Good old couple about „The Wife” by Meg Wolitzer.

It is rare for me to have such a positive and ambiguous feeling at the same time as for the book written by Meg Wolitzer ”The Wife”. A recently filmed novel that shows us a long marriage from the perspective of a wife who matured to leave.

The book begins on the plane, which Joan and Joe Castelman fly from the United States to Finland, for the Literature Award Ceremony. Of course, this is not a Nobel Prize (what's interesting, the film has not been played with such games anymore and the protagonist just gets the prize of the Swedish Academy) but still a high distinction - appreciating the whole work of the author. On this journey, Joan meditates on her relationship, which began more than thirty years earlier when she was just a student and Joe was a beginning Academic lecturer. Romance, marriage, children, work - the heroine meditates over the years of her relationship reflecting on what actually caused her to stay with her husband for so long.

The novel has fantastic elements - the first of them is devoting the narrative of a woman who only years later sees how ill-conceived, or perhaps more forced by society were her decisions. This is an interesting, very true narration, especially when it comes to the times when Joan's marriage begins - how she perceives her abilities, duties, how she relates to the lecturer and then her husband, seeing his disadvantages but accepting them, because after all - she brought up in a world where the inequality of opportunities and ambitions of men and women are obvious. Secondly - it is excellent to show how slowly a marriage turns into a certain sequence of habits - the spouses are still together but quite separately, they work together but everything they do is marked by some repetition. Joan does not feel happy and actually everything she does for her husband is mechanical - without emotions.

The book fantastically shows how certain life decisions - especially the wrong ones - over the years, we justify not before others but above all ourselves. Sometimes we repeat these justifications until we can not distinguish them from the truth. On the other hand - the author does not bring a break in Castelman's relationship only to problems typical of moral literature - like, for example, her husband's infidelity. On the contrary - the heroine's unfaithfulness does not bother her much, but rather hinders much less than one would expect. Interestingly, I have the impression that this is one of the most real life threads in the whole novel - not all women have to treat the unfaithfulness of husbands in the same way. And sometimes this unfaithfulness slows them down from a sense of duty or remorse.

The author perfectly sketches the character of Joan - a strong, confident, talented woman who for the majority of her life made decisions against herself, putting her husband in the first place and his incredible talent. Joan herself repeats that the most important are her children, but when we read about children - especially about her son David, it turns out that it does not necessarily mean that everything with the kids will be ok. Especially since the book perfectly shows the family in which whatever happens, everything will always revolve around a narcissistic father who believes that both successes and failures of his children should be judged only in relation to him. Anyway - almost from the very beginning, both the reader and the protagonist, I think, realize that Joe Castelman is not a good material for her husband, but we still understand a little why the heroine first decides on the affair and then the book fantastically shows how certain life decisions - especially the wrong ones - over the years, we justify not before others but above all ourselves. Sometimes we repeat these justifications until we can not distinguish them from the truth. On the other hand - the author does not bring a break in Castelman's relationship only to problems typical of moral literature - like, for example, her husband's infidelity. On the contrary - the heroine's unfaithfulness does not bother you much, but rather hinders much less than one would expect. Interestingly, I have the impression that this is one of the most real life threads in the whole novel - not all women always have the unfaithfulness of husbands in the same way. And sometimes this unfaithfulness slows them down from a sense of duty or remorse.

The author perfectly sketches the character of Joan - a strong, confident, talented woman who for the majority of her life made decisions against herself, putting her husband in the first place and his incredible talent. Joan herself repeats that the most important are her children, but when we read about children - especially about her son David, it turns out that it does not necessarily mean that everything with the kids will be ok. Especially since the book perfectly shows the family in which whatever happens, everything will always revolve around a narcissistic father who believes that both successes and failures of his children should be judged only in relation to him. Anyway - almost from the very beginning, both the reader and the protagonist, I think, realize that Joe Castelman is not a good material for a husband, but we still understand a little why the heroine first decides on the affair and then on the marriage.

At the same time, the book has, one drawback and is the ending. After a very interesting psychological portrait of a life that goes a bit with someone but more alongside someone. A great portrait of abandoned ambitions and missed opportunities. There is an ending that tries to convince us that the whole story we've seen is going a little differently than we thought all the time. On the one hand - it is interesting because it makes the heroine largely unreliable - both in the description of her life and her experiences. On the other hand - I get the impression that it would be a much better book without this plot twist.

Interestingly, the book is also a good look at the literary world because it is made from the inside. The author describing Joe but also his friends and the environment (and the whole process of receiving and waiting for prizes) well shows this type on the one hand sensitive, on the other authoritarian writers who all their lives need constant confirmation of their size, and do not pay attention to prizes, but only when they will not win them. This world is full of jealousy, pride and narcissism. Reading the novel, I had the impression that the author writes about this world from her own experience and is able to describe (though in the background) the portrait of this very imperfect environment. In particular, the process of receiving a phone with information about a significant literary prize is phenomenally written. I have the feeling that more than one author confided in her from his process of "waiting, not waiting" for the prize.

Reading the novel I had the whole impression that it is exactly the literature that you would probably call a woman, but I prefer to call it - the literature of a woman perspective. I can not imagine that a book about how you can endure in such an unfulfilled marriage - especially in the context of certain social requirements - would be write a man. Wolitzer perfectly reflects the situation of a woman who is not necessarily weak, passive or unintelligent (because the heroine's intelligence certainly can not be denied), she packs herself in a situation in line with social expectations. Looking at her life from the perspective she can see her mistakes and at the same time - when she thinks about her behavior, only after a while can see that she made these decisions not necessarily completely alone. Especially at the beginning of the book - when the heroine is still a student - you can see how many later complications result from the fear of telling a man the truth - criticizing him or violating his ego. The protagonist tacitly assumes that this is something she is not allowed to do - at the same time it was an assumption imprinted by a society that did not allow (the book takes place mainly in the past) to disturb the male sense of intellectual superiority.

I must admit that the book primarily brings the pleasure of reading a well-conducted, ambiguous narrative, from the point of view of not necessarily happy, but very reconciled with the life of a woman in which something broke. The fact that this cracking takes place without great dramatic scenes or the obvious dramatic moment makes the whole story very easy to refer to real life, where often marriages do not need the obvious great moment to break up. It is also realistic that Joan's husband does not notice at all that she is considering going away. It does not necessarily mean that he acknowledges the happiness of his wife, but rather assumes that she will not want any changes after all these years. I have the impression that many marriages with so long history have the same problems - because they have lived so many years, nobody wants to do anything.

Unfortunately - because in recent days I am very busy, I have not yet had the opportunity to see the movie adaptation of the novel. I'm very curious how it turned out - especially since Glenn Close seems to have been created for this role and reading a novel - which, seems a bit different from the movie, I saw her all the time as Joan, while Jonathan Pryce fits me very well as Joe. I must see the movie although I'm afraid that it will have to wait for DVD. But if you've seen a movie, I highly recommend looking into the book - mainly because it's just well-written. And as the film and the book are good, it gives a lot more joy and satisfaction.

#book #review #movie #culture