her involvement of therapists and experts is really useful and insightful, and other times it's distracting. Sometimes her explaining can get overexplaining (a footnote to explain they/them pronouns, for example). But I did like knowing that these conversations and events were being recorded as faithfully as possible thanks to her complete dedication.
This book made me really sad. I never felt like Krantz brought me over to her side, her way of seeing things. We only grew further and further apart.
Content warnings for sexual assault on the page in detail, emotional and physical abuse. There is a lot of writing about sex here, including BDSM, I didn't find it particularly racy but I also have a very high bar for such things. Most readers will probably find it to be much more than they're used to. As mentioned there is also queerphobia and transphobia (lots and lots of gender as genitals). I would not recommend this book for readers who have been in a physically or emotionally abusive relationship unless they are fully aware and ready going in.
I have been thinking about how to review this book for a long time. It's difficult because to really get into the meat of my review involves making bare the whole structure of the book, which (despite the fact that this is a memoir) feels like I am giving spoilers? It's weird. But I'm going to do my best to review in such a way that I keep it to a minimum.
If you follow my reviews you'll know that I primarily find one repeating critique in memoir, especially memoir written by relatively young writers: there is not enough distance between the person and the events for them to understand what the story is. This can create this very weird dynamic where as a reader, you realize that you are seeing more clearly than the memoirist. It creates a distrust and a disconnect and it's never a great experience for me. It has taken me several years to really process and understand the kind of tumult and reframing in my own life that Krantz goes through in this book, but she is turning around and sharing it with us almost right away. And, as is often the case, she kind of has it all wrong. The story Krantz says she's telling, a story of "love, liberation, and non-monogamy" starts at the end. Everything that's come before is just how she got there, and I certainly wouldn't call those events liberating.
So if this isn't a book about nonmonogamy, what is it about? It is about one relationship. In that relationship, "Adam" explains that he does not want to be monogamous. And, as a good internet writer in the age of the women-tell-all internet, Krantz decides that she is going to write about this. To do so, she keeps a detailed diary and often records conversations to make sure she is as accurate as possible. For the first half of the book we follow Rachel and Adam through many ups and downs as they try to make their relationship work in this nontraditional way. The second half of the book shifts and starts to consider their relationship from more of an analytical one, bringing in therapists and experts. (There is one argument portrayed in great detail with therapist commentary that, I have to say, was truly fascinating to read. I think for a lot of people who have struggled with the particular issues involved, it will be either too horrifying to get through or very validating. Imagine having a difficult argument transcribed and then analyzed by mental health experts!)
But the main issue here is not non-monogamy. This is Adam's line, and much of what Krantz writes about, that Rachel is struggling with it. But Adam cannot fool me. I have been nonmonogamous for several years. I have seen people practice it in a wide variety of forms, and I have seen people use it for positive and negative ends. And this is where we start getting into potentially spoilery territory. Because, to me, even within the first chapter the red flags were piling up and they never stopped. I even started texting one of my partners because I felt like I was losing my mind a little bit because so many things sounded absolutely bananas but on the page were treated as perfectly reasonable. (My partner, happily, confirmed that it was all absolutely bananas.) This relationship does not have a non-monogamy problem. And Rachel never really gets a chance to decide what she wants from non-monogamy, or make choices about how she wants to practice it. This relationship has a whole pile of other problems, but non-monogamy makes a convenient scapegoat to a particular kind of partner who insists that everything would be fine if you could just get past your own issues.
It's also worth noting that as non-monogamy goes, their version of it is pretty weird! Some of it goes back to the red flag stuff, some of it is because Krantz is an internet writer and so can use that to get into "fun" things to write about like sex parties and swingers clubs, and I guess some of it is supposed to be presented to us as research. Swinging is where they end up much of the time, which is pretty uncommon for a millennial (it's more common with boomers), but also there are lots of homophobic and transphobic issues that come up in swinging that were really unpleasant, and surprising given Krantz's longing to build more of a queer community for herself.
If I hadn't had this big overwhelming problem with the book I would spend more time nitpicking Krantz's approach. Sometimes her involvement of therapists and experts is really useful and insightful, and other times it's distracting. Sometimes her explaining can get overexplaining (a footnote to explain they/them pronouns, for example). But I did like knowing that these conversations and events were being recorded as faithfully as possible thanks to her complete dedication.
This book made me really sad. I never felt like Krantz brought me over to her side, her way of seeing things. We only grew further and further apart.
Content warnings for sexual assault on the page in detail, emotional and physical abuse. There is a lot of writing about sex here, including BDSM, I didn't find it particularly racy but I also have a very high bar for such things. Most readers will probably find it to be much more than they're used to. As mentioned there is also queerphobia and transphobia (lots and lots of gender as genitals). I would not recommend this book for readers who have been in a physically or emotionally abusive relationship unless they are fully aware and ready going in.
February 3, 2026
Why yes, I am recommending my own book. I think I did the best/most earnest job I could, and if you don't love yourself, how in the hell are you gonna love somebody else, etc.
OPEN is funny, plot-driven, romantic, and erotic. You will also learn from all the interviews and research woven in. It's also a dark psychological romantic thriller, as much or more about gaslighting and emotional abuse as it is about non-monogamy, bisexuality, and kink.
I’ve been told it is hard to put down (or not get turned on by) by enough people that I feel confident suggesting you add it to your reading list.
OPEN is funny, plot-driven, romantic, and erotic. You will also learn from all the interviews and research woven in. It's also a dark psychological romantic thriller, as much or more about gaslighting and emotional abuse as it is about non-monogamy, bisexuality, and kink.
I’ve been told it is hard to put down (or not get turned on by) by enough people that I feel confident suggesting you add it to your reading list.
January 14, 2022
The unconventional polyamorous lifestyle has always invited a high level of curiosity, pre-conceived notions, and speculation. In some states and communities, a person involved in multiple relationships can be dismissed from their job for immoral conduct. Rachel Krantz explores the subject matter of non-monogamy in her intriguing confessional debut: “Open: An Uncensored Memoir of Love, Liberation, and Non-Monogamy” (2022). Rachel Krantz studied at NYU, as a multi-award-winning journalist/editor, her work has been featured on several popular programs and notable publications.
As Rachel was exiting a relationship with Dan, she quickly met another man. "Adam", a serious intellectual, was a graduate level educator, had authored two novels and articles on psychological studies. On their second date, he administered the Briggs-Meyer Personality Test that verified their compatibility as a couple. Rachel was very impressed with Adam’s meticulous Brooklyn apartment and how he lavished her with his undivided attention. When she lost the lease on her own apartment, he casually suggested that she move in. From the start, this wasn’t a relationship of equals, as Adam assumed a parental like role of mentor/teacher, introducing a new lifestyle of complete freedom and non-monogamy.
Attending and participating in sex clubs, swinger parties and gatherings including exclusive nudist resorts with like-minded couples and individuals was pretty exciting for Rachel. Eventually such events were compensated by a variety of sponsors as Rachel developed her writing/reporting skills and social following. Rachel interviewed psychological experts and therapists and reported the findings in her articles, and included informative interviews, research notes and studies, etc. following each chapter in the book-- adding credibility and value to her storyline. It was unclear how writing about her personal life with Adam may have affected the dynamics of their relationship as it was probed, analyzed, and subjected to a steady stream of comments by those following Rachel’s reportage.
It seemed like the most successful happiest non-monogamist couples had been married for years and kept their “play time” within the boundaries of social clubs/resorts. At times, Rachel felt jealous and insecure when Adam pursued other women. Overall, the couple’s numerous revolving outside relationships seemed superficial, lacking in a true emotional connection and/or staying power-- which wasn’t surprising.
“...And She Lived Openly Ever After” Is the title of the last chapter in the book, and as an Influencer, Rachel’s story continues and much of it remains to be seen. This memoir is a significant step in a literary direction and opportunity for her. **With thanks to Harmony Books via NetGalley for the DDC for the purpose of review.
As Rachel was exiting a relationship with Dan, she quickly met another man. "Adam", a serious intellectual, was a graduate level educator, had authored two novels and articles on psychological studies. On their second date, he administered the Briggs-Meyer Personality Test that verified their compatibility as a couple. Rachel was very impressed with Adam’s meticulous Brooklyn apartment and how he lavished her with his undivided attention. When she lost the lease on her own apartment, he casually suggested that she move in. From the start, this wasn’t a relationship of equals, as Adam assumed a parental like role of mentor/teacher, introducing a new lifestyle of complete freedom and non-monogamy.
Attending and participating in sex clubs, swinger parties and gatherings including exclusive nudist resorts with like-minded couples and individuals was pretty exciting for Rachel. Eventually such events were compensated by a variety of sponsors as Rachel developed her writing/reporting skills and social following. Rachel interviewed psychological experts and therapists and reported the findings in her articles, and included informative interviews, research notes and studies, etc. following each chapter in the book-- adding credibility and value to her storyline. It was unclear how writing about her personal life with Adam may have affected the dynamics of their relationship as it was probed, analyzed, and subjected to a steady stream of comments by those following Rachel’s reportage.
It seemed like the most successful happiest non-monogamist couples had been married for years and kept their “play time” within the boundaries of social clubs/resorts. At times, Rachel felt jealous and insecure when Adam pursued other women. Overall, the couple’s numerous revolving outside relationships seemed superficial, lacking in a true emotional connection and/or staying power-- which wasn’t surprising.
“...And She Lived Openly Ever After” Is the title of the last chapter in the book, and as an Influencer, Rachel’s story continues and much of it remains to be seen. This memoir is a significant step in a literary direction and opportunity for her. **With thanks to Harmony Books via NetGalley for the DDC for the purpose of review.
December 31, 2021
3.5 Stars
As a biography and reality show lover, I thought I would be intrigued by this memoir of a young woman exploring the boundaries of a non-monogamous existence. As a voyeur, I was interested in the sections depicting her actual experiences, but tuned out (for the most part) the psycho-babble references that padded the end of each chapter. I also grew weary of the psycho-babble some of the parties would say to each other, discussing their non-monogamous lifestyles, rationalizing them. I do find reading about people with lifestyles very different from mine interesting, which is why I also enjoy reality TV. However, while at first I was riveted by some of Rachel's experiences with her live-in boyfriend Adam such as participating in swingers parties and nudist getaways, it ultimately turned me off and depressed me as the story crawled to an end. Different strokes for different folks, I say!
Thank you to the publisher Rodale, Inc. / Harmony for providing an advance reader copy via NetGalley.
As a biography and reality show lover, I thought I would be intrigued by this memoir of a young woman exploring the boundaries of a non-monogamous existence. As a voyeur, I was interested in the sections depicting her actual experiences, but tuned out (for the most part) the psycho-babble references that padded the end of each chapter. I also grew weary of the psycho-babble some of the parties would say to each other, discussing their non-monogamous lifestyles, rationalizing them. I do find reading about people with lifestyles very different from mine interesting, which is why I also enjoy reality TV. However, while at first I was riveted by some of Rachel's experiences with her live-in boyfriend Adam such as participating in swingers parties and nudist getaways, it ultimately turned me off and depressed me as the story crawled to an end. Different strokes for different folks, I say!
Thank you to the publisher Rodale, Inc. / Harmony for providing an advance reader copy via NetGalley.
Read
April 25, 2022DNF @ 18%
I really gotta learn to read the synopsis 😂
I wanted a book more about non monogamy and polyamory and this is obviously a memoir but it focuses on one relationship she had and what they went through. The guys name is Adam and from the start he gave me 🚩. From reading some reviews I know she only speaks on this relationship and their adventures with non monogamy and everything else and then therapy and this seems rude but I’m not interested in that. Also was listening to the audio and her voice (the author) was grating to me 😵💫 anyway, not for meeee!
