Messageboard
The Village Hall聽 permalink
Book of the Month January 2010
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.聽
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
鈥楻evolutionary Road鈥 by Richard Yates.
Published in 1961, Revolutionary Road was a 鈥渢hinly-veiled depiction of Yates (1926-1992) and his immediate surroundings, in many cases with the names barely changed. It was widely praised at the time of publication, only to fade into semi-obscurity except for a small group of devotees鈥 (from 鈥楢 Tragic Honesty: The life and work of Richard Yates鈥 by Blake Bailey, 2003).
*
I came across this book via the 2008 film directed by Sam Mendes, which made a huge impression on me (unexpectedly 鈥 as I had sat down with a 鈥榦h well, give it a go鈥 attitude). As it happened, OH already had the book and mentioned how incredibly faithful the film was to the original story, so I was intrigued to read it - hence my suggesting it as 鈥榖ook of the month鈥. I also noticed the book (serendipity, soon after I saw the film) on the list of 鈥60 great novels of the past 60 years鈥 that was discussed in the press and in ML back in Autumn 09.
Well, /where/ has this book and author been hiding all my life! I鈥檇 never even /heard/ the title of Yates until a few months ago
I read it almost in one sitting: 8 hours of intensive reading, and was totally immersed in it. I loved the style of writing and (3-part) structure of the book. It is very tightly constructed, action taking place (psychologically) amongst primarily 3 families in one suburb, over one year. OK, I already knew the ending, so will be interested to hear from others on how they followed the story and what they /thought/ might happen. After the film, I was left feeling emotionally drained 鈥 rather like after watching 鈥榃ho鈥檚 afraid of Virginia Woolf鈥.
The characters were so amazingly well-written, and all so human in their aspirations and flaws. Who could /not/ identify with at least one of them? I was especially impressed by the portrayal of Johnny Givings (also brilliantly acted in the film).
I found there was so much to contemplate on reading this book, so much 鈥榤eat鈥 to it but having to gather some thoughts together to start this thread, I think for me it was /not/ just about 鈥榯he American dream鈥, but rather what it is to be human and to have hopes and needs and trying to do the best one can (and often failing) with the cards one is dealt in life.
It is a deeply saddening book. I don鈥檛 think the word 鈥榯ragic鈥 would be out-of-place in describing it.
For me, it is certainly a book to keep, to re-read, to delve into, to recommend and to lend to others.
Well that is my overall view anyway! I look forward to what others have to say, and will be back with more specific comments on the characters in due course. -
Message 2
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
Thank you for introducing this month's discussion, Bette. I hadn't come across Richard Yates till now, but I thought 'Revolutionary Road' was well-deserving of its place on the '60 great novel of the past 60 years'. I'll be back later to discuss the book. Meanwhile.....
Upcoming discussions:
February 21st: 'To Kill a Mockingbird' by Harper Lee (Rwth of Cornovii)
The narrator is the 12 or 13 year old daughter of Atticus Finch, a widowed lawyer practising in a small town in the Deep South. There is a murder and the locals are very keen on stringing up one of the local negroes. I have seen the film with Gregory Peck (swoon thud).
March 21st: 'Legend of a Suicide' by David Vann (Herb Robert)
This is the author's (fictional?) reaction to his father's suicide when he was a child and entirely set in Alaska. Available in Penguin at 拢7.99.
April 21st: (ladyglencora to introduce a discussion)
May 21st : 鈥楾he Poisonwood Bible鈥 by Barbara Kingsolver (E. Yore)
The Poisonwood Bible is a novel about the Price family, who in 1959 move from the southern US to the Belgian Congo. The Prices' story, which parallels the Belgian Congo's tumultuous emergence into the post-colonial era, is narrated by the five women of the family: Orleanna, long-suffering wife of Baptist missionary Nathan Price, and their four daughters 鈥 Rachel, Leah, Adah, and Ruth May.
