Gene Schmidt's Reviews > The Goldfinch
The Goldfinch
by
by
This was a huge disappointment for me. The opening New York sections were excellent, the description of the museum bombing and the whole Mansfield Park thing Tartt has going with Theo and the Barbour family, all of this works beautifully. I was excited to keep on reading to see where it all ended up, but once things move to Las Vegas the story takes a seriously wrong turn. I seem to be a minority opinion here, but there you have it. I do remember sitting up all night in 1992 reading The Secret History. But this is something else...
I have to wonder for whom Tartt thinks she's writing. Does she really imagine that intelligent adult readers are going to be enthralled with hundreds of pages detailing the antics of a pair of burned-out druggie teenagers who spend their time smoking weed, swilling vodka, and dining on packets of sugar and whatever junk food delicacies they can boost from the local supermarket? Well, perhaps they will, the book *is* on the NYT besteller list. But once all the hype and interviews die down...who knows?
The comparisons to Dickens are particularly inappropriate. Dickens wrote about orphans and other unfortunates who are on the receiving end of undeserved bad luck, but his characters struggle *against* degradation and dissipation. Poor little Joe the crossing sweeper sleeps in Tom All Alone's because he has no other choice. But here Theo and Boris revel in their squalor and dissipation . (Boris is the kind of character who seems to exist only in books and movies: the burn-out loser druggie who is failing all his classes in school but is really a secret genius who reads Dostoevsky and Thoreau in his rare sober and lucid moments. Yeah...right. I've been to high school. Burn outs are burn outs).
Nor is there any hint of Dickens' rollicking and life-affirming humor in the book. In fact there is no humor of any kind whatsoever (at least not as far as I read). Not a drop of wit. No one even cracks a halfway decent dirty joke.
And then there is Theo's father, an inveterate gambler deep into the loan sharks, and his aging sexpot girlfriend Xandra...both potentially interesting characters, except they are presented in one-dimensional terms throughout their stay in the novel, and really exist for no other purpose than to end up the way they do (at least in the case of Theo's dad). Wasted opportunity.
Too bad. I gave up halfway though the book. There is just such an incredible ugliness about all (or almost all) of the characters that I found I didn't care a damn what happened to them and certainly didn't want to spend any more time with them. The ironic part is that Tartt is an incredible writer, a master of descriptive prose, attentive to detail and able to create a truly believable world on the page. Too bad it's such a rotten world.
I have to wonder for whom Tartt thinks she's writing. Does she really imagine that intelligent adult readers are going to be enthralled with hundreds of pages detailing the antics of a pair of burned-out druggie teenagers who spend their time smoking weed, swilling vodka, and dining on packets of sugar and whatever junk food delicacies they can boost from the local supermarket? Well, perhaps they will, the book *is* on the NYT besteller list. But once all the hype and interviews die down...who knows?
The comparisons to Dickens are particularly inappropriate. Dickens wrote about orphans and other unfortunates who are on the receiving end of undeserved bad luck, but his characters struggle *against* degradation and dissipation. Poor little Joe the crossing sweeper sleeps in Tom All Alone's because he has no other choice. But here Theo and Boris revel in their squalor and dissipation . (Boris is the kind of character who seems to exist only in books and movies: the burn-out loser druggie who is failing all his classes in school but is really a secret genius who reads Dostoevsky and Thoreau in his rare sober and lucid moments. Yeah...right. I've been to high school. Burn outs are burn outs).
Nor is there any hint of Dickens' rollicking and life-affirming humor in the book. In fact there is no humor of any kind whatsoever (at least not as far as I read). Not a drop of wit. No one even cracks a halfway decent dirty joke.
And then there is Theo's father, an inveterate gambler deep into the loan sharks, and his aging sexpot girlfriend Xandra...both potentially interesting characters, except they are presented in one-dimensional terms throughout their stay in the novel, and really exist for no other purpose than to end up the way they do (at least in the case of Theo's dad). Wasted opportunity.
