Under Review

Gwendoline Riley’s New Novel Surveys the Wreckage of Middle Age

格温多琳·莱利的新作审视中年生活的残骸
“The Palm House” is haunted by stubborn male egos and sharp-edged women whose honesty is often ineffectual in the face of life.
《棕榈屋》里萦绕着顽固的男性自负与棱角分明的女性——她们在生活面前那份诚实的锋芒,往往徒劳无功。
April 22, 2026
Illustration of couple by a window
Illustration by Shane Cluskey

The danger of describing other people, of applying adjectives to human beings, is that words stick and flatten. The moment I say that my mother is X, I destroy every aspect of her that X fails to contain. As each word of a sentence unfurls and you home in on your point, you risk losing hold of a person’s layers, their texture and shape. An insect stuck to a board: the metaphor’s overused, but it holds. A novelist’s task is to get the insect pinned but keep it quivering. Most writers give up. Their books have moments that flutter and spurt, images or scenes brought to vivid life, but then readers want heroes and plot, characters they like—meaning characters who are softer, less fearful simulacra of themselves. There’s an appalling conception of fiction as an escape, when, in fact, its job is to make us more attuned to life’s truths rather than blunted, far away.

描述他人、将形容词加诸人身是危险的,因为词语会黏附、会压平。一旦我说母亲是X,我便抹杀了X无法涵盖的她的一切。当句子逐词展开,你聚焦于论点时,便可能失去对一个人层次、质感与形态的把握。昆虫钉在展板上——这比喻虽被用滥,却依然成立。小说家的任务是将昆虫钉住,同时让它保持颤动。多数作家放弃了。他们的作品偶有扑闪迸溅的瞬间,意象或场景被赋予鲜活生命,但读者总想要英雄与情节,想要讨喜的角色——实则是更柔软、更少恐惧的自我仿制品。有种骇人的观念将小说视作逃避,可事实上,小说的使命是让我们更敏锐地感知生活真相,而非钝化感知、远离真实。

Gwendoline Riley, who’s published eight books in the U.K. and is now out with “The Palm House,” in the U.S., seems instinctually able to keep the insect quivering. Her novels linger hardly at all on exposition and plot, and open mid-conversation, or in what seems like mid-thought. They sometimes lose hold of time but bound forward with a vibrating force. Scenes are tightly contained, dialogue hurled back and forth. The effect is that of a metal detector held close to the ground, finding the spaces that complicate and contradict whatever assumptions we might feel compelled to make about others.

格温多琳·莱利(Gwendoline Riley)在英国已出版八部作品,如今她的新作《棕榈屋》在美国面世。她似乎天生就懂得如何让那只昆虫保持震颤。她的小说几乎不流连于铺陈与情节,往往在对话中段或思绪半途骤然展开。时间感时而模糊,文字却以震颤之力向前奔涌。场景高度凝练,对话如投枪般往来交错。这种效果恰似紧贴地面的金属探测器,总能探入那些幽微地带——它们不断瓦解着我们自以为对他人形成的认知,让那些定见变得复杂而矛盾。

Discover notable new fiction, nonfiction, and poetry.

发现值得关注的小说、非虚构与诗歌新作。

Like many of Riley’s earlier books, “The Palm House” is narrated in the first person, by a woman—this time, her name is Laura—who grew up lower middle class, with a selfish, bumbling mom and a cruel, ignorant dad. The settings and details (sometimes there’s a sibling; the parents may be either alive or dead) aren’t always the same, but the same basic structure recurs across her fiction. Laura’s a writer. She has left the town where she was raised and made a life in London, but she’s still stuck, unable to stop circling the people and places she comes from. Up to this point, “The Palm House” resembles Riley’s two most recent novels, “First Love” and “My Phantoms.” From here, though, the novel diverges. The narrative focusses less tightly on the “I” than in her earlier books, and—these departures feel linked—the “I” has reached middle age.

