Titus Groan

Titus Groan is the first book in the Gormenghast trilogy written in 1946.

Castle Gormenghast is an ancient gothic stronghold, vast in size yet slowly crumbling into disrepair after many centuries of neglect. The mighty castle is ruled by the eccentric Groan family; half-mad members of the aristocracy whose antics might be more in line with what you would expect inside a sanatorium. At the beginning of the book the 77th heir to the throne of Gormenghast has been born; Titus. Despite the title of the book Titus remains a baby throughout and plays no significant part in the events that unfold. Instead the story focusses on the rest of the Groan family, their servants and a boy named Steerpike; a seventeen year old Machiavellian kitchen boy full of ambition and desires for power. Through the cunning use of manipulation, deceit and arson Steerpike escapes from servitude and, with impressive speed, manages to squirm his way into the affections of the ruling caste of Gormenghast with terrible, far reaching consequences.

The story is a serious one but there is a good deal of humour to be found in the pages. The settings are atmospheric and frightening. However the characters are what really brought the story alive for me. I'm not sure any other book contains within its pages such a concentration of eccentric misfits. Bizarre but also interesting and satisfying. Alas despite the truly wonderful character development the story, for me, ultimately failed to live up to my expectations.

The book is too long and, to be blunt, not an awful lot happens for most of it. Too much time is spent setting the scene and too little is given to dialogue between the characters. It could have been a brilliant story if it had been 100 pages shorter and there was a little more excitement.

Final verdict 3/5

Chris

The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane

Stephen Crane wrote his civil war novel The Red Badge of Courage in 1895 and although he was born after this war, it is considered to be a realistic depiction of a young solider.
We take for granted now when literature depicts the psychological view of soldiers or only focus on a small group of recruits rather than the overview of a war so it’s not hard to see how influential The Red Badge of Courage has been.

The novel follows Henry, a new recruit to the Army who at first is subject to endless marching around and the boredom that accompanies it. While the soldiers sit around waiting for rumours that fighting will eventually begin, Henry has time to reflect on his situation and he wonders how he will react once he actually sees battle: will he stand and fight, or turn and run. This psychological battle in his head continues even when he is engaged in battle as he tries to overcome his fears.

“Well, I wanta do some fighting anyway,” interrupted the other. “I didn't come here to walk. I could 'ave walked to home-'round an' 'round the barn, if I jest wanted to walk.”

The novel is quite an intense read as Henry goes through a wide range of emotions from bravery, pride, wishing for a wound (his own read badge of courage) to sheer cowardice. These emotions along with the men’s contempt for their superiors make this one of the most interesting depictions of war I have ever read.

Unfortunately the writing is very heavy going and quite difficult to read. At times, especially during the battle scenes I had trouble working out what was going on and if Henry was observing or participating. This meant that I did not get emotionally involved with the story or with Henry which is a great shame as the ideas and concept is very interesting.

At times he regarded the wounded solders in an envious way. He conceived persons with torn bodies to be peculiarly happy. He wished that he, too, had a wound, a red badge of courage.

Would I recommend this? There are more modern novels which deal with similar themes which are easier to read and have more of an emotional impact so I wouldn’t recommend this one unless you had a particular interest in novels of this period or you wanted to understand why this novel is so influential.

Verdict 2 1/2/5

Posted by Jess

On the Road by Jack Kerouac

On the Road was first published in 1957 and is a largely autobiographical account of Jack Kerouac’s various road trips taken with his friends during the 1940s. All names were changed (to protect the not so innocent) and the story mostly features the characters Sal Paradise (based on Kerouac) and Dean Moriarty (based on real life person Neal Cassady) along with various other real life characters occurring throughout.

I have used this image from Wikipedia to show the different trips that Kerouac took and the book is about these journeys and about the drugs, casual sex and general naughtiness that went on while travelling the American highways. This book was originally written on a fifty-foot-long roll of paper and the narrative is realistic and vivid.

