What do you think?
Rate this book
The Effect of Living Backwards
Does Alice really hate her sister, or is that love? Was she really enrolled in grad school, or was that an elaborate hoax? Is this really a hijacking, or is it merely the effect of living backwards?
350 pages, Paperback
First published June 23, 2003
26 people are currently reading
602 people want to read
About the author
Heidi Julavits
119 books345 followersHeidi Suzanne Julavits is an American author and co-editor of The Believer magazine. She has been published in The Best Creative Nonfiction Vol. 2, Esquire, Story, Zoetrope All-Story, and McSweeney's Quarterly. Her novels include The Mineral Palace (2000), The Effect of Living Backwards (2003) and The Uses of Enchantment (2006) and The Vanishers (2012).
She was born and grew up in Portland, Maine, before attending Dartmouth College. She later went on to earn an MFA from Columbia University.
She wrote the article "Rejoice! Believe! Be Strong and Read Hard!" (subtitled: "A Call For A New Era Of Experimentation, and a Book Culture That Will Support It") in the debut issue of The Believer, a publication which attempts to avoid snarkiness and "give people and books the benefit of the doubt."
In 2005, she told the New York Times culture writer A.O. Scott how'd she decided on The Believer's tone: "I really saw 'the end of the book' as originating in the way books are talked about now in our culture and especially in the most esteemed venues for book criticism. It seemed as though their irrelevance was a foregone conclusion, and we were just practicing this quaint exercise of pretending something mattered when of course everyone knew it didn't." She added her own aim as book critic would be "to endow something with importance, by treating it as an emotional experience."
She has also written short stories, such as "The Santosbrazzi Killer", which was published in Harper's Magazine.
Julavitz currently lives in Maine and Manhattan with her husband, the writer Ben Marcus, and their children
She was born and grew up in Portland, Maine, before attending Dartmouth College. She later went on to earn an MFA from Columbia University.
She wrote the article "Rejoice! Believe! Be Strong and Read Hard!" (subtitled: "A Call For A New Era Of Experimentation, and a Book Culture That Will Support It") in the debut issue of The Believer, a publication which attempts to avoid snarkiness and "give people and books the benefit of the doubt."
In 2005, she told the New York Times culture writer A.O. Scott how'd she decided on The Believer's tone: "I really saw 'the end of the book' as originating in the way books are talked about now in our culture and especially in the most esteemed venues for book criticism. It seemed as though their irrelevance was a foregone conclusion, and we were just practicing this quaint exercise of pretending something mattered when of course everyone knew it didn't." She added her own aim as book critic would be "to endow something with importance, by treating it as an emotional experience."
She has also written short stories, such as "The Santosbrazzi Killer", which was published in Harper's Magazine.
Julavitz currently lives in Maine and Manhattan with her husband, the writer Ben Marcus, and their children
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 190 reviews
October 26, 2007
This was a profoundly irritating book. I'd been dimly aware of Heidi Julavits, as one of what I loosely think of as the "Eggers coterie". Co-editor of "The Believer", the first issue of which contains a 'manifesto' written by Julavits, the thrust of which is a plea for reviewers to be kinder ('less snarky') to new and experimental fiction.
All of which should be irrelevant - after all, one should be able to judge her book on its own merits. My judgement - clever, readable, but ultimately a sterile exercise in cleverness with nothing at its core. The reason I found the book so irritating is that, having read through the 350 or so pages, it led to nothing at all. There is no there there in this over-clever, emotionally empty, confusing dogs breakfast of a book. As a story, it doesn't work - the plot defies credibility in so many ways it's an embarrassment. If it's meant as some kind of parable or allegory, it can't be said to work either, as one has no idea at the end what bizarre point Julavits might be trying to make.
Not trying to be snarky here, Ms Julavits, but I see no reason to exempt your efforts from the normal standards one would apply to any piece of fiction. And, in my book, there is no level on which your book can be considered anything but a dismal, sterile failure.
All of which should be irrelevant - after all, one should be able to judge her book on its own merits. My judgement - clever, readable, but ultimately a sterile exercise in cleverness with nothing at its core. The reason I found the book so irritating is that, having read through the 350 or so pages, it led to nothing at all. There is no there there in this over-clever, emotionally empty, confusing dogs breakfast of a book. As a story, it doesn't work - the plot defies credibility in so many ways it's an embarrassment. If it's meant as some kind of parable or allegory, it can't be said to work either, as one has no idea at the end what bizarre point Julavits might be trying to make.