June 21st: 'The Old Man Who Read Love Stories' by Luis Sepulveda (Bette)
The book is set in a remote river town in Ecuador. An elderly widower, Antonio, finds comfort in reading romance novels brought to him by the visiting dentist. But when a female jaguar begins carrying out a reign of terror in the area, Antonio's expertise in jungle ways is called upon to get rid of the problem. Written originally in Spanish, the book was dedicated to a man who fought and died to preserve the Amazon jungle, Chico Mendes.
July 21st: [Novel by Anita Burgh 鈥 title to be confirmed] (Rwth of Cornovii)
August 21st: 'The Mayor of Castro Street: the life and times of Harvey Milk' by Randy Shilts [(equoiaTree).
"Known as 'the Mayor of Castro Street' even before he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Harvey Milk's personal life, public career, and final assasination reflect the dramatic emergence of the gay community as a political power in America. It is a story full of personal tragedies and political intrigues, assasinations at City Hall, massive riots in the streets, the miscarriage of justice, and the consolidation of gay power and gay hope."
September 21st: 鈥楥aves of Steel鈥 by Isaac Asimov (ali-cat)
21st October: 'Elidor' by Alan Garner (Rwth of Cornovii)
21st November: [To be confirmed]: 'Precious Bane' by Mary Webb (SequoiaTree)
15 December: 'Wind in the Willows' by Kenneth Grahame (Herb Robert)
For a list of links to past Book of the Month discussions, please see message 63 in the Rota thread (second half of that long post):
F2693944?thread=7019221&skip=60&show=20
People might also be interested in the original Book Club, which discusses a different author or genre each month (threads start on the first day of the month): F2693944?thread=7209674 -
Message 3
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:03 GMT, in reply to Bette in message 1
A beautiful introduction, Bette, and one that mirrors many of my own thoughts on reading this book recently (I have not seen the film.)
Before getting too deeply into it, I'd just like to comment on the first few pages: the perspective of the narrative is extremely fluid to start with - we just do not know where it is going until gradually things coalesce around April Wheeler. But what is strikingly apparent to me at the beginning is how the "promise of failure" so quickly comes to suffuse the atmosphere. It is quite heart-breaking how the Laurel Players leave their dress rehearsal to drive home to "whatever older, less explicit promises of failure might lie in wait for them there."
While Arthur Miller's plays may be more explicit in their examination of the "American dream," I think you're right to emphasise the focus in this book on the everyday failures of being human.
Rather oddly, while I tend to agree that the book can appear deeply saddening, as you put it, I found that it was not depressing, simply because of the resilience of the characters and their accommodation to fate as they meet it. -
Message 4
Posted by goalpostsoflife (U10655386) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
I will try to return and contribute more meaningfully. I only recently discovered this book through reading reviews of the film (a massively feeble take on it, ime, but I did read the book first). I simply canNOT believe how little known Yates is, I'm by no means claiming that I'm so widely read that nothing escapes my radar, but I've never even seen a reference to him until recently.
I'm currently reading his collected short stories and I'm nearly lost for words. They are extraordinary.
I will follow this thread with interest. -
Message 5
Posted by plum the depths (U5587356) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
I too had never heard of Yates or this book, so good choice Bette.
I was interested to read in your opening piece that the story and characters were based on Yates himself and his surroundings I assume that means his friends and or family, poor them. I have to say I found the book cruel that is not to say I didn't enjoy it but oh my goodness he was scathing about the middle classes and their failings.
As I was reading I kept thinking their lives are not so bad in fact they are very straight forward ordinary lives but now seeing that he was writing about himself I can see how frustrated he must have been. The American dream turns out to be suburban life!
I did not see the end coming. I knew they would never make it to Paris that was obvious but April's death, no that was a shock. Those poor kids, they ended up with his much older brother that wouldn't happen today I'm sure.
