Nothing Natural

by Jenny Diski

'Nothing Natural centres with illuminating precision on a sado-masochistic relationship. Rachel is in her thirties, a single parent admired by her friends for her self-sufficiency . But when she meets the compelling, sinister Joshua she discovers another side to herself . In a sense which horrifies her, she has found herself . An outstandingly well-written novel' New Statesman An addictive story of a dangerous love affair with a shocking denoument, this is a complex examination of the relations between the sexes at their most combatative and collusive. It is a clever book with much to tell us about the nature of desire and what should or should not be permissable.

Genres: Fiction, Erotica, Novels, Feminism, Sexuality, Contemporary, Literary Fiction

280 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1986

About the author

Jenny Diski was a British writer. Diski was a prolific writer of fiction and nonfiction articles, reviews and books. She was awarded the 2003 Thomas Cook Travel Book Award for Stranger on a Train: Daydreaming and Smoking around America With Interruptions.

Reviews

[Jon Zelig · Rating 5 out of 5]

Won’t do (anything close to) a full review here, but (for whoever might be listening/reading) I did want to “poke at” this book (and author) just a bit.

Diski had a tremendously difficult and traumatic life: a matter of record.

She was something close to “rescued” by Doris Lessing: a matter of record.

But that “rescue,” well. . . (also a matter of record) brought its own bumps and grinds; and one has to think, as an author, that this “linkage” must have quickly come to feel both b(Lessing) and curse (deeply apologize for punning; will be better about my meds).

Really, lifetime, hard not to think that, for Diski, this became a kind of “I’m-not-my-mother!” on steroids.

I won’t pretend that I have read much else of what Diski has written, but I do know that she died of cancer recently, and that she spent the last months of her life publicly chronicling what that was like (not an entirely new thing to do at this point; brave nonetheless).

Which brings me back to. . .

Not quite sure why I am (just a little) resistant to calling the core relationship in “Nothing Natural” “abusive.” Which is not at all to say that I would call it “healthy.”

To try to loop all of this together: what I find appealing about the novel (my own twisted sense of the erotic to the side) is that it is **honest.**

Neither Diski nor her protagonist, Rachel, are “playing.” They are living out their (complicated, messy, somewhat “broken”) lives. . . and letting readers in on it—which Diski did, literally, up to the end.

That’s rare!

Don’t know if this is archaic but, there’s a phrase that some people used to use: “Refrigerator Privileges.”

That means, “people you can stay with (at the drop of a dime) who take for granted that, once let in, you can raid the refrigerator at will.” You don’t get bogged down in constantly asking “is this ok” or “is that ok.” You’re hungry? You find something to eat. It’s fine. Don’t worry about it.

My corollary to this would be: The shower in my house is normally just a laboratory of fungi (and the-secular-gods know what else). Some people come visit? Gotta clean the shower. Other people? Well, if you know someone well enough. . . you relax into showing them your mess.

Which is how I feel about “Nothing Natural.”

I would not presume to project too much of the protagonist’s life onto the author—the-secular-gods help me if I were to be treated that way!—but I think Diski should be credited here for *not* editing.

The novel is ragged and difficult in some ways? Yes.

People who find that problematic should be warned away (and that’s fine).

But for me (not a fan of utter incoherence but) . . . a certain degree of mess?

That’s why I both read AND write.

Y’know: that whole “human condition” thing.

[Michele · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another book that's earned a place on my shelf (checked it out from the library) but not for the reasons you think.

The Publisher’s Weekly review had this to say about the sexual elements of this book;
"While the sadomasochistic encounters are clearly depicted, the novel should not be considered pornographic. The character development is sensitive and psychologically sound as Diski shows how Rachel's disturbed psyche is the result of emotional damage in childhood."

This book is about the inner life, and that's what kept me turning the pages. Characters are utterly believable - Rachel, the protagonist - has moments of cowardice and dishonesty - but you still end up caring what happens. The ending is a complete surprise, and left me wondering, wanting more, but also glad I didn't know what really happened.

Diski's writing reminds me of Mary Gaitskill, another of my favorite writers. I want to have Diski's books on hand so I can study her prose and become as fluent and precise a writer as she. Maybe someday...