与莱利早前的许多作品一样,《棕榈屋》采用第一人称叙事,叙述者是一位在底层中产家庭长大的女性——这次她名叫劳拉——母亲自私而笨拙,父亲冷酷又愚昧。故事背景与细节(有时会出现兄弟姐妹;父母或健在或已故)并非总是一成不变,但这种基本结构在她的虚构作品中反复出现。劳拉是个作家。她离开了成长的小镇,在伦敦安家立业,却仍困在原地,无法停止围绕故土与故人打转。至此,《棕榈屋》仍延续着莱利前两部小说《初恋》与《我的幻影》的脉络。但从这里开始,小说走向了岔路。叙事不再像早期作品那样紧密聚焦于"我"的视角——而"我"已步入中年,这种疏离感与年龄转折似乎相互关联。

Speaking of middle age: the book is wreckage from the start. It’s 2017. Laura and a friend, Putnam, sit and drink at a bar on the Thames. A hurricane offshore whips up ash and sand from wildfires in Spain. Putnam has just quit his job as an editor at a magazine called Sequence. He and Laura have been friends for years, allied by what each of them wanted most to become, and are now joined together less by shared hopes than by the disappointments and frustrations that having become entails. As with so many magazines, Sequence’s board has no sense of what the magazine is, and when its editor-in-chief dies he’s replaced by a cad—he insists on being called Shove—whom everyone, but especially Putnam, hates. Putnam is forty-nine, and has been at Sequence more than half his life. His father has just died. He is unfailingly committed to the fact of his pain. Laura, long-suffering friend, tries again and again to take him out, cheer him up; she helps clean out his father’s house and suggests other jobs. But Putnam is dogged, digging his heels in:

说到中年:这本书从一开始就是一片狼藉。那是2017年。劳拉和一位名叫帕特南的朋友坐在泰晤士河畔的酒吧里喝酒。远海的一场飓风卷起了西班牙野火留下的灰烬与沙尘。帕特南刚辞去《序列》杂志编辑的工作。他和劳拉相识多年,曾因各自最想成为的模样而结盟,如今将他们维系在一起的却不再是共同的希望,而是成为之后必然伴随的失望与挫败。和许多杂志一样,《序列》的董事会根本不明白这本杂志是什么,当主编去世后,接替者是个混蛋——他坚持要别人叫他"肖夫"——所有人都讨厌他,尤其是帕特南。帕特南四十九岁,在《序列》度过了大半生。他的父亲刚刚去世。他固执地沉溺于自己的痛苦之中。劳拉作为长期忍耐的朋友,一次次试图带他出门散心;她帮忙清理他父亲的房子,还建议他找其他工作。但帕特南很顽固,寸步不让。

He didn’t want reassurance. He didn’t want sense. He didn’t want fellowship. He did not want a substantive conversation. I found it mind-bending, to be faced down by this willful ignorance from one of the cleverest people I knew. I felt a prey object. Putnam was forty-nine! And as well as living, had he not spent a good proportion of those years reading, thinking, watching films? Had none of that given him an inkling of how to face life? Some model for elegant survival? Maybe this was all one in the eye for that old myth. Or new myth, was it? Newspaper-pedalled? If I thought of it that way I was less lost. Why should he learn anything? Was that a way to look at it? Or had he absorbed something else? Was this a sort of bovarism I was dealing with?

他不需要安慰。他不需要道理。他不需要陪伴。他不需要实质性的对话。面对这位我认识的最聪明的人之一如此固执的无知,我感到思维错乱。我成了被猎食的对象。帕特南(Putnam)已经四十九岁了!除了活着,他难道没有把那些年的大部分时间用来阅读、思考、看电影吗?难道这些经历没有给他一丝如何面对生活的启示吗?没有提供某种优雅生存的范本吗?或许这一切都是对那个古老神话——或者说新神话?报纸鼓吹的那种?——的当头一棒。这样想时,我就不那么迷茫了。他凭什么要学什么呢?可以这样看待这件事吗?还是说他吸收了别的东西?我面对的莫非是一种包法利主义?

