The quotes in this book offer profound insights into various aspects of life. On change, Jules remarks that there won't be a riot, as the stationary and dusty world seems to support his claim. The common thread of humanity through time is evident when one realizes that people have always been the same, lonely and hopeful, and that reading their thoughts makes time seem to stand still. Love is described as a delirium that can drive a person crazy, while unrequited love brings anticipation and trembling. The meaninglessness of the world is emphasized by the chaotic and ever-changing headlines in the newspapers, making one question how to live in such a crazy world.

Self-knowledge is also explored, with the understanding that each person is unique and cannot escape their own self. The transience of things, such as love and marriage, is a recurring theme, leaving one wondering what can truly last. The book also contains many interesting observations about women and men. Women are described as having a wealth of words and emotions, while men are often silent. Women contemplate and judge, while men act without thinking. Maureen sees a man as a machine, following a cycle of love that she has memorized. And women, in general, are the ones who wait, dream, and wonder what will come next in their lives.

There were certain aspects of the story that I truly adored.

For instance, the specific events involving Loretta, Maureen, and especially Jules were captivating.

However, the in-between sections, which were filled with highly descriptive inner thoughts of these characters, felt a bit excessive to me.

While I understand the importance of delving into the characters' minds to gain a deeper understanding of their motives and emotions, at times it seemed to overshadow the actual progression of the plot.

I found myself skimming through some of these overly detailed passages, eager to get back to the more action-packed or dialogue-driven parts of the story.

Nevertheless, I still appreciate the author's effort in creating such complex and multi-faceted characters, and I look forward to seeing how their stories unfold in the future.

Overall, it was a good read, with a few areas that could perhaps be refined for a more seamless and engaging experience.

Joyce Carol Oates is truly a unique and polarizing author.

Her works are not for the faint of heart or those seeking light and fluffy reads. Mostly, she delves into the lives of characters that one would likely avoid in real life. However, once their stories are laid out on the pages, it becomes impossible to look away.

In "Them," Oates sinks her teeth deep into the essence of what it means to be human. The characters she creates are like a mirror reflecting the diverse and complex individuals living in the world today.

Despite the sometimes uncomfortable or unlikable nature of her stories, Oates is an undeniably great storyteller. Her ability to draw readers in and keep them engaged is a testament to her talent.

Personally, I have really enjoyed the Wonderland series. Although "Them" may not be my absolute favorite book from the series, it still holds a special place in my heart for its raw and unflinching portrayal of the human condition.

Overall, Joyce Carol Oates's works are a must-read for those who are brave enough to explore the darker and more complex aspects of life and人性.

A very crucial aspect of excellent writing, a quality that is most astonishing and always showcases itself in a proficient, skillful, and good writer, is this: a story, a plot, or even a premise can be completely outside your realm of interest, ten feet away from your concerns and the fucks you're willing to give. And yet, it can still enthrall you as a reader and keep you engaged, solely by the sheer power of a writer's prose and style. This sums up my relationship with this particular work. The story itself is filled to the brim with exaggerations and melodrama that would befit the worst soap opera out there. Let's not forget the Jules and Nadine arc, whose vibes gave me PTSD flashbacks of the horrible Twin Peaks episodes with the silly pouty kid James and his cringe-worthy black widow lady. Thank you very much. It was so meh to me, and I swear if it weren't for JCO, I would've thrown away the book. Donna Tartt's shitty novels were bad enough for my reading experience, and I would never subject myself to such bad, poor, vapid, fecal matter-like writing that is only relevant because a bunch of nitwits in Gen Z, good-for-nothing TikTokers, are bratty motherfuckers.

The novel is a "naturalistic novel" about a wretched working-class family in Detroit. There are many of the 19th-century naturalistic writing schemes, worthy of a meticulous Zola or a sadistic frenzy for details à la Flaubert, and a D.H. Lawrence-like scalpel psychology dissection of characters and masculine prowess in its Medusan gaze for both genders alike, which will make your inner feminist-snowflake-wuss-generation self enraged.

Yet, JCO doesn't stop there. From the very first page, the dreaded "Author's Note" lets you in on a metafictional joke: "the story is not fictional at all, Maureen Wendall was a student of mine, this is her story according to her, I even embedded some of her letters to me in some chapters, here be my guest, read them". And you, as a gullible reader, take the bullet.

