Read Women discussion

Happy New Year everyone! Our January Sci-Fi Fiction read is Sea of Tranquility by Canadian novelist and essayist Emily St. John Mandel.

For those that would like a bit of background about the novel, the following links will take you to reviews by The New York Times and The Guardian.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/30/bo...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/202...

I'm excited about starting off the year with this work. I read Station Eleven and absolutely loved it. This seems to be a very different novel but the author's wonderful writing has you hooked very quickly and I look forward to exploring it with you.

So, who is planning to join us for this read? Have you read any other novels by the author? What expectations do you have for it?

I'm in! I got the Kindle version before it was nominated for our group read so I am excited to join in. I may be a little late with it because I am currently reading a few others that I need to finish first. I did not read Station Eleven but watched the series and was very taken in. I thought of reading the book afterward and may still do that.
Happy New Year.

I have the audiobook from my library and am looking forward to my first experience with this author. Not sure to expect. I don't normally listen to sci fi on audio either so that should be interesting

My library copy should be available soon - Excited to join in!

Started this today. Loving it already!

Okay - I think I am going to give Emily St. John Mandel another shot. I loved Station Eleven, and immediately binge-watched the show. I was so disturbed by things that were changed (not disappointed, disturbed), that it turned me off of her work since she had been a part of the writing of the show. But..... why not? :) Now, I have to get the book - LOL. But hey - my choir gave me a gift certificate to a book store, so...... ;)

I listened to the first hour last night in bed with a migraine. I found the first narrator (Edwin's pov) to be a bit ridiculous with his over the top accent but then it was a different time... The writing is good and kept me listening but I found the subject matter to be a bit meh.

Joining today! I got the eBook version and already saw that it only has 190 pages on my reader... so I'll probably be through with it in a day or a few.
I've never read any other works from that author and I'm not a big fan of sci-fi. In fact, I generally dislike what I've seen so far of the genre as it always seems to center patriarchal society structures, but that's probably more due to me not reading a whole lot to begin with. Expectations? Not sure honestly. I'm open to everything and just hope to spend a nice time reading this book.

I have already read this, so I won't be reading along. Interested to see what y'all think of it.

I finished this last night in print. I won't put in any spoilers yet, but I will say it was one of those books where I was saying out loud "oh! OH!" as pieces fell together. I loved it.

Ryo - I am not a big sci-fi fan either. But this book and the author's first book, Station Eleven, both blew me away. She has a way of making the "what happened" of the dystopia more of a background foundation for the story and centers more on her characters and how they are dealing with life.

Hannah wrote: "I listened to the first hour last night in bed with a migraine. I found the first narrator (Edwin's pov) to be a bit ridiculous with his over the top accent but then it was a different time... The ..."

I'm sorry to hear about your migraine, Hannah. I hope that you are on the mend. I'm impressed that you could even listen to anything in that situation.

I admit to being a little perplexed by the opening chapters. Mostly because I kept thinking "have I purchased the correct novel? This doesn't seem like sci-fi".... until it finally did. So I hope that you keep going

Ryo wrote: "I've never read any other works from that auhor and I'm not a big fan of sci-fi. In fact, I generally dislike what I've seen so far of the genre as it always seems to center patriarchal society structures, but that's probably more due to me not reading a whole lot to begin with."

Glad that you are joining us Ryo and I hope that this is a pleasant sci-fi experience for you. There are actually lots of female sci-fi authors out there. I think it is a fairly popular genre for women as it allows them to create new worlds that destroy that patriarchal structure you mention and allows them to explore alternatives to that. It is still too early for me to decide if this particular novel is a good example of that. I did really enjoy Station Eleven.

I think this is also a lovely segue to send a question out to everyone. It is a question that actually appears in the novel and some suggestions were posed in response but I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks. why do you think that sci-fi and dystopian novels are popular during times such as pandemics or other turbulent or confronting moments of time?

I agree with Liesl, there's a lot of feminist sci fi out there which is very anti-patriarchy. The genre gives a lot of freedom to explore other ways of being for the world/society. Which leads on to my answer to Liesl's excellent question. I think turbulent times motivate readers to look for alternative models for society, when they think that the status quo is crumbling. What could happen next? Although, many dystopias show the worst case scenario (especially for women) so you would think this would only raise anxieties during these times...

