I'm puzzled by the reviewers that swooned over "Cowboys are my Weakness" and hate this current title.
"Cowboys," written by Houston in her late 20s, are stories by someone who's just found her voice and is trying it out. They are light stories, but Houston is hiding her feelings behind the adventures themselves.
In "Waltzing the Cat," the author is ten years older with a lot of introspection (and apparently good psychotherapy) under her belt. We still get some of the amazing adventures, but we also get to see Houston develop emotionall, through her alter ego/main character Lucy. It's more about how these adventures affect her, what memories they dredge up, what she learns from them. Houston's style has evolved into an unusual mix between the classic "women's confessional" and terse, Hemmingway-ish Western stories. It works, and it works beautifully.
You must understand that THIS BOOK IS NOT A NOVEL, but a set of related short stories that occur only roughly in chronological order, NOT chapters. Other reviewers found the book "disjointed," I myself did not. Because they are separate stories, I didn't find it odd that the character felt differently, even contradictory, about things at different time and in different stories.
I read all three of Houston's books over the weekend, and I can highly recommend all of them, but to me, "Waltzing the Cat" was the best of the three, just nosing out her nonfictional essay collection "A Little More About Me," which in turn just nosed out "Cowboys are my Weakness."
less
0 comments
Post a comment