The House I Loved (2011)

In high school history I learned about Napoleon III & Baron Haussman's grand project in the 1850s that levelled whole neighbourhoods in order to build the boulevards that helped make Paris a world capital, and I found the story fascinating. When I read the review of The House I Loved, which is set against that historical event, in the Globe & Mail last year, I put it on my wishlist. The story follows Madame Rose Bazelet who is a widow living in her husband's family home, which is slated for demolition. The rest of her neighbourhood has moved out, but she holds on, hiding in the basement and writing letters to her deceased "beloved" husband.

What a disappointment! The main problem is the author's choice to use the epistolary structure. It is entirely artificial and contrived. The entire time I read this, I constantly thought "no one writes letters like this." Halfway through I realized the book reminded me of one of those internet memes that make a statement and follow it with "said no one ever." Here's a meme for you: a picture of me holding up this book and saying "said no one ever." I'll open to any page and give you an example:

". . . she seized my hand, fairly stuttering with emotion as she cried out, 'Oh, but you cannot stay here any longer, Madame Rose!' The house will be pulled down in the next twenty-four hours! It would be madness to stay, you will . . . ' Her eyes met mine, those toffee-colored eyes shining with intelligence, and I looked back at her, calmly, my back straight." Who writes like that in a letter? It's beyond silly.

The House I Loved would have actually made sense if it had been written in third person point of view instead. However, even then, it still would have been a boring story. There was a "secret" to be revealed at the end, but due to the heavy foreshadowing, it wasn't even a little surprise.

You may ask why I read such a poorly written, boring book. I really shouldn't have, but it was very short, and I really was fascinated by the preposterous writing. At least it was set in Paris.

A note about the cover: I love this cover photo--strolling down an allee, the gravel path, the mansard roof in the distance--this could only be France. And the flowing red dress is perfection. However, there was no scene in the book anything like this, the house in question (although it was a nice house), was on a crowded side street, and that gorgeous dress is obviously 20th century, while the book was set in the mid-19th century. Well, they got the France part right. ( )

Loved this story. If you have ever loved a home, you would totally understand Rose's dilema. Great story with a great piece of history in there too! ( )

One of the reasons I wanted to read this book, set in Paris 1860, was that I am fascinated by the remodeling of Paris that occurred around that time. The bones for the city we know today were created then, with the demolition of significant parts of the existing city. I was hoping to learn more about it from the history books, and instead garner some impressions what it might have been for the Parisians of the time, to have their homes and neighborhoods sacrificed for a newer, safer, stronger, healthier Paris, bearing the stamp of the Emperor Napoleon III (and bits of the first two Napoleons, too.) I've heard that the main reasons for the Haussmann Plan, was to help with health and hygiene, and because the underground city, of caverns, quarries, and catacombs, had made the foundations insecure. This book answered relatively little of my questions, so I'll have to go on and do a little historical digging.

The basic story was okay, not stunning, but gave me some drips and drabs of info and a few moments which I liked. What really stunned me was that I hadn't paid attention to who was reading the book, and it turned out to be the same voice actor of a 32 disk book which I recently listened to. She's good, but even a good voice actor as this one is, there are limited voices to choose for characters. It was rather disconcerting to hear the voices of several of the main characters, from an epic fantasy, placed in Paris of 1860. But I got over it.

Rounded up to 3 stars, because I don't know how much the voice distraction contributed to my overall attitude to the book. It was a rather ponderous story, but I did stick with it. I will add that I was not a huge Sarah's Key fan, though I did like the movie made from the book (in fact, liked it better than the book.)

Although things are continually happening and the tension tightens, the book has little plot, in my opinion, because it doesn't have a real ending or point. It explores old age caught in difficult circumstances with change being demanded. A lady remembers her first sight of the house and her future husband and all the memories collected in the house over the years, good and bad. So as the demolition crews move closer and closer, she refuses to move. ( )

I did not enjoy this book nearly as much as her previous book Sarah's key. I was expecting a lot more. I had just recently seen the art exhibition of d'Arget's work showing the old streets of Paris before the buildings began to be pulled down so had some understanding of the time period but the story and characters did not grab me at all and I found it a very predictable and boring plot ( )