Educated by Tara Westover: notes by Richard, thanks to others for sharing theirs.

BBBC Meeting:  Thursday, 4^th July 2019, Flower and Forrester, Combe Down

Present: Richard (his book choice), Andrew, ChrisB, ChrisW, John, MarkT, MarkW, Steve, Willm.

Apols, score and notes received: MarkT,

Overall, this was a book almost universally appreciated - I hesitate to use the word ‘enjoyed’ as there is much that is not actually enjoyable in this memoir - but all were clear that this was a good book, and most thought it to be either very good or exceptional (in terms of scores, we had three in the 9s, 3 in the 8s, a 7.5, a 7.25 and a 6.6).  Almost everyone had a great deal to say about the book, and it generated quite a lot of discussion.  Most agreed that it was ‘a remarkable book’, and terms such as ‘I loved the book’, ‘it was an amazing book’, etc. abounded.

Many people stated that although they tended to prefer fiction, this book was an exception to that, being both extremely thought-provoking, and almost novel-like in its themes structure and exposition (in fact some queried whether or not it WAS factual, or was in fact a novel ….).

One of us summarised that this was a book about religion and faith, memory and truth, reality and sanity and perception, tyranny and power, abuse, guilt and shame, attachment and detachment, loyalty and love, and what makes up a person. – Quite a lot, really!

More Detail: all were agreed that this book was not about religion per se, but rather about

·         the power and devastating effect of early and regular abuse on later self-esteem and ability to move forwards in the world, even if one is actually resilient.

·         the power of various protective factors (such as her belief in the protectiveness of her mother, her relationship with Tyler, Tyler introducing her to music, the closeness and love from at least some of her grandparents, and her native intelligence) to assist resilience.

·         the power of education – not just academic education, although that in itself is very powerful, but what education IS: “Everything I had worked for, all my years of study, had been to purchase for myself this one privilege: to see and experience more truths than those given to me by my father, and to use those truths to construct my own mind. I had come to believe that the ability to evaluate many ideas, many histories, many points of view, was at the heart of what it means to self-create” – or to be educated.’

·         the unreliability of memory, and of how we all construct and reconstruct our memories, all of the time – as the author writes later in the book: “The future could be different from the past. Even the past could be different from the past, because my memories could change: I no longer remembered Mother listening in the kitchen while Shawn pinned me to the floor, pressing my windpipe. I no longer remembered her looking away.”

It was agreed that this was quite an amazing account of an almost unbelievable journey, from a family that, as a child, she believed was right and which rejected everything society has developed for people’s benefit, however flawed and distorted at times; through the ‘slow-burn’ realisation that what she had experienced was oppression and abuse.  One clever writing device she uses is that the way she describes this journey means that the reader has to realise this in the same way that she starts to realise and accept it.

All were also agreed that both the writing, and the story she told, was compelling: accidents to the various children and adults and the graphic descriptions of the aftermaths - her burned brother, her burned father, the car-crash-injured family members; the physical and psychological abuse of and cruelty to Tara by Shawn; and much more.

All again were agreed that this was an honest and very readable account; that she writes exceptionally well, and has some lovely ways of describing and phrasing things: ‘easy to read, with fluent prose and some great turns of phrase’. This is true both for her descriptions of the physical environment, especially her ‘home mountain’, but also of the places such as Cambridge and Harvard where she studied, and in her turns of phrase, such as “Not knowing for certain, but refusing to give way to those who claim certainty”: a lovely phrase, and an important idea, for her in her journey and more generally.  It was felt that her writing held an air of innocence, possibly partly attributable to her having read so little of others’ and hence not being over-exposed to other influences – instead she wrote very conversationally, in a way very reflective of how people actually speak and think. ‘Effortless and unencumbered’.

It was felt that Tara told her life story so skilfully, she somehow allows us to both experience what she went through and yet disassociate from the worst parts, simultaneously, in the same way she did. She did this so seamlessly that it was only on stepping back one could realise what a brilliant writing technique it is: offering, in the same sentence, a narrative of what her future self came to understand was happening to her, and at the same time to relay perfectly how the young girl she was then, lived it.

There is a lot in this book (and this was an area which developed and got progressively larger) about the awful way that this (and many other religions and cultures – it was remarked that this was ‘The Handmaiden’s Tale writ large, in real life’) not only treat women, but also make them think and feel about themselves.  The whole set of descriptions about the use of the word ‘whore’ and the terrible double standards applied to men and women, about sex and sexuality and dress of course, but even more to how they are brainwashed into thinking about themselves.  As she writes: “I evolved a new understanding of the word “whore,” one that was less about actions and more about essence. It was not that I had done something wrong so much as that I existed in the wrong way. There was something impure in the fact of my being. “It’s strange how you give the people you love so much power over you”, I had written in my journal. But Shawn had more power over me than I could possibly have imagined. He had defined me to myself, and there’s no greater power than that.”  There was an interesting discussion about the idea that it is in these ways that these religions and cultures create such terrible distorted self-images in their members, especially their female ones. Her description later of how she could not accept praise, or help was again very powerful: “I could tolerate any form of cruelty better than kindness. Praise was a poison to me; I choked on it. I wanted the professor to shout at me, wanted it so deeply I felt dizzy from the deprivation. The ugliness of me had to be given expression. If it was not expressed in his voice, I would need to express it in mine.”

