After 12 days I have only read 8 chapters of "Sacred Hunger". Barry Unsworth is kicking my mental ass. I'm finding the writing style and the language to be archaic - it's just a real slog to try and read. Also, in one scene the characters are referred to alternately by their names, their professions, and the characters they are playing in an amateur dramatics production - confusing to say the least! I just cannot focus on this novel right now, so in the hope that I will be able to enjoy it properly at a later date, I am giving up trying to read it right now.
It feels pretty good.
Also, as I've mentioned previously, there is absolutely no way I'm going to finish this list by September 13th. Rather than discarding the idea of a deadline entirely, I've decided to extend it to December 31, 2012. An extra three and a half months still may not be enough time to read the remaining novels, but it's worth a shot! Quite frankly, January will be a month of delicious new 'genre' reading whether I'm finished with the Man Booker's or not - my 'want to read' pile is bordering on the unmanageable!
For now, I'm going back chronologically to 1971 and V.S. Naipaul's "In a Free State". Plus, I finally got a copy of the inaugural winner last week, so I may try that next.
Happy Reading!
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Friday, August 10, 2012
Altering Misconceptions
So, "The English Patient" by Michael Ondaatje. I read that (took me 15 days for those keeping score). I will admit, I approached this title with almost as much trepidation as I did Salman Rushdie's "Midnight's Children" - to me they are the epitome of modern classics. I am young enough that it feels like both of them have always been a part of the pop lit cannon. Everyone who reads knows of them. That carries a lot of weight of expectation, which mostly has nothing to do with the actual novels.
Interestingly, this novel ranked 2nd in my list of 'titles I am least looking forward to reading' when I began, with Schindler's Ark in 1st (another title which bore the weight of enormous expectations!). I have a suspicion that anything WWII related is designed to make me weepy - which I HATE - plus I understood it to be a romance. War romance? Usually twice the weeping!!
I did not cry. I didn't even have to try not to cry. It is an interesting story. It is a travelogue, a mystery, it has the tension of a thriller (who doesn't tense when there's a bomb being defused?!). I enjoyed "The English Patient". It is clearly written - only at one point was I not entirely sure of what I was being told. The story and the characters are engaging, and deeply human. I didn't cry, although it is filled with tragedy. I learned new things. All in all, it is a solid top 8 of the books I've read so far, and one of only two books that I had preconceived notions of which did not disappoint. Yay!
My favourite part of the novel was the use of 'altered books' to depict the characters rewriting of their own histories - absolutely loved it! Both Hana, the Canadian nurse, and the titular character alter books, and in combination with the frequent use of quotation in the story it creates a desperate love song to civilization, as expressed through literature. While they are rewriting their world, they are trying to understand it through the literature of the past.
It is really freaking beautiful.
I've always loved the idea of altered books - adapting an existing work to express a larger story, or even an entirely different story, within the leaves of another story. Inspired! But, I can't bring myself to actually do it! I have a passion for beautifully crafted books and I feel that marking in them in any way, well, destroys them. It's a bit ridiculous, I know, especially since I also love the idea of marginalia. But I simply can not write in a book!
I was sorely tempted to grab Roddy Doyle's "Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha" on my way out the door this morning, rather than Barry Unsworth's "Sacred Hunger". Unsworth and Ondaatje were joint winners in 1992, Doyle the winner in 1993. I've had "Sacred Hunger" beside my bed for three weeks now. It's a bit daunting. 630 pages, and it appears to be about the slave trade. Not exactly 'light' reading in any sense. Doyle, on the other hand, is tempting on so many levels. I loved "The Commitments" (although I haven't ventured into the rest of the Barrytown trilogy yet) and I love all things related to Ireland. So why is "Sacred Hunger" waiting in my bag? Because I know if I skip it now, I'll come up with more excuses to continue post-poning it, and it may never get read. At least, not by me! And that would never do!
Happy reading!
Interestingly, this novel ranked 2nd in my list of 'titles I am least looking forward to reading' when I began, with Schindler's Ark in 1st (another title which bore the weight of enormous expectations!). I have a suspicion that anything WWII related is designed to make me weepy - which I HATE - plus I understood it to be a romance. War romance? Usually twice the weeping!!
I did not cry. I didn't even have to try not to cry. It is an interesting story. It is a travelogue, a mystery, it has the tension of a thriller (who doesn't tense when there's a bomb being defused?!). I enjoyed "The English Patient". It is clearly written - only at one point was I not entirely sure of what I was being told. The story and the characters are engaging, and deeply human. I didn't cry, although it is filled with tragedy. I learned new things. All in all, it is a solid top 8 of the books I've read so far, and one of only two books that I had preconceived notions of which did not disappoint. Yay!
My favourite part of the novel was the use of 'altered books' to depict the characters rewriting of their own histories - absolutely loved it! Both Hana, the Canadian nurse, and the titular character alter books, and in combination with the frequent use of quotation in the story it creates a desperate love song to civilization, as expressed through literature. While they are rewriting their world, they are trying to understand it through the literature of the past.
It is really freaking beautiful.
I've always loved the idea of altered books - adapting an existing work to express a larger story, or even an entirely different story, within the leaves of another story. Inspired! But, I can't bring myself to actually do it! I have a passion for beautifully crafted books and I feel that marking in them in any way, well, destroys them. It's a bit ridiculous, I know, especially since I also love the idea of marginalia. But I simply can not write in a book!
