35 of 41 people found the following review helpful
Starts off slowly and slides inexorably downhill,
This review is from: The Gathering (Paperback)
What is it about the literary crowd? Why are they so different from the rest of us? This book got good reviews in the press and won the Booker prize, yet most readers didn't rate it at all, and neither do I. A novelist can just about get away with writing about a dreary subject (in this case the unlikable narrator's unlikable family) but only if the writing is really good. I found the pretentious style of this book to be grating and irritating, partly because of the author's attempts at making it 'literary' (lots of very short sentences, often just one word) and partly because of the constant first-person present-tense (I say, he says, etc) which isn't particularly unusual, but which becomes tiresome when combined with the lack of substance.
Apparently this book has sold by the hundreds of thousands on the back of all the initial praise, in which case there must be a hell of a lot of disappointed people out there.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 18 Jan 2014, 12:01:57 GMT
Digital Diva says:
I am one of the disappointed readers of this book!
Posted on 3 Jul 2016, 07:24:22 BST
Yellow Duck says:
"What is it about the literary crowd?" They need to prove that they have more discernment, learning, poetic intelligence etc than the average reader. So over the years they have chosen some truly awful books. Try the first ever winner, (1969) "Something to Answer For." Along with "The Bone People" (1985) - a purely political choice and probably the worst novel ever published, and "How Late it Was, How Late" (1994) which won because the judges couldn't agree which of the entries was best. So they gave the prize to the worst - by a long, long way. The judges do sometimes get it right. "Remains of the Day" (1989), "Life of Pi" (2002) etc.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›