I have long been curious about Ali Smith’s books. I tried reading one of her books some time ago, but struggled with it and left it just a couple of chapters in. I think her writing was a bit too cerebral and kept me at a distance from the plot. But I did want to try again, and so picked up How to be both (really trying to do some justice to my Man Booker reading plan).
This time around, I managed to complete her book, but my impression remains the same – very literary, very clever, but a tad too cerebral. I appreciate the writing, the artfulness of the book, but remain untouched by the story and the people.
About the book
How to be both is a novel all about art’s versatility. Borrowing from painting’s fresco technique to make an original literary double-take, it’s a fast-moving genre-bending conversation between forms, times, truths and fictions. There’s a Renaissance artist of the 1460s. There’s the child of a child of the 1960s. Two tales of love and injustice twist into a singular yarn where time gets timeless, structural gets playful, knowing gets mysterious, fictional gets real—and all life’s givens get given a second chance.
~ Synopsis from goodreads
My Review
I have so many thoughts on this book. It took me ages to unpack what’s going on. But the basic setup is that a 15th-century painter, Francescho del Cossa, is yanked through time and space to invisibly observe a 16-year-old (Georgia, aka George) grieving the death of her mother in contemporary England.
How you experience the novel depends on chance: half of the copies are printed so that George’s story occupies the first section of the narrative, and the other half start with Francescho’s narrative. I got the book with George’s story first. Regardless of which one you get, I feel that the book requires at least two readings to understand everything as a whole and put the plot together, which would have been nice if the story had been a bit more gripping. I liked it, but not enough to read it all over again back-to-back.
The two parts are also very differently written, and the difference is stark enough that they could almost be two separate novellas. George’s story reads very modern YA, while Francescho is like historical fiction. The difference in story treatment is offset by the similarity in their characters. Both of them are female; Francescho poses as a man to enter a male dominated career, Georgia is boyish and possibly exploring her gender identity and/or her sexuality.
The two stories are quite separate, but mildly impinge on each other, or at least it felt that way reading the story in the George + Francescho order. I am not sure how my experience would have been if I read it the other way round. I definitely think I would have been more invested in the book as Francescho’s story is the stronger, more compelling one.
I struggled understanding the title though and the reasoning for structuring the book in the way she did. I wasn’t sure what the both in the title was referring to. I also felt like both stories ended very abruptly with no conclusion in sight, and I never quite understood why Francescho was able to see George and follow her around if she was unable to have any part in her life other than observing?
What I did appreciate was learning that Francescho is based on real Renaissance artist Franceso del Cossa, and the painting referred to in her work is this one.
I wish I had known this while reading the book. Seeing this image would have helped me visualize and appreciate the story better as I was reading.
