As usual, I have been reading three completely different things!
Alexandra Andrews’s debut thriller, Who Is Maud Dixon?, is so close to Patricia Highsmith’s The Talented Mr Ripley that it feels almost like a retelling, although there are also shades of Caroline Kepnes’s You in its cynical take on the literary world. Florence is an editorial assistant in New York who never seems to do or say the right thing; her less privileged upbringing leaves her feeling like an outsider. Like other young women of her generation, she’s fallen in love with the novel Mississippi Foxtrot, written under the pseudonym Maud Dixon. When Florence is invited to travel to Morocco to work as a personal assistant for the woman behind the pseudonym, Helen Wilcox, she believes she will learn the secret of how to be a successful novelist. However, she still feels stuck too fast in her old identity. When an unexpected opportunity to become Helen Wilcox – and through her, Maud Dixon – comes up, what will Florence do with it?
The first half of this thriller was really intelligently written; although the early chapters are not overtly eventful, I felt completely gripped by Florence’s voice and observations. In the second half, it comes off the rails a bit, with an identity-swapping plot that becomes too complicated and a little absurd. Highsmith’s decision to have Tom Ripley’s deception be initially so simple, but so audacious, felt even wiser after reading Who Is Maud Dixon? I would have been much more convinced if the novel had taken a quieter turn and focused more on literary deception. In particular, Andrews’s decision to make Mississippi Foxtrot loosely autobiographical felt unfortunate given that Elena Ferrante’s decision to write under a pseudonym seemed at least partly motivated by the assumption that women writers can only write about their own lives. As she writes anonymously, Ferrante’s critics can’t draw neat lines between her life and that of her characters, which seems to be exactly what she wants. Instead, Andrews falls back on a really tiring trope – that all novels are simply veiled versions of autobiography – which doesn’t leave her any room to explain wider questions about writing. However, I would definitely read her next novel, as I thought Florence was such an interesting creation, and she carries the book even in its sillier moments.
I received a free proof copy of this novel from the publisher for review. It’s out in the UK now.
Naomi Ishiguro’s debut novel, Common Ground, also starts in a very familiar place. It’s 2003, but it might as well be 1950; thirteen-year-old Stan is the school outcast, teased for his NHS glasses and old clothes, and struggling after his father’s death. When he meets cool sixteen-year-old Charlie, who doesn’t go to school but works at the local gym instead, an unlikely friendship results. Stan – who, speaking as someone who was also a pretty unworldly teenager in 2003, seems almost impossibly naive – is fascinated by Charlie’s Traveller* family and shocked at the abuse they receive. Almost ten years later, in 2012, Stan and Charlie meet again at a party in London. Both are now very different people, and struggle to connect across class, education and racial divides. Charlie’s life has been marked by the social exclusion and discrimination he’s experienced, while Stan seems to have lightly shrugged off his earlier suffering. Will their previous closeness be enough to bring them together?
Common Ground has very worthy intentions, and draws attention to a form of racism that is often forgotten, despite recent headlines about discrimination against Traveller communities in both Britain and Ireland. However, as a novel, I found it plodding and simplistic, and much too long. I was a little puzzled about what it was trying to do. A number of reviews describe it as ‘feelgood’ or ‘heartwarming’, but I found it rightly, relentlessly grim. If you’re looking for something that cheerfully explores community in the vein of Libby Page’s The Lido or Joanna Cannon’s Three Things About Elsie, this is not the book for you. However, by itself, that isn’t a problem – there’s no reason why a book that explores this kind of entrenched racism should be uplifting. The trouble is that Common Ground doesn’t bring much more to the table. The prose is competent, but both Charlie and Stan remain within the boundaries of their respective archetypes. When they meet again in London in 2012, Charlie slips straight into the salt-of-the-earth working-class observer role, mocking middle-class students’ pretentious views on art (why is this always the way protagonists demonstrate emotional authenticity?) while Stan can’t speak without lapsing into journalistic jargon about austerity politics. People are more complicated than this.
I was sorry not to like Common Ground more, because I really admire its focus on the experiences of Traveller communities. I would actually be keen to try Ishiguro’s collection of short stories, Escape Routes, to see how her writing works in a very different form.
I received a free proof copy of this novel from the publisher for review. It’s out in the UK on 25th March.
*There are a range of terms that these communities use to refer to themselves, as the linked article describes. I’m using ‘Traveller’ in this review because it’s the word Charlie seems to prefer.
