9 Comments

That. Was. AMAZING!! I don’t have anything profound to say about it except this is the kind of book that makes me joyous to be doing the thing I’m doing, that reminds me why it’s all worth it, because someone wrote that. At first I was like meh and then I was like WHAAT and then I was like OH and then I was like *sobbing on the floor.* Truly an accomplishment in the literary fiction genre and reminds me why I like it.

Expand full comment

Picked up this book based on your recommendation. I will be returning to this once I finish it.

Expand full comment

Good because you need to read this book for Novel

of Ideas anyway! 😜

Expand full comment

Reading this post was a great start to my day -- I also rapturously loved 'Wellness' an I can recommend a book to other people or read professional reviews but getting to read this kind of reaction and reflection on Hill's work from another talented writer is another level. Thank you!

Expand full comment

This resonates - I share your (and Nathan’s) emotional connection with the Midwest, also love endless prairies and plains and skies, and have spent a lot of years trying to suck it up and not make people mad!!!

Expand full comment

Also -- I am always recommending Nathan Hill as 'Jonathan Franzen if he liked women and understood the Internet, or possibly vice versa.' Am I being unfair to JF/ should I give 'The Corrections' another go? (I have read and mostly liked 'Freedom' and 'Purity' but I got stuck on the 'professor/student affair' chapter of 'The Corrections ' and have never gone back.

I am very interested in the millennial defense of Franzen tho I think I'm always gonna prefer Hill.

Expand full comment

(I didn't get stuck on the chapter because I objected morally but it is where I got stuck :))

Expand full comment

So basically my fondness for Franzen stems pretty exclusively from Corrections and Freedom: I was blown away by both books, so much that I sought out How to Be Alone and was really comforted by the essay where he admits to feeling stressed that he’s “not reading enough.” I couldn’t get into Purity, though, and haven’t read Crossroads yet, but I’ve heard amazing things. (Also couldn’t get into Twenty-Seventh City and haven’t tried Strong Motion.)

And yes, there’s a definite struggle to write women (though, to be honest, he doesn’t struggle as heavily as DFW did in that area), and his contrarianism and too-cool-to-sell-out Gen X thing can be exhausting. My theory about him is that he’s actually operating out of a place of pretty intense anxiety, and that coupled with formative years spent in Gaddis/Gass/Pynchon Land (the reading diet of pretty much every cishet white dude literary celebrity of his generation), has led him to enact some tired patriarchal stuff that he could stand to be more aware of.

That said, the people for whom he’s become a convenient punching bag often haven’t read him. If they had, they’d know there are WAY worse offenders in the categories of “misogynist asshole” and “elitist Luddite” -- dudes whose behind-the-scenes behavior makes Franzen’s occasional oversexualization of some of his female characters and silly refusal to go on Oprah look pretty quaint. That said, though, I agree with you that I definitely feel more warm/at home/spiritually transported when reading Nathan Hill, but up close the two are dissimilar enough to me that trying to slot them into the same category sometimes feels strange to me 😅

Expand full comment

You know, that's fair, I shouldn't try to fit all the white cis male Midwesterners who write novels of ideas into the same box! And it's also fair to note that JF tends to stand in for a bigger category of writer by people who generally aren't interested in that kind of book. I know when 'The Corrections ' came out I was in my 20s and getting my mind blown by 'White Teeth' and the Regeneration trilogy and 'The Hours' and 'American Gods,' plus I was discovering crime fiction and 'The Sopranos' and I went in skeptical about what a Midwestern family saga was going to say to me -- maybe it's worth a revisit now.

I will always treasure Purity for the throwaway line about the anarchist Pip dated who made her pay for everything because he didn't believe in money (I've. . .met that guy though fortunately not dated him) and I do think the Berlin section is pretty great, but I've sort of forgotten where it goes from there.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Expand full comment