The Stockholm Syndrome was mentioned [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22447726] as having great similarities to the impact that such long-term brainwashing has on people. Even later in Tara’s journey, when she tries to change things, she takes all the blame and responsibility for the fact that her family is being divided – it is her fault for raising the issue, not their fault for having done the things in the first place.  Indeed, the whole area of how she ‘rocked the boat’ and the ways that people responded to that, and then changed their responses, was extremely interesting and generated much comment, with many talking about the mother’s behaviour as being ‘a damning indictment’.  But on the other hand, Tara talks about why her mother failed to live up to what she had said she would do to support her: “But hers or not, those words, which had so comforted and healed me, were hollow. I don’t believe they were faithless, but sincerity failed to give them substance, and they were swept away by other, stronger currents.”  So she was sincere, but that sincerity did not have any substance to it.

This upbringing created Tara, a person burdened by shame and guilt; not being able to make sense of things, how to reconcile her new and old lives - having to disconnect her university life from her life at home. And all of these conflicts were extremely stressful, and all underpinned by her feelings of having been let down by the very people she (and we) believe should be there to protect her, her parents: “We had been bruised and gashed and concussed, had our legs set on fire and our heads cut open. We had lived in a state of alert, a kind of constant terror, our brains flooding with cortisol because we knew that any of those things might happen at any moment. Because Dad always put faith before safety.”  Yet although her parents and brother not only do not protect Tara from danger and harm, they lead her into both; she persists in trying to stay part of the family and trying to fix things - years after she left home, she is still trying to win the love of her parents which they had still never given, and only grudgingly offer to her at the end of the book, and only with huge and unacceptable conditions attached.

Another generally agreed aspect was that, although the book was full of alarming and awful events and people and behaviours, it was very moving at times, with the author generally avoiding being sentimental or melodramatic.

There were also flashes of humour – her incredulity over Rosa Parks taking a seat on the bus, which puzzled her as it seemed an odd thing to steal – which also helped to leaven out the awful things.

Other elements that people liked were:

·         her descriptions of family and friends and tutors: you feel you really know them, especially, her mother and father, and Shawn, Audrey and Tyler.

·         the references throughout to music (and to performance), and the power of music to transcend some of the more awful elements – it was interesting that her father, so opposed to her going out into the community, embraced this when she either sang, or obtained parts in theatrical performances;

·         the intellectual power that was occasionally revealed, in a number of ways, but including her PhD and her choices about it: her PhD “didn’t treat Mormonism as the objective of human history, but neither did it discount the contribution Mormonism had made in grappling with the questions of the age. Instead, it treated the Mormon ideology as a chapter in the larger human story. In my account, history did not set Mormons apart from the rest of the human family; it bound them to it.”  As one of us stated, this was her intellectual resolution: her mental resolution took longer.

·         the lack of trust in conventional medicine and the reliance on non-Western medicine, to an extreme degree – and how this then led to great wealth for the family;

·         the underpinning issues in all traditional or immigrant or minority religious communities: of conformity to tradition versus assimilation and ‘fitting in’ to the prevailing or surrounding culture, and of how difficult it is for parents to steer a course through these areas (or even if they should do so, versus instead embracing assimilation and the idea of the ‘melting pot’);

·         some of her throwaway observations, such as “I began to experience the most powerful advantage of money: the ability to think of things besides money”;

·         excellent descriptions of her various mental states as she battles with her family loyalty and recognition that she cannot have both emancipation and family life;

·         how in the USA it is possible to live ‘off grid’;

·         the rather amazing fact that, of the 7 siblings, three managed to escape, and all of those obtained PhDs, all with no formal education until the age of about 17. There was a discussion over whether education allowed them to escape, or whether they escaped and then found education (or some mix of the two), but it was clear that education was a key to her continued escape, as it is to so many others: she and her siblings who managed to get educated could leave the thrall of the family mores, but those who could not had neither the life chances nor the money to avoid employment in the family and hence acceptance of all it believes. In many ways, this book describes the nature of all extremists, told through a family story: no other view is worthy of consideration, because the “truth” is God’s truth, as told by the patriarch.

There were also a few areas which people were critical about, or were less wholeheartedly positive.

·         A few people raised the issue of sexual abuse, and found it unlikely that with so much physical abuse, in a situation where women were so badly treated, that there would not also be sexual abuse – and that in fact sex was a theme largely absent in the book.

·         A number felt that she was in some way ‘holding back’ all the way through, although it was unclear why that was.  It may have been due to sexual abuse; it may be that much of the book is a result of ‘false memory’ – and it was suggested that, in the same way as many of the ‘negative’ characters had been given pseudonyms, there might be a number of issues which the publishers had decided could not be included. One of use suggested that the book would have been gone over extremely carefully by lawyers, to remove various elements.

