What do you think?
Rate this book
Tony and Susan
Через четверть века после развода первый муж Сьюзен присылает ей по почте рукопись своего первого большого романа. Сьюзен никогда не верила в талант Эдварда, который в юности мечтал посвятить себя писательству, но стал в итоге страховым агентом. Однако она принимается читать, и роман неожиданно захватывает ее. Он полон намеков и загадок, адресованных непосредственно ей, Сьюзен. Читая, она заново осмысляет отношения с Эдвардом, свой новый брак и, по сути, всю свою жизнь.
Эта четвертая по счету книга американца Остина Райта, автора семи романов и нескольких эссе, вышла двадцать лет назад. Но настоящую славу она принесла Райту уже посмертно, в 2010 году, когда ее переиздали в Англии. Восторженные отклики прессы и читательский успех заново открыли миру великолепного писателя, неповторимого мастера стиля и захватывающей сюжетной интриги.
Эта четвертая по счету книга американца Остина Райта, автора семи романов и нескольких эссе, вышла двадцать лет назад. Но настоящую славу она принесла Райту уже посмертно, в 2010 году, когда ее переиздали в Англии. Восторженные отклики прессы и читательский успех заново открыли миру великолепного писателя, неповторимого мастера стиля и захватывающей сюжетной интриги.
374 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 1993
662 people are currently reading
11341 people want to read
About the author
Austin Wright
28 books106 followersAustin McGiffert Wright was a novelist, literary critic and professor emeritus of English at the University of Cincinnati.
He grew up in Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, son of the geographer John Kirtland Wright and Katharine McGiffert Wright, and namesake of his uncle, Austin Tappan Wright, writer of the utopian novel, Islandia. He graduated from Harvard University in 1943. He served in the Army (1943–1946). He graduated from the University of Chicago, with a master's degree in 1948, and a Ph.D. in 1959.
He married Sara Hull Wright, in 1950. They had three children: Joanna Wright (died 2000), Katharine Wright of Berkeley, CA, and Margaret Wright, and two granddaughters, Madeline Giscombe and Elizabeth Perkins.
He grew up in Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, son of the geographer John Kirtland Wright and Katharine McGiffert Wright, and namesake of his uncle, Austin Tappan Wright, writer of the utopian novel, Islandia. He graduated from Harvard University in 1943. He served in the Army (1943–1946). He graduated from the University of Chicago, with a master's degree in 1948, and a Ph.D. in 1959.
He married Sara Hull Wright, in 1950. They had three children: Joanna Wright (died 2000), Katharine Wright of Berkeley, CA, and Margaret Wright, and two granddaughters, Madeline Giscombe and Elizabeth Perkins.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,351 reviews
August 20, 2024
***NO SPOILERS***
This is not a thriller. Bookstores and libraries can shelve it as a thriller, and Saul Bellow can endorse it by calling it “a story of blood and revenge,” but it’s not thrilling. It’s not a mystery or literary fiction either. It belongs to no category. It’s a discombobulated, terrible something-or-other.
Austin Wright structured Tony and Susan as a story within a story. It concerns the Susan of the title and focuses on her domestic life, with soporific flashbacks to her flawed first marriage and musings on the problems in her current marriage. She’s reading a manuscript, Nocturnal Animals, a story her ex-husband wrote. It’s through Susan that the reader learns about Nocturnal Animals’s main character, Tony, and the most nightmarish time of his life. Nocturnal Animals is more engaging than Susan’s section but not by much. This isn’t to say Nocturnal Animals is good, just that it’s slightly less terrible.
Why Wright felt it necessary to construct his narrative this way is unclear. The occurrences in Susan’s world and in the world of Nocturnal Animals are unconnected—or at least a connection is vague, in which case that’s as good as no connection. It’s as if Wright felt a straight-up thriller wouldn’t be impressive enough and therefore decided upon the story-within-a-story structure. That’s too bad because if he’d ditched Susan’s section and spent time fully realizing Nocturnal Animals, this could be something worth reading.
There’s an introspective tone to this book that makes it obvious Wright was aiming for a literary fiction thriller. But the writing style is too strange. Sentence fragments are abundant, and that can be fine—some writers know how to use them well—but for Wright, these are very much not fine. His fragments read like full sentences that got chopped in half, sometimes comprehensible only on the third reading but even then not always.
There are some sparks of greatness that offer a glimpse into what Tony and Susan could have been—short-lived sparks but sparks nonetheless. Wright’s depiction of a man grieving is beautiful, not especially moving (it’s hard to feel emotionally invested in any of these flat characters), but the all-consuming loneliness and sense of profound loss is always palpable. Also, most notably, the opening of Nocturnal Animals is the strongest part of the book. This is when the pivotal action occurs, and it’s the most startling and suspenseful scene Wright dreamt up.
Otherwise Tony and Susan is boring. The crime that defines Nocturnal Animals is matter-of-fact; there’s no twist in this story; no punch; nothing to gasp over from page one to page 326; and, maybe worst of all, no reason to read to the end because the conclusion is not only a letdown but a big, fat “huh?” This may be one of the best examples of the thriller that wasn’t.
This is not a thriller. Bookstores and libraries can shelve it as a thriller, and Saul Bellow can endorse it by calling it “a story of blood and revenge,” but it’s not thrilling. It’s not a mystery or literary fiction either. It belongs to no category. It’s a discombobulated, terrible something-or-other.
Austin Wright structured Tony and Susan as a story within a story. It concerns the Susan of the title and focuses on her domestic life, with soporific flashbacks to her flawed first marriage and musings on the problems in her current marriage. She’s reading a manuscript, Nocturnal Animals, a story her ex-husband wrote. It’s through Susan that the reader learns about Nocturnal Animals’s main character, Tony, and the most nightmarish time of his life. Nocturnal Animals is more engaging than Susan’s section but not by much. This isn’t to say Nocturnal Animals is good, just that it’s slightly less terrible.
Why Wright felt it necessary to construct his narrative this way is unclear. The occurrences in Susan’s world and in the world of Nocturnal Animals are unconnected—or at least a connection is vague, in which case that’s as good as no connection. It’s as if Wright felt a straight-up thriller wouldn’t be impressive enough and therefore decided upon the story-within-a-story structure. That’s too bad because if he’d ditched Susan’s section and spent time fully realizing Nocturnal Animals, this could be something worth reading.
There’s an introspective tone to this book that makes it obvious Wright was aiming for a literary fiction thriller. But the writing style is too strange. Sentence fragments are abundant, and that can be fine—some writers know how to use them well—but for Wright, these are very much not fine. His fragments read like full sentences that got chopped in half, sometimes comprehensible only on the third reading but even then not always.
There are some sparks of greatness that offer a glimpse into what Tony and Susan could have been—short-lived sparks but sparks nonetheless. Wright’s depiction of a man grieving is beautiful, not especially moving (it’s hard to feel emotionally invested in any of these flat characters), but the all-consuming loneliness and sense of profound loss is always palpable. Also, most notably, the opening of Nocturnal Animals is the strongest part of the book. This is when the pivotal action occurs, and it’s the most startling and suspenseful scene Wright dreamt up.
Otherwise Tony and Susan is boring. The crime that defines Nocturnal Animals is matter-of-fact; there’s no twist in this story; no punch; nothing to gasp over from page one to page 326; and, maybe worst of all, no reason to read to the end because the conclusion is not only a letdown but a big, fat “huh?” This may be one of the best examples of the thriller that wasn’t.
November 4, 2019
this is the new big hoopla book - previously published in the early nineties, then out of print, then recently republished in england to much acclaim, now revived and reintroduced to america. an exhausting journey for one little book.
fortunately, it is interesting enough to withstand such rough treatment.there is a lot i liked about this book, even though had it been written these days, it would have needed a little updating. a well-placed cellphone would have changed the trajectory of the novel altogether. and i am not usually one to long for technology. but rrrrrr - cellphone, tony!!
this is one of those "check out my unconventional structure, yo" novels. its shape is the novel-within-the novel: susan has received the unpublished manuscript of her former husband, which relationship she ruined by cheating on him with her current husband. she reads portions of the novel and then steps back, ruminating on what she is reading, and rehashing all her old mistakes and trying to discern a hidden meaning in the novel; a message directed at her. it considers the impact of fiction upon the reader, the writer's place within his own narrative, the problematic situation of reading a novel by someone intimately known to the reader, and the process a reader goes through in adapting the experiences in the novel to their own lives in order to make sense of a character's motivations. so, it has a lot going on, and gives me the same little bookish shivers as some of my favorite books: Mr. Peanut, The Seducer, Magnetic Field, The Sea Came in at Midnight; the same snap of realization, and even though there are parts that i think are less well-written than those books, i still have to applaud the intention and the way it all unfolds. it is definitely a fun read.
fun, ha. yeah, the subject matter is not fun, though, it is a good example of discomfort writing. it is mostly about the consequences of hesitation and indecision, the glorious
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
and I have seen the eternal footman hold my coat, and snicker,
and in short, I was afraid.
situation.the looking at all the possible outcomes and realizing that in the thinking, the opportunity has been lost.
the manuscript susan is reading is about tony, a man whose life is ruined because he is a man slow to act; a thinker who is at the shallow end of the masculinity pool. a man who does not know what to do with violence when he is confronted with it, but will maybe have to eventually tap into that side of himself.
something like this, maybe:
and susan, reading the tony character's story, begins to question what her own life has meant, and where her decisions have led her, and wonders where, in the edward she knew, this novel has germinated.
it's good stuff. you will probably hate every single character, and want to slap them all around a little bit, but you might as well read it - there is hoopla about it, after all...
come to my blog!
fortunately, it is interesting enough to withstand such rough treatment.there is a lot i liked about this book, even though had it been written these days, it would have needed a little updating. a well-placed cellphone would have changed the trajectory of the novel altogether. and i am not usually one to long for technology. but rrrrrr - cellphone, tony!!
this is one of those "check out my unconventional structure, yo" novels. its shape is the novel-within-the novel: susan has received the unpublished manuscript of her former husband, which relationship she ruined by cheating on him with her current husband. she reads portions of the novel and then steps back, ruminating on what she is reading, and rehashing all her old mistakes and trying to discern a hidden meaning in the novel; a message directed at her. it considers the impact of fiction upon the reader, the writer's place within his own narrative, the problematic situation of reading a novel by someone intimately known to the reader, and the process a reader goes through in adapting the experiences in the novel to their own lives in order to make sense of a character's motivations. so, it has a lot going on, and gives me the same little bookish shivers as some of my favorite books: Mr. Peanut, The Seducer, Magnetic Field, The Sea Came in at Midnight; the same snap of realization, and even though there are parts that i think are less well-written than those books, i still have to applaud the intention and the way it all unfolds. it is definitely a fun read.
fun, ha. yeah, the subject matter is not fun, though, it is a good example of discomfort writing. it is mostly about the consequences of hesitation and indecision, the glorious
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
and I have seen the eternal footman hold my coat, and snicker,
and in short, I was afraid.
situation.the looking at all the possible outcomes and realizing that in the thinking, the opportunity has been lost.
the manuscript susan is reading is about tony, a man whose life is ruined because he is a man slow to act; a thinker who is at the shallow end of the masculinity pool. a man who does not know what to do with violence when he is confronted with it, but will maybe have to eventually tap into that side of himself.
something like this, maybe:
and susan, reading the tony character's story, begins to question what her own life has meant, and where her decisions have led her, and wonders where, in the edward she knew, this novel has germinated.
it's good stuff. you will probably hate every single character, and want to slap them all around a little bit, but you might as well read it - there is hoopla about it, after all...
come to my blog!
October 10, 2021
La novela es buena, recomendable. Del estilo no puedo decir que me haya encandilado, pero desde luego es eficaz, y lo narrado realmente interesante, tanto las dos historias que contiene como toda la especulación metaliteraria.
