Hello!
A bit of a bumper edition this week because I missed last week -- I was ill and couldn’t look at a screen, nevermind think and write about books. We’re back again!!
What I’ve been reading and what I think about it
I’ve now finished Joyce Carol Oates’ Blonde (1999), and can safely say that I haven’t felt so challenged and invigorated in such a strange way for a long, long time. I enjoyed the reading of it immensely, but I felt a bit gross after I was done,and I’m unsure what I think of it overall.
First of all, it is, without a doubt, a piece of art. It fictionalises Marilyn Monroe’s life in such a way that requires immense skill and research. There is truth in it -- the general chronology of her life, including the films she was in and her marriages, is there, as well as how it draws on contemporary commentary on her as a person (such as how Tony Curtis hated her, and was pretty vocal about it). The prose is excellent and it never felt like a huge book, which it is. Even though I would have said I was a fan of hers before reading this novel, I now feel deeply sympathetic towards Monroe and truly believe she was a once-in-a-lifetime talent, who was unfairly maligned by the press and the male-led Hollywood elite.
That being said, there are liberties taken within the novel that I’m unsure how to reconcile with such an enjoyable reading experience. Even talking about someone’s life as a ‘reading experience’ feels uncomfortable to me; despite positioning itself as fiction, there are still constant reminders that this draws on real life, such as when Oates talks about the films that she has acted in and I am familiar with. Is it ethical to make a story out of somebody’s life? The answer to that is probably yes, but it depends on the story you are telling.
There was undoubtedly tragedy in Monroe’s life, that much is obvious even with a working knowledge of her childhood and her struggles with a multitude of things later on in her life. This is presented well, but you would be forgiven if your takeaway from Blonde is that there was no real joy to be had by her either. The joy that is presented is illustrated with a tinge of sadness and derision, a kind of ‘poor Marilyn, she didn’t know that these people were only being nice to her because she was an actress’, or something along those lines. This is what feels unethical to me, I think, an assertion that we know better.
The inherent contradiction that runs through it is also difficult to contend with. Oates concentrates on how ‘Marilyn’ was a persona for Norma Jean Baker, something that other people believed in but Norma Jean could only channel when she was in the right mindframe. She criticises how people thought that they knew her, but she had much more going on -- even though this novel makes a huge amount of assumptions itself. (I can’t remember where I read it for the first time, but there is that infamous anecdote of an interviewer walking down the street with her, and Marilyn points out that nobody recognises her, because she hasn’t turned her persona on. As soon as she does this, people start to turn their head and approach her. It feels like Oates read this and absolutely ran with it, making it the focal point of MM’s life; how there were two of her, the ‘real’ her, and the character Marilyn Monroe.)
Interestingly, the bits I pretty actively hated were those that were a complete fabrication, clearly inserted so that there could be a clear narrative arc which is only fully revealed to us in the final pages. (If others read this as cheap, I wouldn’t blame them. I don’t think that, I can see why it was done, but if you were to take real issue with the book on moral grounds, this would be the main sticking point, I feel). Oates writes in a throuple situation between Monroe and the sons of Charlie Chaplin and Eddy G. Robinson that goes on to dictate much of her thinking throughout the rest of her life, and it just feels overwrought and weird. I didn’t actually know that this was made up until I looked it up about half way through, but even before that I felt like it was inauthentic.
I’ve spent the majority of this newsletter heavily criticising this book, I know, but I do absolutely think it is one of the most interesting things I’ve ever read. Will I watch the film? I don’t know. I think I need a bit of distance from the book first.
This week I have also been reading I’m a Fan by Sheena Patel (2021) and The End of Nightwork by Aidan Cottrell-Boyce (2022) in preparation for separate events I’ll be hosting at The West Kirby Bookshop next week, on 1st and 4th respectively. I believe the Sheena Patel event is sold out, but you can get on the waitlist and/or get tickets for Aidan Cottrell-Boyce’s event by emailing Jordan and Dan on hello@thewestkirbybookshop.com. Both are brilliant!
Books on my radar
Rachel has quite literally not stopped going on about The End of Vandalism by Tom Drury (1994), so I feel like I need to read it to assuage her
Not to be that smug person who comments ‘so glad I can finally talk about this’ on people’s pregnancy announcement posts but I can, actually, finally tell you that Eliza’s next novel Penance is absolutely one of the best novels I have ever read in my life. It is out in July and I implore you to pre-order it!!!! It is such a stunning reflection on the true crime ‘community’ and how it is pretty deeply flawed ethically, as well as how horrendous it is to be a teenage girl, especially one who has access to the internet.