data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3e93f/3e93f17383f9ba33abda0c1bcd823f8be88452e4" alt=""
I'm reading this book at the moment, by Catherine Eisner, published by Salt. If anyone else has read it, please can you explain why Salt call it a "novel" rather than a collection of short stories? I don't see how it can be a novel, as it consists of individual 'case studies' of women with mental health issues. I have read about a third of the way through so far, and there is no connecting thread between the individual accounts, or none that I can see. I know there is sometimes a stigma associated with selling short story collections (and this is a debut collection), but since Salt is a great champion of the short story, I can't think they would fall into the trap of believing readers would be put off by the tag 'short stories'.
Please don't misunderstand - I'm enjoying what I've read so far (although I do feel some of the stories are over-written and the individual voices don't always shine through). I just don't see it is as a novel, and wonder why Salt do.
2 comments:
I started to read it and thought the exact same. I abandoned it but intend to go back!
Hi, WRW, glad I'm not alone. Someone pointed me to a blog where Eisner explains her reasoning but I'm still baffled. Something to do with it resembling a symphony. I'm afraid I just thought - a symphony's not a novel! I guess I'm missing the point.
Post a Comment