Hay una novela negra, Animales nocturnos, que su autor hace llegar a su exmujer, Susan, tras quince años sin saber nada el uno del otro. Esta novela, que leemos junto a Susan, tiene un principio trepidante, desde el primer párrafo el autor consigue con suma facilidad que nos metamos en la piel de Tony, su protagonista, involucrándonos en su toma de decisiones, en sus procesos psicológicos, haciendo más terrible el horror de los sucesos narrados.
Es atractivo como se describe la lectura que hace Susan del manuscrito recibido, cómo el hecho de conocer al autor modifica el sentido de lo leído, como afecta la propia vida a ese proceso de lectura, su hogar, sus hijos, su marido ausente, todo lo que la rodea mientras lee y todos los recuerdos que la aparición de su exmarido le ha traído a la memoria: el tipo de relación que mantuvieron, su ruptura y el inicio de la actual. Todo forma parte de la lectura, la complementa, la modifica, la sesga. Hasta el pasado rememorado ha cambiado para Susan, lectora también de la narración no escrita de su vida. Vida que, como toda narración, como el propio relato ahora leído, tiene sus alternativas, sus encrucijadas que modificaron el desarrollo posterior; vivir, escribir, es elegir posibilidades, tomar decisiones, rechazar caminos... y la cobardía es un gran impedimento siempre.
Hay una novela negra, Animales nocturnos, que su autor hace llegar a su exmujer, Susan, tras quince años sin saber nada el uno del otro. Esta novela, que leemos junto a Susan, tiene un principio trepidante, desde el primer párrafo el autor consigue con suma facilidad que nos metamos en la piel de Tony, su protagonista, involucrándonos en su toma de decisiones, en sus procesos psicológicos, haciendo más terrible el horror de los sucesos narrados.
Es atractivo como se describe la lectura que hace Susan del manuscrito recibido, cómo el hecho de conocer al autor modifica el sentido de lo leído, como afecta la propia vida a ese proceso de lectura, su hogar, sus hijos, su marido ausente, todo lo que la rodea mientras lee y todos los recuerdos que la aparición de su exmarido le ha traído a la memoria: el tipo de relación que mantuvieron, su ruptura y el inicio de la actual. Todo forma parte de la lectura, la complementa, la modifica, la sesga. Hasta el pasado rememorado ha cambiado para Susan, lectora también de la narración no escrita de su vida. Vida que, como toda narración, como el propio relato ahora leído, tiene sus alternativas, sus encrucijadas que modificaron el desarrollo posterior; vivir, escribir, es elegir posibilidades, tomar decisiones, rechazar caminos... y la cobardía es un gran impedimento siempre.
“El libro se ha acabado. Susan lo ha visto consumirse, ante sus ojos a través de hojas, párrafos, líneas, palabras, hasta el capítulo final. No queda nada, se ha extinguido. Ahora ella es libre de releer o revisar fragmentos, pero la novela está muerta y nunca volverá a ser la misma. En su lugar, por la grieta que ha dejado silba una ráfaga de viento semejante a la libertad. La vida real, que vuelve para poseerla.”Lástima que el último tercio de la novela flojee y el final sea demasiado enigmático, con demasiados flecos sueltos para una novela negra al uso.
May 18, 2019
A married woman gets the manuscript of a book entitled Nocturnal Animals through the post from an ex-husband she’s barely heard from in the past 20 years. So starts a novel that is one of the most interesting I’ve read in years. As Susan reads through the manuscript (a dark, dense and harrowing tale in its own right) she starts to reflect on the shortfalls of her current marriage and on her would be writer ex-husband, and the role she played in thwarting this aim. She also considers the meaning of the tale and the purpose of it having been sent to her.
This book within a book format works well here and I found Nocturnal Animals itself to be a spooky but compelling tale; the style reminds me of Paul Auster’s The Music of Chance - it has the same retro, tale around the campfire feel to it.
The whole piece is brilliantly constructed with prose that is clever and subtle throughout. Tony and Susan was first published in 1993 (the author died in 2003). It didn’t sell that well initially but has recently been re-published. It’s considered now – by some – to be an American literary masterpiece. I enjoyed it immensely.
This book within a book format works well here and I found Nocturnal Animals itself to be a spooky but compelling tale; the style reminds me of Paul Auster’s The Music of Chance - it has the same retro, tale around the campfire feel to it.
The whole piece is brilliantly constructed with prose that is clever and subtle throughout. Tony and Susan was first published in 1993 (the author died in 2003). It didn’t sell that well initially but has recently been re-published. It’s considered now – by some – to be an American literary masterpiece. I enjoyed it immensely.
August 7, 2011
Incredibly disappointed by this book--Susan is reading a novel(Nocturnal Animals) sent to her by her ex-husband, Edward. For some reason, she feels that the manuscript is some sort of veiled threat from Edward (why she thinks this, I don't know--it really doesn't make sense. Susan is just neurotic). Tony, the main character in Edward's novel, is aggravating to the point where you just want to scream. I found myself wanting to just put down this book because I could not stomach the idiocy of Tony and Susan. I kept reading largely because I wanted to see how Tony's story is resolved (very unsatisfactorily). The hype for this novel simply isn't justified. Gah!
Read
August 30, 2016Unfairly marketed as "the new GONE GIRL" (just how many of those are we going to get before publishers finally realize that this is about as much of a selling-point as "comes with its own raw blubber carrying-case"?), this is a truly spectacular book - part-thriller; part investigation into the uneasy relationship between reader and writer; part exploration of fiction; part study of human relationships, neuroses, anxiety, grief and what it means to be civilized.
Don't go into it looking for easy answers, lovable characters, a linear plot or a satisfying resolution. Those things are for ordinary thrillers, and this is nothing like one of those. Do expect to be strangely gripped. Do expect to be haunted. Do expect to remember this book at odd times when you're driving at night, or when you encounter one of those pockets of human strangeness that make you reassess your world. Apparently it's all set to be a movie. If so, I shall avoid it, simply because I don't believe that the plot of this book - gripping though it undoubtedly is - is what makes it so unique. What makes it unique is the construction, the written style - so stark and yet idiosyncratic - and the queasy, lurching sense of something formless emerging from the two twisted strands of narrative. I've waited a long time for something like this to emerge from the wave of post-Gone-Girl ephemera: and this is it. A perfect conjunction of literary and genre. A classic, in the true sense.
Don't go into it looking for easy answers, lovable characters, a linear plot or a satisfying resolution. Those things are for ordinary thrillers, and this is nothing like one of those. Do expect to be strangely gripped. Do expect to be haunted. Do expect to remember this book at odd times when you're driving at night, or when you encounter one of those pockets of human strangeness that make you reassess your world. Apparently it's all set to be a movie. If so, I shall avoid it, simply because I don't believe that the plot of this book - gripping though it undoubtedly is - is what makes it so unique. What makes it unique is the construction, the written style - so stark and yet idiosyncratic - and the queasy, lurching sense of something formless emerging from the two twisted strands of narrative. I've waited a long time for something like this to emerge from the wave of post-Gone-Girl ephemera: and this is it. A perfect conjunction of literary and genre. A classic, in the true sense.
March 2, 2017
perfect and harsh story
March 18, 2017
La novela en la que se basa Animales nocturnos. Animales nocturnos es el título del manuscrito de Edward y tres noches lo que tarda Susan (su ex) en leerlo. La escena de los coches y la familia, los perturbados esos que no sabes por dónde te van a salir y demás, sin querer desvelar nada, es prácticamente idéntica a la película (aunque más adelante el libro tiene sus cambios) y posee la misma tensión y atmosfera mal rollera e insana. Me interesaba ver como el autor introducía la novela de Edward dentro de la parte de Susan, cómo lo combinaba. Al final lo hace de forma sencilla, que suele ser lo que mejor funciona. Un libro de culto en USA que no conocía y me ha encantado descubrir. La única pena no haber descubierto antes la novela que la película porque me ha quitado mucho intríngulis. Con todo, recomiendo ambas cosas.
September 17, 2017
That was officially the longest 2 weeks of my life. Never has a book stretched out for so long, seemingly never-ending, and I have read the LOTR trilogy!
Honestly? I hated this book. I didn't like Susan (the narrator) - I felt she was smug, even after excavating her crappy life with her adulterous husband. I found her parts particularly boring. I just didn't care.
The manuscript by Edward (Susan's ex-husband of the past 25 years) was somewhat more interesting. I like a good crime novel. However, it didn't blow me away and in the end I didn't care what happened - whether those criminals received a swift and merciless justice or the victim suffered indefinitely.
I also disliked the writing "style". The "literary technique" of either not finishing sentences logically or typing them out like Yoda might speak. It was forced, a desperate attempt at making this novel about how one writes and reads rather than how we associate a books narrative with our own lives in order to understand or contextualise a characters actions/situation. I didn't buy it and nothing interesting was revealed to me.
Don't bother. Honestly. After I was about half way through I started skipping whole pages in order to move on with my life.
It gets one star because for some reason I didn't just toss the damn thing away, clearly something about it intrigued me enough that I wanted to know what happened.
Honestly? I hated this book. I didn't like Susan (the narrator) - I felt she was smug, even after excavating her crappy life with her adulterous husband. I found her parts particularly boring. I just didn't care.
The manuscript by Edward (Susan's ex-husband of the past 25 years) was somewhat more interesting. I like a good crime novel. However, it didn't blow me away and in the end I didn't care what happened - whether those criminals received a swift and merciless justice or the victim suffered indefinitely.
I also disliked the writing "style". The "literary technique" of either not finishing sentences logically or typing them out like Yoda might speak. It was forced, a desperate attempt at making this novel about how one writes and reads rather than how we associate a books narrative with our own lives in order to understand or contextualise a characters actions/situation. I didn't buy it and nothing interesting was revealed to me.
Don't bother. Honestly. After I was about half way through I started skipping whole pages in order to move on with my life.
It gets one star because for some reason I didn't just toss the damn thing away, clearly something about it intrigued me enough that I wanted to know what happened.
June 20, 2025
This is my second round reading this book. Well. That was unexpected. I've never read a book anything like this ever. Totally unique and deeply thought-provoking. Cleverly written too. I started it mid-afternoon and it's now 2:20am and with my eyes struggling to stay open I had to finish it. Cover to cover. It has very mixed reviews. Some loved it, some really disliked it.
Susan gets sent a manuscript from her ex-husband. The book is titled Nocturnal Animals. During their marriage he was a frustrated, often depressed writer and she criticised his writing quite harshly. Theirs was a complex relationship. So when this book turns up many years later - both of them now married to new people the question is why?
This novel is unusual as we get to be Susan. We are in her mind and feel her feelings as she reads the novel but we are also reading the book he's written too. So it's like reading two books in one. Both writing styles are very different. Clever of the author to do that. The actual manuscript story had me hooked and riveted. One hell of a twisted tale.
The characters in the manuscript are fantastic. The dark, menacing bad ones especially so. The author did a top notch job of really making the characters just as central to this novel as the plot. In saying that I did struggle with "knowing" Susan fully. In a way it's meant to be like that I think as we switch between reading the manuscript and Susan's current days as she reads it whilst her husband is away on a business trip.
As Susan reads she shares and reflects on her past life with her ex but also what the book is making her feel and what is stirred up. It's an interesting perspective to be a reader, in a characters mind as they read a book. Layers upon layers. Quite unusual.
I liked this more than I expected. It's not a light book, it requires some focus and attention. It's incredibly good because you not only want to know how the manuscript story ends but also how Susan's story ends after she's finished the book. Her ex sent her a note requesting to meet her you see, after many years to hear her opinion on his book. You are questioning all the time many things within these two storylines that really are one.
If the manuscript was published as a novel in its own right then I loved it. 5 stars from me. Some aspects of Susan's reading perspective and how it's projected is why this didn't hit 5 stars overall for me. But know this - I highly recommend this book if you fancy something different, somewhat challenging and to be led where you don't know where either ending will land. It's impossible to predict either.
