As I sip my cup of tea, I
am reflecting on the collective disappointment we as a book group experienced
with our latest selection, and how this differs from a situation when some
enjoyed the novel and some did not. I
will talk about that soon, but first, I wanted to mention the awesome audiobook
I finished earlier in the week.
I recently finished
listening to John Le Carré’s novel, Our Kind of Traitor. It tells the story of disillusioned Oxford don
Perry and his lawyer girlfriend Gail, a young British couple who, while
enjoying the trip of a lifetime in Antigua, meet dapper Russian guest Dima, and
unwittingly become involved in international espionage and money-laundering. Drawn in by
the eclectic members of Dima’s extended family, including beautiful daughter Natasha
and a pair of unusual nieces, they develop a close, albeit bizarre,
relationship with the group, until one evening, Dima confides top-secret information
about international money-laundering involving not only fellow Russian mafia
members but also top-ranking officials and political figures from countries
around the world, and asks Perry to help him and his family to defect to England. Upon
their return home from their vacation, Perry, nicknamed “British Fair-Play” by
Dima, does his best to live up to this assessment of his character by providing
a full account of all that was said and done during their brief friendship to
MI-6. Readers are then taken on the slow,
detailed journey through the bureaucratic rigmarole that precedes the approval
for this defection to happen, with painstaking detail provided at every step of
the way. This contemporary offering from
Le Carré is a real treat for anyone who may have struggled with his earlier Cold-War books
featuring George Smiley, as it presents readily-accessible and contemporary
characters and themes, while still demonstrating his storytelling mastery and
amazing writing talent. I read this
novel a couple of years ago, but forgot all but the most basic plot summary, so
it was an excellent listening experience for me. My previous experience reading this novel was
one of the reasons I chose A Perfect Spy for my book club to read, not
realizing that is was going to be more difficult and less accessible than this
novel or, say, The Constant Gardener.
Anyway, I would highly recommend this novel as a book or audiobook for
anyone who enjoys espionage fiction, and would also say that this would be a
good one to start with if you have always wanted to read a novel by Le Carré
but were afraid to try.
Now on to our “Novel
Disappointment”… I tried to read Louise
Penny’s The Beautiful Mystery, set in a monastery in a remote part of
Quebec. The prior is found dead in the
garden, and Chief Inspector Gamache is called in to solve the case. He and his team are possibly the first people
to ever be allowed inside the monastery walls, which house the monks who have
achieved worldwide fame for their preservation, resurrection and perfection of
the ancient Gregorian chants, once believed to be lost forever. I expect that the rest of the book details
their investigation into the murder, and the monks who live at the monastery,
but I will admit to reaching only page 89 after three days of reading, and
finally giving up. It was partly the
repetition in the text that was frustrating me, but also the stuttering,
stilting way she wrote. For example, on
page 11: “It wasn’t, then, a casual
call. An invitation to dinner. A query about staffing or a case going to
trial. This was a call to arms. A call to action. A call that marked something dreadful had
happened. And yet, for more than a decade
now every time he heard those words, Beauvoir’s heart leapt. And raced.
And even danced a little. Not
with joy at the knowledge of a terrible and premature death. But knowing he and the Chief and the others
would be on the trail again.” Look at
all those sentence fragments!! That could
have been one or two full, flowing sentences that would take a few seconds to
read, but as a stilting, stuttering paragraph, it takes the reader so much
longer to get through. At first I
thought this was just me, that I must certainly be missing something. Louise Penny, after all, is a wildly popular
bestselling mystery novelist, one whose novels, at least one of them, has been
adapted for TV starring Nathanial Parker, of “Inspector Lynley” fame, as Chief
Inspector Gamache. But when I got the
group started with the discussion, they reiterated the writing concerns detailed above, as well as making the following comments: too many characters, many unnecessary
characters, too much information, repetitive, the story dragged, it was too
long, many details that were thrown in made it seem too contrived, Gamache was
too perfect, all the characters were one-dimensional, it was not memorable, and
the ending was jarring, and also unbelievable.
One member said that she had a hard time keeping track of the real plot
and the sub-plot, but once she realized this, she skipped the parts about the
sub-plot and only read the parts about the real plot, and it started to make
more sense. Another felt that the occasional,
but regular, use of French terms thrown into the text was unnecessary and “pompous”,
since readers didn’t need reminders that the story is taking place in a
French-speaking province. We all found
the information on the music and the chants to be interesting, and one member
pointed out that the imagery of the monastery was significant: Gamache’s first impression was of the
light-filled rooms, the effect of the prisms in the windows when there was full
daylight, suggesting beauty, purity, and “otherworldliness”, but that underneath, the
foundation was cracked and rotting. I
also found, in the 89 pages that I read, some examples of very fine writing,
and an intelligent, subtle humour. Someone in my book group some time ago requested that I add a Louise
Penny mystery to the list, and this title was said to be one of her best books,
so I put it on the list “untested”, as it were.
What was wonderful about our conversation was how candid we could be
once we realized that everyone else felt the same way about the book. We could all agree with and build on the
previous member’s complaint with yet another example or opinion. It is much more difficult to have a lively
conversation when opinions are split, or when even one member has a view that
is strongly opposed to the rest of the group.
At those times, we couch our opinions in euphemisms, soften our tones,
and generally try to have our say without challenging anyone else’s opinions or
hurting their feelings. I find people
are especially careful to use gentle language until they know how I, as the
selector, felt about the book, in case I would be offended that they didn’t
like a book that I chose. So it’s much
more fun when we are all on the same page about a book, and so this was a fun
and lively discussion about how much we disliked this book. Members who had read other books by Penny didn’t
recall the use of such stilted writing, but no one was entirely sure, thus
demonstrating the “forgetableness” of the novels. (Oh boy, it really is fun to rant sometimes!)
OK, that’s all for
tonight. Enjoy the rest of the weekend!
Bye for now…
Julie
Julie
It is good to rant once in awhile! Good post.
ReplyDelete