Dept. of Speculation: Being Thirty-Something Sucks

Dept of Spec second coverAs Jenny Offill writes sardonically in Dept. of Speculation, “wives have requirements too, of course,” including “unswerving obedience.” So when my wife, A.M.B., recommended I read the same book that I had seen make her both laugh out loud and gaze silently into the distance, well, I did as I was told. And I was glad: Dept. of Speculation was poignant, funny, and concise.

“Concise” isn’t a word you hear used much these days to compliment novels, given the long-standing trend in modern literature to equate a book’s merit with the endurance required of the reader. (NPR says Jonathan Franzen’s newest book “is likely to be something of a sprawl,” which is enough to keep me from punishing myself with it like I did his last two books.) When Offill wants to quote an aphorism from Rilke, Hesiod, or Keats, or a book about marriage from 1896, she doesn’t waste space inventing some silly, unbelieveable conversation among the characters in which to do it. She just quotes them and moves on.

To be honest, I did not find the book “demanding” nor “disparate and disconnected,” as two glowing reviews described it. I thought it was straight-forward and genuine, a far more accurate depiction of the protagonist’s inner world than is typically found in a “sprawling” work of literature. Life is lived in the immediate present as a sprawl, but a person’s emotional life — particularly when they are in turmoil — is usually more a series of piercing vignettes and ruminating spirals, each so powerful and confused and contradictory that they are typically indescribable.

Offill’s gift is the ability to capture those moments in clear, compelling prose. Consider this standalone passage in the book:

I have lunch with a friend I haven’t seen in years. She orders things I’ve never heard of, sends back a piece of middling fish. I tell her various schemes to redeem my life. “I’m so compromised,” she says.

In a typical work of literature, that same scene would have absorbed a dozen pages to communicate the same message, but in Offill’s hands it comes out just the way it would in a person’s memory, as a vague sense of economic insecurity (“She orders things I’ve never heard of”) and a recognition of her friend’s entitlement (“sends back a piece of middling fish”) followed by her friend’s apparent lack of useful guidance and the depressing, self-absorbed response of “I’m so compromised.” Everything you needed to know — everything that you would have remembered — in four sentences.

As A.M.B. said, “The wife’s observations about motherhood and marriage are honest and compelling.” But there’s another lurking theme in the book that warrants attention, and which I hope will give it additional staying power for the future: the sharp decline in happiness and optimism that seems to plague people in their mid-to-late thirties these days.

There’s a well-known sociological trend for happiness to decline in people’s 40s and 50s — often called the “midlife crisis,” as detailed at length by The Atlantic not too long ago  — but, in my observation, that professional and personal malaise seems to be affecting people as early as their mid-thirties, much as it affects the late-thirties couple of Dept. of Speculation. Offill demonstrates this same problem just as well as she demonstrates the challenges of motherhood and marriage, and I hope other readers and critics won’t dismiss that as a side-effect of their personal life. As I read the book, the issues are all tied together, for both the wife and the husband.

It’s an excellent book and an excellent recommendation from A.M.B. I’m grateful she did not heed the advice of that 1896 marriage guide, to wit: “The indiscriminate reading of novels is one of the most injurious habits to which a married woman can be subject.”


Three things from A.M.B:

  1. Thanks, Mr. AMB, for your wonderful review! And for your “unswerving [intermittent] obedience.” 😉
  2. Here’s my review of Dept. of Speculation.
  3. For those who have read this novel, there will be a “spoilers-welcome” discussion of it at Socratic Salon on April 29th.


  1. Enjoyed hearing Mr. AMB’s thoughts on this! The content of this one is so thoughtful, but overall the book left me feeling pretty lukewarm; it didn’t really stick with me afterward. There was something about the way it was executed that didn’t work for me (even though I love unique formats!). I feel like I’d need to read it again…but don’t really want to. I’m glad The Socratic Salon will be discussing it, though!

    1. Thanks! I love it when my husband adds his two cents to my blog.

      By the way, remember that flower bed I told you about (the one my kids put in over their spring break last week)? Well, the deer have been nibbling on our supposedly “deer resistant” plants. Oh well. I always knew the “deer resistant” label was too good to be true. The deer have been munching on our dianthus and hyacinths. They’ve left the snapdragons alone.

  2. I looked it up at Amazon. Published by Random House, so I shouldn’t be surprised they’re charging nearly as much for the Kindle copy as for the paperback. What’s up with that? There is no paper or printing or postage involved in the Kindle copy, so why not cut that price at least in half? This is a major gripe of mine; feel free to ignore.

    I’ve added it to my wish list. If the price goes down, I’ll get it. 🙂

    1. That’s certainly an interesting question! I can see what you mean, though I’d say it’s a short novel. It’s loosely connected thoughts that tell a story.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s