Customer Reviews

We Were the Mulvaneys

5 star:		(118)
4 star:		(119)
3 star:		(87)
2 star:		(73)
1 star:		(108)

 

 

There is no doubt in my mind that Joyce Carol Oates is a wonderfully gifted writer. However, I don't believe her writing style is for everyone. We Were the Mulvaneys, however evident of Oates's talent, is a tedious, overdescriptive work that takes patience and perseverence to get through.

We Were the Mulvaneys is the story of the Mulvaney family in the mid-1970s. They are the more-than-typical family, like the ones on TV who play games together in the living room after dinner. A little on the corny side, but the love they share for each other is obvious in the beginning chapters. Then something happens to one of the family members - a tragedy atrocious and unforgettable - that threatens to tear the Mulvaneys apart.

While the story itself was very good, I could not get into the book. I was hoping maybe it would be a late-bloomer, but there was never a point that I reached that inspired me to keep reading. I did finish the novel, but only after a week of exhausting myself. However, there is an audience out there for this book, and my suggestion is this: If you are the type of reader that enjoys a slow pace, highly descriptive writing, wordy sentences and a lack of dialogue, then We Were the Mulvaneys would be an excellent choice. My own personal shortcomings about this book is in no way reflective of the talent or storytelling ability of Joyce Carol Oates. Please read this and see for yourself.

The Oprah book club selections are certainly getting more complex!

This book will strike an immediate chord to a family 'putting on airs' yet within the house having its problems. It hithome for me and will most likely hit home for many others because we know of families that seem perfect.... and often we find out much later what was truly happening.

I do not believe that the choice of Mt. Ephraim as the hometown of the Mulvaneys was by accident. Ephraim and Manasseh were sons of Joseph - and while the latter committed heinous crimes against all moral authority, Ephraim was a redeemer. A striking metaphor against which much hurt is set - and one missed by the editorial reviewers.

This family functions quite well - all that we'd say is 'too good to be true' *is* actually true until Marianne, the girl so beautifully described that we actually *feel* she's the 'girl next door' to *us* is sexually assaulted. Actually, we are never told whether it was rape or consensual. And the beauty of this is that for the purposes of this story it doesn't matter.

It is the *effect* of the assault on the family that begins their descent. I will not spoil the book by telling you the details as to how each of the brothers and the parents fall off their respective wagons. But the cumulative effect is devasting, as told by the narrator, a now adult youngest brother Judd.

How can such a complete destruction of a classic nuclear family be a book I'd want to read? Because as someone once said, it is when a man stares into the abyss that he finds his character.

Suffice it to say that when you are done with this book you will feel as though you knew the Mulvaneys, suffered with them, and wonder how you would have reacted.

I believe everyone can relate to one or more of the characters in this book.

I also believe that this book is a *must* read.

If you want a book that will make you think realistically about life's challenges - and not give you answers, but rather present situations that make you think about how you would respond, this is the book for you.

The cliche that we learn more from our mistakes than our successes never applied more.

And all of us can probably stand to look at this side of life. As with 'The Dark Side of the Light Chasers', it is by looking at our human frailties and faults, shining the light on ourselves, warts and all, that we can come to true self-awareness.

This novel speaks volumes about how families fall apart and are mended again. The book is engrossing; the story spins out then out of control to a point of terrible sorrow; then it is spun into something more resilent than it was before. It takes one twist in a young woman's life to push the family to its knees. Her misstep resonated within her family to the point of destruction. The twist was a sexual assault; the girl was drinking for the first time, got in the wrong car, and was raped by a popular kid from school. The impact on the Mulvaneys- who all seemed perfect- was shattering. They try to stand together, but the town turns against them once the accusation is made public. Since the story takes place in the '60's, the rape made the girl into both the agressor and the victim. The father, who took such pride in his family, especially his only daughter, takes to drink. He also decides he can't stand to sight of Marianne and all the ruin she has thus far brought to the family. He forces his wife to choose between him and their daughter; in a moment of cowardice, the mother sides with her husband. Thus, the daughter is banished from the family to her aunt's home in another town. The family falls further into disrepair as the father loses his business, the oldest son goes to Vietnam, the second son goes to school but gets trapped in a sea of indifference. The story is told from the point of view of the youngest son. He is bewildered by the power of accusation and to some extent, sex. He is horrified by his father, misses his sister and ignored by his brothers. Only his mother stays by his side; but their relationship is complicated. He's the heart of the family so he has to watch his family falls apart. In a sense, he suffers the most, if only because his age forces him to live with parents who are no longer in love; and the rest of the family stays away as much as possible. He goes from the youngest to the only child of the Mulvaneys. As the sadness nearly overwelms the reader, the story turns again when the mother- a stronger character than portrayed earlier- pulls the family back together. But she is only able to do so after her husband dies. Any move before his death would force her to acknowledge her husband as the linchpin of most of the misery that befalls the family. He drove his beloved daughter away because the rape changed her in his eyes. Then, he loses his business, farm and the rest of the family by drinking too much. Once he is gone, she is able to mend the Mulvaneys to a point beyond their childhoods. Oates outlines a regular American family at a specific point in time and the sorrows brought upon it with grace and style. Using the youngest son as an innocent bystander to tell the Mulvaney's story works nicely; his shock, bewilderment and sorrow is ours.