Like Emma Bovary, who yearns to be “the amoureuse of all the novels, the heroine of all the plays, the vague ‘she’ of all the books,” Putnam keeps reaching for impossible things, not least a sense of freedom from the drudgery of real life. He’s too blustery and finally self-protective—he doesn’t kill himself—to be Emma, but, at the end of the novel’s first section, he tells Laura that when he broke up with Katherine, a member of the Sequence team and apparently the only serious girlfriend of his life, he took a train to the Sussex coast. “ ‘I kept walking and I kept shouting,’ he said. The word he shouted, over and over again, was, ‘Free.’ ”

就像包法利夫人渴望成为"所有小说中的情人,所有戏剧中的女主角,所有书籍里那个朦胧的'她'"那样,帕特南(Putnam)也在不断追逐不可能的事物,尤其是从现实生活的苦役中挣脱出来的自由感。他太过虚张声势,最终又太懂得自我保护——他没有自杀——所以成不了爱玛,但在小说第一部分的结尾,他告诉劳拉(Laura),当年与序列团队成员凯瑟琳(Katherine)分手时——她显然是他生命中唯一认真交往过的女友——他乘火车去了苏塞克斯海岸。"'我不停地走,不停地喊,'他说。他反复喊着的那个词是:'自由。'"

Riley’s previous novel, “My Phantoms,” opens, as “The Palm House” does, in the middle of a conversation. The narrator’s grandmother is talking about her late husband, who served during the Second World War:

莱利(Riley)的前作《我的幻影》(My Phantoms)与《棕榈屋》(The Palm House)一样,开篇便是一场对话的中间。叙述者的祖母正谈论她已故的丈夫——那位曾在二战期间服役的男人。

There was “nothing for him” in England.

英格兰"没有他的容身之地"。

“There were no ‘Homes for Heroes.’ Oh no. No ‘Homes for Heroes.’ ”

"哪有什么'英雄之家'。哦,没有。根本没有'英雄之家'。"

My grandmother said this indignantly. And if my mother was there, she used to shake her head and join in: “There was nothing, no. Nothing.”

祖母愤愤不平地说出这句话。如果母亲在场,她也会摇头附和:"什么都没有,真的。什么都没有。"

That repeated “nothing” is surely a deliberate echo of the “ ‘Nothing?’ ‘Nothing.’ ” in “King Lear,” when Lear beseeches each of his three daughters to declare the strength of their love for him, and his youngest, Cordelia, replies that she is unable to speak what is not true. The central deadlock of the play—a daughter unwilling to pander to a parental figure’s pride, a father unwilling to suffer being wounded in that way—recurs throughout Riley’s books, which are haunted by stubborn, Lear-like male egos and hard-edged women whose honesty is bracing yet often ineffectual in the face of life. “The Palm House,” in focussing its attention on Putnam, seems to ask—like so many podcasts and op-eds over the past several years—what is owed, really, to men? Yes, there’s wreckage all around, but what’s new about that?

这反复出现的"nothing"(无)无疑是对《李尔王》中"'Nothing?' 'Nothing.'"("无?""无。")的有意呼应——当李尔王恳求三个女儿各自表白对他的爱意时,小女儿科迪莉亚回答她无法言说违心之语。这出戏剧的核心僵局——女儿不愿迎合父辈的虚荣,父亲不愿承受这般伤害——在赖利的作品中反复出现,那些顽固如李尔王的男性自我与棱角分明的女性形象萦绕其间,后者诚实的品质令人振奋,却往往在现实面前徒劳无功。《棕榈屋》将聚光灯对准帕特南,似乎像过去几年众多播客和专栏文章那样叩问:我们究竟亏欠男性什么?是的,周遭尽是废墟,但这又有什么新鲜?

Once Putnam has been established, the book’s relationship to both character and time shifts. The narration runs through a klatch of men Laura’s known, all of whom waver between absurd and pathetic but who are still able to harm. The worst is Chris Patrick, a comedian popular “with a certain kind of girl,” to whom Laura sent adoring tape recordings when she was young. (“It seemed awful to me that he was lonely, as he often said. ‘So lonely’ was his phrase. What a world, I thought. What could it mean that someone like that could be lonely?”) She starts going to his comedy shows, where she makes a friend, Anna. He invites them back to his hotel. He’s twenty-nine; they’re both in their teens. “Giz a squeeze,” he says. Laura describes the fantasies she and Anna have about Chris Patrick, “about a future where he had been brought low somehow and we went and found him and rescued him. No one recognized or remembered him except for us. . . . We were in our thirties, elegant and fulfilled; he was fifty, and, frankly, a wreck.” They’re smarter than him, and it’s useless in the face of age, gender, money, power. But then, even as teens, the girls sense that time will alter how that power feels and looks.

