Customer Reviews

The Mermaid Chair

5 star:		(102)
4 star:		(95)
3 star:		(120)
2 star:		(128)
1 star:		(177)

 

 

Amazon.com's editorial review is so far off base it's stunning. It says "By boldly tackling such major themes as love, betrayal, grief, and forgiveness, The Mermaid Chair forces readers to question whether moral issues can always be interpreted in black or white." I say, what book doesn't "tackle" this issues? They're so universal, few books don't "tackle" them? To say nothing of boldness.

The only thing this book does boldly is advance a quasi-Ayn Rand like "philosophy" that essentially consists of the mantra "Selfishness is good." Well, let me rephrase that. This book toutes subordination to one's every whim and desire and unrepentant selfishness with no thought to external consequences and wraps it up shabbily as the politics of reawakening and philosophy.

If I could communicate one statement to the author, whose "Secret Life Of Bees" was an infinitely more charming book that did not groan under the weight of its preternaturally overburdened excesses and trite ambitions, it would be this: There are probably few protagonists less involving, sympathetic, and interesting than whiny, self-aggrandizing, navel-gazing narcissists.

Reading this review, you might think I don't like books like these. That's not true. Introspection and questioning the fundamentals of one's life as a means to genuine, meaningful, and edifying self-realization and self-actualization can often be a fascinating read. But not this. This is a book about an utterly vapid woman whose obsession with herself and her own thoughts and feelings leads her to some rather shallow and unconvincing experimentations done far better in much older books. You've met people like this. Nothing fascinates them more than themselves, and they're endlessly questioning the meaning of their thoughts, feelings, etc. like they are the center of the universe. That's not interesting.

Of course the author throws in the by-now-stereotypical "grave misfortune involving parents from childhood that was never dealt with that must be dealt with now" for good measure. Ugh. There's no growth, there's no learning going on here. If nothing else I've said about this book stays with you, then let this pronouncement - this book is an exercise in what happens people when they become too inwardly fixated to the point of narcissistic obsession. There's no growth, there's no learning.

To contrast, a number of years ago I read Graham Joyce's "Dark Sister" about a bored housewife who, after years of dutiful service to his husband, came, through magic of sorts, around to a legitimate exploration of what her life could be, especially in regards to her independence from her odious husband. It did so in a charming style that wasn't condescending or overly cloying, unlike this novel, and while it made the housewife's concerns paramount and somewhat inwardly focused, it did so without all of the annoying, whiny "Me! Me! Me!" prattling that passes as self-discovery in this book.

In short, I wouldn't recommend this book at all, unless you think self-discovery through unremittant self-indulgence and melodramatic emotional posturing sounds like a good time.

What a disappointment! "The Secret Life of Bees," Monk's previous book, was original. It featured a believable heroine and an interesting cast of supporting characters, even if its ending was contrived. Reviewers wrote that this book was even better, so....I had high hopes.

The book is the trite, oh-so-often-told story of a middle age woman who is discontent despite having unlimited money, a wonderful child, and a wildly handsome, incredibly wonderful, professionally successful husband.

She runs to the aid of the mother she has not visited in seven years -- in large part because mom hated the last birthday present she gave her -- and, huge surprise!, falls in love with the first man who crosses her path. The attraction is all the stronger, and the sex amazing, surprise again!, because he is unavailable.

There are two predictably eccentric minor characters, and the mother is so thinly drawn that it is difficult to summon a mental picture of her.

There is practically zero suspense as the main character, the woman fleeing a perfect life, is not interesting enough to inspire much interest in the details of a trauma that she endured at age 9 and that has colored her relationship with her mother.