·         Others felt that, by virtue of it being a memoir, the part of a novel which is based on imagination was missed (although others suggested that maybe a lot of the book was fictional anyway!)

·         One of us felt that although the first half was compelling, gradually, the 2^nd half became less so; and the ending appeared too trite.

Richard Velleman, July 2019

The Secret Scripture Sebastian Barry

The Secret Scripture Sebastian Barry

This book interweaves the sad history of Ireland, its civil war and independence with the prejudices of religion and the tragic consequences for Roseanne about whom the story is written.

It attracted a great many positive comments e.g. : fantastic; really enjoyed; very good; beautifully crafted descriptions; most beautiful prose, lyrical at times; perfectly crafted phrases; a work of great imagination; wonderful description of Roseanne’s childhood and home life; a beautifully written book. 

A couple of examples of the author Barry’s, turn of phrase are: … my mother’s wits were now in an attic of her head which had neither door nor stair, or at least none that I could find;

… in a country of cupboards every one with a skeleton in it, especially after the civil war, no one was exempt;

These positives were tempered by other comments, often from same readers, e.g.: I have forgotten a lot of the plot; the story didn’t really stick; absolutely a case where the sum is less than the parts; ephemeral; felt distanced from the characters; wanted to be incensed by the horrible events, but wasn’t; it did not appear realistic that as a modern trained psychiatrist Dr Grene did not come down more in favour of the “truth“ that Roseanne recounted rather than accepting that the “truth” as seen from Father Gaunt’s account. 

Roseanne suffered tragically from the misogynistic and prejudiced Father Gaunt, and It seemed surprising that she had accepted her lot so easily and had not done more to fight her committal. She was simply forgiving of all that had gone on in the past which gave an added sadness to her story with the loneliness that she had experienced in her long incarceration. However other comments recognised Roseanne’s remarkable resilience and that, despite the cruelties and tragic loss, the human spirit’s ability to accept and survive shone through.

The dual diarists format generally was seen as working quite well. The voices of Roseanne and of Dr Grene were both powerful. Although Roseanne appeared accepting of her life, she may have been deliberately or unconsciously mis-remembering some crucial parts of it.  Roseanne seem to gain clarity and fulfilment from setting down her memories on paper whereas Dr Grene found more and more confusion examining his  past relationship with his wife and guilt for his alleged single sexual misdemeanour. Although Dr Grene seemed more feeble and incompetent (especially as a trained psychiatrist), he too was trying to understand his own character. 

All readers were impressed by the many strata disclosed within the basic story e.g. the complexity of family and societal relationships; the dead hand of religion at that time; the complicated politics; the ubiquity of betrayal; how perceived infidelity destroyed relationships and lives; passionate hatreds; extreme, cruel and violent behaviours generated by social and political beliefs; the degree to which an individual or society considers its extreme beliefs or behaviours to be simply normal; the unreliability of memory; how we mis-remember as a self-protective mechanism; the covering-up of mistakes or misdeeds, and the difficulty of resisting the urge to do so.  The story illustrates how there is no definite truth - only the experiences of different people about the same event - “nobody has a monopoly on truth”

As so many layers were exposed, also, so many were easily overlooked.  Several readers found it difficult to grasp who was who in the civil war, and why they were fighting and killing each other.  Also the closeness of Irish familial ties and the destructive consequences of these ties being shattered. 

The group having just finished ‘Milkman’ about the complexities of near contemporary Catholic/Protestant  relationships in Belfast it was very interesting to read about the history of this earlier time in the same century. Another comment was made as to the degree Ireland had changed within a few years e.g in the treatment of unmarried pregnant women and orphans; the lessening power of the church; the move towards a middle ground in politics, although of course there remain many unresolved political differences within the Republic of Ireland as well as between the Republic and Northern Ireland.

In some parts, the plot seemed highly unlikely or verging on magic realism by the serendipitous occurrence of events. Readers were not expecting the ending. Some thought however, whether this denouement was really necessary, and did it add anything to the story? Nevertheless, if one applied the ‘So, what?’ question to the whole novel, it would have to be agreed that the exposition of personal and social history, tragedy, survival, as well as the psychological insights, and some wonderful prose, would serve as examples of the learning as well as enjoyment that this book provides. 

It was noted that this is a book that would sustain a second reading, and several members of the group had done so, at least in part.

The Constant Gardener, by John le Carré

29th April, Forester & Flower, Combe Down, Bath.

The Constant Gardener is a 2001 novel which is provocative and challenging. It is Le Carre’s take on the different dynamics and influence of governments, aid agencies, politicians and multinationals in the developing world. In a review in the Observer, Nigel Williams described the book as “a work of fierce political intelligence, tackling the key question of the failure of the West to deal with all those things that the collapse of communism should have made easier to confront - Third World poverty, corporate greed and political cynicism”.