Not trying to be snarky here, Ms Julavits, but I see no reason to exempt your efforts from the normal standards one would apply to any piece of fiction. And, in my book, there is no level on which your book can be considered anything but a dismal, sterile failure.
June 26, 2013
I'm not sure why I play these weird games with myself. I had triumphantly gotten my most-highly-anticipated book of the moment, Swamplandia!, right before I left for a week-long beach vacation. But I wouldn't let myself start it before I got on the plane, and so I had a gap of like a day, and so I had to pick up something else to read first. Why did I pick such a long book? Why did I pick such a long, strange book? This one wound up taking up my entire damn vacation (I admit, there was a lot less reading-on-the-beach time than I'd anticipated, but still). In a way it wasn't so bad, because this book was awfully engaging, and of course it turned out later that Swamplandia! was a huge fucking disappointment, but still. But still! Stupid, stupid.
Shall I say something about this book? It's weird as hell. Heidi Julavits has stuff to do with McSweeney's, so I was expecting something maybe a little twee-er, maybe a little quirkier, maybe a little more wide-eyed and upbeat. This book is instead really really twisty, in that backwards-forwards way (I should have been tipped off to this by the title) where it starts glancingly in the present, then shoots way back into the past, then slowly boomerangs itself back and forth and back and forth until the past catches up and we're all in the present. But the "present" parts never really got fully explained, and I was either too sun-blind or too stupid to quite connect all the necessary dots, so I finished it feeling a bit unsettled.
But. It was still very polished, very engaging. Great characters and dialogue. Really evocative settings and atmospheres. Tons and tons (maybe too much?) of internal struggle, where things are explained and re-explained, looked at over and over by a very introspective and very slightly suspect narrator. Heidi is super smart, obvs. I'll definitely read more of her. But probably not on vacation.
Shall I say something about this book? It's weird as hell. Heidi Julavits has stuff to do with McSweeney's, so I was expecting something maybe a little twee-er, maybe a little quirkier, maybe a little more wide-eyed and upbeat. This book is instead really really twisty, in that backwards-forwards way (I should have been tipped off to this by the title) where it starts glancingly in the present, then shoots way back into the past, then slowly boomerangs itself back and forth and back and forth until the past catches up and we're all in the present. But the "present" parts never really got fully explained, and I was either too sun-blind or too stupid to quite connect all the necessary dots, so I finished it feeling a bit unsettled.
But. It was still very polished, very engaging. Great characters and dialogue. Really evocative settings and atmospheres. Tons and tons (maybe too much?) of internal struggle, where things are explained and re-explained, looked at over and over by a very introspective and very slightly suspect narrator. Heidi is super smart, obvs. I'll definitely read more of her. But probably not on vacation.
July 23, 2009
For awhile, I couldn't make up my mind about Heidi Julavits. I read The Mineral Palace forever ago, when I was too young to bother having a particularly reasoned opinion about books (and anyway I don't remember it), and I read The Uses of Enchantment last year and really liked it, but there was something about the literary ethos to which she belongs that I couldn't make up my mind about. But now, after reading The Effect of Living Backwards, my mind is definitely made up: Heidi Julavits is fucking brilliant. I devoured this book, and the only reason it took me more than two days to read is because I made the sad mistake of leaving it at work over the weekend. First of all, the plot is incredibly well-executed, and, coupled with Julavits's sharp, often funny prose, that would have been enough. But throw in the novel's protagonist, Alice, a complex, sarcastic, cynical cipher of a woman, and her conflicted but deeply real relationship with her sister Edith, and you have a book that could not have been any better. Plus, for all that the characters in this novel exhaustively discuss their selves and motives, the reader can never really be sure what is true and what isn't, and the effect is a layered, moving, and often hilarious puzzle. I can't recommend this book highly enough.
March 13, 2021
Okay. I owned this book, and I have for a long time. So now I finally read it. But why?
The premise is engaging, so I guess I wanted to give it a chance. Clearly she’s a good writer, and she’s clever. But. But!