I read Secret Life of Bees when it first came out, and immediately deemed it as a moderen day classic and one of the best books that I have ever read. Therefore, I could hardly wait to begin The Mermaid Chair.
The novel begins with a promising start and Sue Monk Kidd's descriptions of the island and the ocean itself are absolutely breathtaking. One of her great strengths is her magical way with words and how she can make the reader feel as if you are walking on Egret Island.. This novel is also very rich with its religious symbology and metaphors, as well as some of the explorations of the feminine mystique.
However...
One of the things that blew me away about "Bees" were the too-good-to-be-true characters. Lily was one of the most believable protagonists in years, while the three sisters were incredibly rich characters. However, in Mermaid the characters are sketches of themselves with no real meat. It seems as if Kidd intended these characters to be something more, but only drew them out in pencil.
I liked what I saw of Kat, as well as Benne. But couldn't Kidd have developed them? I would have been so much more attached if she had....
Even Jessie, as the narrator is depicted as shallow and insensitive. I would have loved to have heard more from Nelle instead of her being stereotyped as "the crazy woman". What was her perspective on thing?
As for the romance factor--don't get me wrong. I love romance, but it has to be classy and well done. There has to be a conncection of the characters falling in love, as well as not too much of the lovey-dovey factor. Tracy Chevallier does a very classy job of writing romance, if you want an example. With Jessie and Whit, it seems as if Jessie just wanted him to fill the gap not because there was a "connection". She hardly thought of her daughter and her husband--and I understand that she was going through a midlife crisis but couldn't she have dealt with this issue in another way?
And in general, I began to feel as if I was reading a harlequin romance novel in the middle of the book!
I would have loved for this novel to have been more about the island itself as well as the religious aspect. Leave Whit alone, and have Jessie deal with her father's death and the issues with her mother, for this is where the real problem lies. If the novel had only dealt with this aspect, Jessie could have "found herself" just as well.
I gave this novel three stars because of the beautiful descriptions and religious symobology, as well as the actual ending of the book; which was very moving. However, my advice is not to waste your money on the hardcover--wait for the paperback addition, or better yet borrow it from the library or a friend.

Jessie Sullivan returns to her childhood home, after her mother cuts off her own finger as an act of religious atonement. While Jessie is with her mother, she begins to question her life, marriage, and purpose. She also begins an affair with a young priest that lives in the monastary next door. Jessie attempts to solve the riddle of what her mother is atoning for, and find her own path in the process.

I know that following "The Secret Life of Bees" would be extremely hard to do. I adored the novel. However, I went into "The Mermaid Chair" with an open mind and hoped for the best. I didn't even read reviews about the books, so as to remain open-minded. I was so horribly disappointed with this novel. It wasn't interesting or compelling in the slightest. I couldn't relate to Jessie, no matter how I tried. And I found the ending of the novel, the big revelation about Jessie's father, to be so unbelievably contrived that I wished I had never read this book to begin with.

I am certainly glad I did not purchase this novel. I cannot say that I would recommend it to anyone. If you wish to give it a try, go to the library.

I give this work two stars only because of the prose. It's beautifully crafted. Few writers can string words together with as much imagery and impact. Beyond that I say shame on the agent, shame on the publisher and shame on the writer for falling into the trap of a quick second work to capitalize on the success of The Secret Life of Bees. I can't see myself rushing out to buy her third book, so unless this is the last book, it's self defeating to crank us this kind of pablum.

The plot--if we could dignify it as such--can pretty much be summed up as bored housewife/artist gets turned on by island monk with whom she has an affair, and all parading under the guise of spiritual awakening with a bit of lust as the fuel. Problem is, she doesn't develop any sensible rationale for her actions (say, an abusive husband) and, worse, she fails in her attempt to establish a credible reason for Father Thomas to leave his secular life and become a monk. Yes, she tries, but her explanations are as cliched and contrived as everything else in this work--like the crazy mama and the modern Aunt Jemima stirring her gumbo pot and looking out for the good white folks of the island, including sweet little Jessie who she practically raised herself.

I suppose lust is as good a reason as any to have an extramarital affair but why with this wimpy monk? Is it the forbidden love cliche? And why is it a best seller among women? Seems to me if a male protagonist did in a book what Jessie does, both the author and the book would be trashed on Ophrah and Everywhere Else. But wait, what am I thinking? Wasn't Bridges of Madison County a blockbuster? Isn't there a double standard here, ladies? Yes, I'm a guy and I just don't get it.

Finally, the absolute worst part for me was the shift from 1st person Jessie into 3rd person Father Thomas. Has Ms. Kidd never taken a creative writing course or read a how-to book? Why did her agent and publisher let her get away with this? They all know better, so it had to be deliberate and conscious. Some broken rules work. This one doesn't. First, because it was a jarring transition (Hey Sue, if you wanted to do shifting points of view, why not stick to 3rd person throughout). The second reason is because we learn nothing new or different about Pere Thomas by being in his head. Jessie has already told us--or it's revealed in dialogue with Jessie. Talk about redundancy and the need to edit.