Too bad. I gave up halfway though the book. There is just such an incredible ugliness about all (or almost all) of the characters that I found I didn't care a damn what happened to them and certainly didn't want to spend any more time with them. The ironic part is that Tartt is an incredible writer, a master of descriptive prose, attentive to detail and able to create a truly believable world on the page. Too bad it's such a rotten world.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Goldfinch.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Started Reading
November 14, 2013
–
Finished Reading
November 19, 2013
– Shelved
Comments Showing 1-50 of 116 (116 new)
message 1:
by
Jennie
(new)
-
added it
Nov 19, 2013 12:44PM
Yes! Gene! Perfect description and summary. The only difference between you and I is that I'm still slogging thru it. What I need is a partner in crime at the same spot as me so I can whip off an email and commiserate! :)
reply
|
flag
Thank you, Gene, for speaking truth to money-backed, publishing power. OMG I am almost GIDDY to find you and like-minded souls out here in virtual reality. I will finish it, as I'm invested. But I am absolutely LOATHING Theo, Boris, Kitsey...all of them. Rarely have I read a book (save, perhaps "A Confederacy of Dunces") that I have disliked so intensely, wanted so badly to send crashing through a pane of glass.
I agree entirely. I think there was way too much ego ( 10 years in the writing) and way to big of an advance for this book to fail. I am always skeptical of reviews of big books by other writers. Seems like a small club ( big advance writers and publishers) looking after their own. I'll take an academic reviewer any day. The whole Las Vegas part was so boring. Why on earth a couple of hundred pages on the high jinks of druggy teenagers in Vegas ? A high character is the antithesis of an interesting protagonist , on any level. Being stoned is being stuck - no growth as a human being. Frederick Exley at least made it funny from an adult's perspective.
I AGREE!!!! I loved the beginning, and also believe that Las Vegas was a disaster that never stopped for 600 more pages.
I completely agree with this (and with the above commenter who notes that the book doesn't recover post-Vegas). Thanks for expressing my thoughts so exactly.
And the beat goes on. At least the avg rating has dropped in the past month. It's now at 4.14. I think back when I started reviewing it it was at something like 4.89. Still. Seems a bit high... Ha! (Channeling Boris)
I completely agree with your review. Theo has to be the most self-indulgent character I have read in a long, long time. "Let me snort some Oxy because I am soooo deep."
Hi Guys!I Is there room in the club for me? I couldn't sleep last night, so I slogged through the Vegas part and back to Manhattan, but I skimmed some of it. I totally agree with
Hi Guys!I Is there room in the club for me? I couldn't sleep last night, so I slogged through the Vegas part and back to Manhattan, but I skimmed some of it. I totally agree with Gene, characters like Boris only exist in books. Real druggies and burn-outs don't read. I taught for a living, I should know. After I came to death 4 and 5, I just couldn't take this book even a little bit seriously anymore. I think G.R.R. Martin is following Theo around. UGH I feel like I'm in too deep now to stop, but there willl be lots of skimming.
I absolutely agree with this review!!! And I am delighted that I am not the only one who does not think this is 'the best book of the year'! I slogged through it, but that is certainly quite a few hours I'll never get back.
Yes,I believe the Vegas section was where the book began to "jump the shark" - and, for me, it never recovered.
I am in full agreement with this review and most of the comments on this thread. I'm about 65% through the book and 100% done with it. I'm forcing myself to continue to read it and eventually complete it because I keep thinking that I will blunder (Theo style) into the third act of the book and receive some sort of enjoyment from this experience. Lindallen - you're completely right with the "jump the shark" comment about Vegas.
Iheoma, I appreciate your devotion, but I can promise you that the third act of the book WILL NOT bring you enjoyment. Sorry to have to disillusion you, but it's a lesson I learned the hard way.
Lindaellen wrote: "Iheoma, I appreciate your devotion, but I can promise you that the third act of the book WILL NOT bring you enjoyment. Sorry to have to disillusion you, but it's a lesson I learned the hard way."
Not good news. Thanks for warning me though.
Not good news. Thanks for warning me though.
In all fairness, my book club - a group of truly committed readers who are not afraid to tackle the hard stuff - was split of this book. Four of us HATED it; the other five liked, or perhaps even, loved it. So you must take all my comments with a grain of salt.....(But, truly, I hated the last part of the books worst of all) Okay, I will shut up now!
