There are a lot of memoirs and pieces of cultural criticism available that relate the ways in which women are diminished by external social pressures. I have read a lot of books of that type, and some of those books are excellent, but in my experience none are like Ernaux's. I have been trying to put my finger on the differences between Ernaux and others, and while I don't think I have them nailed down, I have a few thoughts.

Many writers on this topic focus on external limitations on girls and women, on being kept down by The Man (which also includes women -- the world is full of Aunt Lydia's.) Ernaux does not ignore the external, in fact she regularly acknowledges it as the first step in the process of limiting women. Then she moves past that step and a lot of her work is about her own lens was shifted, how she went from "people expect me to..." to "I want to do this" even when things gave her no pleasure. She moves the focus from the external to the internal, to the problem being how we are brainwashed into viewing ourselves differently, and how the external limitations and pressures conferred by the patriarchy limit our capacity for success outside of the arena of home and family.

Ernaux was raised in a home where her mother ran the family store and her father took on most of the domestic work. She was spared domestic duties, she excelled in school and had no chores so she never learned to fold laundry and cook and clean. It was a happy home in that people played to their strengths and were content in their roles. When others mocked her parents she came to know it was something she should be embarrassed about. Then came the shift. She was afraid people would see her like her mother, and she moved her energies from academic success to making the very best chocolate mousse and cleaning her room. In her early teens she set herself to being a sexually desirable woman with the same vigor. She was convinced she was defective for wanting to be an accomplished woman when she could be obsessing about boys who held no interest other than fulfilling the drive (which drive came from outside, not from her needs) to be noticed by males. The same later applied to having children. Neither she nor her husband wanted children, Ernaux felt external pressures, and made that her goal though she longed to finish her degree and become a teacher. Despite not enjoying raising her son, and loving her teaching, when she was finally freed of the diapers and nursing stage of parenting (which she clearly detested) she convinced herself that she wanted a second even against her husbands wishes.

Ernaux has such a dazzling present memory of the process of internalizing those strictures and she writes about that so spectacularly well that I came to see those processes in my own life and the lives of the women I know best. These things snuck up on me, I don't remember being socialized, I just was. I never questioned a lot of my choices, and I thought many of my decisions were all mine. I now see how they were forced on me. Seeing her process helps me understand my own, and it helps me to better guide my grad students who are analyzing and making their own choices now. Also truthfully, she helps me see how I view women, and honestly sometimes judge women, differently than men. Embarrassing but true. I think we all know how ludicrous and racist it is when people say they "don't see color", but we do not see that it is equally ludicrous and sexist to "not see" gender. Not seeing, not acknowledging differing starting lines and differing life experience and social messaging is the same as saying "I really want to keep the status quo." I am embarrassed to be a person who for so long thought that the erasure of gender based lines in the workplace was the goal. Ernaux helps me see my error, my lack of an imagination strong enough to envision real equity.

This book takes place in an era different than the one we are in, but I found it far less dated than I wanted it to be. Yes, we are in an era where most women have careers in addition to parenting and running the home, but still, 50 years later over 90% of women who work outside of the home do at least an hour a day of housework compared to 30% of men. When I was in the thick of parenting most all the women I knew spent all their non-office time on home and children while all the men in those homes had hobbies, golf, gaming, woodworking, etc. We still see women as "lucky" if their men "help" with home and childcare. Women are expected to perform at a higher level in the workplace than men, and are judged for outsourcing their domestic responsibilities. So yes, some of this is a bit dated, but I really wish it felt more dated -- this is no relic.

This was a 4.5 for me, but really only because I think some of her later work is stronger, and not because there is anything missing here. ( )

Rarely does Ernaux repeat herself, and always she has something important to say. Her positions, and stories, may not always be the most popular, but she makes perfect sense to me. She is, in my opinion, one hell of a woman. And a very good writer as well.

After having a couple days to think more about what I read, it is obvious to me that Annie was pretty angry at herself for falling into this man-family-homemaker trap that she never ever truly wanted for herself. But she is not a man hater. She is bitingly real about the stupid stereotypes women inflict on themselves, and mother-in-laws, for example, who promote their submissive motherly, female behavior. But Annie never gets in your face about things she finds disgusting. But she is sarcastic, funny, and clear about what she finds repulsive in herself and those she is supposed to love. ( )

Rarely does Ernaux repeat herself, and always she has something important to say. Her positions, and stories, may not always be the most popular, but she makes perfect sense to me. She is, in my opinion, one hell of a woman. And a very good writer as well.

After having a couple days to think more about what I read, it is obvious to me that Annie was pretty angry at herself for falling into this man-family-homemaker trap that she never ever truly wanted for herself. But she is not a man hater. She is bitingly real about the stupid stereotypes women inflict on themselves, and mother-in-laws, for example, who promote their submissive motherly, female behavior. But Annie never gets in your face about things she finds disgusting. But she is sarcastic, funny, and clear about what she finds repulsive in herself and those she is supposed to love. ( )