The manuscript story is thrilling, with aspects of crime, justice, grief and the dark side of human beings. I was eager to keep going back into that part of this novel.
The author sadly passed away in 2003, he has however left behind a great novel. The book was first published in 1993 then had a resurgence in 2010 with republication. I'll be seeing what other books he may have written. Such a unique and memorable book this was. So I give this 4, almost 4.5 stars overall and as I said the manuscript within 5 stars that Susan is invited to read. So, dare you step into the pages dear reader? Please do. Something out of the ordinary is great.
I read a paperback edition of this book, bought new in Waterstones. A movie has been made of this book called Nocturnal Animals, starting Jake Gyllenhall.
::~~~~~~:::::~~~~~:::::~~~~~:::::~~~~~~::
Thanks so much for reading my review!
I hope you enjoyed it, if you did I’d be delighted if you leave me a “like” and I love to read your comments. If you’d like to connect you can follow me or please send me a friend request.
If you are an Author or Publisher and you’d like me to consider reading and reviewing your book(s) please just message me.
Susan gets sent a manuscript from her ex-husband. The book is titled Nocturnal Animals. During their marriage he was a frustrated, often depressed writer and she criticised his writing quite harshly. Theirs was a complex relationship. So when this book turns up many years later - both of them now married to new people the question is why?
This novel is unusual as we get to be Susan. We are in her mind and feel her feelings as she reads the novel but we are also reading the book he's written too. So it's like reading two books in one. Both writing styles are very different. Clever of the author to do that. The actual manuscript story had me hooked and riveted. One hell of a twisted tale.
The characters in the manuscript are fantastic. The dark, menacing bad ones especially so. The author did a top notch job of really making the characters just as central to this novel as the plot. In saying that I did struggle with "knowing" Susan fully. In a way it's meant to be like that I think as we switch between reading the manuscript and Susan's current days as she reads it whilst her husband is away on a business trip.
As Susan reads she shares and reflects on her past life with her ex but also what the book is making her feel and what is stirred up. It's an interesting perspective to be a reader, in a characters mind as they read a book. Layers upon layers. Quite unusual.
I liked this more than I expected. It's not a light book, it requires some focus and attention. It's incredibly good because you not only want to know how the manuscript story ends but also how Susan's story ends after she's finished the book. Her ex sent her a note requesting to meet her you see, after many years to hear her opinion on his book. You are questioning all the time many things within these two storylines that really are one.
If the manuscript was published as a novel in its own right then I loved it. 5 stars from me. Some aspects of Susan's reading perspective and how it's projected is why this didn't hit 5 stars overall for me. But know this - I highly recommend this book if you fancy something different, somewhat challenging and to be led where you don't know where either ending will land. It's impossible to predict either.
The manuscript story is thrilling, with aspects of crime, justice, grief and the dark side of human beings. I was eager to keep going back into that part of this novel.
The author sadly passed away in 2003, he has however left behind a great novel. The book was first published in 1993 then had a resurgence in 2010 with republication. I'll be seeing what other books he may have written. Such a unique and memorable book this was. So I give this 4, almost 4.5 stars overall and as I said the manuscript within 5 stars that Susan is invited to read. So, dare you step into the pages dear reader? Please do. Something out of the ordinary is great.
I read a paperback edition of this book, bought new in Waterstones. A movie has been made of this book called Nocturnal Animals, starting Jake Gyllenhall.
::~~~~~~:::::~~~~~:::::~~~~~:::::~~~~~~::
Thanks so much for reading my review!
I hope you enjoyed it, if you did I’d be delighted if you leave me a “like” and I love to read your comments. If you’d like to connect you can follow me or please send me a friend request.
If you are an Author or Publisher and you’d like me to consider reading and reviewing your book(s) please just message me.
December 21, 2016
Susan leads a comfortable suburban life: a doctor’s wife, a mother and homemaker, her quiet existence is interrupted when she receives her ex-husband Edward’s debut manuscript for her review: a novel called Nocturnal Animals. But she and Edward divorced over twenty years ago – why would he reach out to her now? Then as Susan begins reading she notices pieces of herself in the story – a vicious, dark story of revenge, rape and murder. Is Edward exorcising demons through his art or is this a veiled threat of what he’s planning to do to her and her family…?
Jake Gyllenhaal is one of my favourite actors who’s almost always in really interesting movies so when I saw the trailer for Nocturnal Animals, I wanted to read Austin Wright’s novel, Tony & Susan, first. I haven’t seen the movie yet but I hope it’s better than Wright’s novel – not that the book is bad but it’s very uneven in quality.
The first hundred or so pages are amazing. Tony is the protagonist of Edward’s novel and he and his wife and daughter are headed to their holiday home in Maine, driving through the night to get there as soon as possible. Then at some point in the night they’re forced off the road and confronted by three thugs who separate Tony from his family, drive off with his wife and daughter, and things get worse from then on. Wright ramps up the tension superbly and the narrative is wonderfully unpredictable and as fast-paced as a great thriller should be. I even liked the little touches of awkwardly phrased sentences dotted throughout to remind you we’re reading an unedited manuscript which has yet to be buffed out.
But after that initial burst of excitement things unfortunately slow down considerably. The novel shifts gears down quickly from a thriller to a slow, ponderous introspective character portrait that’s much less compelling to read. The story improves once the investigation for the thugs gets underway and every time Wright focuses on this, the novel becomes great again – the problem is when the narrative switches to Tony’s dreary day-to-day which is at least half the time.
The story progresses slowly but it does progress and some scenes are better than others - Susan’s chapters, while few, were very dull and the final act is interminably drawn-out. The story is framed with Susan reading Edward’s novel - a story within a story – and what kept my interest the most throughout was the expectation of seeing Edward at the end and finding out what the point of it all was; except the ending is very underwhelming and disappointing.
That said, you could – reading deeply between the lines – interpret a more satisfying meaning to it all symbolically.
That’s how it goes sometimes with literary fiction: the genre loves the open-ended interpretations and it depends on the reader how they want to see it – and there’s almost certainly other ways to look at the novel I haven’t considered.
The first hundred pages were outstanding and the rest of the book was intermittently good, though it really felt like a lot of scenes dragged on which diminished my enjoyment of the story. The ending too was really weak and, while you can come up with interpretations for it like I did, it feels like a helluva lot more heavy-lifting on the reader’s part to make up for the too-soft author’s touch – I can see why some people might resent that. Tony & Susan is an unusual and original novel that suffers the same problem a lot of literary novels do: letting the artiness get in the way of a good story.
Jake Gyllenhaal is one of my favourite actors who’s almost always in really interesting movies so when I saw the trailer for Nocturnal Animals, I wanted to read Austin Wright’s novel, Tony & Susan, first. I haven’t seen the movie yet but I hope it’s better than Wright’s novel – not that the book is bad but it’s very uneven in quality.
The first hundred or so pages are amazing. Tony is the protagonist of Edward’s novel and he and his wife and daughter are headed to their holiday home in Maine, driving through the night to get there as soon as possible. Then at some point in the night they’re forced off the road and confronted by three thugs who separate Tony from his family, drive off with his wife and daughter, and things get worse from then on. Wright ramps up the tension superbly and the narrative is wonderfully unpredictable and as fast-paced as a great thriller should be. I even liked the little touches of awkwardly phrased sentences dotted throughout to remind you we’re reading an unedited manuscript which has yet to be buffed out.
But after that initial burst of excitement things unfortunately slow down considerably. The novel shifts gears down quickly from a thriller to a slow, ponderous introspective character portrait that’s much less compelling to read. The story improves once the investigation for the thugs gets underway and every time Wright focuses on this, the novel becomes great again – the problem is when the narrative switches to Tony’s dreary day-to-day which is at least half the time.
The story progresses slowly but it does progress and some scenes are better than others - Susan’s chapters, while few, were very dull and the final act is interminably drawn-out. The story is framed with Susan reading Edward’s novel - a story within a story – and what kept my interest the most throughout was the expectation of seeing Edward at the end and finding out what the point of it all was; except the ending is very underwhelming and disappointing.
That said, you could – reading deeply between the lines – interpret a more satisfying meaning to it all symbolically.
That’s how it goes sometimes with literary fiction: the genre loves the open-ended interpretations and it depends on the reader how they want to see it – and there’s almost certainly other ways to look at the novel I haven’t considered.
The first hundred pages were outstanding and the rest of the book was intermittently good, though it really felt like a lot of scenes dragged on which diminished my enjoyment of the story. The ending too was really weak and, while you can come up with interpretations for it like I did, it feels like a helluva lot more heavy-lifting on the reader’s part to make up for the too-soft author’s touch – I can see why some people might resent that. Tony & Susan is an unusual and original novel that suffers the same problem a lot of literary novels do: letting the artiness get in the way of a good story.
August 30, 2011
This is a re-release of a book that reviewed well but didn't have a large readership, the author has since passed away but the publishers think so highly of this book that they have given it a second chance. I have to admit that it really held my interest, it is a book within a book construct, but the foreboding tension of the story is fantastic. The last third of the book was not as good as what came before but it has stuck in my mind. That is always the sign to me of a successful book.
November 8, 2025
The sonda remains the same (*1)
Mi è capitato più volte nell’ultimo periodo di leggere romanzi che ne contengano altri al loro interno. Tony & Susan di Austin Wright contiene ANIMALI NOTTURNI di Edward Sheffield. Se sei uno scrittore, cosa puoi conoscere meglio della scrittura? Ecco perché l’escamotage del metaromanzo è frequente.
Interrogata AI a riguardo, mi fornisce la seguente risposta
Non c'è un consenso universale su quale sia il "primo" metaromanzo della storia, ma tra i candidati spiccano il Genji monogatari di Murasaki Shikibu (XI secolo) per essere considerato il primo romanzo in assoluto e il primo psicologico
AI talvolta è inattendibile, così chiedendo a Wikepedia emerge che
Più specificamente la metanarrazione secondo Piero Boitani compare con le Finzioni (Ficciones, 1944[3] di Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986), dove si scrive di letteratura nella letteratura.[4]
Entrambe le fonti concordano sul fatto che Se una notte d'inverno un viaggiatore, scritto nel 1979 da Italo Calvino è un fulgido esempio di metanarrativa.
Vi ho annoiato? Non è ancora niente, perché il romanzo essendo ambientato negli anni ’90 vi costringerà ad abbandonare le consolidate certezze tecnologiche. Addio Google e Wiki, ma soprattutto addio alla possibilità di chiamare, di essere rintracciati, di rintracciare in qualsiasi luogo. Non pensiate poi di scrollare le pagine con il pollice.
Che vi trovi concordi o meno, delinquere e rimanere impuniti era più semplice in passato. Prendete il caso di Tony Hastings, sua moglie Laura e sua figlia Helen, che viaggiavano di notte sull’autostrada nella Pennsylvania del Nord e che ingaggiarono una pericolosa gara di sorpassi e ripicche con l’auto di due balordi. Non potettero chiamare il 911 quando furono speronati e poi costretti a scendere.
In un primo momento c’è una tensione alla DUEL, per un lungo tratto ANIMALI NOTTURNI ha la meglio su Tony & Susan, la traccia principale è quasi un intralcio a quella secondaria. Bisognerà arrivare alla fine per assistere alla sovrapposizione delle tracce. Spiegare dove conducono le doppie impronte diminuirebbe il piacere di dedicarsi al libro
Si scrive perché tutto muore, si scrive per salvare quello che muore. Si scrive perché il mondo è un caos inarticolato, e non riesci a vederlo finché non ne disegni la mappa con le parole. Si scrive perché scrivere è come mettersi gli occhiali quando si ha la vista debole. No, si scrive perché si legge, si scrive per ripetere a proprio uso e consumo le storie della nostra vita. Si scrive perché nella mente c’è un brusio, e scrivere è come tracciare un sentiero nel brusio per riuscire a raccapezzare un senso di sé. No, si scrive perché si è chiusi nel guscio del proprio cranio. Scrivere significa mandare come una sonda nei crani altrui, aspettando che qualcuno risponda
Può bastarvi per decidere di metterlo in lettura? A me sarebbe bastato se avessi letto questa citazione.