This book was incredibly annoying. Nothing in the book could be normal or plain. A person can’t just have died. No, she was murdered by crazed teenage girls from a neighboring boarding school. Or pierced by a bamboo tent stake while on a bus driven by an epileptic. A person can’t get a box of chocolates, it has to be ant infested. A child can’t have a relationship with another child that resembles friendship, she has to dream up an elaborate ritual with a red rubber ball.
The whole thing was just too crazy and surreal. The whole book held me at an arm’s length shouting “LOOK AT HOW CRAZY I AM!”
It contained just the most annoying aspects of self-aware fiction without any of the rewards. I cared about exactly two of the characters and it was not any of the characters who dominated the novel. No, it was a side character and her daughter, who appear in maybe ten percent of the book.
I get it, life is a series of seemingly random events that we can connect because we are smart. Everyone carries shame, we’re all connected, we’re all slightly crazy.
I honestly didn’t care about any of this novel, I read it out of guilt but this book has now absolved me of all the “owned but unread” books in the house. If I haven’t read it yet, maybe it’s because the book is just bad?
From now on, if I don’t love it by page five, I’m out!
The premise is engaging, so I guess I wanted to give it a chance. Clearly she’s a good writer, and she’s clever. But. But!
This book was incredibly annoying. Nothing in the book could be normal or plain. A person can’t just have died. No, she was murdered by crazed teenage girls from a neighboring boarding school. Or pierced by a bamboo tent stake while on a bus driven by an epileptic. A person can’t get a box of chocolates, it has to be ant infested. A child can’t have a relationship with another child that resembles friendship, she has to dream up an elaborate ritual with a red rubber ball.
The whole thing was just too crazy and surreal. The whole book held me at an arm’s length shouting “LOOK AT HOW CRAZY I AM!”
It contained just the most annoying aspects of self-aware fiction without any of the rewards. I cared about exactly two of the characters and it was not any of the characters who dominated the novel. No, it was a side character and her daughter, who appear in maybe ten percent of the book.
I get it, life is a series of seemingly random events that we can connect because we are smart. Everyone carries shame, we’re all connected, we’re all slightly crazy.
I honestly didn’t care about any of this novel, I read it out of guilt but this book has now absolved me of all the “owned but unread” books in the house. If I haven’t read it yet, maybe it’s because the book is just bad?
From now on, if I don’t love it by page five, I’m out!
March 9, 2012
Siblings Alice and Edith are en route to Edith's wedding, from Casablanca to Melilla. Along the way, they converse about their thoughts and feelings, reminisce about their childhoods...and then, out of nowhere, it appears that the plane has been hijacked.
The players/perpetrators are Bruno, Stephen, Tom...and possibly unknown others.
But this story is not at all what it seems. In the opening paragraphs, Alice, telling this story as the first-person narrator, is at an Institute where role-playing and anti-terrorist games are the order of the day. In a Post 9/11 world, referred to throughout this book as The Big Terrible, the anti-terrorism advocates have turned to in-fighting, dividing into the Insurgents and the Brain Worms.
Thus, on Alice's flight to Melilla, there is an aura of game-playing all around the participants: Unwilling participants who are subjected to numerous experiences which, in retrospect, may not have actually been life-threatening.
Themes of rivalry (including sibling rivalry) appear throughout the story, as do themes of questioning reality and truth. Which stories does the reader believe? Who is doing what and why? Did events unfold as we thought, or is it all the "effect of living backwards"?
In a conversation between Edith and Alice, we glean a bit more about the "experiment":
"Talk about controlled experiment."
"Or maybe we're just the controlled test audience," Edith said. "In the not too distant future—depending on our valuable feedback—people will be signing up for this sort of experiment willingly. People will pay to be hijacked, so that they can attain some transcendent, triumphant sense of resignation about their slogging, awful lives. The motto could be: No matter how far you go, there you are again. You know. Familiarity. Remember what Dad said about familiarity."
"It breeds intent."
"He said people don't want new things. People don't want to be surprised."
As we ponder the themes, the ethical questions posed throughout "The Effect of Living Backwards," we also hear the narratives of several "passengers" on the "hijacked flight." But their versions of truth are just that...their versions. Or so we come to believe.
But what is the true story here? And how do Alice and Edith fare? What will ultimately happen, and how will each of them resolve the issues?
As a reader, I felt confused most of the time, intrigued some of the time, and quite happy to finally finish this "experiment." Boldly contrived and brilliantly articulated, the author shows the reader her talent for philosophical issues and experiments. But I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone who enjoys simply reading and understanding a story. And while I admired the effort, I didn't enjoy it. Therefore, three stars.