Generalizations like "druggies and burn outs don't read" are completely incorrect. I haven't read the book so I don't know anything about Boris but not all drug addicts and burn outs are unintelligent morons. Trust me...I know those statements are false like any other blanket statements. The statement about druggies not reading is blatantly false. Granted not all drug addicts read just like not all non-addicts read. I've been in recovery for 5 years but I have read, on average, 100 books a year since I was in grade school...including the years I was actively abusing substances. I graduated from college with a 3.84 GPA. My life fell apart a few years out of college but some addicts/alcoholics live fairly normal lives for a long time. So normal that most would not suspect anything. The typical image of a drug addict isn't always the reality. Addicts and alcoholics come from all walks of life....
I think what we're trying to convey is that in fiction, both movies and books, teenage burnouts that smoke, inhale or inject every type of drug under the sun are too often portrayed as sage rebels, intellectually so far above all their classmates that they are just misunderstood and too cool for everyone. It's a literary and movie trope that is used OFTEN. Reality is very different from these tropes, but of course people from all walks of life struggle with substance abuse. Books and film are the ones who romanticize it.
Also, Boris was really annoying. You can look it up under TV tropes, they list books and film too. That character is called "The Erudite Stoner".
I kept picturing Boris as Judd Nelson's character in The Breakfast Club.
I am one of the many who "slogged" (love that word) through this book, praying for a payoff for having dug through massive piles of detail. It just all came up short for me. This was not a page-turner, more of a page-skimmer, with me always looking for something concrete to grasp onto to hold my interest. I gave it 3 stars because there is no denying the writing is evocative, but detail without payoff is frustrating.
I am one of the many who "slogged" (love that word) through this book, praying for a payoff for having dug through massive piles of detail. It just all came up short for me. This was not a page-turner, more of a page-skimmer, with me always looking for something concrete to grasp onto to hold my interest. I gave it 3 stars because there is no denying the writing is evocative, but detail without payoff is frustrating.
I am just past the point where he left Las Vegas. I agree that section went on way too long and too much description of the drinking and drugs. I found that very distasteful and think it could have been done with a lot less detail and length.
I finished it today and have some affection for the whole but I so agree the story could have been beautifully told in half the words. Pages and even chapters describing drug and alcohol use. Is anything more boring?? Obviously Tartt thinks so but I sure don't. Spoiler alert... Theo doesn't stop with the drugs in adulthood, they are practically a character, they are so omnipresent.
I was in Barnes and Noble 2 days ago and saw Goldfinch starring at me while checking out. I asked the salesperson if she read it and she said no the jacket description did not appeal to her. I told her I just "suffered" through the book and didn't get all the hype and 5 stars. Did we all read the same book? I agree that the beginning was good and caught my interest. When the story moved to Vegas and focused on the "looser" lifestyle of Theo, Boris and the rest, I was ready to throw the book out in the snow! Then all the drug stupor back at Hobie's and the dishonest business practices where Theo didn't have the strength of character to make amends.
What is wrong with Theo that he could not just get his act together and be the man he thinks he should be. He would be able to woe Pippa...Kitsey is a flighty airhead. I know the art thief underworld is high-stakes and violent. This was just too much with the whole Boris thing.
I was hoping for so much better and felt very put out by the time I spent reading this long tedious novel. The only character I remotely cared for was Pippa. So glad I'm done.
What is wrong with Theo that he could not just get his act together and be the man he thinks he should be. He would be able to woe Pippa...Kitsey is a flighty airhead. I know the art thief underworld is high-stakes and violent. This was just too much with the whole Boris thing.
I was hoping for so much better and felt very put out by the time I spent reading this long tedious novel. The only character I remotely cared for was Pippa. So glad I'm done.
Hard to believe but the book gets even worse when Theo leaves LV. you did the right thing quitting. The last six pages might be the worst garbage I have read. Philosophy 101 " the Meaning of Life" "good things come out of bad" and " one step at a time"
I'm halfway through and seriously considering giving up. Ponderous, slogging, feet dragging through muck--just a few of the phrases weighing down my mind as I trudge on.
Made it to about 350 pages, began skimming then gave up. Couldn't make a connection between the book title and the endless details of these characters and their lives. Also, I didn't like any of the main characters, the language finally got to me, (sick of the f-bomb) and felt the book was going nowhere.