(*1)
https://youtu.be/DtVKz0rv4cg?si=wcNtn...
Mi è capitato più volte nell’ultimo periodo di leggere romanzi che ne contengano altri al loro interno. Tony & Susan di Austin Wright contiene ANIMALI NOTTURNI di Edward Sheffield. Se sei uno scrittore, cosa puoi conoscere meglio della scrittura? Ecco perché l’escamotage del metaromanzo è frequente.
Interrogata AI a riguardo, mi fornisce la seguente risposta
Non c'è un consenso universale su quale sia il "primo" metaromanzo della storia, ma tra i candidati spiccano il Genji monogatari di Murasaki Shikibu (XI secolo) per essere considerato il primo romanzo in assoluto e il primo psicologico
AI talvolta è inattendibile, così chiedendo a Wikepedia emerge che
Più specificamente la metanarrazione secondo Piero Boitani compare con le Finzioni (Ficciones, 1944[3] di Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986), dove si scrive di letteratura nella letteratura.[4]
Entrambe le fonti concordano sul fatto che Se una notte d'inverno un viaggiatore, scritto nel 1979 da Italo Calvino è un fulgido esempio di metanarrativa.
Vi ho annoiato? Non è ancora niente, perché il romanzo essendo ambientato negli anni ’90 vi costringerà ad abbandonare le consolidate certezze tecnologiche. Addio Google e Wiki, ma soprattutto addio alla possibilità di chiamare, di essere rintracciati, di rintracciare in qualsiasi luogo. Non pensiate poi di scrollare le pagine con il pollice.
Che vi trovi concordi o meno, delinquere e rimanere impuniti era più semplice in passato. Prendete il caso di Tony Hastings, sua moglie Laura e sua figlia Helen, che viaggiavano di notte sull’autostrada nella Pennsylvania del Nord e che ingaggiarono una pericolosa gara di sorpassi e ripicche con l’auto di due balordi. Non potettero chiamare il 911 quando furono speronati e poi costretti a scendere.
In un primo momento c’è una tensione alla DUEL, per un lungo tratto ANIMALI NOTTURNI ha la meglio su Tony & Susan, la traccia principale è quasi un intralcio a quella secondaria. Bisognerà arrivare alla fine per assistere alla sovrapposizione delle tracce. Spiegare dove conducono le doppie impronte diminuirebbe il piacere di dedicarsi al libro
Si scrive perché tutto muore, si scrive per salvare quello che muore. Si scrive perché il mondo è un caos inarticolato, e non riesci a vederlo finché non ne disegni la mappa con le parole. Si scrive perché scrivere è come mettersi gli occhiali quando si ha la vista debole. No, si scrive perché si legge, si scrive per ripetere a proprio uso e consumo le storie della nostra vita. Si scrive perché nella mente c’è un brusio, e scrivere è come tracciare un sentiero nel brusio per riuscire a raccapezzare un senso di sé. No, si scrive perché si è chiusi nel guscio del proprio cranio. Scrivere significa mandare come una sonda nei crani altrui, aspettando che qualcuno risponda
Può bastarvi per decidere di metterlo in lettura? A me sarebbe bastato se avessi letto questa citazione.
(*1)
https://youtu.be/DtVKz0rv4cg?si=wcNtn...
October 26, 2017
Este es uno de los libros que me cuesta reseñar y para ello hay dos razones, la primera es que trata dos historias, una de ellas, la vida de Susan y la otra, la historia de "Animales nocturnos", el manuscrito que Edward, ex-esposo de Susan, envía a nuestra protagonista para pedir su opinión; ambas tienen un tono bastante distinto, aun cuando se encuentran relacionadas. La otra razón, y es lo que me quitaré de encima rápidamente, es que he visto la película y considero que es un tanto superior al libro, el director hizo un manejo del lenguaje visual impresionante, además de que introdujo algunas variaciones a la historia y los personajes que, sin perder su esencia, hacen que todo, especialmente el final, sea más profundo e interesante (dejando de lado el hecho de que Susan debe serv despreciable para lograr este efecto).
Creo que lo más sencillo es hablar de las historias de manera separada y luego conjuntarlas en la conclusión. Susan es una mujer que tras casarse con Edward, quien fuera un compañero de casa cuando fue niña, espera tener un futuro brillante, pero tras la deserción de Edward a su prometedora carrera como abogado para seguir su sueño de ser escritor, Susan se ve en una vorágine de frustración, soledad y suelos rotos, que lleva a la ruptura de su matrimonio, un segundo casamiento y el abandono de sus sueños profesionales en pos de apoyar la carrera de su actual marido. Su historia se centra en describirnos a Susan y como fue que su carácter la llevo a su situación actual, dando como resultado un personaje complejo, lleno de matices y con un profundidad bastante respetable, que fácilmente puede ser cualquier otro lector, tanto por la manera en que describe que se lleva a cabo su proceso lector como por todos los pensamientos que transitan su cabeza. Es a través de ella que conocemos a Edward, por tanto la descripción de él a pesar de ser detallada como la de un hombre inseguro, frustrado y con cierta simpleza, combate con la nueva imagen que Susan crea ahora gracias a las percepciones que le da la novela. A pesar de ser ella quien narra, y hablarnos muchísimas veces de su vid en realidad nunca llegamos a conocer a Susan, la manera en que Wright la describe nos lleva a dudar constantemente de quien es ella en realidad, por lo que terminamos notando que a pesar de su aparentemente civilizado exterior, nos deja entrever un interior oscuro y profundo, cargado de culpas, ira y terror por sí misma.
"Animales nocturnos" es el libro creado por Edward, narra la desgracia en la que cae Tony, cuando tras un viaje por carretera, pierde a su esposa e hija en un terrible asesinato perpetuado por tres bandidos. Esta historia es muchísimo más interesante que la vida de Susan, especialmente por lo que muestra acerca el autor y lo que fue su vida, quedando claro que esta historia es la prueba física de que se ha liberado de la sombra de Susan, además de que desea vengarse de ella (cosa que logra gracias a este manuscrito). Es aquí donde la parte de misterio se desarrolla de manera explícita, la persecución, el sentimiento de abandono y la soledad son tratados de manera magnífica, y puedo decir que el final de este manuscrito me pareció excelente y lo suficientemente trágico, inesperado y simbólico.
Ahora bien, en conjunto ambas historias lo que buscan es demostrar la naturaleza de Susan y Edward, y como se deterioraron y lastimaron el uno al otro, además de cómo al caer la noche ninguno de los dos fue un santo. Cargada de introspección e hilada a través de personajes realistas e interesantes, se presta a ser magnífica dado que trata de una buena manera tanto historia como personajes, aunque no de manera conjunta. Aun con todo esto, la realidad es que al terminar la lectura algo falta: el misterio que rodeo una parte de la historia sabe a poco, y te deja la sensación de que el cierre total fue terriblemente abrupto y anti-climático. No se puede negar que el autor hace un buen trabajo en crear ambos mundos, y el desarrollo de personajes es excelente, pero esa inquietud que siente Susan durante la lectura, queda opacada por la dificultad del lector de sentir lo mismo por la totalidad del libro.
Creo que lo más sencillo es hablar de las historias de manera separada y luego conjuntarlas en la conclusión. Susan es una mujer que tras casarse con Edward, quien fuera un compañero de casa cuando fue niña, espera tener un futuro brillante, pero tras la deserción de Edward a su prometedora carrera como abogado para seguir su sueño de ser escritor, Susan se ve en una vorágine de frustración, soledad y suelos rotos, que lleva a la ruptura de su matrimonio, un segundo casamiento y el abandono de sus sueños profesionales en pos de apoyar la carrera de su actual marido. Su historia se centra en describirnos a Susan y como fue que su carácter la llevo a su situación actual, dando como resultado un personaje complejo, lleno de matices y con un profundidad bastante respetable, que fácilmente puede ser cualquier otro lector, tanto por la manera en que describe que se lleva a cabo su proceso lector como por todos los pensamientos que transitan su cabeza. Es a través de ella que conocemos a Edward, por tanto la descripción de él a pesar de ser detallada como la de un hombre inseguro, frustrado y con cierta simpleza, combate con la nueva imagen que Susan crea ahora gracias a las percepciones que le da la novela. A pesar de ser ella quien narra, y hablarnos muchísimas veces de su vid en realidad nunca llegamos a conocer a Susan, la manera en que Wright la describe nos lleva a dudar constantemente de quien es ella en realidad, por lo que terminamos notando que a pesar de su aparentemente civilizado exterior, nos deja entrever un interior oscuro y profundo, cargado de culpas, ira y terror por sí misma.
"Animales nocturnos" es el libro creado por Edward, narra la desgracia en la que cae Tony, cuando tras un viaje por carretera, pierde a su esposa e hija en un terrible asesinato perpetuado por tres bandidos. Esta historia es muchísimo más interesante que la vida de Susan, especialmente por lo que muestra acerca el autor y lo que fue su vida, quedando claro que esta historia es la prueba física de que se ha liberado de la sombra de Susan, además de que desea vengarse de ella (cosa que logra gracias a este manuscrito). Es aquí donde la parte de misterio se desarrolla de manera explícita, la persecución, el sentimiento de abandono y la soledad son tratados de manera magnífica, y puedo decir que el final de este manuscrito me pareció excelente y lo suficientemente trágico, inesperado y simbólico.
Ahora bien, en conjunto ambas historias lo que buscan es demostrar la naturaleza de Susan y Edward, y como se deterioraron y lastimaron el uno al otro, además de cómo al caer la noche ninguno de los dos fue un santo. Cargada de introspección e hilada a través de personajes realistas e interesantes, se presta a ser magnífica dado que trata de una buena manera tanto historia como personajes, aunque no de manera conjunta. Aun con todo esto, la realidad es que al terminar la lectura algo falta: el misterio que rodeo una parte de la historia sabe a poco, y te deja la sensación de que el cierre total fue terriblemente abrupto y anti-climático. No se puede negar que el autor hace un buen trabajo en crear ambos mundos, y el desarrollo de personajes es excelente, pero esa inquietud que siente Susan durante la lectura, queda opacada por la dificultad del lector de sentir lo mismo por la totalidad del libro.
February 7, 2017
This book annoyed me to the point of madness. It was filled with unbelievable situations,ridiculous choices and irritating ,ineffectual characters. I am floored that someone read this book and proclaimed,"This book will make a great movie,someone get Gyllenhaal on the phone"
It was as pointless as my dog chasing her tail,but a least she seems to get enjoyment from it.
It was as pointless as my dog chasing her tail,but a least she seems to get enjoyment from it.
July 23, 2011
A story within a story that fails to deliver more than passing interest.
Edward, Susan’s first husband, has sent her his novel, Nocturnal Animals, to read before he comes to visit. Susan, a little at loose ends with her husband in New York at a conference, reads the manuscript and is caught up in Tony’s dilemma. Is there more to the story or is Susan reading too much into it?
In what seems to be a treatise on modern marriage and selfishness, Austin Wright’s Tony and Susan is a study in contrast and futility. Susan is unsure why she left Edward and remarried, choosing to blind herself to the truth, and Edward, in his own way, is telling Susan he was ineffective and could not or would not fight for her until it was too late.
