What do you think?
Rate this book
The Road Through the Wall
Everyone knew the residents of Pepper Street were "nice" people -- especially the residents themselves. Among the self-satisfied group were: Mrs Merriam, the sanctimonious shrew who was turning her husband into a nonentity and her daughter into a bigoted spinster; Mr Roberts, who found relief from the street's unending propriety in shoddy side-street amours; Miss Fielding, who considered it more important to boil an egg properly than to save a disturbed girl from destruction. It took the gruesome act of a desperate boy who lived among them to pierce the shell of their complacency and force them to see their own ugliness.
220 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1948
198 people are currently reading
5397 people want to read
About the author
Shirley Jackson
333 books11k followersShirley Jackson was an influential American author. A popular writer in her time, her work has received increasing attention from literary critics in recent years. She has influenced such writers as Stephen King, Nigel Kneale, and Richard Matheson.
She is best known for her dystopian short story, "The Lottery" (1948), which suggests there is a deeply unsettling underside to bucolic, smalltown America. In her critical biography of Shirley Jackson, Lenemaja Friedman notes that when Shirley Jackson's story "The Lottery" was published in the June 28, 1948, issue of The New Yorker, it received a response that "no New Yorker story had ever received." Hundreds of letters poured in that were characterized by, as Jackson put it, "bewilderment, speculation and old-fashioned abuse."
Jackson's husband, the literary critic Stanley Edgar Hyman, wrote in his preface to a posthumous anthology of her work that "she consistently refused to be interviewed, to explain or promote her work in any fashion, or to take public stands and be the pundit of the Sunday supplements. She believed that her books would speak for her clearly enough over the years." Hyman insisted the darker aspects of Jackson's works were not, as some critics claimed, the product of "personal, even neurotic, fantasies", but that Jackson intended, as "a sensitive and faithful anatomy of our times, fitting symbols for our distressing world of the concentration camp and the Bomb", to mirror humanity's Cold War-era fears. Jackson may even have taken pleasure in the subversive impact of her work, as revealed by Hyman's statement that she "was always proud that the Union of South Africa banned The Lottery', and she felt that they at least understood the story".
In 1965, Jackson died of heart failure in her sleep, at her home in North Bennington Vermont, at the age of 48.
She is best known for her dystopian short story, "The Lottery" (1948), which suggests there is a deeply unsettling underside to bucolic, smalltown America. In her critical biography of Shirley Jackson, Lenemaja Friedman notes that when Shirley Jackson's story "The Lottery" was published in the June 28, 1948, issue of The New Yorker, it received a response that "no New Yorker story had ever received." Hundreds of letters poured in that were characterized by, as Jackson put it, "bewilderment, speculation and old-fashioned abuse."
Jackson's husband, the literary critic Stanley Edgar Hyman, wrote in his preface to a posthumous anthology of her work that "she consistently refused to be interviewed, to explain or promote her work in any fashion, or to take public stands and be the pundit of the Sunday supplements. She believed that her books would speak for her clearly enough over the years." Hyman insisted the darker aspects of Jackson's works were not, as some critics claimed, the product of "personal, even neurotic, fantasies", but that Jackson intended, as "a sensitive and faithful anatomy of our times, fitting symbols for our distressing world of the concentration camp and the Bomb", to mirror humanity's Cold War-era fears. Jackson may even have taken pleasure in the subversive impact of her work, as revealed by Hyman's statement that she "was always proud that the Union of South Africa banned The Lottery', and she felt that they at least understood the story".
In 1965, Jackson died of heart failure in her sleep, at her home in North Bennington Vermont, at the age of 48.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 458 reviews
August 6, 2025
one of history's scariest writers, shirley jackson, writing about one of the world's scariest subjects: children.
much of the delight in shirley jackson is the way she sees right through the world, to a creepy core few of us can perceive. in her books, she holds all of these cards, slowly granting the reader one strange and unexplained card at the time until, in the climax, she drops them all.
it seems like jackson has a huge hand in this book, but she never quite let the reader see it.
90% of this book is made up of almost vignettes, moments in the lives of a number of households living on one street in california. there are ominous-feeling moments to be sure (no one writes children like shirley jackson), but they never seem to build on each other.
although maybe i just missed something. if there are roughly 80 characters and all of them have similar names (hallie and harriet, marilyn and mary), there's not a snowball's chance in hell i'm going to keep track of them.
bottom line: even shirley jackson's meh is good to me.
3.5
much of the delight in shirley jackson is the way she sees right through the world, to a creepy core few of us can perceive. in her books, she holds all of these cards, slowly granting the reader one strange and unexplained card at the time until, in the climax, she drops them all.
it seems like jackson has a huge hand in this book, but she never quite let the reader see it.
90% of this book is made up of almost vignettes, moments in the lives of a number of households living on one street in california. there are ominous-feeling moments to be sure (no one writes children like shirley jackson), but they never seem to build on each other.
although maybe i just missed something. if there are roughly 80 characters and all of them have similar names (hallie and harriet, marilyn and mary), there's not a snowball's chance in hell i'm going to keep track of them.
bottom line: even shirley jackson's meh is good to me.
3.5
February 21, 2025
3.75
Satire can be boring if it’s not done well, or if the reader doesn’t get it for some reason. This first novel of Jackson’s is satire and I didn’t “get” it the first time I read it, back in my early Shirley Jackson-reading days, when I was young and expecting something different after reading her “classics.” While this won’t be a favorite novel, I appreciate it now.
I also appreciate Jackson not sparing her irony on the neighborhood children of Pepper Street. Except for a three-year-old, who's treated like a silent doll, the children can be just as bad as the adults—makes sense, the latter are their role models. The children’s need to be either a leader or a follower; their desire to grow up quickly; their burgeoning sexuality, as confused as they might be about it, are not glossed over.
Neighborhoods with children running around, playing games with one another on their street seem to go in cycles. Exclusive neighborhoods are still prevalent, many gated as is the one beyond Pepper Street, where some of the families yearn to go and others don’t give a thought to as they know it’s beyond their means. This novel was published in 1948 and set in 1936, yet neighbors still discriminate in similar, subtle ways against “unsuitable” outsiders who rent or buy a house in their enclave.
The (unneeded) prologue maps each house in relation to the others of Pepper Street. And while that may read tedious, and the names of the adults and their children may run together at times, it’s not important to distinguish all the characters right away: Eventually the “cream” will rise to the top.
*
From page 109:
When one has created a thing exactly necessary; when a hiding place so accurate exists, the difficulty which arises is that the thing, containing itself, has room for nothing else. Even in a new friendship with maidens, there may be nothing worth hiding in a secret place.
Satire can be boring if it’s not done well, or if the reader doesn’t get it for some reason. This first novel of Jackson’s is satire and I didn’t “get” it the first time I read it, back in my early Shirley Jackson-reading days, when I was young and expecting something different after reading her “classics.” While this won’t be a favorite novel, I appreciate it now.
I also appreciate Jackson not sparing her irony on the neighborhood children of Pepper Street. Except for a three-year-old, who's treated like a silent doll, the children can be just as bad as the adults—makes sense, the latter are their role models. The children’s need to be either a leader or a follower; their desire to grow up quickly; their burgeoning sexuality, as confused as they might be about it, are not glossed over.
Neighborhoods with children running around, playing games with one another on their street seem to go in cycles. Exclusive neighborhoods are still prevalent, many gated as is the one beyond Pepper Street, where some of the families yearn to go and others don’t give a thought to as they know it’s beyond their means. This novel was published in 1948 and set in 1936, yet neighbors still discriminate in similar, subtle ways against “unsuitable” outsiders who rent or buy a house in their enclave.
The (unneeded) prologue maps each house in relation to the others of Pepper Street. And while that may read tedious, and the names of the adults and their children may run together at times, it’s not important to distinguish all the characters right away: Eventually the “cream” will rise to the top.
*
From page 109:
When one has created a thing exactly necessary; when a hiding place so accurate exists, the difficulty which arises is that the thing, containing itself, has room for nothing else. Even in a new friendship with maidens, there may be nothing worth hiding in a secret place.
February 4, 2019
Having read some of Shirley Jackson’s most famous novels, as well as her recent biography, I thought I would like to read all her work, from the beginning. This is her first novel, written in 1947 and published in 1948, the same year as, “The Lottery.”
