Literary Wives #32

The Headmaster's Wife 

by Thomas Christopher Greene

Perhaps, just perhaps, I will actually have this book read 

AND a review posted by Monday, April 2nd! 

It is now Monday, March 5th and I am starting to read the book...so fingers crossed

that I can finally make enough time to rejoin the other Literary Wives reviewers in April!
Be sure to check their reviews:
Naomi at Consumed By Ink
Kay at whatmeread
TJ at My Book Strings
Eva at The Paperback Princess
Kate at Kate Rae Davis
Here are my past Literary Wives reviews.

I have literally been interested in reading this book 

since I first saw mention of it. 

I believe I am always a bit fascinated by the idea of 

"boarding school," having never attended such an 

institution myself. Though I did attend summer 
residential  camps. But those were only 
one to two weeks in duration.

Perhaps those are somewhat the same? 

Camp just doesn't last nearly as long...

Here is an excerpt to read... That is the opening scene of this rather sad and depressing story. Maybe it's just me, or perhaps it is my mood at the moment, but while I found this to be a 'realistic' piece of fiction, I definitely felt it to be depressing overall. 

The first section (one half) of the book is entitled "Acrimony" and is narrated by Arthur, the second section "Expectations" is narrated by Elizabeth, and the third section containing the last 18 pages is entitled "After" and is narrated by Russell. And...here comes my rant! I was angry during those first 137 pages of this book! Sooooo angry! Yet again, here I am reading about a middle-aged male in a position of power over female students who is not only fantasizing about one of those female student's bodies and how it would feel to have sex with her, but actually acting upon such inappropriate, unethical, and to my mind immoral thoughts! Ugh! (I was reminded of On Beauty by Zadie Smith. I did read it, but have yet to review it.)

She walks by our table...I contemplate the shape of her beneath her clothes. 
She is full-breasted, but otherwise unremarkable. This is her peak, I think, rather ungenerously. 
She will never be this beautiful again. (14)

To which I mentally respond..."and neither will you be as handsome again, asshole!"  Sheesh! And to top it all off, he is married! Has been for many years... Yuck! Why can't  authors tackle complications other than this when describing long-term committed/marital relationships?!? But...there was an end to this theme...and the narrator's reliability was unverified, so that was a relief to me! Whew! I didn't have to continue my anger throughout  the remaining 136 pages. At this point I thought I should probably reconsider my pledge to NEVER read Lolita by Vladimir Nabakov. Not because I have somehow learned to condone an adult male being "in love with" or sexually drawn to a 12-year-old female, but because I have already read of similar relationships in modern-day fiction, so why not read a classic version? Yikes! :( Though in Nabakov's book this man is also the child's step-father. Even worse!!! Okay, rant aside...

In immediate follow-up to the opening scene, one of the cops who discovers Arthur begins a conversation with him at the police station:

...you were in the park. Naked. Twenty-degree weather. Snow on the ground. 
Walking in Central Park naked.

Is that a crime?

Yes. It is, in fact.

In Vermont it's not.

Seriously?

Yes. You can be naked. You just can't be obscene.

What's the difference? (7)

Admittedly, I had to kinda chuckle at this point. Is there a difference between appearing nude in public and acting 'obscene'? I guess it might be a matter of personal belief and comfort level. After all, aren't there still "nudist colonies"? I assume people in such communities would not consider nakedness obscene, but perhaps to the general population an overwhelming majority would? I can only assume so...

This book is set mainly in Vermont, as is Lancaster School, with other settings also in the northeastern U.S.There are several instances when characters are walking barefoot in the snow. This helps to conceive of the weather and landscape as a character in and of itself. At the very least it makes for an interactive 'background'. Back to the opening scene: 

Soon he is naked, and he sets off again, leaving his clothes in a neat pile on the path, 
and he moves up and over the hilly terrain, his eyes straight ahead, 
oblivious to the people who gasp when they come around a corner to find him
marching toward them. All that matters to him is the feel of his bare feet 

crunching wonderfully on the crusty snow beneath him. (5)

And Elizabeth as she is walking toward the river:

She steps onto the lawn and grins again, this time from the cold and squish 
of the soft lawn on her bare feet, surprisingly pleasant, 
and then the feel of the slightly crunchy snow at the edges as she begins to walk. (253)

The river is a recurrent theme: 

Lancaster moves forward with the force of a river and...

once someone is gone it's as if he were never there. (206)

That was her thought in referring to Russell's absence...

She wanted to belong to Lancaster more than anything, to feel the old school run through
her like a river, and who better to give her that than Arthur? (165)

At one point Arthur contemplates what it would feel like to purposefully fall into the river when it is icy cold, but Elizabeth actually does...

She raises her arms to her side and holds them out and then she closes her eyes.

Falling is the easy part, she tells herself. We think it's not, but it is. 

We are just not taught to do it...She goes up on her tippy toes. She leans foward. 

She opens her eyes and gravity does its work, and the last thing she sees is the blue sky, 

and the brown of the fields, and the water rushing toward her. She closes her eyes 

as she tumbles underneath it, instinctively holding her breath for the smallest of moments 

before allowing the river to fill her, suspend her, take her and not let go. (255)

Now that is some excellent writing, is it not? I felt as if I was falling into the river! 

It was easy for me to feel empathy for Betsy. She was definitely between a rock and a hard place, in my opinion, as she realized her true feelings for Russell and Arthur. But I admired her 'balls' in choosing and being totally honest and open with Arthur. Another reason I could relate to her is her comment, "I'm just not good at being a girl." IMHO I believe Betsy (like me) tends to communicate in a very direct and blunt manner, similar to what many might consider to be more of a 'male' way of communicating. Arthur asks her the first time they meet, "Are you always this tough?" That made me smile since my husband has expressed his amazement at the way I communicate openly and honestly, unlike most females he's known.  