The protagonist in Edward’s novel is an academic, a pale and cold man whose grief over the rape and murder of his wife and daughter barely skim the surface of his existence. He says all the right things and appears shell-shocked in the aftermath of discovering their bodies, but their deaths fail to touch a fundamental core response. Tony is useless, an automaton going through the motions of a happy life without ever being truly happy or reveling in the joys and togetherness of family. His distance from his brother in Chicago is more than a symptom; it is the fundamental truth of his life.
Susan is a bored housewife of a successful man. She has a lovely home, beautiful and talented children, and a husband who cheats on Susan as he cheated on his first wife with her. Arnold, Susan’s husband, seems to be an arrogant jerk, and she does not know whether she should have stayed married to Edward, ineffectual and colorless Edward.
Wright’s twisted sentences are like a corridor of mirrors that reflect endlessly without coming near the real thing, the people who cast the reflections. He fails to give Tony, Susan, Edward, or Arnold more than a glancing touch with his narrative brush. With passages like It was important to recognize the importance of things, for he knew now that everything important was important, nothing was more important than importance. from Edward’s novel and the disjointed, rushing language that is supposed to depict Tony’s disorientation during and after the hijacking incident, Wright muddies the waters.
Tony and Susan fights for an identity, for some clear point of view that will support the author’s thesis. While there are moments when Edward’s novel is fast paced and evocative, the rest of the novel is as colorless and cowardly as Tony is. There is little risk and the payoff is questionable.
Wright’s novel within a novel construction will doubtless wow the literati but provides little in the way of an interesting story or larger themes. One thing Wright did get right was the way Edward’s novel was written as an amateur’s first draft. The rest is too subtle and highbrow for this reviewer.
###
Edward, Susan’s first husband, has sent her his novel, Nocturnal Animals, to read before he comes to visit. Susan, a little at loose ends with her husband in New York at a conference, reads the manuscript and is caught up in Tony’s dilemma. Is there more to the story or is Susan reading too much into it?
In what seems to be a treatise on modern marriage and selfishness, Austin Wright’s Tony and Susan is a study in contrast and futility. Susan is unsure why she left Edward and remarried, choosing to blind herself to the truth, and Edward, in his own way, is telling Susan he was ineffective and could not or would not fight for her until it was too late.
The protagonist in Edward’s novel is an academic, a pale and cold man whose grief over the rape and murder of his wife and daughter barely skim the surface of his existence. He says all the right things and appears shell-shocked in the aftermath of discovering their bodies, but their deaths fail to touch a fundamental core response. Tony is useless, an automaton going through the motions of a happy life without ever being truly happy or reveling in the joys and togetherness of family. His distance from his brother in Chicago is more than a symptom; it is the fundamental truth of his life.
Susan is a bored housewife of a successful man. She has a lovely home, beautiful and talented children, and a husband who cheats on Susan as he cheated on his first wife with her. Arnold, Susan’s husband, seems to be an arrogant jerk, and she does not know whether she should have stayed married to Edward, ineffectual and colorless Edward.
Wright’s twisted sentences are like a corridor of mirrors that reflect endlessly without coming near the real thing, the people who cast the reflections. He fails to give Tony, Susan, Edward, or Arnold more than a glancing touch with his narrative brush. With passages like It was important to recognize the importance of things, for he knew now that everything important was important, nothing was more important than importance. from Edward’s novel and the disjointed, rushing language that is supposed to depict Tony’s disorientation during and after the hijacking incident, Wright muddies the waters.
Tony and Susan fights for an identity, for some clear point of view that will support the author’s thesis. While there are moments when Edward’s novel is fast paced and evocative, the rest of the novel is as colorless and cowardly as Tony is. There is little risk and the payoff is questionable.
Wright’s novel within a novel construction will doubtless wow the literati but provides little in the way of an interesting story or larger themes. One thing Wright did get right was the way Edward’s novel was written as an amateur’s first draft. The rest is too subtle and highbrow for this reviewer.
###
January 18, 2025
تا حالا به این فکر کردید که با کلمات از کسی انتقام بگیرید؟
کتاب«تونی و سوزان»سال 1993 منتشر شد. سال 2016 بر اساس این رمان یک فیلم سینمایی با نام«حیوانات شبرو»اکران شد که بعد از سالها و حتی مرگ نویسنده توجهات رو به این کتاب معطوف کرد. همینطور که مترجم فارسی بعد از تماشای این فیلم تصمیم به ترجمه کتاب گرفت. اما پشت پردهی این تغییر عنوان چه موضوعی هست؟
برای پاسخ به این سوال باید کمی درباره کتاب صحبت کنیم.*
در واقع ما با یک داستان در داستان روبهرو هستیم یا به عبارتی کتاب در کتاب. سوزان بستهای از طریق پست دریافت کرده از طرف ادوارد، شوهر سابقش. داخل این بسته یک نسخه دستنویس از رمانی به قلم ادوارد هست به انضمام یک نامه. ادوارد که مدتها سودای نوشتن در سر داشت بلاخره موفق به خلق رمان شده و از سوزان که مدرس ادبیات هست و احتمالا همچنان مورد اعتماد درخواست کمک برای بهبود کتابش کرده.
اولین موضوعی که سوزان رو به فکر فرو میبره عنوان رمان هست «حیوانات شبرو». عنوانی که برای خود من هم عمیقا کنجکاوی برانگیز بود.
ادوارد در نامه به این اشاره کرده که چندماه بعد برای تعطیلات سال نو به شهر محل زندگی سوزان سفر خواهد کرد و به همین جهت اون فرصت نسبتا زیادی داره تا به خوبی دستنوشته رو بررسی کنه اما در اثر مشغله کاملا فراموشش کرده. زمانی که این موضوع مجدد به خاطرش میاد فقط چند روز تا موعد سررسیدن ادوارد باقی مونده. از طرفی روبهرو شدن با همسر سابق در حالی که سالها از جدایی گذشته و از زندگی فعلیت راضی هستی، در حالی که دوباره ازدواج کردی و چندبار بچه دار شدی کار سادهای نیست. مسیر زندگی و درگیر روزمره شدن وقایع و خاطرات گذشته رو در سایه برده، با این توضیح که حالا با کوچکترین اثری از نور همه چیز کاملا روشن و واضح شده.
ادوارد به زودی از راه میرسه و سوزان باید سریعتر شروع به مطالعه کنه. اما ادوارد چطور یکباره نویسنده شد؟ حالا که به آرزوش رسیده چرا باید سوزان رو وارد این ماجرا کنه؟ سوال های متعددی ذهن سوزان رو مغشوش کرده ولی اون فعلا فرصت کافی برای پیدا کردن پاسخشون رو نداره. بلاخره با بی میلی و از جهت قرار گرفتن در عمل انجام شده، فقط بخاطر برداشتن بار تقاضای ادوارد از روی دوش خودش شروع به مطالعه میکنه. ابهامات ماقبل مطالعه کم نبود اما با قرارگرفتن در مسیر داستان این ابهامات بیشتر و اون قبلیها پررنگتر میشن. احتمالا ادوارد با هوشمندی پای سوزان رو داخل این مرداب کشیده ولی زمان زیادی نمونده تا خودش مستقیما به این سوالات پاسخ بده، باید تا انتهای کتاب منتظر حضور ادوارد باشیم.
و اما داستان حیوانات شبرو
این داستان تم جنایی-معمایی داره و به راحتی اسپویل پذیر هست. پس بهتره چیزی دربارهاش ندونید تا بدون پیش فرض از مطالعه لذت ببرید. من هم به همین جهت صرفا سرنخ کوتاهی بهتون میدم.
یک خانواده سه نفره(پدر، مادر و دختر) با خودرو شخصی در حال سفر بین ایالتی هستند. یک تصادف عجیب و مرموز با خودرویی شامل سه مرد باعث توقف اونها میشه. درگیری بین رانندهها بالا میگیره و تصمیم نهایی این هست که در اولین شهر به پلیس مراجعه کنند. هر کدوم دیگری رو مقصر این رخداد میدونه. برای اطمینان به اینکه خودروها در مسیر ازهم فاصله نگیرند یا احیانا فرار نکنند افراد بین دو خودرو پخش میشن. مادر و دختر به زور سوار خودرو دوم میشن و یکی از اونها با پدر خانواده همراهی میکنه. از این حرکت بوی خوبی به مشام نمیرسه و رنگ آدمربایی میده. اما هیچی قابل حدس نیست و برای پی بردن به سرانجام وقایع باید با داستان پیش رفت.
تم
در کنار فضای معمایی و کمی هم جنایی بودن داستان این نگاه درست و دقیق نیست. در واقع بهتره بگم که کامل نیست. فضای داستان بیشتر روی واکاوی احساسات و روان آدمی متمرکز شده. به این صورت که وقایع داستان باعث تشویش هرچه بیشتر سوزان میشه و در حالی که درگیر یادآوری خاطرات شده مرتب با اتمام هر بخش از کتاب به فکر فرو میره و گاها دنبال انطباق داستان و شخصیتهای اون با واقعیت زندگی خودش هست و بیشتر سردرگم میشه. شاید حتی بشه گفت عشق و زندگی مشترک دغدغه اصلی نویسنده است.
کلام پایانی
بیشتر از این نمیگم تا خودتون بخونید. فقط توصیه میکنم با انتظار یک داستان جنایی نفسگیر سراغ این کتاب نیاید که قطعا میخوره تو ذوقتون. همینطور که گفتم جنایت فقط بستر مناسب برای بسط دادن تفکرات شخصیتهاست نه بیشتر. به همین جهت اگر اندکی کم حوصله و تندخوان هستید ترجیحا سراغ این کتاب نیاید. اما اگر به کتابهای دردناک علاقهمند هستید و در متن فرو میرید این کتاب برای شماست.
* بعد از اکران فیلم و توجه مجدد بازار نشر به کتاب عنوان فیلم و کتاب در نسخه اصلی(انگلیسی) یکسان سازی شد که بازخورد بهتری بگیره و از سردرگمی مخاطبین جلوگیری کنه. هرچند که ثبت این عنوان روی کتاب منطقیتر بهنظر میاد چون چیزی نزدیک به 95 درصد حجم کتاب رو متن حیوانات شبرو به خودش اختصاص داده و ما در 5 درصد باقی مانده با سوزان و زندگیش روبهرو هستیم و درواقع حیوانات شبرو کتاب اصلی هست اما شخصا عنوان تونی و سوزان رو بیشتر میپسندم.
-اولین کتاب 2025
بیستونه دی صفر سه
کتاب«تونی و سوزان»سال 1993 منتشر شد. سال 2016 بر اساس این رمان یک فیلم سینمایی با نام«حیوانات شبرو»اکران شد که بعد از سالها و حتی مرگ نویسنده توجهات رو به این کتاب معطوف کرد. همینطور که مترجم فارسی بعد از تماشای این فیلم تصمیم به ترجمه کتاب گرفت. اما پشت پردهی این تغییر عنوان چه موضوعی هست؟
برای پاسخ به این سوال باید کمی درباره کتاب صحبت کنیم.*
در واقع ما با یک داستان در داستان روبهرو هستیم یا به عبارتی کتاب در کتاب. سوزان بستهای از طریق پست دریافت کرده از طرف ادوارد، شوهر سابقش. داخل این بسته یک نسخه دستنویس از رمانی به قلم ادوارد هست به انضمام یک نامه. ادوارد که مدتها سودای نوشتن در سر داشت بلاخره موفق به خلق رمان شده و از سوزان که مدرس ادبیات هست و احتمالا همچنان مورد اعتماد درخواست کمک برای بهبود کتابش کرده.
اولین موضوعی که سوزان رو به فکر فرو میبره عنوان رمان هست «حیوانات شبرو». عنوانی که برای خود من هم عمیقا کنجکاوی برانگیز بود.
