Go Fug Yourself Book Club discussion

I didn't vote for this book, and had mixed feelings about it, but as it turned out I loved it. I should have had faith. I like Curtis Sittenfeld's work a lot, and was a fan of American Wife, which was a similar undertaking to Rodham, but with a clearly fictionalized Laura Bush. There was a big distinction though, between the two books. American Wife was clearly fiction inspired by a real person. I was deeply uncomfortable with the idea of creating an alternate life for a living breathing universally known woman. It seemed really unfair to Hillary who has seen her life hijacked and recast by so many people and ought to be able to reclaim her own narrative without anyone, whether it be Rush Limbaugh or Curtis Sittenfeld, putting their grubby hands all over her truth. I also thought it would be hard to imagine a Hillary Rodham not married to Bill Clinton. So much of her feels defined by him. Then I realized it is mostly only the crummy parts that are defined by him and I was unable to let that issue go.

The one bugaboo for me was Hillary's wonkiness. If not for Bill, I don't think she would have been a politician on the national stage. I see her as maybe having become a Marian Wright-Edelman, or a Samantha Power, or a Sally Yates. Those are all wonderful things to be, I know Sally a bit, and she is something of a hero of mine, so I am not throwing shade. The distinction is not at all one of merit. Those women seek just enough power to accomplish specific goals and to steer policy. That is a whole differnt thing that wanting to be president. I think you have to want the power itself as an end not a means, you need to work for the power harder than you work for the agenda. That does not mean you won't do great things with the power. But that kind of power is a job in itself. and few want the job of pursuing and keeping power. Fewer still are cut out for that path. Hillary rose to perceived power because of Bill, not because she worked for that on her own behalf. Once onstage, for reasons known only to her, but some of which are easy to (correctly or not) figure out, Hillary tried to make herself that kind of person. I think she could have fit the costume if she had won. But the truth is I think she is a lot happier working on what is important to her without the glare of the spotlight, and I think if Bill had not pushed her on stage that is what she would have done. This idea that sans Bill and his naked ambition she would have fallen ass-backward into a presidential bid based on merit rather than hard-charging politicking ignores pretty much all of American history. Like really ALL of it. I enjoyed the fantasy, but I still saw it as a fundamental fault with the concept.

A secondary concern, I assumed the book would he a hagiography. Hillary is a goddess divine and everything would have been great if it wasn't for men (particularly men like the randy -- possibly rapey -- Bill Clinton.) Honestly maybe it was sort of a hagiography, but it was more too. It was a great story that stuck surprisingly close to to real life. It was funny and charming, and gave us a behind the curtain look at politics rooted in public service (as opposed to DJT politics rooted in personal gain and ego masturbation) that made me really miss West Wing. More than that, it was a clarion call to women to claim their lives, to tune out as much of the static as possible about needing a man and needing to please others all of the time, to stop judging other women by standards set by men for their pleasure, and to stop overlooking the boys-will-be-boys behavior that got us into the seething pit of hell in which we currently find ourselves.

I really loved reading the book. I found myself excited to listen to this whenever I had a moment. Speaking of which, I did listen to this, and the reader, Carrington MacDuffie, was absolutely amazing. It felt like Hillary was talking, but MacDuffie was not doing an impression. The reading was lively and straightforward, and she did other voices of both genders without sounding absurd which is often and issue in audiobooks.

I know others had serious reservations about the book (I know a couple of you REALLY disliked it) so I look forward to hearing from you. If nothing else I think we can all agree it was more fun that reading coverage of our actual election.

I really want to read this, but alas I am still on the holds list at the library. And our town isn't that big, I am honestly kind of surprised the wait has been so long.

I always have a very big TBR pile, and I never stop buying, so I've got to admit, most of the time I only participate in these readings and discussions when I already own the book.

But for some reason, I went ahead and bought this book just for our group, even though it is still extremely painful for me to think of the 2016 election.

I enjoyed her *voice* a lot. Her memories of past events were just as full of small details as I imagine they would be in real life.