I was sorely tempted to grab Roddy Doyle's "Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha" on my way out the door this morning, rather than Barry Unsworth's "Sacred Hunger". Unsworth and Ondaatje were joint winners in 1992, Doyle the winner in 1993. I've had "Sacred Hunger" beside my bed for three weeks now. It's a bit daunting. 630 pages, and it appears to be about the slave trade. Not exactly 'light' reading in any sense. Doyle, on the other hand, is tempting on so many levels. I loved "The Commitments" (although I haven't ventured into the rest of the Barrytown trilogy yet) and I love all things related to Ireland. So why is "Sacred Hunger" waiting in my bag? Because I know if I skip it now, I'll come up with more excuses to continue post-poning it, and it may never get read. At least, not by me! And that would never do!
Happy reading!
Thursday, August 2, 2012
They Do This Every Year?
I finished reading Ben Okri's "The Famished Road" on Friday (that was July 27th) having taken 37 days - a new record! Not the sort of record I've been hoping for, but a record nonetheless. It was a really interesting read, an absolute feast of words and imagery. I enjoyed it. It's a story about a 'spirit child' who chooses to live rather than return to the spirit land, and the story is filled with his wanderings and various attempted abductions by spirits trying to return him to the spirit land. It's a bit random, and the time line is difficult to follow, but it was a fun novel.
I'm a bit concerned with one of review quotes on the back of my copy. Philip Howard of 'The Times' says "the message is universal" and to be honest, I'm just not sure what that message is! Another of the quotes, Jenny Turner of 'New Statesmen & Society', says "Overwhelming.... just buy it for it's beauty"! I think perhaps she didn't get the universal message either, and just enjoyed it for the delicious wonder of the language. Sometimes a beautiful novel can just be a beautiful novel, right? I think I'll probably read it again though, just to be sure!
I'm already halfway into my next read, Michael Ondaatje's "The English Patient", and I'm sure if I can convince myself not to watch four-hours of Olympic coverage after work again (Go Team Canada!) I'll be able to finish it tomorrow. Of course, I'm also knitting a lovely new shawl (Memoria by Oblivious Knits, in 'Silver Lining' from the lovely & local Dragonfly Dyewerx, for those curious) so that's a bit distracting as well. But I am impressed with the novel so far. It's living up to my expectations of it anyhow!
It needs to be said - yes, there is no way I'm going to make my goal of reading all the Man Booker prize winners in 12 months. I have 22 books left to read, and only 42 days. If I were only reading books I absolutely loved, and not working full-time, or watching Olympics/any TV, or knitting, or sleeping, I would say 'Sure, I can make that!' but, sadly or not, I must also live outside the pages. I am not going to give up entirely, I will continue to read only the Booker books until I catch up, which means I will be doing this for the rest of my life. Did you know they do this every year?! ;)
There are a few really interesting looking titles on the 2012 long list! It will be interesting to see what happens this year, since only one of the authors is of the 'old guard' and the rest are all first-time nominees. I'm a bit cynical, though, so I admit I will be disappointed but unsurprised if Hilary Mantel's sequel to her 2010 Man Booker prize winning novel "Wolf Hall", "Bring Up The Bodies", wins - even though I've heard great things about "Wolf Hall', and I'm sure the new novel is wonderful too! It would be fantastic to see a new winner. I was a bit disappointed that Patrick Dewitt's "The Sisters Brothers" didn't win last year, since I've heard nothing but good things about it. I had hoped that I would be finished with the past winners in time to at least read this years short-list before the prize is awarded, but again, so not going to happen. Regardless, it will be interesting to see who wins!
Happy Reading!
I'm a bit concerned with one of review quotes on the back of my copy. Philip Howard of 'The Times' says "the message is universal" and to be honest, I'm just not sure what that message is! Another of the quotes, Jenny Turner of 'New Statesmen & Society', says "Overwhelming.... just buy it for it's beauty"! I think perhaps she didn't get the universal message either, and just enjoyed it for the delicious wonder of the language. Sometimes a beautiful novel can just be a beautiful novel, right? I think I'll probably read it again though, just to be sure!
I'm already halfway into my next read, Michael Ondaatje's "The English Patient", and I'm sure if I can convince myself not to watch four-hours of Olympic coverage after work again (Go Team Canada!) I'll be able to finish it tomorrow. Of course, I'm also knitting a lovely new shawl (Memoria by Oblivious Knits, in 'Silver Lining' from the lovely & local Dragonfly Dyewerx, for those curious) so that's a bit distracting as well. But I am impressed with the novel so far. It's living up to my expectations of it anyhow!
It needs to be said - yes, there is no way I'm going to make my goal of reading all the Man Booker prize winners in 12 months. I have 22 books left to read, and only 42 days. If I were only reading books I absolutely loved, and not working full-time, or watching Olympics/any TV, or knitting, or sleeping, I would say 'Sure, I can make that!' but, sadly or not, I must also live outside the pages. I am not going to give up entirely, I will continue to read only the Booker books until I catch up, which means I will be doing this for the rest of my life. Did you know they do this every year?! ;)
There are a few really interesting looking titles on the 2012 long list! It will be interesting to see what happens this year, since only one of the authors is of the 'old guard' and the rest are all first-time nominees. I'm a bit cynical, though, so I admit I will be disappointed but unsurprised if Hilary Mantel's sequel to her 2010 Man Booker prize winning novel "Wolf Hall", "Bring Up The Bodies", wins - even though I've heard great things about "Wolf Hall', and I'm sure the new novel is wonderful too! It would be fantastic to see a new winner. I was a bit disappointed that Patrick Dewitt's "The Sisters Brothers" didn't win last year, since I've heard nothing but good things about it. I had hoped that I would be finished with the past winners in time to at least read this years short-list before the prize is awarded, but again, so not going to happen. Regardless, it will be interesting to see who wins!
Happy Reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)