Hannah wrote: "I think turbulent times motivate readers to look for alternative models for society, when they think that the status quo is crumbling. What could happen next? Although, many dystopias show the worst case scenario (especially for women) so you would think this would only raise anxieties during these times....."

I feel the same Hannah. I think our disillusion with the present is what makes us crave another alternative. Personally, I think it is hope that keeps us going.

Do you think that the story reflected the dangers of time travel well? How does it compare with other stories that you might have read?

Just a reminder that it is only the first week of January so don't forget to hide spoilers for those that are still reading, or haven't yet started.

I don't read much Sci-fi, but what I have I've mostly enjoyed.

I'm about 1/4 of the way through this one and having a bit of trouble getting into it. I can't seem to connect with any of the characters. Perhaps it's just not be that type of book, or perhaps I need to get further into it.

Interested to hear how others are liking it so far.

Lindsey wrote: "I don't read much Sci-fi, but what I have I've mostly enjoyed.

I'm about 1/4 of the way through this one and having a bit of trouble getting into it. I can't seem to connect with any of the chara..."

Hi Lindsey, I understand what you mean. I would actually say that this is not a typical sci-fi novel, and I think the issue with the characters is that you shift eras so every time you are getting into the story of a character, the story bounces into another era with new characters. Try to hang in as there are connections and once the story is in full swing, it poses some interesting questions about life.

Liesl wrote: "Lindsey wrote: "I don't read much Sci-fi, but what I have I've mostly enjoyed.

I'm about 1/4 of the way through this one and having a bit of trouble getting into it. I can't seem to connect with ..."

Thanks Liesl. I'll definitely keep going and keep an open mind. I'm intrigued at least, to see what's unfolding.

After reading everyone's comments I decided to take a look via Amazon and ended up reading as far as the sample would allow, five chapters. Sci-fi is not a genre I'm drawn to but what I read of this book I really enjoyed. I put in a request via Libby and am hoping it comes available soon.

Both Edwin and Gaspery are second sons. Given the changes that have taken place in society between when Edwin and Gaspery lived, did you notice any similarities between these characters and their stories?

I've finished the novel now and I'm a little disappointed since it felt so short and the motives of Gaspbery are alien to me.

why do you think that sci-fi and dystopian novels are popular during times such as pandemics or other turbulent or confronting moments of time?
I guess people seek comfort in knowing how others might've dealt with their dystopian future, recognizing their own thoughts and feelings expressed through a fictional character. Perhaps it might also be a way to validate the current situation by making it seem drastically less scary compared to a fictional, dystopian future.

Do you think that the story reflected the dangers of time travel well? How does it compare with other stories that you might have read?
I don't think the story really makes the dangers apparent. Sure, it's seen as dangerous, is highly restricted and only a few well-trained selected people are allowed to time travel to begin with, yet when thinking about it, even the slightest difference would be enough to potentially divide the past into another, different timeline. So having time travelers to begin with is a huge risk by itself already.
I'm not really sure how that Time Institution even arrived at the conclusion that time travel, no matter how restricted and carefully vetted the travelers, should be possible to begin with. Then, there's also a huge track record of them messing up several times.

I finished the book last night and I enjoyed it. As far as scifi novels go, this one was more cerebral and literary. Not too hard on the scifi elements. For me this is a meditative piece of fiction. It is slow moving and involving. For me the book succeeds on its literary merits. As far as its scifi merits... eh.

The novel doesn't explore the scifi elements. It's not about the time travel aspects, those are vehicles for the commentary. Its almost written for people who are not interested in scifi but in the "fish out of water" tale. We are told the rules of time travel but no exploration of those elements or the rationality of them. Scifi is rife with this type of storytelling aka "deus ex machina" aka it's "magic" or no real work takes place in the story regarding the foundation (established narrative). There is a lot of very interesting things alluded to here but no exploration, just an analysis of the fallout. I was interested in the notion that there are multiple entities capable of time travel and how does the Time Institution determine their effects as opposed to other folks meddling. The method of punishment for deviation seemed political in nature not commiserate with the crime(?). The who Gaspery conundrum is an infinite loop. Is he named after the character or is the charater named after him. Etc. The world building in the novel was full of opportunity for exploration, but Mandel seemed more interested in her characters than the world they inhabit.

Ryo wrote: "I've finished the novel now and I'm a little disappointed since it felt so short and the motives of Gaspbery are alien to me...."

