Nora Webster, by Colm Toibin

7 of us met at The Pulteney Arms on Thursday July 2^nd to discuss this book about the life, thoughts and development of a recently widowed woman from County Wexford in southeast Ireland in the late 60’s / early 70s.

Everyone agreed it was a quiet book that didn’t immediately catch fire. However, for most of the group it drew us in and painted vivid and engrossing scenes that told a much more complex story than was initially apparent. A ‘sleeper’, one called it. Described by one of us as a ‘journey through bereavement’ there was appreciation for the clever way that Toibin managed to make this a very personal account of the awakening of the previously-suppressed independent personality of an intelligent Irish woman. There was no judgement in the narrative; that was left entirely for us to make. It dod seem though that in every situation she found herself in, Nora was the odd person out – which must have been exactly how she was feeling.

And make it we did, particularly with regard to her relationship with her boys. One of us in particular found her parenting skills shockingly bad and ended up disliking her for that and other reasons. Conversely more than one of us really bought into the development of Nora’s personality and story, and some felt that it was this gradual build-up of a character that was the book’s chief attraction. It didn’t shy away from describing strange episodes that might not have seemed entirely plausible – two young boys left with Josie… for two months! A visit where ‘something’ may have happened, but we never find out exactly what. For all of us to differing degrees, there was a subtle unstated suggestion of child abuse, and one of us said he appreciated that it didn’t come to anything concrete but stayed there in the background throughout – much more effective.

Nora’s discovery of music as a metaphor for her widening horizons was well drawn and provided the exclude to vivid and amusing scenes. Particularly with the ‘I don’t care what they think’ music teacher. The drunk drive home with the fierce woman who organised the pub quiz was also enjoyed, and both exemplified the way in which ‘small’ events were given due prominence in the narrative without feeling insignificant or overblown. The geographical settings were ‘brilliantly realised’ without resorting to florid descriptions – even for those who had not visited Ireland.

Juxtaposed with this homey parochial background was the emergence of the Troubles in the North, and the suggestion that Maurice would have been involved had he still been alive, as well as the temporary disappearance of the daughter as she herself got involved in Dublin, taking her own steps to independence along the way.

So we (most of us) enjoyed the journey, but views became a little more fragmented as the end of the book drew near, with its dream-like episode and strange half-lit revelations coming to Nora. It prompted the response ‘So what?’ from one of us – is it much more than simply an enjoyable read? What does it really tell us about life the universe and everything? Another found the sequence unbelievable (along with most of the rest of the book) and was unable to see what it added to the narrative.

Overall though a rewarding, slow burner of a book that proved that you don’t have to use dayglo colours to paint a vivid picture.

Average score out of 10 was 7.34.

Thank You, Jeeves by P G Wodehouse

Mark Th kicked off by explaining why he had chosen the book:  he had expected to go for the Sisters Brothers, with Sarah Waters as backup and the Woodhouse included only as a makeweight on the list.  But somehow with Ras’ funeral he had felt that it would be refreshing to read something quick, light and inconsequential - so Jeeves it was.   He had then begun – needlessly as it turned out – to worry that our discussion might be limited.  This was partly because Wodehouse was writing pure farce set in a bubble of unreality entirely separate from life in the thirties – with the Wall Street Crash, mass unemployment, advent of Hitler and so on.  It was also in view of the way that most fiction deals with significant themes and issues whether love betrayal and revenge, or war, global warming, race etc.  Wodehouse avoids engaging with much of real life and the actions of his characters are part of a general whimsy where nothing seems to have very serious consequences.  Added to this, there was the misfortune of coming up with a book that used ‘blacking up’ as a plot device, which is unlikely to sit well with any of us and to which all of us would object vehemently if written now. 

