>>25
oh, to keep with the tradition of twentieth-century misogynists.
Actually, no.

tl;dr: WORDS, WIT, WORLD!!!

long:
The work's strongest point is the very elegantly maintained balance throughout the whole book, I liked that. Also, I enjoyed the somewhat Gogolian collapse into into chaos.
On the weaker side - which somewhat bogged down the experience for me - is prima facie the language (I don't quite follow the "The words are carefully chosen, written with great skill."). While it's agreeably written, it didn't strike me as quite as pristine as I'd expected from >>17. As mentioned in >>12, probably a very unfair bias on my side. Sorry. Otherwise, I must admit, that a fair amount of ennui just stemmed from the fact that I'm probably miles away from the writer's world. We don't share the same brand of humour, my interest in the cultural environment employed is negligible, her intellectual affiliations that seep through the whole work are lightyears far from mine; and so I remained reasonably entertained, but largely unimpressed.