Even though the stories are connected via Gaspery, the author has established several separate stories and, like you, I felt the ending was a bit rushed. Apart from Edwin's story, we didn't really get any closure about the lives of Mirella, Olive or Zoey. It felt like there were too many loose ends.

Monica wrote: "I finished the book last night and I enjoyed it. As far as scifi novels go, this one was more cerebral and literary. Not too hard on the scifi elements. For me this is a meditative piece of fiction..."

I couldn't agree more, Monica. I felt like it had aspirations of being a contemplative piece about time travel but it never delved into the consequences of altering history. If Edwin's story is a reflection of the author's stance then (view spoiler)[ it suggests that the alterations don't matter because Edwin died anyway. However, Olive's story was not completed and so we never see what those consequences were. (hide spoiler)]. For anyone interested in a well-written contemplation of how life is altered by different actions, I would recommend Life After Life by Kate Atkinson. It isn't a time travel novel but the story keeps looping back to the same events and shows how the lives of the characters evolve if different actions were taken at a critical moment in time.

I do think that the author was subtly suggesting that it would be impossible to control the alterations even if only one body controlled time travel. Essentially, Gaspery goes on a mission designed by the Time Institute and they identified the 4 people that he had to visit. (view spoiler)[ With all the resourses that they have, they were not aware that they were sending Gaspery to visit himself. Imagine how much more complicated this would be if there were other institutions that were also going back in time (which was suggested in the story but not explored). (hide spoiler)].

As I mentioned in my response to Ryo, the ending felt a little rushed. The author seemed to focus on tying up Gaspery's story but Olive's story was left incomplete. So we have no idea (view spoiler)[ what action the Time Institute took to clean up the change in the time line. Did they allow her to continue on with her life which would have altered history, or did they step in and create an ending for her so that history was altered too much? (hide spoiler)]

Ultimately, the big question for me is what is the point of time travel if you have to ensure that you don't change anything? I guess the closest that we got to that was the author illustrating that human beings are not rational and we cannot be trusted not to alter the past. Gaspery believes that he is unemotional and has no interest in altering events, (view spoiler)[ but when faced with a person that was lightly connected to his past, he suddenly felt compelled to warn Olive to leave Earth immediately. (hide spoiler)]

I love your analysis, Liesl. Also your recommendation of Life After Life :)

This was a re-read for me and I found that I enjoyed it more this time around. My only notation from the first time was that I had wished for more character development. I do not think that is what I meant. I think I thought it was too short. As you all say, there are unresolved scenarios with characters we were introduced to. I wanted to know what happened to Zoey. What happened to Olive? Was Gaspery doomed to spend the rest of his life in prison in the past? Did any of his actions make much of a difference for the future?

I just finished the book, and I think I will need to sit with it for a little while before I comment too much. I did enjoy the book. Like others, I feel that she skimmed too many things that could have been delved into deeper. I loved the way the elements tied together. I was also very confused during part 1. Who is this guy and how is it a sci-fi story when it was set in the beginning of the 20th century! The pandemic tie-ins were quite interesting. I'm glad I gave Mandel another chance.

Monica wrote: "I finished the book last night and I enjoyed it. As far as scifi novels go, this one was more cerebral and literary. Not too hard on the scifi elements. For me this is a meditative piece of fiction..."

I agree, I read this a while ago so can't remember the finer points of the plot but it seemed like SF for people who don't read SF, which basically cannibalised elements of SF but framed within a more conventional literary fiction form.

Hannah wrote: "I agree with Liesl, there's a lot of feminist sci fi out there which is very anti-patriarchy. The genre gives a lot of freedom to explore other ways of being for the world/society. Which leads on t..."

Absolutely, obviously there are right-wing, regressive SF authors but it's long been a genre that's provided a haven for queer writers and writers of colour from Samuel Delaney and Octavia Butler onwards. Authors like Ursula K LeGuin wrote novels that were considered ground-breaking in terms of their questioning of gender norms, long before Judith Butler came on the scene. And then there are contemporary writers like Ann Leckie and Becky Chambers who focus on queer, non-binary and trans characters. I thought Jo Walton's Among Others was a nice intro to the appeal of SF fandom for women and anyone who doesn't conform to mainstream society, it also deals with issues around ableism and discrimination, again themes widely explored in SF well before realist fiction caught up. Outside books there are shows like Star Trek which I adore in all its forms, which has long celebrated and explored diversity - and had/has large queer followings for that very reason - and even more explicitly so in recent shows.