Greene depicts the stereotypical political advantages associated with those students whose parents/families are large donors to private institutions. An ounce of marijuana is uncovered in a male student's room. Though drug cases "are normally a swift exit from the school," this boy happens to be "a Mellon, of the Pennsylvania Mellons," making an "easy decision complicated." Arthur admits:

When I was younger, I might have just gone by the book, but with age you come to terms 

with the fact that not everyone arrives into this world on an equal footing. 

There is no real equity at boarding school...Justice is not blind at Lancaster. 

I call the boy's father and let him know I will make an exception to the normal policy, 

but that if it happens again I will not be able to be so generous. 

The father says he understands and will have a difficult talk with Junior. 

It goes without saying that a check will arrive in the coming week. 

History says it will be significant. (22)

Yet when small bottles of liquor are discovered hidden under another male student's bed, he is expelled. The headmaster is particularly frustrated when he persists in declaring his innocence! He refuses to lie and confess to something he didn't do to supposedly remain at Lancaster school with only a punishment rather than expulsion. As you might suspect, this student happens to be the son of a plumber and secretary! No big donation to be had there in repayment for letting their son 'off the hook' for his crime. In reality both of these incidents could have been handled by the police, but that would not prevent those with money being able to 'buy' their  way 'off the hook'! In fact, the U.S. judicial system is simply an elaborate extension of such discrimination. 

In discussing parenthood with the cop, Arthur states: 

What is the only thing a parent needs to do?

I don't know.

Think about it.

I am.

The answer is an easy one. It's the only answer. 

Make sure your children live longer than you do. 

Do that and you've really done something, okay? The rest is filler. (107)

This definitely made me stop. And gasp. Really? Is it really that simple? I think not. I think there is so much more that a parent owes to his/her child. And as we see in the U.S. currently, simply sending your child to school can seal her or his death warrant. A parent cannot be held liable for that. But...if your child has died, I can easily imagine feeling as if you did not fulfill the most basic of parental responsibilities--keeping your child safe and alive. However, once they turn 18 (at least in the state of Indiana), s/he is considered an independent adult in legal terms. So, when Ethan enlists at the age of 18 there is nothing either parent can do about that. It was his decision alone to make. Did Arthur's expectations for his son help to alienate Ethan? Perhaps and most probably. I have always contended that family relationships are so complicated because we have so many "expectations" for the other(s). 

There is much irony contained within this novel. Not the least of which involves Russell and Arthur. While Arthur frames Russell and forces him out of Lancaster, it is Russell who ends up rescuing Arthur... Russell has proven his mettle as both an honest man and a man of honor and has become a success in that, as far as we know, he has lived his life from this philosophical base of doing what is 'right'. And as it should be, Arthur ends up losing in the end...losing virtually everything he has ever achieved or accomplished.

...sometimes the only path to immortality, paradoxically, is to die. (127)

Perhaps the ultimate irony. It was at this point I was convinced Arthur had killed Betsy. 

Now the Literary Wives question: 

What does this book say about wives or about the experience of being a wife?

At one point, Betsy realizes she and Arthur are more alike than she had imagined:

Like her, he is broken. And she thinks perhaps this is what love is: 

letting someone else see that part of you that shatters like glass. 

All of us are broken in our own way. 

And in that moment...she knows she will marry Arthur. 

They will grow old together, broken together, and as long as 

they both don't completely shatter at the same time, 

they might find a way to pick each other off the ground. (215)

Now that, I believe, is true. A good relationship requires give and take, supporting and accepting support when needed. 

Per Arthur:

But if you learn anything in a marriage it is when to give up.

I used to think that all marriages ran the same trajectory.

They start with wanting to climb inside the other person and wear her skin as your own. 

They end with thinking that if the person across from you says another word, 

you will put a fork in her neck. 

That sounds darker than I mean it to, for it is joke. The truth usually lies in between, 

and the most one can hope for is accommodation, that you learn to move around each other, 

and that when the shit hits the fan, there is someone to suffer with... 

There are few things in this life we are equipped to do alone is all I'm trying to say. (111)

There is so much nuance contained within this one quote! Having remained in a marriage way beyond the point at which I was anywhere close to "happy" for over 12 of the 22 years, I have my own interpretation of the first line, though I am uncertain that is exactly what Arthur means. All marriages are NOT the same since all people are NOT the same. Each relationship is different and runs a different course. But...is the most for which we can hope simply "accommodation"? Honestly, my goal is to achieve much more--a true partnership where each person contributes to the relationship. I believe it is impossible for each partner to contribute equally, as one person is typically doing more at any one time than the other, but there should be a semblance of 'balance' in my opinion. I believe that is different for each two people and they must work together to determine what makes each and both of them happiest. With that said, I believe it is totally unrealistic to expect to be "happy" in a relationship with another human being every single second of every single day. If that is your expectation, I can predict that you will never feel totally satisfied with another person--perhaps you should adopt some pets with which to share your daily life instead! 