Jackson was to say, that the first book an author publishes is the book written to get back at their parents, and, certainly, there are hints that some of this novel comes from her childhood experiences. The scene is a suburban childhood, in the fictional Californian town of Cabrillo. Jackson hints at her dissatisfaction with her own childhood experiences – the constraints of being well brought up, the veneer of respectability ,and the ugly emotions that she scented beneath that outward, public behaviour.
For those who have delighted in, “The Haunting of Hill House,” or “We Have Always Lived in the Castle,” this may seem a little tamer, but there is much in this, first book, which suggests both Jackson’s brilliance as a writer – her sharp, satirical eye – and glimpses of the work that is yet to come.
It is the start of the summer holidays in Pepper Street, and the inhabitants of the houses have long days ahead of them. The neighbourhood children are allowed to play out and it is with the children of the street that Jackson is mainly concerned. Their various feuds, battles, friendships and loyalties, that will be tested through this book.
Shirley Jackson is one of my favourite authors. In this book she peeks behind curtains (at one point, a boy in the road even creeps into another families house), examines marriages, parenting styles, snobbishness, intolerance, prejudice, bullying, casual cruelties, and more. She is perfect at capturing the undercurrent – the way a neighbour leans forward to hear a titbit of gossip, then rushes to the telephone to pass on the news, or the sniping arguments between a married couple. The way those who feel they are more respectable, sneer at those they sense are beneath them. The scent of fear, of weakness, of anything which can be exploited.
The book culminates in a neighbourhood party and a shocking conclusion. Perhaps more shocking is the reaction to the events, which are all too modern and realistic. There may have been no social media, or mobile phones, in 1948, but Jackson had no illusions about the cruelty of human nature. I was far more impressed by this than I thought I would be and look forward to reading of Jackson’s work.
Jackson was to say, that the first book an author publishes is the book written to get back at their parents, and, certainly, there are hints that some of this novel comes from her childhood experiences. The scene is a suburban childhood, in the fictional Californian town of Cabrillo. Jackson hints at her dissatisfaction with her own childhood experiences – the constraints of being well brought up, the veneer of respectability ,and the ugly emotions that she scented beneath that outward, public behaviour.
For those who have delighted in, “The Haunting of Hill House,” or “We Have Always Lived in the Castle,” this may seem a little tamer, but there is much in this, first book, which suggests both Jackson’s brilliance as a writer – her sharp, satirical eye – and glimpses of the work that is yet to come.
It is the start of the summer holidays in Pepper Street, and the inhabitants of the houses have long days ahead of them. The neighbourhood children are allowed to play out and it is with the children of the street that Jackson is mainly concerned. Their various feuds, battles, friendships and loyalties, that will be tested through this book.
Shirley Jackson is one of my favourite authors. In this book she peeks behind curtains (at one point, a boy in the road even creeps into another families house), examines marriages, parenting styles, snobbishness, intolerance, prejudice, bullying, casual cruelties, and more. She is perfect at capturing the undercurrent – the way a neighbour leans forward to hear a titbit of gossip, then rushes to the telephone to pass on the news, or the sniping arguments between a married couple. The way those who feel they are more respectable, sneer at those they sense are beneath them. The scent of fear, of weakness, of anything which can be exploited.
The book culminates in a neighbourhood party and a shocking conclusion. Perhaps more shocking is the reaction to the events, which are all too modern and realistic. There may have been no social media, or mobile phones, in 1948, but Jackson had no illusions about the cruelty of human nature. I was far more impressed by this than I thought I would be and look forward to reading of Jackson’s work.
September 28, 2020
I’m a big fan of Shirley Jackson’s - The Haunting of Hill House is great, We Have Always Lived in the Castle is a masterpiece, and her short stories are mostly amazing - but I was shocked at how utterly bad her first novel, The Road Through the Wall, was.
Nothing happens. There’s no story. It’s set in small town America in the 1930s in a middle-class neighbourhood. Kids play, adults adult. There’s the vaguest suggestions of transgression like a couple having an affair, one woman possibly prostituting herself to pay the bills, some anti-Semitism - all so very lightly hinted at in that subtle way of Jackson’s. But nothing that adds up to a clear or even remotely compelling story.
There are far too many characters nearly all of whom are indistinct - they were just names to me and never individuals I could tell apart. That’s largely because they all seem to have the same personality (perhaps intentionally - Jackson commenting on the conformity of the society?) but also because none of them do anything to set themselves apart from the others. They’re such a horribly dull bunch to read about.
The only characters that stood out were the r-worded kids who move into the neighbourhood about halfway through and nothing happens with them besides them moving in. Jackson ends her rambling, unimpressive narrative with something that comes out of nowhere and has no impact because it comes out of nowhere and because the character was just another non-character - who could care? And what’s the point anyway? It’s so gratuitous and silly.
I was expecting to see something of the kind that went into the spooky stories Jackson became famous for but there was literally nothing here (there’s a passing reference to an old lady being dubbed a “witch” by the kids but she’s just an old lady who doesn’t do anything, like every other character). Unimaginably boring, I wouldn’t recommend Shirley Jackson’s The Road Through the Wall to anyone, fans or otherwise - spare yourself the tedium!
Nothing happens. There’s no story. It’s set in small town America in the 1930s in a middle-class neighbourhood. Kids play, adults adult. There’s the vaguest suggestions of transgression like a couple having an affair, one woman possibly prostituting herself to pay the bills, some anti-Semitism - all so very lightly hinted at in that subtle way of Jackson’s. But nothing that adds up to a clear or even remotely compelling story.
There are far too many characters nearly all of whom are indistinct - they were just names to me and never individuals I could tell apart. That’s largely because they all seem to have the same personality (perhaps intentionally - Jackson commenting on the conformity of the society?) but also because none of them do anything to set themselves apart from the others. They’re such a horribly dull bunch to read about.
The only characters that stood out were the r-worded kids who move into the neighbourhood about halfway through and nothing happens with them besides them moving in. Jackson ends her rambling, unimpressive narrative with something that comes out of nowhere and has no impact because it comes out of nowhere and because the character was just another non-character - who could care? And what’s the point anyway? It’s so gratuitous and silly.
I was expecting to see something of the kind that went into the spooky stories Jackson became famous for but there was literally nothing here (there’s a passing reference to an old lady being dubbed a “witch” by the kids but she’s just an old lady who doesn’t do anything, like every other character). Unimaginably boring, I wouldn’t recommend Shirley Jackson’s The Road Through the Wall to anyone, fans or otherwise - spare yourself the tedium!
March 18, 2022
You know how you walk by a lovely house with the curtains pulled back, and you glimpse the neat furniture and knick knacks, and you think how nice the people’s lives must be, how flawless compared to your own? Well Shirley Jackson knew better, and in this story she reveals just what is really taking place behind those pristine facades. And brilliantly, she shows us through the eyes of children.
In this her first novel, Jackson gives us a mostly upper-middle class neighborhood (with a few “undesirables” thrown in) next to a large wall that encircles a grand estate. Their street ends at a gate beyond which “was a neighborhood so exclusive that the streets had no names, the houses no numbers.” Summer has just begun and the children play, the adults try to control them, and what initially appears good or bad is inverted by Jackson’s contrary pen.
Young Harriet (the one who wants to be a writer so probably represents Shirley) has made friends with a Jewish girl, and her mother warns: “Actually, however much we may want to find new friends whom we may value, people who are exciting to us because of new ideas, or because they are different, we have to do what is expected of us.”
Jackson grew up in a suburb of San Francisco and she apparently based the location of this story on that town. It’s the perfect spot for such a satire: small enough for rampant gossip, with mixed neighborhoods but sitting at the foot of the super-rich. She was born in 1916, and likely drew on her own childhood experiences, but set the story in 1936. It was published in 1948, a decade later, while she was probably witnessing her own childrens’ similar struggles, and even though my childhood took place another decade beyond that, the class divisions and racism and sheer pettiness was all very familiar. It’s sadly timeless, apparently.
“Mrs. Desmond was neither intelligent nor unintelligent, because thinking and all its allied attributes were completely outside her schedule for life; her values did not include mind, and nothing that she intended ever required more than money.”