That said, the group felt that the book had a lot going for it. The consensus was that it was far from being a masterpiece, but nonetheless was ‘refreshing, the use of words is fantastic’ (Chris W), ‘light and enjoyable’ (Chris B), ‘a pleasant, quick read’ (Richard) with ‘a great turn of phrase’ (Steve) and some very funny moments (Mark T and Steve).  Early discussion particularly centred on the development of the characters of Jeeves and Wooster (other characters being stock theatrical caricatures). The relationship between them varied from mother/son to husband/wife, master/servant (with this role sometimes reversed) and friend/companion.   The farcical plot was seen both as theatrical (Mark T), televisual (Richard) and lending itself to radio dramatisation (Mark Th). Despite the escapist bubble of the setting, the group did manage to come up with some themes to chew over.  There was interesting discussion of the idea of ‘knowing one’s place’ following the role reversal implied by Wooster’s remark to Jeeves to this effect.  Chris B highlighted the disrespect inherent in the treatment by Wodehouse of characters of lower social origin in the book (Jeeves having to be super learned, Brindley a raving Bolshevik, Voules a tubby comic turn etc.).  It was noted that characters like Jeeves could rise so far but no further, whatever their merits and abilities. This lead on to further discussion of the notion of ‘the power behind the throne’, and an interesting, if improbable comparison from Richard with T Cromwell as so (brilliantly/uselessly*) depicted by Hilary Mantel.  Steve also made a comparison to a Handful of Dust in the portrait of the declining wealth of the aristocracy in the face of the rising (US) capitalist moneyed classes.

(*delete as appropriate)

The most praised aspect of the book was Wodehouse’s prose.  Mark Th appreciated the way that exaggeration and understatement were applied in almost reverse proportion to the normal rules of cause and consequence.  This meant that Wooster could not bear to be tired, hungry or meet Americans and would be ‘peeved…vexed… or a dashed sight worse....’  but a raging fire completely burning down two houses was a relatively minor worry: ‘I’m afraid you’re a cottage down Chuffy’.  Likewise Jeeves suggests ‘I was wondering if it would not be best to obviate unpleasantness by removing yourself from the yacht, sir’. Chris W saw this skill in the use of language as having influenced comedy in later years, such as the Monty Python’s Upper Class Twits.  Mark Th felt that the first person narration by such a warm, positive and naïve character added to the charm of the book.

On what turned out to be the one strongly dissenting note, Rob was unable to attend, but got right to the front of the Mr G. queue, expressing by email his clear dislike of a book which he felt was ‘a new low in book club reading’. The book was too long, tedious and contained ‘offensive racism’.  He felt strongly that while ‘some may argue that this was a product of its time, and is excusable on that basis, I don't agree’ - arguing there is a difference between incorporating racism as a contemporary description of behaviour and continuing to expect it to be a source of humour in the 21st century (as the publishers of this book clearly do).  Here he correctly anticipated the views of those at the meeting where the conclusion was that we should be wary of anachronistic censure of past generations. While the racial element was clearly uncomfortable, the book was not ruined by the blacking up. It was born of an era before racism had been ‘discovered’ and countered with the rise, for example, of the NAACP in the 1950s. There was discussion of the powerful role of blacking up in American vaudeville, and its obvious prominence in early Hollywood output.  A number of the group recalled golliwogs and the Black and White Minstrels. There was also mention of Small Island and how racism in our parents’ generation had often simply not been recognised. 

There was far less overall consensus on the important topic of what meal Jeeves would be if he were a food:  Mark T was all for mulligatawny soup starter. This was followed by Mark Th who felt a light salad with sparkling water would follow; for Richard it was popcorn.  Steve was on for a cream tea (probably taking in Chris B’s cucumber sandwiches); Chris W envisioned a Tutti Frutti ice-cream.

A Handful of Dust – Evelyn Waugh

The Pulteney Arms. May 31, 2012.

First published in 1934 A Handful of Dust deals with issues of class, social change, loyalty and faith, to name but four. Despite this, it's a shortish novel, written in an accessible style and with a deceptive lightness of touch. Today it is cited by some authorities as one of the great English novels of the 20th century. But what did the Bath Blokes make of it?