The players/perpetrators are Bruno, Stephen, Tom...and possibly unknown others.
But this story is not at all what it seems. In the opening paragraphs, Alice, telling this story as the first-person narrator, is at an Institute where role-playing and anti-terrorist games are the order of the day. In a Post 9/11 world, referred to throughout this book as The Big Terrible, the anti-terrorism advocates have turned to in-fighting, dividing into the Insurgents and the Brain Worms.
Thus, on Alice's flight to Melilla, there is an aura of game-playing all around the participants: Unwilling participants who are subjected to numerous experiences which, in retrospect, may not have actually been life-threatening.
Themes of rivalry (including sibling rivalry) appear throughout the story, as do themes of questioning reality and truth. Which stories does the reader believe? Who is doing what and why? Did events unfold as we thought, or is it all the "effect of living backwards"?
In a conversation between Edith and Alice, we glean a bit more about the "experiment":
"Talk about controlled experiment."
"Or maybe we're just the controlled test audience," Edith said. "In the not too distant future—depending on our valuable feedback—people will be signing up for this sort of experiment willingly. People will pay to be hijacked, so that they can attain some transcendent, triumphant sense of resignation about their slogging, awful lives. The motto could be: No matter how far you go, there you are again. You know. Familiarity. Remember what Dad said about familiarity."
"It breeds intent."
"He said people don't want new things. People don't want to be surprised."
As we ponder the themes, the ethical questions posed throughout "The Effect of Living Backwards," we also hear the narratives of several "passengers" on the "hijacked flight." But their versions of truth are just that...their versions. Or so we come to believe.
But what is the true story here? And how do Alice and Edith fare? What will ultimately happen, and how will each of them resolve the issues?
As a reader, I felt confused most of the time, intrigued some of the time, and quite happy to finally finish this "experiment." Boldly contrived and brilliantly articulated, the author shows the reader her talent for philosophical issues and experiments. But I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone who enjoys simply reading and understanding a story. And while I admired the effort, I didn't enjoy it. Therefore, three stars.
December 11, 2007
"Where do you get these expectations? The movies?"
I stared at her as if to reply, Where else does one get one's ideas about anything?
* * *
I realized that I was not a creative woman, merely a strangely raised woman, and that exposing one's children to exceptional situations will not protect them from mediocrity.
* * *
Waitressing appeared to be a far more noble way to serve humanity. People tend to know what they want, and it's nice to just give it to them sometimes, without telling them they're wrong for wanting it.
* * *
"Survival is a game, Alice. People who play it well persist unscathed. People who play it poorly fall prey to actions they think they're being forced into, but to which they succumb of their own volition."
* * *
Nothing hurts more than an apt description.
* * *
"Plain girls get fucked. They get fucked especially, because men are fond of convincing themselves that they can philanthropize with their dicks."
* * *
"I decided, from that day forward, to make everything that happened to me appear as if I'd engineered it. Every heartbreak, every failure. I dated wounded people, and when they wounded me back, it was all because I'd orchestrated it to happen that way. There was no longer any need to feel ashamed about anything. I had eradicated shame."
* * *
The problem is that people your age believe change to be the act of trading one static arrangement for another. That is not change. That is merely trading one static arrangement for another.
I stared at her as if to reply, Where else does one get one's ideas about anything?
* * *
I realized that I was not a creative woman, merely a strangely raised woman, and that exposing one's children to exceptional situations will not protect them from mediocrity.
* * *
Waitressing appeared to be a far more noble way to serve humanity. People tend to know what they want, and it's nice to just give it to them sometimes, without telling them they're wrong for wanting it.
* * *
"Survival is a game, Alice. People who play it well persist unscathed. People who play it poorly fall prey to actions they think they're being forced into, but to which they succumb of their own volition."
* * *
Nothing hurts more than an apt description.
* * *
"Plain girls get fucked. They get fucked especially, because men are fond of convincing themselves that they can philanthropize with their dicks."
* * *
"I decided, from that day forward, to make everything that happened to me appear as if I'd engineered it. Every heartbreak, every failure. I dated wounded people, and when they wounded me back, it was all because I'd orchestrated it to happen that way. There was no longer any need to feel ashamed about anything. I had eradicated shame."