Okay, I'm getting heated here, so I'm going to sign off before I take away that second star. I want my money back. Bottom line is that fans of Ms. Kidd should read the customer reviews first before before rushing out to buy her next book.

While reading The Mermaid Chair, I was so distracted by the artificial writing that I couldn't get into the story. In all the literature and writing classes we have all had, I have never seen a story so obviously outlined. Kidd employed every writing device possible: the ridiculous character of Benne, who exists only to blurt out 'truths' that the author can't figure out how else to share between characters; the 'red herring' regarding the relationship of the mother to the senior monk; the perfectly timed 'crises' that allowed the daughter and 'hot monk' to come together and be separated effortlessly.

The story itself was as bad as the writing. Perhaps sweet, casual, summer affairs were cool for teens in the 60's; but in our reality of broken families and STD's, the idea of two middle aged people breaking their vows to follow their 'hearts' sounds --- stupid. Considering the strength of women shown in The Secret Life of Bees, I am amazed that Kidd would indulge a selfish, inconsiderate woman like her main character to end 'happily ever after.' Affairs do not strengthen marriages. Men should not use monasteries to run away from difficult lives. Mental illness in the form of self-mutilation is not spontaneously healed by telling a difficult truth. And symbols, if they are strong enough on their own, should not need pages of explanation to make their point in a story.

And I agree with a previous reviewer about the setting - I could not picture this taking place on a SC island at all.

It's hard to believe that the same pen wrote both The Secret Life of Bees and Ther Mermaid Chair. The former was a wonderful story beautifully told. The characters were engaging, the situation engrossing, the plot carefully knit, the language a pleasure to read and savor. The latter book, on the contrary, is a totally ordinary piece of third-tier woman's magazine fiction. A terrible disappointment on every level: characters that are poorly developed, a plot lacking in originality, as is -- with few exceptions -- the use of the English language. At the many knots left untied, my own reaction was "who cares anyway?" Bad sign, Ms. Kidd.

I suppose that just about any follow-up to a novel as successful as The Secret Life of Bees will sell itself, and editors know that. But they shouldn't assume that we readers will continue to buy anything at all that has Kidd's name on it. Those who have read both The Secret Life of Bees and The Mermaid Chair now know that you can't judge a book by its cover -- or by its author.

I loved The Secret Life of Bees and was expecting to love this one. I was very disappointed. I may as well have read a Harlequin romance. The plot was a predictable cliche, the characters were unsympathetic, and it was boring. I would recommend readers skip this one and hope the next novel is better.

Sue Monk Kidd is a marvelous wordsmith. Before writing her two current novels, she was an author of several Christian books: "When The Heart Waits"(1990) and "God's Joyful Surprise" (1987). Her religious books asked the difficult questions concerning life that other Christian fare would normally miss -- hence it is no surprise that her new novel, "The Mermaid Chair" deals with the difficult questions that other novelists avoid.

"The Mermaid Chair" examines love from many perspectives: married life and obligations, an erotic and spiritual affair, parental love and the comfort of an old homestead. I love this book because choices need to be made and the choices are not always clear-cut.

American popular fiction rarely deals with the inner spiritual life --- this is a novel that integrates the spiritual with the mundane of our lives. After the reader finishes this novel, go out and read her other books. They are just as good.

I can't begin to describe how disappointed I was in this novel. Bees was sooooooo good. Gone are the many wonderful turns of phrase and settings that drew you into the Bees story. Gone are the wonderfully drawn characters. Instead, you will be treated to the main character's endless memories of this and that, none of which the author gave any reason to care about. The endless "I recall when . . . I remembered that . . . It reminded me of the time . . ." just made the story drag and drag and drag and drag and drag and drag and I found myself reading Mermaid only because I liked Bees so much. Because the writing style is so much more amateurish, I suspect this book was either 1) written long before Bees, OR 2) written against an impossibly tight deadline. Just look at all the sentences with "as" connectives - it's a dead giveaway of amateur writers. Mermaid doesn't hold a candle to Bees and those that weren't blinded by the success of Bees can see it.