Random: the comment about not having taste but opinions about others at the bottom of page two made me say "hah" and then suddenly think about how this book was so "American", it just popped into my head that American books always have their books, heroes, whatever take themselves as important, British seem the very opposite - hence they have a great impact on me, and Americans often don't. Of course that can't be right, it was just a disconnected pseudo-epiphany, but I wonder if even About A Boy has that same self-obsessed feeling, even if a character also defines himself mostly by society.ETA: before I change my mind again - my antipathy was woken by the comparisons to the show Sex and the City; reading the next few pages (in admittedly painkiller-addled mood) was enjoyable, I liked him not just for the ironing but mostly for saying his friend was much more intelligent though he himself is much better educated, and something similar later re. the wife. Rare thing.Otherwise I wonder if he always splits his novels up into bites like Maupin (who is quoted in the blurb). It makes no sense except as inserts, perhaps, rather than headers. I prefer the ongoing novel style here.ETA: finally finished. Didn't hate it, easy to read, but there are too many things niggling I'd like to get down for myself, and most are due to the reviews on the blurb, which are still not true. He's not a master, not even of small human stuff, he does NOT write ABOUT real estate and marriage, he doesn't touch deeply on any of the subjects like anon internet dating and other OCs let alone celibacy, and what he says about marriage and life are bland snippets of well known facts and opinions, nowhere near anything insightful (can September 11 really elevate a book to "insightful" just by being mentioned a lot? without an actual look at the flight attendants life, ever?). THAT makes me angry because I worry that even intelligent Americans are beyond boring and stupid.I don't even much care that too many females are manipulative and bad for the men.The romantic relationship is clear from the first mention of the other guy, clear even to them, and never even gets to a kiss. I don't think it's just literary pretentions, I think it's true inability to write about "love" and caring. The only quote with a tiny sliver of non-cliché insight was 179 (chapter: In Theory, Yes) where he is "humiliated by desire" and "embarrassed ... mortified" by being overcome by "love".Again, more readable (ie. novellistic) than Maupin, better than Rodi, less loveable than Kenry, and frustrating me so much I wish I had another of his to read (but not Object of Affection, because the film doesn't even allow me the illusion of non-mainstream-potentially-interesting story).*mope* I want something real, someone not shying away from describing instead of writing the opposite of relationships.
Eh. Very light style writing, which is fine. Set in Boston, which is super fun for me. But the main themes/plots are perilously underdeveloped. It's all there, it just evidently needed a massive rewrite and fleshing out that it never got. The love story between William and Edward never really happens. It's all William thinking about it, but somehow realizes it without the aid of a major come to Jesus moment so how do you believe it? I mean, I know what the come to Jesus moment is supposed to be, but it is so tangential it doesn't work. Way too much time is devoted to the side story with other men, esp Didier, with no payoff really. And the side story with Charlotte & Samuel also is never fully developed in a way that makes sense. It's like McCauley avoided tension for his main characters or something. We are told all along - oh this friendship is bad you'll regret it, blah blah, but the payoff on that is very weak. Very weak indeed. Even the relationship with Kumiko lacks oopmph.In short, it's like there are two warring stories - one about real estate deals and shagging random men and one about William developing his relationships. The former is just the backdrop for the important latter, but McCauley gets way to enmeshed in the former and essentially wastes the book on it. So when stuff happens with the latter, it isn't built up properly, doesn't feel like it's a big deal like it should be, etc. This is all pretty frustrating for a book I essentially enjoyed reading. Sadly, I can't recommend it! Hmph.
What do You think about Alternatives To Sex (2007)?
I'm a fan of the fucked up character and this novel's star attraction, William Collins, is definitely one. When he's not trolling the Internet for cheesy hotel hookups with other men, little Willy is obsessing over ironing and the cleanliness of his surroundings. So the novel starts out in a predictably fun for me way. Are men or drugs the answer after all? However, while little snatches of genius like "...you're nearing forty. Just ride it out and do what everyone else does: get your teeth whitened and go on Zoloft." pop up throughout, several months beyond reading it, I can't ultimately remember the plot. Could this be a problem? Probably. Does it detract from the enjoyment I felt while reading it at the time? Not one bit. The title alone should make anyone at least read the book jacket.
—Jennifer
William is a middle aged realtor in Boston, struggling to make sense of life in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. In spite of that very serious sounding description, the book is a mostly lighthearted piece of fluff. William struggles to deal with his emotions--by cleaning obsessively, by engaging in meaningless sex with strangers he meets in chat rooms (the book takes place in 2002 after all), by becoming celibate. There is a wide cast of supporting characters, some more successful than others, some nothing more than people with one characteristic. A good book for the beach. Reminded me of the author's earlier success, "The Object of My Affection"
—David Jay
This book started out on a good note. That was the best part.The characters were introduced, and by the end of the book we learn pretty much nothing about them. There is a couple that fights and is looking for a house, the main characters tennant, and a few other characters that had storylines that never went anywhere. The entire storyline is pretty weak. The main character doesn't have many likeable characteristics. His goal is to become abstinent, and...wait for it...he can never accomplish this goal. Never. He doesn't even try. So i'm confused as to why it's named "Alternatives to Sex," when the main character doesn't even try to find them. It should be renamed "Alternative Sex," as we get to read all about the random sex the character has with other men while he sort of trys to talk himself out of it, but never does.I forced myself through the second half of the book, because I hate to drop books, and when I had 20 pages left, I considered putting the book down for good. I was so close to finishing, but did not care one bit about what happened to the characters by that point, and then skimmed the rest. Maybe my expectations were too high. I was aiming for Nick Hornby, and landed somewhere far away.
—Zachary