In some ways Hillary reminds me of my mother-in-law. Both are brilliant, both had terrible fathers, and both became involved with *terrible* men. My mil married and stayed married, despite all the humiliations (which are quite similar to those that Hillary has suffered in her marriage to Bill). So I cheered when novel Hillary fled and built a life of her own. And it was a solid life.

Nits: Would novel Hillary never have served in Obama's Cabinet? Would the American people really elect Illinois Senators back-to-back? Would the DNC have even gotten behind that scenario? Biggest nit: The appearance, in any form, of Trump!

Allie wrote: "I really want to read this, but alas I am still on the holds list at the library. And our town isn't that big, I am honestly kind of surprised the wait has been so long."

Oh that is too bad! I got the audio really fast on this, and my town is pretty big :) Hope it gets there soon and that you enjoy the read.

Lisa wrote: "I always have a very big TBR pile, and I never stop buying, so I've got to admit, most of the time I only participate in these readings and discussions when I already own the book.

But for some re..."

I wish we could leave Trump out of every story, but to be fair he seems, to me at least, to be inevitable. Not necessarily inevitable as a president (I think Biden would have won if he had not lost his son and had been able to run in 2016) but as a big loud voice. We all know that there is a large part of America that was not celebrating what we think of as the wins of the Obama presidency. We also know that there is this big chunk of folks that don't trust the "slick" insiders and wanted an "outsider" candidate, and we know that true outsiders don't have the money and connections to every actually win a presidential election. Just my two cents.

I love what you said about your MIL, I think so many women of that generation have similar stories to tell. That must have made the read so personal for you! I am of the generation after Hillary, 15+ years her junior, and I still know people who fell into that trap, but it was less common by then. Living as a true feminist was an impossibility for most every woman in the 60's and 70's who wanted to keep her foot in the mainstream. Feminists were marginalized, and actively kept from positions of power, so the hooked on to their men (whether or not they were good men) and built from behind them. Reading this, and seeing an alternative to that scenario was a real blast for me too.

I am so glad you bought the book! I have the same issue. I gave away about 1000 books before a move in 2016 and I have been pretty strict about limiting my buying since then, and I still have boxes of books and no room to add them to my many bookshelves. I got this one on Overdrive. Thank goodness for Overdrive! I love paper books, and read them a lot, but I am used to Kindle, and like audio, so Overdrive and Hoopla supply most of my new books these days.

I really enjoyed the first 3rd of the book. Then it got overlong and I made myself finish it. I really liked early Hillary in this book. Middle and end Hillary seemed kind of flat and one dimensional. I think it's exceedingly difficult to reenvision someone who's living's life.

I really disliked this book, and I *adored* American Wife. The most convincing character in the book is Bill; I think she has a much better understanding/insight into what motivates him, but also the effect his very real charisma has on others is. I don't think she gets anywhere near that level of insight into Hillary.

Here's the review I wrote of it when I read it over the summer. I look forward to reading everyone's commentary here and happy to talk about specific bits and pieces!

The Hillary in this book is someone to whom things happen, who gets swept along, convinced by others to run for office. It suggests that she's so insecure about her sexual/romantic appeal to men that she is hesitant in other areas of her life too. The narrator in the book is oddly clinical as she describes things, including sex; Hillary has no earthiness or worldliness, which seems completely out of character from the real life person. There's a weird tendency to introduce minor/
inconsequential characters by their full names, for instance (I wonder if Sittenfeld is trying to imitate the style of a political memoir here?).

The book is profoundly uninterested in politics and it shows in small ways and big. It's hard to know what issues Hillary cares about, the book hews closely to many real-life moments from Hillary's and the other characters' lives, but never in terms of signature issues that Hillary worked on while she was in politics.

The book mostly skips over the 2008 election, though in real life it was riveting and pivotal--it's really interested in 2016 because it's a chance to bring Bill and their romantic relationship into the mix. It misses entirely the actual circumstances of the 2016 election when two (Bernie and Trump) candidates essentially make populist, outsider appeals and use them effectively against Hillary. Though the Hillary in the book is a long-time senator, I'm not convinced she would have amassed the kind of virulent backlash that actually prevented real-life Hillary from gaining the presidency, without the preceding 30 years of nasty media and actual political power that she endured/gained as part of the Clinton presidency (in this book, Bill loses his 1992 bid).

