Tomcat in Love

Here is the story of a man who literally has to fight off the women. All of the women in his life are seriously and instantly attracted to him. ...Or at least that's how Tom sees it.

To the rest of us, Tom is a mysogenistic narcissist--and has been for years.

When his wife leaves him to marry a man whom he won't even name, but simply calls "tycoon"...Tom's grip of reality starts to falter. From public spankings, black mail, live crying fits/suicide threats on television to his old Vietnam 'buddies' who promised to enter his life again...to kill him--Tom needs some help.

The ONLY thing that killed the book for me was the last 30 pages. I would have preferred a different ending. Regardless, you should read it and see if you agree with me show more or not. show less

Ugh. I know it was written as psychological satire, but it's like the worst of all the dead white guys came back as one Voltron like super white guy. O'Brien did his job too well and left me with a protagonist I despise. He's not an anti-hero (a villain we root for) and he's not a sympathetic foil (someone whose terrible choices we understand). He's just awful.

If you loved Pale Fire or any book by Philip Roth (I did, I do), then you will enjoy this book. Somehow for me though, this one just caught in my throat.

If you like quirky, but intelligent, you’ll simply delight in this story of debonair linguistics professor Thomas H. Chippering who is obsessed with his one true love, Lorna Sue, but also with women in general. After his marriage fails and he blunders his way through an odd assortment of other women, Chippering hatches a plot to take revenge on his ex-wife, her “tycoon” husband, and her (incestuous?) brother.

With Chippering, Tim O’Brien has created a distinctive and hilarious character, one so unlike those of his Viet Nam war novels. The author’s creative use of language literally bounces his protagonist along this novel’s zany path. Something is not quite right about most of the characters in this story. Nevertheless, out show more of chaos comes fun for O’Brien’s readers and insight for our main man, which eventually leads to a just-right ending. This novel comes highly recommended for a rollicking good time! show less

O'Brien always seems to dig into these nooks and crannies of the psyche that go unexplored by most authors. Here, the awful, awful titular character dwells on the unique characteristics words take on when coupled with experience. It's unnerving in a way that I'm having trouble describing (just like some parts of The Lake of the Woods chilled me in some fundamental way that I still can't unpack, years after reading it).

Anyway, this is a really well-written book, and as loathsome as Chippering is, I think O'Brien turns a mirror around a bit to point it back at the reader. The satire works, too, though I can't figure out how some reviewers pegged this as a straight-up ha-ha comedy. It's a comedy in the classic Greek sense, I guess....

All of the reviews quoted on the cover of Tomcat in Love call it a "comic novel," or "wildly funny," or "laugh-out-loud funny." I closed the book and looked at those reviews multiple times during my reading. The main character is sort of a hapless guy. He's a professor of linguistics in Minnesota, a Vietnam veteran, a man who is irresistible to women (don't believe that? Just ask him, he'll tell you) - and yet, things seem to always turn out wrong for him. He married his childhood sweetheart, Lorna Sue, but she's since left him and married a tycoon with a stupid name. The problem is that Thomas just can't let go, no matter what his pursuit of her does to his life.

Sounds hilarious, right?

It is, kind of. It reminded me of an Elmore show more Leonard novel being put into a blender with Catch-22 and about a third of Tristram Shandy, and then someone sneaking in a dash of A Confederacy of Dunces. (Full disclosure: I absolutely hated A Confederacy of Dunces, but I cannot help but note some similarities between Ignatius T. Reilly and Thomas H. Chippering). O'Brien has a way of mixing the heartbreaking, the true, and the ridiculous together from paragraph to paragraph, and he does that frequently here. I felt like the book was maybe just a tad over-long, but I'm not sure what could be cut. I just know that my reading pace slowed in the latter part.

Recommended for: fans of breaking the fourth wall, logophiles, people who don't mind the absurd mixed in with their pathos (or vice versa).

Quote: "The shortest distance between two points may well be a straight line, but one must remember that efficiency is not the only narrative virtue." show less

The first 200 pages of this book are funny, but after that, the narration of our protagonist get much more disorganized. Thomas is a self-absorbed creep who loves to hear is voice too much. His speeches are nothing but a bunch of supercilious shit, but at the same time, I can't stop cheering for him. What's odd is that he seems less crazy than the ex-wife he stalks.

I wanted to read this book because I had previously read The Things They Carried and In the Lake of the Woods. I'd call myself a Tim O'Brien fan at this point, and this book is a very nice change from the others I have read.

from James:

I can't believe I read the whole thing. I'm usually one to give up on books I'm not enjoying, but this was a train wreck; I couldn't look away. By that I don't mean the writing, I mean the main character, Tom. As always, O'Brien leads the reader along with half truths until the end, but this time I just felt manipulated.

Here are two passages that sum up the book:

-from page 176: Even in the most banal circumstances, human love is a subtle and enigmatic phenomenon, almost beyond analysis, but in my own particular case, which was nothing if not unique, the ordinary amative complexities seemed to have been multiplied by a factor verging on the infinite. On the one hand I had loved Lorna Sue completely and absolutely. On the other show more hand there was the reality of my ledger. Between those two poles lay the force field of my individuality, that ceaseless internal warfare we call "character." (I was not simple Lothario; I was complicated.) I yearned for steadfast, eternal love, as represented by the lasting fidelity of one woman, but at the same time I wanted to be wanted. Universally. Without exception--by one and all. I wanted my cake, to be sure, but I coveted the occasional cupcake too.

- and from page 322: Old facts, new spin.

I really like O'Brien's writing, but instead of this one, try his more famous books: The Things They Carried and Going after Cacciato first. Then, if you can stomach it, you might enjoy Tomcat in Love. show less