Meg Waite ClaytonCritiques

I don't much like reviewing things that didn't do much for me, and am hoping the author and narrator don't read this. Goodreads doesn't seem to have the audio format that I listened to (B013PVQRKW), narrated by Jennifer Ikeda, so I'll use this record.
The first several chapters felt especially contrived -- pulled together perhaps out of various article clippings and photos--it felt removed and, perhaps due to the narration, whimsically nostalgic--the tone was like someone reminiscing about "the good ol' days", which felt miss-placed, given the topic. I liked though, this unique perspective--getting an idea of the monumental risks required from as yet unknown female journalists/photojournalists if they weren't to be completely shut out from covering the war.

I learned a lot about France during WWII, and Surrealist Art. Very well-developed characters..some, but not all based on real people. Unfortunately, it was a little slow, and some of the dialogue seemed stilted. Otherwise, not bad.

I wanted to like this book. Interesting topic, based on a real-life heroine who spent ww2 using her obscene wealth to get people out of occupied France, save them from the Nazis, etc, but I could not warm to the main character. As the author described her she comes across as soulless, caring most for her dog of all the other characters.
The author’s created characters also seem oddly unemotional. The situation they are in is frequently dire and yet the tension only raises once during their escape- there is never any doubt that with the heroine’s money and American papers all will come
To right.
Tiny bit annoying to have everyone say how she was safe because she has those US papers, like everyone involved genuflected at anyone who said they were American. And of course the American woman was more competent than all of the other women who didn’t have the magic papers and yet did the same or more dangerous work.
There’s a stuffed kangaroo that is inserted for increased twee. And the male hero insists on carrying his films with him everywhere despite the danger to him and his child if he does so.
A story of the privileged during ww2, living in chateaus and hosting parties. It galled a bit with the backdrop of the bombing of Ukraine.

I had to give up on this one. I've read a couple others by Meg Waite Clayton and enjoyed them, but I just found my mind wandering while listening and I couldn't stay focused on the story. This may be one of those instances where the audio format wasn't the best choice for me.

I really liked this book. It made me think of my best friends and the bond of friendship among women. Meg captures all of that beautifully. The other thing I really appreciated about this book is it wasn't a male bashing - woman's power sort of book. There are good men in it, great men and a crappy man. I am so sick of books that make women perfect and men the root of all evil. Loved that.

Jewish Book Award Finalist
P.S - Insights, Interviews & More…. Section at end of book

Love triangle in the middle of some western front action. Concept would have been fine as an Atlantic or new yorker article-it's too much for a book.½

This novel of World War II, set in France after the German invasion, was inspired by real-life American socialite Mary Jayne Gold, who used her charms, smarts, and money to help artist and writers escape European occupation. Clayton reimagines Gold as Nanee, a volunteer known as the Postmistress for her courier work with real-life journalist Varian Fry. Nanee, an adventurist at heart, is always looking for ways to help refugees sought by the Gestopo, which leads her to try to free photographer Edouard Moss, a German Jewish refugee imprisoned in Camp des Milles, a man she'd met only once previously yet is unable to stop thinking about.

The book is a fast read, with a good sense of time and place, requisites for historical fiction. Along with the action and intrigue, there is also the compelling attraction between widowed Edouard and Nanee, complicated by Edouard's need to find and reunite with his young daughter Luki. And peppered throughout are discussions about art, the need for it and the philosophy of it. The story is straight-forward while the main characters are complex fully formed They and the story linger in my mind, just the way I love books to end.

Giving up on this at page 23. I find the style of writing really hard to follow. It's no fun to have to keep re-reading the same passages. Too many books out there to choose from - dumpin' it

A novel about a woman learning to write a novel – I love it! A story about getting by with a little help from your friends. Very enjoyable.

