A novel, a question.

Has anyone out there read Jeffrey Eugenides's novel The Virgin Suicides? If so, did you like it?

If so, why?

I read it yesterday and I'll admit that's about my only reaction. What was the point of this book? Why would anyone enjoy it? There must be all sorts of things I'm missing here, because it was well received critically, was a big bestseller, and was also made into a movie. Maybe because the basic outline of the story was rather titillating? All five daughters of the Lisbon family eventually commit suicide,* one by throwing herself out an upstairs window onto a fence, the other four a year later, by various means. The story is told in flashback, I'm assuming by one of the neighborhood boys, who watched the family of all girls, fascinated.

Etc., etc., for 250 pages. I'll admit it: I just don't get it. To me it read like a very male, very adolescent fantasy of how crazy women get when they're locked away from boys (the Lisbon parents are strict about dating), which is a theme I find annoying, to say the least. Oh--except that hypothesis doesn't work for one of the daughters, Lux, who finds plenty of male companionship, eventually resorting to having sex on the roof of her house with numerous suitors.

I kid you not. On the roof. I'd have to see the house in question but it's difficult to picture that, logistically.

So I MUST be missing something. Right? What is it I'm missing? Please tell me so I can understand.

*Evidently it's based loosely on an actual event. Hm. Maybe I can track down some nonfiction on the story instead. ADDENDUM: Here's what I learned in the Literature Resource Center database, available thanks to my local public library: "The author got the idea for The Virgin Suicides while visiting his brother's house in Michigan and chatting with the baby sitter. The young woman said that she and her sisters had all attempted suicide at one point. When Eugenides asked why, she replied simply, "pressure." The theme of inexplicable adolescent trauma amid a placid suburban landscape gave birth to the plot of the novel."

Comments

[Jessica]

I read "The Virgin Suicides" when it first came out. I was in junior high, and I just stumbled across it on the Librarian's Picks shelf. I loved it! I remember thinking that it would make an excellent movie but that it could never be made. I thought about it frequently over the years. When the movie came out, I felt totally vindicated.

Anyway, what did I like about it? I was utterly fascinated by the 1st person plural narrative voice. I identified with that feeling of crushing on someone from afar. I also identified with having a completely insane family life. I was hooked on the plot, surprised by the ending, and impressed by Eugenides's audacity.

I dunno, I just dug it, I guess. Of course it could be a case of Flash Gordon Syndrome, when your memories of something you enjoyed at a younger age are embarrassingly far off from your reevaluation as an adult.

[Citizen Reader]

Jessica!
Okay, the first person plural voice, it's unique. I'll grant you that. You've also given me some valuable insight into the rest of it--I may not be the correct audience for this book, as my family is close, and we tend to take the Norman Maclean view of everyone else ("the world was full of bastards").

Have you ever considered re-reading it? And did you also read "Middlesex"?

[J.S. Peyton]

I haven't read Virgin Suicides though it has been something I've wanted to read for quite some time now - ever since I read and loved "Middlesex." I can't speak for "Virgin Suicides" but "Middlesex" was much better than I thought, and one book I think you might have less problems with.

[Jessica]

Hmm, now here's an embarrassing confession. I waited forever to get "Middlesex" from the library, then had to give it back without reading it because I had so much else in the pile. The sad part is that I had been on the lookout for more from him ever since "Virgin Suicides."

Would I re-read VS? Actually that's not a bad idea, revisiting something 15 years later. (I checked, and if it came out in 1993 then I was actually a senior in high school). Maybe I will read it and then do a Flash Gordon post about it.

[Florinda]

I thought The Virgin Suicides was beautifully written, and I'm another one who is intrigued by first-person-plural narration. However, it's a novel that is very clearly a FIRST novel, and I agree that the story was rather slight.

I read it after I read Middlesex, which I totally fell in love with, and while Suicides does show potential, it definitely pales in comparison.

[Citizen Reader]

J.S.,
Yes, I've had Middlesex home, but guess what the problem was? Too long! At 250 pages, The Virgin Suicides just seemed more approachable. I need to be independently wealthy so I can pick up those longer books without worrying about how long they'll take to read...

Jessica,
No pressure, I know you've got plenty to read. But I'd be interested to hear what a re-read would do for you. I find re-reading certain books (and not others) an interesting habit in its own right, anyway.

Florinda,
I'm getting the feeling I'm in the minority here, and that's okay. I think I can agree with the beautifully written part. Although I think the first person plural annoyed more than intrigued me--I wanted to know who was talking, and why, and the idea that there was this group of dudes out there dwelling on these sisters vaguely creeped me out. But it was a unique device, I'll grant you.

[Lesbrarian]

Don't worry, you're not alone. I thought it sucked.

