The Uses of Enchantment, Heidi Julavits

Not to be confused with Bruno Bettelheim’s with The Uses of Enchantment, which is stringently assertive in it’s psychoanalytical study of tales, fairy tales, and other folklore. There are some interesting comparisons to the two books.

Heidi Julavits has created a book in three parts, twisted and mixed together in alternating chapters. It is the story of Mary Veal who is famous for being a girl who was purportedly kidnapped, molested, and released two months later. Cast in and around Boston, the book carries literal and symbolic references to Witch Trials and the hysteria that surrounded them.
1- Initial and following segments are titled “What might have happened”.
2- The next segments are notes from Dr. Hammer, her psychiatrist who interviews her and attempts to help her after she returns.
3- The third are 14 years later, when Mary returns home for the funeral of her mother and tries to put all the pieces back together.

In the opening of the book, we see Mary migrate to a car outside her school where a bored man has been watching the girls smoke cigarettes on numerous days. She climbs into his car and plays on his emotions and undercurrent of desire to get him to play along with her “abduction”. She is well read but average in most every other fashion.

Following throughout are sessions with Dr. Hammer as he unravels her story and becomes obsessed with the fact that she may be lying about her abduction.

By the end of the book I was pretty enthralled. The aptly titled “What may have happened” segments leave you unsure at the end of your POV and analyzing her yourself, looking for a gleam of fact behind her fairytale. Is she telling the truth, is she lying, is she telling the truth when she says she is lying? Maybe a little of all three.

Freudian discussion spatters all of Dr. Hammers notes and make you wonder exactly how much of Freud is actually relevant today; whether his mastery was only meant to be a stepping stone in the psychoanalytical world instead of a pillar.

There is an interesting character in this book named Roz. She is an all encompassing Feminist psychiatrist who drove her points home in any (verbally violent) way possible. She really shines as an antagonizing pain in the ass. Another poitedly Feminist character, the man who “abducts” Mary has a fair amount of talk on the subject too.

All in all a well researched and very well written book.

(Review originally published 11/28/07) ( )

The book was a lot of nothing. There was much innuendo without resolution. ( )

This is a review, a written assessment of a particular product—in this case a book—that is meant to highlight its strengths and inform others of its potential flaws. Reviews can be great: reviews can catch the attention of the consumers, they give tried and true evidence that a product is worth buying (or not buying). This is also the greatest flaw of a review. Send out a message again and again that a product is flawed and the consumers will stop buying, even if that product is truly great.

I first came across The Uses of Enchantment seven years ago while shelving books at the library. The cover enticed me immediately. The appearance of a hole burnt in the dust jacket, the colors, the beautiful hair, the font (great work on the cover of this one, cover designer peoples!) The novel's description completely pulled me in. Then I noticed other books by the same author on the shelf, and I read their descriptions and I knew, right then, I had found a new favorite author.

Except when I got home and added the book to my Goodreads there was a huge red flag: The Uses of Enchantment had a rating that was barely rising above 3.0. And Julavits' other books weren't doing much better. The reviews blasted the book; there were so many one to three star ratings. The reviews were peppered with phrases like “I hated this book” and “what a waste of time.” And so I did what any intelligent consumer would do—I put the book on my “I'll probably never read this, but I'll keep it on my shelf because it's so pretty” shelf. My putting aside this book had nothing to do with following the masses, it had to do with experience. When I look back at the books I have read which have the lowest overall ratings, I must say that I disliked most of them. Prior to The Uses of Enchantment, the only book with a rating less than 3.25 that I absolutely loved was Rowling's polarizing The Casual Vacancy. I had too many other “good” books to read to waste time on something I'd probably hate. Yet, that small voice of hope from seven years ago would nag at me occasionally, telling me I'd never know if I didn't give it a try. Finally, I gave in.

I'm not quite sure why I finally decided to give The Uses of Enchantment a go, but I'm glad I did. The book was phenomenal. It's possible that my super low expectations buoyed the book considerably, but I don't believe so; I think I would've liked this novel regardless of the reviews. First of all, the prose is amazing. Julavits writes with such beauty. I was reminded of two other authors whose work I enjoy but who also receive many poor reviews: Hannah Pittard and Meg Wolitzer. Perhaps there is something in the style of these authors that repulses some readers, but whatever it is, I want more of it. When I ponder the negative comments of others, and the complaints I personally disagree with, I think mostly of comments about “how boring” these works are, how “nothing happens,” or how “unresolved” they are. I would agree that not much happens in these books, and in the case of Pittard's first novel the lack of “anything” happening was the only barrier to a five-star review, but I would argue that enough happens, especially in the characters themselves. And perhaps that is the distinction here. Are these novel's largely character and language driven? I would say, yes. Apparently too much so for many readers. Personally, I find novels with absolutely no plot boring as well, but light plot is acceptable. Add some great character development and some wonderfully spun sentences and I'm hooked.

As far as the argument that The Uses of Enchantment is unresolved, I disagree. Does the reader get a clear answer as to what happened or didn't happen? No, not really. But I think it can be deduced what likely occurred, and this is good enough for me. Study the psychology of these characters, pay attention to this “wronged-woman project” the school participates in, and I think that not only does the “what might have happened” fall into place, but also the importance of it not mattering. The brilliance of the novel is in the not knowing. What about Dora? Mary is asking. What about Bettina Spencer? What about all of us women who have been wrongly accused? Does it matter if all our facts fall into line, or is it enough that we are simply hurting? That's what I walked away with anyhow. And I applaud Julavits for a well-orchestrated story.

So, take it from me, kids. Ratings can good, but they also be a tool of the devil. I mean, come on, this poignant story of a confused adolescent girl is worth only 3.04 stars, but Twilight, a story about an adolescent girl who plays baseball with vampires because she's so disturbed, wracks up 3.56 stars? Heed the advice of a book snob: Ratings are of the devil! ( )

I love this book, in particular the "what may have happened" sections, but also how it all ties together. Another thing that I like, is that when I picked it for the firts time I wasn't so sure if I was going to like it, I thought: "ok, once more the girl becomes a victim", but this was not the case at all (the same thing happened the first time I saw Juno, although they are quite different).

Previous reviweres have mentioned that they liked better the earlier version of Mary, that she was more interesting. Which is true. Nevertheless, if Mary had grown up and continued to do the same things she did as a teenager, she'd be a completely different person (without empathy for anyone's feelings, needing to be always the centre of attention). Instead, she is atoning for her past actions, and is trying to go unnoticed. As her aunt says at some point: "you were a teenager, you didn't know that anyone else existed". This fact, that as she grows up she discovers that other people exist and that her actions have consequences, is what makes Mary human and somehow more well-balanced that some of the adults in the book, even if not as adventurous as her younger self. ( )

Much like the last book I read, I don't like the characters, or maybe even the story. But I keep reading everything this woman writes, because though it's depressing/annoying, she's really good at writing about how fucked up people are and thoroughly people can fuck each other up. It's smartly written, with some kind of brilliant descriptions.