I enjoy reading historical fiction, especially when I learn about someone I had not known about previously. Nanee is modeled on the heiress Mary Jayne Gold who helped smuggle artists and other intellectuals out of France.
In this book, Nanee is a pilot who is working as a postmistress so she can pass information in support of the resistance. She meets and falls in love with Edouard Moss, a widower and Jewish photographer who has escaped the Nazis, but is put in a French internment camp. He gives his daughter Loki to friends to keep her safe. Nanee wants to help them escape.
This is a tale of resistance and love, as well as sacrifice. I am amazed at the courage of those who put their lives on the line to help others escape the regime of the Nazis.

This book was inspired by the life of Mary Jayne Gold, a Chicago heiress. She worked with Varian Fry who is known for smuggling Jewish artists and intellectuals out of France during WWII. This book tells Ms. Gold’s story, how she played an important role in helping European Jews and intellectuals escape Nazi Germany in 1940-1941. The story is told from the perspectives of Nanée and photographer Edouard Moss.

Nanée, yearning for freedom and adventure, becomes a pilot. This leads to her joining the resistance when the Germans roll into Paris. In Marseilles, she is introduced to Varian Fry. Working with him, she becomes known as the Postmistress because she delivers messages to those in hiding. She courageously risks her life many times sheltering refugees and helping them escape through the mountains to Spain or smuggling them aboard freighters leaving Europe.

Edouard Moss, a German Jewish photographer, escaped Germany with his young daughter. However, he is interned in a French labor camp leaving his daughter in France. Clayton writes of the horrors he encounters in the camp and his longing to find a way back to his daughter.

Moss’ name is on Hitler’s list of artists and intellectuals who need to be silenced. Nanée is assigned to rescue him, find his daughter, and get them to safety. Over time, romance blooms between Nanée and Edouard.

This book was difficult to get into. I was about halfway through it before it sparked my interest. It also seemed really disjointed, not flowing smoothly. Fortunately, I was already familiar with Varian Fry’s work so that held my interest. But from the beginning, I loved Nanée’s canine companion Dagobert.

Interspersed throughout the book are quotes from Mary Jayne Gold’s book “Crossroads Marseilles 1940.”

I recommend this book for its historical aspect. Gold helped subsidize the operation Fry worked for. The organization is credited with participating in the rescue of some 2,000 refugees. Among the escapees were artist Marc Chagall and writer Hannah Arendt.

Based on experiences of real people, this historical fiction pays homage to women news correspondents during WWII. Liv, a talented AP photographer from New York, and Jane, a reporter from Nashville, have joined Allied forces in France to document the last stages of the war. Women are not welcomed or wanted in these roles at the time, and they persevere in the face of many barriers. They want to be among the first to cover the 1944 liberation of Paris, so they head out on their own in the hopes of getting closer to the action. They meet and travel with Fletcher, a British military photographer and friend of Liv’s husband, who tries to protect them without making it too obvious.

The author does an exceptional job of helping the reader imagine what it must have been like to live in a warzone, where they travel by jeep, survive on military-issue rations, sleep in uncomfortable surroundings, try to keep clean by washing in a helmet, and deal with imminent danger. For example, at one point, they are shown caves where people have been hiding from the Nazis:

“Within a minute, the world around us was pitch-black and I was creeping uneasily behind Liv, groping for the sides of the cave. They were gritty cold, but anchoring, and slightly less frightening than the smell of the damp stone and the taste of underground air and the quiet crunch of steps that might be ours alone, or might not.”

Well-selected relevant quotes from real war correspondents open each chapter. It is mostly told in first person from Jane’s point of view. There is a bit of a love triangle among the trio, but it does not overpower the historical story. The history is well-researched, and the writing is direct. The characters are believable, and their camaraderie feels authentic. The plot is based around the trio’s journey and is portrayed as a series of encounters, though a key piece of the story appears to be abandoned at the half-way point. The ending is particularly well-done. It is an inspirational story of strong women risking their lives, overcoming obstacles, and surpassing social stereotypes.

DNF. Tried twice to read this book. Is it disjointed, too much about nothing? Symbolism? Not sure why I could not read it.

TW: Child sexual abuse; incest; sexual assault; racism; misogyny; victim-blaming.

