The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

Boulder by Eva Baltasar, translated by Julia Sanches

I enjoyed Permafrost but haven't read the latest. The first was queer and I think this one is as well.

I really enjoyed this one, but Permafrost edges it out for me

This is the only one on the longlist I've currently read, and I found it just alright and thought it paled in comparison to Permafrost.

I thought Permafrost was incredible and Boulder was one of my most anticipated 2022 reads. It was similar in some ways, but the writing really nosedived in my opinion. The metaphors and similes were absolutely constant (several per page in a very short book) and distracting, pulling me out of the story every time. In many of the instances, I felt the sentence would have been stronger just by ending the sentence before the comparison.

Many people who have similar reading taste to me loved it though, so I think I'm in the minority! I'm still interested in reading the third in the triptych.

they told me mamut is coming out next year! I hope it's more like permafrost writing wise

Yahaira wrote: "I really enjoyed this one, but Permafrost edges it out for me"

I agree there was a lot I liked about this but found Permafrost far more memorable.

I liked this a lot - but haven't got to Permafrost yet.

Rachel wrote: "The metaphors and similes were absolutely constant (several per page in a very short book) and distracting, pulling me out of the story every time. In many of the instances, I felt the sentence would have been stronger just by ending the sentence before the comparison."

I had a problem with this over-use of figurative language as well and wasn't sure if it was a translation issue.

But the working out of ideas in the book and the way it confronts big ticket topics overcame the niggly prose style in my case.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Rachel wrote: "The metaphors and similes were absolutely constant (several per page in a very short book) and distracting, pulling me out of the story every time. In many of the instances, I felt t..."

I agree, although the style didn't irritate me as much as it has others.

I really liked Permafrost as well so am - or was till I read this thread! - looking forward to this

I came to this having not read Permafrost and liked it quite a bit. Interestingly I don't remember disliking the elaborate language either.

“The metaphors and similes were absolutely constant (several per page in a very short book) and distracting, pulling me out of the story every time. In many of the instances, I felt the sentence would have been stronger just by ending the sentence before the comparison.”

This is all I need to know to know that this is not a book for me!

That’s actually the very thing that pulled me out of Nightcrawling. I don’t remember it being an issue with Permafrost.

I don’t remember an abundance of metaphor in Nightcrawling.

It was the abundance of simile that had me rolling my eyes before the end of the first chapter.

Then I must have been really caught up in the story because overuse of simile and metaphor sound sophomoric to me, I can’t read it.

I couldn't handle the writing in Nightcrawling, but I didn't have this issue with Boulder

Yahaira wrote: "I couldn't handle the writing in Nightcrawling, but I didn't have this issue with Boulder"

That's encouraging. I started Boulder today but quickly decided I need to reread Permafrost first. I'm surprised by how different they are. It's a loose triptych.

David wrote: "That’s actually the very thing that pulled me out of Nightcrawling. I don’t remember it being an issue with Permafrost."

I didn't remember experiencing it with Permafrost either which is why I found it so jarring in Boulder. I wish I could have overlooked it because I quite enjoyed the subject matter but I was frustrated with the writing almost straight away so I could never fully sink into the story.

I ended up liking this. Permafrost is a bit more dramatic and substantial, but I do appreciate a novella like Boulder that knows when to stop. Nice to see a longlisted work that centers the experience of a queer woman.

What is the connection between this and Permafrost (well other than same author obviously) ie is it a sequel?

I had understood they were the first two novels of a “triptych that aims to explore the universes of three different women in the first person”.

But then is that the sort of loosely connected triptych which exists more conceptually in the author’s mind. Or the “really should read them in order” type of trilogy. Sounds more like the first?

I haven't read Permafrost (yet) but that didn't prevent me liking Boulder a lot - I don't get the impression it's a sequel as such, so yes, more conceptual as Paul says?

I'm currently reading Boulder (haven't read Permafrost). I'm enjoying the second half of the book more somehow.

More like Ariana H it sounds ie thematically connected

Thanks. Have read Permafrost but re-reading it would have two issues

- I don’t reread books in part as a principle and in part for logistical reasons (see 2nd issue)
- I’d have to buy it again as I didn’t keep it!