Alwynne wrote: "Monica wrote: "I finished the book last night and I enjoyed it. As far as scifi novels go, this one was more cerebral and literary. Not too hard on the scifi elements. For me this is a meditative p..."

I looked at her skimming of sci-fi elements as a natural reflection of the fact that the world had been that way for over 100 (?) years and was no longer a "big deal". This was the "normal" for the characters. I would not even classify it as "dystopia" because of that normalness.

I agree with both of you, Alwynne and Monica, I did not think of it that way, but it is sci-fi for non-sci-fi readers. (Raises hand here) - Me! I get lost in the sci-fi world of such books as "This is How You Lose the Time War" (which I read but wouldn't even rate because I didn't think it was fair to do so), because I just cannot wrap my head around it. Your reference to literary fiction form, immediately made me think of fantasy. And that I love!

I just want to thank you all for the lively discussion and the beautifully written thoughts.

Liesl wrote: "Monica wrote: "I finished the book last night and I enjoyed it. As far as scifi novels go, this one was more cerebral and literary. Not too hard on the scifi elements. For me this is a meditative p..."

I assumed Olive's story was deliberately incomplete because Olive is a thinly-veiled, version of Mandel herself, a play on autofiction that disrupts the more obviously SF aspects of the ongoing plot. So many aspects of Olive's story line up with comments and observations made by Mandel about her own experiences as an author in various interviews and articles.

I too finished this in the past week and have been processing my thoughts. I value character development and world building, so perhaps this just wasn't my style. It almost could have been twice as long, with more development throughout (though I don't think that was the point, and it felt quite calculating by the author.)

I enjoyed it enough, and appreciated the story and thought-provoking questions regarding morality, time travel, etc.

One thing I haven't been able to wrap my head around - I just can't quite figure out how everything started in the first place. How the blip or whatever they called it even began in the first place.... what initiated Gaspberry's travel in the first place, if it was in fact *his travel that initiated the crack in the system, so to speak?

Sophie wrote: "This was a re-read for me and I found that I enjoyed it more this time around. My only notation from the first time was that I had wished for more character development. ..."

Hi Sophie, what do you think it was that made the read more enjoyable the second time through?

Alwynne wrote: "I assumed Olive's story was deliberately incomplete because Olive is a thinly-veiled, version of Mandel herself, a play on autofiction that disrupts the more obviously SF aspects of the ongoing plot. So many aspects of Olive's story line up with comments and observations made by Mandel about her own experiences as an author in various interviews and articles...."

That is quite interesting. I don't know much about the author so was not aware of that. I did read that the character of Edwin is actually a tribute to one of her ancestors although he is such an uneventful character that it is hard to imagine this being a tribute.

Even if Olive is loosely based upon the author, the story still could have been dealt with. It is not an auto-biography. Personally I would find the idea of killing off a character based loosely upon myself a little amusing.

Lindsey wrote: "One thing I haven't been able to wrap my head around - I just can't quite figure out how everything started in the first place. How the blip or whatever they called it even began in the first place.... what initiated Gaspberry's travel in the first place, if it was in fact *his travel that initiated the crack in the system, so to speak?..."

This is a fantastic question, Lindsey. The story is very clear about the reasons that Gaspery is being sent back on his first investigation so there doesn't seem to be any way to come up with an alternate explanation for his visit. It definitely paints a very dismal picture of the Time Institutes capabilities.

Liesl wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "I assumed Olive's story was deliberately incomplete because Olive is a thinly-veiled, version of Mandel herself, a play on autofiction that disrupts the more obviously SF aspects of..."

Well the divide between autofiction and autobiography is a rather fragile/tenuous one!

Lindsey wrote: "One thing I haven't been able to wrap my head around - I just can't quite figure out how everything started in the first place. How the blip or whatever they called it even began in the first place.... what initiated Gaspberry's travel in the first place, if it was in fact *his travel that initiated the crack in the system, so to speak?"

That's the trippy part of the book. I'm not really sure what to say about it honestly. I loved the way it all fit together in this weird little loop.

During Olive's book tour she is frustrated when she is asked about her husband looking after her child while she is away.

Did you find it surprising that a book set in the future still posed questions like this? Do you think this question relates more to the world we live in rather than what the world might look like in the future?

Liesl wrote: "During Olive's book tour she is frustrated when she is asked about her husband looking after her child while she is away.
Did you find it surprising that a book set in the future still posed ques..."