[Frank · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vijftig tinten maar dan anders. Typische autobiografische debuutroman, beetje braaf. Diski is waarschijnlijk beter als schrijver van scherpe essays, boekbesprekingen en (al dan niet autobiografische) beschouwingen dan als romanschrijver. Dit blijft iets te veel kleuren binnen de lijntjes, ondanks dat would-be ‘schokkende’ aspect van een sadomasochistische verhouding. Allemaal keurig netjes opgebouwd, netjes verdeeld over hoofdstukken, verschillende relaties keurig aan elkaar gespiegeld, en nog een (wat onwaarschijnlijke) frappe aan het einde om het af te maken.

Het lijkt wel goed vertaald, en de vertaling uit 1989 doet over het algemeen ook helemaal niet gedateerd aan, behalve op sommige punten. Ook zonder het Engels erbij op te zoeken, merk je aan de tekst hoezeer vertalers uit het Engels soms worstelen met de invloed van het oprukkende Engels in het Nederlands.
Dat komt onder meer naar voren in de dialogen, die ik niet altijd even overtuigend vind, onder meer in het gevloek. Dat kan overigens ook komen doordat Diski gewoon niet de allerbeste dialogen schrijft.
Ander voorbeeld: blijkbaar hadden we toen nog moeite met het begrip onenightstand. (Niet in moreel, maar in taalkundig opzicht: hoe moesten we dat vertalen?) Het woord komt nogal eens voor, en daardoor is hier herhaaldelijk sprake van ‘eennachtsverhoudingen’. Dat doet natuurlijk wél gedateerd aan, en ik denk dat het ook toen al moeizaam las.
Dat wil niet zeggen dat het een zwaktebod van de vertaler was: ik ben halverwege de jaren 90 begonnen met vertalen, en ik herinner me nog goed dat we ook toen in ondertitels al worstelden met de term. Onenightstand was gewoon nog geen ingeburgerd leenwoord, het stond (misschien) nog steeds niet in de Van Dale, en als vertaler diende je niet op de troepen vooruit te lopen, dus moest je er een geschikte Nederlandse omschrijving voor vinden. Die niet bestond!
Grappig is dan weer om te zien dat selffulfilling prophecy, ook zo’n moeizaam te vertalen begrip, in dit boek wél gewoon wordt gebruikt, niet eens cursief gezet, en abusievelijk geschreven als drie woorden: self fulfilling prophecy.
Ook op een koddige manier verouderd is deze zin: ‘De rest van die avond bracht ze door met overschakelen van het ene kanaal van de televisie naar het andere, zonder iets te vinden dat haar kon boeien maar vastbesloten om niets anders te doen.’ Eigenlijk is dat een prima zin, helemaal niets mis mee, behalve dat hij duidelijk stamt uit een tijd toen zappen nog geen Nederlands woord was. (Misschien mede in de hand gewerkt door het feit dat tv’s met afstandsbediening in de jaren 80 lang nog niet overal gemeengoed waren. Wij hadden die thuis in ieder geval niet, ik vond destijds een tv met ‘tiptoetsen’ al heel hip.)

[Jennessa Jessy · Rating 2 out of 5]

The start was exciting, being my first smut book ever… but I found it got repetitive. I enjoyed the authors writing flow and that’s what made me stick around until the end. All in all, it was a little bit of downer and I couldn’t wait to finish this book.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

1991 notebook: Intelligent, cutting and scary, maybe a mite too schematic, some things superfluous - Pete the skinhead - could have cut 50 pages or so..

[Svalbard · Rating 5 out of 5]

Libro che ha una storia un po’ strana per come mi è arrivato: prestatomi da un’amica tanti anni fa (doveva essere il 1998 o giù di lì, all’epoca ero un lettore episodico e distratto) mi piacque moltissimo e lo lessi più d’una volta. Quando feci per restituirlo, la mia amica disse che ricordavo male, di certo non era stata lei a prestarmelo… e allora me lo sono tenuto. Bisogna anche dire che lei la lettura non l’ama molto, per cui ci può stare che se ne fosse dimenticata. Comunque, dato che, dopo aver letto i libri di Michela Marzano e di Leo Ortolani, mi sto abbastanza interessando alla questione delle adozioni, ho pensato di rileggerlo.

Si tratta di un libro molto complesso; per certi versi ci sono due narrazioni parallele, tra loro fortemente intrecciate. La protagonista è Rachel, una ragazza inglese nata in una famiglia fortemente disfunzionale, costretta a costruirsi un’identità molto protettiva per ripararsi dalle feroci accuse di non-amore della madre e dal disinteresse a fasi alternate del padre. Il tutto finché il padre non se ne va, la madre impazzisce definitivamente, e lei viene messa in un istituto. Poi, quando è già grandicella, viene adottata da un’intellettuale di sinistra molto impegnata nel sociale e nel politico. Alcuni anni dopo, Il libro ce la racconta più che trentenne, sposata, separata e con una figlia, che abita nella classica casetta inglese a due piani, e per lavoro assiste e istruisce ragazzi con problemi di adattamento che non possono frequentare scuole normali.