Yes, the book had an unspecified and/or multiple narrator. And, well, so?

Was it supposed to be thought-provoking? Didn't provoke any thoughts here.

Was it supposed to amaze me with the beauty of the prose? Didn't.

I didn't give a shit about the characters. I thought it was vaguely interesting that they all offed themselves (though I knew it was gonna happen; the title was a dead giveaway, pardon the pun) but I didn't feel fear, or sorrow, or despair, or nothin'. I luuuuurv grim fiction, but this wasn't it.

So it gets very faint points for plot, and it kinda totally fails on all other parts.

A longish short story, now-- if Eugenides had trimmed it down to fifty pages, I might have enjoyed it.

Aaaargh, Literary Fiction. Gonna go back to my paperback vampire mystery, now. It's not deep, it's not profound, and it DOESN'T PRESUME TO BE.

[The Laundress]

ouch. I read this so long ago and I can't remember squat about it except when I read it, I thought it was brilliant. Oops, nine years later, I don't think I connected the two books with one author.

Similarly, loved "Middlesex" and now just kind of babble when anyone asks me "Is it good?". Well, yeah, um, kinda. Uh I liked it. Just not to clear about the details? Am I weird about forgetting most about most everything I read, even if I liked it?

Haven't seen the film though, missed that and sufficiently intrigued to seek it out.

[Citizen Reader]

Ah ha, Lesbrarian, I can ALWAYS count on you. Although I am starting to see a little bit of what would appeal about this book--and I'm starting to feel this is a book you might just have to be in the right mood/place to enjoy--I still think back on it, and say, "What?" For one thing--I'd like to hear a girl's take on the story. The neighborhood boys watching these sisters en masse with such dreary concentration creeped me out, I'll admit.

Laundress!
Yes, I know you loved Middlesex, that's one of the reasons I keep dragging it home even though I never, ever get it read! You will have to let me know how the film is if you see it, okay?

I totally understand liking books and authors and not knowing why. I'm going through that sort of thing with Ian McEwan right now--it just seems, on paper, like he's an author I wouldn't enjoy. And yet I do! And I couldn't really tell you why, either. So, once again: to each their own.

[laura]

I tried listening to The Virgin Suicides awhile ago and gave up, I think because I was similarly uninterested in the male narrators' viewpoint.

[Bookie]

Well. It was interesting, if nothing else. My favorite part of course, was that it was made into a movie where Tripp Fontaine was played by my boyfriend Josh Hartnett.

[Cara]

A friend sent me over here because this is my favorite book, and I've read it something like 7 times.

*SPOILERS*

I'll add to the chorus of people saying that the writing is beautiful. As for the book being about what happens when girls are locked away from boys, I think that it's actually about what happens when girls are treated as delicate little flowers that need to be protected and locked away from society in general, and of course in the Lisbon girls' case this was taken to the extreme.

There certainly is a male adolescent fantasy quality to the book, and I think the point was that the Lisbon girls knew that as well, and that was why they invited the boys over in the end. I think they're saying "we're not going to be your fragile fantasy girls who need saving." They weren't looking to be saved -- I think that they wanted someone to witness what the isolation and objectification had done to them, and to say "we're not what you think we are." I also think that it has a very Thelma and Louise/The Awakening quality to it -- women who have always been restricted from making their own choices finally deciding that they weren't going to live that kind of life anymore. Of course killing yourself isn't probably the world's best solution, but I think the point is that it is a choice, and those women are sticking up their middle finger at society and telling them that they're not going to put up with the crap any longer.

I actually find it to be a feminist book, which is a big pull for me. And I think that Eugenides gets inside the head of a teenage girl quite well -- I thought the same with Middlesex, which I love but didn't like quite as much. I actually found parts of that plot to be a lot more contrived.

And for the record, I HATE the movie. I think it was horribly done, the characters and acting were flat, and I frankly didn't care that much if the girls offed themselves. But I feel the exact opposite when reading the book. Every time before the part when the girls actually do kill themselves, I have to kind of put the book down for a while and mentally prepare myself.

But hey, to each their own.

[Citizen Reader]

Cara,
You have many interesting things to say about this book, which I find interesting in itself. Any book that causes this much thought; well, that's a book I have to respect, even if I didn't much like it.

I particularly enjoyed your point re: the sisters not really needing the boys to save them. Their solution may not have saved them, but they certainly took matters into their own hands. I also enjoyed your opinion about Eugenides's getting inside the heads of teenage girls. I will most freely admit that I was not a very typical teenage girl, for a variety of reasons. So that may be part of the appeal that I was missing.

Thanks for the disclaimer about the movie. I think I'll skip it.