I struggled with the large cast of characters--more than my feeble brain could keep track of sufficiently. I fell right into the story though, because I’d heard all of these attitudes before. But readers who grew up after, say, the mid-60’s may have to translate some of the conventions to newer ones they themselves have experienced.
After this, my fifth Shirley Jackson novel, I can’t help but think it’s a wonder humanity has survived this long.
In this her first novel, Jackson gives us a mostly upper-middle class neighborhood (with a few “undesirables” thrown in) next to a large wall that encircles a grand estate. Their street ends at a gate beyond which “was a neighborhood so exclusive that the streets had no names, the houses no numbers.” Summer has just begun and the children play, the adults try to control them, and what initially appears good or bad is inverted by Jackson’s contrary pen.
Young Harriet (the one who wants to be a writer so probably represents Shirley) has made friends with a Jewish girl, and her mother warns: “Actually, however much we may want to find new friends whom we may value, people who are exciting to us because of new ideas, or because they are different, we have to do what is expected of us.”
Jackson grew up in a suburb of San Francisco and she apparently based the location of this story on that town. It’s the perfect spot for such a satire: small enough for rampant gossip, with mixed neighborhoods but sitting at the foot of the super-rich. She was born in 1916, and likely drew on her own childhood experiences, but set the story in 1936. It was published in 1948, a decade later, while she was probably witnessing her own childrens’ similar struggles, and even though my childhood took place another decade beyond that, the class divisions and racism and sheer pettiness was all very familiar. It’s sadly timeless, apparently.
“Mrs. Desmond was neither intelligent nor unintelligent, because thinking and all its allied attributes were completely outside her schedule for life; her values did not include mind, and nothing that she intended ever required more than money.”
I struggled with the large cast of characters--more than my feeble brain could keep track of sufficiently. I fell right into the story though, because I’d heard all of these attitudes before. But readers who grew up after, say, the mid-60’s may have to translate some of the conventions to newer ones they themselves have experienced.
After this, my fifth Shirley Jackson novel, I can’t help but think it’s a wonder humanity has survived this long.
December 29, 2018
Foreword, by Ruth Franklin
--The Road Through the Wall
--The Road Through the Wall
August 20, 2020
This is a really scary novel, and the scary part pertains to how 'normal' everything is. The residents of Pepper Street are all obsessed with outdoing each other and looking better, earning more money and covering up anything that might make them look different. The same goes for their children, who are cruel, opinionated and love to spread gossip. Behind the façade of the perfect families, cracks are starting to show - some of the couples aren't as happy as they make out, some are worried about money, some are being unfaithful, but all is kept behind the neat picket fences and sharply painted walls.
Most of the book keeps you on tenterhooks, waiting for the terrifying finale that is bound to come - and it does. And when it does, the lasting taste in your mouth is bitter. There is nothing so frightening as a human's capacity for evil.
Most of the book keeps you on tenterhooks, waiting for the terrifying finale that is bound to come - and it does. And when it does, the lasting taste in your mouth is bitter. There is nothing so frightening as a human's capacity for evil.
March 26, 2025
HELL
How could I think Shirley Jackson in a simple ordinary neighborhood?!
Review might come...
Ajax ⭐⭐⭐/5
the Banshees of inisherin ⭐⭐⭐/5
Catfish rolling ⭐⭐⭐
the Dogs of Athens (Goddess War, #0.1) ⭐⭐⭐
Elder Race by Adrian Tchaikovsky ⭐⭐⭐⭐
the Fire Next Time ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
Geneva ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Hysteria (Alexander Gregory Thrillers, #2) ⭐⭐⭐
Instructions by Neil Gaiman ⭐⭐/5
Judge Dee and the Poisoner of Montmartre (Judge Dee, #3) ⭐⭐⭐⭐
the Kidnapped Prime Minister (Hercule Poirot Short Story) ⭐⭐⭐
the Love by Stendhal ⭐⭐⭐
the Mirror & the Light (Thomas Cromwell, #3) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Nettle & Bone ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Ogres by Adrian Tchaikovsky ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Piranesi ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
Quidditch Through the Ages ⭐⭐/5
the Road Through the Wall ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Summer Knight (The Dresden Files, #4) ⭐⭐⭐⭐
a Tide of Black Steel (Age of Wrath, #1)
Unready to Wear ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
the Visitor: Kill or Cure by Mark Lawrence ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Worth Dying For (Jack Reacher, #15) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Xingu by Edith Wharton ⭐⭐⭐⭐
You Were Never Really Here ⭐⭐/5
Zero Day ⭐⭐⭐/5
How could I think Shirley Jackson in a simple ordinary neighborhood?!
Review might come...
Ajax ⭐⭐⭐/5
the Banshees of inisherin ⭐⭐⭐/5
Catfish rolling ⭐⭐⭐
the Dogs of Athens (Goddess War, #0.1) ⭐⭐⭐
Elder Race by Adrian Tchaikovsky ⭐⭐⭐⭐
the Fire Next Time ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
Geneva ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Hysteria (Alexander Gregory Thrillers, #2) ⭐⭐⭐
Instructions by Neil Gaiman ⭐⭐/5
Judge Dee and the Poisoner of Montmartre (Judge Dee, #3) ⭐⭐⭐⭐
the Kidnapped Prime Minister (Hercule Poirot Short Story) ⭐⭐⭐
the Love by Stendhal ⭐⭐⭐
the Mirror & the Light (Thomas Cromwell, #3) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Nettle & Bone ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Ogres by Adrian Tchaikovsky ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Piranesi ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
Quidditch Through the Ages ⭐⭐/5
the Road Through the Wall ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Summer Knight (The Dresden Files, #4) ⭐⭐⭐⭐
a Tide of Black Steel (Age of Wrath, #1)
Unready to Wear ⭐⭐⭐⭐/5
the Visitor: Kill or Cure by Mark Lawrence ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Worth Dying For (Jack Reacher, #15) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Xingu by Edith Wharton ⭐⭐⭐⭐
You Were Never Really Here ⭐⭐/5
Zero Day ⭐⭐⭐/5
January 19, 2016
I'm currently slowly working my way through all of Shirley Jackson's books (many for the umpteenth time); it was a pleasure to revisit this, her very first novel, originally published in 1948. Road tells the story of the residents of Pepper Street in a genteel suburb of San Francisco in the summer of 1936. That these people are by and large a distinctly unpleasant bunch of alternately backbiting, bigoted, snobbish, or mean-spirited folks is what seems gives a lot of readers pause; but one of Jackson's principle aims with her fiction was to rip away the veneer of polite society and expose the darker instincts that lie just below the surface. There's also the fact that Road features a rather large cast for such a short book (just under 200 pages). Despite the hard edges of the characters populating Pepper Street (Mrs. Merriam and a young girl named Virginia are among the most horrible people Jackson ever conjured up and that's really saying something), they are vividly, uncomfortably human. And though the cast is a bit unwieldy, Jackson tells her story in short vignette style, with her always-smooth prose, so it's easier to keep up than it would be in the hands of a lesser talent. Road isn't perfect, but it's a fine, dark satire of middle class America. For being a relatively young work, it holds up remarkably well. I give it 3 1/2 to 4 out of 5 Shirleys.
August 7, 2013
First let me comment on this particular publication, which was riddled with editing errors, at one point referring to one of the characters, Miss Fielding, as Miss Flemming. Furthermore, the description on the back of the book doesn't fit the story. Very bizarre.
All that said, though slightly different from Jackson's later novels, which more easily fall into the horror genre, The Road Through the Wall still delivers in Jackson style.
Most notably is Jackson's insight into middle-class America/suburbia. She's an expert at exploring the good/bad duality of our psyche, and at times this reads like a reality TV show "The Families of Pepper Street" except well crafted with more depth and intentional satire.
She also delivers a chilling ending, the most tragic element, not what happens, but how the various characters react.
This really is Shirley doing what she does best...forcing us to face the evil aspect of our human nature.
As far as the reviews that complain "no plot", I can only shrug my shoulders and think, you missed the point, which I guess is okay, since not every book is for everyone.
Bottom line: this isn't formulaic Mc-Fiction.
Finally, there are a lot of characters in this book, and at times it is extremely hard to keep track of them. In retrospect, I wouldn't worry about trying as the important themes/characters emerge regardless.