Rachel ha sviluppato una personalità fortemente indipendente, che le rende intollerabile la vita di coppia; per quanto le piacciano gli uomini e il sesso, non riesce a pensarsi in una relazione fatta di impegni a medio e lungo termine, di convivenza, di abitudini stabilizzate (dormire insieme, farsi da mangiare, ecc.) e per questo finisce per allontanare da sé tutti gli uomini con i quali comunque aveva avviato delle relazioni affettive. Tranne uno, Joshua, conosciuto per caso da un’amica, anche lui con un’infanzia fortemente disfunzionale, che avvia con lei proprio il tipo di rapporto di cui sembra avesse bisogno: nessuna possessività, solo casuali notti assieme, colorate di BDSM. Lui le telefona, arriva, mangiano, bevono, parlano, fanno sesso e poi lui, sempre poco prima dell’alba, prende e se ne va senza darle alcun appuntamento successivo, fino a che, settimane o mesi dopo, non si rifà vivo e il ciclo ricomincia. Sarebbe perfetto, se non fosse che lei non ha nessun controllo su questo ménage: nonostante abbia il suo numero di telefono e l’indirizzo non può manifestare nessuna aspettativa o richiesta di vederlo, perché questo significherebbe creare un legame, cosa dal quale entrambi rifuggono.

L’altra vicenda è quella legata tanto alla riflessione di Rachel sul proprio passato, quanto al suo lavoro nell’ambito dell’assistenza sociale. In particolare essa riguarda Pete, un giovane problematico, con profondi problemi di socializzazione e nello stesso tempo di grande intelligenza, anche lui con una storia fatta quasi esclusivamente di istituti e case-famiglia. E questo è il pretesto per mettere sul tavolo tutta una serie di questioni collegate al tema: quanto è realizzabile il desiderio profondo di chi si trova in simili situazioni di trovare una famiglia “vera” da cui essere adottato? Quanto l’adozione può essere realmente sostitutiva di un vero rapporto parentale? Fino a che punto essa coimplica in sé l’amore “obbligato” e “inevitabile” (o che si presuppone tale) di una vera madre o di un vero padre, e quanto, ad esempio, un “no” è un “no” circostanziato ed educativo (ti voglio bene ma è no) e quanto un “no” che invece ti rifiuta del tutto, come persona nella sua integrità?

E poi c’è l’insipienza, o per meglio dire, la “responsabilità limitata” dei servizi sociali e degli operatori che vi lavorano. E’ evidente e inevitabile che ciascuno di loro abbia una propria vita, e che per loro si tratti sostanzialmente di un lavoro, come tutti i lavori fatto di doveri, di rapporti a volte critici con colleghi e superiori, di necessità di mettere dei paletti per evitare che esso invada la propria vita privata. Ovviamente il tutto contro le aspettative, legittime o meno, degli assistiti; quando, per screzi nei confronti di un superiore, uno degli assistenti decide di dare le dimissioni e lasciare la casa-famiglia, Pete va fuori di testa, diventa violento, si trasforma in un “caso” da trattare con metodologie correzionali pesanti. A Rachel è chiaro che Pete non potrà mai avere una vita normale, il meglio a cui potrà aspirare è di non finire in carcere o drogato, ma non si può sperare nulla di più per lui. In una serie di riunioni che coinvolgono anche lei, in quanto sua insegnante, gli operatori le fanno un ricatto morale pesantissimo: lei ci accusa di non volergli dare quello che dovremmo, impegno totale, casa, valori umani, eccetera. Ma lei, quanto sarebbe disposta a dargli le stesse cose? In sostanza, perché non è lei, visto che ha con lui un ottimo rapporto, a prenderselo in casa e magari adottarlo?

Rachel, di fronte all’orripilante giochino logico del genere “se ti senti tanto migliore di noi comportati di conseguenza” è costretta a capitolare. Pete viene prima trasferito in una specie di riformatorio - dove, peraltro, pare che la disciplina lo aiuti a trovare un suo equilibrio - ma poi, di fronte alla prospettiva di essere messo in una clinica psichiatrica dove lo aspettano trattamenti pesanti con psicofarmaci o peggio, si suicida.

