Many good moments and interesting thoughts, sadly coupled with questionable drivel. The humour sometimes bordered on offensive, as seems too often the case with today's chick lit/comedy fiction.It's the story of three women. Rose Feller is a plain, conservative, bright thirty-year-old lawyer in Philadelphia. Her younger sister Maggie is a learning-disabled, shallow, irresponsible young woman who loses one job after another and keeps a string of boyfriends. Ella Hirsh is an old widow in Florida with a heavy secret. What connects the three of them is the premature death of Rose and Maggie's mother, who was also Ella's only daughter. After an ultimate fight between the sisters, each of them begins a journey of self-discovery that will lead them ito Ella's doorstep, and eventually to happiness.The problem with this book? The first hundred pages. I understand the author's need to establish the setting and the characters, but when you've read any summary or review of the story before picking up the novel, you know what's coming up (Rose and Maggie's fight, Rose and Jim's breakup), and you can't wait till it happens. For a while I really wasn't sure I was going to like the book, because of how impossible it was to get into the story. The characters were like caricatures to me. So, okay, it's a comedy, but that part is not even that funny. It's just... stereotypical, artificial, and over-the-top.Rose is the ugly, brainy, reasonable big sister. (But she's not actually that ugly, she just lacks self-confidence because of her "stepmonster", a botox-filled, snobbish woman who's always trying new "weird" diets, like... vegetarianism. o_0 Yeah, I know; me too.) Maggie is the hot, uneducated, flighty little sister. (But she's not actually that stupid, she just lacks self-confidence because she is a victim of the school system.) It feels like reading large print in bold letters, underlined. Just to be sure that you picked that up: Rose is the ugly, brainy one with a good job; Maggie is the pretty, shallow one without a job. You can repeat after me to check you got it right. (And all the while I was wondering, "Is any real person even remotely like either of these sisters?")I'm being a little cruel here. But the thing that bothered me the most, maybe, was how much it contrasted with the rest of the book. The rest of the book, FYI, I liked. It made me laugh, it brought tears to my eyes, it made me smile and sigh and nod with understanding. But it isn't all in the writing, in the narration, or in the plot. It's in the meaning: how does the rest of the book account for such a beginning? The Rose and Maggie we discover after the Big Fight are suddenly much more interesting, much more real and enjoyable than the ones who were initially introduced. So my question is: how did women who can actually realize and achieve all that, live for respectively 28 and 30 years without showing the smallest inkling that they could?Why would an unmarried, childless lawyer have known about Three Bears Park, a tiny pocket of a playground between Spruce and Pine Streets? Would a woman who took the same route to work every day have known that on the five hundred block of Delancy every house flew a different flag? How could she have suspected that the shops and grocery stores would be bustling at one in the afternoon, filled with people in khakis and sweaters instead of business suits and briefcases?Because she is old enough, duh? Don't get me wrong, I loved this part. I could finally relate to it. My point is that the Big Fight is overplayed. No matter how big it was, I don't believe that it can change a person's life so completely and suddenly. You've got to have it in you, or it's going to be an extremely long road. You can challenge me on this one, but from my perspective, thirty sounds like a mighty advanced age to me to make such naive, baby steps into life. What I loved about the book basically reminded me of my adventures between ages 18 and 22. When you first get into the adult world and learn how men work, how dating works, how jobs work, how city life works. How you work. What you want. What you can do.She was having... what? [...] Fun. Well, not fun exactly, not fun like a party was fun, not fun like getting dressed up and looking great and feeling people's jealous eyes moving over her was fun. It was a challenge―the kind of challenge that her series of dead-end minimum-wage jobs never gave her. It was like being the star of her own detective show.Also, I liked Maggie's story better than Rose's, though it's obvious that Rose is the main character. Now another thing about In Her Shoes, is that many things are very predictable (again, an unfortunate consequence of the obvious, exaggerated, repetitive beginning). Like which guy she's going to end up with, what job would be ideal for her, and whatever would do her good. All this I could tell from a very early point in the novel. But what happens to Maggie and Rose right after the Big Fight, I couldn't have foretold. And it's really cool, and original, and fun. That's what makes In Her Shoes a good book, in spite of everything I criticized. Moreover, remember it's a light and easy read, so if you're the least bit curious, you'll still read through the first hundred pages without too much trouble, like I did. I guess it's worth it.
I read GOOD IN BED, which I think is an earlier novel by this author, and I enjoyed it, so I expected this to be even better. Alas, it took a small step back.Like GOOD IN BED Weiner has a plump protagonist, which I approve of. This, perhaps, is why her work is denigrated as "women's fiction." Rose is a lawyer who has the misfortune of falling in love with one of her firm's partners. Her messed-up sister Maggie comes to visit and basically throws a hand-grenade into Rose's life. Maggie moves out, and the novel follows her, alternating between what Maggie does with her life and what happens to the sister she left behind.The novel is basically a story of change, growth, and reconciliation. Of the two, Maggie's story is more elaborate. She grows the most because she has the farthest to come. However, I found some of her choices hard to comprehend; they seemed out of character for her. The person she is at the end of the book seems completely different from the one at the first of the book. Great arc, but I think she needed to have more pages to make such a drastic change. Rose changes her life too. She takes a leave of absence from work, and then immediately starts a job as a dog walker, of all things. I'm sure that was meant to be a metaphor, but it seemed like a really dumb thing to do, like leaving a medical practice to serve coffee at a kiosk. Especially baffling was that she didn't seem to have any problem with her job prior to the event that made her want to leave. Why not just switch firms?I think the weakness of this book is that it spends nearly equal time with Rose and Maggie, when Maggie is the only one who really needs to change. All of Rose's "changes" seemed like a step in the wrong direction. She moves from a man she adores to one she's ambivalent about. She moves from a career that challenges her intellectually to one that doesn't pay a living wage.I'm not going to get into specifics, but I felt the conclusion, where Maggie figures out how to make it up to her sister, a little forced. There was another scene, as well, that introduced tension that didn't get resolved.I'm not going to say this book isn't worth reading. I did like the characters, and some of their adventures amused me (Maggie at Princeton). However, this isn't Weiner's best work.