ادوارد در نامه به این اشاره کرده که چندماه بعد برای تعطیلات سال نو به شهر محل زندگی سوزان سفر خواهد کرد و به همین جهت اون فرصت نسبتا زیادی داره تا به خوبی دستنوشته رو بررسی کنه اما در اثر مشغله کاملا فراموشش کرده. زمانی که این موضوع مجدد به خاطرش میاد فقط چند روز تا موعد سررسیدن ادوارد باقی مونده. از طرفی روبهرو شدن با همسر سابق در حالی که سالها از جدایی گذشته و از زندگی فعلیت راضی هستی، در حالی که دوباره ازدواج کردی و چندبار بچه دار شدی کار سادهای نیست. مسیر زندگی و درگیر روزمره شدن وقایع و خاطرات گذشته رو در سایه برده، با این توضیح که حالا با کوچکترین اثری از نور همه چیز کاملا روشن و واضح شده.
ادوارد به زودی از راه میرسه و سوزان باید سریعتر شروع به مطالعه کنه. اما ادوارد چطور یکباره نویسنده شد؟ حالا که به آرزوش رسیده چرا باید سوزان رو وارد این ماجرا کنه؟ سوال های متعددی ذهن سوزان رو مغشوش کرده ولی اون فعلا فرصت کافی برای پیدا کردن پاسخشون رو نداره. بلاخره با بی میلی و از جهت قرار گرفتن در عمل انجام شده، فقط بخاطر برداشتن بار تقاضای ادوارد از روی دوش خودش شروع به مطالعه میکنه. ابهامات ماقبل مطالعه کم نبود اما با قرارگرفتن در مسیر داستان این ابهامات بیشتر و اون قبلیها پررنگتر میشن. احتمالا ادوارد با هوشمندی پای سوزان رو داخل این مرداب کشیده ولی زمان زیادی نمونده تا خودش مستقیما به این سوالات پاسخ بده، باید تا انتهای کتاب منتظر حضور ادوارد باشیم.
و اما داستان حیوانات شبرو
این داستان تم جنایی-معمایی داره و به راحتی اسپویل پذیر هست. پس بهتره چیزی دربارهاش ندونید تا بدون پیش فرض از مطالعه لذت ببرید. من هم به همین جهت صرفا سرنخ کوتاهی بهتون میدم.
یک خانواده سه نفره(پدر، مادر و دختر) با خودرو شخصی در حال سفر بین ایالتی هستند. یک تصادف عجیب و مرموز با خودرویی شامل سه مرد باعث توقف اونها میشه. درگیری بین رانندهها بالا میگیره و تصمیم نهایی این هست که در اولین شهر به پلیس مراجعه کنند. هر کدوم دیگری رو مقصر این رخداد میدونه. برای اطمینان به اینکه خودروها در مسیر ازهم فاصله نگیرند یا احیانا فرار نکنند افراد بین دو خودرو پخش میشن. مادر و دختر به زور سوار خودرو دوم میشن و یکی از اونها با پدر خانواده همراهی میکنه. از این حرکت بوی خوبی به مشام نمیرسه و رنگ آدمربایی میده. اما هیچی قابل حدس نیست و برای پی بردن به سرانجام وقایع باید با داستان پیش رفت.
تم
در کنار فضای معمایی و کمی هم جنایی بودن داستان این نگاه درست و دقیق نیست. در واقع بهتره بگم که کامل نیست. فضای داستان بیشتر روی واکاوی احساسات و روان آدمی متمرکز شده. به این صورت که وقایع داستان باعث تشویش هرچه بیشتر سوزان میشه و در حالی که درگیر یادآوری خاطرات شده مرتب با اتمام هر بخش از کتاب به فکر فرو میره و گاها دنبال انطباق داستان و شخصیتهای اون با واقعیت زندگی خودش هست و بیشتر سردرگم میشه. شاید حتی بشه گفت عشق و زندگی مشترک دغدغه اصلی نویسنده است.
کلام پایانی
بیشتر از این نمیگم تا خودتون بخونید. فقط توصیه میکنم با انتظار یک داستان جنایی نفسگیر سراغ این کتاب نیاید که قطعا میخوره تو ذوقتون. همینطور که گفتم جنایت فقط بستر مناسب برای بسط دادن تفکرات شخصیتهاست نه بیشتر. به همین جهت اگر اندکی کم حوصله و تندخوان هستید ترجیحا سراغ این کتاب نیاید. اما اگر به کتابهای دردناک علاقهمند هستید و در متن فرو میرید این کتاب برای شماست.
* بعد از اکران فیلم و توجه مجدد بازار نشر به کتاب عنوان فیلم و کتاب در نسخه اصلی(انگلیسی) یکسان سازی شد که بازخورد بهتری بگیره و از سردرگمی مخاطبین جلوگیری کنه. هرچند که ثبت این عنوان روی کتاب منطقیتر بهنظر میاد چون چیزی نزدیک به 95 درصد حجم کتاب رو متن حیوانات شبرو به خودش اختصاص داده و ما در 5 درصد باقی مانده با سوزان و زندگیش روبهرو هستیم و درواقع حیوانات شبرو کتاب اصلی هست اما شخصا عنوان تونی و سوزان رو بیشتر میپسندم.
-اولین کتاب 2025
بیستونه دی صفر سه
September 29, 2020
Solid 4*
Now a major Tom Ford movie NOCTURNAL ANIMALS who probably everyone saw already.
I am not sure why it has such a low rating on GR. I presume people are expecting a thriller or a detective story. It is not that at all.
It is a book in a book. Susan gets a book manuscript called “Nocturnal animals” from her ex husband whom she separated 20 years ago. Reading a very brutal and tragic story she tries to understand and look back at their life together. Is it some kind of revenge?
Nice marriage study where there is no good characters. And god TONY in Nocturnal animals was so annoying!
It’s a shame that I saw movie before reading the book
Now a major Tom Ford movie NOCTURNAL ANIMALS who probably everyone saw already.
I am not sure why it has such a low rating on GR. I presume people are expecting a thriller or a detective story. It is not that at all.
It is a book in a book. Susan gets a book manuscript called “Nocturnal animals” from her ex husband whom she separated 20 years ago. Reading a very brutal and tragic story she tries to understand and look back at their life together. Is it some kind of revenge?
Nice marriage study where there is no good characters. And god TONY in Nocturnal animals was so annoying!
It’s a shame that I saw movie before reading the book
April 28, 2015
The most gripping, unusual, elegantly written fiction I’ve read in some time. Though “postmodern mysteries” too often trend toward the over-precious and self-absorbed, this one delivers in a very fundamental, even insidious way. Ex-husband Edward, after twenty years of separation, sends remarried ex-wife his manuscript about a man whose wife and daughter are abducted, raped, and murdered along an empty stretch of Pennsylvania freeway, after which he stumbles into something akin to revenge. The book-within-a-book is riveting, but it’s Susan’s response to what she didn’t know about Edward, and thus herself, that lifts an otherwise excellent read to the level of the unforgettable.
March 31, 2017
Originally published as Tony and Susan, Nocturnal Animals is described on the cover as "extraordinary", "nail-biting", "truly horrifying", "gripping and unsettling", "absorbing, terrifying, beautiful and appalling, unforgettable". So, I thought I was in for a thrilling ride.
It's the story of Susan Morrow, who receives a manuscript from her ex-husband Ed. Ed and Susan haven't spoken in years, so this is completely out of the blue. Susan reads the novel in three sittings, and we get to read it with her, so the chapters are split between Ed's novel (called Nocturnal Animals, hence the title) and Susan's reaction to it. We also get chapters about Susan's life. Ed has told Susan he will be visiting and wants to speak to her about the book as "she was always his best critic."
The novel is disturbing - a man (Tony) is travelling in a car with his wife and daughter when they're ran off the road by a group of thugs. Tony is driven off in one car, his wife and daughter in another - and that's the last time he sees them alive. We follow Tony's journey to find justice for his family and to seek revenge.
Ed's novel was choppy - it's hard to get into it at first, but then the story takes off. I really enjoyed the first part - I actually enjoyed the entire first 150 pages or so of this novel as a whole, I liked the build up and I liked Susan's reaction. I hated Tony, I thought he was a fool, but that usually isn't enough to turn me off a book. What turned me off here was the promise of action, the hint of excitement - why is Susan worried? Is this a threat from Ed? Is he plotting something? Is there something wrong? Is it a message to Susan? I raced through Ed's novel to get to Susan's "real life" chapters and was treated to pages and pages of her reminiscing about stuff that had happened when she was married to Ed, or about wondering if her new boring husband Arnold was being faithful. It was so, so boring.
A "gripping, thrilling ride" this is not. Yes, Ed's fictional story is mildly interesting, but it just reads like an amateur crime novel in need of a good editor (which it is, I suppose). I feel like we were being set up for something and it just didn't happen. I feel duped.
Total and utter waste of reading time - the story within a story has been a thing for centuries (Shakespeare even did it) - and I like it - but it only makes sense if there's a connection between fiction and reality, otherwise it's just a woman reading a boring book. Or, in this case, a woman who spent the guts of two weeks reading a boring book about a woman reading a boring book.
It's the story of Susan Morrow, who receives a manuscript from her ex-husband Ed. Ed and Susan haven't spoken in years, so this is completely out of the blue. Susan reads the novel in three sittings, and we get to read it with her, so the chapters are split between Ed's novel (called Nocturnal Animals, hence the title) and Susan's reaction to it. We also get chapters about Susan's life. Ed has told Susan he will be visiting and wants to speak to her about the book as "she was always his best critic."
The novel is disturbing - a man (Tony) is travelling in a car with his wife and daughter when they're ran off the road by a group of thugs. Tony is driven off in one car, his wife and daughter in another - and that's the last time he sees them alive. We follow Tony's journey to find justice for his family and to seek revenge.
Ed's novel was choppy - it's hard to get into it at first, but then the story takes off. I really enjoyed the first part - I actually enjoyed the entire first 150 pages or so of this novel as a whole, I liked the build up and I liked Susan's reaction. I hated Tony, I thought he was a fool, but that usually isn't enough to turn me off a book. What turned me off here was the promise of action, the hint of excitement - why is Susan worried? Is this a threat from Ed? Is he plotting something? Is there something wrong? Is it a message to Susan? I raced through Ed's novel to get to Susan's "real life" chapters and was treated to pages and pages of her reminiscing about stuff that had happened when she was married to Ed, or about wondering if her new boring husband Arnold was being faithful. It was so, so boring.
A "gripping, thrilling ride" this is not. Yes, Ed's fictional story is mildly interesting, but it just reads like an amateur crime novel in need of a good editor (which it is, I suppose). I feel like we were being set up for something and it just didn't happen. I feel duped.
Total and utter waste of reading time - the story within a story has been a thing for centuries (Shakespeare even did it) - and I like it - but it only makes sense if there's a connection between fiction and reality, otherwise it's just a woman reading a boring book. Or, in this case, a woman who spent the guts of two weeks reading a boring book about a woman reading a boring book.
November 19, 2020
It's a story within a story. It examines the reality of life versus the reality we choose to see, and what we will do to protect that chosen reality.
Susan, the protagonist, reads the tragic story of Tony, a character created by her ex husband Edward, whom she has not seen for over two decades. Out of the blue, she receives a manuscript that Edward has written with a request to critique it. Though leery of his reasons for contacting her after so many years, she prepares herself for what she will or will not find in his story and determines that she will put past personal grievances aside in order to give a fair and unbiased review.
At first, Susan is drawn in by the imminent danger of the story, but as she delves deeper into Tony's story, she finds herself sympathizing with him, even as she condemns his actions. She begins to question her own character as she examines Tony's, and she realizes the similarities in their thoughts and reasoning.Was this Edward's intention all along, or is she reading more into his request for her critique than is warranted?
This book made me think, made me question what I myself would do in such circumstances, not just Tony's, but Susan's as well. How often do we blind ourselves to the truth in order to create a reality we can live with?
The subtlety Wright uses to show the parallels between Susan and Tony could almost be missed, but Wright deftly incorporates hints within Susan's inner dialogue and places it at key points throughout the story to keep the reader from going too far astray.