Questo scatena in Rachel un evento depressivo di dimensioni colossali, descritto straordinariamente bene. Dapprima cerca di resistervi, lasciandosi andare perfino a un episodio lesbico con la sua migliore amica, Becky; poi, quando si rende conto di quanto anche lei non sia capace di far altro che del male - passato il momento del piacere allontana brutalmente e seccamente l’amica, per non sentirsi impegnata e ricattata affettivamente, sebbene sappia con questo di causarle un dolore immenso - è la fine. Disperazione, solitudine, ipotesi di suicidio, sguardo disincantato sull’insensatezza del mondo e della vita, una sequenza di doveri e di compiti da adempiere, di aspettative altrui da soddisfare (e come ben si sa il tragico tocca sempre il comico; nella fattispecie l’incapacità di scrivere un biglietto d’addio e quindi circondarsi di fogli appallottolati con cui la gatta si mette a giocare, o pensare di mettere un cartello sulla porta di casa, “non entrare, mi sono suicidata”, eccetera). Poi un ricovero volontario in ospedale psichiatrico - e pure lì regole, compiti da adempiere, ruoli da recitare - la fuga da esso, e finalmente, poco per volta, ospite di un’amica in campagna non invadente e circondata da bei paesaggi agresti, il lento ritorno verso la salute e l’equilibrio.

Infine, la curiosissima conclusione della storia. Tornata a casa dopo il faticoso recupero di sé stessa, Rachel compie una serie di azioni quanto meno bizzarre: scrive una lettera a Joshua descrivendo una fantasia di costrizione e violenza che vorrebbe veder messa in atto. Lui ovviamente è entusiasta e disponibilissimo a giocare il ruolo. Ma lei va alla stazione di polizia e dice di aver notato un uomo che si aggira di notte con fare sospetto intorno a casa sua, ottenendo l’assicurazione che l’avrebbero tenuta d’occhio. Poi, tornata a casa, spacca un vetro simulando un’effrazione (ovviamente nella realizzazione della fantasia lui avrebbe trovato la porta aperta).
Le cose vanno come previsto: lui arriva, la lega, comincia a “violentarla”... in quel momento arrivano i poliziotti e lo arrestano. Il libro finisce così, con lei, indifferente, che mentre i poliziotti portano via Joshua guarda fuori dalla finestra e si chiede quando finalmente termineranno i lavori stradali davanti a casa sua.

E’ un finale decisamente assurdo, soprattutto rispetto a tutto quello che lo ha preceduto. Innanzi tutto non si riesce bene a capire per quale motivo Rachel debba liquidare il suo amante in un modo tanto brutale; era la storia che faceva per lei, non ne aveva il controllo ma forse non voleva averlo, e se il suo fine era insinuarsi più in profondità nella vita di lui avrebbe potuto almeno provarci. Del resto, gli aveva mandato una lettera manoscritta descrivendo lo “scenario” del loro incontro. Si suppone che a lui basterà mostrarla alla polizia o ai giudici per scagionarsi completamente, e far finire lei in un mare di guai.

Poi ho pensato al fatto che io stesso, tanti anni fa, avevo scritto un racconto, in cui immaginavo che una ragazza - modellata senza troppi infingimenti su una mia ex amica che, tanto per cambiare, non aveva voluto diventare la mia ragazza come io desideravo - si suicidava. Feci leggere questo racconto a varie mie altre amiche - non la diretta interessata, ovviamente - e generalmente piacque; solo una, non senza ragione, mi dette del “narcisista”. In effetti, oggi non capisco perché, per “liquidare” dalla mia psiche la tipa avevo dovuto ricorrere a un meccanismo tanto tortuoso, quando sarebbe stato molto più liberatorio e salutare un bel “vaffanculo stronza, chi cazzo ti credi di essere”. E ho pensato che Jenny Diski ha evidentemente prestato molto di sé alla protagonista del suo libro: sicuramente la sua vicenda esistenziale (infanzia travagliata, istituti, una sorta di adozione da parte della scrittrice Doris Lessing), e forse anche il desiderio di “liquidare”, sia pure in maniera capziosa, qualche presenza disturbante della sua vita, come avevo fatto io con la stronz… ehm, con la ragazza che non mi aveva voluto.