I really gotta learn to read the synopsis 😂
I wanted a book more about non monogamy and polyamory and this is obviously a memoir but it focuses on one relationship she had and what they went through. The guys name is Adam and from the start he gave me 🚩. From reading some reviews I know she only speaks on this relationship and their adventures with non monogamy and everything else and then therapy and this seems rude but I’m not interested in that. Also was listening to the audio and her voice (the author) was grating to me 😵💫 anyway, not for meeee!
January 6, 2023
non-monogamy is the door that krantz walked through when getting into a multi-year relationship with the main guy, adam, but after reading these carefully-documented conversations and conflicts, i think that this book is not really about non-monogamy, and is more about how men are shitty, and how adam is one of the shittier ones. this book is further evidence that people who have a sliver of psycho-something knowledge are sometimes more harmful than people who wouldn't touch therapy with a fifty-foot stick because the former group of people know how to manipulate the people around them to no end while using the sliver of psych knowledge they have as proof that they are enlightened. but i digress.
the fact that krantz (and her People TM) is using the framing of non-monogamy to sell this book when most of the conflicts are not about openness in the relationship, and are more about fundamental relationship negotiations, is Bad Actually. what this means is that krantz grapples with non-monogamy when that grappling is not going to solve the issues in the relationship, AND that in a book where krantz is trying to prove that messy stories about non-mainstream relationships deserve respect, she ends up confusing the narrative and blaming non-monogamy for, again, problems that are not actually about the non-monogamy in their relationship. like, the problems in their relationship were not the non-monogamy / jealousy / openness, but were about power, control, nonconsensual behavior, and abuse.
re: the footnotes. i love a footnote usually. this book has too many. about 75% of the way through, i stopped reading most of the footnotes because they were overly explanatory and distracting. memoirs can be artistic and this one just ... wasn't for me.
i'm honestly mad because this is not a short book and i was really hoping we'd get some positive looks at a wide range of non-monogamy :(
the fact that krantz (and her People TM) is using the framing of non-monogamy to sell this book when most of the conflicts are not about openness in the relationship, and are more about fundamental relationship negotiations, is Bad Actually. what this means is that krantz grapples with non-monogamy when that grappling is not going to solve the issues in the relationship, AND that in a book where krantz is trying to prove that messy stories about non-mainstream relationships deserve respect, she ends up confusing the narrative and blaming non-monogamy for, again, problems that are not actually about the non-monogamy in their relationship. like, the problems in their relationship were not the non-monogamy / jealousy / openness, but were about power, control, nonconsensual behavior, and abuse.
re: the footnotes. i love a footnote usually. this book has too many. about 75% of the way through, i stopped reading most of the footnotes because they were overly explanatory and distracting. memoirs can be artistic and this one just ... wasn't for me.
i'm honestly mad because this is not a short book and i was really hoping we'd get some positive looks at a wide range of non-monogamy :(
March 19, 2022
Rachel Krantz' memoir Open is a reflection on the complexities, nuances, and conflicts inherent in romantic relationships - whether with one or with many.
Rachel embarked on her study of non-monogamy through a happenstance date with Adam. Adam, a scholar of love and desire, was forward about his non-monogamy and Rachel, a feminist interested in exploring her own sexuality, decides she's willing to give it a try. From this first date, springs a deeply passionate and intense relationship between Rachel and Adam, Rachel and Miranda, Rachel and Liam, Adam/Rachel and Leah, etc. Each of these characters serves as a point of reference for Rachel as she considers the dangers in her own relationship and the beauty in others.
I came to Open expecting a lecture on the ethical and moral problems of monogamy and on moving beyond it, but what I encountered was a beautifully written and nuanced story that challenges any sort of relationship dogma that would try to instill itself as superior. Rachel has an ability to be both emotionally vulnerable and intellectually deep in a way that makes her writing insightful, interesting, and unexpected. Though at times the book gets a little too "woo woo" new age for me (and Rachel tends to over police her language a bit too much), the general premise is significant: relationships, be they monogamous or not, are built on trust, honesty, understanding, and so much more, and those things make our romantic lives beautiful and worth pursuing.
Rachel embarked on her study of non-monogamy through a happenstance date with Adam. Adam, a scholar of love and desire, was forward about his non-monogamy and Rachel, a feminist interested in exploring her own sexuality, decides she's willing to give it a try. From this first date, springs a deeply passionate and intense relationship between Rachel and Adam, Rachel and Miranda, Rachel and Liam, Adam/Rachel and Leah, etc. Each of these characters serves as a point of reference for Rachel as she considers the dangers in her own relationship and the beauty in others.
I came to Open expecting a lecture on the ethical and moral problems of monogamy and on moving beyond it, but what I encountered was a beautifully written and nuanced story that challenges any sort of relationship dogma that would try to instill itself as superior. Rachel has an ability to be both emotionally vulnerable and intellectually deep in a way that makes her writing insightful, interesting, and unexpected. Though at times the book gets a little too "woo woo" new age for me (and Rachel tends to over police her language a bit too much), the general premise is significant: relationships, be they monogamous or not, are built on trust, honesty, understanding, and so much more, and those things make our romantic lives beautiful and worth pursuing.
November 15, 2021
We need more books about polyam relationships!
This memoir forces readers to confront their conflicting desires about love and monogamy. Do you want a fairytale prince to come and whisk you away from everyone else? What do you intend on doing with him in your castle alone for the rest of your days? Why do so many people lie and cheat when they could just be honest about their desires with their partners?
Monogamous relationships (and the adultery that they make possible) have always been amply represented. Anna Karenina had to throw herself under a train for cheating. The Princesse de Cleves had to join a nunnery just for falling in love with a man who wasn't her husband. Even Zeus couldn't sleep around without the vengeful antics of his jealous wife. I think it's high time we also began to tell stories about relationships in which non-monogamous feelings and behaviors are part of the relational form.
Krantz explores ethical non-monogamy in all of its complexity. Her story is not a fairy tale and she does dive into the dark sides of these types of relationships. They can produce romantic conflict that's confusing, exhilarating, devastating, but the point is that it is all part of a legitimate relationship structure.
Full disclosure: Krantz is my friend and I've watched her navigate many of the situations she presents here. I'm so proud of her for coming out publically and writing this beautiful, brave, and important book.
This memoir forces readers to confront their conflicting desires about love and monogamy. Do you want a fairytale prince to come and whisk you away from everyone else? What do you intend on doing with him in your castle alone for the rest of your days? Why do so many people lie and cheat when they could just be honest about their desires with their partners?
Monogamous relationships (and the adultery that they make possible) have always been amply represented. Anna Karenina had to throw herself under a train for cheating. The Princesse de Cleves had to join a nunnery just for falling in love with a man who wasn't her husband. Even Zeus couldn't sleep around without the vengeful antics of his jealous wife. I think it's high time we also began to tell stories about relationships in which non-monogamous feelings and behaviors are part of the relational form.
Krantz explores ethical non-monogamy in all of its complexity. Her story is not a fairy tale and she does dive into the dark sides of these types of relationships. They can produce romantic conflict that's confusing, exhilarating, devastating, but the point is that it is all part of a legitimate relationship structure.
Full disclosure: Krantz is my friend and I've watched her navigate many of the situations she presents here. I'm so proud of her for coming out publically and writing this beautiful, brave, and important book.
December 12, 2022
Alright, so Rachel Krantz is smart and charming, and I genuinely like her writing. But. This is basically just her making a case for why her ex sucks. Which on the one hand, I get it, it's not like I've never had the urge to write a 350 page book on how someone was driving me crazy. But she actually did it. She wrote a whole ass book about how her ex is a dick.
The thing that bothers me the most about this is that she tries so hard to sound woke, frequently taking breaks to inform the reader about sexism, racism, homophobia, and trans rights issues, but she is very quick to label anything she doesn't like or that doesn't benefit her personally as sexist or racist. She doesn't like relationship anarchy or rationalism (or objectivity?) so she writes them off as being "for men" and therefore part of the patriarchy and bad. No further explanation. They're just for men and therefore sexist. As if women couldn't possibly be interested in these things. Who's being sexist now? But my main question is: how are you going to sit there and act like you're all about dismantling power structures but also be super into relationship hierarchies? To me her constant mentioning of marginalized people and calling things sexist/racist seems like a manipulation tactic to get us to see her as a good ally and to dislike what she wants us to dislike without her having to make an actual, rational, case for why it's bad.
Anyway, I don't doubt Adam was a total dick in some ways and did things that weren't okay, but she clearly wanted complete freedom to do whatever she wanted while controlling Adam's options. Relationship Anarchy for me, but not for thee, basically. That's what the entire book feels like it's about: How Rachel wants to do whatever she wants, including dictating what other people do. And she spends about half the book making the case that he pressured her into polyamory, but she was super into it right from the beginning and declared multiple times she couldn't imagine going back to a life of monogamy. And she made it pretty clear that Adam was completely up front about being polyamorous and 100% let her set the pace and decide when he could start seeing other people. But it's like she can't accept responsibility for deciding to become poly to be with him, so whenever things get emotionally uncomfortable for her suddenly the whole thing becomes something that's being imposed on her without her consent as if she was dragged into it kicking and screaming. Yeah. Personally, I would run screaming for the hills at the thought of dating someone who wasn't already completely on board with my relationship style from the get go so Adam is obviously sus. But she complains as if everything was so one-sided in Adam's favor, but it seems like whenever Adam tried to limit what she did in any way she didn't respect that and would be like, "Nah, I'm gonna do what I want even though I agreed to your terms" or she would agree and feel very oppressed, but when he pushed back against her more extreme limitations (such as vetoing his relationships) she acted so put upon. Like, "All I wanted was to veto his relationships, and he even let me do it…but he didn't like it! What a jerk." It seems like Adam never got to have his feelings about the relationship dynamic when it wasn't working for him because it upset her, but she wanted him to react the exact right way when it wasn't working for her. And again, not denying he might have been really terrible, but she doesn't seem like a good partner either. It seemed like she treated Adam like garbage just because he was a man and therefore not entitled to desires and feelings in the same way as her, a woman. Like she mentions multiple times where she broke their agreements very early on because she felt like it and it's what she wanted. And it's not until the very end that she mentions him doing anything similar. (Granted, his things, if true, are much more unforgivable.) It didn't sound like she felt he was entitled to boundaries or autonomy the same way she felt she was. It didn't seem like she was capable of hearing no, so of course every time he did something she didn't like he seemed like a monster. And it doesn't feel like she saw him as a real person. At no point does the way she describes him make him seem like anything other than a need fulfillment machine. And maybe he willingly played the part. I'm not saying he's blameless. It just seems like it was complicated.
I also feel like it was incredibly gross that she has a whole transcript of a conversation with Adam where she has different therapists interjecting their thoughts. It's crazymaking to me to have her spend the whole book talking about how he didn't comfort or reassure her, and then she has this transcript that she's using as proof of how terrible he is. And when he attempts to comfort her and be reassuring she's interjecting like, "Wow, classic narcissistic manipulation." I'm just left being like jesus, sounds like a real no-win situation. Villain if you do, villain if you don't. And again, maybe he was terrible, but this conversation didn't make him look that bad. Like their dynamic is clearly weird, but he doesn't seem like he's the worst person in this conversation. And this was interesting - she says in a conversation with him that when she expresses her feelings he gets annoyed and shuts down, and he responds to this conversation by getting frustrated and trying to end the "hours long" (her words) conversation to go to sleep. Him expressing a boundary and her ignoring it btw. It seems to me like he doesn't want to stay up all night arguing in circles. That seems reasonable. But in a previous conversation just a few pages earlier he complains about feeling like he can't express himself and her response is to literally walk away! And apparently go complain about him to her friends. She has the same reaction to the same criticism but worse! I feel like she doesn't even realize he said the same thing to her that she said to him and she reacted by shutting it down. Like she somehow doesn't know this happened even though she wrote it down in her own book. Because she just can't hear what he's saying. At another point she kink shames him by getting angry at him for needing triangulation to get off, and I thought that was kind of fucked up. Like I think her feeling humiliated is 100% valid and she's totally entitled to feel bad about it, but the implication is that he's wrong for needing it to be that way and should change, and I'm like look man, sexuality is weird. Lots of people have a weird thing that really works for them. And she was all about his kink for a long time which probably made him feel happy and safe. I would bet in this moment he felt hurt that she's now angry and attacking him after acting like she was fine with it for so long. I think his response is basically, "Yeah, but how would you like it if I criticized what works for you?" And then she's offended that he would dare to say anything about how she gets off because what works for her is much more normal. She takes what he's saying as an attempt to make her feel insecure, but my interpretation is he's trying to get her to understand how her attack makes him feel.