* * *
The problem is that people your age believe change to be the act of trading one static arrangement for another. That is not change. That is merely trading one static arrangement for another.
August 20, 2014
Unfortunately, I read this book a while ago, so I'm not reviewing it while it's fresh in my mind. But it's gotten such bad reviews here that I feel almost an indignant duty to praise it.
I'll admit, it's not for everyone. It's a postmodern work, and a lot of people don't like the postmodern movement. What Julavits does in this book is thoroughly confuse you until you don't know who's good, who's bad, what the hell is going on, and if it all even happened. It's a strange journey through a plane hijacking, but she blurs the lines between attackers and victims, good guys and bad guys. You start to wonder "Whose fault was that?" "What caused this?"
Part of the story takes place in your head, as you make determinations about what influenced what, who caused what, what people's intentions were. And it makes for, well, a crappy story in the traditional sense. The characters and setting are not as clearly defined because clear definition leads you to draw certain conclusions. But in the non-traditional sense, it sucks you into the story in a way few books can.
I'll admit, it's not for everyone. It's a postmodern work, and a lot of people don't like the postmodern movement. What Julavits does in this book is thoroughly confuse you until you don't know who's good, who's bad, what the hell is going on, and if it all even happened. It's a strange journey through a plane hijacking, but she blurs the lines between attackers and victims, good guys and bad guys. You start to wonder "Whose fault was that?" "What caused this?"
Part of the story takes place in your head, as you make determinations about what influenced what, who caused what, what people's intentions were. And it makes for, well, a crappy story in the traditional sense. The characters and setting are not as clearly defined because clear definition leads you to draw certain conclusions. But in the non-traditional sense, it sucks you into the story in a way few books can.
June 16, 2009
I really wanted to read Julavits' "The Mineral Palace," but I live in a non-English-speaking country and have to read what I can get my hands on. Which was this book. Lots of bad reviews and complaints about it lowered my expectations. Perhaps that's why I was so pleasantly surprised with this book. Sibling rivalry is one of my favorite subjects, especially between two sisters, with only a year between them, and the older sister thinking she is beautiful and deserving, and the younger sister having to cope with that. This was a fact of life for me growing up, so the dynamics between the sisters, which seem so unrealistic to many readers, rang absolutely true to me. Sure, the fact that it was all set against a hijacking was kind of wacky, but wacky in an interesting way. Yes, it took concentration to follow this book, and yes, the sisters were both despicable in their own ways, but who isn't.
July 21, 2014
I finished it, but just barely. I really wanted to like this book, but midway through, it became a bit of a chore (not a challenge, though, just a chore.) I've read books where I was never quite sure what was going on, but could maintain the assumption that the author was smarter and craftier than me, but in this case, I feel like the author lost control of her characters and premise (BOTH very interesting mind you, which was what kept me reading) Now off to read other reviews to see how many DFW references there are, or if it was just me!
June 2, 2009
Account, by an unreliable narrator, of an airline highjacking and its aftermath—or perhaps not, as one of this book's key themes is appearance vs. reality. Overtones of Lewis Carroll and Vladimir Nabokov. Julavits creates excessively writerly prose, and depends too much on verbing nouns.
March 30, 2012
Like a cross between "The Magus" and TV's "LOST." This captivated me right from the start but I suspect it needs another read to fully appreciate the flipped-on-its-head plot.
April 27, 2017
3.3...I was pretty into this book --actually was super into this book-- until the halfway mark, at which point I just couldn't stay interested. Other folks might love it though. I've never read a book with a plot like this, and while I appreciated the sinister, twisted feel of the story (it reminded me a little of Palahniuk's Survivor--in a good way!), it was so unrealistic and far-fetched that eventually the novelty wore off and it felt annoying. I did finish it and don't regret reading it, but I didn't love it like I thought I would.
The book is organized largely by narrators, which seems to bother some people but I liked that component, the main narrator in particular--author does a great job with her voice. It also jumps around to different time periods, with lots of flashbacks and context even within the chapters, and that got a little old. I get that the point is to keep the reader guessing, piecing together what's happening, but for me at least, it was a bit overdone.
Overall, I wouldn't actively not recommend this book, but have a backup just in case.