The joke was on you, dear reader, my enemy, my like! For the note and the JCO addressed in the MW letters were also fictional.

Even the arc that was the hardest on me, Jules and his Nadine, was written in a prose that was dissecting in a very cold and detached, yet at the same time poetic, way. The power relation at play and the manifestation of Eros and Thanatos in male sexuality were explored. That was completely brilliant too.

Also, if you want Don Delillo-esque dialogues between silly 60's student revolutionaries, then this novel is for you. If you want a dissection of human cruelty, racism, misogyny, bloodline curses, and American dream red pilling and other shit worthy of a Faulkner or an O'Connor, then this novel is for you.

All in all, it's a good parody of naturalistic writing. JCO is a superb writer. I believe she can write anything and excel at it.

For a woman who has resided in Detroit for merely a few years, it is truly astonishing how vividly she brings this city to life.

Everything seems so real to me - and that holds significant weight considering these characters are so difficult to fathom, highly dysfunctional, perhaps even sociopaths or crazy.

Oates manages to step into their shoes, fully experiencing every dreadful thought and every terrible deed.

Yes, it is alarmingly violent and although the characters may seem implausible, their actions are consistent with who they are.

Oates never shrinks back; she neither explains nor judges them.

As she states, there are countless ways to interpret a story, and each reader takes away what they can.

On the initial reading, I was both captivated by her authenticity and violence and shocked by it.

On the second reading, I gained a deeper appreciation for the characters and who they were, and how their identities were intricately intertwined with the world they emerged from.

Oates allows them to be as they are, without attempting to reform them or impose a moral framework on this story.

Despite its darkness, bleakness, and craziness, I discovered on this reading that once the shock subsides, one can perceive tiny rays of light within this dark portrait that Oates has painted.

It dawned on me as a tragic story that is illuminated.

I've been endeavoring to make my way through all of the National Book Award Fiction winners, and I was truly glad to have a reason to read this particular novel.

At first, I had a rather difficult time getting fully immersed in the book. In fact, after reading about 30 pages or so, I almost gave up, as I felt completely unconnected with any of the characters. However, I'm extremely glad that I persisted.

The story centers around a hardscrabble working poor family in Detroit during the 1960s. There are three main characters - the mother, son, and daughter - who are generally the focal points of the novel, and the focus alternates from chapter to chapter. The family members endure a succession of tough events (I won't provide any spoilers here). Oates presents each of them in a sympathetic yet also realistic way. You get to experience all of their bumps, warts, troubles, and successes.

It's truly great to read a novel that zeroes in on the troubles of a working-class family. The language that Oates employs in the novel is stark and direct. After those initial 30 or so pages, the novel progresses at a brisk pace, filled with numerous interesting threads and plot twists and turns, making it a captivating read.

On an unfailingly rewarding journey through the complete works of JCO, I’m currently finishing #19, Marya: a life.

In between times, I’m reading Greg Johnson’s biography - Invisible Writer. So far, I’ve enjoyed every title of hers that I’ve read. But most of all, I’ve loved Blonde and them.

Her depiction of Detroit in the late 1960s still seems horribly relevant to present day USA. The characters from them were so real to me that they’ve stayed in my mind as if they were people I’ve actually met. In particular, of course, Maureen and Jules Wendell. Jules must be the archetypal anti-hero. It’s easy to see why JCO confessed to an ‘abiding affection for him, among all her characters’.

It would have been fascinating to know more of his later history. It's surely one of the greatest novels in the English language. The way JCO weaves the story, the depth of the characters, and the social commentary she presents make it a truly remarkable work. I can't wait to see what else she has in store for her readers in her other works.

A searing and complicated look at the (de?)evolution of a family stricken by poverty and the loveless underbelly of the American Dream, them earned Joyce Carol Oates the National Book Award in 1970, and rightfully so. This novel delves deep into the lives of its characters, presenting a raw and unflinching portrayal of their struggles.

Readers expecting easily likable characters and neat resolutions need not apply. This is a big novel with something worthwhile to say. It challenges our preconceptions and forces us to confront the harsh realities of life.