Then later on in the book she complains about him gaslighting her and it's like dude. Just because you were questioning your version of reality doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make it gaslighting. Maybe you've hit upon a blind spot on your own bullshit and are starting to see cracks in the story you've been telling yourself. The other person has to INTEND to make you feel confused for it to be gaslighting. He just seems like he's trying to explain what he thinks, and sometimes he theorizes about what might be going on with her and sure, that makes him seem arrogant. But she's certainly no better at the whole psychoanalyzing her partner thing as evidenced by this entire chapter. She's sitting here giving us a play by play of what she thinks he was doing/feeling/thinking and what his motivations were and her interpretations feel really questionable and self-serving. And she even says at the end she doesn't think he was trying to manipulate her. So it's not gaslighting then! It just means your realities don't match up. This whole thing just makes me feel bad for him because it seemed like there was no way for him to get it right. I don't doubt that he's bad at dealing with other people's feelings, but from this it doesn't seem like he's manipulative as much as genuinely uncomprehending/unable to speak her language. To me he reads as autistic, not an evil mastermind. Like she points out that he urges her to stop poisoning her friends against him if she wants the relationship to be healthy as proof that he's a bad dude, and it's like well he has a point. He's not even telling her not to do it, he's just pointing out that it's counterproductive to the long term viability of the relationship. An abusive person would have demanded she not talk to her friends or intimidated her with anger. To me this reads like he's trying to get her to reign in her urge to villainize him for sympathy/attention because then she'll have to do damage control later when her friends are like, "wtf why are you still together?" She says this had the effect of isolating her from her friends and family, but it's possible to complain about your relationship without poisoning people against it. I can tell from reading this book she's not very good at that. She has a very, "I'm not saying he's a monster I'm just saying he's a monster" way of writing about him. She goes out of her way to unfairly represent his side. Like it's totally valid that she had a bad reaction to what he said! But that doesn't mean he's a bad person for saying it.
So much of this book feels like that meme of spiderman pointing at himself. She accuses Adam of being controlling and yet she openly admits to having a complete meltdown every time she's not in control of him. She accuses Adam of wanting complete freedom to her detriment, but she doesn't seem capable of being in a relationship that limits her prospects. She talks about how what she needs is a partner she can limit. She actually says she thinks veto power should always be on the table. I'm like for both people or just you? I can't see her being cool with someone using their veto power over her. She'd probably dump them. And she says Adam love-bombs, but you can see in her own writing how extremely love-bomby she is. She writes truly poetic passages about how great every single person mentioned in this book is. She talks about seeing signs of narcissism in Adam, but this book is all about how she desperately wants to be the center of other people's worlds, to be loved and adored and taken care of. You could easily make the case based on what she wrote that Adam was her narcissistic supply. She complains about gaslighting but she wrote a 350 page book to say that Adam's reality is wrong and he's delusional and a bad man. You would think if she cared about these things and thought they were bad she would take special care not to do them herself. I never once got the sense that she cared about anyone else's reality or experience unless it was validating hers.
This moment felt like such a good representation of the problem:
Rachel: I don't have any problem putting you first.
Adam: You say that, but you always put yourself first.
Rachel to herself: He's calling you selfish.
This entire book backs up the point that Rachel always puts herself first. She is so #girlboss #feminism about getting what she wants. And every time she doesn't do exactly what she wants she acts so victimized by her own restraint. She has so many problems putting Adam first that she wrote a whole book about it. This is why I'm like who is gaslighting who here?
And again, he might be the worst. And I'm not saying that being selfish is bad or that she should have wanted to put him first. But she lacks self-awareness. She appears deaf to everything Adam says to her and it feels like she interprets what she doesn't want to hear as abuse.
She started writing this book soon after the break up and I think she really should have tucked this book away for a few more years to get more distance from it before publishing it. I think she still needs more time to process what happened. Like she's still in the rediscovering herself phase at the end of the book and she hasn't yet reached the examining her own roll it in part, or really even understanding the worst of it because you have to do so much growing and changing to really understand what went wrong in a situation like this. Like what about you caused you to be attracted to this situation? What should your boundaries have been? How would you feel if the other person expressed those same boundaries? Did they? Did you respect them? Are you taking responsibility for your choices? Is what you expect from other people consistent with what you think they should be allowed to expect from you? Is what you expect from yourself something you would think was reasonable if you were on the outside looking in? There are like a thousand questions you need to work through after something like this and it's a whole ass process and it takes forever.
The thing that bothers me the most about this is that she tries so hard to sound woke, frequently taking breaks to inform the reader about sexism, racism, homophobia, and trans rights issues, but she is very quick to label anything she doesn't like or that doesn't benefit her personally as sexist or racist. She doesn't like relationship anarchy or rationalism (or objectivity?) so she writes them off as being "for men" and therefore part of the patriarchy and bad. No further explanation. They're just for men and therefore sexist. As if women couldn't possibly be interested in these things. Who's being sexist now? But my main question is: how are you going to sit there and act like you're all about dismantling power structures but also be super into relationship hierarchies? To me her constant mentioning of marginalized people and calling things sexist/racist seems like a manipulation tactic to get us to see her as a good ally and to dislike what she wants us to dislike without her having to make an actual, rational, case for why it's bad.
Anyway, I don't doubt Adam was a total dick in some ways and did things that weren't okay, but she clearly wanted complete freedom to do whatever she wanted while controlling Adam's options. Relationship Anarchy for me, but not for thee, basically. That's what the entire book feels like it's about: How Rachel wants to do whatever she wants, including dictating what other people do. And she spends about half the book making the case that he pressured her into polyamory, but she was super into it right from the beginning and declared multiple times she couldn't imagine going back to a life of monogamy. And she made it pretty clear that Adam was completely up front about being polyamorous and 100% let her set the pace and decide when he could start seeing other people. But it's like she can't accept responsibility for deciding to become poly to be with him, so whenever things get emotionally uncomfortable for her suddenly the whole thing becomes something that's being imposed on her without her consent as if she was dragged into it kicking and screaming. Yeah. Personally, I would run screaming for the hills at the thought of dating someone who wasn't already completely on board with my relationship style from the get go so Adam is obviously sus. But she complains as if everything was so one-sided in Adam's favor, but it seems like whenever Adam tried to limit what she did in any way she didn't respect that and would be like, "Nah, I'm gonna do what I want even though I agreed to your terms" or she would agree and feel very oppressed, but when he pushed back against her more extreme limitations (such as vetoing his relationships) she acted so put upon. Like, "All I wanted was to veto his relationships, and he even let me do it…but he didn't like it! What a jerk." It seems like Adam never got to have his feelings about the relationship dynamic when it wasn't working for him because it upset her, but she wanted him to react the exact right way when it wasn't working for her. And again, not denying he might have been really terrible, but she doesn't seem like a good partner either. It seemed like she treated Adam like garbage just because he was a man and therefore not entitled to desires and feelings in the same way as her, a woman. Like she mentions multiple times where she broke their agreements very early on because she felt like it and it's what she wanted. And it's not until the very end that she mentions him doing anything similar. (Granted, his things, if true, are much more unforgivable.) It didn't sound like she felt he was entitled to boundaries or autonomy the same way she felt she was. It didn't seem like she was capable of hearing no, so of course every time he did something she didn't like he seemed like a monster. And it doesn't feel like she saw him as a real person. At no point does the way she describes him make him seem like anything other than a need fulfillment machine. And maybe he willingly played the part. I'm not saying he's blameless. It just seems like it was complicated.
I also feel like it was incredibly gross that she has a whole transcript of a conversation with Adam where she has different therapists interjecting their thoughts. It's crazymaking to me to have her spend the whole book talking about how he didn't comfort or reassure her, and then she has this transcript that she's using as proof of how terrible he is. And when he attempts to comfort her and be reassuring she's interjecting like, "Wow, classic narcissistic manipulation." I'm just left being like jesus, sounds like a real no-win situation. Villain if you do, villain if you don't. And again, maybe he was terrible, but this conversation didn't make him look that bad. Like their dynamic is clearly weird, but he doesn't seem like he's the worst person in this conversation. And this was interesting - she says in a conversation with him that when she expresses her feelings he gets annoyed and shuts down, and he responds to this conversation by getting frustrated and trying to end the "hours long" (her words) conversation to go to sleep. Him expressing a boundary and her ignoring it btw. It seems to me like he doesn't want to stay up all night arguing in circles. That seems reasonable. But in a previous conversation just a few pages earlier he complains about feeling like he can't express himself and her response is to literally walk away! And apparently go complain about him to her friends. She has the same reaction to the same criticism but worse! I feel like she doesn't even realize he said the same thing to her that she said to him and she reacted by shutting it down. Like she somehow doesn't know this happened even though she wrote it down in her own book. Because she just can't hear what he's saying. At another point she kink shames him by getting angry at him for needing triangulation to get off, and I thought that was kind of fucked up. Like I think her feeling humiliated is 100% valid and she's totally entitled to feel bad about it, but the implication is that he's wrong for needing it to be that way and should change, and I'm like look man, sexuality is weird. Lots of people have a weird thing that really works for them. And she was all about his kink for a long time which probably made him feel happy and safe. I would bet in this moment he felt hurt that she's now angry and attacking him after acting like she was fine with it for so long. I think his response is basically, "Yeah, but how would you like it if I criticized what works for you?" And then she's offended that he would dare to say anything about how she gets off because what works for her is much more normal. She takes what he's saying as an attempt to make her feel insecure, but my interpretation is he's trying to get her to understand how her attack makes him feel.
Then later on in the book she complains about him gaslighting her and it's like dude. Just because you were questioning your version of reality doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make it gaslighting. Maybe you've hit upon a blind spot on your own bullshit and are starting to see cracks in the story you've been telling yourself. The other person has to INTEND to make you feel confused for it to be gaslighting. He just seems like he's trying to explain what he thinks, and sometimes he theorizes about what might be going on with her and sure, that makes him seem arrogant. But she's certainly no better at the whole psychoanalyzing her partner thing as evidenced by this entire chapter. She's sitting here giving us a play by play of what she thinks he was doing/feeling/thinking and what his motivations were and her interpretations feel really questionable and self-serving. And she even says at the end she doesn't think he was trying to manipulate her. So it's not gaslighting then! It just means your realities don't match up. This whole thing just makes me feel bad for him because it seemed like there was no way for him to get it right. I don't doubt that he's bad at dealing with other people's feelings, but from this it doesn't seem like he's manipulative as much as genuinely uncomprehending/unable to speak her language. To me he reads as autistic, not an evil mastermind. Like she points out that he urges her to stop poisoning her friends against him if she wants the relationship to be healthy as proof that he's a bad dude, and it's like well he has a point. He's not even telling her not to do it, he's just pointing out that it's counterproductive to the long term viability of the relationship. An abusive person would have demanded she not talk to her friends or intimidated her with anger. To me this reads like he's trying to get her to reign in her urge to villainize him for sympathy/attention because then she'll have to do damage control later when her friends are like, "wtf why are you still together?" She says this had the effect of isolating her from her friends and family, but it's possible to complain about your relationship without poisoning people against it. I can tell from reading this book she's not very good at that. She has a very, "I'm not saying he's a monster I'm just saying he's a monster" way of writing about him. She goes out of her way to unfairly represent his side. Like it's totally valid that she had a bad reaction to what he said! But that doesn't mean he's a bad person for saying it.