This book has lots of enticing parallels to Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury: three brothers in distress over the fall from innocence of a beloved sister. Mule Mulvaney the athlete is nicely parallel to Jason Compson the tough businessman, Patrick Mulvaney the scientist gone off to Cornell to Quenton Compson the sensitive son gone off to Harvard. Is it possible that our narrator Judd is also parallel to the youngest Compson son Benjy, the idiot by whom the tale of sound and fury is initially told?

It's tempting to think so. Because then he would be an untrustworthy narrator and I wouldn't have to believe what he tells us about these people.

When reading Joyce Carol Oates, I always have the feeling that she must have her tongue way in her cheek. She's pulling our legs but keeping a very straight face. Look at the ending here: Mom's hair has become silver glinting like mica - a crown. Patrick the bitter bookworm turned terrorist is now a perfect California boy with a great arm for slow pitch softball. Wounded and wild Marianne has been domesticated by the Horse Whisperer - who proposes while euthanizing her beloved old cat. And of course, like Christ, Daddy has died for all our sins and we can all be the perfect Mulvaneys again. Surely this can't be serious.

I have to admit this is the first book I have ever read in which I felt compelled to write a review. I am an avid reader and my tastes are very eclectic so I was suprised by my emotions upon reading this book. It was the first novel of Joyce Carol Oates that I had read so I didn't really know what to expect. But I had always heard she was a very fine writer so I figured I'd give it a try. Also, I have read many of Oprah's book club selections and generally found them fine. This book is the exception. It may be the most depressing, disappointing book I have ever read. I realize its a dark subject, rape, however I didn't know it was possible to take a dark subject like this and take it to an even lower level. I found the treatment of Marianne by her parents, particularly her mother to be both unrealistic as well as borderline criminal. I realize that things like this happen in "the real world". However, this is fiction. To portray this family for the first 150 pages or so as "perfect", to show them with incredibly strong emotions and lovingness in one part of the book and to switch midstream as Oates did and not only do a 360 degree change was completely outside the realm of realism within this story. Of course I realize that parents might react as the Mulvaney's did upon the rape of their child. However, there was absolutely nothing in these parents character to suggest that this was remotely possible.When Corinne sent her supposed "beloved" daughter away, I threw the book down in disgust. Both because I felt it was a horrible betrayal by a mother but more importantly from a reviewers point of view, a betrayal by Oates of the readers. It just didn't ring true and appeared to me to be a device. I don't know how or why I finished the rest of the book, probably just to see if it could be redeemed from that point on. I shouldn't have bothered. Once the "reality" of the book is shattered you can't get it back. It set the tone and was downhill from there. This may just be the most depressing novel I have ever read.

First of all, is this supposed to be taking place during the sexual revolution, the mid 1970's? She makes it seem as though upstate NY is some kind of primative village in the middle ages where "loose" women (or women who have been raped)are stoned to death. Give me a break! I went to high school in upstate NY in the early 1980's and believe me, this is not realistic at all. While date rape is a common reality, and many get away with it, the women's "reputation" would not be ruined and cause the downfall of her whole family! This is just absurd. Some in the community would turn against them, some would stand by them, some just wouldn't give a damn. That is human nature. The unequivocal rejection of all of them, and the destruction of the father's business is not realistic. Also, at one point she says that the father looks through the want ads "help wanted - male" Again, a throwback to the 1950's, not the late 1970's. And what's with all of the cutsey nicknames? It's like she is stuck in some kind of fake "Leave it to Beaver"/ Norman Rockwell version of upstate NY in the 1950's. This book is irritating in that ALL of the characters are totally superficial and without any backbone whatsoever. If you don't live here, take my word for it, most people that have to scrape ice and snow off of their cars daily in the winter in subzero temp. have a little more chuztpah than this. And a little more sense of perspective in what is important in life. And a better sense of humor! Many little factual errors are also annoying to me, and she could have done more research on her setting. For example: NY York state fair is usually in Syracuse, not Albany, etc. Also, there are plenty of factual errors relating to nature, wildlife, farming etc. OK, maybe petty, but if you live in upstate NY, it seems that this writer didn't bother to really find out what it is like to live here, taking away from the books credibility. Also it is insulting to those of us who do live here. Most annoying to me is the total lack of anger on Marianne's part. This does not ring true. While many scenes were heartbreaking and felt real, others were just empty and fake. She would have experienced more complex emotions, including anger at her parents for what they did to her. She just had no inner strength and I felt she remained a passive "victum" through out. Very unsatisfying.

