Back on the Elizabeth Gilbert train.

I don't have much else to say about Elizabeth Gilbert's new book Committed: A Skeptic Makes Peace with Marriage, other than that I enjoyed it.

Gilbert is best known for the smashing popularity of her last book (which was also an Oprah choice), Eat, Pray, Love. I read that book before the hype machine blew it all out of proportion, and I liked it okay (particularly the part where she ate her way through Italy; the second parts of the book, praying and loving, in India and Indonesia, didn't do a whole lot for me). Then, when women started hailing it as the most influential book for them outside maybe the Bible, I started getting a bit annoyed. Sure, it was an okay read. But to take as your inspirational text a book about a woman who starts over after a traumatic divorce by traveling and writing about it (and had the luxury of doing so)? Meh. I just didn't get that aspect of it, and I'll admit I was doubly annoyed when...***SPOILER ALERT***

the book seemingly found Gilbert coming full circle only to--you guessed it--fall in love with another man. ***END SPOILER ALERT.***

There's nothing wrong with love. There's nothing wrong with men.* I just thought it was rather funny that a book millions hailed as being about "finding yourself" actually had quite a bit to do with "finding someone else." But hey, Gilbert is a good writer, and for many years she was a working writer before she hit paydirt, so her windfall seemed more well-deserved than many in the writing world.**

So I was looking forward to reading Committed (for whatever reason, I always find nonfiction about marriages fascinating), and I was not disappointed. Although the overall arc of the narrative is Gilbert's and her partner's efforts to jump through the necessary hoops to get married and supply him with a more permanent home in America (the man she would eventually marry, Felipe, was Brazilian, and had spent many years traveling between Australia and America), Gilbert also returns to her more reportorial roots and provides some research on different topics in marriage: how it typically works out for women; what it does to one's autonomy; its history, etc. I really enjoyed learning all of that stuff, although I'll admit that a large part of Gilbert's charm is still her personal take on subjects:

"Reality exits the stage the moment that infatuation enters, and we might soon find ourselves doing all sorts of crazy things that we would never have considered doing in a sane state...When the dust has settled years later, we might ask ourselves, 'What was I thinking?' and the answer is usually: You weren't.

Psychologists call that state of deluded madness 'narcissistic love.'

I call it 'my twenties.'" (p. 102.)

So there you have it. I like her. I liked this book. It moved right along, I got a few chuckles, and it certainly didn't make me any dumber. And yes, I'm thinking of making those three things my sole criteria for "nonfiction books I enjoy."

*Actually, my favorite book of Gilbert's remains the one she wrote about a very particular man, titled The Last American Man. Frankly, it may seem wrong to say this, but I think she's a stronger writer when she's writing about men.

**Thomas Friedman, James Patterson, I'm looking at you.

Comments

[Rachael]

I was almost afraid to click the link to this post, expecting to read the usual griping about Gilbert. I'm oddly relieved you liked it, because I did, too, and I'm tired of defending my appreciation.

I'm not saying it set my world on fire (neither did Eat, but I enjoyed it a great deal). But it was so refreshing to see someone work through not how to fall in love (which seems easy), but how to make a marriage that works for the two people involved.

It was a bit rough in some ways (you could kinda tell that she had struggled with the book and the idea of remarriage), but it flowed nicely. And she's always happy to laugh at her own angst, which makes other people's angst a bit more palatable.

[Citizen Reader]

Rachael!
Well, I can't pick on nonfiction authors all the time. :) I really do have a little soft spot for Gilbert; I like the way she can turn a phrase and I think she does her homework. I also like her author photo, and the fact that she looks like she's wearing very little make-up. I never really understood the big furor over "Eat, Pray, Love," but I was more than willing to let it go due to my liking for her as an author.

Frankly, I also enjoyed Felipe, her intended, as a character. When she's whining (somewhat) about always wanting to go to Angkor Wat and he's had enough traveling, I loved it when he told her just to go without him already, it was no problem. Something about that little story made me think that even if these two crazy kids are afraid of marriage, they just might make it work.