So much of this book feels like that meme of spiderman pointing at himself. She accuses Adam of being controlling and yet she openly admits to having a complete meltdown every time she's not in control of him. She accuses Adam of wanting complete freedom to her detriment, but she doesn't seem capable of being in a relationship that limits her prospects. She talks about how what she needs is a partner she can limit. She actually says she thinks veto power should always be on the table. I'm like for both people or just you? I can't see her being cool with someone using their veto power over her. She'd probably dump them. And she says Adam love-bombs, but you can see in her own writing how extremely love-bomby she is. She writes truly poetic passages about how great every single person mentioned in this book is. She talks about seeing signs of narcissism in Adam, but this book is all about how she desperately wants to be the center of other people's worlds, to be loved and adored and taken care of. You could easily make the case based on what she wrote that Adam was her narcissistic supply. She complains about gaslighting but she wrote a 350 page book to say that Adam's reality is wrong and he's delusional and a bad man. You would think if she cared about these things and thought they were bad she would take special care not to do them herself. I never once got the sense that she cared about anyone else's reality or experience unless it was validating hers.
This moment felt like such a good representation of the problem:
Rachel: I don't have any problem putting you first.
Adam: You say that, but you always put yourself first.
Rachel to herself: He's calling you selfish.
This entire book backs up the point that Rachel always puts herself first. She is so #girlboss #feminism about getting what she wants. And every time she doesn't do exactly what she wants she acts so victimized by her own restraint. She has so many problems putting Adam first that she wrote a whole book about it. This is why I'm like who is gaslighting who here?
And again, he might be the worst. And I'm not saying that being selfish is bad or that she should have wanted to put him first. But she lacks self-awareness. She appears deaf to everything Adam says to her and it feels like she interprets what she doesn't want to hear as abuse.
She started writing this book soon after the break up and I think she really should have tucked this book away for a few more years to get more distance from it before publishing it. I think she still needs more time to process what happened. Like she's still in the rediscovering herself phase at the end of the book and she hasn't yet reached the examining her own roll it in part, or really even understanding the worst of it because you have to do so much growing and changing to really understand what went wrong in a situation like this. Like what about you caused you to be attracted to this situation? What should your boundaries have been? How would you feel if the other person expressed those same boundaries? Did they? Did you respect them? Are you taking responsibility for your choices? Is what you expect from other people consistent with what you think they should be allowed to expect from you? Is what you expect from yourself something you would think was reasonable if you were on the outside looking in? There are like a thousand questions you need to work through after something like this and it's a whole ass process and it takes forever.
January 10, 2022
Originally published on my book blog, TheBibliophage.com.
3.5 stars rounded up
The upcoming memoir from Rachel Krantz, Open: An Uncensored Memoir of Love, Liberation, and Non-Monogamy is raw and sometimes raunchy. It’s also a tale about control and gaslighting in relationships. As the memoir opens, Krantz is a twenty-something writer who doesn’t think like a monogamous woman. Her journey into the world of alternate sexual options is eye-opening and vulnerable.
Krantz tells her story through several means. Sometimes she shares diary entries or transcripts of recorded conversations. Other times, she tells stories of events she experienced. Throughout it all, she intersperses research, both primary and secondary, into the mindset of various types of relationships.
Her perspective is that monogamy is a patriarchal construct, subtly designed to hold women down. Ironically, the first intentionally non-monogamous relationship she enters is with Adam, a man who is both controlling and patriarchal. She actually calls him “Daddy” on occasion and he calls her “my little girl.” Still, the most compelling part of her memoir is the meandering journey she takes while determining if he’s the right man for her.
She lives under Adam’s thumb for quite some time. At first, he seems caring and nurturing. But the more time she spends with him, the more she removes other friends from her life. At the same time, she struggles to live up to his “expectations.” The nature of an open, non-monogamous relationship complicates his antithetical need for control. Meanwhile, Krantz struggles with jealousy and feelings of inadequacy. Adam doesn’t do anything to make her feel more secure.
And as her research and writing work offers Krantz the opportunity to see other non-monogamous relationships in action, she realizes Adam regularly gaslights her. This concept is new to her, so she explains it in detail here, which is helpful.
My conclusions
Yes, this memoir has plenty of openly sexual writing, description, and dialogue. But it serves an important end beyond any sense of titillation. Polyamorous or non-monogamous relationships deserve a legitimate exploration. And Krantz shares both her personal experience and her subjective research. Together these aspects blend into a compulsively readable memoir.
I believe that Krantz genuinely desires a mentally and emotionally healthy life while also being non-monogamous. However, achieving that is considerably more complicated than she expected. This is the crux of what makes Open a complex memoir. Krantz draws us in early to her process. We watch her understand non-monogamy, explore a potentially long-term relationship, and mature into a fully functioning adult. Each piece of this experience needs the other to be completely realized.
I picked this up because of how polyamory figures in a few of my favorite fictional series. I also know two couples who’ve explored the boundaries of non-monogamy, with varying degrees of success. Krantz delivered what I hoped for: a realistic, nonfiction exposition of the lifestyle with advantages and disadvantages.
If you’re curious about the non-monogamous lifestyle, this is a valuable tool for understanding its ups and downs. Krantz is honest, self-effacing, and ultimately presents important explorations.
Pair with Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny by Kate Manne, because it explains patriarchy like nothing else. Alternately, try Living an Orgasmic Life: Heal Yourself and Awaken Your Pleasure by Xanet Pailet because it also focuses on sexual empowerment.
Acknowledgments
Many thanks to NetGalley, Rodale Inc. / Harmony, and the author for a digital advanced reader’s copy in exchange for this honest review. The anticipated publication date is January 25, 2022.
3.5 stars rounded up
The upcoming memoir from Rachel Krantz, Open: An Uncensored Memoir of Love, Liberation, and Non-Monogamy is raw and sometimes raunchy. It’s also a tale about control and gaslighting in relationships. As the memoir opens, Krantz is a twenty-something writer who doesn’t think like a monogamous woman. Her journey into the world of alternate sexual options is eye-opening and vulnerable.
Krantz tells her story through several means. Sometimes she shares diary entries or transcripts of recorded conversations. Other times, she tells stories of events she experienced. Throughout it all, she intersperses research, both primary and secondary, into the mindset of various types of relationships.
Her perspective is that monogamy is a patriarchal construct, subtly designed to hold women down. Ironically, the first intentionally non-monogamous relationship she enters is with Adam, a man who is both controlling and patriarchal. She actually calls him “Daddy” on occasion and he calls her “my little girl.” Still, the most compelling part of her memoir is the meandering journey she takes while determining if he’s the right man for her.
She lives under Adam’s thumb for quite some time. At first, he seems caring and nurturing. But the more time she spends with him, the more she removes other friends from her life. At the same time, she struggles to live up to his “expectations.” The nature of an open, non-monogamous relationship complicates his antithetical need for control. Meanwhile, Krantz struggles with jealousy and feelings of inadequacy. Adam doesn’t do anything to make her feel more secure.
And as her research and writing work offers Krantz the opportunity to see other non-monogamous relationships in action, she realizes Adam regularly gaslights her. This concept is new to her, so she explains it in detail here, which is helpful.
My conclusions
Yes, this memoir has plenty of openly sexual writing, description, and dialogue. But it serves an important end beyond any sense of titillation. Polyamorous or non-monogamous relationships deserve a legitimate exploration. And Krantz shares both her personal experience and her subjective research. Together these aspects blend into a compulsively readable memoir.
I believe that Krantz genuinely desires a mentally and emotionally healthy life while also being non-monogamous. However, achieving that is considerably more complicated than she expected. This is the crux of what makes Open a complex memoir. Krantz draws us in early to her process. We watch her understand non-monogamy, explore a potentially long-term relationship, and mature into a fully functioning adult. Each piece of this experience needs the other to be completely realized.
I picked this up because of how polyamory figures in a few of my favorite fictional series. I also know two couples who’ve explored the boundaries of non-monogamy, with varying degrees of success. Krantz delivered what I hoped for: a realistic, nonfiction exposition of the lifestyle with advantages and disadvantages.
If you’re curious about the non-monogamous lifestyle, this is a valuable tool for understanding its ups and downs. Krantz is honest, self-effacing, and ultimately presents important explorations.
Pair with Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny by Kate Manne, because it explains patriarchy like nothing else. Alternately, try Living an Orgasmic Life: Heal Yourself and Awaken Your Pleasure by Xanet Pailet because it also focuses on sexual empowerment.
Acknowledgments
Many thanks to NetGalley, Rodale Inc. / Harmony, and the author for a digital advanced reader’s copy in exchange for this honest review. The anticipated publication date is January 25, 2022.
November 15, 2021
I’m not sure what I expected going into Rachel Krantz’ memoir. I suppose I expected the story of a poly relationship that worked, almost like a sales pitch for a no monogamous lifestyle. Instead what I got was a complex exploration of Krantz’ first non monogamous partnership interwoven with a sociological and psychological exploration of her self and her lifestyle. It was fantastic. Four and a half stars.
February 17, 2022
I felt like it was an extremely difficult read, but as a life-long polya kinkster I feel it's worth it. you truly go on the journey of learning the hard lessons in kink, polyamory, life, and love in this book. it's a super raw cut memoir about the extremely fucked up way she entered the world of polyamory/nonmonogamy, and kink. It's about being gaslit by someone that you still feel fondly towards, manipulated by someone who you make excuses for. reading it felt like slowly falling off a cliff. it was long and brutal and I probably shouldn't have read it all in one straight shot but we're here now.
it did have a redeeming second half (though it didn't have the one I wanted). in it she accurately brings the reader through the IMMENSE amount of personal growth and education into nonmonogamy and self that she gathered and I thought that was well done. it's not trying to glamourize polyamory or be a textbook, though it does point to textbooks frequently in its footnotes and references. it was raw and real and idk it did manage to impress me overall.
also she talks about enjoying daddy kink stuff but she doesn't feel the need to defend or over explain herself about that and I respect that.
it did have a redeeming second half (though it didn't have the one I wanted). in it she accurately brings the reader through the IMMENSE amount of personal growth and education into nonmonogamy and self that she gathered and I thought that was well done. it's not trying to glamourize polyamory or be a textbook, though it does point to textbooks frequently in its footnotes and references. it was raw and real and idk it did manage to impress me overall.
also she talks about enjoying daddy kink stuff but she doesn't feel the need to defend or over explain herself about that and I respect that.
September 8, 2022
I really like Rachel Krantz. I have listened to her on podcasts for a while now. When I saw this was available to request I did not hesitate. While it is heavy on her journey with sexual experiences, which I don't want to read all about, for the most part, I think she is an amazing human and respect Rachel so much! I began following her because of her veganism and activism initially. She has a voice and a story to tell. I am so glad to have read it.
Thank you, NetGalley, Rachel Krantz, and the publisher for the opportunity to read a digital edition. I later bought the audible version to listen to. Rachel reads this herself and I often cannot pass up the opportunity to listen to an author read their own book if I know I like the book. Highly recommended! Audible version and ebook!
Thank you, NetGalley, Rachel Krantz, and the publisher for the opportunity to read a digital edition. I later bought the audible version to listen to. Rachel reads this herself and I often cannot pass up the opportunity to listen to an author read their own book if I know I like the book. Highly recommended! Audible version and ebook!
July 22, 2024
WHAT. A. TIME. TO BE ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!
Polyamory haters, stand up!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This book was truly made for us. The only upside to being here at the end of the world is that I get to witness these sorts of chaotic books being published.