The end of the book is a weird sort of wish fulfillment about all of the easy wins (overturning the Hyde Amendment?!) that would magically happen if Hillary had been elected, divorced from the virulent anti-choice, right-wing politics that actually exist in the U.S. and that have prevented previous Democratic administrations from such policy victories. This book offers too easy an explanation for anti-Hillary politics, that's it's all gender-based (as opposed to based in part to the perception of her as an elite Washington insider, or as someone with centrist politics with a blind eye towards the power of finance and big industry). Yes, gender had a huge role to play in 2016, but I don't think it would have been the same if, as is the case for book-Hillary, she hadn't had nearly 40 years in the media crosshairs, as first lady of Arkansas and the US, before she runs in 2016. The book also suggests that Donald Trump could have easily been tamed into a pro-Hillary surrogate with a little ego flattery, ignoring his own deeply misogynistic, white national politics that propelled him to the presidency.

Leah wrote: "I really disliked this book, and I *adored* American Wife. The most convincing character in the book is Bill; I think she has a much better understanding/insight into what motivates him, but also t..."

Interesting take. There are various points I think are really valid, but don't you think Hillary would not have been an Washington insider if not for her association with Bill?

Bonnie G. wrote: "Leah wrote: "I really disliked this book, and I *adored* American Wife. The most convincing character in the book is Bill; I think she has a much better understanding/insight into what motivates hi..."

If I'm following you (sort of got lost in the various don't's and not's): The book would have us believe that Hillary is able to achieve insider status (almost 25 years in the Senate and the runner-up for the presidential nomination in 2008) without Bill. Doesn't book Hillary come to DC the same year as real-life Clinton was elected (can't recall if book Hillary is elected in 1992 or 1994)--in any case, long enough to accumulate political power and support for two serious presidential bids.

But the book is uninterested in the actual reasons that, to my mind, Hillary's presidential bid(s) failed. In 2016, she was easy to tear down by a populist left and a populist right for her general insider status, but especially for the ways she upheld the interests of and was part of the financial elite--the book doesn't contend at all with this aspect of Hillary's political life before running for 2016 and of course it's not an issue in the election depicted in the book (this is what I mean by it being uninterested in politics--there's no way to miss this aspect of the 2016 election).

I absolutely believe that her presidential ambitions, in 2008 and 2016, were also thwarted due to sexism, but I feel like the book isn't very thoughtful about the specific ways that misogynist narratives about Hillary were formed over the years, and how she herself re-fashioned her look, her speaking voice, her public demeanor and so many other things in response to the very virulent sexism she faced over the years. I think a lot of that sexism was in response to the specific ways she "failed" to be a traditional stay-at-home political spouse, but instead kept her own name, didn't dress particularly feminine in her early days at AS first lady, kept her career, then later showed so much interest in policy as first lady (including directing the health care effort). The book's version of sexism just seems so generic and unearned, given that book Hillary hasn't been in the public eye for nearly so long nor in the public eye as a wife and mother who is somehow "failing" to perform the expected gender role.

At the end of the day, i think this book is more interested in (and like I said above, more insightful about) Bill than in Hillary, despite the title and narrator--he's this charismatic, wily figure, sexy, flirtatious, conniving, appealing and repellant. He propels so much of the action and conflict, whereas Hillary is so often passive and reactive. The real Hillary is endlessly fascinating to me but I found book Hillary pretty dull and I definitely didn't think the book gave me much insight into her.

I have often wondered if the American Presidency was, for Hillary, the ultimate validation. If it was about doing meaningful work, there were so many other things she could have continued doing that would have made a greater impact on women and families. This novel didn't clarify that, in a way I found true. I never really understood why she wanted to be President, why it was worth all the misery.

Leah wrote: "Bonnie G. wrote: "Leah wrote: "I really disliked this book, and I *adored* American Wife. The most convincing character in the book is Bill; I think she has a much better understanding/insight into..."

