Pages

Tuesday, June 4, 2019

"The Three Weissmanns of Westport" by Cathleen Schine

"The Three Weissmanns of Westport" by Cathleen Schine is not something I probably would have picked up to read, were it not my library book club's selection for June. The great thing about a book club, of course, is that you're exposed to books /& authors you might not consider reading if left to your own devices -- and sometimes, you find some real gems.

On the flipside, the not-so-great thing about a book club is sometimes the current selection is not one that really interests you at first glance -- and the more you read, the more your first impression is confirmed, and you have to either abandon the book altogether (something I dislike doing) or slog your way through to the end, so that you can still take part in the group discussion in a meaningful way.

Unfortunately, for me, "The Three Weissmanns" falls into the second category.

As the story opens, Betty Weissmann's wealthy husband of 48 years leaves her for a much younger woman and (despite promising "I will be generous") cuts off her credit cards and household accounts, and edges her out of their Central Park apartment in Manhattan. As a woman in her 70s who has never worked a day in her life and has become accustomed to a certain standard of living, Betty is at a loss, until a cousin offers her his rundown beachfront cottage in Westport. Meanwhile, Betty's 50-something daughters from a previous marriage, Annie & Miranda, are facing financial difficulties of their own, and wind up moving into the cottage with their mother.

Several of the cover blurbs/reviews of this book point out that it's an homage to Jane Austen's "Sense and Sensibility," and it does follow the plot of that story loosely. (I read S&S some years ago -- also saw the movie with Kate Winslet & Emma Thompson around the same time -- which is notable for being the only movie I've ever dragged dh to that he really, really did not like in the end!) I found myself agreeing with the Goodreads reviewer who notes, "You should never pay attention to a blurb that reads, "...homage to Jane Austen." It will invariably set you up for a big letdown. Because the truth is, nothing is as good as Jane Austen."

It wasn't a really BAD book, but I didn't think it was really great either. The prose was crisp, the characters were well drawn. I just didn't find them particularly appealing, interesting or sympathetic, and there really wasn't much of a plot to draw me in either. It picked up a bit toward the end, but...

Right now, it has a rating of 2.91 on Goodreads, with most of them (about 40%) falling squarely in the three-star middle range. I would say that's about right.  I gave it 3 stars (2.5, rounded up).

Have you read this book? What did you think of it?

(I won't be back from visiting my parents in time for the next book club meeting, and there is no meeting in August... not sure what September's selection will be!)

This was book #18 that I have read in 2019 to date, bringing me to 75% of my 2019 Goodreads Reading Challenge goal of 24 books.  I am (for the moment, anyway...!) 8 (!!) books ahead of schedule to meet my goal. :) 

1 comment:

  1. I feel like I've read this, but it didn't stick with me... which doesn't say much about it! I didn't always keep lists of what I've read, but the title sounded familiar. But also, like it was a blah book. I love the Goodreads reviewer's insight into when they say "an homage to Jane Austen," hilarious! I feel the same way whenever someone says it's "like Gone Girl," because then I get mad they've spoiled the fact that nothing is as it seems and there will be some earth-shattering revelation that changes everything you thought you knew. And rarely is it anywhere as good as Gillian Flynn. Grrr. Congrats on being sooooo far ahead on your reading challenge! You're a reading fiend!

    ReplyDelete