The novel tells the story of Justin Quayle, a British diplomat whose activist wife is murdered. Believing there is something behind the murder, he seeks to uncover the truth and finds an international conspiracy of corrupt bureaucracy and pharmaceutical money. A large pharmaceutical company working under the cover of AIDS tests and treatments, is testing a tuberculosis drug that has severe side effects. Rather than help the trial subjects and begin again with a new drug, the company covered up the side effects and continued to develop the drug. The plot was vaguely based on a real-life case in Kano, Nigeria. Le Carré writes in the book's afterword: "by comparison with the reality, my story [is] as tame as a holiday postcard". The book was later adapted into a feature film in 2005.

JH: saw the novel as a fable – a story of good and evil, the weak versus the powerful (in the tradition of David & Goliath, Robin Hood, or the Lord of the Rings). As in the tradition of all good fables it is rather improbable, for example, the way that Justin travels on a false passport to Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Canada and back to Kenya. But is a great story of individual commitment & personal passion in contrast to the cynicism & pragmatic amorality.  It can also be read as a historical novel reflecting the values and experience of the late 20th Century. - a world on the cusp of arrival of the internet and computer security, higher levels of corporate scrutiny, governance & accountability.  Could it happen today?  Are multinationals, particularly big-pharma, as unethical, manipulative & venal as described in the book? The context of Kenya rings true – the government at the time was notoriously corrupt, and certain individuals and companies had significant influence.

Chris B:  enjoyed the book, liked the way the tension and the drama kept up through the book. Felt Le Carre good at creating scenes and characters – particularly the way that characters emerged, for example, how Justin’s character evolved and was developed through the book. He noted that you get to know Tess much more after her death.  Some of characters may appear stereotypical and rather old fashioned, but drawing on his experience working in government and internationally such people do exist. He recognised that diplomats have a difficult role balancing their own personal values with government’s different agendas – a state of constant tension which often means they appear indecisive. He also noted that it would be interesting to see how other authors, like Graham Greene, would have handled this issue and explored the resulting personal conflicts and tensions.

Chris W: a good and exciting read.  He enjoyed some of the characters involved and good descriptions of the Kenyan setting and events like the funeral. Concerned it may have been a rather superficial commentary on some highly complex issues – for example the characterisation of diplomats and their role., or the negative portrayal of pharmaceutical companies and the way they work in Africa. Felt the level of malfeasance portrayed was not plausible – as no company would risk the legal repercussions and potential consequences. This led to a discussion, based on past and recent experience, of the way big pharmaceuticals currently behave and what they have been accused of. 

WM:  enjoyed individual bits of the novel and some of the characterisation, such as Gloria, but generally found story improbable and felt the style was exaggerated and overly stereotypical. In general the book did not work for him and lost interest in it.

RV:  found story not terrible satisfactory – not sure Le Carre writes very well about some of the internal conflicts and potential contradictions.  Felt characters in this book rather two-dimensional characters (good or bad) and feels that in some of his earlier novels he was more successful at portraying characters struggling with moral and personal conflicts - complex characters who were internally conflicted. He was not sure these internal conflicts brought out or explored sufficiently in this novel. For example, how UK diplomats are expected to represent, and so appear to condone, UK government policies etc. – policies that might be at odds with their own values and moral compass. RV also raised a concern that the author appears to takes sides on some issues – this raised a debate as to whether authors should take sides in writing novels that touch on sensitive political issues or personal behaviour.

SC:  not normally comfortable with spy fiction and in the past had found many of Le Carre’s novels hard work and so was surprised how much he enjoyed this novel. He found the subject matter interesting, and liked the characterisation of some those involved.  But was concerned that at times it read like a rather tedious exposition of some of the issues involved, and at times the discussion around some of the issues was rather clunky.  He wondered if spelling out the issues involved in this way was a device to move the story along. Different characters were introduced to develop such expositions, for example, the way the pilot McKenzie was used to explain the particular context of what was happening in the North of Kenya and Southern Sudan. 

MW:  the Constant Gardner feels like a book written by an author who knows his skills and his limitations; I have read the Smiley novels and this one has similar characteristics, for example the plot is well thought through, and it’s a good read.  It’s a political thriller with a sympathetic but rather boring hero, (definitely not James Bond), a number of Bond villains, both foreign and closer to home and, best of all, sexy Bond women all over the place. The only other thing I would like to say is about the ending, which, for such a long book, I found rather abrupt and disappointing, and depressing, with the baddies seemingly getting away with it but Justin being blown away. Yes I know that is how it would have gone in real life, actually he probably would have been blown away sooner in real life, but it would have been nice if Justin could have lived happily ever after with Ghita or Lara or Brigit from Hippo, and the baddies could have gone to jail. 