Bernie has been a member of Congress for nearly 30 years, why would he not be seen as an insider if you believe Hillary would just by virtue of tenure her in Congress in the book? That confuses me. Mostly Hillary's loss was white people, male and female, who fear electing a Democrat, and especially a nonwhite or female Democrat. People seem to think white people elected Obama. They did not. 37% of white voters (male and female) voted for Obama in 2012. In fact, a Democrat has not taken the majority of white voters since LBJ. My point, and I do have one, is that Hillary lost for many reasons, not just gender and not just the association with Bill (whose presidency I lived through, and who I liked as a president, even if he was a crap husband and a misogynist.) I think the concept of taking Bill out the mix and doing a "what if" is compelling, but I can see why you didn't find it so.

Also, Leah, I agree the book is more interesting when it deals with Bill. but I think that is because Bill is more interesting than Hillary. Not better, not smarter, not more able, but more interesting.

Lisa wrote: "I have often wondered if the American Presidency was, for Hillary, the ultimate validation. If it was about doing meaningful work, there were so many other things she could have continued doing tha..."

That is a good point. It is slightly differnt from, but related to my issue with the book. As much as I enjoyed reading the story, I don't think that Hillary would have ever sought the presidency if not for the spotlight shone on her as First Lady. I think she would have been a tireless worker fighting for the welfare of women and children, I think she might have been a Senator or even a Cabinet member or perhaps a judge, but I just don't think she would have been interested in the presidency, and the book did not tell me why my feelings on that were wrong. (This conversation may get the book knocked down to a 4-star)

I also came down on the dislike side for this one. I finished it because I wanted to see how it ended (and, of course, so we could discuss it here!). The first section felt uncomfortable and too "uncanny valley" to enjoy. The second part, her time in Chicago, worked the best for me because it was completely invented.

But the third section brought things back down. I agree with others that it was forcing the story towards a specific end, wedging in particular figures and issues not because they made sense but because the author wanted to have them (Trump, Bill), and ignoring the parts they didn't want to deal with (Bernie&co, actual deliberation on issues, a real reckoning of her response to Carol Moseley Braun, a Cabinet role). For a book that was so pro-Hillary, it didn't serve her well as a character.

That the book was so fixated on some specific names and details, but coy, vague, or glossy on others, really disrupted the balance of the narrative for me. Is it trying to be a character-driven personal fantasy or a close-to-real alternate history? Neither mold fit, so I would be reluctant to recommend this book to many people.

Sara wrote: "I also came down on the dislike side for this one. I finished it because I wanted to see how it ended (and, of course, so we could discuss it here!). The first section felt uncomfortable and too "u..."

Really interesting Sara. I completely read this as personal fantasy. I wasn't bothered by Sittenfeld end running issues (the polarization of the country as the Dems move far left and the Reps continue to swim in the far right swamp because that is its own book. I don't think this book could have done what I think it set out to do (create an allegory showing how accomplished women would be judged if not seen first as who they are in relation to men) while addressing the many many issues that are relevant to explaining 2016. I did find it depressing that the only way Sittenfeld saw this as possible was to rob Hillary of a partner and motherhood, but maybe that is accurate.

I'm late to the discussion, but I also fell on the dislike side for this book. I enjoyed reading American Wife so I had high expectations for Rodham.

Bonnie, I think part of what was hard for me was exactly what you said about her being robbed of a partner and motherhood.

Sara, I also think you hit the nail on the head for me. It seemed like a book that was trying to do too many things. I wonder if that partially had to do with this book being written during the election time.

Ultimately, I felt uncomfortable while reading the book. I'm not sure if it was because of the interactions between Hillary and Bill (which was weird to read for me for some reason), the way in which I was triggered by the role DT played, or in the way it all played out. I think Leah said it earlier, but her characterization did feel a bit wooden or not fully relatable or human. I don't really know how to explain it.

It wasn't a total miss for me, but definitely not what I expected.

Gaby wrote: "I'm late to the discussion, but I also fell on the dislike side for this book. I enjoyed reading American Wife so I had high expectations for Rodham.