I said what I said!! (but here’s why)
Before everyone gets upset, I will have y’all know that I am a polyamory hater, a monogamy hater, and a hater of everything else on this planet. (For more on why I find it important to be critical of both relationship styles, here is a thread on my other rant platform.)
I’m also a Gen Z lesbian, which means most people I know are either currently in an open relationship, or are still reeling from their prior experiments in nonmonogamy. I fall into both camps, as my girlfriend and I had a lot of growing pains when opening our relationship four years ago. Thanks to a wonderful ENM therapist, counsel from family/friends, and honestly pure luck, we have come out on the other side of the nonsense, and are mostly enjoying life and dating these days.
On a serious note, I love my girlfriend and my many polyamorous friends, and have seen lots of them work extremely hard to become devoted, compassionate hinge partners and/or unicorns. At the same time, our dating sagas prove that quality nonmonogamy experiences are far from the norm. The polyamorous community has TERRIBLE representatives, many of whom struggle to keep the “e” in ENM. Rachel Krantz’s Open is a captivating portrait of her relationship with “Adam”, the sort of smugly awful relationship anarchist who makes me proud to be a polyamory hater.
Carmen Maria Machado, you will always be famous!!
There is no way this book could exist without my favorite lesbian memoir, the incomparable In the Dream House. Carmen Maria Machado’s book remains the standard for modern memoirs about abusive relationships, and Open is no exception. Krantz’s blend of social commentary and storybook-esque nonfiction constantly reminded me of Machado’s work, and Krantz even cites In the Dream House in her memoir.
When Krantz draws on narrative concepts like the hero’s journey to explain how societal tropes shielded her from realizing she was in an abusive relationship, it immediately calls to mind CMM’s use of the Motif Index of Folk-Literature throughout In the Dream House. Both authors are pulling from sources high and low to contextualize their personal experiences of surviving abuse, and to share how our society made their relationships possible (if not probable.) In Open, Krantz leans on the work of couples’ therapists, cultural anthropologists, and literary theorists to shed light on the deeper relevance of her story. You leave this book understanding exactly why this story is important not just to her, but to countless people struggling in similar dynamics.
While it’s so exciting to see Carmen’s sons live and in action, I don’t want to overdo the comparison. For those of y’all who love Machado’s imaginative crafting of her books, Krantz’s approach is much more straightforward—you won’t find any Choose-Your-Own-Adventure chapters, 1940s horror movie reviews, or SVU reboots here. However, in Krantz’s defense, I think the clearer format works well for her story, and I imagine might be better received by her audience, who I assume are less into queer theory and lit than Machado’s readers. (If you do want a longer list of CMM’s many sons, check out this fantastic list from the Grand Rapids Public Library .)
Please BFFR: polyamory and kink are neutral tools used by many evil people
My final In the Dream House comparison is that Open made me think about the equivocations and distancing that queer, nonmonogamous, and kinky people perform to “protect” their communities from connotations of abuse. The issue is that many people who consider themselves "real" polyamorists or doms would rather discredit the rampant instances of abuse in their communities than address them head-on. They are onlookers and bystanders to relationships like Rachel and Adam’s, but they believe such relationships would taint the reputation of their precious lifestyles/identities/etc. These sorts of people value their social and sexual circles more than they do the safety of people crushed by abusers within these circles. The irony is that their urge to sweep all “bad representation” under the rug—isolating abuse survivors in the process—is actually what taints the reputation of these fringe communities.
Of course, this is a flaw of nearly every hierarchical or societal organization I can think of—the church, sororities or fraternities, and of course families. Given the topic of this book, however, it feels important to underscore that predators are alive and well in many polyamorous and BDSM communities, and they often receive the same sort of “missing stair” treatment that Adam does in this book. For more context on how the missing stair theory shows up in the world of polyamory, I would suggest checking out this blog summarizing the abuse and harassment committed by the author of an advice book that is still recommended in many ENM circles, and this associated video, which explains how a culture of “protectionism” provides shelter for abusers in these fringe communities, at the expense of their victims. It will be immediately clear how similar these people’s experiences seem to Rachel’s.
All this is a long prelude to me saying that I couldn’t disagree more with the reviews claiming Open is a memoir about a toxic relationship, and not indicative of ENM or kink relationships. THIS IS A MEMOIR ABOUT THE UNIQUE FORMS OF GASLIGHTING THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE PRACTICING KINK AND POLYAMORY. This book is deeply relatable to many of the ENM horror stories I’ve heard from my friends, and to the horror stories outlined in the blog and video above, which happened to a bunch of Gen X and Millennial white people in Portland that I will never meet in my life. So many people have eerily similar stories and experiences in these fringe communities, and we can’t all be lying about it. Instead, I think the liars are the people acting like these sorts of relationships do not frequently occur in polyamory or BDSM circles—that actually sounds like something Adam would say!!!
All in all, I think it’s deeply sinister that people have this urge to protect the institution of polyamory or other fringe communities above protecting individual people engaging with these communities. It’s deeply troubling that so many people would like to cast aside Rachel’s story, instead of using it to soberly reflect on what can go wrong that these lifestyles and practices can be so clearly used to facilitate abuse. If more readers were able to drop their hubris, I think they would find Open to be a really insightful memoir that helps show how dangerous it can be to explore new practices in fundamentally unsafe relationships. As someone who has been in a polyamorous relationship for years and is also seeking a d/s relationship, I learned a lot from this memoir. I think if more people read this book with curiosity and compassion, instead of defensiveness, there would be lots we could all learn from Krantz’s experience.
To be fair: it’s not (just) polyamory, it's (also) the creepy ass boyfriend and the fucked-up relationship he co-created.
I feel like I probably have to spell this out: I AM NOT SAYING THAT ADAM IS ABUSIVE BECAUSE HE IS POLYAMOROUS OR A DOM. (Yes, I understand Adam would not consider himself to be a “dom” and that their dynamic is dangerously unnegotiated.) Rather, I think Adam easily manipulated the practices of kink and ENM to achieve his goals: to evade accountability and control his partners. In my dictionary, manipulation is a devious use of something or someone. My point, then, is that the manipulation of kink and ENM is still *the use* of kink and ENM. And so, people who claim that they responsibly use BDSM and ENM shouldn’t be able to just say “I don’t know her” to anybody who is deviously using their same lifestyle practices.
But to go more into why I hated Adam, Rachel Krantz should be really proud of how she was able to make such an egotistical, self-centered asshole come to life on the page. I wanted to smack this man on multiple occasions, and I have never met him, but I have met so many jerks who share his personality. When Adam was putting Rachel on the stand for simply expressing a dissenting opinion, or trying to brainwash her using "the Socratic method", I wanted to tear my hair out. I’m so glad she reached out to the gaslighting researchers as part of her book prep, because she really needed some help!! It is just so frustrating that people are allowed to treat others in this fashion, and it never gets easier to read about.
Finally, back to Adam’s manipulation of polyamory terms, this book is yet another example why self-proclaimed relationship anarchists will never see heaven!! In my experience (and clearly in Rachel’s), people who mistreat all of their partners, relatives, and friends love manipulating RA frameworks to claim that they just want “more respect” for their non-nesting partners. I’m reminded of that satirical article about the heartbreaking moment when a broken clock is right twice a day. When the most immoral person you know suddenly draws an ethical line at the "immorality" of primary partnership, it may bring on both heartbreak and heartburn!!!!! Once again, I am so glad that Rachel was able to realize just how awful this guy was.
Re: co-creating the relationship...
At the same time that Rachel was certainly the aggrieved party in this relationship, she does allude to several aspects of “co-creation” of this relationship. For starters, Adam is partially able to indulge his superiority complex by appealing to Rachel’s own. This seems to be a core part of how they came together in the first place, and throughout the memoir, Rachel condescends to her other partners and to the swingers she considers to be “less evolved” nonmonogamists. She looks down on swingers who have the same misogynistic and transphobic views that Adam later reveals himself to have, so you know it’s not an actual moral or political boundary, just a desire to feel like others are more “basic” than she is. It reminded me of this famous Bonnie Burstow quote:
I don’t mean to say that Rachel *by any means* deserved to be abused by Adam because she was complicit in his arrogance. However, I appreciated how Krantz shows that her own traits (e.g. elitism) and hidden desires may have made her a particular target for his mistreatment. Like In the Dream House, Open is full of reflections about the concerning origins of our romantic and sexual desires, and how these fantasies—which are often characterized as neutral or benign—can lead to really dark places when they are “acted upon” with abusive and untrustworthy partners. A key example of this comes in Rachel’s exploration of just why the unnegotiated d/s or DDLG dynamic was so appealing to her.
She connects her submission to a desire for rest that is both understandable and constantly cited as a defense for many resurgent “fads” in our society: tradwifes/stay-at-home-girlfriends, generational wealth schemes, you name in! In so many cases, achieving “rest” through these methods requires the sacrifice of your autonomy, your morality, or sometimes both! Sad as it is to say, there is no way to create “passive income” that does not exploit others, and there is no way to safely engage in a d/s dynamic without active negotiation from both parties—which, yes, can feel like work. In an increasingly awful world, it makes sense that so many of us are seeking relational and financial escapism. However, this book really underscores how the urge to just “turn your brain off” and let others lead the way without any checks and balances can be very dangerous.
Things I didn't enjoy as much
As noted in many other reviews, I do think this would be a stronger memoir if the author had a little more distance from her subject matter. I understand the urge to write a story while it’s somewhat fresh in your mind—when you are closer to something, you remember it more with a certain resonance that can’t be re-accessed in hindsight. For a survivor of sexual and emotional abuse, I imagine it would feel particularly important to share your story in a way that felt true to who you were when you experienced such dark moments. However, I don’t think this gamble played off in the case of Krantz’s memoir. As terrible as it is to say, I feel like the author is not still that removed from her relationship with Adam, and its hold over her. In many passages, it felt like she was still in the role of “girlfriend to a terrible man”, trying to smooth over his flaws for onlookers. Krantz seems incapable of providing a deeper summary to the story than an inquiry that "perhaps romantic happiness had less to do with the relationship model itself, than having a foundation of secure attachment and compatible desires." It’s a welcome reminder, sure—ENM never works when it functions as a never-ending conquest scheme to constantly outsource one’s insecurities. There is a core need for security and stability as a foundation before you dive into this stuff, and this memoir certainly illustrates that. However, I felt like we could’ve received an even stronger closing note if this author had more time to detach from this relationship.
My other pet peeve with this book is something M.S. Wells wrote about in her review of Unmasking Autism by Devon Price. There is this growing trend where white authors who consider themselves to be “allies” will caveat random parts of their books with hasty disclaimers about how the scenarios they’re describing may not apply to Black people because of police brutality or something else they heard about on NPR. The problem is not the attention to contradictory experiences, but the way they do it—with unconsidered throwaway comments that show these issues are not important enough to be discussed in-depth in their book, but are moreso being included so they can’t be “cancelled” by readers. This sort of thing is becoming woefully common amongst chronically online authors, and I wish someone would tell them how irritating it is.
Krantz is unfortunately another example of this, as Open includes a slew of rash footnotes that range from asides about “white supremacy culture” to random citations of the only Black or trans authors she seems to know. Having read many of the books she haphazardly references, it often felt like she just threw out the Google search results for “who talks about gym culture and racism” and kept it pushing. She’s also very inconsistent about when an act of white privilege requires a disclaimer that “Black people would be punished for doing what I’m doing.” Krantz adds a footnote about the unjust rollout of drug legalization when smoking weed with her mom, but has no thoughts about how exploitative the tourism industry is when she goes to Cancun or Jamaica for these swinger resorts. Do one or do none—and my vote would be none of it!!!
