Booker Prize 2026 · Audiobook Review
Written by Chloé Aridjis · Narrated by Emer Kenny
Longlisted for the Booker Prize 2026, Chloé Aridjis’s novel is short, strange and full of ideas about memory, loss and the objects we leave behind. But did its dreamlike, experimental approach work for me—or did it leave me wondering what on earth had happened?
The Story
Flora is in Mexico City visiting her family when an encounter with the family dog leaves her in hospital. There, she meets Wilhelmina Blau, an elderly German woman fascinated by magic lanterns and the strange world of early optical devices.
Their nocturnal conversations draw Flora into Wilhelmina’s memories, possessions and past. After Wilhelmina dies, Flora returns to London carrying more of that past with her than she might have expected.
It’s an intriguing premise, but I struggled with the execution. The story repeatedly wanders into observations, memories and little diversions that often seemed to lead nowhere. At other times, simple things felt over-explained while the things I really wanted explained were left tantalisingly — or frustratingly — obscure.
The Narrator
Emer Kenny narrates the audiobook, and while her delivery is clear and perfectly listenable, I wanted more distinction between the characters.
Wilhelmina is specifically described as speaking English with a heavy German accent, yet I heard very little of that in the performance. It may sound like a small point, but stronger characterisation could have added definition to a novel that already feels deliberately elusive.
For me, this was one of those occasions when the narration didn’t quite provide the extra lift the book needed.
The Waffleometer
At only around four and a half hours, The Shadow of the Object certainly isn’t long. But waffle isn’t measured in hours.
The diversions, observations and side roads repeatedly left me wondering why we had wandered away from the story. A twenty-hour audiobook can earn every minute of its running time; a four-and-a-half-hour one can still make you think, Why are we talking about this?
Scores
Story & Writing: 2 / 5
Narration: 2.5 / 5
Waffleometer: 3.5/ 5 (higher means more waffle)
The Verdict
There is clearly more going on in The Shadow of the Object than I appreciated while listening. Learning afterwards about the novel’s connections with Freud, memory, loss, and the way people can remain present through objects helped me understand some of what Chloé Aridjis was trying to do.
But understanding it better didn’t make me enjoy it more.
I don’t mind a book making me think — I rather like it. But I’d quite like it to entertain me while it’s doing it. That doesn’t mean jokes, explosions or a car chase in chapter three. A book can entertain by fascinating, moving, unsettling or surprising me. This one simply didn’t.
And then there was the ending. I listened, went back and read it, and still wasn’t entirely sure what had happened. Perhaps I’m simply not in tune with experimental literature. But ambiguity works best for me when a book leaves me desperate to unravel it.
With this one, unfortunately, the book didn’t make me want to find out badly enough.