All that said, though slightly different from Jackson's later novels, which more easily fall into the horror genre, The Road Through the Wall still delivers in Jackson style.
Most notably is Jackson's insight into middle-class America/suburbia. She's an expert at exploring the good/bad duality of our psyche, and at times this reads like a reality TV show "The Families of Pepper Street" except well crafted with more depth and intentional satire.
She also delivers a chilling ending, the most tragic element, not what happens, but how the various characters react.
This really is Shirley doing what she does best...forcing us to face the evil aspect of our human nature.
As far as the reviews that complain "no plot", I can only shrug my shoulders and think, you missed the point, which I guess is okay, since not every book is for everyone.
Bottom line: this isn't formulaic Mc-Fiction.
Finally, there are a lot of characters in this book, and at times it is extremely hard to keep track of them. In retrospect, I wouldn't worry about trying as the important themes/characters emerge regardless.
October 17, 2018
3.5 stars, rounded down
I love Shirley Jackson a lot, but this book didn't really grab me. I think it's because there were too many characters and I didn't really get what was going on half of the time. There were some great scenes and her characteristic weirdness and the great description of female companionship, but it left something to be desired.
I think I will eventually re-read this and I can imagine liking it better the second time, when I don't try to find a plot that isn't there.
It's bizarre to me that some people tag this as "Horror", unless we're talking the Suburban type.
I love Shirley Jackson a lot, but this book didn't really grab me. I think it's because there were too many characters and I didn't really get what was going on half of the time. There were some great scenes and her characteristic weirdness and the great description of female companionship, but it left something to be desired.
I think I will eventually re-read this and I can imagine liking it better the second time, when I don't try to find a plot that isn't there.
It's bizarre to me that some people tag this as "Horror", unless we're talking the Suburban type.
February 17, 2014
This is a series of everyday vignettes about the horrible, horrible, normal people that fill the microcosm of Pepper Street. Horrible children, horrible spinsters, horrible wives and husbands. The horribleness of the community builds with each page, so the entire time, I was waiting for a Truly Awful Thing to happen. But don't look for any one Truly Awful Villain; like the Shirley classics to come, the evil is in the mass.
October 25, 2019
Jackson is a great writer. However, it shows that this is was her first novel.
Not much happens in this book.
I found myself saying: yes, suburbs are banal and people are awful. Do I really need to spend time immersed in this book to realize that? It wasn't enjoyable.
The fine observations of human character that are a hallmark of Jackson's writing are here, but the ensemble format doesn't allow for enough time to be given for each individual to really coalesce on the page.
The only real drama feels shoehorned into the end, and leaves the reader feeling that the finale of the book was both rushed and unresolved. In that way it feels - as intended - "real" - but is still unsatisfying.
It's also missing the two elements that I usually most love about many of Jackson's works - the weird, and the wry.
Not much happens in this book.
I found myself saying: yes, suburbs are banal and people are awful. Do I really need to spend time immersed in this book to realize that? It wasn't enjoyable.
The fine observations of human character that are a hallmark of Jackson's writing are here, but the ensemble format doesn't allow for enough time to be given for each individual to really coalesce on the page.
The only real drama feels shoehorned into the end, and leaves the reader feeling that the finale of the book was both rushed and unresolved. In that way it feels - as intended - "real" - but is still unsatisfying.
It's also missing the two elements that I usually most love about many of Jackson's works - the weird, and the wry.
March 1, 2023
1948
Shirley Jackson's first novel.
I made myself read it, but never have I been able to get into this. It is very 1940s arty. Like just snippets of dialogue, like the real plot is happening in the background. A great deal of it is almost young adult. Kind of annoying.
Shirley Jackson was more arty and poetic (well, not her nonfiction books about raising kids) until her last 2 novels (The Haunting of Hill House and We Have Always Lived in the Castle). Then she died at age 48.
Shirley Jackson's first novel.
I made myself read it, but never have I been able to get into this. It is very 1940s arty. Like just snippets of dialogue, like the real plot is happening in the background. A great deal of it is almost young adult. Kind of annoying.
Shirley Jackson was more arty and poetic (well, not her nonfiction books about raising kids) until her last 2 novels (The Haunting of Hill House and We Have Always Lived in the Castle). Then she died at age 48.
March 21, 2019
Having sat with it awhile, I think this might actually be one of my favourites; the writing is smooth and dark, and Jackson, masterful as always at her character studies, gives us a whole road of them, sketching each character with apparent ease. Everyone was awful, in a completely believable way, and even while the ending was brutal and (mostly) unexpected, Jackson's calm continuation into the epilogue was also a perfect comment on people's response to other people's tragedies. Shock, horror, and very quickly moving on.
Honourable mention to the very last line; it was just so Jackson that I had to laugh. She's up there with my favourite authors now, I think. Looking forward to her short stories.
Honourable mention to the very last line; it was just so Jackson that I had to laugh. She's up there with my favourite authors now, I think. Looking forward to her short stories.
September 30, 2011
As far as I can tell, this was Shirley Jackson's first novel. It has a few flaws but you can recognize her. She already had her fingers on the pulse of the dark underside in American suburban life. "The Lottery," the short story which made her career, was published in The New Yorker in the same year as this novel.
Over a period of one summer, a group of families, all of which live on the same block, interact in the way of small neighborhoods. Each family is introduced with a bit about their backgrounds, their children if they have any, and a description of their house. (This part was hard to keep straight; I ended up making a map of the block with the names of the characters next to the houses.)
It becomes clear that most of these families are in flux. Each one is either on the way up or down; in the case of a couple elderly women living alone, on the way out.
The children drive the events but with much interference from their hovering parents. For a reader like myself, who grew up in just such a neighborhood during the mid 1950s, reading this short novel was excruciating and eye-opening. We might as well have had these very same families on our block.
Jackson's trademark sense of foreboding is apparent from the first page of the Prologue and continues through to the tragic conclusion. Pepper Street in 1936 in a small California town is home to Harriet Merriam, young teen, overweight, aspiring writer. Her overbearing, Puritanical mother interferes at every opportunity but especially when Harriet befriends the lone Jewish girl on the block. Anyone could say that the parents in the neighborhood mean well, but all of them are caught up in attitudes and outside forces beyond their awareness.
By the end of the summer, the wall that surrounds the highly affluent section which abuts Pepper Street is being broken through to allow for a new street into the area, giving access to a coming subdivision. The wall is symbolic of the barriers which keep certain classes of people out (or in, depending on the point of view.) Most families on Pepper Street aspire to live inside that wall, never acknowledging the walls that already surround them.
The kids only know that something has become unsettled and for the reader they are the barometer of change. It will be another decade or so, but these are the neighborhoods from which my generation boiled out in rebellion, in destruction, in the restructuring of American life known as The Sixites.
Today many baby boomers look back with nostalgia on those years when we knew all our neighbors and could run free all day. They should read The Road Through The Wall.
August 28, 2019
If you know anything about the personal life of Shirley Jackson, you'll know that her childhood and adulthood were marred with the expectation of her to fit into typical mid-century American society; grow up in a functional family, then grow up and create one of your own. Jackson never really fit into this groove, even if she did succumb to the pressures of following this if only by presentation. This allowed her, however, to develop a keen critical eye on America's most protected institute - the Family. Through an exploration of a fictional suburb in 'The Road Through the Wall', Jackson lends a critical and unnerving eye to post-war suburbia, and defrocks one of the most romanticised eras (especially in visual culture) in American history.
The novel is set in the midst of sunny Californian suburbia, on a street called Pepper Street (I felt it could be called 'Pleasant Street' but maybe that's a little too on the nose). On this street are a variety of families, all vying for the approval of their peers. Told predominantly through the interaction of the children and their mothers (as is typical for a Jackson novel the mother-daughter relationship is explored), the novel shows an unsettling, disturbing and scathing view of an American suburban landscape Jackson was personally familiar with.
This book seems written for me, because just like Jackson I am definitely partial to criticise suburban culture; I also grew up in a suburb and while it wasn't hellish and full of horror like this book, I can see some lines being drawn. The antagonist in this novel is not a single character; rather it is pretty much everyone in the novel operating under an unspoken rule of cultural confinement. The entirety of the novel takes place on Pepper Street (bar one scene at the school but its a flashback), and while the perspective flits between families there is a deeply claustrophobic feeling; statements are repeated in the same conversation, alliances are made, broken, remade again, and though many aspire to be anywhere but on Pepper Street, there they all are. Pepper Street takes on a sense of liminality between worlds, presents a state of in-betweenness and non-permanency that counters the strong sense of containment which creates an effect of restlessness; you just don't want to be on that accursed street.