I think you're right about it being a bit rough--like most NF these days I suppose it was rushed to market with very little editing or copyediting support. But maybe the roughness was intentional, too, as the two of them did "rough it" in many parts of the world while waiting for their paperwork.

[medieval dresses]

Truly a must read book! :)

[Pop Tart]

I haven't read Gilbert but isn't she the nonfiction equivalent of Jodi Picoult?

[Citizen Reader]

Pop Tart,
GASP! I never thought of comparing Gilbert and Picoult (and I know you like the early Picoult), and I could be wrong, but I would never put them in the same category. However, I do think a lot of women who read and enjoyed "Eat Pray Love" would also be Picoult readers, so I can understand the comparison. But I think Gilbert has a much better way with words, and isn't, at this point, simply exploiting shocking stories and diseases to sell books. I think her earlier book, "The Last American Man," and her novels, did okay, but I don't think they were huge monetary successes; the novels in particular were decidedly "literary."

But that's another question. Do you consider Picoult "literary"? Or "mainstream" or "commercial"? (Which is where I'd put her.) Anyone else want to weigh in on the question? I can't really distance myself from my dislike of Picoult to answer the question fairly...

Very interesting, Pop Tart, you minx.

[bybee]

I like The Last American Man the best, too.

[Citizen Reader]

Bybee,
Yes, you and me both. I am aware of her novels, but I'll admit I've never read one. Perhaps I will try one of those this summer too, although I've already got "Lonesome Dove" and "Gone with the Wind" on my TBR list, so it could be a while!

[Jane]

Typepad didn't allow my emoticon but I did wink with the Picoult comparison. That said I do think there is a fair amount of overlap in the readership - which is one of those things that's always so tough about RA. In regards to a lot of those appeal factors, these probably wouldn't overlap much - other then both being about and for women for the most part. It is the x-factor of RA, but I know I would be pretty confident in suggesting EPL to some Picoult readers who were looking for nonfiction to try out.

And I would classify Picoult as mainstream/commercial and think that she has become more about the schtick/next shocker then anything else. And that's okay (to quote Stuart Smalley)...just not for me anymore.

[Jane]

Forgot to add: If we're saying that Gilbert isn't the NF version of Picoult, who is?

How's that for a debate question?

[Citizen Reader]

Jane,
I agree that this sort of case is one of the "intangibles" of RA work. An advisor can do everything right and still not know when the reader they're working with is simply in the mood for something different or has unknowable "deal breakers"--even if you knew my interest in all things Brit, for instance, you might not know about my disinterest in all things WWII, so anything set in that era, even if in Britain, is not going to be something that turns me on.

But, I think you are right about the Picoult-EPL connection. In that case I think you are transcending subject and style and moving into "word of mouthability"--I think sometimes women in particular really like to read what everyone else is reading, and both Picoult and EPL fit that description. It's yet another dimension of RA to explore.

Hm, the NF equivalent of Picoult. I would have said something like Mitch Albom, or anything by Jeffrey Zaslow--"The Last Lecture" or "The Girls from Ames." Anything in which melodrama is the overriding characteristic. But those are just guesses. What do you think?

[Pop Tart/Jane]

I like "word of mouthability"! I'm going to tweet it to everyone I know, so that it can become a household phrase - though it may take a while to catch on since I think I have about 25 followers. It does describe very well the appeal of these and other books for certain readers.

I think for the NF equivalent you're right about Albom (ick) especially since he does have that "word of mouthability", but I think we may have to come up with someone who is more prolific and gets their readers buying/reading every book the minute it's published.

To bring this back to RA, for a reading match, what about some true crime? Or survivor stories - not man against mountain, but girls who grew up under the Shah, etc.? How about that one about the woman's sister who was murdered by her husband? Came out a few years ago I think, but I can't remember the title, something like "If you're reading this, I'm dead".