Curiosamente la critica (v. la pagina del libro sulla Wikipedia inglese) non lo ha apprezzato molto, lo ha letto come un libro “antifemminista”, si è focalizzata sulla vicenda del rapporto BDSM di Joshua e Rachel e non su quello, molto più ampio e importante, di Pete e dei deliri dell’assistenza sociale. E’ anche vero che il libro fu pubblicato nel 1986, le “cinquanta sfumature” non erano ancora state scritte e lo sdoganamento della sessualità kink ancora non aveva avuto luogo, per cui che una donna avesse fantasie di violenza sembrava a dir poco aberrante. A parte che i momenti BDSM nel libro sono sempre molto “misurati” e colmi di reciproco rispetto; il male “peggiore” che Joshua fa è il suo apparire e sparire a proprio gradimento lì dove la donna media - ma Rachel non pare certo collocarsi in questa media - vorrebbe l’uomo che c’è sempre, presente e coccoloso. Tra l’altro la critica di Doris McIlwain appare molto superficiale, dato che non è affatto vero che Joshua nella narrazione violenta un bambino, ma Rachel sospetta, senza peraltro alcuna prova concreta, che abbia approfittato di una ragazza adolescente con la complicità di un’altra donna - forse anch’essa una sua fantasia. Chissà se il finale sia stato pensato per “rimettere le cose a posto” da un punto di vista etico e sociale; ma evidentemente, se questo era il fine, non è bastato.

[Cecilia · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don’t even know what this was.

[Elsje · Rating 3 out of 5]

Van de blurb: 'De onafhankelijke, geëmancipeerde Rachel ontmoet de sinistere Joshua. Hun verhouding heeft een SM karakter, wat naar Rachels eigen gevoelens eigenlijk niet kan en mág. En toch... zij geniet ervan. De spanning tussen wat Rachel voelt en wat zij volgens de heersende moraal geacht wordt te voelen geeft deze roman een intense kracht.'

Dit beschrijft m.i. niet goed waar het boek over gaat. Voor mijn gevoel ging het over twee zaken: allereerst over het verkennen en het bewaken van de eigen grenzen: tot hoe ver laat je met je sollen? En ten tweede ging het over: wat brengt mensen ertoe om zich emotioneel af te sluiten voor anderen? Rachel, maar ook Joshua krijgen de rillingen van emoties. Liefdevol, maar ook tranen, nee, niks voor hen, weg ermee! En de gevolgen voor henzelf en voor hun vrienden zijn niet mis.

De SM-stukjes vond ik wel erg plastisch. Het dient de eerste twee keer zijn doel, maar daarna had ik genoeg van het 'misbruik' (ik zet het tussen aanhalingstekens omdat het gewenst was) en het bijbehorende klaargekom... expliciet beschreven seks past gewoon niet zo goed bij mij.

En toch ben ik blij dat ik het gelezen heb. Mooi eind ook, zonder verklapper niet verder toe te lichten.

[Sandra de Helen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is Diski’s first novel and shows that she was willing to put everything on the line right out of the gate. What Tom Spanbauer calls “dangerous writing.” In this book, decades before Fifty Shades of Gray, Diski writes about a woman’s experience being involved in an S&M relationship. She doesn’t only write about what happens, she writes about how the woman recognizes and acknowledges truths about herself she didn’t know were there. The protagonist is a divorced mother of a young girl who prefers to have affairs, not committed relationships. Then she finds herself in a three-year relationship with a cruel, manipulative lover. After a mental breakdown and a stint in a mental hospital, she sets a plan in motion to extract revenge. What is most interesting (to me) about this work is how sensitive the character development is, and it seems entirely plausible. I’ve read several of Diski’s books, and each one is different from the other.

[Victoria · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not at all what I expected, but an intriguing read nonetheless. Diski describes depression in an honest and forthright way that can only be known to someone who has experienced what it is really like. Parts of this novel are just painful. I expected this to be a story about a sadomasochistic relationship - and it is that - but it is more the story of a woman who is severely depressed and unable to cope with life. Most of the novel is about her depression and tremendous sense of isolation. The relationship seems secondary or perhaps symptomatic (?)of what she is going through emotionally. I'm not sure I am describing it right, but Rachel is very detached and withdrawn. She functions on auto-pilot and tries very hard not to get too attached or let others get too attached to herself. She is drawn to Joshua because he doesn't want permanence and they want the same things sexually. At first I thought this novel would present their unique relationship as something that is taboo to others but natural to them. I thought the title would end up as somewhat of a tease and the story would present this relationship as something healing and beneficial to both participants rather than damaging. That is not what happens. This novel is primarily about Rachel's struggle to feel something more than emptiness. It is about her confusion with Joshua and her lack of knowledge about his doings when he is away from her. There is a big mystery that is never solved by the end of the story, and this is the reason for my rating. The ending is quite shocking and I gasped out loud. Still it is very disappointing. We are left wondering what happened to these people after the ending. It seems to me that in her desire to trap Joshua, Rachel certainly trapped herself. Did she do this deliberately or is this a symptom of her illness?