The line about "someone to suffer with" certainly brings back some memories. There was a tragic event with one of my children, and I called my best friend who immediately said, "I'm on my way!" But I hadn't called expecting her to be there with me, only to talk with her, and I replied, "Oh, you don't have to do that!" To which she said, "I don't want you to be alone." I looked up and my (now-ex, thankfully) husband was in my line of vision, and I suddenly realized that she was so right! I was actually (emotionally) "alone" although I was technically married and my 'partner' (I use that term loosely!) was 'with me', I was indeed all alone... I will never forget just how abandoned and bewildered I felt as that realization hit me... And thank goodness for her! (That was some 22 years ago and we are STILL best friends!) 

Unfortunately, Arthur was a manipulator and manipulated himself right into Betsy's life and offered her the financial security and status she desired in adult life--being a "faculty wife" and then "Headmaster's wife." 

It is obvious what she saw in Arthur. She wanted to belong to Lancaster more than anything, 

to feel the old school run through her like a river, and who better to give her that than Arthur?

The school was not only in his blood, it was his blood...

There is a silly immortality to the boarding school life..

Teaching- even running a boarding school-is another form of arrested adolescence.

Even in their responsibilities, they are all playing Peter Pan, 

the real world something that happens outside these ivy-covered walls. (165)

She admits to being "grateful" to Arthur for giving her a pass on the mandatory swimming test to enable her to graduate from Lancaster, and this 'favor' is what brings him back into her life and allows her to overlook the wrongs he has wrought upon Russell... I couldn't resist wondering just who else he had manipulated in his lifetime. Though, heading a private institution demands manipulative skills as a fund-raiser, does it not? :)

Elizabeth felt she had

A perfectly scripted life, in other words, with regimented days and seasons defined as much 

by the rhythms of school as by the weather. It was beautiful to be a part of something bigger 

than she. Something that stretched both backward, to generations that came before, 

and forward, purposefully, to generations that had not yet arrived. 

Her life had both symmetry and meaning and sometimes 

Elizabeth thought that was all one could possibly ask for. (233)

She realizes that a large reason for her ambivalence regarding having a baby and starting a family is the fact that she has none of the typical concerns of other wives, 

...cooking and cleaning house and paying bills--all of that is taken care of for you at Lancaster. 

It is as if you had all the trappings of adulthood with none of the responsibility. (197)

When Arthur was at Yale and she at Wellesley, she spent many weekends with him and would always get upset when leaving. This is when Arthur 

invariably commits the one mistake he will compound throughout their lives: 

a failure to leave her alone. If he just let her be sad, just let her dwell in it for a moment, 

she would come out the other side and be fine. 

But he is a man and he wants to fix her. 

She tells him not to, she tells him he cannot, but he doesn't stop. (212)

This particularly struck me because this is something I have been working on lately--recognizing an emotion for what it is and the underlying source and accepting it, just being with it for awhile. Then moving on. And I feel sometimes as if we want to "fix" our partners when perhaps both would benefit from the other just "being there" and not trying to fix whatever seems to be wrong. I thought this was a beneficial insight. 

But was Elizabeth truly happy? At least in the way I view happiness--fulfilled emotionally... At one point she admits she may have been happy. However, she tells Russell when they meet many years later, she and Arthur "were done a long time ago." I felt the best relationship depicted was that between Betsy and Russell and I grieved for their loss... I did not feel that Arthur was a genuinely caring person in many ways. I believed him to be a male who was definitely not in touch with his feelings, and that typically makes such a person rather cold-hearted and unable to truly "connect" with others at an emotional level. I believed him to be all about the routines and regimen.

What is the next Literary Wives review?

It is Stay With Me 

by Ayobami Adebayo

Join us on June 4th!


I am excited about this one!



Happy Reading!
--Lynn

Literary Wives #21!!

The Disobedient Wife 

by Annika Milisic-Stanley

Admittedly, I found the cover image 
for this book rather fascinating 
in its simplicity.
My initial thoughts upon seeing it were 
that it certainly did depict the 
isolation any "wife" might feel if she 
was NOT "obedient" in a 
Muslim marriage, 
especially in more traditional 
Islamic societies/cultures. 
Of course, as we learn from reading 
this book, it can also depict 
that same 'isolation' for any woman 
(or partner) in any marriage.

And...don't forget to check out the other cohosting bloggers' reviews:

Emily of The Bookshelf of Emily J
Ariel of One Little Library

Noami of Consumed by Ink

Kay of whatmeread

Click here for more information about Literary Wives and 
other co-hosting bloggers currently on hiatus!

Check out our Facebook page!

The author contacted us and asked if we would like to read and review her book for the Literary Wives Online Book Discussion Group, and we agreed we would. 
She very graciously provided free copies to each of us in exchange for our honest reviews.
I find it rather interesting that we have read two books 
in sequence dealing with marriages set within Islam. 
However, in my mind, there was little commonality between this book 
and The Happy Marriage by Tahar Ben Jelloun. 
I particularly appreciate the fact that The Disobedient Wife seemed to be very practical 
and dealt with the realities of daily life between married partners. 
This was a book that struck me as 'pragmatic' and I could appreciate that. 
Though both books did deal with the reality of a male expecting his female spouse
to become/be an "obedient" and subservient person in their relationship,
even when subjected to abuse. 
As Harriet states, 
"Tajikistan is a cruel place for a young woman who marries the wrong man." (198)

The thought that kept running through my mind as I finished reading this book was:
While physical abuse/violence is definitely the most dangerous to a person's survival, 
other forms of "abuse" can definitely be just as debilitating in many ways. 