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "More like Ariana H it sounds ie thematically connected"

Agreed - and if anything perhaps more tenuous than Harwicz. It was not at all necessary for me to reread Permafrost except to confirm that you do not need to reread Permafrost.

Paul wrote: "But then is that the sort of loosely connected triptych which exists more conceptually in the author’s mind. Or the “really should read them in order” type of trilogy. Sounds more like the first?"

You don't have to read them in order, she's interested in women's lives, and the idea of the novels is that they speak and we listen to their voices,so first person, and that there are overlaps in their experiences. All are queer and all their stories linked to exploring ideas and feelings around the maternal. A not very well-translated by the search engine overview:

"The writer considers that the women of ‘Permagel’, ‘Boulder’ and ‘Mammoth’ have in common, in addition to being lesbians, that they are “somewhat peripheral” characters. “They are in society, but suddenly they leave. They feel very uncomfortable in the society that has touched them,” he said. Baltasar confesses that in this aspect he “mirrors” himself with his characters. “Creating a protagonist for me is a year-round company,” the writer notes. “He is a person who is not real, but for me he is very real,” he added.

Also, the common denominator of the three books is the fact that they reflect on motherhood, one of Baltasar’s “topics of interest,” as she defines it. “I was a very young mother, at the age of 24, and it’s a subject that interests me,” she confesses. However, Baltasar also argues that after the trilogy, motherhood is a topic she “hopes to leave.” “At the end of the leaflet I want to leave the topic of motherhood, to see if I’m able to keep writing other things without it appearing that way,” she says.
https://www.archyde.com/eva-baltasar-...

I've read Permafrost but I'm taking that doesn't seem any need to re-read it (or for anyone who hasn't read it to read it).

no on either count

I've read both of these and each works fine as a standalone piece.

Loved the writing in this. After 500 pages of Janet and John it was a pleasure to read lots of metaphor and simile. So good I immediately reread it (another advantage of 100 page novels).

I just wish it was longer and more substantial. The perspective is the one seldom found in literature and I felt there was a lot of space for exploration. And I quite liked the character as well as the writing.

It's over 100 pages - bit too long for my taste!

My video review: https://youtu.be/iSdyzudsoxQ

I really liked this! If Permafrost is better I need to read it too. So much to talk about in this slim book.

WndyJW wrote: "I really liked this! If Permafrost is better I need to read it too. So much to talk about in this slim book."

Great! What were your thoughts?

I thought Baltasar gave them appropriate names! I loved the intensity, the raw energy of the narrative. I appreciated that by only giving us access to Boulder’s thoughts Samsa was kept an emotional distance so we didn’t have to worry about being fair to Samsa, allowing us to not judge Boulder when she was brutally honest about what she wanted, what she felt she gave up or accommodated for the relationship, what she didn’t want, about her longing for her freedom while not wanting to lose Samsa until (view spoiler)[she did, and then tried too late to rebuild the connection. (hide spoiler)] We knew it was a one sided story.

It was refreshing to see a woman who knew she wanted not to be a mother not change her mind even when she grew to love the child who she was happy (view spoiler)[to see 3 or 4 days a month (hide spoiler)] instead of the mythical maternal gene switching on when the child was born.

I thought Baltasar used the tropes and stereotypes of motherhood to good effect: swollen, milky breasts, child and mother physically creating a union which left Boulder on the outside, new mother friends group, no interest in sex, Samsa’s reluctance to let Boulder have Tinna on her own, literally closing the bedroom door to Boulder. All of that created a new Samsa that was an exaggerated portrait of the mother which put Boulder’s bewilderment and feeling of loss in the face of these changes in starker contrast and explained the distance that grew between them.

The scene (view spoiler)[Boulder walked in on of Samsa, breasts leaking milk, while bringing a mother to orgasm while that mother was breastfeeding her baby was a stunning symbolic representation of the cult like worship of mothering and breastfeeding among some women. (hide spoiler)]

It’s a 5 star book for me!