I have to admit, I started this book a bit skeptical. The main plot: A woman is trying to find herself, leaves a sub-par marriage, and goes on a trip around the world.
This sort of story reminds me of The Awakening by Kate Chopin. There is, however, a major difference between the two. Kate Chopin's book astonished readers of the late nineteenth/early twentieth century. I didn't care much for the message behind Chopin's book, which was basically that it was alright to abandon commitments, like your husband and children. Chopin's protagonist is a woman who did the traditional thing and realized she felt trapped and unfulfilled. The message was important from a social criticism standpoint, but the story, for me, was just too unrealistic. People can't just go around abandoning people who rely on them. But at least The Awakening expressed the frustration of many women who had been told that their only options in life were to get married and have kids, or live the rest of their lives with their parents as "old maids". This concept was surely on the minds of many women, who, in a time when women could not vote or have a career in the field of their choice, probably didn't have the guts Kate Chopin had.
Fast forward to almost a hundred and ten years later, and we get Elizabeth Gilbert's travel diary. This is a woman who most thirty year olds can not relate to. Sure, many would love to do what she did: split the divorce proceeds from the house, throw all of their possessions into a room at their sister's house, and blow all of their savings on a year-long trip, with absolutely no plan for the future. Don't get me wrong - if you can swing this sort of lifestyle, good for you. My point is that the book provides the reader with more frustration and discontent than it does inspiration. Most people at age thirty have kids and can not just pick up and leave. Gilbert has the attitude that her life was really difficult. Really, she dug her own hole. She got married to someone she didn't totally love, she didn't know how to communicate her unhappiness to her husband, who didn't care to acknowledge it, and she had made commitments and promises she simply couldn't keep. She should be applauded for changing her life in order to make herself happier, but I couldn't help feeling bad for her husband, who by all accounts seemed like a decent enough guy.
Her attitude toward traveling and experiencing new cultures often left me rolling my eyes or cringing. For example, when she travels to India, she goes to live temporarily at an ashram. She spent lots of money and had to fill out applications for the privilege of staying at this ashram, where the teacher she displayed such a cult-like devotion to was inaccessible to visitors and usually hidden off in some distant part of the building. The real eye-roller comes when she explains that each of the guests had to do chores for several hours a day. Her duty was to wash the floors. Instead of merely accepting the fact that chores need to be done no matter where one goes, Gilbert tells us:
"So that's where you can find me for several hours a day now - down on
my knees on the cold marble...working away like a fairy-tale stepsister.
(By the way, I'm aware of the metaphor - the scrubbing clean of the
temple that is my heart, the polishing of my soul, the everyday mundane
effort that must be applied to spiritual practice in order to purify the
self, etc., etc.)" (page 131).
Sure, whatever helps you get through the day. There's nothing wrong with helping out with chores at a religious establishment, but let's not be so haughty about it: The organization needs the help and manual labor of guests because it can't afford to pay workers to keep the place clean and running smoothly. It's fine to see metaphors in life, but sometimes, you're just being pretentious.
While describing her adventures in Italy, she makes another self-righteous comment only someone from an over-privileged culture could make in good conscience. She describes looking for the booth where train tickets are sold, and she says that she needs to find the man whose job it is to sit, mourning his life, in a grimy booth. That's a paraphrase, but "mourning his life" really is printed in there. She makes this statement without even seeing the man first, without having any knowledge of what his values or his personal circumstances are. She doesn't seem to realize that not everyone is defined by their job, nor is everyone free to pick up and leave every situation they find themselves in.
In short, my main problem with the book is that her adventure is not very realistic for the average person. If your idea of fun is to read the adventures of someone you can't possibly emulate, this book is for you. But if you would rather read a story that inspires you to make changes in your life you can actually make in the real world, give this one a miss.