Granted, the danger is more immediate, overt, and obvious with physical violence. As in the case of Savsang, the physical abuse was horrific and should have never been allowed to go unpunished and to continue. This is what scares me most about countries where there are no laws to protect people, especially "wives" or female partners, from such abuse. Or...even if there are laws on the books, the reality is that many times there is no enforcement and no one with political/legal power who will listen to and/or believe victims, especially when they are female, and especially when they are "married" to their abusers. I love the way Milisic-Stanley depicts this in such detail through the simple everyday aspects of these women's lives. They literally have nowhere to turn and no one who will actually help them. In fact, as depicted here, the community/ies overall are supportive of these male abusers! The females actually abuse other females just as badly! Particularly the older females, and specifically mothers-in-law! I can never stop shaking my head when I consider such situations. Perhaps A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaleid Hosseini is the most intimately violent book I've read about the plight of females in traditionally rigid Islamic culture. Though this one qualifies as the second most among the books I've read!

Regardless of the fact that Harriet has plenty of financial resources and is free to plan her days, she proved to be just as 'stuck' in her marriage as anyone else, although she and her husband certainly had no relationship even closely resembling a true partnership with effective communication and sharing and he totally withdrew from his family, effectively abandoning them in all ways except financially. Harriet had dutifully agreed to abandon her own career to "trail" her husband in diplomatic work around the world. This involved a commitment to moving every 2-3 years to a completely different geographic location and culture(s), which can be very isolating in and of itself. It's rather obvious that none of these expat wives are dealing well with the stress of this lifestyle, though Harriet seems to be the best adjusted. However, as Henri pulls away and abandons their relationship and his family, she also sinks into depression and relies on alcohol for her escapism.

By page 50 or so I was a bit sick and tired of Harriet's complaints, while she seemingly overlooked Nargis' own plight of extreme poverty, I was glad to see that she finally did begin to see Nargis for who she truly was and what her life entailed regarding discomfort and inaccessibility to services, having barely enough money to avoid starvation for herself, her children, and her extended family. Even Nargis admits that the only reason her own parents were willing to allow her to move back with them after she left her second husband who consistently beat her and her son, was her ability to work and contribute consistent income to the household! Her own parents!! Harriet did have a good heart and had obviously been generous with "servants" in the past, much to her miserly husband's chagrin! Once she begins to realize what needs Nargis has (for boots, decent weather-appropriate clothing, and increased earnings), she does her best to help. Though at one point Nargis is a bit worried about Harriet's intensity to find her more work to fill what few leisure hours she now has... A couple of months ago I heard a study reported on NPR regarding the development of empathy within people who were "rich" or "well off" and had little to no sense of empathy for others who were less fortunate than themselves. In this study, these 'hard-hearted' people, as I would call them, were exposed to videos depicting hardships faced by individual people. Amazingly, even just a bit of such exposure did increase the participants' sense of empathy and willingness to help others. It didn't take much to create this type of change and awareness of others' struggles among these people. That gives me some hope... 

Nargis has worked hard and saved money to purchase a store in their mahalla, though the irresponsible lazy men in her family almost ruin that for her within the first couple of months! I purchase as much as I can through Fair Trade resources, since I can be assured the artisans (both in the U.S. and other countries) are paid fair market prices for their goods and services. This is how I obtain the tea I drink every day. It is through such organizations that even females can become economically successful, and experience proves that when females have control of a family's finances that money is typically used as it should be--to care for, feed, and educate the children. This opposed to the majority of males who will simply party away whatever money they make, to the detriment of their families, leaving little to none for necessities. 

Milisec-Stanley did a good job of depicting the resulting political unrest of economic decline; once men are unable to find work to support themselves and their families, they can become easy recruits for terrorist organizations and/or other revolutionary and/or criminal institutions and groups. For example, when Jamshed walked into the bar and purposefully sat down to speak with Pouloud, he already knew Pouloud had been working in Russia, but had not yet returned. I'm sure these men were all targeted as those who were unable to find legitimate work in Tajikistan, so they were all the more likely to jump at the chance to carry out illegal activities to earn money. Of course, for me, I am cynical enough to believe that any time one group of people is given power over others (i.e. Muslim males over females) they are more likely to become lazy in their tyranny, though Milisec-Stanley made it clear that when there are no possibilities for work, a society becomes rife with dissatisfied citizens. Additionally, that pushes those who will work toward more nefarious and even illegal activities. As  Henri states, "cotton and aluminum prices have fallen through the floor, so heroin is the main income earner." It is difficult to redirect people from criminal activities to make money when there is no other viable option available. And honestly, when Pouloud recited the daily routine of his life while working in a Russian factory, I could definitely understand why he wouldn't wish to return. It was horrid, virtually unbearable. Though that was the only bit of sympathy that man received from me! However, he was also a product of this specific time and place, to a degree. As a Muslim male he had total control and power (so he thought) over his "wife," and certainly no one would dispute that, not even his own parents! I kept thinking as I read this, that I don't believe any of my three sons would ever abuse their partners or children, at least they'd better not, 'cause they'd better hope it was the police or someone else who got to them first...and not their mother! I would have little mercy on them for such reprehensible behavior! 

What does this book say about wives or about the experience of being a wife?

Since I am not enamored by any organized religion, I found it extremely interesting that the Tajikistan marriages were all within the Islam religion, but the one 'western' marriage about which we received detailed information involved a man who was "atheist" in his spiritual/religious beliefs. So while it was obvious to see the abuse heaped upon wives by Muslim males, the 'abuse' Henri commits against Harriet is much more insidious and unseen, at least by her. All she knows is that she is "adrift" without her partner as a means of support (in every way other than financial) or even an active member of the family! She and her children have quite literally been abandoned by Henri. It is not until she sees the Russian woman in his hospital room, who is pregnant with his child, that Harriet totally rejects him as her husband. (With regard to the bomb incident, I found it interesting that the only other person supposedly injured by this device, the gardener, was never even mentioned as to any injuries or his possible death. We are only informed of the westerner's injuries...) Ironically, as Henri pulls away more from his own family, he fires one of the servants and demands that Harriet begin to cook for him and his guests, even though the food supply is sketchy at best, and it requires her to spend much time (and money) shopping for food, etc. While he never physically (or sexually) abuses Harriet, he is abusive to her in every other way, particularly emotionally. 