MT:  mostly enjoyed the book and it thought it was easy to read - I used to look forward to reading it. There were some confusing bits; however the book was easier to follow than the film. The telling the story from different people’s perspective and in different time zones was a bit confusing at times. But I did sort out the plot in the end. It was mostly told from Justin’s view point, so I felt I got to know him a bit, and liked him. It is a fascinating insight to this world. Is it really as corrupt as the story makes out? I have had some experience with the generosity of Pharma and medical device industry, but never as bad as the story - just flash flights and expensive dinners to try and buy your allegiance, not more than that - no killings at all?  Whilst reading the book, he had been watching the Widow on the TV; thought there was lots of overlap between the stories. I liked the way everyone fancied Tessa, especially the scoundrel Sandy. The interplay between Sandy and Tessa was well done. Certain parts I remember and liked -the lunch scene with Pellegrin, not listening at all was good. I suspected the Doctor was gay long before it came out, and knew he was not having an affair with Tessa. It was a strange coincidence that we have another book about TB. I would like to know what the connection is between TB and Aids, mentioned in the book, for example. There were lots of mention about clinical trials, and some things were not correct, so maybe the author had not researched that properly, or maybe things were very different in the past? The ending was a bit frustrating -at one point I thought he was going to commit suicide, but I wanted to know more how the end came. 

AA:  Le Carre is a great storyteller and he tells a great story here. He keeps the narrative moving along at a good speed without skimping on atmosphere or description.  And his concise way of writing is compact with elegant turns of phrase without being dense or knotty.  He has a fluent, easy-to-read, clear writing style. I really enjoyed the development of Woodrow, Justin, and particularly Tessa who is gradually being constructed from the eyes and words of other characters. 
Quotes that I particularly enjoyed were:
“The High Commission stood on a slope, and its continuing subsidence was enough to tilt pictures out of true after a weekend on their own.”
“Bluhm when the party’s nearly over, slumped in a chair and looking lost and empty, with everything worth knowing about him hidden five miles down.”
“He advanced on her, and said, ‘Good evening, Gloria, how very good of you to have me,’ in a voice so bravely mustered that she could have wept and later did.”

AA, as a doctor with experience of working with TB patients and in light of the book’s focus on TB (and the group’s interest in the disease), pointed out that:
* •    One-third of the people in the world are infected with TB, but most don't develop disease as their immune systems contain it. The waning of the immune system with old age may result in reactivation with the bacteria no longer being contained so they start to cause disease. There are two main groups in the UK who have TB - elderly indigenous people with reactivation and immigrants infected overseas who come with disease.
* •    TB used to be endemic in UK - Tom Jones and Ringo Starr had it and my dad’s chest X-ray showed he’d been infected with TB as a child in the 20s which had stayed contained. TB, what was called “consumption", lead to the death of millions including illustrious individuals such as Orwell, Burns, DH Lawrence, Florence Nightingale, Dylan Thomas, Alan Sillitoe, Somerset Maugham and various Brontë’s, plus Eleanor Roosevelt, Stravinsky, Camus, Chekhov and Kafka.
* •    Given that development of disease is a fine balance between immune containment and bacterial challenge, AIDS (which suppresses/destroys the immune system) unmasks latent TB. It also makes each disease harder to treat, and the patient ends up on two separate cocktails of nasty drugs which often interact and cause further trouble in an already weakened individual without a functioning immune system to assist in the battle against the bugs - that is if you are lucky enough to have access to medical care and the correct drugs. Not to mention the funds.
* •    When HIV took off in Africa transmission was mainly heterosexual, so it was young adults who were the main victims of the epidemic. As TB was (and still is) endemic and effective treatments were elusive, the results were devastating with huge numbers of children orphaned – many who had been infected with HIV through maternal-child transmission.


Constant Gardner BBBC Scores:  CW-7.1, CB-7,  AA–7,  MT-7,  JH-7,  MW-6.7,  SC-6,  RV-5.5, WM-3,   

Transcription, by Kate Atkinson

March 7th 2019. The Packhorse, Southstoke, Bath. 

Set during three time periods in the 1940s working for MI5 as a secretary, the 1950s working in the BBC and the 1980s looking back on life this story builds into a spy thriller set during a  time when allies, enemies and allegiances changed and it was difficult to know who to trust…
General consensus of an easy read by all with some finding  rather irritating and shallow and others enjoying the details of postwar England and the activities of M16.

Richard
Easy to read but irritating-too many problems. No character development in the main character with the denouement extremely irritating -absolutely no hint at all that Juliet had any political convictions at all never mind that she might be working for the communist party.
Juliet was a non person-the world passed her by -she was SO dumb.
There were good bits the author’s ability to deal with prejudice rang very true “it must be awfully handy to have a scapegoat for the worlds ills. (Women and the Jews tend to be first in line, unfortunately)“ some of the quotes ring very true for the current debate about Europe and foreigners.
A Very forgettable book.

Chris B
Easy to read but extremely light. The characters were mildly interesting but no real detailed explanations or sophistication in Juliet’s character. The book rather trivialised the war and the Cold War - a bit of a caricature. The British Secret Service for example- that there would be the inevitable closet gay.