Final Thoughts
While I’m really glad we’re starting to get stories like this, we are probably a few years out from memoirs where the authors are able to really nail the content. In the meantime, Rachel Krantz’s Open is an important addition to mainstream representation of nonmonogamous relationships, as much as that might upset some people to hear. This book *is* about polyamory, it’s about abuse, and it’s a lesson about how both structures can reinforce each other. That’s a lesson worth learning, and worth existing alongside more celebratory coverage of ENM. I think it’s important for us all to engage with the unfortunate ways our various identities, practices, and lifestyles are invoked to harm others. To the extent that this book helps explore that, I think it’s a welcome contribution—though I will be waiting for better executed work in the future.
Polyamory haters, stand up!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This book was truly made for us. The only upside to being here at the end of the world is that I get to witness these sorts of chaotic books being published.
I said what I said!! (but here’s why)
Before everyone gets upset, I will have y’all know that I am a polyamory hater, a monogamy hater, and a hater of everything else on this planet. (For more on why I find it important to be critical of both relationship styles, here is a thread on my other rant platform.)
I’m also a Gen Z lesbian, which means most people I know are either currently in an open relationship, or are still reeling from their prior experiments in nonmonogamy. I fall into both camps, as my girlfriend and I had a lot of growing pains when opening our relationship four years ago. Thanks to a wonderful ENM therapist, counsel from family/friends, and honestly pure luck, we have come out on the other side of the nonsense, and are mostly enjoying life and dating these days.
On a serious note, I love my girlfriend and my many polyamorous friends, and have seen lots of them work extremely hard to become devoted, compassionate hinge partners and/or unicorns. At the same time, our dating sagas prove that quality nonmonogamy experiences are far from the norm. The polyamorous community has TERRIBLE representatives, many of whom struggle to keep the “e” in ENM. Rachel Krantz’s Open is a captivating portrait of her relationship with “Adam”, the sort of smugly awful relationship anarchist who makes me proud to be a polyamory hater.
Carmen Maria Machado, you will always be famous!!
There is no way this book could exist without my favorite lesbian memoir, the incomparable In the Dream House. Carmen Maria Machado’s book remains the standard for modern memoirs about abusive relationships, and Open is no exception. Krantz’s blend of social commentary and storybook-esque nonfiction constantly reminded me of Machado’s work, and Krantz even cites In the Dream House in her memoir.
When Krantz draws on narrative concepts like the hero’s journey to explain how societal tropes shielded her from realizing she was in an abusive relationship, it immediately calls to mind CMM’s use of the Motif Index of Folk-Literature throughout In the Dream House. Both authors are pulling from sources high and low to contextualize their personal experiences of surviving abuse, and to share how our society made their relationships possible (if not probable.) In Open, Krantz leans on the work of couples’ therapists, cultural anthropologists, and literary theorists to shed light on the deeper relevance of her story. You leave this book understanding exactly why this story is important not just to her, but to countless people struggling in similar dynamics.
While it’s so exciting to see Carmen’s sons live and in action, I don’t want to overdo the comparison. For those of y’all who love Machado’s imaginative crafting of her books, Krantz’s approach is much more straightforward—you won’t find any Choose-Your-Own-Adventure chapters, 1940s horror movie reviews, or SVU reboots here. However, in Krantz’s defense, I think the clearer format works well for her story, and I imagine might be better received by her audience, who I assume are less into queer theory and lit than Machado’s readers. (If you do want a longer list of CMM’s many sons, check out this fantastic list from the Grand Rapids Public Library .)
Please BFFR: polyamory and kink are neutral tools used by many evil people
My final In the Dream House comparison is that Open made me think about the equivocations and distancing that queer, nonmonogamous, and kinky people perform to “protect” their communities from connotations of abuse. The issue is that many people who consider themselves "real" polyamorists or doms would rather discredit the rampant instances of abuse in their communities than address them head-on. They are onlookers and bystanders to relationships like Rachel and Adam’s, but they believe such relationships would taint the reputation of their precious lifestyles/identities/etc. These sorts of people value their social and sexual circles more than they do the safety of people crushed by abusers within these circles. The irony is that their urge to sweep all “bad representation” under the rug—isolating abuse survivors in the process—is actually what taints the reputation of these fringe communities.
Of course, this is a flaw of nearly every hierarchical or societal organization I can think of—the church, sororities or fraternities, and of course families. Given the topic of this book, however, it feels important to underscore that predators are alive and well in many polyamorous and BDSM communities, and they often receive the same sort of “missing stair” treatment that Adam does in this book. For more context on how the missing stair theory shows up in the world of polyamory, I would suggest checking out this blog summarizing the abuse and harassment committed by the author of an advice book that is still recommended in many ENM circles, and this associated video, which explains how a culture of “protectionism” provides shelter for abusers in these fringe communities, at the expense of their victims. It will be immediately clear how similar these people’s experiences seem to Rachel’s.
All this is a long prelude to me saying that I couldn’t disagree more with the reviews claiming Open is a memoir about a toxic relationship, and not indicative of ENM or kink relationships. THIS IS A MEMOIR ABOUT THE UNIQUE FORMS OF GASLIGHTING THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO PEOPLE PRACTICING KINK AND POLYAMORY. This book is deeply relatable to many of the ENM horror stories I’ve heard from my friends, and to the horror stories outlined in the blog and video above, which happened to a bunch of Gen X and Millennial white people in Portland that I will never meet in my life. So many people have eerily similar stories and experiences in these fringe communities, and we can’t all be lying about it. Instead, I think the liars are the people acting like these sorts of relationships do not frequently occur in polyamory or BDSM circles—that actually sounds like something Adam would say!!!
All in all, I think it’s deeply sinister that people have this urge to protect the institution of polyamory or other fringe communities above protecting individual people engaging with these communities. It’s deeply troubling that so many people would like to cast aside Rachel’s story, instead of using it to soberly reflect on what can go wrong that these lifestyles and practices can be so clearly used to facilitate abuse. If more readers were able to drop their hubris, I think they would find Open to be a really insightful memoir that helps show how dangerous it can be to explore new practices in fundamentally unsafe relationships. As someone who has been in a polyamorous relationship for years and is also seeking a d/s relationship, I learned a lot from this memoir. I think if more people read this book with curiosity and compassion, instead of defensiveness, there would be lots we could all learn from Krantz’s experience.
To be fair: it’s not (just) polyamory, it's (also) the creepy ass boyfriend and the fucked-up relationship he co-created.
I feel like I probably have to spell this out: I AM NOT SAYING THAT ADAM IS ABUSIVE BECAUSE HE IS POLYAMOROUS OR A DOM. (Yes, I understand Adam would not consider himself to be a “dom” and that their dynamic is dangerously unnegotiated.) Rather, I think Adam easily manipulated the practices of kink and ENM to achieve his goals: to evade accountability and control his partners. In my dictionary, manipulation is a devious use of something or someone. My point, then, is that the manipulation of kink and ENM is still *the use* of kink and ENM. And so, people who claim that they responsibly use BDSM and ENM shouldn’t be able to just say “I don’t know her” to anybody who is deviously using their same lifestyle practices.
But to go more into why I hated Adam, Rachel Krantz should be really proud of how she was able to make such an egotistical, self-centered asshole come to life on the page. I wanted to smack this man on multiple occasions, and I have never met him, but I have met so many jerks who share his personality. When Adam was putting Rachel on the stand for simply expressing a dissenting opinion, or trying to brainwash her using "the Socratic method", I wanted to tear my hair out. I’m so glad she reached out to the gaslighting researchers as part of her book prep, because she really needed some help!! It is just so frustrating that people are allowed to treat others in this fashion, and it never gets easier to read about.
Finally, back to Adam’s manipulation of polyamory terms, this book is yet another example why self-proclaimed relationship anarchists will never see heaven!! In my experience (and clearly in Rachel’s), people who mistreat all of their partners, relatives, and friends love manipulating RA frameworks to claim that they just want “more respect” for their non-nesting partners. I’m reminded of that satirical article about the heartbreaking moment when a broken clock is right twice a day. When the most immoral person you know suddenly draws an ethical line at the "immorality" of primary partnership, it may bring on both heartbreak and heartburn!!!!! Once again, I am so glad that Rachel was able to realize just how awful this guy was.
Re: co-creating the relationship...
At the same time that Rachel was certainly the aggrieved party in this relationship, she does allude to several aspects of “co-creation” of this relationship. For starters, Adam is partially able to indulge his superiority complex by appealing to Rachel’s own. This seems to be a core part of how they came together in the first place, and throughout the memoir, Rachel condescends to her other partners and to the swingers she considers to be “less evolved” nonmonogamists. She looks down on swingers who have the same misogynistic and transphobic views that Adam later reveals himself to have, so you know it’s not an actual moral or political boundary, just a desire to feel like others are more “basic” than she is. It reminded me of this famous Bonnie Burstow quote:
“Often father and daughter look down on mother (woman) together. They exchange meaningful glances when she misses a point. They agree that she is not bright as they are, cannot reason as they do. This collusion does not save the daughter from the mother’s fate.”
I don’t mean to say that Rachel *by any means* deserved to be abused by Adam because she was complicit in his arrogance. However, I appreciated how Krantz shows that her own traits (e.g. elitism) and hidden desires may have made her a particular target for his mistreatment. Like In the Dream House, Open is full of reflections about the concerning origins of our romantic and sexual desires, and how these fantasies—which are often characterized as neutral or benign—can lead to really dark places when they are “acted upon” with abusive and untrustworthy partners. A key example of this comes in Rachel’s exploration of just why the unnegotiated d/s or DDLG dynamic was so appealing to her.
She connects her submission to a desire for rest that is both understandable and constantly cited as a defense for many resurgent “fads” in our society: tradwifes/stay-at-home-girlfriends, generational wealth schemes, you name in! In so many cases, achieving “rest” through these methods requires the sacrifice of your autonomy, your morality, or sometimes both! Sad as it is to say, there is no way to create “passive income” that does not exploit others, and there is no way to safely engage in a d/s dynamic without active negotiation from both parties—which, yes, can feel like work. In an increasingly awful world, it makes sense that so many of us are seeking relational and financial escapism. However, this book really underscores how the urge to just “turn your brain off” and let others lead the way without any checks and balances can be very dangerous.
Things I didn't enjoy as much
As noted in many other reviews, I do think this would be a stronger memoir if the author had a little more distance from her subject matter. I understand the urge to write a story while it’s somewhat fresh in your mind—when you are closer to something, you remember it more with a certain resonance that can’t be re-accessed in hindsight. For a survivor of sexual and emotional abuse, I imagine it would feel particularly important to share your story in a way that felt true to who you were when you experienced such dark moments. However, I don’t think this gamble played off in the case of Krantz’s memoir. As terrible as it is to say, I feel like the author is not still that removed from her relationship with Adam, and its hold over her. In many passages, it felt like she was still in the role of “girlfriend to a terrible man”, trying to smooth over his flaws for onlookers. Krantz seems incapable of providing a deeper summary to the story than an inquiry that "perhaps romantic happiness had less to do with the relationship model itself, than having a foundation of secure attachment and compatible desires." It’s a welcome reminder, sure—ENM never works when it functions as a never-ending conquest scheme to constantly outsource one’s insecurities. There is a core need for security and stability as a foundation before you dive into this stuff, and this memoir certainly illustrates that. However, I felt like we could’ve received an even stronger closing note if this author had more time to detach from this relationship.
My other pet peeve with this book is something M.S. Wells wrote about in her review of Unmasking Autism by Devon Price. There is this growing trend where white authors who consider themselves to be “allies” will caveat random parts of their books with hasty disclaimers about how the scenarios they’re describing may not apply to Black people because of police brutality or something else they heard about on NPR. The problem is not the attention to contradictory experiences, but the way they do it—with unconsidered throwaway comments that show these issues are not important enough to be discussed in-depth in their book, but are moreso being included so they can’t be “cancelled” by readers. This sort of thing is becoming woefully common amongst chronically online authors, and I wish someone would tell them how irritating it is.
