Recently, I've read
On Chesil Beach - Ian McEwan
To be honest, I delayed reading this because I have a rather polar problem with Ian McEwan - some of his stuff, I adore ("Enduring Love", "Atonement") and some I really can't get on with at all ("The Child In Time", "Amsterdam"). As the world and his wife knows, this was in the running for the Booker and was the favourite, only losing out at the last moment to "The Gathering". To be honest, I did feel before I'd read this that it was somewhat unfair to include this book in the shortlist at all, as it is a novella rather than a novel, but having read it, I completely take that back. It's small, yes, but perfectly formed. The narrative switches between the two protagonists (I love that word), Edward and Florence, a nervous couple on their wedding night who are deeply in love but find themselves unable to confront the issue of sex, very much an elephant in the sitting room. We see their nervous fumblings, examine their mutual histories and finally reach the climax (as it were) of the novel, their confrontation on Chesil beach. Personally I find McEwan's careful, slightly understated style perfect, and the closing pages of the novella are breathtaking. Highly recommended.
The Outsiders - S.E. Hinton
I'd been meaning to read this for a while (do we sense a pattern emerging?!), and had somewhat mixed feelings about it. I enjoyed it, yes, but it was a bit too sentimental ("Stay gold, Ponyboy") for my tastes, and some of the descriptions grated rather, especially those of the characters. Enjoyable, but a bit naive.
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley
To begin, I have to say that I really, really like Huxley's writing style. There's a certain way that he frames things that perhaps isn't to everyone's taste, but really appealed to me. I've read "1984" by George Orwell (who hasn't?!), and I have to say I find Huxley's vision slightly more terrifying - as Neil Postman put it, "What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one." Despite the fact that it is Bernard who initially appears to be the protagonist, I personally disliked him immensely and felt none of the pathos that I felt for Winston from "1984" - this was instead reserved for The Savage, John. There was thing I noticed though that I didn't understand; in chapter eleven, it says:
"John thought it very nice. "Still," he said, "Ariel could put a girdle round the earth in forty minutes."
Hang on. Could he? I had a strange feeling that was Puck. Yes, I just checked, it was. So why does John make this mistake? I can't seem to find anything about it. Anyone feel like contributing?
Someday This Pain Will Be Useful To You - Peter Cameron
I have a confession to make. I love "The Catcher In The Rye". Yes, I know it's cliched. Yes, I know the world and his wife love that book. But I do. I bought this book purely because I thought it had a good title and I saw something about Holden Caulfield on the back. I loved it. Whilst it's true that there are a few similarities between the hero, James Sveck and Holden Caulfield, I realised as I was reading it that it's grossly unfair to "Someday" to simply see it as an updated "Catcher", because it's so much more. The (wait for it) protagonist James is incredibly appealing despite (or perhaps because of) his poor relationships with the other characters of the novel, and beautifully written. He feels like a real person. I like the understatement of the novel, the fact that there isn't a great driving plot because there doesn't need to be. I like the fact that James can't recognise his feelings towards John (in this respect, he is slightly reminiscent of Christopher from "The Curious Incident Of The Dog In The Night Time"), I like the fact that there are no life-changing character upheavals, basically I like everything about it. Highly recommended.
Persuasion - Jane Austen
This is one of my AS level set texts, and I blush to confess that I hadn't felt like reading it until recently because I "didn't like Jane Austen much". How wrong I was. To my surprise, once I made myself pick "Persuasion" up, I genuinely could not put it down. Austen is incredibly bitchy (well, ironic, but bitchy covers it), something I enjoyed immensely, but the thing that really got me is this. I confess, I was ignorant, I thought that I would find nothing to relate to in this novel, I thought it was dry. Then I read it. Austen's use of free indirect speech is just stunning, and the way that she expresses Anne's emotions is so REAL. Take this, for example.
Eight years, almost eight years had passed, since all had been given up. How absurd to be resuming the agitation which such an interval had banished into distance and indistinctness! What might not eight years do? Events of every description, changes, alienations, removals—all, all must be comprised in it, and oblivion of the past—how natural, how certain too! It included nearly a third part of her own life.
Alas! with all her reasoning, she found, that to retentive feelings eight years may be little more than nothing.
I loved it.
The Great Gatsby - F. Scott Fitzgerald
This is another of my set books. I read it several years ago, but thought that I'd better reread it for all those thrilling essays. I enjoyed Fitzgerald's descriptions, but hated just about all of the characters, especially Daisy (I can never resist the urge to slap her when she starts going on about "such beautiful shirts!" Ugh.). Nick was marginally the best of them, but I still think he's only a little more morally sound than the others, despite his protestations that they're "a rotten bunch". Hmm.
Terrier - Tamora Pierce, Fairest - Gail Carson LevineI've lumped these two together, because they were too young for me and a bit silly to boot. "Terrier" was all right, interesting plot, typical Pierce heroine, somewhat overlong and with one of the worst, toe-scrunchingly embarrassing descriptions ever - "he makes my peaches tingle". Ugh. "Fairest" was unadulterated tripe.
...to be continued