I also found it interesting that Frank and April would have been around my parents age. I would have been those kids if you see what I mean and now in my fifties I have children in the mid to late twenties. The struggles are the same in a way. We want to lead exciting lives, be a bit edgy and all that but end up living quite straight lives. I hope my kids and I have more passion in their lives than the couples in the book did. I mean Mrs Givings what a frightful woman. All that she said at the end; she was anything but giving. Actually Yates used an interesting choice of names for his characters. But maybe that was just chance as I see he (Yates) barely altered the names of his friends.
Yes an all round interesting and thought provoking read. -
Message 6
Posted by barbara1835 (U10780912) on Thursday, 21st January 2010
I have never heard of Richard Yates either and I am very glad to have read this book.
Frank seems so superficial and vain, also casual in his attitude to Maureen, in fact quite cruel.
Gradually we see his vulnerable and pathetic side
as the pretences that he and April put up are stripped away,ending in the bitter reality of her abortion and death.
This is brilliant writing, isn't it? So many layers and very subtle undertones.
I found the character of Mrs. Givings very interesting...superficially a real bore and a fuss pot but she has plenty of unhappiness to cope with because of her son. She works out her own ways to achieve some sort of happiness and the dog at the end is a nice touch.
The story carries the reader along and afterwards the subtle undertones start to become clear.
Barbara1835 -
Message 7
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
Thanks for all the comments so far!
#3 I found that it was not depressing, simply because of the resilience of the characters and their accommodation to fate as they meet it.聽
Yes, I go along with that. I didn't find the book sad in a 'tear-jerker' way, nor did I find it depressing - for the reasons you put so succinctly.
#4 currently reading his collected short stories and I'm nearly lost for words. They are extraordinary. 聽
Apparently, Yates used to send off his stories to the New Yorker - which consistently rejected them. After his death, the NY published them in a special issue. His daughter waved the copy in from of his urn of ashes and said 'You made it at last, Dad!'.
#5 I have to say I found the book cruel that is not to say I didn't enjoy it but oh my goodness he was scathing about the middle classes and their failings.
...
I mean Mrs Givings what a frightful woman. 聽
I didn't find/feel that, actually. I felt sorry (though I don't mean /condescendingly/ so) for /all/ the characters. There was nobody I disliked, as such. I thought the Givings family was amazingly well-written. Poor Mrs Givings: She doesn't know how to deal/help John, and her husband keep his hearing-aid turned off! However, there is so much detail in the book (and I don't have that great a memory) - ideally I need to read the book again and take notes!
As for April, I felt warmer towards her in the film, I think. In the book, she came across more 'complicated' (maybe because of her harking back to her memory of an unhappy childhood). There was a lot of background detail given in the book, and I shall now need to watch the film again to see how much of that was translated to the cinema. -
Message 8
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:22 GMT, in reply to Bette in message 1
The character of Johnny Givings is, in my view, the one slightly weak point of the book. He is of course an interesting character and fits well into the "hidden lives of suburbia" theme, but I did feel that he had been introduced more as a plot device to confront April and especially Frank with their own failures. The final exchanges between Johnny and the Wheelers (at the end of chapter 5 in part 3)seemed to overplay the overt moral point of the story. In view of the subtlety of the rest of the book I felt it jarred slightly that things needed to be spelt out in quite this manner by the 'idiot savant.' -
Message 9
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
in reply to Herb Robert in message 8
Ah well, we shall have to agree to disagree on that! I'll be interested to hear other readers' opinions on Johnny and the Givings family. I was undoubtedly influenced very much by the film, as I thought the actor playing Johnny was outstanding, and that the portrayal of mental disturbance astonishingly realistic. I certainly don't see him as 'idiot-savant'* - not on the autistic spectrum, if you like.
* nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, but saw that Kim Peek (the 'model' for Rain Man') died last week. -
Message 10
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:59 GMT, in reply to Bette in message 9
Perhaps 'idiot savant' is the wrong word. I think I saw him a bit like the fool in King Lear - the one who has licence to say the things that everyone's thinking but dare not say. Not that there's a real comparison there either, of course. Anyway, we'll see what others think of this.