Willm
Enjoyed good quality writing, light but unbelievable. Implausible that Juliet could be the sleuth whilst being a typist. Many too many chance coincidences. Meeting in the fog, being found on Paddington Station, everybody knew where she was all the time-totally unbelievable. The twist at the end was “cute“ but there was no substantiation for why this should happen at all leading up to her having Communist leanings.

Andrew 
A dull start with the description of her childhood but the writing crisp and entertaining with an easy “floaty“ style. The mundanities of life are well described in the book. The book lost it pace in the middle section with way too many coincidences. Farcical meetings. And then suddenly at the end Juliet becomes a Communist! Andrew enjoyed the story and the writing. But didn’t fully engage him. It was nice to read but “thin”.

Mark T
Mark read the book in India and enjoyed it as a light-hearted read but the fact that he can’t remember it now is a reflection of his thoughts of the book. He felt that there were many parts that were tedious. The description of Juliets mother dying was well described and he enjoyed the tension when Juliet is hiding in Mrs Skaifes’s house hanging off the creeper outside the window!

John
This was a book following in the great tradition of “derring do“spy stories about M15 typical of the spy thrillers written by CJ Samson. It was not pretending to be more. Captured the era well particularly the description of life at the BBC.
Prejudices at the time against women, Jews and race were done well by the author and the issue of trust-who do we trust was well questioned. It was an easy read a “warm bath“ and touched on some very relevant issues for example appeasement- the fact  that prior to the Second World War Lord Halifax and others nearly did a deal with the Nazis.………

Mark W
An easy read but not very much happened during the first hundred pages and the last 50 went mad! The central character isn’t the “shaper” of the story. This is a novel written by a female author about a female without that individual being the lead role. He found the plot “clunky“ and that it was full of irritating asides expressed by Juliet in parentheses.
At the end the author decided she needed to cram in some exciting stuff so the last 50 pages are inexplicably full of plot.

Steve
There are numerous irritating errors the first being the reference to North Utsire which only came into the shipping forecast in the 1980s! However, he felt that he was drawn into the story and enjoyed it.He felt that it was cunningly written and he liked the character of Juliet- an abandoned orphan.
He particularly liked Juliet’s asides and felt that this was a persuasive account of how things would have been in post war MI5. With the basic logistics of one room next to the next filled with a typist and technician.
He found the story where later Juliet went on to become a double agent as being plausible and thought-provoking.
Well researched and believable book.
Terrific.

Chris W
Enjoyed the atmospheric writing bringing to life 40s and 50s England and details about MI5 work with Nazi sympathisers during the war. The book was good in that it raised questions about truth, patriotism, identity and self. There were numerous good quotes.
However on the downside there were very predictable stereotypical characters-public schoolboy spies with the standard closet homosexual. The book had large sections that were slow moving with little action. Difficult to connect with Juliet‘s character particularly with her irritating asides in parentheses. Very little justification at the end to explain Juliet becoming a double agent.


Scores

Richard 3.5
Steve 8.5
Andrew 6.5
Mark T 6 .8
Mark W 6 .5
Willm 6.0
John 7.0
Chris B 5 .5
Chris W 6 .6

Milkman by Anna Burns

Milkman by Anna Burns

Date of Meeting: Thursday 4^th April 2019

This book was picked because of its interesting first chapter, and was described by the Guardian as ‘original, funny, disarmingly oblique and unique: different’. It was also the Booker Prize winner for 2018, not usually a selling point for me, but it seemed the sort of book that would not be described as ‘an easy read’ and so it transpired.

The discussion was an interesting one: there were three camps: ‘the enjoyed it’ camp, the ‘hated it camp’ and the Richard camp.

Dealing with the ‘hated it’ camp first of all, (Mark T and John), it seemed that Mark T, who was the first to comment, ‘passionately hated it’ and it was ‘one of the worst books I’ve ever read’, and he gave up at the end of the second chapter (roughly 20% of the book). However, after listening to the next four reviews, was heard to say ‘well perhaps I should have persevered a bit longer’, until sustained by John, who ‘found it unreadable’ and felt ‘angry and disenfranchised’, and gave up at roughly the same time as Mark T.

Mark W, in his brief introduction to the book, was struck by the style of the writing, strange at first but quite soon didn’t notice and was able to ‘go with the flow’. And what a flow it was, written entirely from the perspective of the narrator, whose name we never learn. According to the author herself, ‘This is a book about rumours, gossip, the power of gossip, the power of history and also the power of fabricated history, when rumours become the history’. Among the many quotes that could have been pulled out, two in particular were nominated, illustrating the dark humour of the book.

 Firstly, when describing an encounter with the ‘Wee Sisters’ (aged 8, 9 and 10 and never named, like all of the characters and places in the book):

‘I came in that day and we found them, no longer deep in Joan but now at those papers. ‘Wee sisters!’ we cried. ‘Where’d you get these? What on earth is going on?’ ‘Hush, older sisters,’ they said. ‘We’re busy. We’re trying to understand their viewpoint.’ After that they returned to poring over their broadsheets and tabloids while we, their elder sisters, disbelievingly looked on. Then we looked at each other –me, third sister, second sister and first sister. Trying to understand their viewpoint! What obscurity would wee sisters utter next? As for their remark, it was of the type that instantly could taint any person in our area.’