A mixed response, it's fair to say. The humour that Waugh uses to make his narrative slip down more easily left some cold. Others enjoyed this aspect of his writing (the description of the Master of Hounds standing in a distant field nibbling forlornly on an ginger nut…) finding it understated and more effective for it. Some found the writing style fairly anonymous, not really making a case for remark – again, others thought the writing highly skilled, the words and themes meticulously chosen, and the book an achievement in covering so much ground in relatively few pages.

To what extent was Waugh's subject matter relevant to us today? The degree to which the narrative was steeped in 1930's upper-class terminology made it harder for some to identify with the characters, and the apparent fickleness with which relationships were regarded raised a barrier to empathy. Some of the characters seemed plain unbelievable (Princess Abdul Akhbar, anyone?).

But there was genuine interest in the legal matters surrounding the plot – the impending change in the divorce laws, and the seemingly ridiculous subterfuges that were required beforehand to effect a legal separation.

On one hand, there was a sense of profound change in established ways of life and expectations – houses being split into flats, the future of Hetton in doubt (becoming a school perhaps – Chris W was very informative about the huge numbers of stately homes and estates that had to be sold to cover death duties pretty much until the 1970s), apparent lack of respect for the sanctity of marriage, and even in Brenda's case for her son's life and death.

As for Waugh himself, it was notable that we did spend quite a lot of time relating what we though about the book to what we thought about him – more than we normally would, I think. Perhaps this was partly because he's a well-documented writer, known to be irascible, perhaps pompous, not suffering fools gladly… but also from a middle class background himself and therefore arguably aligned more with Beaver than anyone else in the book. Ras wasn't impressed by Waugh's war record. We wondered, to what extent did the book's use of racially pejorative terms (shocking to us today) suit his literary purpose, or did they simply reflect the times he was writing about, and did he himself find them easy to use?

It's perhaps no surprise that, as the book's nominator, Steve was a fan - a masterclass in effective and elegant writing, though admittedly stretching credibility on occasion for 21st century consumers. Most support came from Neil and Mark Th, sadly neither of whom were there on the night! With all scores now in it averages 6.48, which slots in between Case Histories and Suite Francaise - mid-table anonymity.

The Yacoubian Building - Alaa Al Aswany

September 14th 2011; The Packhorse, South Stoke, Bath.

Generally this book was enjoyed by most of the group and in fact achieved some rave reviews from several members although at the end of the evening the scores did not quite tally with this.

The book centred on the lives of the residents of the Yacoubian Building in central Cairo at the time of the first Gulf War, from the most affluent living in their spacious apartments and working in its comfortable offices to the squalor of its rooftop residents living in cramped metal cages. The building has seen better times, being a sad reflection of its former splendour, and through the portrayal of the building and the intertwined lives of its residents Aswany depicts the decay of modern Egyptian life under the Mubarak regime. Given that this book was published in a predominantly Muslim country the story depicts in graphic but not distasteful detail issues such as homosexuality, sex, promiscuity, corruption, religion and fundamentalism - and does this in a humorous way but also with elements of sadness and poignancy. Nothing in the Egyptian way of life seems to occur without backhanders, baksheesh or an alternative motive and the author leaves you with a feeling that society in Egypt has become thoroughly degraded.

From my point of view I really enjoyed this book as it opened up an insight into a way of life which I knew nothing about and which had become particularly relevant given the recent " Arab Spring " and the subsequent revolutions taking place throughout the Arab speaking world. The frustrations of the Egyptian way of life which were depicted explained clearly why the younger generation particularly were being drawn to fundamentalism having no opportunity to progress their lives through hard work and where the amount of the bribe and your father's job were the only currency to achieve success. I felt the writing style was very readable and you were really able to get behind the characters in the book, and understand the dilemmas in their lives.

