anyway, I've been spiraling about this bit from the Emily Henry Vulture profile: "For Henry, the choice is in part about trying to avoid the trap of the blasé “smart cool woman” who’s “allowed to be horny” but isn’t allowed to mix horniness with romanticism. She still gets uncomfortable when she has to go over the mechanics of a sex scene in detail with the copy editors, she says."
and
"Henry’s books are full of people who are messy and know they need to deal with it before they can be good partners." -- is this not the "you can't fall in love until you love yourself." like, this simply isn't how the world works, it doesn't function like that. what's more is that January deciding to love Gus in spite of his divorce (???) feels like some retrograde Catholic thing more than Prot, that even though he was cheated on (the book wouldn't work if it was remotely his fault) he still shoulders the blame as far as January can see
I am wondering at what point she might come to realize that Gus is a good writer - there's no way this book ends without her having a come to Jesus moment about his boy books... January is in too deep for still not having read anything by him
i have the vulture prof on the docket for next week. once you learn that emily henry married someone she met when she was 18 in cincinnati it all starts to fall into place.
i agree about the neo catholicism but the final third of the book is more mormon than anything, rendering earlier musings on marriage less complex than catholicism would allow.
i am generally less interested in the illogical rules she invents about falling in love than in the fact that she is simply not in love, at all. she can't choose anything--to forgive her dad, to be horny, to have a crush, to write a book--with conviction because everything is humiliating to her. she doesn't want gus because he wants her--embarrassing. it reads that she wants jacques and is convincing herself she doesn't.
i don't think either of them are good writers. i think, like emily henry, they stumbled into successful careers in fantastical emily in paris kinds of ways. instead of just letting that be fantastical, though, they have to be poor and miserable and crumpled
"I was tame, I was gentle 'til the circus life made me mean" - Taylor Swift re: Emily Henry's January Andrews' circus novel
the way i'm calling off the circus burning the disco down sending home the horses and the rodeo clowns
anyway, I've been spiraling about this bit from the Emily Henry Vulture profile: "For Henry, the choice is in part about trying to avoid the trap of the blasé “smart cool woman” who’s “allowed to be horny” but isn’t allowed to mix horniness with romanticism. She still gets uncomfortable when she has to go over the mechanics of a sex scene in detail with the copy editors, she says."
and
"Henry’s books are full of people who are messy and know they need to deal with it before they can be good partners." -- is this not the "you can't fall in love until you love yourself." like, this simply isn't how the world works, it doesn't function like that. what's more is that January deciding to love Gus in spite of his divorce (???) feels like some retrograde Catholic thing more than Prot, that even though he was cheated on (the book wouldn't work if it was remotely his fault) he still shoulders the blame as far as January can see
I am wondering at what point she might come to realize that Gus is a good writer - there's no way this book ends without her having a come to Jesus moment about his boy books... January is in too deep for still not having read anything by him
i have the vulture prof on the docket for next week. once you learn that emily henry married someone she met when she was 18 in cincinnati it all starts to fall into place.
i agree about the neo catholicism but the final third of the book is more mormon than anything, rendering earlier musings on marriage less complex than catholicism would allow.
i am generally less interested in the illogical rules she invents about falling in love than in the fact that she is simply not in love, at all. she can't choose anything--to forgive her dad, to be horny, to have a crush, to write a book--with conviction because everything is humiliating to her. she doesn't want gus because he wants her--embarrassing. it reads that she wants jacques and is convincing herself she doesn't.
i don't think either of them are good writers. i think, like emily henry, they stumbled into successful careers in fantastical emily in paris kinds of ways. instead of just letting that be fantastical, though, they have to be poor and miserable and crumpled