Showing posts with label life after life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label life after life. Show all posts

Friday, August 9, 2013

the impossible lives of greta wells. andrew sean greer. (128)


a week after learning about "life after life" by kate atkinson, i received an email from barnes and noble (i think) highlighting "the impossible lives of greta wells" which was also about a woman living multiple lives.  i figured maybe quasi-reincarnation was the new literary trend so decided to check it out.

(*i really enjoyed this book and if you haven't read it, stop here and go read it.  this is your spoiler alert if you decide to continue on.)

i have to start off by sharing that it is nothing like "life after life", while ursula would die and return to the same life, greta time-travelled to her own life in a different era.  we meet greta in 1985, her twin brother, felix, had just died of AIDs, her lover left her because she had neglected him and due to these events, she fell into a depression.  to treat her depression, greta begins electroconvulsive therapy (a milder form of electric shock therapy).  it is through these electriconvulsive treatments that she time-travels to 1918 and 1945.  greta discovered that she always travels in sequence and as a result of the other gretas having the same treatment.

1985 greta was not exactly in the greatest state of mind prior to the treatment and time-traveling must be overwhelming and scary.  however, greta discovered that her 1985 family and friends are her family and friends in 1918 and 1945.  and of course, she is always greta.  also, luckily for greta, her eccentric aunt ruth (who i absolutely loved) had a open mind in 1918 and 1985, and believed greta was time-traveling and became her confidant.  the stress of time traveling was less because greta time-travelled to familiar settings.

in 1918, greta's twin brother, felix, came back from the dead, figuratively.  her aunt ruth is still has wild as ever, filled with that fitzgerald-esque flair for partying.  and her lover, nathan, that left here in 1985, is her husband but he is away at war.  she also has a lover, leo.

in 1945, greta's twin brother, felix, is a live and married with a child.  her aunt ruth is dead. ruth died in an accident, at the fault of greta, and greta's treatment is a result of the trauma from the accident.  nathan is her husband and they have a child named for her brother, felix.

it appears that all three gretas are leading very different lives but actually their lives are very similar, the only real difference is the era they live in.

for example, greta's brother is gay in all three eras. in 1985, felix was out and had a partner, alan.  in 1944, he was married with a son but was seeing alan on the side.  it was sad to see them having to masquerade their love with a friendship but at least they were able to be together.  then, felix was caught in a gay bar and as a result his wife leaves him.  in 1918, felix was a bachelor and about to marry a senator's daughter.  greta attempted to set up alan and felix by having them meet at a party like they did in 1945.  however, her scheming was pointless because they had already met.  it made my heart smile when greta realized because it proved felix and alan's love to be true because they always found each other in every era.  sadly though, because it was 1918, their affair was brief and alan ended things.  

i appreciated greer's representation of homosexuality as something innate and not the product of a time period.  how often, homosexuality is painted as a modern epidemic when homosexuality has been around since the beginning of time.  it was heartbreaking yet inspiring to see felix's changing attitudes towards his sexuality.  in 1918, he is ashamed and full of self hate but in 1985, he is out and proud, demonstrating that it is and will get better.  the only thing that i found frustrating was 1985 greta's desire to force her brother out of the closet in 1918 and 1945.  even though she was accepting of his sexuality, he had not accepted it.  and in all my years of being the straight girl BFF to gay boys, i have learned you have to let people come out when they are ready and simply shower them with your support when they do.  

the lives of greta were also tainted by infidelity.  1985 and 1945 nathans were both unfaithful to greta, proving once a cheater, always a cheater.  however, in 1918, it is greta that has the affair with a younger man named leo.  granted it is 1985 greta that eventually slept with leo, it is quite obvious that 1918 greta loves him because she searched for him in 45 and 85.  as a reader, i kept on wondering why 1985 greta didn't seek him out in 1985, he was so in love with greta, maybe he was her true love not nathan.  also 1918 leo gave me some insider scoop on new york.  leo took greta to a secret chamber in the washington square arch!  (i googled to see if it was true and it is!  if you want to read more here is a curbed post.)  but it was interesting to note that nathan and greta's relationship was plagued by infidelity.  i have never been in a relationship in which someone cheated on me so i can't speak from experience, but i can imagine it is easier to cope with infidelity if it's an inevitable part of your relationship versus your failure as a partner.  i am not trying to let cheaters off of the hook, i think individuals need to be honest about their lost of feelings but i do feel that greer is trying to demonstrate that some relationships are just doomed.  