JCO herself says this is one of the books she feels she will be remembered for having written. And it's not hard to see why. This challenging, and honest, look at the lower class dealing with woes of all sorts, is worth the hype. It's a masterpiece that will stay with you long after you've turned the last page.

This is the third novel in the quartet of the Wonderland Series.

Not having read the other books, I was truly unsure as to whether I would be able to pick this one up and "catch on" easily. However, there was no need to fear.

Joyce Carol Oates does it right once again. You can read this book even if you have never even heard of the others and still enjoy it on its own merits.

She takes you back to the 50's in Detroit, allowing you to vividly see and feel what it was like to be poor and struggling during those days.

The story encompasses a wide range of themes including race, class, family, love, urban life, marriage, and women. It's truly the whole shebang!

As always, I absolutely loved it. There is just something about her writing that has an irresistible pull on me and makes me identify deeply with her women characters.

Somehow, she seems to have an uncanny understanding of how everyone would feel, from the young child who is terrified of her father to the abused teenager who dreams of getting away and becoming a good mother.

Her ability to bring these characters and their emotions to life is truly remarkable.

I had great difficulty in giving this novel such a low assessment. Truly, I have a deep appreciation for "how" Oates writes. As a highly intellectual author who composes in a high register and employs literary devices so brilliantly, Oates belongs to the same category as Philip Roth or John Updike. However, there is a lack of levity, and I must admit that it is sometimes this very ingredient that makes writers who write in this way more bearable.

My issue with "Them" is that the tone of the writing, its register, diction, and literariness, seem to divorce the writing from the story being told. In most cases, good writers strive to describe the world they have created or are visiting in the language of its inhabitants, thereby making the telling appear authentic and valid. If the world in question is that of the dirt poor, for example, does it make sense to express the thoughts, feelings, and so on of the characters in the exceedingly recondite, exalted, and eloquent language of an Ivy League academic? Do we really want to hear this story told by that particular voice? Doesn't the jarring discrepancy between the two worlds throw us off? Unfortunately, it did for me. One can't help but wonder why Oates, with her background, chose to turn her attention to the social stratum examined in this novel. Anyway, in my opinion, she botches the project, for despite the penetrating and nuanced insights of her powerful mind, her voice still puts her at odds with the subject matter.

I just read JCO's little intro last night. I have to finish another book first, so I'll probably start tomorrow. I wanted to read "What I Lived For" but haven't been able to find it at the local libraries, so I'll read this relatively famous one. "We Were the Mulvaneys" was only so-so for me, but I want to give the author another shot. My edition is a paperback with a murky B&W cover photo of a riot scene.

Day one... I'm still barely into the book, but I like the author's style. It's abrupt, almost brutal.

Another day... I'm making some progress here, but my spare time has become precious. Job demands and car woes... I was thinking that I've read a number of books in recent years about the troubles of white families in the land of opportunity (America). "The Corrections", "After This", and "We Were the Mulvaneys" are some that come to mind, and now this book, which drops the observo-scope down lower on the old socioeconomic scale. The family in this book is intensely dysfunctional, nomadic, and hopeless. Emotional and spiritual nourishment for the kids is not forthcoming. We are learning how two of the children cope and try to create their own more satisfying and protected inner lives, immune from the stresses of their wider (though still constricted) environment. Escape is dreamed of... Who are "them" anyway? The faceless flyover people of America, I suppose. Dead-enders both urban and rural. Obviously, JCO finds the subject fascinating, and the fact that Maureen is based on a real person and her family makes it extra compelling. Not many left in Detroit, I suppose. Maybe Eminem came from the same background as Maureen. She (or someone like her) could be his mother, I suppose. "Middlesex" was also set in Detroit. A very different kind of story, though.

Day next... Another hundred pages into this grim saga. I can sort of relate to those who express misgivings about sticking with the "pain" family all the way. I'm semi-committed to sticking with it. JCO is not a great writer, but she's pretty good, and she means business. Notes: Loretta is another mother in the vein of Mama Mulvaney; hysterical, clueless, and narcissistic but a survivor. I'm seeing parallels with the "Roseanne" show. R. worked as a hair salon go-fer too. Pretty much the same hollering social class too. As in "Vanity Fair", money and/or the lack thereof is paramount. Having it offers a means of escape to freedom and control.