The book is organized largely by narrators, which seems to bother some people but I liked that component, the main narrator in particular--author does a great job with her voice. It also jumps around to different time periods, with lots of flashbacks and context even within the chapters, and that got a little old. I get that the point is to keep the reader guessing, piecing together what's happening, but for me at least, it was a bit overdone.
Overall, I wouldn't actively not recommend this book, but have a backup just in case.
Read
April 25, 2022 ...my childhood experience at Camp Robansho, where my sister Edith and I were made to stand naked before the canoe shed so that our spines could be photographed and our posture analyzed by the camp physician, an agitated cricket of a man who stank of butterscotch drops and old tennis shoes…
What began as an interesting novel quickly turned into a waste of my valuable time. I didn't get more than twenty pages in when I decided I had had enough. In my opinion, a rather disappointing effort by the editor of a respected West Coast literary magazine.
What began as an interesting novel quickly turned into a waste of my valuable time. I didn't get more than twenty pages in when I decided I had had enough. In my opinion, a rather disappointing effort by the editor of a respected West Coast literary magazine.
September 27, 2024
Funny, witty, totally kooky, and enjoyable. The end takes an interesting, strange, hard to follow turn. But overall, the sisters relationship, the dialogue, and the humorous internal monologues won me over
January 21, 2025
I picked this book up having absolutely no idea what it was about, and despite the mediocre reviews, I absolutely enjoyed it!
Between the Shame Stories, hidden references to Alice & Wonderland, and the debate on what “truth” really is, this post-modern take on a life after 9/11 makes for an entertaining read.
Between the Shame Stories, hidden references to Alice & Wonderland, and the debate on what “truth” really is, this post-modern take on a life after 9/11 makes for an entertaining read.
July 27, 2015
So this book. So many mixed feelings.
The writing itself is fantastic. Julavits is extremely talented and that is obvious from this book. It definitely, even though a work of fiction, made me question everyday moments in my life and circumstances that come with it.
However the end threw me off. I didn't realize that it was something set up and that almost upset me....but again, it's a book.
I enjoyed the description of the hijacking way more than her institute stories. But again I think that was the writing.
Definitely not a book to just pick up and read, but a good one if you want a challenge for sure!
The writing itself is fantastic. Julavits is extremely talented and that is obvious from this book. It definitely, even though a work of fiction, made me question everyday moments in my life and circumstances that come with it.
However the end threw me off. I didn't realize that it was something set up and that almost upset me....but again, it's a book.
I enjoyed the description of the hijacking way more than her institute stories. But again I think that was the writing.
Definitely not a book to just pick up and read, but a good one if you want a challenge for sure!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 19, 2007
You know, I think that Julavits is a pretty talented writer, and I enjoyed this book enough that I picked up her next novel. That said, I found myself getting impatient with this book. The concept of the mock terrorists is wildly entertaining, but I started to become irritated with the narrator -- and I have a pretty high tolerance for pomo self-indulgence. I'm definitely curious to read more of Julavits' work, however.
May 8, 2021
This book had a profoundly interesting premise and approach, but it fell flat. I didn’t feel like it actually brought me anywhere; there was no “aha” moment. The characters were almost entirely unlikeable, and not only were key questions not answered, it wasn’t entirely clear what the key questions necessarily were.
March 9, 2011
Ugh, can I count this as read? It was so dreadful and slow I was distracted and day dreaming while reading and finally I dropped the book one day, lost the page. I never opened it again and donated to the local library. Don't waste your time, it sucked.
April 19, 2018
Could not finish this book, which is not something I have said about many books. I wanted to like it , as the style was witty, however the more I read the more confused and less engaged I became. Maybe it all pulls together in the end? I guess I will never know.
May 19, 2008
I should like this. The three blurbs on the back are from two of my favorite authors (saunders and bender) and one I like (eggers). Just didn't do anything for me.
June 16, 2019
Ms. Julavits wins. Not just because I purchased the book; not just because I read the book, or had an emotional response during and after reading it, but also because I have written the kind of review she likely wanted me to write, which was if not her primary or secondary goal, was certainly no less than her tertiary one (even though I’ve set out three other targets earlier in this very long sentence and who knows, maybe this kind of rambling solipsism was also an intended effect?). So, congratulations to Ms. Julavits for successfully engineering the outcome she desired by manipulating me, the hapless and predictable reader.