One of the primary tensions in the novel is perhaps not the adherence to Family Values, as I previously thought, but the desire to define what the American family is through total control of the family unit; there are no boundaries between parent and child, there's a sense of militant surveillance of the kids, and a reliance on (and anxiety of) neighbourhood gossip. How can one seek approval in a culture that has unspoken rules and moving goalposts?
An unnerving novel, but a brilliant one that turns a critical eye on one of the most heavily romanticised eras in American history at the same time it was happening. Like Yates, Jackson seems able to rise above the culture she is situated in and see it for all the problems it has.
The novel is set in the midst of sunny Californian suburbia, on a street called Pepper Street (I felt it could be called 'Pleasant Street' but maybe that's a little too on the nose). On this street are a variety of families, all vying for the approval of their peers. Told predominantly through the interaction of the children and their mothers (as is typical for a Jackson novel the mother-daughter relationship is explored), the novel shows an unsettling, disturbing and scathing view of an American suburban landscape Jackson was personally familiar with.
This book seems written for me, because just like Jackson I am definitely partial to criticise suburban culture; I also grew up in a suburb and while it wasn't hellish and full of horror like this book, I can see some lines being drawn. The antagonist in this novel is not a single character; rather it is pretty much everyone in the novel operating under an unspoken rule of cultural confinement. The entirety of the novel takes place on Pepper Street (bar one scene at the school but its a flashback), and while the perspective flits between families there is a deeply claustrophobic feeling; statements are repeated in the same conversation, alliances are made, broken, remade again, and though many aspire to be anywhere but on Pepper Street, there they all are. Pepper Street takes on a sense of liminality between worlds, presents a state of in-betweenness and non-permanency that counters the strong sense of containment which creates an effect of restlessness; you just don't want to be on that accursed street.
One of the primary tensions in the novel is perhaps not the adherence to Family Values, as I previously thought, but the desire to define what the American family is through total control of the family unit; there are no boundaries between parent and child, there's a sense of militant surveillance of the kids, and a reliance on (and anxiety of) neighbourhood gossip. How can one seek approval in a culture that has unspoken rules and moving goalposts?
An unnerving novel, but a brilliant one that turns a critical eye on one of the most heavily romanticised eras in American history at the same time it was happening. Like Yates, Jackson seems able to rise above the culture she is situated in and see it for all the problems it has.
October 21, 2016
The Road Through the Wall is Queen of Creepy Shirley Jackson's first novel. In the foreword to the Penguin edition which I borrowed from the library, Ruth Franklin writes: 'Compared to The Haunting of Hill House or We Have Always Lived in the Castle, Jackson's masterful late novels, The Road Through the Wall is a slighter work. But it is marvellously written, with the careful attention to structure, the precision of detail, and the brilliant bite of irony that would always define her style'.
The novel was published in 1948 to a 'largely unappreciative audience'; its critics were 'put off by the book's unpleasant characters, its grim tone, and its violent conclusion'. The Road Through the Wall is a prelude of sorts to The Lottery, which was published the following year. It takes place in 1936, on Pepper Street in small town California. Instead of a familial saga, it is rather more of a neighbourhood affair, although the familial relations are nothing less than fascinating throughout. We meet several families resident on the street, and come to know them intimately thanks to Jackson's wonderful, measured prose. Every single character has differing traits, and one of Jackson's real strengths here (and there are many) lies in demonstrating the imagination and power of children.
The Road Through the Wall is not my favourite of Jackson's works, but it is taut, surprising and compelling, and certainly an accomplished debut. It took a final direction which I wasn't expecting, but which made an awful lot of sense in retrospect. The ending is marvellously and creepily crafted, and I very much liked the way in which Jackson left some of the most pressing questions unanswered.
The novel was published in 1948 to a 'largely unappreciative audience'; its critics were 'put off by the book's unpleasant characters, its grim tone, and its violent conclusion'. The Road Through the Wall is a prelude of sorts to The Lottery, which was published the following year. It takes place in 1936, on Pepper Street in small town California. Instead of a familial saga, it is rather more of a neighbourhood affair, although the familial relations are nothing less than fascinating throughout. We meet several families resident on the street, and come to know them intimately thanks to Jackson's wonderful, measured prose. Every single character has differing traits, and one of Jackson's real strengths here (and there are many) lies in demonstrating the imagination and power of children.
The Road Through the Wall is not my favourite of Jackson's works, but it is taut, surprising and compelling, and certainly an accomplished debut. It took a final direction which I wasn't expecting, but which made an awful lot of sense in retrospect. The ending is marvellously and creepily crafted, and I very much liked the way in which Jackson left some of the most pressing questions unanswered.
January 5, 2009
Found at the library book sale, the jacket sold me on the book. Unfortunately, Jackson's fine writing and intriguing characters are lost in a pointless, detailed subarban life that spirals into nowhere.
There are many frustrating points in the story where, had she been a more daring writer, would have filled the novel with more complexity and brought motivations and secrets to light. But she didn't go there. Hester leaves, who knows where. Frederica's sister's condition is never explored, and we do not know how they go on, or how their mother keeps them. What about that little tryst behind the brick wall? And Mrs. Mack and her dog? There are so many things left to uncover.
Perhaps the theme here is that one never really knows another, even one's neighbor. Also, many are content enough with our lives that we choose to keep a distance--even with our "friends".
I found the anti-Semitism curious. There are no rumors or misdeeds that are attributed to the Perlmans. And their daughter falls into a mutually redeeming friendship with Harriet, until her mother discovers it. Given that there are no specific historical references, it's hard to place the cultural atmosphere at the time, reading it now. It's a little timeless, this cloistered place. But given that this book is a product of the Forties... I don't know. Curious.
If you picked up this book for the dead girl and her bloodied head on the cover, as I did, you will be disappointed. It takes a long time to get there, and there is no satisfactory resolution. This book reads more like a collection of vignettes than anything else. Well-written, but not skillfully plotted.
There are many frustrating points in the story where, had she been a more daring writer, would have filled the novel with more complexity and brought motivations and secrets to light. But she didn't go there. Hester leaves, who knows where. Frederica's sister's condition is never explored, and we do not know how they go on, or how their mother keeps them. What about that little tryst behind the brick wall? And Mrs. Mack and her dog? There are so many things left to uncover.
Perhaps the theme here is that one never really knows another, even one's neighbor. Also, many are content enough with our lives that we choose to keep a distance--even with our "friends".
I found the anti-Semitism curious. There are no rumors or misdeeds that are attributed to the Perlmans. And their daughter falls into a mutually redeeming friendship with Harriet, until her mother discovers it. Given that there are no specific historical references, it's hard to place the cultural atmosphere at the time, reading it now. It's a little timeless, this cloistered place. But given that this book is a product of the Forties... I don't know. Curious.
If you picked up this book for the dead girl and her bloodied head on the cover, as I did, you will be disappointed. It takes a long time to get there, and there is no satisfactory resolution. This book reads more like a collection of vignettes than anything else. Well-written, but not skillfully plotted.
October 12, 2019
"'We must expect to set a standard. Actually, however much we may wish to find new friends whom we may value, people who are exciting to us because of new ideas, or because they are different, we have to do what is expected of us.'
'What is expected of me?' Harriet said suddenly, without intention.
'To do what you're told,' her mother said sharply." - Shirley Jackson, The Road Through the Wall, page 148
Shirley Jackson is a master of Gothic suspense and it occurred to me the other day that I should therefore make an effort to read everything she has ever written.
The Road Through the Wall was her first novel and it centres on Pepper Street, where a number of very snooty families (and one or two exiled ones) live. Plotwise, I found the ending to be a total let-down. I want to know who did it and the reveal never came, so I now feel totally unsatisfied. The one thing I feel certain of is that it likely wasn't Tod. I don't know why he was so desperate to sell his bike and he's a sneaky little so-and-so, but there was never any indication of him being particuarly interested in Caroline. Hester, he was fascinated by, and he was always trying to get the other boys to hang out with him, but Caroline? And, as one of the other characters said towards the end,
Tod's real problem is that he's an outcast in the group of children.