I really enjoyed this book. It gave me pause, put me at odds with both characters, and then made me consider how I truly compared to both protagonists.
Well played, Mr. Wright. RIP, sir.
Susan, the protagonist, reads the tragic story of Tony, a character created by her ex husband Edward, whom she has not seen for over two decades. Out of the blue, she receives a manuscript that Edward has written with a request to critique it. Though leery of his reasons for contacting her after so many years, she prepares herself for what she will or will not find in his story and determines that she will put past personal grievances aside in order to give a fair and unbiased review.
At first, Susan is drawn in by the imminent danger of the story, but as she delves deeper into Tony's story, she finds herself sympathizing with him, even as she condemns his actions. She begins to question her own character as she examines Tony's, and she realizes the similarities in their thoughts and reasoning.Was this Edward's intention all along, or is she reading more into his request for her critique than is warranted?
This book made me think, made me question what I myself would do in such circumstances, not just Tony's, but Susan's as well. How often do we blind ourselves to the truth in order to create a reality we can live with?
The subtlety Wright uses to show the parallels between Susan and Tony could almost be missed, but Wright deftly incorporates hints within Susan's inner dialogue and places it at key points throughout the story to keep the reader from going too far astray.
I really enjoyed this book. It gave me pause, put me at odds with both characters, and then made me consider how I truly compared to both protagonists.
Well played, Mr. Wright. RIP, sir.
November 30, 2020
2.5 stars, rounded up.
This was ok, I guess. Not what I was expecting (I thought it was a thriller, it’s more of a drama). It had a very strong beginning that drew me in immediately, but then proceeded to meander for 300 pages. I could not have cared less about Susan or her domestic issues, and her inner monologue whilst reading the book - her thoughts on Nocturnal Animals, specifically- were long-winded bouts of nonsense that read, to me, like Austin Wright was trying way too hard to come across as deep and smart and philosophical but it did not work.
But the story-within-the-story, Nocturnal Animals (the book that the main character Susan was reading, and that we the reader were therefore also reading), kept me turning the pages. It was far fetched but it was supposed to be and I found myself wanting to know what was going to happen to Tony and what he would do next. This was the redeeming factor for me, although this too got a bit too slow in parts.
I probably won’t read anything else Austin Wright has written but I am glad I’ve read this. Now I can watch the movie, ha.
This was ok, I guess. Not what I was expecting (I thought it was a thriller, it’s more of a drama). It had a very strong beginning that drew me in immediately, but then proceeded to meander for 300 pages. I could not have cared less about Susan or her domestic issues, and her inner monologue whilst reading the book - her thoughts on Nocturnal Animals, specifically- were long-winded bouts of nonsense that read, to me, like Austin Wright was trying way too hard to come across as deep and smart and philosophical but it did not work.
But the story-within-the-story, Nocturnal Animals (the book that the main character Susan was reading, and that we the reader were therefore also reading), kept me turning the pages. It was far fetched but it was supposed to be and I found myself wanting to know what was going to happen to Tony and what he would do next. This was the redeeming factor for me, although this too got a bit too slow in parts.
I probably won’t read anything else Austin Wright has written but I am glad I’ve read this. Now I can watch the movie, ha.
September 14, 2025
Weird, really really weird. This is a book about a woman who reads a book written by her ex husband, the book is a revenge thriller called Nocturnal Animals. As she's reading the book she muses about her current marriage and her previous marriage and the choices she's made.
I think the author has tried to write something different but it's just really strange and the two bits don't really fit together. It does Start of quite well, in fact really well, but then descends into a rabble about self loathing and the auth0rs obsession with the penis. All the characters are unlikeable, I just didn't care in the end.
I think the author has tried to write something different but it's just really strange and the two bits don't really fit together. It does Start of quite well, in fact really well, but then descends into a rabble about self loathing and the auth0rs obsession with the penis. All the characters are unlikeable, I just didn't care in the end.
September 21, 2020
Durante tres noches acompañamos a una mujer en la lectura de un manuscrito titulado 'Animales nocturnos', que su ex-marido, después de muchos años sin tener contacto, le ha enviado para saber su opinión.
Lo que más me ha gustado es el juego metaliterario: estar leyendo la historia de una mujer que está leyendo otra historia y ver cómo la lectura le evoca diferentes momentos de su vida, de la misma manera que a mí, como lectora, me está sugiriendo otros pensamientos.
A través de la novela va recordando episodios de su matrimonio anterior y también de su situación actual y al mismo tiempo trata de dilucidar qué hay de cierto en la ficción que su ex-marido ha escrito.
El tema es interesante pero el desarrollo a veces es un poco confuso y no acaba de satisfacer las expectativas.
Hay una película de 2016, basada en el libro, titulada 'Animales nocturnos' con Jake Gyllenhall y Amy Adams, que ha tenido críticas muy positivas.
Lo que más me ha gustado es el juego metaliterario: estar leyendo la historia de una mujer que está leyendo otra historia y ver cómo la lectura le evoca diferentes momentos de su vida, de la misma manera que a mí, como lectora, me está sugiriendo otros pensamientos.
A través de la novela va recordando episodios de su matrimonio anterior y también de su situación actual y al mismo tiempo trata de dilucidar qué hay de cierto en la ficción que su ex-marido ha escrito.
El tema es interesante pero el desarrollo a veces es un poco confuso y no acaba de satisfacer las expectativas.
Hay una película de 2016, basada en el libro, titulada 'Animales nocturnos' con Jake Gyllenhall y Amy Adams, que ha tenido críticas muy positivas.
November 26, 2021
Τέλειο, συγκλονιστικό, ένα βιβλίο μέσα σε βιβλίο, προκλητικό, σκοτεινό, ένας βαθύς διαλογισμός για το συγγραφικό ταλέντο σε σχέση με τον εκάστοτε χαρακτήρα, την προσέγγιση στην τέχνη άρα και στην ζωή εν γένει και τις σχέσεις των ανθρώπων.
Αυτές που αλλάζουν με το πέρασμα του χρόνου γεμίζουν, φουσκώνουν εμπειρίες και αναμνήσεις μα το βασικό υλικό που φτιάχτηκε η νόηση της πνευματικότητας τους, η ταυτότητα τους η μοναδική για τον καθένα και αδέκαστη μα και η ύπαρξη που πάντα προδικάζει τα μελλούμενα μέσα απο τις στάσεις ζωής στην πρώτη νιότη, η μόρφωση, η κουλτούρα, η κοσμοθεωρία που θαμπώνει με διάφορες πυκνότητες ομίχλης κάθε νου χωριστά και κάθε ιδιοσυγκρασία που δρα πάντα σε σχέση με κάποιον άλλον για να μπορεί να υπάρξει μες τη μοναδικότητα της.
Η μοίρα είναι σχεδόν πάντα παραγωγό της συνύπαρξης. Στο συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο το ζευγάρι που βλέπουμε αρχικά καταφέρνει να σταθεί μέσα από την τέχνη στα πόδια της συνείδησης. Και έτσι η σχέση τους αλλά και οι ίδιοι αποκτούν ψυχή και ταυτότητα.
Η μοναδικότητα εδώ ανάμεσα τους αγωνιζόταν να σταθεί πλάι σε μιαν άλλη, οι δυο τους ήταν ανταγωνιστικοί, διψούσαν για σύγκριση όχι για συντροφιά και έτσι έχασαν το παιχνίδι διότι κάθε μοναδικότητα έτσι όπως το διαβάζουμε και το νιώθουμε και το καταλαβαίνουμε ,μέσα από αυτά τα υπέροχα μελανιασμένα λόγια του συγγραφέα, κάθε μοναδικότητα πρέπει να έχει δική της ταυτότητα.
Η έλλειψη ταυτότητας σχετίζεται εδώ πέρα με την απόλυτη έννοια της μοναξιάς, σ’ αυτή τη σχέση που δηλώνεται ως κυριαρχική για το βιβλιο, οι χαρακτήρες του συγγραφέα , το νεαρό ζευγάρι, γεννιέται, ζει και πεθαίνει.
Μέσα του κρύβονται δυστυχίες ή ευτυχίες έννοιες που από μόνες τους δε λένε τίποτα γιατί είναι και παγίδες και παγιδευμένες.
Ο Τόνυ πάντα καλλιτέχνης, νιώθει αδικημένος,
πάντα διαφορετικός αλλά χαρακτηριστικά πολύ αδύναμος.
Οι λέξεις ξέρουν τόσο καλά να κάνουν πολέμους,
ξέρουν τόσο καλά να αγαπάνε να μισούν να αγωνίζονται να αγνοούν, αυτή η αίσθηση των εννοιών τους είναι πράγματα ρευστά που πλανιούνται ή όχι, μα αποκαλύπτουν αυτούς που κρύβονται στη σκιά της ζωής τους με πανικό, αφού χάνουν ό,τι αγαπούν και ντρέπονται για την σπατάλη της ζωής τους.
Και όπως καταλαβαίνουμε όλοι, η κατάσταση μέσα σ’ αυτή τη σχέση του Τονυ και της Σούζαν δημιουργούσε και δημιουργεί στο μυαλό του αναγνώστη ένα πανικό, ένα πανικό που κρύβεται πίσω από ένα θρίλερ, ένα γραμμένο θρίλερ απο τον αδύναμο άνδρα μιας σχέσης αναφορικά με έναν δειλό άνδρα μιας οικογένειας. Η οικογένεια του που πέφτει θύμα απαγωγής, εγκληματικής βίας και τρομακτικού χάους.
Πίσω από αυτό το πολυεπίπεδο έργο μπορούμε να διακρίνουμε όλη την απολογία ψυχής του συγγραφέα.
Δεκαπέντε χρόνια μετά το χωρισμό του στέλνει στην πρώην σύζυγό του το πρώτο του ολοκληρωμένο μυθιστόρημα καθώς εξακολουθεί να την θεωρεί την καλύτερη κριτικό του.
Μέσα όμως από αυτό το μυθιστόρημα βγαίνει η δική του στάση ζωής, η δική του κοσμοθεωρία,η δική του ανημποριά, η δική του αδυναμία, η δική του δειλία,
που κάποτε πριν χρόνια δεν είχε το θάρρος, δεν είχε το κουράγιο να σταθεί στα πόδια του και να διεκδικήσει την αγάπη, να διεκδικήσει την Σούζαν.
Να παλέψει για το παιδί που έχασε για πάντα και τη γυναίκα που αγάπησε παράφορα και άτολμα.
Αυτό εκφράζεται μέσα από το θρίλερ του πρώτου βιβλίου, ναι δεν είχα τη δύναμη να σε κρατήσω δεν είχα τη δύναμη να σε διεκδικήσω δεν είχα τη δύναμη να κάνω πράξεις τολμηρές να πάρω ρίσκο και ξέχασα για πάντα, σε έχασα για πάντα.
Αυτό το βιβλίο αφήνει πολλές πόρτες ανοιχτές είναι βαθύ είναι σκοτεινό είναι τολμηρό είναι ριψοκίνδυνο είναι επικίνδυνο παίζει με το μυαλό του αναγνώστη, αλλά σίγουρα δεν μπορώ να παραδεχτώ ότι δεν υπάρχει τέλος ή το τέλος είναι ακαταλαβίστικο.
Ακόμα κι αυτό είναι ένα τέλος.
Διάβασα κάπου, σε κάποιες κριτικές πως δεν το κατάλαβαν, το τέλος ήταν ακαταλαβίστικο, το τέλος ήταν αφηρημένο, ήταν άστοχο, ήτανε απότομο, γιατί θα πρέπει να ψάχνουμε να βρούμε ένα τέλος που μας αρέσει εμάς ή ας σκεφτούμε λίγο γιατί τελειώνει έτσι. Μπορεί αυτό το τέλος το ακαταλαβίστικο να είναι η έννοια του.