Krantz is unfortunately another example of this, as Open includes a slew of rash footnotes that range from asides about “white supremacy culture” to random citations of the only Black or trans authors she seems to know. Having read many of the books she haphazardly references, it often felt like she just threw out the Google search results for “who talks about gym culture and racism” and kept it pushing. She’s also very inconsistent about when an act of white privilege requires a disclaimer that “Black people would be punished for doing what I’m doing.” Krantz adds a footnote about the unjust rollout of drug legalization when smoking weed with her mom, but has no thoughts about how exploitative the tourism industry is when she goes to Cancun or Jamaica for these swinger resorts. Do one or do none—and my vote would be none of it!!!
Final Thoughts
While I’m really glad we’re starting to get stories like this, we are probably a few years out from memoirs where the authors are able to really nail the content. In the meantime, Rachel Krantz’s Open is an important addition to mainstream representation of nonmonogamous relationships, as much as that might upset some people to hear. This book *is* about polyamory, it’s about abuse, and it’s a lesson about how both structures can reinforce each other. That’s a lesson worth learning, and worth existing alongside more celebratory coverage of ENM. I think it’s important for us all to engage with the unfortunate ways our various identities, practices, and lifestyles are invoked to harm others. To the extent that this book helps explore that, I think it’s a welcome contribution—though I will be waiting for better executed work in the future.
April 16, 2023
This book isn't about love and liberation. It's about toxicity and abuse. The subtitle should be, Everything You Should Never Do If You Want An Open Relationship, Or Even Just a Healthy Relationship At All.
"Adam" is manipulative and abusive, with red flags galore abounding from his first appearance. Rachel is gullible, easily manipulated, emotionally immature, and definitely should not have been in a nonmonogamous relationship, which requires a level of self-awareness she just did not possess. But surprise! Adam basically steamrolled her into it! The lesson here is not to let yourself be pushed into decisions by someone who is good in bed. Also not to move in with someone after a month of dating them. I've taken longer to consider whether to purchase certain articles of clothes and furniture than that, FFS.
At one point Rachel literally creates a list of Adam's red flag behaviors. Then convinces herself to ignore them and stay with him. GOOD IDEA. 🤦🏻♀️
He also sexually and physically assaults her, on separate occasions, denies doing either, gaslights her, and later in the book Rachel says she doesn't want people to think he's a bad person.
Sorry. He's a bad person.
Rachel is no picnic either. She doesn't deserve Adam's horrific treatment, but she also continually is jealous when he dates other people and doesn't want him to do it, yet expects to be able to date other people herself. It's confusing and as I mentioned above, she's not self-aware enough to understand or manage her emotions.
Rachel ends the book by saying that she intends for her 300+ pages of relating her horrific dumpster fire relationship to empower someone else who went through this same experience. Good grief. There's nothing empowering about reading someone else's trauma. And make no mistake: this book is fucking traumatic.
Please do not read this book expecting empowerment. All it did was make me feel unsettled and distressed. Also some moments of secondhand embarrassment when Rachel did things like use phrases like "sperm competition," an Actual Phrase she used to describe male partners she dated who weren't Adam. Classy! Let's reduce humans to body fluids! Oh my god.
I'm so tired of books, both fictional and nonfiction, that portray all variations of nonmonogamous and nontraditional relationships as inherently dysfunctional, destined not to work, replete with unavoidable drama, peopled by manipulative and pathological abusers, and riddled with fucked-up power and gender dynamics. It's one-sided and it sucks.
Ugh to this book. I hated it.
"Adam" is manipulative and abusive, with red flags galore abounding from his first appearance. Rachel is gullible, easily manipulated, emotionally immature, and definitely should not have been in a nonmonogamous relationship, which requires a level of self-awareness she just did not possess. But surprise! Adam basically steamrolled her into it! The lesson here is not to let yourself be pushed into decisions by someone who is good in bed. Also not to move in with someone after a month of dating them. I've taken longer to consider whether to purchase certain articles of clothes and furniture than that, FFS.
At one point Rachel literally creates a list of Adam's red flag behaviors. Then convinces herself to ignore them and stay with him. GOOD IDEA. 🤦🏻♀️
He also sexually and physically assaults her, on separate occasions, denies doing either, gaslights her, and later in the book Rachel says she doesn't want people to think he's a bad person.
Sorry. He's a bad person.
Rachel is no picnic either. She doesn't deserve Adam's horrific treatment, but she also continually is jealous when he dates other people and doesn't want him to do it, yet expects to be able to date other people herself. It's confusing and as I mentioned above, she's not self-aware enough to understand or manage her emotions.
Rachel ends the book by saying that she intends for her 300+ pages of relating her horrific dumpster fire relationship to empower someone else who went through this same experience. Good grief. There's nothing empowering about reading someone else's trauma. And make no mistake: this book is fucking traumatic.
Please do not read this book expecting empowerment. All it did was make me feel unsettled and distressed. Also some moments of secondhand embarrassment when Rachel did things like use phrases like "sperm competition," an Actual Phrase she used to describe male partners she dated who weren't Adam. Classy! Let's reduce humans to body fluids! Oh my god.
I'm so tired of books, both fictional and nonfiction, that portray all variations of nonmonogamous and nontraditional relationships as inherently dysfunctional, destined not to work, replete with unavoidable drama, peopled by manipulative and pathological abusers, and riddled with fucked-up power and gender dynamics. It's one-sided and it sucks.
Ugh to this book. I hated it.
February 1, 2022
Having been happily married, monogamously, for 20+ years, I was intrigued by this memoir because the concept of “the lifestyle” is so antithetical to my desires. I’m certainly not prudish – to each their own – but I know I could never overcome my jealousy of knowing my partner was with another person romantically. How is it possible to be liberal enough, even aloof enough, to be secure in an open relationship?
At the risk of sounding contradictory, I appreciated her use of external sources to support her rationalizations, but simultaneously found the psychology at times over the top. Rachel was a broken person while she was with Adam. It was often painful to read. Rachel’s words often became self-indulgent, losing focus with glib psychoanalysis, but then she would come back to center and introduce the reader to a new idea. I found myself more than once staring wide-eyed at her words thinking, “That’s exactly how I felt with [gaslighting crazy ex] . . .”
Rachel Krantz is aware of how her situation with Adam is not universally applicable. At times salacious, at times brutal, this memoir strikes at the heart of the human condition, the craving for security and desire to be cherished. People fulfill that need in different ways, and Rachel pretty much explores them all. It all boils down to self-esteem, empowerment, and self-awareness. It’s not really about sex at all.
Rachel’s book is brave and candid, and she trusts her reader. I’m grateful she shared her story with me.
Many thanks to Netgalley and Harmony for this advance copy.
At the risk of sounding contradictory, I appreciated her use of external sources to support her rationalizations, but simultaneously found the psychology at times over the top. Rachel was a broken person while she was with Adam. It was often painful to read. Rachel’s words often became self-indulgent, losing focus with glib psychoanalysis, but then she would come back to center and introduce the reader to a new idea. I found myself more than once staring wide-eyed at her words thinking, “That’s exactly how I felt with [gaslighting crazy ex] . . .”
Rachel Krantz is aware of how her situation with Adam is not universally applicable. At times salacious, at times brutal, this memoir strikes at the heart of the human condition, the craving for security and desire to be cherished. People fulfill that need in different ways, and Rachel pretty much explores them all. It all boils down to self-esteem, empowerment, and self-awareness. It’s not really about sex at all.
Rachel’s book is brave and candid, and she trusts her reader. I’m grateful she shared her story with me.
Many thanks to Netgalley and Harmony for this advance copy.
October 10, 2022
Now that's exactly the kind of real-life story everyone needs to read.
January 25, 2023
After taking time to really sit with it, I had to return for a well-deserved review of ��Open”, which sits firmly at the top of my 2022 list of “books that make you go ‘oof’”.
From a male reading perspective, “Open” strikes fear and almost becomes a parable of the perils of engaging in alternative relationship dynamics from a place of emotional immaturity, ego, and avoidance. From the reading perspective of anyone with experience engaging with men within a casual dynamic, “Open” is filled with a unique validation of hurt and dissatisfaction, that succeeds through Krantz’s ardent commitment to self-reflection and radical honesty in processing and retelling both sexually explicit and emotionally complex details, for example:
“I knew my way of consistently engaging with Liam was a way of confirming my unworthiness, my suspicions of my fundamental unlovability and needy repulsiveness, even. Chatting with him was like snapping a rubber band on my wrist. He took too long to respond and obviously considered me much less, perhaps not even at all. I was one of several women, I assumed. Yes, our entire dynamic was increasingly humiliating, but increasingly humiliating was my new normal.”
Or
“Now that I was an openly non-monogamous woman, the men I would date treated me in ways I was lucky enough to mostly avoid before . . . . But for me, the worst insult would prove emotional. The way in which I was already considered “spoken for” and therefore somehow immune to attachment. The way it was assumed that I wouldn’t catch feelings, or want to be loved and treated with the usual care. After a decade of being considered girlfriend material, I was now experiencing what it is to be treated by men as if I was little more than an amusing pit stop on the highway to arriving at respectable woman town. That it was assumed casual sex was all I was available for or wanted was frustrating and hurtful to put it mildly.”
This characterization is, inevitably, overly reductive and does not give enough credit to the breadth of research and contemplation that shapes Rachel’s broader characterizations of her experiences with non monogamy, but the role of men like Adam and Liam is as domineering over the novel as in the relationships themselves. Yet, despite her frank characterizations of clear red flags and misbehavior, Rachel’s recounting is filled with a sense of compassion and understanding, without creating excuse or forgiveness, and it is this approach that allows the contemplative reader to understand the emotional ecosystem from a hundred foot view, allowing each dynamic to be seen for what it is.
That being said, despite genuinely trying to feature the full spectrum of her experience as a queer woman, my main critique with “Open” is that the lessons to be learned from her queer experience is buried by the bad behavior of men and more shocking reading material generated by that bad behavior. That being said, Rachel owns that the novel can offer no more than her experience and her unique social perspective. For what “Open” lacks in diversity of experience, it gives back in raw vulnerability which may inspire the voices of others to fill the gaps.
From a male reading perspective, “Open” strikes fear and almost becomes a parable of the perils of engaging in alternative relationship dynamics from a place of emotional immaturity, ego, and avoidance. From the reading perspective of anyone with experience engaging with men within a casual dynamic, “Open” is filled with a unique validation of hurt and dissatisfaction, that succeeds through Krantz’s ardent commitment to self-reflection and radical honesty in processing and retelling both sexually explicit and emotionally complex details, for example:
“I knew my way of consistently engaging with Liam was a way of confirming my unworthiness, my suspicions of my fundamental unlovability and needy repulsiveness, even. Chatting with him was like snapping a rubber band on my wrist. He took too long to respond and obviously considered me much less, perhaps not even at all. I was one of several women, I assumed. Yes, our entire dynamic was increasingly humiliating, but increasingly humiliating was my new normal.”
Or
“Now that I was an openly non-monogamous woman, the men I would date treated me in ways I was lucky enough to mostly avoid before . . . . But for me, the worst insult would prove emotional. The way in which I was already considered “spoken for” and therefore somehow immune to attachment. The way it was assumed that I wouldn’t catch feelings, or want to be loved and treated with the usual care. After a decade of being considered girlfriend material, I was now experiencing what it is to be treated by men as if I was little more than an amusing pit stop on the highway to arriving at respectable woman town. That it was assumed casual sex was all I was available for or wanted was frustrating and hurtful to put it mildly.”