Wives. As a Muslim female you have no rights within a marriage, unless you happen to have knowledge of and access to services that westerners have established to help females escape intolerably abusive relationships/marriages. This is reinforced by the community(ies) overall, including the woman's own family, etc. Though I did note that Nargis' mother, Gulya, was finally agreeable to her daughter seeking help hiding from her husband once he had admitted he was smuggling drugs and insisting that she join him in these criminal activities. In retrospect, I had to wonder how much of that was to get Nargis out of her house to help protect herself, her husband, and her son (Whom she had always favored and deferred to, as any good Muslim mother would with a male child.) from Pouloud should he come after Nargis as he had promised to do? I couldn't imagine that self-preservation wasn't a large motivating factor for this 'change of heart.'

Yet as a wife of a seemingly 'progressive' western diplomat, you were expected to allow your husband to similarly do as he pleased and remain in the marriage. Granted, at least for Harriet, there was no physical/sexual abuse involved, other than abandonment and neglect, but she was certainly expected to just stand by and stay in the marriage, no matter what. Though unlike Nargis, she did apparently have family who could and would help her, at least to some extent, back in England. And we learn that she had extracted enough financial settlement from Henri to adequately support herself and her children. And, it is in this final stage of their relationship that Harriet proves she had indeed 'seen' and understands what type of help Nargis and her children can use most, as she arranges to pay all schooling fees for the children; providing education for their children is the main financial challenge for parents in most of the underdeveloped countries. Education is not 'free' or automatically provided by these governments. Typically, these governments don't even provide sufficient infrastructure, sanitation or plumbing, etc. These people live alongside their own waste, as did Nargis and her family. 

So what made these two women choose to break free from their respective marriages? It was an internal strength that each of them had and used. The ability to be strong and persevere, regardless of the challenges they faced. We discover that it is Nargis' strength that keeps Harriet motivated to improve herself and advance her own life once she returns to England with her children, cutting Henri from their lives. As she states,

Whenever I feel frightened of the future, uncertain of whether I can manage alone, I think of her.

What would Nargis not be able to do in Britain? 

What could she not achieve without tradition and poverty holding her back? 

Her trials were so much worse than anything I have had to face, yet she prevails. 

She inspires me forward, into my new, uncertain life and gives me the determination to succeed. And so I will. (285)

Much of what this book spoke to me of was the ability of women to be people in their own right. Not to be owned by or beholden to a male in a marriage to determine their life. In my own experience, I agree with those 'experts' who claim many fewer marriages would remain intact if females had financial independence in their own right. This has been true for me in my own experience with marriage. Women who have financial security can leave much more easily than those who do not. It is a matter of economic viability, just as it applies to countries such a Tajikistan where people are unable to obtain work to support themselves. Education and economic opportunity provide stability, for societies overall, and women in particular.

If you haven't read this book, you really should.

I would highly recommend it and would love to know more about the author 

and how much, if any, of this book reflects her own personal experiences.

Islam is not conducive to women being their own people overall.

I can only hope that will change for the better.

In my opinion, there cannot be a stable society when one-half 

of its population is subjugated and controlled by others.


Join us for our next 
Literary Wives read 
in August.


We will review 
How to Be A Good Wife 
by Emma Chapman

Literary Wives #20!!

The Happy Marriage

by Tahar Ben Jelloun

and translated by

André Naffis-Sahely

Honestly, I hardly know where to begin with this review.

When I first read the publisher's blurb, I didn't think 

this book sounded like something I would enjoy.

Then it was brought to the attention of some of the other 

cohosting bloggers of the Literary Wives online book discussion group, 

and we decided to ask the publisher for free review copies.

It was one of the first times I can recall receiving such a quick response from 

a publisher, and within 2 weeks we had all received our copies of this book!

Thank you very much to Melville House! 

Regardless of that, we are all offering our honest and heartfelt reviews!

Perhaps the best thing I can do at this point is direct you

to much more knowledgeable and professional critiques of this work. 

Here is the review written by Robin Yassin-Kassab, 

published in the January 30, 2016, 

edition of The Guardian.

Here is the review written by Boyd Tonkin, 

published in the January 21, 2016, 

edition of Independent.

Here is the review written by Malcolm Forbes, 

published in the April 3, 2016, 

edition of The National.

Here is the Publisher's Weekly review.

And...don't forget to check out the other cohosting bloggers' reviews:

Emily of The Bookshelf of Emily J
Ariel of One Little Library
(Welcome back Ariel!!)

Noami of Consumed by Ink

Kay of whatmeread

Click here for more information about Literary Wives and 
other co-hosting bloggers currently on hiatus!

Check out our Facebook page!

UPDATE: (4-5-16) In a quick aside, in researching the author and book a bit more, I believe my first instinct may well be correct. Jelloun evidently has before questioned the rigid patriarchal Islamic view of marriage. I did feel that the artist's rather disconnected 'voice' was meant to be representative of Muslim males, whereas the much more direct, individualized, and curt 'voice' of his wife, Amina, was meant to represent individual Muslim females as they begin to try to assert themselves in such rigid 'religious' unions. I believe that may have been part of his intent. This book has certainly provoked meaningful discussion amongst us!

