Lots of telling, no showing
Houghteling has written an uninspired book about a topic that should have been a sure win. As someone who loves art and Paris, I was very much looking forward to reading this story about looted paintings. Houghteling, though, fails to deliver.
One basic rule of creative writing is to show, not tell, but the author tells and tells and never allows the reader to feel any emotional connection to the protagonists. The father, Daniel, an art dealer, and his assistant Rose (whom the narrator is enamored of) are inspired from real people, and Houghteling picked Daniel¿s son, Max, to tell the story, probably to justify writing a work of fiction about this. Unfortunately, Max is very bland and uninteresting, and Houghteling doesn¿t help matters with her dense style.
For instance, at the end of the first chapter, she describes the father¿s refusal to let his son into the family¿s business in all of two sentences. This is a critical moment in the book that should have made us feel for Max, and Houghteling doesn¿t even create a scene about it. We don¿t know who is right - father or son - and we¿re deprived of a unique opportunity to care about Max. Instead, the author overwhelms us throughout the book with mention after mention of paintings¿ names and quick references to art history. She shows off her knowledge but doesn¿t draw the reader into the beauty of the paintings.
We never understand why Max falls for Rose, and remains obsessed with her for so long. The Rose Houghteling depicts is quite annoying, sharing too much information when she first meets Max and making snotty comments. She behaves like a woman with no morals, especially for the time, moving in with the Berenzons, accepting Max¿s advances for no particular reason (it¿s hard to see what she finds in him), although she quite rapidly puts an end to the affair. A protagonist suggests Rose then sleeps with Max¿s father, although Rose denies it after the war, many pages later in the book. When the accusation is first made, one takes it as true. It¿s hard to like that Rose. The real one deserved better than that.
The part of the novel after the war is better, but fails to engage the reader because the best moments are, again, told rather than shown. In particular, Rose tells the narrator about her efforts to keep records of looted art during the war. She¿s now accused of being a collaborator, and the fight by this remarkable Resistante both during and after the war should have been a spellbinding part of the book. I would have loved to see Rose¿s efforts as they happened, maybe using a second point-of-view (Max before the war, Rose during the war, with the two points of view converging in 1944 at the Liberation). Instead, the after-the-fact account left me cold. The one good part in Houghteling¿s novel is toward the end, when Max gets a Morisot painting back and plots to buy back Manet's "Almonds". But that¿s too little, too late, and by then many readers will have lost interest in the book.
The book also has developments that stretch the reader¿s credulity at several critical junctions (for instance when Rose shows up by Max¿s side in a church, one day after the war when he¿s looking for her, but has not seen her for years), and some anachronistic details.
The author does have a wonderful flowing style when she avoids one-sentence scenes, and one has to give give her credit for her excellent idea. Hopefully her next book will be better.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback.
Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.