since greta's electrotherapy sessions were not forever, greta's time traveling had a deadline.  she was only having 12 procedures and the 12th procedure would restore all of the gretas to their correct era.  but with a interesting twist of fate, 1985 greta decided to stay in 1918.  granted, her love affair with leo did result in her being pregnant with his child, and nathan was very much aware of it.  nathan attempted to make greta and the unborn child sick and as a result, 1985 greta as 1918 greta leaves nathan.  so it makes sense that 1985 greta decided to stay in 1918, she had created a world in which she was only greta equipped to survive.  1918 greta, after leaving nathan (something 1918 would have never seem fathomable), was a single mother and 1985 greta was the only one thanks to her era was capable of the independence required.  furthermore, in 1918 she had her brother felix and her aunt ruth.  consequently, 1945 greta stayed in 45 where she would live happily ever after with nathan and 1918 greta would stay in 1985 where she could seek out her one true love, leo. that clever greta even hunted him down!  

i was shocked at first for the novel ending this way but realized it made sense and couldn't end any other way.  life is too fluid for our self identities to be so stagnant.  we sometimes fail to see the many selves that we have.  as a gemini, i have always felt like i have multiple selves for example the krisha i am with my friends is not the same one that my co-workers see or even my family.  but there are traits that are very much me, just like all the gretas were alike but not alike.  

as greer wrote:

perhaps one day they will invent a camera to capture the fleeting self--not the soul, but the self---!: we can truly see how we were on any particular day and mark the shifting of lives we lead that we pretend belongs to one person alone.  why is it impossible to believe:  that we are many headed as monsters, as many armed as gods, as many hearted as the angels?

we do have multiple lives that belong to different people.  it makes us all sound like we have disorder but in actually it's how we survive.  in order to make our impossible lives possible we have to grow as an individuals and become the best person for whatever life throws at us.  just as greta did.  (granted she had time travel to aid her with her mission.)

before i close i also have to share this wonderful quote:

morning had awakened like a girl in a tantrum who will wear nothing but her party dress, and unseasonal warmth spread over things.

i just loved that simile!

oh and one last note, read on huffington post that madge just got the movie rights for this book!  i am not one for novels to movies but madge did call him personally! how cool!!

Monday, May 27, 2013

life after life. kate atkinson. (112)



i had never heard of kate atkinson before but both amazon and barnes and nobles sent out emails promoting her new book "life after life" the week it came out.  since the premise sounded interesting, a woman, ursula todd dies numerous times but is always reborn, i decided to check it out.

i wasn't sure what to expect but i really enjoyed "life after life" like five stars on goodreads.com enjoy.  as the cover informed me, author gillian flynn called it "one of the best novels [she's] read this century", which initially sounded impressive but after realizing that we are only 13 years into this century, i can agree with her.  

"life after life" was enthralling, i had to find out how urusla's lives would turn out and what she would alter or how fate would alter it for her.  though i will admit there was a period when i did get a bit bored with her life (after she purposely killed herself for the first time) but it was
mostly because she lost her psyhic-esque powers.  also i couldn't put it down because i had to find out how it ended!  the book opens with an event that takes place in germany in 1930 and given the time and the place it is foreshadowed that hitler was assassinated!  this kept me reading and searching because i had to find out how would ursula's lives got to that point?