Check out this great review written by Tony Malone that 

I found in Words Without Borders, The Online Magazine for International Literature.

Reading these reviews did help me place this book within Morocco's political history. The new Moudawana family law code took effect in 2003, the same year that this book ends and a divorce is being worked out by Amina's and the artist's lawyers. There is a possibility that Amina could take him to court and detail his many extramarital affairs, thereby entitling her to a hefty financial settlement. The artist has been told by several of his male friends that they were left destitute in the wake of their divorces, since they were made to give their wives virtually everything (house, car, property, alimony, and other financial payments) in the court-ordered settlement. My assumption is that prior to the enactment of these laws, women/wives had virtually no legal claims against their husbands; men could do as they damn well pleased and the women were helpless and left destitute if they legally ended their marriage. At least this gave me some additional understanding of the overall situation between the artist and his wife, Amina. Without such legal rights, women would definitely be encouraged to remain in marriages despite abuse, unhappiness, etc. We learn the artist is Muslim, as he mentions the Qur'an. When I read this, I wondered what that bit of information was to indicate. That he was the male and therefore should control everything and his wife should be submissive? Or is that simply a 'Western' oversimplification? However, when I discovered Islam is the most common religion in Morocco, I could then understand perhaps a bit better just how the civil law may well override/disrupt the religious practices and challenge the patriarchal hierarchy within family units. 

This book has been compared to Fates and Furies by Lauren Groff, which was not a book I enjoyed reading either. (Sorry, President Obama, while I really like you and appreciate your efforts as President, I definitely disagree with your selection of Groff's book as the best for 2015.) So that comparison did not encourage me. As soon as I received my copy I read the first 20 pages or so, and immediately decided I'd better wait to read it, 'cause it was not resonating with me at that time. Then I started it again this past week. Unfortunately, I had the same feeling I'd had before, but I had made a commitment to read and review it for Literary Wives, and by golly, that's what I did! (Much to my chagrin...) 

I found it impossible to connect with the artist character in any way other than sympathizing with his disability, particularly when he couldn't even swat at a fly on his nose to shoo it away. Nor could he speak well enough or make enough noise for one of the two "Twins" to help him get rid of the obnoxious fly. Or...

A string of drool hung form his half-open mouth. From time to time, 

one of the Twins would gently wipe it away. This would stir him back into consciousness, 

and he would feel ashamed that he's been unable to contain his spittle, ashamed that he'd dozed off. It was these little things that bothered him the most, rather than the fact he was paralyzed. 

The illness had changed his habits. Was it an illness or was it death? (9)

When your life is in someone else's hands, is it still really a life? (27)

It is true that what we miss most are those seemingly minor abilities that we take for granted when we are healthy. But there my sympathy ends. And as I read, I realized that there are some people who would believe this stroke and resulting paralysis happened to him as punishment for his infidelity, etc. Be that as it may, I honestly found the prose uninteresting. I was bored as I read. I seemed to pause every 5-8 pages to 'count' how many pages I'd read, telling myself I could read at least that many more... Sad. This book just did not resonate with me. I would have preferred a bit more balance of negative and positive characteristics in both characters, but especially the artist, since almost 75% of the book is him...whining, griping, and complaining, except when he waxes on about the many many women with whom he had affairs, which definitely seemed boastful! 

I found it disingenuous at best for him to proclaim that he truly and genuinely loved any of these women. I was unable to picture him as capable of a monogamous relationship. At least not one in which he remained 'faithful.' Now, to be fair, I have a tough time dealing with people who cheat on their spouses. For me, there is no 'excuse' or rationale that can justify that. If you don't intend to remain faithful, then don't make a long-term/lifetime commitment to a monogamous relationship! And...if you are that unhappy, end that relationship FIRST! Then go screw around with other people. In my mind, a person must make a CHOICE, a conscientious decision, to have sex with another individual, whether married or not, I do not buy the argument that it "just happens." With that said, as I have noted before, I have friends who have cheated in their marriage, though they were separated and contemplating divorce at the time. And...I am still friends with them. However, having been the 'faithful' person whose spouse was 'unfaithful' I am rather rigid on that issue in my own relationships! To say I disliked the artist is a drastic understatement--I could find nothing to like about him. I could perhaps appreciate his artistic skill, but that is it. And, I do not have to like a character to appreciate the characterization, but again, I was just unable to connect with this person in any meaningful way. The writing just didn't work well for me at all. 

The artist convinces Amina to see a marriage counselor, but she only attends one session and when the artist returns by himself:

She came because she thinks you're deranged, while she's in perfect mental health. She's completely wrong, of course, but I'm unable to help people who aren't yet ready for therapy. (67)

This is very true and something few seem to realize. For example, several of my own therapists have commented on the seeming futility of most court-ordered therapy. It sounds good, but if the client isn't willing to participate fully and try to implement change, it is useless. He continues:

For that reason, couples' therapy isn't advisable at this present moment. 

So, what should I advise you to do? Divorce? Separate? Resign yourself? Run away? 

You're going to have to be the one to make that choice. It's yours and yours alone. 

The problems will always be there. People never really change. 

That's not my opinion, it's the wisdom of the ancients. Good luck. (67)

A bit on the pessimistic side, if you ask me. There is always the possibility for change. And, really, this is totally unprofessional and inappropriate for him to say. Though if he is also Muslim? Would that perhaps make a difference? I don't know...it was just my first thought. It would have been interesting to hear Amina's interpretation of the first appointment, but as I recall, we did not. Interestingly, as we read the long list each of these two characters prepares regarding what they don't like about their spouse, there are several mundane everyday annoyances and frustrations included... 