Very worth reading, but not for the faint of heart.

[Sarah]

I read this book many years ago, so long ago that it was hardcover, and I recently reread it. I can't say I enjoyed it as such, but I did, and do, find it quite riveting, if a little depressing, but since Rachel is an unhappy person who suffers from depression, that fits. Rachel says, "The last thing a sadist needs is a masochist," which struck me anew in its accuracy. This is a world I've never inhabited, but through Rachel's thoughts, actions, and analysis of her behavior, I could *almost* imagine how this kind of relationship could come about, one bit at a time.
Three nitpicks:

- Rachel has sex with her best friend, Becky. I found this scene quite gratuitous and rather outlandish that two heterosexual women would engage in sex merely because men have disappointed them. Maybe the author actually did this, but in the context of this novel, I saw no reason to insert it.
- Rachel has loud sex with Joshua, with him beating her, sodomizing her in the kitchen, they have sex in the living room (she has her fling with Becky in the living room also, where they fall asleep on the floor) and not once does Rachel ever think that her very young daughter might awaken, want a glass of water, need the bathroom, or just be crying from a bad dream in the years that the affair with Joshua goes on. The child must have slept like the dead.
- The ending bothered me. Rachel's revenge on Joshua didn't work for me. Even a casual investigation of Joshua would have revealed his many phone calls to Rachel and hers to him, revealing that he was no stranger to her.
All in all, this is a very well-written book that stands the test of time.

[Laurence · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating read. A bit sketchy in places, with some odd choices. Rachel is a solo mother, but seems to spend little time with her daughter Carrie, who seems to only feature fleetingly despite living in eth same house where al;l the action (sexual and psychological) takes place.

Echoes of the authors own life - Rachel (JD) was taken in by an older woman Isobel (Doris Lessing) when she was rejected by her parents. The fact that damaged young man who Rachel works with, is given teh same name a s Rosi Lesing's younger son.

The description of depression and mental breakdown was convincing and gripping, and Joshua, who appears and subjects Rachel to vicous and loveless sex, is a wierd and cold fish. Maybe he never existed, and was just a fantasy?

Approaching 4 stars, but not quite

[Richard Dell · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this a compelling read as I invested in the main characters from quite early in the book. I invested too much it seems and the ending seemed ridiculous and unconvincing.

The book was very much about the inner mental states of Rachel. I liked the way her thoughts provided quite a muddled commentary on her involvement with Joshua. This seemed very real, especially her obsessive thinking.

The BDSM element provided moments of insight but did not feel fully explored. This is definitely not an erotic novel and I admire the matter of fact descriptions. No attempt was made to dress anything up.

The element I found most realistic was the story of Pete and my main reflection, after finishing the book, was about how we respond to the most troubled in society.

[Marcello · Rating 3 out of 5]

Opera che si lascia leggere piuttosto velocemente e che, partendo da una frequentazione avente caratteristiche poco ortodosse, mette a nudo i problemi affettivi ed emozionali della protagonista della storia, tratti forse, almeno in parte, dal vissuto dell'autrice. Ci sono alcuni buoni spunti, come il legame col ragazzo problematico di cui Rachel si occupa per lavoro, mentre altri elementi risultano un po' di maniera e pure il finale sembra più dettato dalla voglia di lanciare un messaggio positivo che da una valutazione circa la sua coerenza e credibilità.

[Leeza]

wowww this floored me actually!! v v powerful look at a woman's psyche and the twists of desire, vulnerability, pain, intimacy - particularly cloying writing on her depression as well. only thing that stops me from giving 5 stars is that the prose and its metaphors felt a bit clunky sometimes, but this really got to me and I'm v keen to read diski's later work and i think is astonishing in its heft and complexity for a first book

[Hal · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book that puts you in the head of a single mother with a serious lot of issues. The fact that we know the author also had a lot of serious issues makes everything more believable. Also, with about 15 pages to go, I had no idea how this whole thing was going to turn out, and that's good.