This book had me hooked, but by the time I made to the end I was sooo depressed. It wasn't enjoyable to read, but I felt compelled to finish it to find out what happened to this tragic family. Even though the ending was supposed to be uplifting, I couldn't shake the feeling of melancholy that had pervaded the entire book.

This is the first book I have read by this much acclaimed author, and I was disappointed. The book was padded with tedious and unnecessary exposition. I found the shifts in point of view, often just as things were starting to get interesting, distracting and frustrating. Seldom have I wanted to skip over parts or skim as much as I wanted to while reading this book. I could have handled all that though, but the characters were not at all believable. Each and every one did a complete about-face in character and personality with little or no explanation. The parents' banishment of the daughter made no sense, particularly considering the time frame of the novel and their nonconformist values in the beginning of the book. I kept thinking,"Why the heck didn't they just move the whole family?" No answer. Hard as she tries to make the parents' sympathetic, they seem to me cruel,selfish monsters with inexplicable motivations. That image just doesn't jibe in any way, shape or form with the parents she originally presents. The daughter's placid, unquestioning acceptance of her "punishment" made even less sense. Each brother seemed to undergo a radical transformation as well, again with no plausible explanation. I understand Oates' point, that an event such as this can change the family dynamics and alter the course of many lives, but she makes the point with all the sublety of a sledgehammer.

I just finished reading this book, sticking with it out of a desperate hope that there would be some kind of backbone in at least one of the characters to speak some truth. The trauma that this family goes through is compounded by selfishness and stupidity, blind faith in the flawed characters around them. Any self-aware person will come away from this book thinking, "Could real people ever be this blind? This silent?"

The trauma that the family endures certainly was met with silence throughout history, but the family's reaction - banishing an innocent daughter, the daughter meekly submitting to this banishment, everyone's (except one son's) acceptance of this complicity - sickened me. Perhaps the point of the author was to make us wonder at this complicity, but no true answers were offered. This lack of confrontation or apology, whether an example to react against or an attempt at creating a "realistic" portrait of a befuddled family, leaves me supremely unsatisfied.

The narrator himself is complicit in the ostracising of his sister, seems to condemn it, yet never creates closure or offers an apology to his sister. The final vision of the book, of the survivors of the family coming together in a loving exchange, is patently unreal. The capacity to forgive is an incredible human trait, but these characters have also fogotten deep traumas that cannot simply be solved by the passing of the father. It was the mother, after all, who arranged the logistics of sending their daughter away. Where is the truth in this sham? Nowhere. Don't waste your money. If you are seeking a delicate portrait of identity and forgiveness, read "Remains of the Day".

I find Joyce Carol Oates books difficult to read because I know when I start one I am going to be let down in some fashion.

Her style is very unique, she is extremely descriptive and is one of the best authors for letting your imagination grasp what the author is describing.

The main problem with this story is it flounders over the issues that are suppose to pull you in. Oates writes as though she is trying to keep you in suspense - a major buildup. She alluded to the rape for one half of the book before she gave us any idea of the actual events. When she does clue us in it is still a major dissapointment, she gives us bits and pieces. It is as though Oates wants to continue the suspense and give us the feeling that there is more to come. Only there isn't anything else. That was it. She wasn't going to tell us anymore than what she alluded to.

She does this several times in the book, leaving more questions unanswered than answered. The planning of revenge by her brother many years later was another buildup that led to only dissapointment. At least Oates gave us details on what actually took place, there were still a lot of unresolved questions (ie. What happened to the rapist? Did he tell his family? Did he report the incident?).

I still enjoy her writing style, it just seems as though she is missing so much potential. It is like she starts with an excellent outline for a plot - but in spite of her excellent writing skills, she is unable to pull it together to give the reader that sense of satisfaction you get when you close a very good book you have just completed.