So this is where I now, on cue, peevishly and self-righteously lament that this book annoyed and irritated me and left me feeling intellectually inferior. Where I nonetheless begrudgingly but what with I myself will judge to be graciousness, acknowledge and praise the humor in the dialogue. And where I note with the familiar air of the aggrieved that the two (two!) blurbs by Mr. Eggers should perhaps have been accompanied by some sort of disclaimer of the professional and personal relationship between him and the author.
And then I will reveal, perhaps with a mix of resentment and admiration, that the book was itself a warning all along that this would happen. That I should have realized that the themes of playing with and preying upon people’s assumptions and behaviors was all laid out very clearly for me and that I should have known I was being victimized - and patronizingly educated - just as the characters in the book were. Even as those characters were themselves engaging in the same controlling tactics without realizing it. Leading me to then question if this review is itself not an act just like the events in the book. And then I will shake myself free of this ouroborus and go back to my mundane, unexamined life (again, note the preordained sarcastic resentment, the only defense left to the injured reader).
So, yes, Ms. Julavits wins. I hope she enjoys her hollow victory (I am sure she will love this write-up, but not as much as she will treasure my assumption that she would read this review, an assumption that only further proves the point she was trying to make).
So this is where I now, on cue, peevishly and self-righteously lament that this book annoyed and irritated me and left me feeling intellectually inferior. Where I nonetheless begrudgingly but what with I myself will judge to be graciousness, acknowledge and praise the humor in the dialogue. And where I note with the familiar air of the aggrieved that the two (two!) blurbs by Mr. Eggers should perhaps have been accompanied by some sort of disclaimer of the professional and personal relationship between him and the author.
And then I will reveal, perhaps with a mix of resentment and admiration, that the book was itself a warning all along that this would happen. That I should have realized that the themes of playing with and preying upon people’s assumptions and behaviors was all laid out very clearly for me and that I should have known I was being victimized - and patronizingly educated - just as the characters in the book were. Even as those characters were themselves engaging in the same controlling tactics without realizing it. Leading me to then question if this review is itself not an act just like the events in the book. And then I will shake myself free of this ouroborus and go back to my mundane, unexamined life (again, note the preordained sarcastic resentment, the only defense left to the injured reader).
So, yes, Ms. Julavits wins. I hope she enjoys her hollow victory (I am sure she will love this write-up, but not as much as she will treasure my assumption that she would read this review, an assumption that only further proves the point she was trying to make).
August 24, 2017
I'd just like to start with saying that Heidi Julavits should be commended for trying to do something creative. This is an ambitious work. I don't think it all came together, but it's unique in a world of mass market fiction and there's something to be said for that.
This bizarre story follows two sisters who are on a hijacked plane, but it is soon apparent that not everything is as it appears. It's hard for me to discuss much of the plot without ruining the experience, but for the first 100 pages Julavits did a great job of alternating chapters between the hijacking and later events to bring me into the story and raise questions about what was happening to the characters.
Once the story gets into the meat of the plot, it loses momentum. I found the lengthly portions where people were imprisoned to drag and the interspersing chapters that told other characters back stories were intriguing but overall broke up the story's flow. For a book with A LOT happening in it, there was lot of downtime that I think could have been cut out of this 350 page book.
I think this book attempts to discuss a lot of deep topics, from Edith and Alice's sibling relationship all the way to terrorism in a post 9/11 world but because there is so much going on with so much seemingly unnecessary background the moments of strength and the solid writing get lost here.
If you want to read something truly different, give this a try. I can't say that it works necessarily, but if you're up for something weird it's not necessarily a bad choice.
This bizarre story follows two sisters who are on a hijacked plane, but it is soon apparent that not everything is as it appears. It's hard for me to discuss much of the plot without ruining the experience, but for the first 100 pages Julavits did a great job of alternating chapters between the hijacking and later events to bring me into the story and raise questions about what was happening to the characters.
Once the story gets into the meat of the plot, it loses momentum. I found the lengthly portions where people were imprisoned to drag and the interspersing chapters that told other characters back stories were intriguing but overall broke up the story's flow. For a book with A LOT happening in it, there was lot of downtime that I think could have been cut out of this 350 page book.
I think this book attempts to discuss a lot of deep topics, from Edith and Alice's sibling relationship all the way to terrorism in a post 9/11 world but because there is so much going on with so much seemingly unnecessary background the moments of strength and the solid writing get lost here.
