The Other Typist

Product Information

For fans of The Talented Mr. Ripley and The Great Gatsby comes one of the most memorable unreliable narrators in years. Now, I know a lot of the above is because of the perspective with which the story is told. The protagonist, or narrator, is shaping the lense through which the story was told or retold. But since I found her to be insufficiently developed, I did not care for her tone and therefore the tone of the story. I also didn't like her, which brings me to my next issue. Do you think Rose is a reliable or unreliable narrator? Why? If you did question her veracity, at what point in the novel did you begin to do so? As the story progressed, I got the sense that something was “off” about Rose. Her friendship with Odalie morphs into an obsession. We learn unsettling things about both Rose’s and Odalie’s past. There was more to Odalie than what she seemed, but was Rose telling the truth about what really happened between them? It was hard to tell. Underneath the laughs, booze, and parties, there was an ominous tone giving me the feeling that something wasn’t quite right.

The Other Typist by Suzanne Rindell: 9780425268421 The Other Typist by Suzanne Rindell: 9780425268421

The ending of this book was… Surprising? Confusing? Both? Most of the ending I thought was good. I liked the twist, and finally finding out what was really going on. Oh, very devious… However, the last sentence baffled me! I was like, “Wait. What???” I felt like either I missed something, or the characters were simply messing with us poor readers. The combination of Suzanne Rindell's impeccable storytelling technique, plus the perfectly understated and prim voice of her narrator, Rose Baker (typist/transcriptionist for criminal confessions at a police department in 1923), plus a riveting story make The Other Typist irresistible and un-put-downable. And I think I would feel this even if I'd never worked as a typist and deposition transcriptionist. And speaking of recycled storylines, the whole time I was reading this book, I was thinking that this story sounded very familiar. A plain protagonist in the wings chronicling the journey of a flashy newfound friend set in the 1920s. Said flashy friend has a mysterious past that keeps changing and said charismatic friend also seems to have a poor mastery of geography when it comes to saying where they are from: Middle West--San Francisco, Santa Fe--California. Odalie/Rose...whoever she is...has got me in an uncomfortable position. I don't know whether I just liked or loved this book. I'm so glad that I'm not the only one who was totally confused by the ending. Open endings don't always make me a disgruntled reader, but in this case it can make the time you invested in the novel utterly pointless.I find little reason to think that Odalie and Rose are the same person; the "multiple personalities" interpretation strikes me as way too far fetched and too complicated to even follow, especially when it includes characters in addition to these two. I admit, though, that there are two places that strongly support that interpretation. Moderately entertaining, I suppose, but this has to be one of the most overwritten books of all time. So many adjectives! So many adverbs! So many idioms when a single word would do just as well! Vast amounts of clunky, obvious foreshadowing! And a narrator who's unreliable--which we know because she helpfully tells us so, several times. Uh, that's not really how you're supposed to do it. The whole thing reads like some kind of parody. I can't recommend it. If you're in the mood for some 1920s-set fiction with Gatsby aspirations, read Rules of Civility. Don't bother with this. This was hands-down one of the most disappointing, poorly written novels I have read in the past few years. The premise excited me: an intrigue/thriller set in 1920s "speakeasy" New York. Sounds good, right? But for all the author's excess use of adjectives, I got no sense of place from her writing. The characters may bob their hair, go to speakeasies and drink homemade gin, but at no point in the novel did I feel transported to 1920s New York. I felt like the events could have been happening at any time, in any place.

THE OTHER TYPIST | Kirkus Reviews THE OTHER TYPIST | Kirkus Reviews

Yes, I felt like I was reading a poor-man's (or in this case poor-woman's) Great Gatsby. And that's something you just can't recreate no matter how great of a writer you are. Rose and Odalie are typists at a New York police station. They take down confessions and transcribe various notes. As Rose and Odalie grow closer, Rose realizes that Odalie is involved is some unsavory activities having to do with bootlegging. She also realizes she has no idea which of Odalie's stories about her past is true, or if any of them are. Who is Odalie? Where does she get her money? Where does she come from? A summer outing to a Gatsby-like mansion outside of the city pushes Rose and Odalie into a jarring meeting with someone from the past. By this point Rose's unreliability as a narrator is clear; as is the fact that Bad Things are going to happen. Not only are we seeing Odalie through the prism of her obsession, but Rose is writing her account in an asylum under the supervision of a psychiatrist who believes that "telling things in their accurate sequence is good for healing the mind". The problem is, Rose can't do linearity. She tends towards egoistic impressionism, a habit Rindell has fun with in a scene where Odalie introduces Rose to her arty friends, only for Rose to be appalled by their love of The Waste Land: "If I recall correctly, the poet was called Eliot Something-Or-Another and the poem itself was all a bunch of jibberish, the ravings of an utter lunatic."

BookBrowse Review

Try I NEVER PROMISED YOU A ROSE GARDEN. I don't remember the name of the author, but I thought it was really good when I read it, like thirty years ago.

Keira Knightley to star in The Other Typist

The protagonist, Rose, was just not likable. In fact, she was annoying. I know that the reader doesn't have to like the protagonist. But the reader should feel invested. There have been many stories where I did not "like" the narrator (Gone Girl), however, the reader has to feel invested in the life and perspective of the character. Rose's inner monologue, along with other elements of the story that she described, reminded me of stories from the Romantic Era and dare I even compare it to the vapid main character in the (groan!)"Gray" series. Rose is either as boring as she explains herself to be, and why would I be interested in that? Or she isn't, and why do I want to feel like she is fishing for compliments the whole book? The story centres around Rose who is employed as a stenographer in a New York Police Department and appears to be innocent and naive and somewhat staid in her ways. Rose's life changes forever the day the other typist is hired to work in her department and we see Rose become obsessed by the flamboyant Odalie. As for Rose's bizarre behavior at the end, I believe it's explained by her (not necessarily sexual) attraction to Odalie, an attraction so intense that over time it's not enough to simply be WITH her, she wants to BE her. In fact, this transformation may have started right after she's questioned for Teddy's murder, when she calmly smokes a cigarette while admiring her diamond bracelets--a very Odalie-like thing to do. It certainly culminates in her using the Sergeant's knife to slice her hair off into a bob.This is the sort of audiobook that is so gripping that I was almost wishing for red signals on my commute with unexplained delays in the tunnel so I could keep listening!