[Sarah Rigg · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was pretty "meh" about the collection of women's erotic writing called "Slow Hand" but liked Diski's story in that collection. So, when I ran across this novel, I was intrigued. My journal from 1997 says I got "sucked into" the book and that there was one part I didn't care for, but overall, I thought she was a very good writer.

[Noa · Rating 4 out of 5]

super intense and not a lighthearted read at all. but honestly the relationships explored and the depth of characters was really intriguing, so even though the book was quite slow paced i didn’t mind. minus 1 star for the sometimes graphic sex depictions and use of the word cunt. other than that it was very dark but i enjoyed

[Caroline · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well this was the only English language book in the library at the hotel I was staying at in Brugge. Very interesting find. Psycho sexual novel but still gripping none the less. Finished it in 2 days. Decently disturbing...how people can be.

[Rachel Bellenoit · Rating 5 out of 5]

Electrifying.

[Chris Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

How to survive and possibly thrive even though damaged. None of her chapters transcend their issues or achieve closure, but some manage to have a good time anyway.

[Litos · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting story of a female that likes domination. Be aware that it is not an erotical or kinky novel.

[Yvette Verwer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book contains one of the best descriptions of a depression in my opinion (and I had a few....).
I really liked the main character.

[Brick Dewachter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Beautiful!

[Malena · Rating 5 out of 5]

I actually loved this book. It was so incredible. Will think abt

[Ravikumar · Rating 3 out of 5]

I sat through and read 'Nothing Natural' by Jenny Diski, a novel much derided by feminists. 'A sad day for feminism' was the caption of one of the reviews of this book while it was described also as a 'revolting book' by Anthony thwaite. The novel has a certain incompleteness , an unfinished quality perhaps as it is Diski's first but it demonstrates her trademark intensity , sharp, scalpel prose and bone chilling explorations of depression and madness.
Rachel kee's entering into a BDSM relationship with Joshua is believable. Her tragic family history, the cramped, circumscribed folie a deux with a severely disturbed mother and a father who decamped and precipitately leaves them conveys how an atmosphere of emptiness , unendurable psychic despair permeates Rachel's life and of why she feels like an 'empty space', unembodied. Her life seems a listless , desultory progression from day to day with the hinterland of bleakness and existential despair permeating her consciousness and life. Joshua's brutal visits or rather visitations , his BDSM acts are repugnant, exploitative but then so is Rachel a masochist who seems to find, in the aridity of being amid her depression and emptiness , some enlivening reminder of life, a sense of a certain anchoring in her very abuse. She is almost becalmed in the amniotic sea of darkness and distress . And Joshua is, for all his disgusting behavior and sex acts , some conduit to stave off this deep anxiety of being, only to reinhabit it .
For all this substratum of clinical and existential depression Rachel kee is an extremely intelligent character. Jenny diski plunges into her interior landscape with startling and often brilliant aplomb, tunneling into the incommunicable depression and melancholia that overrides everything else. For it is a reality of depression that when it is intensified it evacuates everything but its insidious festering numbness . Rachel's very lack of feeling shows depths of melancholia which seep through as emotional deadening . She feels too much, too keenly but is powerless ,in a sense , to do much. Any reprieve seems anodyne .Solipsism is Rachel's default mode, a necessary way to keep afloat .
Joshua's grotesqueness is enhanced in his sexual abuse of a young girl, which is filtered through Rachel's reading an account of it and fitting the pieces together. Joshua is repulsive yet one doesn't quite hate him as much as one is repelled , wanting to turn away from this terrible, severely damaged person who replicates some trauma he presumably experienced. Rachel is ruminative, self questioning , introspective but the undertow of psychic darkness that swamps her also freezes her into stasis, immovability. There is no tinsel escape from this fug of darkness except spirals of self annihilating interludes that reaffirm displacement within. Unrelieved suffering, unameliorated and a state that, in its very unnaturalness , seems more natural in a life where nothing is natural or seems so. It is a chilling, terrifying, horrifying novel but powerful and brilliantly written . Rough round the edges but a beginning of a remarkable writing career for Jenny diski, one of the most venturesome post war writers.