Going around the table at the famous Packhorse Inn in South Stoke (where the deep-fried chips were most appreciated) .......
Ras felt that the book explained how corruption will always prevail and that it was systemic within Egyptian society. He didn't like the writing style and consequently didn't find it an enjoyable read. It also contained too much sex!.
Neil thought it was an excellent book portraying Egyptian society and its scandals in a very authentic way and the fact that although this was a Muslim society the majority of its inhabitants were either aspiring to grasp Western culture or alternatively destroy it. (by means of appropriately positioned truncheons!) If there was any criticism it was the fact that the ending came up very quickly and seemed to be rushed towards the last couple of chapters.
Richard felt that it was an excellent book and that it captured perfectly the characters and beliefs of the people in the story with some good comic elements.
There was then a discussion about the female characters in the book and the fact that only the men apparently erred from their proper behaviour but this was disputed by Richard who felt that the women's behaviour was simply more subtle. Rob was interested to see how different the attitudes were between men and women in respect of unfaithfulness. The discussion then moved onto religion and how 80% of the Egyptian population might be completely uneducated and how easy it would be to divert somebody's beliefs from the usually peaceful tenets of the Muslim faith to a fundamentalist outlook - particularly in the absence of any prospects in life.
Steve considered the book a great read, skilfully written, although "a bit thinly spread" - more of an education than a literary experience.
Chris B. enjoyed the book and thought that it brought the characters and storyline alive and portrayed well the moral dilemmas of Cairo life. He felt the structure was somewhat formulaic and that there were recurrent episodes of optimism and happiness which were subsequently dashed over and over again.
Finally Rob's opinion was that he didn't think much of the book. He felt that it was written from only one perspective-more of an outsiders view of Cairo life than a genuine insight into what really goes on. He felt the author was rather "grinding his own axe" bringing up the same point over and over again and that ultimately the story ended inadequately and too swiftly.
CW
Average score 6.96
See August 2011 for list of all books and scores

Parrol and Olivier – Peter Carey

Can't find any notes of group deliberations. Neil supplied these thoughts:

Well, I have to say this was a very pleasant surprise. I have only read one Pater Carey book before, the Kelly Gang story that won the Booker Prize, and I can't say I was that taken with that particular novel. I found the story rather one-dimensional and the laboured interpretation of how Kelly might have told his own story rather monotonous. So I didn't come to this book with high expectations and my first impressions weren't helped much by the opening sections from either of the narrators. Both seemed very dark and foreboding and didn't hint to me at all of the rather comic tale that would unfold quite amusingly afterwards.

It is perhaps a bit of a stretch to liken this to a 19th century Jeeves and Wooster novel, but the underlying humour seems to be there in the re-telling of the master servant relationship, especially as this relationship is so unconventional. I liked the way we alternated between narrators to get their different takes on the situations and the relationship and I found their characters to be well drawn.

I also found the backdrop to the book interesting. It made me realise how little I know about the French Revolution and more particularly the July Revolution and it has made me go on to read up some more about both to try and better understand the background to Olivier's position. It also threw up some interesting questions for me, amongst which was the question of whether there had been any famous female painters pre the 20th century, something which again I have looked in to and find remarkable that there were so few female painters of any note around this time.

Another aspect I enjoyed was the way Carey used hindsight to draw parallels between modern America and this older version, with sideways nods to the potential for ignorant men to become President for example and their early obsession with wealth and property which Carey seemed very clearly to me to be comparing to the open avarice that poisons the country today.

But most of all I enjoyed Carey's poetic writing style and I loved the way he effortlessly constructed sentences which would take most of us hours if not days to come up with if we could ever at all. Take this sentence for example where Olivier describes a wine he is drinking: "In a year it would be a dowager with a faded corsage, but as it entered my mouth it was vigorous and manly, completely composed, its orchestra all present and correct" - take that Jilly Goolden!

The Siege of Krishnapur – JG Farrell

27^th October 2010

Seven of us at the Fox and Badger (missing Will and Richard) for a discussion about the Siege of Krishnapur. After a good half hour of collective drowning of sorrows with regards to the impact of the economic position/government cuts etc on our work and lives, we had a rough consensus about Krishnapur. Put simply, Steve and Neil both thought it was really good, Ras and Chris thought it was good as did both Marks (though neither had quite finished it) whilst I thought it was reasonably good. One of the impacts of this (along with Mark Th's early departure to rescue stranded offspring) was there was perhaps less discussion about the book than on some other occasions. Overall:

General view that the writing style was easy and clear and he managed to write in the style of the period whilst also not making the book feel dated

Also a general view that the book was struggling at around a third of the way through i.e. the amount of description up to the start of the siege was a bit too long but once the siege description started it became more engrossing

Interesting how the author, for almost everyone, managed to create a strong image of the heat and climate, but somehow failed to enable people to generate a clear picture in their minds of the physical environment and other elements of the setting within which the story was developing. Some of this was perhaps because he didn't give important information - for example, no-one had any idea about how many people there were in the compound either at the start or as time went by.