Wed. night... Life is ever strange. Shortly after reading the Jules-Nadine story, I went to see "Moonrise Kingdom", a tale of confused young lovers on the lam... escaping. As for JCO's version, I'm not convinced. Maureen's story seems genuine enough, but the Jules-Nadine thing sounds like some dreamy, overheated 50's movie script; think James Dean and Natalie Wood. I was a teenager and did plenty of talking and listening. I never heard crap like that. And even in the further development section following, they aren't convincing as somewhat older human beings either. Maureen's letters were wonderful. Were they real? Notes: I'm reminded of a fine New Yorker story of 20 or so years ago (JCO?) about a young woman escaping (St. Louis) from a disintegrating family after the father's death. Jules = Leo Di Caprio = Frank in "Rev. Road" - a bullshitter. There are many tales out there of young lovers on the run in America: "Thieves Like Us", "They Live By Night", "Bonnie and Clyde", "Badlands".... Jules and Bernard... what happened to the clever and "resourceful" Jules? A bunch of B.S.? The author's bad habit of going on and on, which crippled "... The Mulvaneys", crops up again. On page 306... "... they hadn't money"????? How about "they didn't have any money" or "they had no money"? Jules' southern sickness reminds me of Joey's S. American woes in "Freedom".

Finished after the weekend. Well... Joyce has done it again; turned a 4* into a 3* by over-writing and overreaching. Same as with my other JCO read, "We Were the Mulvaneys". This is a better book, but not by much. I want to write a lot about what's wrong with this book, but I find myself with a deficit of caring right now. 500 pages for Maureen to tell the creepy Jules to take a hike... I find myself at a loss to understand the fascination and even attraction of the author to Jules. Let's see... runaway, child-arsonist, mugger, burglar, abductor, adulterer, kidnapper, pimp, helpless (?) exploiter of women (can't seem to stop calling ALL of them "Honey"), rioter, looter, and, yes, finally an apparently remorseless murderer. When JCO speaks of "her deep regard for Jules", it reminds me of Mailer's infatuation with Jack Henry Abbott. These writers are like hypnotized babies in the face of clueless, destructive, and criminal narcissism. I'm not saying that the fucked-up lives of people like Loretta, Nadine, Maureen, Brock, Betty (what happened to her?), Jules, and Jim (GET IT?) are not fascinating from a more detached socio/psychological perspective, but get off the "feeling sorry" for them. Get 'em off the streets first. I liked Denis Johnson's approach in describing the Houston brothers better. Gritty and unsentimental... Maureen's struggles seem to be mostly a result of environment and circumstance, but Jules was weird from the git-go. No doubt the depressing family environment didn't help, but he seemed close to going the Bundy route. A better, more interesting, and accessible (to me) route for the author would have been contained by more objectivity. Notes: Jules reminds me of Jack Boughton in "Home". Once again, the author writes way too much delirious prose about someone in spiritual/emotional crisis (Jules). I had to start skipping so I could finish the book. Same with Marianne Mulvaney... Her writing in this book reminded me of "3 Lives" by Gertude Stein. This is not a good thing, but JCO did the dreamy repetitive prose thing better. I guess the idea is to give a realistic word picture of someone's inner life. All that looping repetition and return. The problem is that most of this inner life is non-verbal except for imagined conversations, and thus troubling and potentially excruciating ("Melanctha") when replicated as prose. 3.25 stars...

5-16-2019 update... Yesterday I read/skimmed the Wiki page for Charles Manson (why? - It's complicated - I was following a brain thread), and it occurred to me that Manson's "life" was reminiscent of that of Jules. I wonder if Manson was an inspiration to the author?

I was in Detroit shortly after the riots when I came across this book. It instantly became one of my all-time favorites. However, after reading it, I was plunged into a state of depression that lasted for months. It really made me think about man's inhumanity to man.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough. The writing is truly superb. It is wonderful in every sense. The author has managed to capture the essence of the human condition and the atrocities that we are capable of with great skill and precision.

The story is both heart-wrenching and thought-provoking, and it will stay with you long after you have finished reading. If you are looking for a book that will make you think and feel, then this is the one for you.