Pepper Road doesn't take kindly to those it rejects. The Perlmans are excluded because they are Jewish. The Terrels are considered ill-bred and have a daughter with a developmental disability. The Martins are poor and considered ill-bred. Basically, there's a lot of class snobbery.
The blurb made it sound like this is a book about monstrous children, but the actions of the children are shaped entirely by their parents. The Desmonds are basically street royalty and their children do not really associate with the other children.Johnny Desmond is held in such esteem that when he is insensitive about one of James Donald's hobbies, James is forced to apologise to him rather than the other way around. This decision is made entirely by the adults - Johnny notably did not want an apology. Tod feels excluded because he is the least favourite child in his family. Another mother - Mrs Roberts - outright states that she only had her second child because her first was such a disappointment. Harriet's mother is emotionally abusive. She is disgusted by the girls writing rather silly, completely innocent love letters that most of the other parents dismiss after a quick chat with their child, and even brings it up later in the story to guilt her. The most awful thing Harriet's mother does though is
The parents in this story are the root of all evil. If it takes a village to raise a child, this village is rotten to the core.
'What is expected of me?' Harriet said suddenly, without intention.
'To do what you're told,' her mother said sharply." - Shirley Jackson, The Road Through the Wall, page 148
Shirley Jackson is a master of Gothic suspense and it occurred to me the other day that I should therefore make an effort to read everything she has ever written.
The Road Through the Wall was her first novel and it centres on Pepper Street, where a number of very snooty families (and one or two exiled ones) live. Plotwise, I found the ending to be a total let-down. I want to know who did it and the reveal never came, so I now feel totally unsatisfied. The one thing I feel certain of is that it likely wasn't Tod. I don't know why he was so desperate to sell his bike and he's a sneaky little so-and-so, but there was never any indication of him being particuarly interested in Caroline. Hester, he was fascinated by, and he was always trying to get the other boys to hang out with him, but Caroline? And, as one of the other characters said towards the end,
Tod's real problem is that he's an outcast in the group of children.
Pepper Road doesn't take kindly to those it rejects. The Perlmans are excluded because they are Jewish. The Terrels are considered ill-bred and have a daughter with a developmental disability. The Martins are poor and considered ill-bred. Basically, there's a lot of class snobbery.
The blurb made it sound like this is a book about monstrous children, but the actions of the children are shaped entirely by their parents. The Desmonds are basically street royalty and their children do not really associate with the other children.Johnny Desmond is held in such esteem that when he is insensitive about one of James Donald's hobbies, James is forced to apologise to him rather than the other way around. This decision is made entirely by the adults - Johnny notably did not want an apology. Tod feels excluded because he is the least favourite child in his family. Another mother - Mrs Roberts - outright states that she only had her second child because her first was such a disappointment. Harriet's mother is emotionally abusive. She is disgusted by the girls writing rather silly, completely innocent love letters that most of the other parents dismiss after a quick chat with their child, and even brings it up later in the story to guilt her. The most awful thing Harriet's mother does though is
The parents in this story are the root of all evil. If it takes a village to raise a child, this village is rotten to the core.
March 18, 2025
Welcome to Pepper Street: a small neighborhood in a small town of California in 1936. The residents of Pepper Street are rather uppity and think highly of themselves; they consider themselves the most upstanding citizens. And like any small rural neighborhood, the ladies love to gossip. In her first published novel, Jackson provides readers with a fly-on-the-wall-viewpoint into these residents’ lives, shining light on all of their faults, flaws, and prejudices (fatphobia, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, mental ableism).
If my math is right, over two dozen different characters are mentioned in the first five pages, all relative to where their houses are placed along Pepper Street. It can make for a confusing read if you allow it to but if, instead, you allow yourself to just go with it, all of the unnecessary sediment will fall to the bottom and the main characters will rise. Even still, having so many characters leaves one ultimately indistinguishable from the next and it would have been a better story if there were more focus on less characters.
If you are looking for Jackson’s best work, this isn’t the place to come. The writing is subpar, not yet having evolved in to the exquisite prose of Jackson’s later works and it is missing the classical touch of unease that Jackson is so good at creating in her stories. I wouldn’t go so far as to call this horror or gothic or really, honestly, even a mystery (the only mystery is on the last few pages). It’s a short book about the mundane every day life on a small street, where there’s drama, drama and everyone knows everyone’s business and everything—or nothing, really—builds to a very dramatic ending. Even with these critiques of mine, I didn't want to stop reading it and found it quite entertaining. I feel that in this work, you can see a talented writer blooming but you can tell that she is only just beginning.
I would recommend this if you are curious about Jackson’s early work, tend to be drawn toward “no plot, just vibes” books, and/or are looking for a brilliant character study. Themes on female companionship (typical Jackson), a society’s treatment of “outsiders” (again, typical Jackson), conformity, and family dysfunction.
If my math is right, over two dozen different characters are mentioned in the first five pages, all relative to where their houses are placed along Pepper Street. It can make for a confusing read if you allow it to but if, instead, you allow yourself to just go with it, all of the unnecessary sediment will fall to the bottom and the main characters will rise. Even still, having so many characters leaves one ultimately indistinguishable from the next and it would have been a better story if there were more focus on less characters.
If you are looking for Jackson’s best work, this isn’t the place to come. The writing is subpar, not yet having evolved in to the exquisite prose of Jackson’s later works and it is missing the classical touch of unease that Jackson is so good at creating in her stories. I wouldn’t go so far as to call this horror or gothic or really, honestly, even a mystery (the only mystery is on the last few pages). It’s a short book about the mundane every day life on a small street, where there’s drama, drama and everyone knows everyone’s business and everything—or nothing, really—builds to a very dramatic ending. Even with these critiques of mine, I didn't want to stop reading it and found it quite entertaining. I feel that in this work, you can see a talented writer blooming but you can tell that she is only just beginning.
I would recommend this if you are curious about Jackson’s early work, tend to be drawn toward “no plot, just vibes” books, and/or are looking for a brilliant character study. Themes on female companionship (typical Jackson), a society’s treatment of “outsiders” (again, typical Jackson), conformity, and family dysfunction.
January 15, 2016
I can't remember a book where I cared less about the characters, most of whom are nearly indistinguishable by both name and behavior, and are too thickly populated. Annoying lengthy Biblical quotations appear throughout, suggesting an allegory of Good and Evil, but I was not able to sort that out, since I skipped them. The layout of the houses on Pepper Street is very significant to the story; it would have been helpful for the author to have included a detailed map of the neighborhood where the action, such as it is, occurs. Instead, a ten-page geographical prologue lays out the area, and introduces the multitude of characters, in complicated, circular prose which I guarantee you will either not understand, or will forget as soon as you begin Chapter 1. The book as a whole is obsessively written at the character level, and we just don't care. Not recommended.
April 3, 2019
A creepy look at suburbia as only Shirley Jackson could tell it.
October 6, 2014
phenomenal! objectively speaking i suppose i would agree with other reviewers in rating this below the haunting of hill house, we have always lived in the castle, and other undisputed heavyweight champions of the literary world - its aims are more modest, for one, and unevenly accomplished. but oh, that prose! shirley jackson skewers her petty nasty snobby spiteful characters with such clean, precise prose - skewers them violently, with glee.
rather than a sustained plot, this book is really nothing more than a series of vignettes, sharp as daggers, meant to convey all the narrow confines of suburban life. or rather - argh, i don't yet have a good way of putting it, because "suburban life" seems to conjure up nothing but a lot of stale images and stereotypes. this isn't that. the families depicted in this book are uniquely themselves; they're also part and parcel of the larger social structure of the suburb, one jackson ultimately condemns as toxic. again, it isn't that she's trying to argue that prejudice and hypocrisy originate in the suburb, or are limited to it. maybe it's the title that comes closest to what's going on here - the idea that a sudden breach in an arbitrary boundary doesn't create blight but rather exposes what had always been there.