The novel overall has a fresh feel and I think this is because the idea of youth searching for more than the conformity of the society they are in is an idea which is being constantly being explored. This does not mean that the book is cliqued however as although the subject matter might not be original, the descriptions of their methods, ideas and the people they encounter is. Crossing the American continent is exhausting enough (I know, I did it) and Kerouac does not hide from the reader the sheer exhaustion, the dirty aspects, the arguments and broken friendships along the way.

One of the stronger aspects of the novel are the people that Sal and Dean encounter along the way. They have various conversations with drunks, travellers, drug addicts and poor immigrant workers all of whom often add more insight than Sal and his friends can provide. The friendship between Sal and Dean is also interesting and goes through many changes throughout as they spilt then meet up again.

A lot has been said on the bad behaviour of the characters and yes they take drugs, have wild parties, visit Mexican brothels and steal cars. This might not seem so shocking now but when you consider these guys were born before my grandmother it just goes to show that despite the fact that each generation thinks they invented teenage bad behaviour, they really didn’t.

There is no plot really, just the endless travels around which I think is the point. The book starts off as a celebration of youth while all the characters are young and free but as the novel progresses and the characters become older a sadness descends on the overall feel of the book. While their drug infused last adventure in Mexico might have been fun for the characters, I was left wondering why the character Dean was doing this while he had a wife who was pregnant and three other children in various states. I’m afraid I became a boring square and wondered when they were going to go home and face up to their responsibilities that THEY had created.

There was an even bigger sadness to come though after I finished the book and looked up what eventually happened to some of the characters long after the book was set. Kerouac died at 47 from cirrhosis caused by years of heavy drinking and his friend Neal Cassady died at 41 from exposure after passing out in the street in Mexico after a party. Perhaps these fates were inevitable when part of a generation collides with the society they live in, but really, was it worth it?

Would I recommend this? Well I was going to give a 3 star rating. But on reflection over a week later I am giving it 4 stars because its certainly given me a lot to think about.

Verdict 4/5

Posted by Jess

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta.'

From the very first line the narrator of Lolita, Humbert drags the reader into his world. Due to the subject matter of this book I was initially unsure how to begin reading this. I wondered if the subject of Paedophilia would be taken as seriously in Lolita as it is today. I wondered if Nabokov was going to manipulate the reader into sympathising with a Paedophile or if the relationship between a Paedophile and a 12 year old girl was going to somehow be presented as a legitimate love story. More puzzlingly I wondered how on earth people how had read this could describe it as a page turner given the disturbing subject matter.

So it was with curiosity and interpretation that I began to read Lolita and as soon as I did I couldn’t put it down and I began to indeed find it a ‘page turner’.

A simple review of Lolita is not going to give the book justice in anyway and will not demonstrate the beauty of the writing, the clever wordplay or that at points the reader has to look beyond parts of the narrative which are sometimes an illusion and try to see what the actual words are telling you. Instead of a review in my normal style, this will just be an outline of my thoughts from the book.

Lolita has an unreliable narrator, a VERY unreliable narrator. Just one look at the top passage demonstrates this, the way Humbert is talking there anyone would imagine that the object of his affection is some long limbed goddess. But of course Lolita is not. If you or I saw Lolita walking down the street all we would see is a normal looking 12 year old girl, but as the book is told through Humbert’s eyes so the reader sees Lolita as seen by him. While Humbert (because of how his Paedophile mind works) might perceive that Lolita is often a willing participant in their relationship and will sometimes narrate the story this way, the reader is left with clues as to how Lolita really feels or how certain scenarios really did play out. Not everything is quite as it seems and what you are reading did not necessarily happen in quite the way you are being told.

Lolita is a difficult character to pinpoint as she is only seen through Humbert’s eyes, but at various points in the narrative I felt her voice came through very strongly. When her voice does come through I saw a very unhappy girl with no where else to go. Humbert does go into detail on how he has to manipulate, lie and threaten Lolita to get her to stay with him on the crazy road trip they embark on; I was not given the impression at any point that Lolita was a willing participant in all of this.

'At the hotel we had separate rooms, but in the middle of the night she came sobbing into mine, and we made it up very gently. You see, she had absolutely nowhere else to go.'