The artist of Amina:

My wife annoys me at least once a day. (180)

That's the definition of living together, isn't it? :)

My wife confuses "good" with "true" and "false" with "bad." (180)

Uh...I would argue those are absolutely correct!! Only a liar would confuse those terms as he evidently does! 

My wife is in love with love and the idea of a Prince Charming. (178)

Or, perhaps she just expects her husband to be a generous kind-hearted faithful soul! Though she does describe reading romantic fairy tales as a child and imagining herself as the heroine. But what person hasn't done that during childhood? 

My wife is sweet to everyone except her husband. (179)

Perhaps that is true, and if so, it is a deal-breaker as far as a long-term committed relationship is concerned. You can live with someone like this, but it isn't pleasant and eventually, you no longer want to endure that person day in and day out. (At least I didn't...)

And Amina of the artist:

My husband eats really quickly, and that annoys me. (287)

Get over it already... :(

My husband snores and shifts around in bed. (287)

Oops! Well, my husband could speak to the annoyance of sleeping with someone who snores...boy, could he! But...we both shift around in bed... :)

My husband claims he loves women too much, which is a lie, he can't even love his wife. (289)

Yes, that would be a good place to start, wouldn't it? 

My husband is bad-tempered and nervous when he's with me, but charming with others. (287)

Oh, boy. Did this bring back memories. I used to tell my ex-husband that if he'd only treat me at least half as well as he did his friends, we could get along much better. In response his eyes would usually glaze over as if he didn't understand. (I don't think he did.)

I did find it interesting that although Amina's family was indigenous Berber and therefore much more in tune with and likely to use the 'dark arts,' supposedly, the artist's sisters had also planted various objects around the house to influence and/or sicken Amina. So, objects had been planted in both the artist's studio and the house. Was any of this responsible for either of their illnesses/behaviors? We do not know... However, the artist blames a neighbor, Lallah for much of his wife's aggressive non-cooperative behaviors. (Anything not to take responsibility, eh?) 

There were absurd aspects to this book. For instance, Criss, one of his many lovers, as she was leaving and breaking up with him,

I'll always be your friend, we just won't be having sex anymore. 

I love solitude, and sometimes I betray that solitude by spending time 

with men who are much like you, artists who are famous, but not too tall. (120)

At this point I exclaim aloud, "What?!?" What difference does height make? :)

Then I go back to my solitary life and my work, which I'm very passionate about 

and which gives me a great deal of satisfaction. 

When I get horny, I pleasure myself and occasionally use a vibrator to orgasm. (120)

This is when I think to myself...WTMI!! Sheesh! Actually, this sounded more like something I might expect a male to say to a female, not vice versa. 

There we have it, darling. Know that we had something very beautiful and very intense. Goodbye! (120)

And...she's gone! Perhaps he's better off without her? Or perhaps they're just two of a kind!

Jelloun did manage to include some valid commentary about being disabled.

Good health, both physical and psychological, always conceals reality; 
it prevents us from seeing the vulnerabilities of others, the occasionally cavernous wounds 
of those who are struck down by fate. We simply walk past them, and while in the best of cases we feel a pang of pity, we ultimately continue on our own path. (21)

All too true. I make a special effort whenever I can to speak to and smile at any person with whom I have contact who appears to maybe have a disability since the most common complaint is the lack of being treated 'normally' (just as we would treat anyone else) by others. I try to strike up a conversation just as I would with anyone else, if they appear receptive. But so many times those of us who are healthy totally ignore or shut those out of our lives who are dealing with illness/disability. The artist discusses this, ruing the fact that his own wife doesn't even come to see him while he is partially paralyzed.

After three long years, the artist/painter is finally able to once again hold a brush and paint, albeit on much smaller canvases than before. 

...even though his body was recuperating, he quickly realized that his marriage would never heal. 

Soon enough, arguments began to creep back into their daily lives, to the point that he started to yearn for those months when he'd been paralyzed and confined to his bed and his wheelchair, 
but at least far removed from her. (160)

Wow...that IS bad...

He'd never understood the concept of power or those who fought to the death trying to attain it.

It just didn't interest him. (166)

My first thought upon reading this? Of course not. As a male, he historically always HAD power! That may just be the feminist in me talking... :)

He'd never left a woman, it was always women who got angry with him and left him. (167)

Uhm...does he consider this to be a good thing? 'Cause I don't...to me that just denotes he really doesn't care.

He always tried to remain friends with them, and unfortunately for him he usually succeeded.

He would be happy to see them again and occasionally resumed his former relationship with them.           He was pleased with the ambiguity of these situations and how flexible they were, even though deep down he knew he couldn't keep that artificial and unhealthy balancing act going forever. (167)

So he supposedly did realize the truth of his transgressions... Loving the "ambiguity" and "flexibility"? Egad. That made me nauseous, at the very least! And Amina speaks of "flexibility" when describing the artist:

He was always keen on smoothing things over, avoiding scenes, no scandals or noises, it was better to remain calm and stay flexible. "To turn a blind eye..." (246)

Of course it was to his advantage to advocate such a philosophy! What an asshole. 

And now to answer that 'Wife' question!

What does this book say about wives or about the experience of being a wife? 