Gwendoline Riley has many gifts as a writer, but I think the most obvious – showcased both in her most recent book, My Phantoms, and her previous one, First Love – is the way she composes dialogue. I can’t think of another writer who nails so precisely how we actually speak, with all of its redundancies, embarrassing repetitions and pointless exclamations. The narrator of My Phantoms, Bridget, is also acutely aware of how even the most throwaway comment might be interpreted, at least when she’s talking to her mother, Hen, which adds an extra layer of self-reflection. Here she is talking to Hen about a drinks party:
“I got stuck with a really boring woman for about ten minutes,” I said.
“Oh no!” my mother said.
“So typical,” I said, “in a room full of interesting people.”
That was a slip-up. I knew it as soon as I’d said it.
“Mmm,” she said, bravely.
I tried to get her back: “The dreadful thing is, I think she felt she’d got stuck with me, too! But neither of us had the wherewithal to break it off.”
“Aargh!” said my mother.
And encouraged, I went on, “I think it’s worse when you feel you’re the boring one!” I said. But there again, that was wrong; I’d given the impression now of such a party-rich life that I could make generalisations.
Bridget tells us almost nothing about herself; the focus of this novella is on character portraits of her parents, her unbearably awful father (whose constant badgering of her when she was a child gives us some idea of why she may have withdrawn so far into herself) and the much more complicated Hen, who is always striving for something brighter and better at the same time as she trips herself up. Hen’s life is the real centre of this story, and the final glimpse of her we get is unbearably sad.
Other reviewers have noted that Bridget’s effacement of herself from the narrative doesn’t mean that we should think of her as unselfish, pointing out that she outsources caring responsibilities to her sister Michelle as Hen gets older, and seems unreasonably opposed to Hen meeting her boyfriend. However, I think Riley leaves Bridget’s motivations deliberately open. She is far estranged not only from her parents but from Michelle, and there seems to be a great deal she doesn’t say about her childhood. And while she is capable of deliberately baiting and upsetting her mother (for example, subtly noting the inconvenience of having dinner with Hen on her actual birthday, because the weather’s always cold and wet) we also see how hard she tries to make pleasant conversation. This kind of watchfulness made me reflect back on what Bridget experienced while she was growing up, as it felt like the kind of learnt behaviour that emerges from an abusive environment. None of these characters are easy to read, but that’s why this novella is so good.
I received a free proof copy of this novella from the publisher for review. It’s out in the UK on 1st April.
I really, really rated First Love, so I’m glad to hear My Phantoms is similarly spot-on (and Riley’s observation skills about emotionally abusive environments, in particular, were incredible in the former; it seems very likely that she’s doing the same thing deliberately in the latter!)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I thought First Love was fantastic but, four years on, I’m ashamed to say I don’t remember much about it. I feel like there’s a strong similarity between the mothers in both of the books, but would have to re-read First Love to confirm. But yes, I think a lot of the reviews have been rather harsh on Bridget.
LikeLike
I just remember finding the dialogue between the protag and her rather nasty husband accurate to the point of being mildly triggering!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, thank you for warning us against these (and Elle for her comment as that will make me avoid that, after my weird thing about not being able to read about nasty marriages since getting married!). A good variety, too! I have a non-fiction book about Traveller communities I’m looking forward to getting to as I know little about them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just to note, My Phantoms has very little marriage-related content, that’s all in First Love! And Who Is Maud Dixon? was a fun read. The only one of these I really wouldn’t recommend is Common Ground 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
My Phantoms sounds really interesting! I haven’t tried Riley’s work before but I think I may start with this one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope you like it!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I loved My Phantoms when I read it just before Christmas and now you’ve tempted me to read it again!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I imagine it would still be so rich on a re-read.
LikeLike
I hadn’t heard of Who Is Maud Dixon? It does sound like fun. As it’s Highsmith’s centenary year I plan to read a couple of her novels and maybe a biography of her, and it would be interesting to throw in a similar read. (I’ve already read Ripley twice, and a couple of its sequels, so wouldn’t reread. I love the film, though!)
I’m going to try Ishiguro’s stories, which I have out from the library. I’ll let you know if they’re any good 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would definitely be interested to know your thoughts on Ishiguro’s short fiction!
I’m afraid re Highsmith I’ve never got much beyond The Talented Mr Ripley. (I did try the sequels but hated them!) The film is one of my favourite films of all time, though.
LikeLike
My book club is going to do Deep Water by Highsmith, and I also have a copy of Carol.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Women’s Prize for Fiction, 2022: The Bread the Devil Knead and Sorrow and Bliss | Laura Tisdall