There are no ‘sex scenes’ but the narrative surrounding these events and the odd comment from both Humbert and Lolita have given me the illusion of thinking I have read more in this regard than I actually have.

'And I catch myself thinking today that our long journey.......was no more to us than a collection of dog-eared maps, ruined tour books, old tyres, and her sobs in the night – every night, every night – the moment I feigned sleep.'

I am sure many people will disagree with me but I think the point of the beautiful prose was to keep me reading and turning the pages rather then to get me to ‘sympathise’ with Humbert. If the book had been written with a sparse realistic narrative I am sure I would have stopped reading within a couple of chapters.

This is not a story of redemption. Although Humbert acknowledges at the end that he ‘destroyed something’ in Lolita he is never really sorry. Do not read this expecting a moral tale.

'I loved you. I was a pentapod monster, but I loved you. I was despicable and brutal, and turpid, and everything, mas je t'aimais. Je t'aimais! And there were times when I knew how you felt, and it was hell to know it, my little one. Lolita girl, brave Dolly Schiller'.

The above are my garbled thoughts and the parts which I think I will take away from it. It’s the kind of book which demands a re-read as I am sure that many parts of it went right over my head. If I was going to criticise I would say that towards the end, the book did linger quite a bit and became drawn out.

Would I recommend this? I can understand why people would have reservations about picking this one up (I did) but I would recommend that anyone interested in literature in anyway should give this a go.

Verdict 4 ½ /5

Posted by Jess

A round up of my bookish news

I have done a guest post over at Fluttering Butterflies on Clovers 'awesome women' today so head over there to read about Beatrix Potter.



I have also been quite productive and have finished my list of American Classics which I hope to read. They are all listed under the page 'The American Project' at the top. I think I have a good mix of classics and more contemporary novels, there are a couple of non-fiction books and even a western in there. I wanted to have around 50 books in the list and I have ended up with just over so I'm quite happy with that, please let me know what you think of the list in general.



Finally I am currently struggling through Moby Dick. I am reading this very very slowly and am now half way through but everyday I swear this will be the day I give up on it. For some reason though I don't want to and every day I find myself reading a tiny bit more. Does this one get any better?

Posted by Jess

Wise Blood by Flannery O'Connor

Flannery O’Connor was an American writer from the southern state of Georgia who wrote mostly short stories but she also wrote two novels including Wise Blood. Quite a lot of her stories are based in the south and contain elements of the grotesque and disturbing and have been described as 'Southern Gothic' but they also deal with moral and ethical issues as a result of her Roman Catholic faith. O’Connor was diagnosed with Lupus at a young age which eventually killed her and she wrote the majority of her work including her novels while battling with this disease.
Wise Blood has all these themes mentioned above and the result is a very strange book indeed.

The story opens with Hazel Motes, a man recently discharged from the Army, on the train to the fictional town of Taulkinham, Tennessee, where he's "...going to do some things I never have done before." Hazel has never been to Taulkinham and once he does get there and has sorted out his lodging, he goes about trying to start ‘the church without Christ’ by street preaching.

Allow me to give you a brief summery of ‘the church without Christ’. Hazel believes that he can be saved from evil by believing in nothing. If he has no soul to save then there is no such thing as sin and therefore he can do whatever the hell he likes. By avoiding sin this way he will get to meet Jesus (or something like that).Of course in doing this, Hazel just proves himself as a believer and other characters are used to argue different aspects of theology.

Other characters in the book include a preacher who may or may not have blinded himself with acid, his daughter who only believes in self-gratification and Hazel’s follower Enoch who is trying to find the new physical Jesus. As I say, it’s a strange strange book which brings in one grotesque character in after another and I’m not entirely sure what to make of it all.

I am glad I read it, the characters were all thought provoking and there was a large amount of black comedy throughout. However I don't think I really connected at all with the story and found the narrative quite strange and out of place in parts.

Would I recommend this? I am really not sure, this author has certainly intrigued me but this book will not leave you with a warm happy feeling at the end so it's up to you.

Verdict 3/5

Posted by Jess