(the literal road through the wall, incidentally, doesn't figure into the book until nearly the end. i mention this because the book blurb for the penguin edition i have makes it sound like it's a central catalyst to the plot, when it's not. seems like other editions - including the blurb here on GR - have had trouble in describing the book as well. my favorite, from 1950: "A MARRIED WOMAN PROWLS THE BACK STREETS." haha! just goes to show how tenuous the "plot" really is.)
don't want this review to make it sound like the book is a mean, petty thing; its characters are, but not jackson. i suppose the reason why i liked (well, "liked" is not the right word) the road through the wall so much is because it's the first time i've seen jackson's ruthless perspicacity so aggressively on display. every vignette knocked me senseless with admiration. though i do have to say that my undisputed favorite moment is when a certain child utters this sublime line, in a rare instance of justice served: "You shut your fat mouth. You just shut up for once in your life and try to act decent."
wise words to live by indeed.
rather than a sustained plot, this book is really nothing more than a series of vignettes, sharp as daggers, meant to convey all the narrow confines of suburban life. or rather - argh, i don't yet have a good way of putting it, because "suburban life" seems to conjure up nothing but a lot of stale images and stereotypes. this isn't that. the families depicted in this book are uniquely themselves; they're also part and parcel of the larger social structure of the suburb, one jackson ultimately condemns as toxic. again, it isn't that she's trying to argue that prejudice and hypocrisy originate in the suburb, or are limited to it. maybe it's the title that comes closest to what's going on here - the idea that a sudden breach in an arbitrary boundary doesn't create blight but rather exposes what had always been there.
(the literal road through the wall, incidentally, doesn't figure into the book until nearly the end. i mention this because the book blurb for the penguin edition i have makes it sound like it's a central catalyst to the plot, when it's not. seems like other editions - including the blurb here on GR - have had trouble in describing the book as well. my favorite, from 1950: "A MARRIED WOMAN PROWLS THE BACK STREETS." haha! just goes to show how tenuous the "plot" really is.)
don't want this review to make it sound like the book is a mean, petty thing; its characters are, but not jackson. i suppose the reason why i liked (well, "liked" is not the right word) the road through the wall so much is because it's the first time i've seen jackson's ruthless perspicacity so aggressively on display. every vignette knocked me senseless with admiration. though i do have to say that my undisputed favorite moment is when a certain child utters this sublime line, in a rare instance of justice served: "You shut your fat mouth. You just shut up for once in your life and try to act decent."
wise words to live by indeed.
November 1, 2024
La strada oltre il muro è stato il primo romanzo di Shirley Jackson, autrice che personalmente mi piace parecchio (in particolare ho apprezzato L’incubo di Hill House, Abbiamo sempre vissuto nel castello e Lizzie).
Non ho trovato questo romanzo all’altezza degli altri suoi libri appena citati, ma l’impronta dell’autrice è già riconoscibile. Quando ho terminato il libro ho pensato: “cosa diamine è successo nelle ultime dieci pagine? Aiuto”. La verità è che le cose successe hanno cominciato da prima.
Facciamo un passettino indietro. Sembra che non succeda nulla per tutto il tempo? Assolutamente sì. Assistiamo a un gossip dietro l’altro sostanzialmente. Mariti che non alzano un dito o al massimo alzano la mano per ubriacarsi. Donne che sono destinate a occuparsi della casa e dei figli. Ma a una certa si rompono pure di quello e con la scusa del cucito si ritrovano per spettegolare male delle altre famiglie di Pepper Street. Figli che quando non sono controllati assiduamente dalle madri danno il peggio di loro.
Quello che vi ho descritto però succede un po’ alla volta. All’inizio sembra tutto perfetto, lo stereotipo del quartiere americano medio borghese degli anni ’40. Ma ecco che un po’ alla volta si insinua una venatura d’inchiostro in un immacolato foglio bianco.
La perfezione comincia a incrinarsi, i vetri cominciano a mostrare le prime crepe in un climax ascendente – ma così lento che si percepisce appena – verso un finale di puro caos; un caos pur sempre contenuto perché bisogna mantenere quella facciata di compostezza che caratterizza gli ipocriti abitanti di Pepper Street.
Non ho trovato questo romanzo all’altezza degli altri suoi libri appena citati, ma l’impronta dell’autrice è già riconoscibile. Quando ho terminato il libro ho pensato: “cosa diamine è successo nelle ultime dieci pagine? Aiuto”. La verità è che le cose successe hanno cominciato da prima.
Facciamo un passettino indietro. Sembra che non succeda nulla per tutto il tempo? Assolutamente sì. Assistiamo a un gossip dietro l’altro sostanzialmente. Mariti che non alzano un dito o al massimo alzano la mano per ubriacarsi. Donne che sono destinate a occuparsi della casa e dei figli. Ma a una certa si rompono pure di quello e con la scusa del cucito si ritrovano per spettegolare male delle altre famiglie di Pepper Street. Figli che quando non sono controllati assiduamente dalle madri danno il peggio di loro.
Quello che vi ho descritto però succede un po’ alla volta. All’inizio sembra tutto perfetto, lo stereotipo del quartiere americano medio borghese degli anni ’40. Ma ecco che un po’ alla volta si insinua una venatura d’inchiostro in un immacolato foglio bianco.
La perfezione comincia a incrinarsi, i vetri cominciano a mostrare le prime crepe in un climax ascendente – ma così lento che si percepisce appena – verso un finale di puro caos; un caos pur sempre contenuto perché bisogna mantenere quella facciata di compostezza che caratterizza gli ipocriti abitanti di Pepper Street.
January 31, 2018
An unpleasant book about bunch of unpleasant people.
The story takes place during a single summer and it shows how much bigotry, hatred, stupidity, infidelity, racism and so on can be hidden under pleasant smiles, neat lawn, clean houses, propriety or good manners.
Its not a murder mystery, even though there is a murder, it's not a creepy story, even though there are some major creepers (Tod Daniels, I'm looking at you, you creepy lurker!). But there is this sense of uneasiness that you can't really put your finger on.
It's agreat book really, Shirley Jackson's first novel that shows how talented, how observant she was.
My only complain is that it should be sold with achart of all the charatcers - it's really hard to follow when they're all have similar names (Hester, Harrie, Helen, Harriet... Mary, Mildred, Marilyn, Mrs. Martin, Mrs. Merriam, Mrs. Mack)....
The story takes place during a single summer and it shows how much bigotry, hatred, stupidity, infidelity, racism and so on can be hidden under pleasant smiles, neat lawn, clean houses, propriety or good manners.
Its not a murder mystery, even though there is a murder, it's not a creepy story, even though there are some major creepers (Tod Daniels, I'm looking at you, you creepy lurker!). But there is this sense of uneasiness that you can't really put your finger on.
It's agreat book really, Shirley Jackson's first novel that shows how talented, how observant she was.
My only complain is that it should be sold with achart of all the charatcers - it's really hard to follow when they're all have similar names (Hester, Harrie, Helen, Harriet... Mary, Mildred, Marilyn, Mrs. Martin, Mrs. Merriam, Mrs. Mack)....
November 30, 2016
"Mrs. Desmond was neither intelligent nor unintelligent, because thinking and all its allied attributes were completely outside her schedule for life; her values did not include mind, and nothing that she intended ever required more than money." These people are the worst and Shirley knew it even back in 1939.
June 15, 2025
So I picked this up at random from my library and this is the first book I read by this author. It also happens to be the first one she's written. Odd how it worked out that way.
When I first started to read this book I did feel a little bit overwhelmed. There was all of this very detailed information about these houses and who lived in each one and the house's position in relation to each other. It was kind of strange and I was thinking "what did I run into here?" I almost felt I had to draw a map on paper with all of this information! I didn't but it was how I felt.
Then when the characters came into the story, things didn't improve right away. I wasn't sure who the main character was as there was views from all of these different people. It also seemed to me that sometimes different characters were talking in the same paragraph! That is something you really don't see very much ... I found it a tad confusing.
So if you decide to read this, know that it does get better. The story does get easier to understand and you quickly get into the lives of these families.
But there are a LOT of characters in here. And at times I found myself flipping back to the beginning of the book to look up a particular one to see how old this character was. Because knowing their ages can certainly help understand the story better.