The second quote follows a difficult conversation with ‘Longest Friend’:

‘After this our meeting in the lounge ended, and after that I had three further encounters with longest friend from primary school. One was at her wedding in the countryside four months on where I was the only one – bar the holy man officiating – not wearing dark glasses. Even the groom, and longest friend in her simple white gown, each had a pair on. Then I met her a year after her wedding, this time at the funeral of her husband. Three months further on from that I went to her own funeral when they buried her with her husband. This was in the renouncers’ plot of the graveyard just up from the ten minute area, also known as ‘the no-town cemetery’, ‘the no-time cemetery’, ‘the busy cemetery’ or just simply, the usual place’.

Overall, Mark W ranked this book alongside Olive Ketteridge and The Handmaid’s tale, in terms of originality and enjoyment.

Next was Andrew, who was pleased this book about The Troubles was chosen, particularly against the backdrop of the Brexit backstop and watching Derry Girls on TV, and, up to a point he really enjoyed it. He thought it gave a real flavour of enclave life, with all its unspoken rituals and conventions and subtexts and rules and un-named people and things, its obfuscation and shadows, its expectations and resilience and fear and its pressure to conform and tensions and suspicions. Also, its ways of doing things and ways of not doing things, its constraints and strictures, its avoidance of hospitals, and telephones, and authorities, its use of rumour as a weapon, like with the Bentley supercharger and Middle Sister’s association with Milkman. The inescapable interconnectedness of everyone and everything, between as well as within communities, and all this from the perspective of an 18-year old woman who was doing all the things 18-year olds do anywhere, but in the confines of this enclave.

The start was excellent with its immediate hints of sinister things afoot, and was straight into the rhythm of the language. He listened to a section on Audible in the car but he had already got the voice and the rhythm from the writing. He liked the way characters were given descriptive names e.g. Maybe Boyfriend and Real Milkman, as well as places e.g. the Ten-Minute Area and the dot-dot-dot places. And he liked the characters, particularly Middle Sister, Ma, Real Milkman and the Wee Sisters. He also liked the way Burns introduced characters e.g. Chef and Real Milkman, and quickly got a real feel of how he became known as the man who didn’t love anybody. He enjoyed the way the story moved seamlessly between topics e.g. from hoarding to how Maybe-Boyfriend’s parents left four children without warning or note to live abroad and become world-famous ballroom dancers. He enjoyed the language e.g’ reading-while-walking, romance-advancement plan, hedge-disparagement, not going to hospital, guardians of the names, my mother, one of the Top Five pious women of the district, and Faithful Terror Of Other People And Not Just On Difficult Days.

While he enjoyed the language, that and the long sentences didn’t make it easy to read, and it was a long book. He found that trying to read it fast didn’t work and it was hard to keep the thread if he skimmed it and at times like walking across a ploughed field, until he slowed down and went with the flow, and enjoyed the language again.

Overall, he liked the story, its plot, its rhythm, its language, its characters, but it wasn’t an easy read unless you allowed yourself to fall into its rhythm.

Two quotes:

‘The only time you’d call the police in my area would be if you were going to shoot them, and naturally they would know this and so wouldn’t come’.

‘Three times in my life I’ve wanted to slap faces and once in my life I’ve wanted to hit someone in the face with a gun. I did do the gun but I have never slapped anybody’.

Steve, our resident Irish expert, was next, and, as expected found the book very interesting, but hadn’t quite finished it. He had highlighted so many things: firstly the book was very much in the tradition of Irish literature with its stream of consciousness from the head of the 18 year old girl. It was important to buy in to the narrative and the long sentences in order get something out of the book. It was a very different and gave a feeling about how extraordinary it must have been to grow up in Belfast during the Troubles. It’s still affected even nowadays. One of the issues he found interesting was about the place of women in the society. He also learned lots of phrases and particularly enjoyed the etiquette of getting off the phone. He was really enjoying it but it was not an easy read. He was certainly intending to finish it.

Subsequent to the meeting, after finishing the book, Steve added that, having finished it, he expected it to stay with him for much longer than some efforts by more established authors that we have read in the past.

Willm was next and found it to be a very original book, a stream of consciousness, all her experiences, thoughts, feelings, pouring out in a tense and impassioned manner. It was a powerful evocation of a whole community dominated by often unspoken rules, deliberate blindness and bounded rationality. The way everyone’s life is curtailed, scripted by their cognitive limitations and the structures of the environment (as is our own of course, but theirs is extreme).