Πρόκειται για ένα υπέροχο βιβλίο δεν έχω δει την μεταφορά του στην οθόνη,δεν έχω δει την ταινία θα την δω και θα κάνω την σύγκριση, εννοείται όμως πως το βιβλίο θα υπερέχει πάντα.
Καλή ανάγνωση.
Πολλούς και σεμνούς ασπασμούς.
Αυτές που αλλάζουν με το πέρασμα του χρόνου γεμίζουν, φουσκώνουν εμπειρίες και αναμνήσεις μα το βασικό υλικό που φτιάχτηκε η νόηση της πνευματικότητας τους, η ταυτότητα τους η μοναδική για τον καθένα και αδέκαστη μα και η ύπαρξη που πάντα προδικάζει τα μελλούμενα μέσα απο τις στάσεις ζωής στην πρώτη νιότη, η μόρφωση, η κουλτούρα, η κοσμοθεωρία που θαμπώνει με διάφορες πυκνότητες ομίχλης κάθε νου χωριστά και κάθε ιδιοσυγκρασία που δρα πάντα σε σχέση με κάποιον άλλον για να μπορεί να υπάρξει μες τη μοναδικότητα της.
Η μοίρα είναι σχεδόν πάντα παραγωγό της συνύπαρξης. Στο συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο το ζευγάρι που βλέπουμε αρχικά καταφέρνει να σταθεί μέσα από την τέχνη στα πόδια της συνείδησης. Και έτσι η σχέση τους αλλά και οι ίδιοι αποκτούν ψυχή και ταυτότητα.
Η μοναδικότητα εδώ ανάμεσα τους αγωνιζόταν να σταθεί πλάι σε μιαν άλλη, οι δυο τους ήταν ανταγωνιστικοί, διψούσαν για σύγκριση όχι για συντροφιά και έτσι έχασαν το παιχνίδι διότι κάθε μοναδικότητα έτσι όπως το διαβάζουμε και το νιώθουμε και το καταλαβαίνουμε ,μέσα από αυτά τα υπέροχα μελανιασμένα λόγια του συγγραφέα, κάθε μοναδικότητα πρέπει να έχει δική της ταυτότητα.
Η έλλειψη ταυτότητας σχετίζεται εδώ πέρα με την απόλυτη έννοια της μοναξιάς, σ’ αυτή τη σχέση που δηλώνεται ως κυριαρχική για το βιβλιο, οι χαρακτήρες του συγγραφέα , το νεαρό ζευγάρι, γεννιέται, ζει και πεθαίνει.
Μέσα του κρύβονται δυστυχίες ή ευτυχίες έννοιες που από μόνες τους δε λένε τίποτα γιατί είναι και παγίδες και παγιδευμένες.
Ο Τόνυ πάντα καλλιτέχνης, νιώθει αδικημένος,
πάντα διαφορετικός αλλά χαρακτηριστικά πολύ αδύναμος.
Οι λέξεις ξέρουν τόσο καλά να κάνουν πολέμους,
ξέρουν τόσο καλά να αγαπάνε να μισούν να αγωνίζονται να αγνοούν, αυτή η αίσθηση των εννοιών τους είναι πράγματα ρευστά που πλανιούνται ή όχι, μα αποκαλύπτουν αυτούς που κρύβονται στη σκιά της ζωής τους με πανικό, αφού χάνουν ό,τι αγαπούν και ντρέπονται για την σπατάλη της ζωής τους.
Και όπως καταλαβαίνουμε όλοι, η κατάσταση μέσα σ’ αυτή τη σχέση του Τονυ και της Σούζαν δημιουργούσε και δημιουργεί στο μυαλό του αναγνώστη ένα πανικό, ένα πανικό που κρύβεται πίσω από ένα θρίλερ, ένα γραμμένο θρίλερ απο τον αδύναμο άνδρα μιας σχέσης αναφορικά με έναν δειλό άνδρα μιας οικογένειας. Η οικογένεια του που πέφτει θύμα απαγωγής, εγκληματικής βίας και τρομακτικού χάους.
Πίσω από αυτό το πολυεπίπεδο έργο μπορούμε να διακρίνουμε όλη την απολογία ψυχής του συγγραφέα.
Δεκαπέντε χρόνια μετά το χωρισμό του στέλνει στην πρώην σύζυγό του το πρώτο του ολοκληρωμένο μυθιστόρημα καθώς εξακολουθεί να την θεωρεί την καλύτερη κριτικό του.
Μέσα όμως από αυτό το μυθιστόρημα βγαίνει η δική του στάση ζωής, η δική του κοσμοθεωρία,η δική του ανημποριά, η δική του αδυναμία, η δική του δειλία,
που κάποτε πριν χρόνια δεν είχε το θάρρος, δεν είχε το κουράγιο να σταθεί στα πόδια του και να διεκδικήσει την αγάπη, να διεκδικήσει την Σούζαν.
Να παλέψει για το παιδί που έχασε για πάντα και τη γυναίκα που αγάπησε παράφορα και άτολμα.
Αυτό εκφράζεται μέσα από το θρίλερ του πρώτου βιβλίου, ναι δεν είχα τη δύναμη να σε κρατήσω δεν είχα τη δύναμη να σε διεκδικήσω δεν είχα τη δύναμη να κάνω πράξεις τολμηρές να πάρω ρίσκο και ξέχασα για πάντα, σε έχασα για πάντα.
Αυτό το βιβλίο αφήνει πολλές πόρτες ανοιχτές είναι βαθύ είναι σκοτεινό είναι τολμηρό είναι ριψοκίνδυνο είναι επικίνδυνο παίζει με το μυαλό του αναγνώστη, αλλά σίγουρα δεν μπορώ να παραδεχτώ ότι δεν υπάρχει τέλος ή το τέλος είναι ακαταλαβίστικο.
Ακόμα κι αυτό είναι ένα τέλος.
Διάβασα κάπου, σε κάποιες κριτικές πως δεν το κατάλαβαν, το τέλος ήταν ακαταλαβίστικο, το τέλος ήταν αφηρημένο, ήταν άστοχο, ήτανε απότομο, γιατί θα πρέπει να ψάχνουμε να βρούμε ένα τέλος που μας αρέσει εμάς ή ας σκεφτούμε λίγο γιατί τελειώνει έτσι. Μπορεί αυτό το τέλος το ακαταλαβίστικο να είναι η έννοια του.
Πρόκειται για ένα υπέροχο βιβλίο δεν έχω δει την μεταφορά του στην οθόνη,δεν έχω δει την ταινία θα την δω και θα κάνω την σύγκριση, εννοείται όμως πως το βιβλίο θα υπερέχει πάντα.
Καλή ανάγνωση.
Πολλούς και σεμνούς ασπασμούς.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 18, 2015
Loved the conceit at the heart of this book - you the reader are reading 'along with' the main character Susan who is reading a manuscript of her ex-husband's novel. So when we react to the drama or the tension as a reader, so is she. But she is involved directly, because this is her ex-husband's work. So we also see the struggle when she has to put the manuscript down to do the daily chores or to consider her current marriage or her previous one. It's also a book about revenge - revenge is at the heart of the manuscript, but it's also present somewhere in the relationships of the people outside of the book, Susan, her husband and her ex-husband. However for me the novel didn't quite clinch on this and I felt it was slightly over-focused on the manuscript story to the detriment of the story of Susan & those around her. The why this manuscript, in this form and why now at this point of her life were never really successfully answered for me. Still, a worthwhile read
February 20, 2017
2.5 Stars
For a thriller it's pretty slow paced and boring.
For a thriller it's pretty slow paced and boring.
November 24, 2017
Una novela dentro de otra novela. Ambas duras, emotivas y con una carga psicológica brutal. Absolutamente impresionante.
November 30, 2023
This has been on to read pile ever since the movie came out, so 2016!
Whilst I remember enjoying the movie and buying this on the back of it, I never really felt compelled to read it.
In some ways, it's nice to have that distance as I didn't feel the urge to compare.
This is such an interesting structured story within a story as Susan receives a manuscript from her ex-husband, which depicts a terrible crime.
I found myself being far more interested in the actual novel that Susan was reading rather than her sections throughout.
Quite ironic I suppose as Susan became deeply invested in the writing and starts to reapprasing her ex Edward.
Despite a strong start, I found the notion of jumping between the two strands made it quite confusing at times.
Whilst I remember enjoying the movie and buying this on the back of it, I never really felt compelled to read it.
In some ways, it's nice to have that distance as I didn't feel the urge to compare.
This is such an interesting structured story within a story as Susan receives a manuscript from her ex-husband, which depicts a terrible crime.
I found myself being far more interested in the actual novel that Susan was reading rather than her sections throughout.
Quite ironic I suppose as Susan became deeply invested in the writing and starts to reapprasing her ex Edward.
Despite a strong start, I found the notion of jumping between the two strands made it quite confusing at times.
July 20, 2021
Un roman inteligent, ăsta e primul cuvânt care îmi vine în minte
Nu mai știu exact când și de ce am pus pe listă „Tony and Susan”. Dar știu că era acolo și am profitat la un moment dat de niște reduceri de la editură ca să o cumpăr. Așa a ajuns din depozit la mine pe raft, dar mi-a mai trebuit vreun an și ceva să ajung la ea.
Am simțit că i-a venit momentul în weekend, când aveam poftă să mă deconectez cu o carte alertă, care să mă țină în priză. Și am găsit-o.
Ironia e că nu e un thriller.
Când eram pe la jumătate (și-mi plăcea tare), am pus un story și mi-au zis patru persoane că au abandonat-o sau că li s-a părut meh. M-am gândit că poate o dă în bară la final.
Am început-o gândindu-mă obsesiv la legătura dintre Tony and Susan, așteptându-mă la vreo crimă sau un moment aha. Dar mi s-a părut atât de bună tocmai pentru că nu a fost un thriller.
E o carte despre scriitori și cititori, despre nopțile alea în care nu vrei să dormi ca să nu lași cartea din mână (cum am pățit și acum), despre momentul când abia aștepți să ajungi la final, dar totuși îl amâni voit de teamă să nu te dezamăgească.
E o carte care o să-mi rămână în minte mult timp de acum încolo, deși sunt conștientă că nu e chiar o carte pentru toată lumea, e subtitlă și diferită de ce am tot citit în viața mea de cititor. Dar tocmai de aceea simt că merită.
Nu mai știu exact când și de ce am pus pe listă „Tony and Susan”. Dar știu că era acolo și am profitat la un moment dat de niște reduceri de la editură ca să o cumpăr. Așa a ajuns din depozit la mine pe raft, dar mi-a mai trebuit vreun an și ceva să ajung la ea.
Am simțit că i-a venit momentul în weekend, când aveam poftă să mă deconectez cu o carte alertă, care să mă țină în priză. Și am găsit-o.
Ironia e că nu e un thriller.
Când eram pe la jumătate (și-mi plăcea tare), am pus un story și mi-au zis patru persoane că au abandonat-o sau că li s-a părut meh. M-am gândit că poate o dă în bară la final.
Am început-o gândindu-mă obsesiv la legătura dintre Tony and Susan, așteptându-mă la vreo crimă sau un moment aha. Dar mi s-a părut atât de bună tocmai pentru că nu a fost un thriller.
E o carte despre scriitori și cititori, despre nopțile alea în care nu vrei să dormi ca să nu lași cartea din mână (cum am pățit și acum), despre momentul când abia aștepți să ajungi la final, dar totuși îl amâni voit de teamă să nu te dezamăgească.
E o carte care o să-mi rămână în minte mult timp de acum încolo, deși sunt conștientă că nu e chiar o carte pentru toată lumea, e subtitlă și diferită de ce am tot citit în viața mea de cititor. Dar tocmai de aceea simt că merită.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,351 reviews