Most of the main characters in here are kids, many around 14 years old. And they all live on the same block. On Pepper Street. And they have this pecking order. Some just don't fit in and they are seen as oddballs. Some of popular but are very mean. But that goes with their families too. It's not just the kids. The games the kids play in here, like Tin Tin may be foreign and outdated, but their behavior is still seen today. Kids making stuff up, lying, snooping, etc.
Parts I found very funny. Parts I found shocking.
Even though this book is old I could still relate to the stuff in here. This stuff still goes on today.
In many ways this story shows how society is broken. And the end shows the price people pay for it.
The end is very shocking. That is where the horror is. But there are other bits of ugly horror through the book. Kids often make bad decisions and you see them in here.
If you can get past the beginning the rest is easy to read.
All in all I enjoyed reading this.
When I first started to read this book I did feel a little bit overwhelmed. There was all of this very detailed information about these houses and who lived in each one and the house's position in relation to each other. It was kind of strange and I was thinking "what did I run into here?" I almost felt I had to draw a map on paper with all of this information! I didn't but it was how I felt.
Then when the characters came into the story, things didn't improve right away. I wasn't sure who the main character was as there was views from all of these different people. It also seemed to me that sometimes different characters were talking in the same paragraph! That is something you really don't see very much ... I found it a tad confusing.
So if you decide to read this, know that it does get better. The story does get easier to understand and you quickly get into the lives of these families.
But there are a LOT of characters in here. And at times I found myself flipping back to the beginning of the book to look up a particular one to see how old this character was. Because knowing their ages can certainly help understand the story better.
Most of the main characters in here are kids, many around 14 years old. And they all live on the same block. On Pepper Street. And they have this pecking order. Some just don't fit in and they are seen as oddballs. Some of popular but are very mean. But that goes with their families too. It's not just the kids. The games the kids play in here, like Tin Tin may be foreign and outdated, but their behavior is still seen today. Kids making stuff up, lying, snooping, etc.
Parts I found very funny. Parts I found shocking.
Even though this book is old I could still relate to the stuff in here. This stuff still goes on today.
In many ways this story shows how society is broken. And the end shows the price people pay for it.
The end is very shocking. That is where the horror is. But there are other bits of ugly horror through the book. Kids often make bad decisions and you see them in here.
If you can get past the beginning the rest is easy to read.
All in all I enjoyed reading this.
January 27, 2019
“The hole in the ground stayed empty for nearly a week, a long time in a fast-moving summer. Several times Harriet and Marilyn came to their secret place, with their library books and the notebook each had taken to carrying, and their candy bars and ice cream cones, and they sat for long afternoons on the grass, talking deeply, and opening the grass cover of the secret hiding place to make sure that no one had disturbed it, and that the sides hadn’t fallen in. Hidden by the trees, and certain they had not been followed, they told one another about their pasts, their futures, and their talents. One afternoon Marilyn said, lying with her head on her arms, looking off into the grass by her face, “Do you believe in reincarnation?” and Harriet said, looking up from The Girl Scouts at Rocky Ledge, “You mean, like turning into wolves?” and when Marilyn said scornfully, “Wolves!” Harriet fumbled with her book and then said pettishly, “You and your big ideas!”
“Honest,” Marilyn said after a short silence. “You know, reincarnation is where you used to be someone else once, before you were born this time.”
Harriet listened, interested. “Like what?” she asked....
...
“I bet I was Egyptian,” she said, carried away, “I always wanted to go to Egypt.”
“I know,” Marilyn whispered softly to the grass, “I remembered a long time ago.”
Harriet was silent, smiling faintly, lost in her dim pagan temple. “I think about it all the time now,” Marilyn said, “I remember lots.” Uneasy and reluctant, she stopped again, and then said, “I remember all the time, I lie in bed and think about it.”
“Well, what, for heaven’s sake?” Harriet said. “I told you.”
“I remember,” Marilyn said emphatically. “I really do.” Her voice became softer, as though she were describing a scene familiar and lovely. “There’s a very very very blue sky, and the hills and grass are so green they almost hurt your eyes and the road is white and it curves around the hill and there are flowers and trees and everything is so soft-looking, and far away beyond the hill you can see where the road leads into a little town.… I can see the town, too,” she added, never looking at Harriet. “It has little houses with low roofs and a bridge over a little river and all the houses are white and they have brown wood trimmings and there’s a village green in the center of the town.…” She was quiet, and Harriet waited breathlessly. “Then,” Marilyn said, her voice stronger and filled with longing, “there’s a little covered wagon that comes down the road and inside they’re all talking and laughing and singing.… “
“Honest,” Marilyn said after a short silence. “You know, reincarnation is where you used to be someone else once, before you were born this time.”
Harriet listened, interested. “Like what?” she asked....
...
“I bet I was Egyptian,” she said, carried away, “I always wanted to go to Egypt.”
“I know,” Marilyn whispered softly to the grass, “I remembered a long time ago.”
Harriet was silent, smiling faintly, lost in her dim pagan temple. “I think about it all the time now,” Marilyn said, “I remember lots.” Uneasy and reluctant, she stopped again, and then said, “I remember all the time, I lie in bed and think about it.”
“Well, what, for heaven’s sake?” Harriet said. “I told you.”
“I remember,” Marilyn said emphatically. “I really do.” Her voice became softer, as though she were describing a scene familiar and lovely. “There’s a very very very blue sky, and the hills and grass are so green they almost hurt your eyes and the road is white and it curves around the hill and there are flowers and trees and everything is so soft-looking, and far away beyond the hill you can see where the road leads into a little town.… I can see the town, too,” she added, never looking at Harriet. “It has little houses with low roofs and a bridge over a little river and all the houses are white and they have brown wood trimmings and there’s a village green in the center of the town.…” She was quiet, and Harriet waited breathlessly. “Then,” Marilyn said, her voice stronger and filled with longing, “there’s a little covered wagon that comes down the road and inside they’re all talking and laughing and singing.… “
March 1, 2016
Shirley Jackson is one of the few authors I feel happy just picking up and reading anything they have written. That said, I was concerned it would be one of her weaker pieces and might find not find it very interesting. That was only partly the case.
The story presents a slice of suburban life in late 1940's America with all the repression, prejudice, conservatism and cruelty that it entails. It is set in a single street, focusing not on any particular character, but hopping in a scattered fashion from one POV to another, both adult and child alike. It is a rather large cast of characters in fact, so much so that even by the end I was still having difficultly putting names to faces as it were.
There are few likeable characters here; most of them being concerned mainly with their social standing and being better than their neighbours. The children are as unkind to each other as the adults, reflecting the same prejudices and attitudes. The adults range from lonely spinsters to married couples in joyless marriages.
The story plods on tracing mundane and trivial incidents in the lives of the residents of Pepper street until you get to the double tragedy at the end that it shockingly concludes with leaving things deliciously ambiguous and unexplained.
This couldn't have been written a decade later, or at least would have been very different, with the advent of teenage culture and rebellion. In that sense it provides a view of then American contemporary life that has disappeared for ever and it is interesting as a period piece.
It's not the sort of thing I normally read but I did find it engaging to hold my interest throughout, her usual bright and readable prose was evident and it was thought provoking. Certainly not up there with her best work but probably worth a read, I'm just not sure who I would recommend it to.
The story presents a slice of suburban life in late 1940's America with all the repression, prejudice, conservatism and cruelty that it entails. It is set in a single street, focusing not on any particular character, but hopping in a scattered fashion from one POV to another, both adult and child alike. It is a rather large cast of characters in fact, so much so that even by the end I was still having difficultly putting names to faces as it were.
There are few likeable characters here; most of them being concerned mainly with their social standing and being better than their neighbours. The children are as unkind to each other as the adults, reflecting the same prejudices and attitudes. The adults range from lonely spinsters to married couples in joyless marriages.
The story plods on tracing mundane and trivial incidents in the lives of the residents of Pepper street until you get to the double tragedy at the end that it shockingly concludes with leaving things deliciously ambiguous and unexplained.
This couldn't have been written a decade later, or at least would have been very different, with the advent of teenage culture and rebellion. In that sense it provides a view of then American contemporary life that has disappeared for ever and it is interesting as a period piece.
It's not the sort of thing I normally read but I did find it engaging to hold my interest throughout, her usual bright and readable prose was evident and it was thought provoking. Certainly not up there with her best work but probably worth a read, I'm just not sure who I would recommend it to.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 458 reviews