普特南的形象确立后,小说与人物及时间的关系开始转变。叙述穿梭于劳拉认识的各色男性之间——这些人既荒谬又可怜,却依然能造成伤害。最恶劣的是喜剧演员克里斯·帕特里克(Chris Patrick),他受"某种类型的女孩"追捧,劳拉少女时期曾给他寄过倾慕的录音带。"他总说自己孤独,'太孤独了'是他的口头禅,这让我觉得可怕。我想,这是什么世道啊,那样的人怎么会孤独?"她开始去看他的喜剧演出,在那里结识了朋友安娜。他邀请她们去酒店房间。他二十九岁;她们都不到二十。"来抱一下。"他说。劳拉描述着她和安娜对克里斯·帕特里克的幻想:"幻想他将来某天落魄潦倒,我们去找到他、拯救他。除了我们没人认得他、记得他……那时我们三十多岁,优雅又满足;他五十岁,坦白说,成了废人。"她们比他聪明,但在年龄、性别、金钱、权力面前毫无用处。然而即便在少女时期,她们已隐约感到时间将改变这种权力的面貌与分量。

We get only a few pages about Laura’s father, by way of her uncle, Owen, who calls to report her father’s death. As in Riley’s previous two books, the novel orbits around the mother—the barnacle or spur the narrator can’t shake. But we learn enough. Owen is a bad-dad-apologist. He and his wife helped to take care of Laura’s dad late in his life. And then this: “Owen had often been there during those long half-term holidays I’d had to spend with my father. He’d seen what went on. Owen, I remember, had dutifully come and sniffed my armpit while my father had held my arm up and said, ‘It’s not just me, is it, that’s a pretty ripe smell?’ ” Laura’s life, in other words, has always been part wreck.

关于劳拉的父亲,我们只从她叔叔欧文那里得知寥寥数页——欧文来电告知她父亲的死讯。正如莱利前两部作品那样,这部小说始终围绕着母亲展开,她如同藤壶或马刺般让叙述者无法摆脱。但我们了解到的已足够多。欧文是个糟糕父亲的辩护者,他和妻子在劳拉父亲晚年时帮忙照料。接着是这段:"那些漫长的期中假期我不得不和父亲共处时,欧文常常在场。他目睹了发生的一切。我记得,当父亲抬起我的胳膊说'不是我一个人这么觉得吧,这味道够冲的?'时,欧文曾尽责地凑过来嗅我的腋窝。"换言之,劳拉的人生始终带着破碎的痕迹。

The book’s movements through time don’t always declare themselves. We get a page break, a new section or chapter, and then we’re in a different period, sometimes marked and sometimes not. In the place of rising action or climax, what pressure exists in the book arises from a sort of roiling helplessness. Laura sees the world so clearly: her mother’s inanities, the failures of the men she knows, the chasm between what she wishes life were and what she knows it is. But what does seeing clearly get her? Her mom is still her mom. Her body still wants sex. The rumbling aliveness of the novel comes, in part, from the friction of these facts: what does it mean, really, to know better? No matter how many years we spend reading, thinking, watching films, somehow, insanely, we still have to live. As the story’s scenes accrue, this collision creates a sense, if not of agency or of power (which is perhaps the stuff of heroes), at least of stamina, the recognition that more and more life, more and more looking at it, can generate its own sort of strength.

这本书在时间中的流转并不总是清晰可辨。我们翻过一页,进入新的章节,便已身处另一个时期——有时会标明时间,有时则不然。书中没有传统意义上的情节推进或高潮迭起,所有的张力都源自一种翻腾不休的无力感。劳拉把世界看得如此透彻:母亲空洞的言辞、身边男性的无能、理想生活与现实之间的鸿沟。但这份清醒又能带给她什么?母亲依然是那个母亲。身体依然渴望着性。小说中涌动的生命力,部分正来自这些事实的摩擦:所谓"看得更明白",究竟意味着什么?无论我们读过多少书、思考过多少问题、看过多少电影,不可思议的是,我们终究还得继续生活。随着故事场景不断累积,这种碰撞产生了一种感觉——即便不是掌控感或力量感(那或许是英雄的特质),至少也是一种持久力,一种认知:经历更多生活,凝视更多现实,本身就能孕育出某种力量。