the novel is filled with great characters.  ursula is a wonderful protagonist that the reader becomes invested in.  one of her lives was extremely dark and was difficult to read.  as i read, all i could think about was how i hope she died soon so that she would be taken out of her misery. also i adored her family, her mother sylvie and all of her literary allusions, her sister pamela and their correspondence and of course her brother teddy since everyone adored him.  i also loved her aunt izzie.  she was a wild one but i loved izzie's crazy lifestyle and all of the colorful things she said plus she was alway there when her niece needed help.

atkinson's writing was beautiful.  her characters were poetic and as a result so is her novel.  it is filled with beautiful descriptions.  and as i mentioned before her characters are very literary and the novel is filled with allusions to keats, dante, the brönte sisters, austen and even dickens.  i loved her description of an elderly izzie as "a dipsomaniac miss havisham" (which could be an apt description for me when i get old.)

(spoiler alert:  wait to read this section until you read it!)

i do feel there were one gap i found in the novel.  for example, when ursula did kill herself, she didn't have any recollection of her previous lives yet she still went to the psychologist.  this did not make sense because the reason ursula went to the psychologist was because of peculiar  déjà vu bouts as a kid but if she had no recollection why did she go to the psychologist?  though the novel
did show some things were bound to happen regardless of ursula intervening.  (spoiler alert!!) i was also surprised as to how ursula never went back to the life in which she became a mother.  i guess she was never really one for motherhood and i am just projecting my personal choice on to her but i would have had the kid but gotten out of germany.  another  challenging part was because of the rebirths, characters were introduced before their importance was none so it was difficult to keep track of everyone.

(spoiler alert!)
i appreciated how in the end ursula could not completely alter history.  some things were meant to be a certain way regardless of ursula's interventions. and alas that is life.  people will always wish that events in history, like the rise of hitler and the holocaust never occurred but unfortunately there is no way to change things.  and instead of dwelling on "what if's", people should learn from it and prevent history from repeating itself.  ursula and pamela's son had a similar discussion to this effect. the world (or if you believe in him god) works in mysterious ways and instead of dwelling on the negative you have to continue on living.  

i find it interesting that i read "life after life" just after having read "the great gatsby" because both novel feature individuals trapped by their past. gatsby wants to go back and relive his life the way it should
have been while ursula is thrown back to relive hers.  it seems like ursula has the upper hand because she can do something gatsby can not.  however, even though ursula has the ability to go back into the past and change things, she still does not have complete control over the course of life.  life did not follow one path for ursula.  it is not like the "choose your own adventure" books of my youth in which it follows the same path and all that alters is your choice.  instead different occurrences caused things to change and some to remain the same so you never know what will occur, you can only make a choice that you think is the best and hope that it is.  this is demonstrated in the novel as ursula is often faced multiple times with the same events.  and again this is life, you have to hope your actions are for the best.

as i have gotten older, i have been dwelling on the past and what i would change if i could go back in time.  yes, i am content with my life so far, i have a wonderful set of friends, a supportive family and random adventures (i recently wrote these things down for a simmons class as to what i was grateful for.) but there are things i would change if i could be reborn as myself: i wouldn't have wasted time on certain guys, i would have study aboard, i would have taken spanish class more seriously in high school, lost my virginity at an earlier age, been a better sister/daughter/friend at times, never quit dance when i was young, did more interning, and became an art history major.  but i have no serious regrets.  and there are definitely some mistakes in my life that i would do over again because it has made the person i am today.  there are also mistakes i made that were worth it do there is that too.  

for those you that know me i am
not one for religion and do not believe in an afterlife because living for etenity sounds tedious and draining.  however, i have always found the idea of reincarnation intriguing but not coming back as different things but as the same person.  it's odd because i have thought of this before reading this book.  i could believe in a universe in which existence is a series of cycles, we get one life and we come back and relive it for all of etenity.  and sometimes we make the right decisions and sometimes we make
the wrong ones but life just goes
on and on in a continual circle or a cyhper that keeps moving like a rolling stone (erykah badu reference).  so if there is a faith that believes in that sign me
up! i like the idea of life after life, just like i liked the book.  

(sorry that was so cheesy but wanted to end this post but was unsure how!  lol)