More reading

[rebness]

Catch-up on the last three books I have read:

Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro

It’s no spoiler to say that the book is about a school of clones in a dystopian England who have been raised to have their organs farmed for transplants when they reach adulthood; that’s the blurb on the back cover. That, my friends, is as interesting as it gets. Instead of anything approaching even slightly thrilling, the book drowns in its own apathy.

It’s ten times more annoying and even more pointless than The Island, which at least had Ewan McGregor to compensate. And explosions.

What was the point of having clones that felt every human emotion – love, hate, jealousy… except that most primeval animal emotion – fear? These clones grow up accepting their fate. They mingle with humans and travel up and down the country, but never question the donation process. The unbelievable part for me was not the science fiction-esque plotline, but the sheer acceptance of the clones. Nobody ever thought it was a bit unfair? Nobody ever thinks to flee the country? Nobody, human or clone, questions anything?

There are suggestions that the novel is about our own apathy and resignation to the status quo. To which I say *eh*. I didn’t even fling the book at the wall (the fate reserved for Merrick and The Wisdom of Crocodiles) as it was just that grey.

Also: I am sick to the back teeth of dystopian fiction and am going to actively avoid it from now on – it is in the Surprise!Wars and Dead Narrators bin for this genre.

Nineteen Minutes by Jodi Picoult
High school shooting and its aftermath. I have resisted Picoult for the longest time, but my boss loaned me this book, so I thought I might give it a whirl.

In sum: it was a compulsive read with some flashes of brilliance, even if the asides: “Every student wants to be popular… do you understand?” were patronising and trite.

It also suffered in comparison to We Need to Talk About Kevin, which, for all its faults, really made me think. There were no surprises for me in this novel, though I don’t regret reading it. Picoult is a competent writer and isn’t afraid to address social issues; it’s just a pity that I feel this one has been better explored by other authors. I wouldn’t be averse to reading more of her novels, particularly as my boss and mothergoddamn  both say that other works of hers are much better, though I probably wouldn’t buy them.


First Love by Ivan Turgenev
Short, melodramatic novella written in the 1860s. Nice read and relatively lightweight for Russian literature from that period – it felt like contemporary English or French fiction in terms of style, rather than Russian. But it was pleasant enough and just what I needed before plunging into EM Forster next.

Comments

[keep-warm.livejournal.com]

I threw Never Let Me Go at the wall after about five minutes and never felt inclined to pick it up again.
Also Jodi Picoult does teenagers-and-guns much better in The Pact. If it's of any use the charity shops in Huyton Village are awash with most of her canon for about a pound.

[rebness.livejournal.com]

You did well. I stuck it out to the bitter, bitter end and regret it.

Ooh! Good point. Did you notice they turned that old church shop into a Subway? Gah!

I get most of my cheap-but-awesome reading in the British Heart Foundation shop, even if they are pretty cheeky and charge £4 for a secondhand novel. Still, at least it's for a good cause. Ahem.

[keep-warm.livejournal.com]

I thought that was a little tasteless.....

AND OMG RITE I don't know what it is with the BHF but I went in there and found all these IMMACULATE, doubt-they've-even-been-opened Jodi Picoults and a load of other win stuff I either didn't own or had lost custody of my copy (half my books are growing mould in a box in a shed in Newcastle)I came out laden and very happy. And read The Lovely Bones for the six trillionth time and STILL hated the Redemption!Sex

[mcgarrygirl78.livejournal.com]

People keep telling me to read Piccoult too...am I really missing something? They say to start with My Sister's Keeper but since my slow ass is still on this Queen Noor biography, who knows when that will be.

[rebness.livejournal.com]

Everyone seems to recommend My Sister's Keeper. Perhaps you and I should read it at the same time and swap notes. ;)

[mcgarrygirl78.livejournal.com]

Lets do that. It'll be a motivator and Lord knows I need one.

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

I really liked Never Let Me Go. (And also, on the jacket blurb for the American edition, there's no mention of clones, so you're not spoiled ahead of time, which I liked.)

[rebness.livejournal.com]

I just could not appreciate it. Maybe it's that I'm tired of that genre, or just... I don't know. The emotions were too sparse for me and I found it hard to reconcile characters who felt such an array of things with the accepting people they were at the end of the book - so an interesting idea just didn't ring true for me.

That said, I'll try more of Ishiguro's work as, like Picoult, my friends advise me he has written stuff I would appreciate more.

[mothergoddamn.livejournal.com]

Should I post you The Pack? Personally I'd say Change of Heart or Sisters Keeper next. I'll keep an eye out for a copy for you.

[rebness.livejournal.com]

You're a star, la!

You can post away if you still trust the Spanish system...

[saffronlie.livejournal.com]

Have you read Remains of the Day, though? HAVE YOU?

[rebness.livejournal.com]

Noooes! My friend Matt said I should read it to give Ishiguro another chance, or he'd 'poke out' my eyes 'and roll them down the street'. So I guess that's next on my list, bb.

[saffronlie.livejournal.com]

DO IT. It is amazing. You'll probably hate it, just to be contrary. I really wanted to read Never Let Me Go when it first came out, but then... I didn't. And everyone has said it's shit, so I probably never will. I'm with you, I'm not interested in dystopias either.

what bernard said

[rebness.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I will, then! *Tosses hair*

Everyone is right. Avoid, avoid! It's really weird, because the things I used to adore in fiction - dead narrators (you turned me off them, missus) and dystopias - really irritate me now. I never, ever liked surprise!wars, so at least there's consistency there.

