We all have stories that you could not make up. I was once allocated the budget to recruit a new member of the engineering team I managed. However, before I could spend this approved budget, I had to apply for approval to ‘increase the head count’. To do this, I had to submit a particular form at a certain date to the HR department and this, I was told, would be reviewed at the next board meeting. My first submission was rejected, with the instruction that more information was needed, which I duly provided – a full A4 sheet justifying the need for the post. This was also rejected – I was informed that the extra information must fit the form. OK, much reduced information was now provided, and soon I heard from one source that the position had finally been approved, and I should expect official notification soon. I proceeded with the recruitment, but on the day before a second interview with a candidate to whom I expected to make a job offer, I was told through the official channel that in fact the position had not been approved. I cancelled the interview. Half an hour later I heard from a more senior person in the organisation that yes, the position had been approved. After explaining the situation, I got an e-mail endorsed by the CEO to confirm this. Through the recruitment agent I then tried to contact the candidate, who as it happens was flying to the UK for the interview. Sorry, I wanted to say, can you come after all? The message did not get through. The second interview never happened. Who in their right mind would want to work for an organisation which behaved like that? Like me? How could I find myself in such a position? In the event I had to continue the search and the position was filled more that a month later than it could have been.
Kafka knows this world. A world were little makes sense. Where each action you take made sense at the time, but, when you are judged by the result, none of it makes sense. A world where snippets of information must be weighed for their value in influencing your decision, but the rules are never clear and the results unpredictable. A world where your emotions, your anger, must be harnessed, not unleashed, if you are even to survive. In the human search for understanding, familiarity sufficient to achieve predictability, there is so much to digest, so many theories to test against the meagre data.
‘The Trial’ is probably Franz Kafka’s most pure example of his art. A complex fabric of topics, treated with consummate ease. In simple language.
On bureaucracy? Is Kafka’s world an amplification of the absurdity we find all around us? That absurdity that results from human behaviour that is the natural consequence of animals with consciousness, driven by emotion. We only pretend to be working in a rational framework of necessary rules designed to achieve a clear purpose. Worse than that, the fabric grows as we each attempt to carve out our own livelihood in what has gone before. We are at once cushioned and shielded from the original intent by the ever expanding fabric of the organisation. Inscrutable procedures are evident but few clues as to what you should do are available. The rules are never explicit; they depend on interpretation and everyone has their own interpretation.
Equally, this novel evokes a tingling sensation reminiscent of that curious state between wakefulness and sleep, between dream and reality where nightmares are mixed with reality and it is impossible to tell which is tangible and which pure imagination – or horror. For a Jew living since the holocaust this novel is a chilling echo to the view held by Nazis that Jews are in some way guilty to the extent that they must be eliminated, a whole race. But no one can say what they are guilty of.
Sex is a recurring theme. Kafka explores this in its many aspects. Read the novel, there is much, much more in store for you!
Written in the second person from Able, nobleman, to his lover Morgan (maybe wife, but like a sister in childhood), Banks has succeeded in his unique approach to yet another confounding topic - that of loyalty.
Able and Morgan are overrun in a time of war, forced to return to their castle by a group, presumable representing the new occupation, led by “the Lieutenant”, female leader of a disorderly band of soldiers.
Abe fights with his loyalties to so many things: these are the enemy, but he is unable to fight back; they slowly but systematically consume his wine and food and destroy the family art treasures, but he is powerless to stop them; the Lieutenant takes Morgan as her lover, but he cannot react for fear of what they will do to him. Inevitably, he is destroyed; as it happens as a result of a practical joke by the band of soldiers.
The total ambiguity of place or time (it could be anywhere in the western world over the last 70 years) adds power to the point. However much we may imagine that we would defend what is of value to us, the reality maybe somewhat different given the circumstance of war. The grandiose setting perhaps plays on that hackneyed phrase: “an Englishman’s home is his castle” This novel questions the loyalty and strength of all of us.
http://www.spikemagazine.com/1298banks.php
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/6422/rev0342.html
Set in post world war two Britain, the style and content of this novel betray little of Ishiguro’s culture and background. Ishiguro was born in 1954 in Nagasaki, Japan, but immigrated to England when he was five. Although his first two novels deal with characters in Japan following world war two, in “Remains of the Day” he turns to the quintessential English culture of the landed gentry and the demise of a way of life epitomised by the central character Stevens, a butler.
The story is one of regret. Stevens devoted his life to Lord Darlington of Darlington Hall and within his own world was proud of this achievement. His devotion, however, prevented him pursuing happiness. The story tracks Stevens’ trip to visit Miss Kenton, a former housekeeper at Darlington Hall. Much to Stevens’ consternation, Miss Kenton reveals that her life “may have turned out better” had she married Stevens. Their mutual love is never explicit, however.
Lord Darlington was an appeaser to Hitler and arranged and hosted dinner parties between the German and British heads of state to allow a forum for mutual understanding. We must remember that, at the time, appeasement was the popular stance, and it was Churchill who stood largely alone in advocating war with Germany. However, Stevens’ regrets extend to his being part of a view which later was regarded as at least mildly treacherous.
In this wonderfully understated novel, the reader is left to interpret what is at the back of Stevens’ mind. He never states his regrets explicitly nor discusses the meaning of regret. By the end of the novel, it is of course far too late to change what has happened. Stevens has devoted his life to someone of now questionable morals (Lord Darlington) and missed the opportunity of happiness with Miss Kenton. All that remains is for him to perfect his skills at bantering with his new employer, Mr Farraday.
http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/remains/
Take some highly topical issues in modern day Britain: school bullying; internet chat rooms and web sites designed to re-unite old acquaintances. Add standard ingredients of serial killing and unrequited love. What you have is a recipe for a fascinating and captivating crime novel executed with Ben Elton’s usual masterly verve. This is a who-dun-it that stands apart from so many. It combines some exploration of the topical issues with candid insights into the insecure thoughts of the central character: Inspector Ed Newson.
Elton has changed style somewhat in this latest novel: you don’t get the belly laughs although the pace is swift and the intriguing plot comes ringing through. The humour is much darker, exploiting Ed Newson’s love for his unavailable assistant, inspector Natasha Wilkie and constructing an unlikely set of consequences to re-union with old school mates.
The final revelation of who-dun-it seems a little unconvincing. This does not detract from the overall good fun and thought provoking experience.
Plot summary (courtesy of the Guardian)
Briony is a successful novelist, but one with a burden. She told a lie when thirteen which had tragic and disastrous consequences. She has had to live with that all her life and turns to her writing to help her come to terms with her pain. This novel is the result. Much of it is true. Some of it is fantasy, relieving her of the burden that lives of happiness were sacrificed to her simple act of childish defiance.
Regarded by some as best in class1 this was the first of Ian McEwan’s works that I read and I am still hoping for that same sense of sheer wonder that it evoked in me from his other works. Enduring Love comes close; but for me
Notes
- Jonathan Yardley’s writing in the Washington Post: Atonement “is the finest book yet by a writer of prodigious skills. [. . .] there is no one writing fiction in the English language who surpasses McEwan, and perhaps no one who equals him”
- http://www.csulb.edu/~bhfinney/McEwan.html
- http://www.ianmcewan.com/