[Nelson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had been a fan of Diski's LRB pieces for years. Recently picked up her first novel and plowed through it pretty quickly. Tells the story of Rachel Kee, a tough-minded singleton who shares care of a young daughter. She makes ends meet by tutoring disadvantaged young people. When the novel begins, she's just started working with Pete, a troubled teen with some unique difficulties. In a way, that's right up Rachel's street, since she was a troubled teen herself with some unique difficulties, who overcame them to forge something like a satisfying life. At least, it was something like one, until she meets Joshua. Before this man enters her life, Rachel is a hardened cynic who dates men and occasionally has sex with them but wants nothing in the way of partnership or permanence. Joshua is a set up and she ends up alone with him at her place and he starts a perfectly cold, clinical and ultimately satisfying sadomasochistic relationship with Rachel. This is the element that seems to get the most attention in talk about the novel (and certainly the blurbs on the cover). But that's really just a portion of a rich portrait of a maddening, sometimes mad, wonderful, interesting protagonist trying to hold life together while juggling multiple pressures. In addition to her daughter, Pete and Joshua, Rachel has a friendship with Becky, yin to her yang. Becky is married, happily at first, and is the optimist who hopes love is forever. Then there is Isobel, Rachel's peculiar and sometimes remote adoptive mother. That introduces the other element of interest in this first novel. Diski was taken in as a troubled teen by the by-then London-based novelist Doris Lessing. Because Isobel is so obviously a version of Lessing, and prickly Rachel a heck of a lot like the public persona of the author, there naturally arises speculation that what we are reading is a roman-a-clef, which then naturally leads into speculation about who Joshua really is. Well, okay. But frankly, the story with its multiple strands and dabbling in the politics of sexual power, is held together by the fascinating, hyper-literate consciousness of Rachel. One doesn't have to figure out who everyone supposedly is to enjoy the hell out of this very smart first novel with its endlessly interesting and frustrating protagonist. For those hoping for a lot of one-handed reading (or scrolling, if you roll with an electronic reader), it's not quite that heavy breathing of a novel. There are sex scenes and there is some description. If you wish to fill the spank bank however, there are far more ripe things out there that won't waste your time with plot and plausible character development. Which is another way of saying this is a good novel that has some sex in it, not a good sex romp that happens to be a novel. Diski was a fantastic essayist and reviewer. In this, her first novel, she showed that she was a quick study, and an accomplished novelist right out of the gate.

[Bevan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This first novel by a talented writer seemed intended to make a splash, and I'm sure it did at the time. It was an angry novel and very much in the spirit of the British writers and playwrights of a decade or two earlier. However, to have been written by a woman seems almost a defiant slap at the Angry Young Men of previous generations, and more like the Beats in America.

In parts it is quite disturbing, and the sex scenes are just raw. Knowing now that she had lived with Doris Lessing for a few years as an adolescent puts a slant on its relevance. It seems uneven but very sharp in places, and the scenes with her young pupil, Pete, are the most beautifully realized.

Ms. Diski seems to have had a rather unpleasant childhood and adolescence, as she relates in other books, most notably the memoir, "In Gratitude." She was in and out of institutions, foster care, and even tried to commit suicide a few times until she was more or less "adopted" by the writer Doris Lessing. This personal history colors all of her books, at least the three that I have read, and I don't know if that's a good thing or not.

[Lizzie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a fantastic exploration of women/people who have suffered as they are growing up, how it has affected them.

But I also think the side characters show a definite contrast, kept at a distance in writing and Rachel keeps a distance from them in her life. Enough to know a bit, but not enough to ever be committed.

If you read this book expecting a purely sexual/romantic exploration of the more 'kinky' side of life, you will most likely be disappointed. Though they are involved heavily, it is not what the writer wanted to write about, it is a very thought provoking and honest portrail of someone.

I felt it easy to relate to and I feel it was deliberately written so the reader could keep sympathy with the main characters point of view, but also see her doubts about herself and the inner confusion of the human mind.

I thought it was an interesting book with an interesting study of psychology, brilliant read but not a good light hearted read.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nothing special. A book about an obsessive sexual affair should be a lot hotter. Nothing Natural started off like gangbusters with a satisfyingly dirty scene by page 20, and then it disintegrated into a fairly pedestrian roman a clef about youthful alienation and anomie, interspersed with increasingly perfunctory 'Demon Lover' episodes. There is some vivid writing about depression and a pretty scary confrontation with the Mental Health Authorities, but the supporting characters are cardboard and the subplot about the troubled youth Rachel tutors is tiresome and self-congratulatory. Also, I'm irritated by books or movies or tv shows that pathologize kink at the same time that they exploit it to titillate.
Bottom line - I like my filth a lot filthier than this. It was written in the Dworkin/MacKinnon/Ed Meese eighties, though. Chilly times, culturally, for sex.