First Love by Gwendoline Riley
Published 2017 · 166 pages · 36,289 words · about 3 hours at an average pace · Literary Fiction
How hard is First Love to read?
First Love scores 73 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it very challenging. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.
- Vocabulary: 68 out of 100
- The text employs a sophisticated vocabulary, featuring words like 'mullions,' 'ramifying,' 'fuliginous,' 'hypotaxis,' 'concatenated,' 'imperator,' 'atavisms,' 'peremptory,' 'badinage,' 'callipygian,' 'chivvying,' 'valorize,' and 'vellications.' While not archaic or highly specialized, these terms elevate the language beyond typical contemporary fiction, requiring a strong reader's lexicon. This places it above '2666' but below 'Moby-Dick' due to less specialized jargon.
- Sentence structure: 65 out of 100
- Riley frequently constructs long, multi-clause sentences, often using extensive subordination and parenthetical asides to layer detail and reflection. While not reaching the extreme hypotaxis of Henry James or Faulkner, the sentences demand sustained attention, such as 'It was so incessant, his phrases so concatenated: there was no way in.' The narrative also incorporates dialogue that mimics natural, often fragmented, speech patterns, adding to the grammatical demands. This is more complex than 'The Great Gatsby' but less dense than '2666'.
- Abstraction: 60 out of 100
- The narrative is deeply grounded in concrete, often unsettling, domestic and personal interactions, yet frequently shifts into abstract psychological and philosophical rumination. The protagonist constantly analyzes motivations, power dynamics, and the nature of memory and self, as seen in passages like 'This cover-seeking—desperate, adrenalized—had constituted her whole life as far as I could see.' While rooted in events, the text prioritizes internal processing and meaning-making, placing it above 'The Great Gatsby' but below '2666'.
- Information density: 68 out of 100
- The text is dense with psychological insights, detailed observations, and a rapid succession of events and reflections, demanding high reader attention. Each paragraph often contains multiple layers of meaning, character development, and emotional nuance, such as the detailed descriptions of Edwyn's abusive language or the mother's complex behavior. The narrative frequently jumps between past and present, requiring the reader to actively piece together timelines and thematic connections, making it more demanding than 'Lolita' but less overwhelming than '2666'.
- Narrative indirection: 80 out of 100
- Neve's internal monologues often contradict or complicate the surface dialogue, requiring readers to infer the true emotional stakes and power dynamics. Edwyn's gaslighting and the mother's self-deception create a constant need to read between the lines of what is said and what is meant, as when Neve notes her own detachment during arguments. This high degree of inference places it closer to works like 'Pedro Paramo' where reality is uncertain and the reader must assemble meaning.
- Symbolic density: 60 out of 100
- While not overtly allegorical, the text employs recurring motifs like the fox and its 'lair,' the 'Kings Cross Inn' as a symbol of safety, and Edwyn's 'project' or 'symbol world,' which carry personal and psychological weight. These elements deepen the narrative's emotional resonance and Neve's internal struggles, but the primary focus remains on realistic character interaction and internal monologue. This is more dense than 'To Kill a Mockingbird' but less so than 'The Great Gatsby' where symbols are more explicitly woven into the story's themes.
- Ironic distance: 78 out of 100
- The narrator, Neve, maintains a significant ironic distance, particularly when observing the self-deception of her mother and the manipulative pronouncements of Edwyn and Michael. Her detached, almost clinical descriptions of absurd or painful situations, coupled with her internal commentary (e.g., Michael's email sounding like a 'teenage girl'), allow the reader to perceive the underlying tragedy and psychological complexity. This aligns with the critical observation found in 'Pale Fire' or 'Lolita,' where the reader is aware of the narrator's or characters' self-deception.
- Resolution withholding: 85 out of 100
- The narrative consistently resists definitive closure, particularly regarding Neve's relationships and her internal state. Conflicts with Edwyn cycle repeatedly, past traumas are revisited but not resolved, and the ending leaves Neve in a state of ongoing struggle and uncertainty, with no clear path forward or emotional resolution. The final image of Edwyn disappearing into the crowd, and Neve's internal questions about her own future, underscore this pervasive ambiguity, placing it closer to 'Crying of Lot 49' or '2666' than 'Lolita'.
- Structural complexity: 82 out of 100
- The novel employs a highly fragmented and non-linear structure, notably through its repeated chapter numbering (e.g., two 'Chapter 1's, two 'Chapter 2's, etc.), which creates a sense of cyclical time and parallel narratives. The chronology jumps frequently between Neve's present with Edwyn, her past relationships, and childhood memories, requiring the reader to actively piece together the timeline and thematic connections. This is more complex than 'Flights' due to the explicit re-numbering, suggesting a deliberate formal experiment in narrative layering.
How First Love is regarded
First Love holds a literary regard score of 52 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.