[saffronlie.livejournal.com]

Duuuuuuuuude, go and like dead narrators if you want, it can hardly be my fault!

[rebness.livejournal.com]

No, no. It totally is your fault. I was all enjoying them, you came along and it was an Emperor's New Clothes moment.

I don't mean they were naked dead narrators, geez.

[mothergoddamn.livejournal.com]

Breakfast at Tiffanys

http://starsofscreen.livejournal.com/22122.html

[pandorasblog]

Jodi Picoult - I thought The Pact was very interesting despite a couple of sketchily drawn secondary characters. It's about two families who are so close that the kids do everything together, and a wedding of the two eldest is expected one day... then one is dead and the other the survivor of an apparent suicide pact.

Never Let Me Go - I really enjoyed it and I'm surprised to hear so many people didn't. I'm very interested in books about closed societies like Hailsham, and while I can understand people being skeptical about the lack of rebellion on the part of the clones, I just didn't find it surprising. I think that, living in a free society driven by a culture of individualism and the (sometimes illusory) impression of freedom of choice, we find it hard to imagine how individuals could not rail against a system that gives them none.

But Ishiguro's characters are conditioned to a degree which most of us have not experienced, and I think that their being raised in an isolated group setting which both prevents their coming into contact with people whose lives are different and reinforces their status quo is significant. They don't have parents who take an interest in their achievements as loved individuals; they have peers who have know will be doing the same things as themselves.

The Hailsham kids discuss their fantasy careers and living circumstances (very much in the context of imagery and possessions rather than complex sets of actions, because that's what they've been exposed to), but, having just left school, they don't know anybody who's actually done these things, and their fantasies are markedly simplistic, like those of younger people.

Why don't they try to escape once the "donations" begin? Fatalism. Their entire lives have been building up to this point; it's fearful but also climactic. And the whole system seems designed to keep them calm, particularly the fact that they're partnered with a carer. The carer sees the donor go through a series of donations, and the whole thing is not unimaginably horrible. I think it's very significant and deliberate that the carer/donor relationship approximates and replaces the group bonding they've had at school, which for them already serves some of the functions of a family unit. Everything in their situation is telling them, "This is like something you've experienced before; this is okay on a fundamental level."

Escaping would be more likely if they were being presented with something to rebel against - actual cruelty or neglect, as seems to have happened at other schools. To escape you need something to run from, but also something to run to, and I think they know that they're not equipped to go out and get a job and a home in the usual way. It seems to be unusual for carers and donors to be people who knew each other well at school, filtering which is probably deliberately designed to prevent groups of friends motivating each other to run. Leaving the only companionship you've known could be intolerable when you don't have a strong sense of home in the world outside. They identify Hailsham as home, and I think they know that they're not going to find it again.

I also think fear plays a big part. Having lived a somewhat closed-off life until recently, I can attest to how academic the possibility of change can seem. It explains a lot about how vague their fantasies of a regular life are; it's not just that they don't have the experience and knowledge to fill in the blanks, but also the fact that the fantasy is psychologically present to help them come to terms with their limitations rather than to spur them to replace one way of life with another...

[peregrinuscanus.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with Pandorasblog - top analysis and review there. NLMG was last year and still is one of my top reads. It's not about a dystopia and will they/won't they escape the donation procedure: it is all about us, and about closed communities too. But mostly about us, about our acceptance of death and the limitations of duty and love and service towards others that limit our own lives. Personally I think this book tops The Remains of the Day, but only just: both books deal with repression of the most stifling kind and the difficulty of facing up to the truth. This duty thing is present in that book too, and an acceptance of paths not taken, or where our life circumstances have brought us to.

Ishiguro is still worth reading, even if you hated this one: The Remains of the Day is probably the most accessible, but An Artist of the Floating World is very good too. The Unconsoled is probably one of the hardest books I have ever read but it's exhilarating.

[rebness.livejournal.com]

I still feel there are too many faults to the novel. Even taking into account the idea that it's us (which I did approach very, very briefly in my post), I still feel that overall the execution fell far short of the idea.

Watership Down is about us and yet I can appreciate the rabbits better than I can this book. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Remains of the Day, though, I will try. I am determined to give Ishiguro another go and I have heard that his detached style is better suited to that book. I'll also give The Unconsoled a whirl.

[rebness.livejournal.com]

I think Ishiguro's problem is that he tries to have his cake and eat it. It does not ring true to me that characters that feel such a myriad of emotions, especially love, cannot feel fear in the most simple sense. The protagonist adores Tommy, hopes and hopes he will be allowed to live with her and yet is resigned at the end? No.

Remember that this is no Nineteen-Eighty Four: the characters are allowed to mingle with society at large. They read the classics - and if they don't get that sense of fear and the preciousness of life from Hamlet or its sheer brevity from Hardy, then what are they taking from these works?

Too, although Madame argues that people would rather some intangible person die than someone they love, I find the explanation that Oh Noes an Experiment Went Wrong trite. Amongst millions and millions of "normal" people, there isn't a grassroots movement that survives?

From a coldly academic point of view, I am intrigued by his ideas and wish the idea of Us As Them had been explored more. As a reader, I was not moved. I was not entertained and much less thrilled; for me, that is the mark of failure.

(If this reply reads harshly, you know I don't mean it as a personal rebuff. This is the way I would approach it if writing a critical analysis.)

[pandorasblog]

I definitely thought that Tommy was afraid, yet contained about it... I don't have my copy of the book any more, but I do remember one conversation in particular about the inevitability of his fate. I dunno... maybe I'm reading stuff into it from my own experience and that isn't as present in the text as it seemed to me...