If you want to read something truly different, give this a try. I can't say that it works necessarily, but if you're up for something weird it's not necessarily a bad choice.
July 10, 2018
The writing of this was excellent, but the plotline was so avant-garde that, frankly, it just sort of flopped.
The surreal story is based on the idea that there's a school for studying terrorists, and this school not only accepts people who are clearly unqualified, but is also run with zero oversight or intelligence. The point, as is emphasized in the first chapter, is to question reality. Do we know why something is the way it is? Do we know whether it is actually the way it is, or perhaps it's something else entirely? Which sounds like it could be interesting, but the execution devolved into characters with zero development making bizarre decisions based on a complete dearth of common sense or self-preservation.
This might be very enjoyable for someone who likes this type of story - perhaps fans of The Raw Shark Texts - and the writing really is quite good.
The surreal story is based on the idea that there's a school for studying terrorists, and this school not only accepts people who are clearly unqualified, but is also run with zero oversight or intelligence. The point, as is emphasized in the first chapter, is to question reality. Do we know why something is the way it is? Do we know whether it is actually the way it is, or perhaps it's something else entirely? Which sounds like it could be interesting, but the execution devolved into characters with zero development making bizarre decisions based on a complete dearth of common sense or self-preservation.
This might be very enjoyable for someone who likes this type of story - perhaps fans of The Raw Shark Texts - and the writing really is quite good.
May 14, 2021
This book... is interestingly bizarre.
I found it in the cabinet in my office at school. I had never heard of it. I looked it up on Goodreads. A mix bag of reviews. So... that cemented my decision to read it when I get bored at school.
The idea of the Shame Stories is fascinating and macabre.
The whole hijacking experience kept me wondering what direction the novel is going to take next.
Oh, and the use of the word "merkin" - because of a silly Youtube video from a few years ago and I am 100% sure I had never seen it used in a book before. Now I have. Haha.
I found it in the cabinet in my office at school. I had never heard of it. I looked it up on Goodreads. A mix bag of reviews. So... that cemented my decision to read it when I get bored at school.
The idea of the Shame Stories is fascinating and macabre.
The whole hijacking experience kept me wondering what direction the novel is going to take next.
Oh, and the use of the word "merkin" - because of a silly Youtube video from a few years ago and I am 100% sure I had never seen it used in a book before. Now I have. Haha.
June 28, 2017
This is one of the strangest books I've read in a long time. I loved the narrative voice (smart, funny, unpredictable, irreverent, and oh-so-unreliable), but I'm still not quite sure what happened in the story. There were so many characters and even more versions of reality. The net result? I was left feeling like I was solving a puzzle as much as reading a book.
September 30, 2017
The premise is fascinating, but I found the book hard to follow. Routinely, I would turn back 1-2 pages because I was certain that I MUST have missed something. I also struggled to connect with the characters, but that is part of what made it interesting. Each one was comprised of both good and bad qualities--like all of us.
November 1, 2020
Well, well, well! This was a roller coaster ride.
This book gave me a lot of Chuck Palahniuck-esque vibes.
Heidi Jualvits has crafted a brilliant albeit outrageous story where none of the characters' narrative can be relied upon. The way she uses the story to highlight sibling rivalry is mind-blowing.
I'm looking forward to reading more of her work. It is worth re-reading.
This book gave me a lot of Chuck Palahniuck-esque vibes.
Heidi Jualvits has crafted a brilliant albeit outrageous story where none of the characters' narrative can be relied upon. The way she uses the story to highlight sibling rivalry is mind-blowing.
I'm looking forward to reading more of her work. It is worth re-reading.
September 4, 2022
Wow. What a fascinating read... there's a lot going on here and I'm still not sure who was who and when they were who they were (or weren't) and if what they experienced was real or not, or partly real. I'm glad the author included a readers guide at the end. That helped focus my meandering wondering. Someone is still going to have to explain the title to me. So, though I'm a bit confused, this was a compelling, interesting book to read.
October 5, 2025
I had a hard time with this book. Not sure why, but even though I read the entire book, I never could get into it like I usually can. It’s not a bad book, it just somehow didn’t do it for me. No spoilers, I’m sure there are people out there that will enjoy it, I’m not one of those people.
My apologies to the author.
My apologies to the author.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 190 reviews