WOW, this book was awful. Narrative passages about nothing clutter several books lately. Have them -be- about something, not just a character Thinking Deep Thoughts of uselessness! This was stuffed full of characters -ruminating- and -brooding- and there was NO emotion behind it. I wonder if it was there to pad word count or something. Even the passages where I am clearly meant to feel something inspired boredom and irritation. The little chapter intros were not as cute or clever as the author wanted them to be. They were meant to emulate, I think, announcements in society pages or school papers. It didn't work. Not only is this multiple POVs written with the exact same voice minus word choices, this flips between timelines of forty years or more for no reason and I couldn't stand it. It was so hard to follow! Laney is a Southern gal stereotype, and most of the time I wished she'd shut up. The author made her too much of a stereotype, is why. Betts needed to be cut entirely. She added nothing, although I found out what a zhaleika was and that's interesting. I watched a clip on youtube. Mia was probably there to balance out the sadness and deep issues of everyone else's stories, and it kind of worked. None of these women had any real character once they got older. Their characterization was barely there to begin with.

They're called the four Ms Bradwells because a professor they had thought he was being clever. He called one Ms Bradwell a drug dealer and I raised my eyebrows. If I hadn't had professors who had been as proud of using shock value as he was, I would have been aghast. But no, some professors absolutely do this. It's inappropriate. Stop. One student is proficient in Latin due to practicing a branch of Catholicism that uses it a lot, and the professor is delighted. The others struggle and a nonsensical phrase emerges that they still use thirty years later. It's--a thing--but it comes off as odd and annoying. The book insists it takes place in 2011, but for all intents and purposes, takes place thirty years earlier, when they're all in their twenties and the horrible stuff is happening. As far as 2011, there's a brief mention of a blog. We never get to see the blog. Not a single entry, just a mention. There's no references to 2011 technology, societal messages, or thought patterns. This is solidly early 1980s, late 70s. Sooo much of the book could have been cut and just focused on that. The rest was just padding. No characterization, no action, no connection between the timelines, just padding.

This was a poorly done character study, not a thriller. I think the reason there's the nonsense about two timelines, with one thirty years into the future, was so all the women could be shown as grown with children the ages they were when the dramatic stuff happened, and how they adjust to it and what they teach their daughters. It's useless. Ginger's mom is a terrible, terrible parent. Most parents would be screaming and plotting murder if their daughter were being sexually assaulted at the age of thirteen by a twenty-year-old, and a family member at that. Ginger's mom just whispers and stares at the friend who told her. Then, she...writes a poem and sticks it in a poetry book...for her daughter to find after she dies. CUT THE MELODRAMA, YOU ASSHOLE. I'd yell at her to protect her kid but...child abuse and sexual assault weren't crimes until the 1970s. There's realistically not a lot that would have been done. The acts are seen as crimes now, but it's still really recent and it's a huge part of why people blame victims and especially brush child sexual assault by family members under the rug. Or joke about it. It's become a joke since the 90s I think. So, back in the 70s, "seduction at thirteen by a cousin" would have been...seen as exactly that, as opposed to "he groomed her for sexual assault". It's still awful all around, and I desperately wish things had been different for Ginger.

This trope always goes one of two ways: survivor becomes withdrawn, dislikes everyone and lots of "cry for help" stuff, which I've never seen portrayed realistically in books outside of "Speak." Or, survivor becomes promiscuous, rebellious, and someone everyone blames and makes fun of. It's never realistic, there's no nuance, and do these authors ever -speak- to survivors? Ugh. Ginger becomes the second one. The phrase "gawky slut" is used in reference to her by someone who's supposed to be her friend. Her cousin assaulted her over a period of years, and she...became a rebel because he wasn't in love with her? WHAT?! You're gawky unless someone falls in love with you?! WHAT THE FUCK. This makes no sense! The "Ginger is a gawky slut" friend later reveals Ginger's rapist is also her rapist. He called her a racist slur and a misogynist slur as well, while assaulting her. Ginger argues, years later when they're adults, that Trey couldn't have raped or been racist to her friend because...he was assaulting -her- all along so blahblah stupid. I HATE THOUGHT PROCESSES LIKE THIS.