Bonnie, I think part of what was hard for me ..."

Really interesting perspective, Gaby. I think you hit on a lot of the key points. I am interested what you and others think about whether there is any truth to Sittenfeld's choice to make Hilary's success dependent on her not having a family. I am a little older than most of the people here. I started practicing law in 1989, and at the time it was certainly is true that nearly all the women I knew who were equity partners (not that many to be sure) did not have kids. The rules have changed some, but there is no question that family obligations are a professional liability for women at least in law. In law I know a lot of women who decide to take counsel roles or support roles (none of which are going to get you to partnership) in order to balance family obligations. I don't know any men who have done the same. I assume that is true in fields outside of law too. Nancy Pelosi raised a houseful of kids, but she was in her 50's before she went to Congress.

In the end I can say enjoyed this book, although the middle section was tough going and I probably wouldn't recommend it to anyone who wasn't a complete political junkie.
And having said that, I definitely wouldn't have tried reading it if I hadn't already read "American Wife" and "Prep". The novelisation of real characters doesn't appeal normally. But the pace and tone of American Wife was beautiful, its story thought provoking. I was a Sittenfeld fan, so ready to follow her on this one - even if it did mean reading about " Bill" and "Hillary's" sex life which was a bit queasy making.
Obviously with "Rodham" Sittenfeld has taken one of the most famous women as her subject, and her novel could never be another "American Wife" - that novel explored a previously unknown back story, and threw new light on a relatively minor political figure (sorry, if that sounds dismissive) . Whereas everything about Hillary, or at least her life since meeting Bill, seems to be known already.
Given all this, I liked Sittenfeld's idea to face Hillary's fame and notoriety head on and actually use the folk knowledge of Hillary - e.g. the "stay home and bake cookies" remarks in slightly different contexts. I liked the re-framing of the famous interview re the Gennifer Flowers affair with an alternative (poorly performing) wife.
Unlike Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton also stirs strong emotions. Again, I liked how Sittenfeld has taken a lot of the criticisms and tropes about Hillary face on, and faced them down, e.g. her wonkiness, her lack of warmth, her lack of electability even against other female candidates. I warmed to this Rodham with her "loneliness from being good at something" from the start.
Even the introduction of Trump as ally was a great final chapter twist.
On the downside? I was disappointed that Sittenfeld ducked the central question over Hillary, i.e. how she's stayed married to Bill Clinton. What would a marriage of convenience or ambition be like to live inside? I still think there's a great novel to be written around a wife faced with her husband's infidelity being publicised worldwide, and their child trying to hold them together. I thought the Bill Clinton in the novel was much less than Bill Clinton in real life. Real life Bill has not traded Hillary in for a younger model, and been supportive (in his own way?) throughout. In fact the rape allegation against "Clinton" was the worst part of the book. There is a lot to be said about Clinton, but the central difference between Clinton and the current incumbent of the White House is that Clinton works on charm. Trump is the man on record as saying he takes what he wants. I'd like to have kept that distance between the two.
I was disappointed that Hillary's life seemed so much smaller after Bill. I was disappointed that there wasn't more about a life in politics. I enjoyed checking out minor political characters - e.g. Carol Mosley Braun, but would have liked more cameos from better known figures like Warren and Saunders. This book is going to be picked up more by politics wonks after all!

Macy wrote: "In the end I can say enjoyed this book, although the middle section was tough going and I probably wouldn't recommend it to anyone who wasn't a complete political junkie.
And having said that, I de..."

Great insights Macy. I used to be a political wonk and maybe that is why I kind of loved this book. I am no longer a wonk, the last four years sent me skittering off into the corner hearing and seeing as little evil as possible while still remaining an informed citizen. I know, head in the sand is dangerous, but so is depression, and the news was keeping me in a dark place.

Anyway, I agree with almost everything here. I did want ot mention that the H&B sex scenes were squicky, but I think they were part of subverting the popular narrative which paints Hillary as frigid (blaming her for Bill's constant infidelity.) Despite the squick I liked that Sittenfeld did that. Digression: That narrative around Hillary is so weird and inaccurate to me. And I know it doesn't matter but still, its weird, I think we all know that Bill was never going to marry anyone who did not enjoy bedsport. Besides, you would think people would know fidelity is not dependant on sexual satisfaction -- if it was I would not know many faithful women.