And you're the review police, Daniela? It speaks volumes (pun intended) to me when a reader is unable to finish a book for all the reasons previously stated. There are too many excellent books out there for me to waste one more minute on this one.
I disagree with you all - I loved the book, and I have no problem with Theo, Boris, and of them. God, who wouldn't take drugs as a young teen if you went through what he did, and Boris too. There are many high functioning addicts and alcoholics in the world. Coping is something everyone does differently.
This reviewer must have a very limited sphere if he believes "burn outs are burn outs." Not to say that Boris's character is believable in all respects, but some of the most brilliant and tortured thinkers in human history have been addicts. He probably doesn't care for Phillip Seymour Hoffman, either... apparently only puritans have the right to think! The self-destructive behavior Theo and Boris get up to in Vegas is what makes them infinitely more interesting than Dickens' irritating, flat little angels.
(That said, and even though I loved the book, the Vegas section was the one that really could have used a good edit and a trim of 20 - 40%.)
(That said, and even though I loved the book, the Vegas section was the one that really could have used a good edit and a trim of 20 - 40%.)
I did not care for this book, Halfway through I put it down and decided nothing would entice me to finish it
I didn't want to give up on it, but the longer I read, the more angry I became....I was nearing the end, and just could not continue. I hated it!
I respect your reaction and only want to point out that (to me) the huge smashing sudden turn from NYC to Arizona was appropriate (but, yes, jarring) because Theo was hurled from his former (cultural, safe - he thought, cozy, somewhat sheltered) life to something so different, so alien and unsupportive. I felt we readers were meant to feel that enormous difference.
The transition from New York to Las Vegas is exactly where I lost momentum, too. Nothing pulled me in after that.
I felt like I could have skipped the whole LV section and just read a page summary of what happened and been happy with that. I lost interest half way though and sadly have given up, which I rarely do.
I so agree with what you've said! I'm not a fast reader, and to get to 300 pages has taken me ages. I am giving up. NY was really good and then they lost me in Vegas. I couldn't care less about teenagers boozing and getting high, and hundreds of pages of it. I couldn't care less about any of the characters, actually. So I'm going to spend my precious time on something else. Glad I'm not alone in this!!
I too a someone struggling along. I'm going to finish it because it's a book club read. I'm within 50 pages of the finish line, but I'm limping not soaring along. The book club discussion should be a good one! Glad to know there are others who were less than captivated.
I loved this book. Having survived an explosion and suffered from post traumatic stress and I found the passages to be so true to what I feel. The drug use,Boris, LV, only underscore how like the
painting our lives can be stolen too through circumstances beyond our control.
painting our lives can be stolen too through circumstances beyond our control.
I couldn't agree more. I kept waiting for it to go back to the good stuff, but it never came. I should have let it go mid-way instead of wasting my time and mind finishing it.
I completely agree! Once the Las Vegas piece began, I hated the book. I had hopes that my love would return in New York, but it never did. I just couldn't drum up any sympathy or caring for any of the characters.
If you cannot see the similarities with Dickens, then I don't know what Dickens you've been reading. Is Theo not a modern day orphan? Everytime Theo begins to settle himself down and accept his fate (like in Vegas), some random, by-chance event knocks him down, leaving him to yearn for the one person who never let him down, his mother.
They both (the authors) explore social problems within their own historical (or lack there of) framework. Where Dickens called into question poverty, child labor etc., Tartt is challenging parental neglect,and teenage drug use, etc.. Each one of those examples influences social stratification in different ways, whether that be in the future, past or present. I won't say your review is wrong because that is your own feelings about the book, but I ask you to reconsider your Dickens comments. To me they are blatantly, if I may be a bit blunt, wrong.
They both (the authors) explore social problems within their own historical (or lack there of) framework. Where Dickens called into question poverty, child labor etc., Tartt is challenging parental neglect,and teenage drug use, etc.. Each one of those examples influences social stratification in different ways, whether that be in the future, past or present. I won't say your review is wrong because that is your own feelings about the book, but I ask you to reconsider your Dickens comments. To me they are blatantly, if I may be a bit blunt, wrong.