Ginger keeps referring to the period of seven years where her cousin repeatedly assaulted and groomed her as "an affair." NO NO NO. Again, counseling for this wouldn't have been around then really. This...is realistic to the 1970s. So have the book take place maaaybe in the 1990s if you want them to reflect reasonably! Mental health services and methods haven't really changed since the 1960s in America. The 1990s had particular types of misogyny still, that could have been an interesting social commentary when compared to the 1970s. The author missed that opportunity and so many others. Trey, her assailant, kills himself later and--each woman flaps her jaws about this, but has no emotion about it. The attitude is "ooh, suicide, let's be both surprised and horribly fascinated by it as well." UGH. I've known people whose assailants died, and their emotions and reflections on it -that they felt comfortable sharing with others- do not reflect what this book said at all. There's a wide variety of emotions and circumstances, and this book did -nothing-. And there were weird journalists? There was no foreshadowing or reason, and no--it felt randomly placed to stretch out the story. It wasn't done well at all.

Whyyyy did Ginger strip down naked on the boat at the end? Why did the book end on that note? Was it poorly done symbolism? Was it an act of rebellion to end the book? What? Ugh. Before I forget: a black pearl necklace was repeatedly referred to in the book. Why does the cover have a double strand of white pearls?.

Trey, the assailant, was nothing but a wind-up rape machine. The author made him a cartoon villain and little more than set dressing. He wasn't even a plot device, that's how poorly this book was written. If the audience wasn't upset that he raped a child, and one he was related to, they would surely be upset that he raped a woman in a way that's seen as unusually degrading, while using racist and misogynist slurs! Be angry, readers! BEEEEEE ANNNNNGRRRYYYY IT'S MYYYY BOOK AND I SHALL CHAAAANNNNELLLLL EMOOOOTIONNSSS FROM YOUUUUU. In response to what the author was doing, I think of Smosh's catchphrase, "SHUT. UP.!"

Books that do a much better job examining sexual assault that actually -have- the rapist in them, thus drawing emotion from the audience and are plot, not set dressing, are "Speak" by Laurie Halse Anderson. "Speak" has the survivor who is withdrawn, and does -excellent- with the portrayal. "Luckiest Girl Alive" by Jessica Knoll has the promiscuous rebel survivor. Please read those and skip this one.

I read LOVE AND RUIN by Paula McLain a couple of month's ago. That didn't stop me from wanting to read this book. I'm a big fan of biographical fiction and enjoy reading different versions of famous love stories. So, I was all game for another take on the Ernest Hemingway & Martha Gellhorn romance. And, I'm pleased to say that I enjoyed this book immensely.

This time did I have much more knowledge about Hemingway & Gellhorn thanks to McLain's book. However, I loved to once again read about this talented couple that and their doomed relationship. Loved the writing and the dialogue. Gellhorn was such a strong woman that she just couldn't submit herself to a relationship where she was the staying home wife. She wanted to be a war correspondent and in the end, did she choose the path right for her. I find her to be such a strong and inspiring woman. To dare to want the star and not letting anyone stop her. Hemingway may have been a brilliant writer, but he didn't score high on the husband part. At least not in his marriage to Martha Gellhorn. And, honestly, a man that has already left one wife for another woman, well the odds that he would do that again are high...

BEAUTIFUL EXILES is a perfect book for historical/biographical history fans. I'm eager to read more by Meg Waite Clayton.

I want to thank Lake Union Publishing for providing me with a free copy through NetGalley for an honest review!

The main character in this historical fiction novel, Nanée (I never found her last name), is based on two real-life women involved in the effort to smuggle refugees out of France during World War II. One was Mary Jayne Gold, an Evanston (not Chicago!) heiress, and the other was German refugee Lisa Fittko, who (along with her husband Hans) helped others escape over the Pyrenees.

Nanée was an American much like Mary Jayne, single and living in Paris at the time the Germans occupied it in 1940, but choosing to stay in France. She fled to Marseille and joined up with Varian Fry (who is also in the book) and others working to help Jewish or anti-Nazi writers, artists, musicians, and others to flee. Having plenty of money, she rented a large old chateau outside Marseille called Villa Air-Bel, where many of the workers lived and the escapees hid until they could get out of France.