This characterization is, inevitably, overly reductive and does not give enough credit to the breadth of research and contemplation that shapes Rachel’s broader characterizations of her experiences with non monogamy, but the role of men like Adam and Liam is as domineering over the novel as in the relationships themselves. Yet, despite her frank characterizations of clear red flags and misbehavior, Rachel’s recounting is filled with a sense of compassion and understanding, without creating excuse or forgiveness, and it is this approach that allows the contemplative reader to understand the emotional ecosystem from a hundred foot view, allowing each dynamic to be seen for what it is.
That being said, despite genuinely trying to feature the full spectrum of her experience as a queer woman, my main critique with “Open” is that the lessons to be learned from her queer experience is buried by the bad behavior of men and more shocking reading material generated by that bad behavior. That being said, Rachel owns that the novel can offer no more than her experience and her unique social perspective. For what “Open” lacks in diversity of experience, it gives back in raw vulnerability which may inspire the voices of others to fill the gaps.
January 3, 2022
Thanks to Netgalley and Crown Publishing for this e-arc.
I don't even know where to start.
This book was simply brilliant!
What I think this book does that no other poly book does is bring down non monogamy through the lens of power dynamics specifically focusing on race, gender, and kink.
Rachel Krantz lays herself bare for us to see her and follow along on her journey. We are there for each messy, unpredictable step and though its hard to read sometimes (trigger warnings for gaslight and relationship abuse) it is also brutally honest in a way that makes this book so engaging to read.
I am delighted that this book can be added as a resource for those practicing nonmonogamy and polyamory and I am really excited to see the reception and conversations that come out about this book.
I don't even know where to start.
This book was simply brilliant!
What I think this book does that no other poly book does is bring down non monogamy through the lens of power dynamics specifically focusing on race, gender, and kink.
Rachel Krantz lays herself bare for us to see her and follow along on her journey. We are there for each messy, unpredictable step and though its hard to read sometimes (trigger warnings for gaslight and relationship abuse) it is also brutally honest in a way that makes this book so engaging to read.
I am delighted that this book can be added as a resource for those practicing nonmonogamy and polyamory and I am really excited to see the reception and conversations that come out about this book.
December 31, 2021
Rachel Krantz offers a no-holds-barred view into the life of an open relationship. She and her boyfriend have agreed to see others, they attend parties for this purpose, and participate in travels with like-minded people. This isn’t written for you to judge, it’s written to give a glimpse into a world most of us don't understand. I still don’t understand it myself, but I appreciate Rachel’s openness and honesty. At times I feel a bit sorry or lonely for her, but again, I think that’s me struggling to understand something that’s different.
The writing style is blunt and clear, the stories are interesting, and her ability to share this private side of her life is captivating.
Sincere thanks to Rodale Inc. Harmony for an ARC in exchange for my honest review. The publishing date is January 25, 2022.
The writing style is blunt and clear, the stories are interesting, and her ability to share this private side of her life is captivating.
Sincere thanks to Rodale Inc. Harmony for an ARC in exchange for my honest review. The publishing date is January 25, 2022.
August 3, 2023
tw: assault, gaslighting, abusive partners- this book was a messy and raw depiction of a woman’s first experience with non monogamy - it had me laughing, thinking, grossed out by men, and digging into some of my own insecurities. written in a similar style to Milk Fed i love these critical memoir stories with a bit of humor.
March 22, 2025
This book was not about “love, liberation, and non-monogamy.” 99% of it was about a toxic and abusive relationship, with each person triggering the other into more toxic behavior. The author seemed to lack emotional maturity and self-awareness, because there were many times she would intentionally trigger her partner’s buttons or do something to piss him off to get a reaction out of him, then she was upset when he overreacted. Some of the author’s friends even told her that if she kept seeing this guy, they would have to end their friendship because the drama was just too much. I felt the same way, and I was the reader! The drama got so tiring. It was a relationship where each person seemed to lack emotional maturity and a clear sense of boundaries.
The author’s repetitive calling out of her white privilege throughout the book also got tiresome. A calling out at the beginning of the book (“I’m writing this memoir from my perspective as a white woman…) would have sufficed. The rest was excessive and struck me as virtue signaling.
I understand the author’s point about the value of portraying messy non-monogamous relationships - they can be as messy as any other relationship. However, the primary relationship in this book is defined not by its non-monogamy, but by toxic and abusive behavior that’s more about fundamental relationship challenges. So I think it’s deceptive to call this a book about non-monogamy when it was really about a toxic relationship, with great examples of what gaslighting, codependency, control, emotional immaturity, and nonconsent looks like. Instead of “liberation,” I felt oppressed while reading this book.
The author’s repetitive calling out of her white privilege throughout the book also got tiresome. A calling out at the beginning of the book (“I’m writing this memoir from my perspective as a white woman…) would have sufficed. The rest was excessive and struck me as virtue signaling.
I understand the author’s point about the value of portraying messy non-monogamous relationships - they can be as messy as any other relationship. However, the primary relationship in this book is defined not by its non-monogamy, but by toxic and abusive behavior that’s more about fundamental relationship challenges. So I think it’s deceptive to call this a book about non-monogamy when it was really about a toxic relationship, with great examples of what gaslighting, codependency, control, emotional immaturity, and nonconsent looks like. Instead of “liberation,” I felt oppressed while reading this book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 8, 2022
Recently finished this memoir and ohhhhh my oh my, I was borderline nail biting to get through it. I wanted Rachel to find what she was seeking so badly. And I really enjoyed the footnotes. I know that sounds weird to say, but I haven’t enjoyed footnotes this much since reading Stiff. I love a good memoir, especially about a complex topic, and non-monogamy can be complex, especially in this scenario. Remember all—many relationships end happily, and many end unhappily, no matter the structure. I appreciate Krantz’s open and transparent approach to the topic, and laying herself bare to explore it openly (see what I did there?). Definitely recommend (for adult audiences—there’s a TW in the forward for goodness sakes).
March 17, 2023
This book is kind of a bummer, just because it deals with so many heavy topics. TW for abuse, gaslighting, etc. It’s important to go into it understanding it’s a *memoir* and isn’t representative of a group of people’s lifestyle, which she’s very clear about. Overall I found it interesting to hear her perspective on what she was looking for in her relationships but a lot of it ended up being her wrestling with what an abusive relationship can look like. A very open and honest read that must have been really difficult to write. 3.5 stars
August 24, 2022
I appreciate that Rachel shared this story - it cannot have been easy to do this, for reasons logistical, emotional, relational. It helped me think about my own relationship to many of the cultural and relationship shifts that are happening around all of us right now, and more about what I want, expect and deserve in my future relationships. Though I don't see it as a memoir 'about polyamory', but rather one about a woman experiencing an incredibly difficult and painful relationship, and how it affected how she saw and understood herself as she worked through it. (A small part of me is also grateful to read a book that makes room for the possibility that practicing non-monogamy is not about being more evolved than those who don't; rather it's a choice that works for some and not others. And neither choice is more 'evolved'.)
I found her ability to endure what seemed like near constant emotional distress, anxiety and pain - for years at a time - impressive, but it also made terribly sad for her. I kept wondering 'this seems so incredibly painful, why is she doing this to herself?' I found her writing style to be super easy to read, even when what was written felt like a constant gut punch. I couldn't help but wonder if a) there was *a lot* about Adam's behavior that was either left out highly edited to protect him and b) if the ending wasn't a little too perfectly wrapped up in a bow. And that's not to take away from any of the well-deserved, and HARD-earned peace, contentment and happiness that she seems to have found and that I hope she has and continues to have.
I found her ability to endure what seemed like near constant emotional distress, anxiety and pain - for years at a time - impressive, but it also made terribly sad for her. I kept wondering 'this seems so incredibly painful, why is she doing this to herself?' I found her writing style to be super easy to read, even when what was written felt like a constant gut punch. I couldn't help but wonder if a) there was *a lot* about Adam's behavior that was either left out highly edited to protect him and b) if the ending wasn't a little too perfectly wrapped up in a bow. And that's not to take away from any of the well-deserved, and HARD-earned peace, contentment and happiness that she seems to have found and that I hope she has and continues to have.
March 29, 2022
This is a really tough one to review. I don't think it's one for people to read if they're curious about non-monogamy/polyamory. It's more if you're interested in Rachel Krantz's life (of course, hence, "memoir"). It was an interesting experience and enlightening in many ways. However, most of those don't show up until later. I'd be very proud and am proud as a reader, but most reasons are not for the non-monogamy aspect, although those do apply as well.
Krantz is an engaging writer. This is not something I would normally pick up, or even be so inclined to read once I realized exactly what I was reading (yes, I wasn't paying full attention when I got it from the library - I'll be the first to admit this).
There were so many parts that were soo hard to read. Not only empathetically but for my own past experiences. It made me glad of how this ended. I really liked how the meditation was added here as well (although I'm not one to do so myself). I could feel how helpful it was overall. It was very peaceful.
In summation: Don't pick this up if you're new/want t0 get more information about non-monogamy/polyamory itself. But if you want to read someone's life journey with some non-monogamy/polyamory as a focus, this is an interesting read.
Krantz is an engaging writer. This is not something I would normally pick up, or even be so inclined to read once I realized exactly what I was reading (yes, I wasn't paying full attention when I got it from the library - I'll be the first to admit this).
There were so many parts that were soo hard to read. Not only empathetically but for my own past experiences. It made me glad of how this ended. I really liked how the meditation was added here as well (although I'm not one to do so myself). I could feel how helpful it was overall. It was very peaceful.
In summation: Don't pick this up if you're new/want t0 get more information about non-monogamy/polyamory itself. But if you want to read someone's life journey with some non-monogamy/polyamory as a focus, this is an interesting read.
July 19, 2024
Most perspectives on polyamory are strictly black and white, for or against, without leaving much room for nuanced discussion. This book is an honest look at both the positives and negatives that can come from the lifestyle. It’s just a single relationship experience, and the toxicity in that relationship shouldn’t be seen as a problem for polyamory more generally, but some of the key themes are here - freedom, love, jealousy, insecurity, sex, control, communication. She explores the best and worst of herself, her partners, and her experiences in a way that adds a personal dimension. In the end, what is made most clear is that all relationships can be good or bad, but the polyamory-monogamy dimension shouldn't be seen as what defines this.
January 12, 2022
My first non-fiction book of the new year! This review will be short (with more coming!).
It's been a day but I'm still proccessing the novel. I read it non-stop since I picked it up on Monday. Multiple pages are bookmarked and my inital thoughts are scribbled all over the back page. I chased my roommates around our small college house, regailing them in passages I thought were expecially relevant to them.
The book is approachable, inclusive, and beautiful. The proccess of reading it is sitting down with an expert intervewer and being made to slowly pull apart all my tightly knotted thoughts and anxieties. Absolutely reccomend.
It's been a day but I'm still proccessing the novel. I read it non-stop since I picked it up on Monday. Multiple pages are bookmarked and my inital thoughts are scribbled all over the back page. I chased my roommates around our small college house, regailing them in passages I thought were expecially relevant to them.
The book is approachable, inclusive, and beautiful. The proccess of reading it is sitting down with an expert intervewer and being made to slowly pull apart all my tightly knotted thoughts and anxieties. Absolutely reccomend.
November 13, 2022
I am lost after reading this book. I have been trying to read up a bit more on polyamory, especially after an editor commissioned me to write a piece on polyamorous relationships. This seemed like a promising introduction to this world, but the narrative structure, journalistic and factual put me off.
And then, the whole jargonry of it - I was confused. I wish there had been a more linear progression of the unraveling of the relationship between Rachel and ‘Adam,’ but with all the BDSM, swinging, sex parties going on, I couldn’t get around to focusing on that relationship.
My head is still spinning.
And then, the whole jargonry of it - I was confused. I wish there had been a more linear progression of the unraveling of the relationship between Rachel and ‘Adam,’ but with all the BDSM, swinging, sex parties going on, I couldn’t get around to focusing on that relationship.
My head is still spinning.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 314 reviews