Bonnie G. wrote: "I am no longer a wonk, the last four years sent me skittering off into the corner hearing and seeing as little evil as possible.."
Ironically I headed off to US politics as light relief from Brexit! I had such hopes!

Macy wrote: "Bonnie G. wrote: "I am no longer a wonk, the last four years sent me skittering off into the corner hearing and seeing as little evil as possible.."
Ironically I headed off to US politics as light ..."

Oh, you are looking in the wrong place. This America is the most dismal of dismal swamps. I take it I shouldn't do the opposite and turn to Brexit. Ah well -- back to trashy romances. I have one by the bed now that has an MMA fighter in the lead. Sometimes thinking is the last thing I want to do. (I am also about 1/4 through The Vanishing Half which addresses some serious social issues but is also a solid family drama in case you are looking for something in-between.)

Bonnie G. wrote: "Digression: That narrative around Hillary is so weird and inaccurate to me. And I know it doesn't matter but still, its weird, I think we all know that Bill was never going to marry anyone who did not enjoy bedsport. ."

Yes, one hundred percent! And agreed about the "squickyness" of those scenes but hadn't thought about how it contrasts with the conception of her frigidity in the real world. When I think about it that way, it makes me appreciate more of what she did with the book and characters. But/And -- if we're truly countering this idea of Hilary as a frigid woman/asexual being, I'm not sure the way it ends for her is as much of a foil to the public conception.

Unrelatedly, I am also drowning myself in romance as to escape the reality of the world :)

Sara wrote: "I finished it because I wanted to see how it ended (and, of course, so we could discuss it here!). The first section felt uncomfortable and too "uncanny valley" to enjoy. The second part, her time in Chicago, worked the best for me because it was completely invented.

But the third section brought things back down. I agree with others that it was forcing the story towards a specific end, wedging in particular figures and issues not because they made sense but because the author wanted to have them (Trump, Bill), and ignoring the parts they didn't want to deal with (Bernie&co, actual deliberation on issues, a real reckoning of her response to Carol Moseley Braun, a Cabinet role). For a book that was so pro-Hillary, it didn't serve her well as a character.

That the book was so fixated on some specific names and details, but coy, vague, or glossy on others, really disrupted the balance of the narrative for me. Is it trying to be a character-driven personal fantasy or a close-to-real alternate history? Neither mold fit, so I would be reluctant to recommend this book to many people."

I agree with everything Sara wrote. I started this book LOVING fictional Hillary, and really identifying with her, and practically applauded when she drove away... and then, part 2 and I was like NOPE. And my mom is a huge Hillary fan, and initially I was going to recommend this to her, but now... not so sure. I mean, I told her I read it, but... I'm not sure what the POINT of the story was. Yes, reimagining her on a quest for the presidency but through different routes and being successful... but... I didn't feel closer to knowing who she was as a character the way this was written. It definitely wasn't a satisfying ending.

Gaby wrote: "Bonnie G. wrote: "Digression: That narrative around Hillary is so weird and inaccurate to me. And I know it doesn't matter but still, its weird, I think we all know that Bill was never going to mar..."

LOL, thank heaven for romance! I think I have read more of it in the past 4 years than in the remainder of my many years on this planet combined!

As for Hillary, I agree that the ending doesn't paint her as a sexy beast, but perhaps at least a warm one? Kris mentioned that she did not see the point of the book, and I was surprised to find I had not really thought about that at all until this discussion. I think I just came at it as a story that looks at how everything changes if we make one different decision, a sort of Sliding Doors concept. I saw it as a rather apolitical political book. As I saw it the book wasn't about issues and wasn't about the 2016 election, it was about (I think) how despite our early certainty that we can compartmentalize our decisions in each area of our lives, every decision has an effect on every area. I know my life would have played out very differently if I had not married my ex, and my marriage would have played out very differently if I had not chosen at the time to focus on building a practice which required constant travel. I read it as about women's choices more than politics and for that discussion Hillary, whose decisions we know so much about, was a fascinating case study. Maybe I misread the whole thing, but with that lens I really liked it.