Many of the characters in the book were real people. The other main characters, Edouard Moss and his young daughter Luki, are entirely fictional. Edouard, a German photographer, is based on many of the creative people Mary Jayne, Varian, and the others helped to escape, after they spent some time interned at Camp des Milles in France.

In an interview, author Meg Waite Clayton explains, "I combine the acts of Gold and Fittko into a single character [Nanée] so that the reader doesn’t have to leave one protagonist behind and join another late in the novel. And Nanée’s personal story, especially her love life, takes a very different path than either Fittko’s or Gold’s, largely to allow me to explore and reveal the emotions people experienced in these circumstances, and the challenges and personal sacrifices, through Nanée and Edouard’s relationship." It will be clear when one reads the book when Nanée transitions from being Mary Jayne to being Lisa - the author has a clever explanation for how this happens.

I enjoyed this book, despite the surreal activities of André Breton (also a character in the book) and the Surrealists and others staying at Villa Air-Bel. ("Exquisite Corpse"? Ugh.) For people who were supposed to be in hiding, their lives and actions (taking photos while you are escaping France?) seemed a little too raucous and carefree for the times.

I also agree with some other reviewers that the title of this book makes little sense. "Postmistress" was a code name Nanée used in her undercover work, but she didn't do this work in Paris, which was then overrun by Nazis. I guess the author or editor like the alliteration - it's easier to say than Postmistress of Marseille.

In 1936, the Nazi are little more than loud, brutish bores to fifteen-year old Stephan Neuman, the son of a wealthy and influential Jewish family and budding playwright whose playground extends from Vienna’s streets to its intricate underground tunnels. Stephan’s best friend and companion is the brilliant Žofie-Helene, a Christian girl whose mother edits a progressive, anti-Nazi newspaper. But the two adolescents’ carefree innocence is shattered when the Nazis’ take control.

This book, inspired by a very real American heiress who aided the French Resistance during World War II, is yet another addition to the expansive genre of WWII-era historical fiction. I struggled to get into this story and I never really felt connected to the characters - who seemed to be both in danger and living separate from it at the same time. I'm certain fans of this type of historical fiction would enjoy this book, but I didn't get much out of it.

A young American heiress who joins with Varian Fry, helps artists hunted by the Nazis escape from war-torn Europe. .Based on the true story of Mary Jane Gold.

Although this book is called "The Postmistress of Paris," most of the book and where she does her "postmistressing," takes place in the South of France within the borders of Vichy France. I didn't care for this book as much as the author's "The Last Train to London."

Meg Waite Clayton is my favorite writer of historical fiction. Her ability to create these fascinating stories inspired by real people, especially overlooked women in history, and infuse them with true heart and soul is second to none, IMO. Her latest novel, THE POSTMISTRESS OF PARIS, is no exception. Here we are introduced to Nanée, a wealthy and beautiful woman who lives in Paris when WWII breaks out. Using her wealth and status as a US citizen, she helps deliver messages to those in hiding, eventually helping the real-life Varian Fry in helping to smuggle artists in danger out of France. Inspired by the real life of Mary Jayne Gold, a Chicago heiress, Clayton again has shed light for me on people who lived through these terrifying times. Often, we know the broader strokes of the story, but it’s the fine details of these lesser known people who risked their lives for those around them that are to time, and through her in-depth research, Clayton helps to shine a light on them. I’ll be looking forward to her next novel. @harperbooks

Relatively few people remain alive who even remember the Nazis — I can remember the Eichmann trial, but that's as good as I can do — yet Nazis remain one of the most frequent and most popular subjects for books, both fiction and nonfiction. They are about as close to absolute evil as we can imagine, and pure evil fascinates us all.

Meg Waite Clayton, much too young to remember the Nazis, writes a compelling novel on the subject nonetheless, “The Last Train to London” (2019). Much of her fiction is truth. A Dutch woman named Truus Wijsmuller really did help rescue thousands of children, most of them Jewish, from Germany and Nazi-occupied territory.