Just once, Laura tries to explain her mother to Putnam. He immediately pins her down: “Northern . . . this annihilating flippancy . . . everything I’ve fought against for my whole life.” Laura’s annoyed enough never to try again, and also has to admit that most of what he says is true. Her mother is flip. She’ll do most anything for “a laff,” as Putnam says. And yet, in the scene immediately preceding this one, Laura has met up with her mother and her erstwhile boyfriend. Her mother’s been laid off and says—flippantly—that she might spend the time revisiting all the places she’s lived, “just as a project.” Laura suggests that it “could tell a story . . . a bit of social history. Where life has taken you.” The conversation drifts. The subject is dropped.

只有一次,劳拉试图向帕特南解释她的母亲。他立刻打断她:"北方人……这种毁灭性的轻浮……我这辈子都在与之抗争。"劳拉气得再也不愿尝试,也不得不承认他说的多半是事实。她母亲确实轻浮。正如帕特南所说,她几乎可以为"找点乐子"做任何事。然而,就在这场对话发生前,劳拉刚与母亲和她前男友见过面。母亲刚被解雇,轻描淡写地说或许可以趁此机会重访所有住过的地方,"就当是个项目"。劳拉建议这"可以讲个故事……一段社会史。看看生活把你带到了哪里。"谈话渐渐飘散。这个话题就此搁置。

Only later do you realize that “The Palm House” moves past and into the houses and flats that Laura’s inhabited. Her mother’s idea was good. The vibrating center of all Riley’s books lies in moments like this. Laura’s mom is as silly as Putnam assumes. But no person is just an adjective. Putnam—with his glib dismissals, his unwillingness to consider what he might be besides the fallen hero of Sequence, to feel something beyond the agony of his father’s loss and his mother’s before that (“Putnam’s mother had died when he was twelve, but this fact was still in some way the key piece of information about him”)—fails to see this.

直到后来你才意识到,《棕榈屋》的叙事早已越过那座温室,延伸至劳拉居住过的那些房屋与公寓。她母亲的直觉是对的。莱利所有作品的震颤核心,都藏在这般时刻里。诚如帕特南所想,劳拉的母亲确实有些傻气。但人从来不只是某个形容词。帕特南——他那轻率的否定,他不愿思考自己除了《序列》中陨落的英雄之外还能成为什么,不愿感受父亲离世(以及更早母亲去世)痛苦之外的任何情感("帕特南十二岁时失去了母亲,但这个事实在某种程度上仍是理解他的关键")——恰恰没能看清这一点。

Riley is much too sharp a writer to pose and answer a single question in her fiction. Being inside her novels is a singular, spiky, often deeply funny experience. But, insofar as “The Palm House” casts its keen eye on men, it lingers on the ways that stories about heroes, about conquering and winning, about what men are owed and deserve, can be just as much of a trap as the stories told to women about what we are or aren’t.

莱利(Riley)是位极其敏锐的作家,从不会在小说中简单地抛出并回答某个单一问题。进入她的小说世界,总是一种独特、犀利且时常令人捧腹的体验。不过,就《棕榈屋》对男性的犀利审视而言,这部作品始终在叩问:那些关于英雄、关于征服与胜利、关于男性应得之物的叙事,是否与强加于女性的"应然"故事一样,同样可能成为困住他们的牢笼。

I don’t believe revealing plot points spoils books, so I will say: Putnam returns to Sequence in the end, as incapable of facing any sense that his life is less than what he had hoped as he was at the beginning. But it’s Laura and the reader who have learned—the novel has shown us if we’ve not yet lived enough ourselves—the weight and import of a survival that is not always elegant, but all the more expansive and hard-won. ♦

我不认为透露情节会破坏一本书的阅读体验,所以我要说:普特南最终回到了锡昆斯镇,他依然像故事开始时那样,无法直面自己的人生未能达到期望的现实。但劳拉和读者已经领悟——这部小说向我们展示了,如果我们自身阅历尚浅——一种生存方式的沉重与意义:它未必总是优雅的,却因此更显辽阔,且来之不易。♦

2 free previews left — register to get 30 translations a month