I personally did not find it surprising. I believed the author's intent with that scene was to show a more pessimistic view of women's rights - "the more things change, the more they stay the same". We are certainly seeing that, politically at least, in recent times in the US (and if I remember correctly, that's where she was when the question was asked.) Think "The Handmaids Tale". (Unfortunately, you can see I am certainly more pessimistic now than I was as a young woman.)

Liesl wrote: "Did you find it surprising that a book set in the future still posed questions like this? Do you think this question relates more to the world we live in rather than what the world might look like in the future?"

Surprising? No. I mean, women in the US are worse off now than they were ten years ago. I think it was a cautionary thing - like things could be still crappy in the future.

I finished this over the weekend. I've read almost no sci-fi. The women in my book club classified it as literary sci-fi or speculative fiction. This led me to google literary sci-fi, a genre I'd not heard of. And when I googled 'best literary sci-fi', a top-30 list included one of my favorite books and writers, Doris Lessing's Re: Colonised Planet 5, Shikasta, the first in a pentalogy called Canopus in Argos: Archives

Someone upthread mentioned a lack of character development and world building. I would agree with this, it's what I found most lacking. The plot was compelling enough to keep me reading when I could have been doing other things but I kept coming up against a kind of thinness to the characters. Was it my lack of experience with this genre? Perhaps.

The ending was mostly satisfying, a few loose ends that didn't feel resolved, as has been mentioned upthread. And some confusion on my part which requires me to go back and parse out a few details. At any rate I enjoyed this for the most part, a quick read, and it's not a book I would have picked up had I not seen it mentioned here.

Liesl wrote: "During Olive's book tour she is frustrated when she is asked about her husband looking after her child while she is away.

Did you find it surprising that a book set in the future still posed ques..."

No I didn't find it surprising, the idea of linear progression through history and one in which things always get better is essentially a cultural myth, in the West it's often linked to the promotion of capitalism and Western forms of democracy as inevitably leading to a better society which can also be exported to countries outside of that system. Olive's issues around childcare and the expectations of her as a 'mother' fit with data gathered during the pandemic about women and the burdens placed upon them as parents. In the UK, for example, it was clear that domestic and emotional labour was still very much split along gender lines, with women taking on the majority of the work. Men who took on this work were considered somehow heroic, look at how many times men are represented as taking on babysitting, when they're actually simply parenting!

I agree with Gail too re: wider political contexts, particularly highlighted by recent shifts in American legislation. But America is deeply divided, part fundamentalist religious state part liberal, and this split is evident in many parts of the West right now, as the lurch towards the far right in Europe highlights.

wild~rose wrote: "I finished this over the weekend. I've read almost no sci-fi. The women in my book club classified it as literary sci-fi or speculative fiction. This led me to google literary sci-fi, a genre I'd n..."

I wouldn't class this as classic SF, and Mandel's also resisted that label. LeGuin's work, to take just one example, is far more sophisticated in terms of the ideas being explored.

During her book tour, Olive visits her parents who had returned to Earth after their retirement, an action that Olive can't understand Zoey also returned to Colony One where she had been born, and Edwin eventually returned to his homeland.

What do you think the author is trying to say about relocation, exile and our ties to our homeland?

Liesl wrote: "Sophie wrote: "This was a re-read for me and I found that I enjoyed it more this time around. My only notation from the first time was that I had wished for more character development. ..."

Hi Sop..." I think in my first read I was too focused on following the time travel part. In this read, I thought more about Gaspberry's mindset. Why did he insist that he could stay removed from the people in the past and then find himself caring about what was going to happen to them enough to interfere? I also got more of the atmosphere of his and his sister's life. It felt like they had no one else but each other and there was this sense of loneliness from both of them.
I guess what I am saying is that I focused more on the characters.

Thanks to everyone that joined in the discussion this month.

Once again I found myself changing my initial rating of the book following some contemplation after our discussions. This time, I downgraded my rating because, although I found the book a quick, easy read, I felt that it was trying to cover too many different issues and not really delving into any of them very deeply. I think we were all left with more questions than answers by the end. Personally, that was a little disappointing for me as I had really enjoyed Station Eleven but I just didn't feel this was even close to that level of work.

Liesl wrote: "I had really enjoyed Station Eleven but I just didn't feel this was even close to that level of work."

I agree - I think Station Eleven was much better. I did enjoy this one though. It was a pretty solid four star read for me.