Clayton's novel focuses on three children, two of them teenagers, in Vienna in the late 1930s. Stephan Neuman, son of a Jewish chocolatier, aspires to become a writer. He is in love with Zofie-Helene, not a Jew but the daughter of a controversial journalist — controversial because she tells the truth about the growing Nazi menace and the persecution of Jews. Zofie, a mathematical genius, equally loves Stephan, the only boy who doesn't think she's weird. The other is five-year-old Walter, Stephan's brother, who expresses his feelings through his stuffed rabbit, Peter.

The author builds the suspense gradually, as Stephan's father is captured by the Nazis and Stephan himself goes into hiding in the sewers. Meanwhile Zofie's mother is imprisoned for what she has written. Tante Truus, as she asks all the children to call her, goes to Austria to make a deal with Adolf Eichmann himself. He allows her to take 600 children by train — but it must be exactly 600 children, no more or no less. Or else none will be allowed out of the country.

How Stephan, Walter and Zofie — plus a surprising 601st child — make it to London rounds out her fine, quick-moving story.

The Postmistress of Paris is a wonderfully written historical fiction book. The main character, Nanee, is an American heiress who lives in Paris after it falls to Nazi Germany in 1940. she assists Jews and anti-Nazi individuals in escaping. Her code name: "Postmistress". This book is full of adventure, hope, and love and is an excellent read. Highly recommend!

3.5 There are many, many WWII novels written from a woman's perspective and/or featuring a role in the war performed by women. Bombgirls, landgirls, codebreakers and more.

Meg Waite Clayton's new novel, The Postmistress of Paris is part of that more, bringing in another perspective. Her main character is Naneé, a wealthy American living in Paris who decides to join the French resistance. Her wealth and American passport allow her to move about freely, delivering messages to those in hiding. She's a great lead character - brave, daring and charming with a strong sense of right and wrong and duty.

She meets photographer Edouard and his young daughter Luki at a gathering of artistes. Edouard has escaped from Germany, but still must try to hide from the Vichy government. It is after this meeting that Naneé decides she must help artistes to escape and to preserve their work.

Now, here's the really neat part - Naneé is based on the life of Mary Jayne Gold, a Chicago heiress, who helped American journalist Varian Fry smuggle well-known artists and intellectuals out of France.

The book's opening chapters introduce us to the two main players, the sparks that fly between them, as well as the artistic setting/element of the book. I must admit, I did find this went on a bit too long for me. I wanted to dive right into the 'action' of the book. The hiding, the subterfuge and the danger. That does come, but Waite Clayton also stops along the way to explore other themes such as the love between a parent and child, the loss of loved ones and the sacrifices made. Different views are provided with Luki having her own chapters, as does Edouard. There are many supporting players, all just as determined with the same goal. I did find one character to be quite detestable as he plays 'games' at the house that the group shares. I thought there would be a reason he was included, but never found a meaning for his inclusion and ugliness. But he is tempered with the addition of a dog to the tale - named Dagobert.

A good addition to the WWII fiction list. Waite Clayton is a talented wordsmith and I did enjoy this novel. However, I did find it to be a bit of a slow burn for me and it felt a repetitive at times.

I chose to listen to The Postmistress of Paris. The readers were Imani Jade Powers and Graham Halstead. Powers has such a rich, melodious, honeyed tone to her voice. It's very pleasant to listen to and easy to understand. The voice for Naneé, absolutely captured the character as I had imagined her. Her speaking speed was just right. There are many French language bits to the story and I found both her pronunciation and accent to be believable. Her performance did justice to Waite Clayton's book. I've also listened to Graham Halstead in the past. He has a very resonant tone to his voice that draws the listener to him. He too speaks clearly and is easy to understand. I like his voice very much, but it wasn't quite what I imagined for Edouard. I had a softer, more continental voice in mind. That being said, he does do a fine job with his narration. Length is 13 hours, 10 minutes.