A discussion about the pace of change in society and how things like social and behavioural norms (e.g. place of women and the British belief that they ruled the world) have changed in the comparatively short period of time since the book was set. This led into a conversation about how the pace of change in the last forty years or so has been quite astounding and whether it continues to crank up at that rate. Differing views on whether there are 'spurts' of societal change because of key innovations (industrial revolution circa 1800, the car early C20th, television in 50s/60s linked to pop music culture and then computers/internet in the last fifteen years - and thus a question about whether we might slow down for a while until the next major development (though in hindsight it's interesting to note that the gaps between the inventions that really influenced change appear to have been becoming shorter).

So, the scores were quite high (with three scores still to come), which was interesting because whilst people liked it, with the possible exception of Steve it wasn't getting the rave review comments that other high scoring books got. Its high position is really because of consensus, with no-one giving it a low score to pull the average down. Rob's current displacement activity is to re-produce the scoring table taking out the highest and lowest scores for every book (a method generally viewed as being more statistically reliable). This resulted in some significant shifts and the current top three of Queens Gambit, Engleby and Krishnapur (in that order), being replaced by Engleby, Equal Music and Kite Runner with Engleby and Equal Music quite some way ahead of anything else. Other big movers (spirit of Fluff lives on) are Fascination, Line of Beauty and Closed Circle in an upwards direction, whilst the big droppers were Case Histories, Jesus Christ and Shadow of the Wind. Krishnapur dropped to ninth. Halidon stayed firmly rooted to the bottom but with Never Never dropping below 10 Bonks (10 Days in the Hills to you) to next to last. However, we'll continue to use the full scores for the rankings.

7.51

City of Thieves – David Benioff

30^th September 2010

There was an unusual level of consensus on this book with the following comments of note:

Ras enjoyed it and ripped through it, though it was not a literary classic. Some doubts about the commercial rewards for such a novel that covers atrocities and cannibalism.

It was a good blend of a light story with the darker side of the war.

An enjoyable read from which much was learnt on that phase of WWII. However, it read like a film script with all the scenes laid out in order.

It was an enjoyable read, but it had a disappointing ending.

Lots of film scenes ready to be acted out, but good mixture of horror and comedy. It needed more emotional impact from the characters.

There was much interest in what Richard might have to say.However, can't find notes that enlighten in this respect.

Rob’s comments (by text) – “Quite liked it, learnt new bits about the war – but not a great book.”

6.88

The Elephant Keeper – Christopher Nicholson

Apparently we read two books in April 2010, not sure why now...

It was an interesting discussion - as it flagged up a range of issues to do with writing style, social history etc etc. Also, with it significantly being set in and around the west country a couple of people (Mark T I think for one) found that of added interest. The comments were, on the whole, quite positive other than from Steve and myself and so it was a bit of a surprise when it came to the scoring that they were on the whole quite low to average (apart from Richard and to a lesser extent Mark).

As I recall at this distant moment, the following were key points in the discussion:

The first part of the book was generally agreed to be the best. It told a good story and contained a lot of interesting social commentary e.g. the relationship between master and servant, the reactions to an elephant appearing int he country for (probably) the first time), the description of city and rural life etc

However, there was also a general view that it tailed off in the latter part - in particular when he went to London when several people began to feel that the novel just stopped working

A majority view (though not consensus) that the relationships between the keeper (see I can;t been remember his name - shows what an impact it had on me) and the elephant became unbelievable at the book went on

Differing views on t he writing style. Consensus that he managed to get the flavour of the period but whether it was well written varied from definitely (Richard) to weak (me).

6.01