What do You think about In Her Shoes (2005)?
In Her Shoes by Jennifer Weiner tells the story of sisters who couldn’t be more different. Rose is a successful Philadelphia lawyer while Maggie is between jobs, apartments and boyfriends. When Rose walks in on Maggie and Jim, the man Rose dreamed of marrying, Rose has had enough.Sick of taking care of her little sister, Rose throws Maggie out, quits her job at the law firm and unexpectedly starts a dog care business. Maggie, with nowhere to go runs to the one place she never thought she’d fit in: Princeton University, Rose’s alma mater. Pretending to be a student, Maggie successfully lives in the library for a semester, until she is found out. With no one else to turn to, Maggie calls her estranged Grandmother who lives in Florida and books a one way ticket to the sunshine state.Ella, Rose and Maggie’s grandmother hasn’t seen her grandchildren since her daughter and their mother died years before. She isn’t quite sure how to begin a relationship with them and is grateful when she has the chance to reunite with Maggie and later Rose.Each chapter is told from the perspective of Rose, Maggie or Ella. Hearing each woman’s voice allowed me to get into their head. At times, I truly hated Maggie, but after hearing her side of the story, I was able to empathize with her.The book has a heartwarming ending and a happy reunion between the two sisters. While the book is a little more dramatic than most sisterly arguments, having a younger sister myself, I was able to relate to some of the annoyances that Weiner describes.Unfortunately, I saw the movie (and didn’t like it) before reading the book. After reading Weiner’s other books, I have to say, this isn’t her best. It was a bit slow to get through and I found it hard to identify with the characters.However, if you are a fan of Good in Bed and Certain Girls, you’ll be delighted to know that Cannie Shapiro makes a cameo in this book!The lesson I took away from this book was that no matter what, sisters are forever. People come and go, but a sister will always be a sister and will be there for you when you least expect it.
—Jessica Lawlor
***Some mild spoilers ahead***Typically, this isn't my kind of book and, if the rating system allowed for half stars, I would have more accurately given it a 2 1/2. This is one of those it was the right book for the right time scenarios. I had just finished reading Nineteen Eighty-Four and Fahrenheit 451 and, suffering a dystopian hangover, needed something light that didn't involve too much thinking. This certainly fit the bill. From the get-go we have a stereotypical plot: two sisters (one pretty but dumb and the other smart but plain) who are insanely jealous of one another despite their bond. However, this stereotype exists because there is a component of jealousy in many same-gender sibling relationships. No matter how much the two love one another, siblings often feel as though they are being compared to one another by parents, family, friends, society at large, and examined for deficiencies that become obvious when compared against their genetic foil. The smart one always wants to be pretty; the pretty one always wants to be smart. The athletic one secretly wants to be a book nerd; the book nerd always wants to be able to dunk a basketball. The one with curly hair always wants straight hair; the one with straight hair longs for curly locks. We end up envying precisely what the other hates or loathes in himself or herself. Maggie and Rose are no exception. There's some rich material to work with here, and Weiner does realistically portray the root causes of the sisters' envy for one another. She also takes some chances: further complicating their relationship is their mother, whose mental illness leads to her death while the girls are still young; the beautiful Maggie suffers from a debilitating learning disability that effectively limits her chances at success in the entertainment industry (she can't read the teleprompter during an MTV audition that she would have otherwise had in the bag); Maggie betrays Rose's trust to such a magnitude that their relationship may be beyond repair (no one can hurt you like a sister and Weiner takes advantage of the opportunity to challenge the sisters' relationship). Oh, and thank heavens she didn't take the route of making the overweight Rose thin by the end.Having said all of that, there were certainly some things I did not love. There's a subplot involving the long-lost maternal grandmother that slowed down the narrative for me. Also, Maggie and Rose just weren't likable characters. These are not two women I would ever want to know in real life. They're self-involved and often petty. I'm also not buying that Rose quit her job to become a dog walker, nor that Maggie lives in the Princeton library and miraculously becomes a literary genius (by the novel's end, Maggie's reading every great literary classic she can get her hands on and spouting poetry like a water fountain). I'm not saying that someone with a learning disability is incapable of doing this, only that Weiner never plausibly made me believe Maggie was capable of doing this. If there was one perk of the inclusion of Maggie's reading of One Art by Elizabeth Bishop, i carry your heart with me(i carry it in by E. E. Cummings, and several classic literary texts, it's that it reminded me that there are certainly better books out there and, even though Weiner's work was somewhat humorous and mildly entertaining, maybe my time would be better served reading some of those. Cross posted at This Insignificant Cinder
—Amanda
I have a feeling I'm going to hate this one. It's already predictable in the first chapter. 1. Selfish, self absorbed girl. 2. The smart, somewhat frumpy sister, who is lonely. Yep I can see where this one is going. :/
—Alicia