Interestingly, we, the readers, never get a real hint or clue as to what is 'accurate' or 'inaccurate' as reported in the book. So we are truly clueless as to how these two people treated each other and who to believe. Given that 75% of the book is devoted to the artist/painter describing his perspective, I can only imagine that we are to concentrate on him and his "story." Of course, I am reminded yet once again, that all memories are skewed by the person doing the remembering. There is rarely, if ever, a truly accurate "eye-witness account" of any memory, because our brains filter and interpret such 'objective' data quite differently. Scientific studies keep proving this over and over. (There are TED talks, etc., about just this phenomenon.) Obviously, neither person is happy or fulfilled in this relationship, and hasn't been for a long long time. 

While he'd never necessarily wanted his wife to one day grow docile and submissive, he had always harbored a secret hope that she would at least become loving and obliging, calm and reasonable, in short, a wife who could help him build a family life and then share it with him. 

It had been his dream. But he'd been misguided and he had instead oppressed his wife, 
forgetting to acknowledge his share of  responsibility for that failure. (11)

Uhm...hello! When you cheat on your wife, don't expect her to be a good partner to you! Period! What an asshole! :) And here was a bit of hint that perhaps this narrator wasn't to be trusted since he is admitting to "oppressing" his wife... Hmmmm...

Imane's story of the woman who literally ate her husband and only spit him out when she wanted him out, and he would always do her bidding. 

Other women followed her example and that's how the tribe of man-eaters was born.

Ever since then, peace has prevailed in this country where 

the swallowed men no longer have a say. (202)

This was another spot that felt absurd to me, unless she was hinting that this was Amina's tribe...and that she believed this was what had happened to the artist or that this was Amina's goal, for as we learn, she had also manipulated Imane.

The artist's letter to Amina:

Be reasonable, I beg you, and be at peace with the fact that we don't love each other anymore.

Love isn't a decision or something that can be forced.

It comes to us and then just as easily goes away again... There's nothing we can do about that... (209)

You know, according to this guy, he has loved many many women throughout his lifetime. I believe he was infatuated and lustful after these women and confused "lust" with "love." I don't believe he honestly knew what that meant or what it should resemble, at least not according to my defintion! 

My mistake was to think people can change. 

None of us change, not least of which a man who's already lived out most of his life. 

I entered his life at a time when he'd decided to stop having fun and settle down, 

because the anxiety of his encroaching death had begun to creep over him. 

I was the little flower who was going to take the reins, 

except that Foulane was the one who took my youth and innocence.

We were not made to be together. That was my mistake, our mistake. (276)

There may be some truth to this...in that the artist (Foulane as Amina calls him, meaning, any man/anyone.) was 14 years older than her and they married when she was only 24 years old and he was 38 years old. And he admitted he had thought it was time he "settled down." Though he never truly remained faithful in the relationship, so I'm uncertain what he meant by "settling down." Sheesh! 

I use all these quotes to prove that we never learn who to believe between these two. Also, there are multiple references to the belief that "love" is due to "fate" and totally outside of any one person's control. I don't know that I believe that, but I do believe that the definition of "love" with regard to marriage or a long-term committed relationship can change throughout adulthood. Obviously these two people came from quite disparate backgrounds which were seemingly incompatible, particularly with regard to their specific families who seem determined not to get along. In addition, there was quite an age difference--she was only 24 and he was 38 when they married. They could have been at very different stages of adulthood/development with that much difference. And...something that is never mentioned beyond once or twice, they had only known each other ONE MONTH before marrying! Yikes!! There was some truth to each of their complaints about the other. I do believe she was correct when she stated he had decided to "settle down" with her, however, he still maintained affairs with other women, so he obviously intended to 'have fun,' just not with her!! It is true that there are different stressors in relationships between partners/spouses once children are born and must be cared for and nurtured. It is not unheard of for partners to become jealous and feel 'left out' when the children seem to consume all the time and energy of their partner. But these two never attempted to communicate, in my opinion. At least it seemed as if there was no attempt made on either of their parts to truly work together once they were parents. 

What does all this say about the artist's wife? 

I believe she stayed in this relationship WAY too long and allowed it to "poison" her, exactly as she states near the end of the book. Yet then she decides at the end to play the role of the "perfect wife" to her husband. I'm sitting in my chair at that point yelling, 

"W-w-h-h-a-a-t-t?!?" I do believe each of them was at fault for the failure of their marriage, though to be fair, if your partner goes from one affair to another on a constant basis, how can you realistically make a marriage work? (At least by my definition.) But I also believe neither of them had the common sense or tools to try to work on it and make it work. Amina was quite the sneak and manipulator. She believed that there should no longer be 'two' people once a couple is married, but that they should meld into one entity. This is at best extremely unrealistic, and at most, damaging in and of itself, in my opinion. Each person must be able to maintain their individuality and yet they must be able to cooperate and get along as a couple. I kept going back to Imane's story of the wife swallowing her husband and could easily imagine Amina feeling as if she could or even should do exactly that. I believe she was evil or possessed in the end after 14 years of marriage to the artist. But I truly don't know. This book seemed nonsensical to me overall. 

In the end, this book was more absurd than anything. 

Honestly, I had much the same feeling upon reading this as I had 

after reading The Stranger by Albert Camus.  

I would love to know what Mr. Jelloun thought a reader should "get" from this book.

Obviously, I didn't "get" much. 

And honestly, I wish I had the time back that I spent reading it.

I truly hope others have a much more positive reaction 

since I do hope every author can succeed.

 I feel as if my review is just as jumbled as this book made me feel in the end. :)

Are you confused yet? 



Join us on June 6th 
when we review 
The Disobedient Wife 
by Annika Milisic-Stanley