She illustrates their bounded mental state throughout - ‘le ciel est bleu’ or black or white; no sunsets; no trees; semtex is normal, reading while walking is not. The district appears to be very working-class and yet, very strangely, she writes the speech of others with a form of words only available to highly educated, highly expressive, emotionally balanced people. He asked himself, throughout, why has she done this? Why not report in the vernacular, the voice of the people? This was, obviously, a deliberate choice. Was it because she wanted to get across to us, the readers, the complications, the complexity, the fractal-like nature of this societal structure, created by repeating a simple process over and over in an ongoing feedback loop? And that this would not have been available to us, at least not fully, in what he imagined to be the sparse and spare, emotionally-charged, language of the local population.

She told us parts of the future from the start, Milkman being killed, Somebody McSomebody threatening her with a gun; then a bit later that she breaks up with Maybe-Boyfriend, so obviously he survives. However these disclosures do not interfere with the experience of tension and threat that follows. A couple of times he felt ‘this is going on a bit too much’, with its sense of repetition, but he decided that this also reflected her experience of the never-ending harassment, the rumours, the blame, the cruelty. As a reader he needed to also experience the boredom of constant curtailment. Overall he was very impressed by its originality, descriptive power, and language.

Chris W started by thinking that there was no way he was going to be able to cope with the book. Like others, he found the first 15-20 pages quite hard, but, like others, he gradually got into it. He found himself reading it with his own Irish accent and just became addicted to it because, once he got into it, found it easy to follow and understand. It was a very convincing portrayal of the mind of an 18 year old girl, with the undercurrent of fear, and the feeling of somebody always watching what you were doing. Her life was torn apart by being stalked by someone, against whom she was unable to defend herself, resulting in a state of permanent fear. He found himself wanting to keep reading. He enjoyed the portrayal of the Wee Sisters, and the contrast between their intellect on the one hand and their more down to earth craving for chips on the other. He also loved the Blower Bentley scene, with its sudden change of mood from the feeling of enthusiasm and pride of Maybe Boyfriend having acquired the supercharger of the old car to the fear when one of the neighbours says :

‘It’s all very well, neighbour, having this so-called classic bit and all, and it’s not like I’m trying to be funny or anything but, which among you at the garage then drew the bit with that flag on’

Like others, Chris W noted that he couldn’t read this book quickly, but really enjoyed the depth in the main character.

Chris B liked the book. He thought that it was inventive and different but disagreed with some of the others in that he thought it was cleverer than a standard stream of consciousness. The author allowed the narrator to be extremely clever, with many variations, and layers of what’s actually going on. The style of the book lent itself so well to the locked-in community in which her only escape was in her reading of 19^th century novels, because she ‘didn’t like the 20^th century’ and to her French class which didn’t actually do much French.

He felt that, although the setting was clearly in Northern Ireland, the society could have been applied to many places, even an English village. He likes how the author defined the characters through the views of other people, for example the person who had become known as the ‘Man Who Didn’t Love Anybody’, aka the Real Milkman, turned out to be one of the kindest people about.

Chris B also hadn’t finished the book, but was very keen to finish it as he was looking forward to the denoument. He wondered whether a bit more context would have added more to the book, but he loved the psychology in which, in this closed society, what you really think is kept hidden.

Finally to Richard, who lulled us into a false sense of security with his opening statement that it was interesting to listen to the different perspectives, and that there were a lot of very good things about the book but that, for him, the book was much less than the sum of its parts. He compared it to ‘The Sellout’ in that it was erudite, interesting stuff.

He thought that the book had a very good beginning but he went off it. He thought it captured the Northern Irish turn of phrase although some of it sounded like Yoda from Star Wars! It was written in a very self-assured way, particularly the scenes with Maybe Boyfriend and the Blower Bentley and the French Class. He found the discussion about names very interesting, where there is a committee keeping a list of disallowed names. He also found it interesting that the Milkman surname doesn’t seem to be very common compared to many other trades.

He got the gender politics really well (as I type I am hearing Richard’s voice saying the words!), for example, the fact that women are not allowed to buy drinks. He thought that the book got the politics of the oppressed really well, the feeling of being browbeaten by the British armed forces, (something that it is difficult for us to appreciate on ‘our side of the water).

As well as ‘The Sellout’ Richard was also reminded of ‘The File’, where it seemed that everyone had a file on them, as in Eastern Germany. He appreciated the humour, the style and the enlightenment, but he really hated it. He didn’t enjoy the flow of words and he felt it went on and on, like a tsunami. It left him feeling exhausted. In the end, he had to really force himself to finish the book.

So, overall, an interesting discussion, and my reflection is that of feeling satisfied that no one described the book as ‘an easy read’ so one objective was achieved! Apologies to the three of you that really didn’t like it, more because two out of the three in particular didn’t get very far and so were unable to make the most of this discussion. I am pleased that most of the Book Club enjoyed the book, as I did; it was certainly not a foregone conclusion from the first few pages!

Scores as follows:

Mark W 8.5, Mark T 2.0, Andrew 8.0, Steve 8.5, Willm 9.5, Chris W 8.7, John 2.0, Richard 3.0, Chris B 8.2.