Bonnie G. wrote: "I read it as about women's choices more than politics and for that discussion Hillary, whose decisions we know so much about, was a fascinating case study.r..."

I hadn't thought about this lens...but I think if I had started the book with that in mind, I might have enjoyed it more! I hadn't thought about that, but maybe the book is really supposed to be about the choices we face and their impacts. Is that an oversimplification?

Gaby wrote: "Bonnie G. wrote: "I read it as about women's choices more than politics and for that discussion Hillary, whose decisions we know so much about, was a fascinating case study.r..."

I hadn't thought ..."

That is exactly where I came from, I really thought it was about how every decision we make changes everything, and what that might have meant for HRC.

I enjoyed the first part of the book (other than the icky sex scenes) as I felt it helped me understand Hillary more as a person - her background, goals, etc. It is an interesting premise to imagine her life without Bill, but I wish that they author had made her personal life more fulfilling. I'm not saying that everyone needs marriage and children, but the emotional affair with her co-worker just painted her as immature. And I hate that Trump ended up being the person that ended up getting her elected.

This *just* came in from the library for me. Based on this discussion, and that the election is tomorrow, I'm assuming that I probably should just return it and check it out again some other time when/if I can stomach it.

Allie wrote: "This *just* came in from the library for me. Based on this discussion, and that the election is tomorrow, I'm assuming that I probably should just return it and check it out again some other time w..."

I can't speak for you, but I am on political blackout right now (I early voted last week) so I don't completely lose my mind. I might hold onto it though, perhaps on Wednesday or Thursday you will feel better.....

I finally managed to secure this book as an ebook from my library in January. I found it fascinating from a non-American point of view especially the route that she took the presidency. I think it helped that I was not familiar with a lot of the backgound to Clinton's actual presidency and her road to 2016.
I did struggle with some of her decision making but everyone does not always make the best choices like her emotional affair and her meeting with Bill in California.
I enjoy the way that you as a book club enjoy me to read books that I wouldn't read.

Siobhan wrote: "I finally managed to secure this book as an ebook from my library in January. I found it fascinating from a non-American point of view especially the route that she took the presidency. I think it ..."

Great to hear from you Siobhan. It is hard to imagine how differnt this book would be for someone not in the US and therefore totally steeped in preconceptions (many accurate, many possible, many matters of opinion, and many invented) about Hillary and Bill. Glad to hear it read well from that perspective!

Diversifying my reading is what I love about the book club too, and I also do a reading challenge (Book Riot Read Harder) for that reason. When left to my own devices I used to read a lot more books about neurotic Jewish people in NY, people dealing with issues of race in the South. and introspective fish out of water types in the Midwest. I am so glad I have changed that up, though I still really love those books. I now read a lot more books set outside the US, and not just 18th and 19th century British authors. Also, when reading the work of American writers I now look to include an array of ethnic, religious, racial and cultural backgrounds. I learn so much looking at things through the lenses of people whose lives are not just like my own.

I have had this on my bedside table for a few weeks, stuck somewhere around the 50 page mark. I am just not feeling it, and am wondering how much of it is because I identify with Hillary's personality and how it is perceived by others a little bit too much. I should probably return it so all the people waiting for it can get their hands on it instead (our library system has done away with due dates for pandemic related reasons and I am squatting on way too many books right now).

CDB wrote: "I am just not feeling it, and am wondering how much of it is because I identify with Hillary's personality and how it is perceived by others a little bit too much."

I felt that way at the beginning, as well But, give it a bit more time. You will likely lose that feeling. I did.

Kris wrote: "CDB wrote: "I am just not feeling it, and am wondering how much of it is because I identify with Hillary's personality and how it is perceived by others a little bit too much."

I felt that way at ..."

I will second Kris on this. Sittenfeld is a good writer, and she sucked me in despite the fact I also have a lot of Hillary feelings.