This may be an interesting area where the film portrayal (which, as I said, I have not seen) may help to give additional depth to a character. -
Message 11
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
Like you, Bette, I read 鈥楻evolutionary Road鈥 more or less in one sitting. I can鈥檛 remember when I last felt so sorry for so many characters while disliking pretty much all of them.
Before reading the book I only knew it was about the disintegration of a marriage. However, from the first chapter it was like observing the slow build-up to an inevitable and bloody train crash. I liked the way Richard Yates showed us subtle insights into the inner thoughts and emotions 鈥 and vulnerabilities鈥 of all three couples. However, ultimately I thought his sympathies lay very much with the men. Was this largely because of the time he was writing (the 1950s) when 鈥渄ecent鈥 men stuck with their wives and families, however much they felt trapped, I wonder?
Of the women, only April seemed to feel equally restless and trapped, but then she was portrayed as a neurotic 鈥 鈥渄isturbed鈥 even, I think Frank once said. Okay, it was a character speaking, not Yates, but I wondered.......
As you said, honest, Yately was extremely scathing about the middle classes and their failings 鈥 and suburbia 鈥 too. It even occurred to me that, Johnny Givings might have been 鈥渘ot well鈥 as Mrs. Givings put it, partly as a response to the stultifying culture in which he was brought up in. Anyway, his lack of inhibition was certainly a great catalyst for the Wheelers.
I did find it a rather depressing book, overall: so much hurt, self-pity and lack of 鈥 I dunno 鈥 generosity of spirit, I suppose.
I haven鈥檛 seen the film yet, but got it out of the library yesterday, so will enjoy seeing how it compares. I didn鈥檛 want to see it in the first place because I am not keen on DiCaprio. However, having read the book I can see he could make a good Frank.
The book itself reminded me both in theme and style of the film 鈥楩ar From Heaven鈥, which is set at about the same time. I thought that film excellent though 鈥 again 鈥 depressing.
Rusty -
Message 12
Posted by goalpostsoflife (U10655386) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
I read the book at least six months ago and haven't retained the finer details (I borrowed it so can't even glance through it to refresh me), so can't comment very detailedly, what with my pathetic memory, but I retain my overall sense of the book very clearly, and the subtlety of the writing.
Another thing that strikes me is that, in addition to what people have observed up-thread, it's a book about self-delusion - almost every character in it (iirc) is self-deluded to some degree (except perhaps Johnny, I had forgotten his name), and Yates strips that away for the reader, if not always for the character him or herself, to see and writhe in, he peals away so many layers that it's excruciatingly raw. -
Message 13
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
Gosh Barbara, I'd almost forgotten poor Maureen as soon as she disappeared - as did Frank,no doubt. The casual cruelty of it all.
gpol, I was lucky enough to find a copy of the book in a charity shop recently. I shall be lending it to f & f and shall also be wanting to read it again in the future.
Although Yates doesn't spare anyone in 'Revolutionary Road' I definitely get the impression he has less sympathy for the women characters. Did you get that impression and, if so, is it the same in his short stories?
Rusty -
Message 14
Posted by goalpostsoflife (U10655386) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
<>
Interesting you ask that, Rusters, as I was musing about his portrayal of women in the stories before I'd found this thread.
He's pretty brutal about a lot of male characters in the stories but while some of his main protagonists are women, and very richly and variously drawn, there is a recurring 'type' of woman who is far 'harder', tougher and altogether shrewder than the men, who are often hapless and left to fall apart in horrifying slow motion while the women can gather themselves up and sail on, with hardly a backward glance.
He's partly admiring of this, I think, but they're not very warm, and where they are warm, they're not very bright.
He has quite a few stories about childhood and those are most astute, girls and boys seem to get equal sympathy from him there.
Sorry, you can tell I've just finished his stories while trying to remember finer details of Revolutionary Road! -
Message 15
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 22nd January 2010
I've just watched the film again. I think the screen-play/script has been incredibly well done, though having said that, there is inevitably a lot more detail in the book on the different characters (where they are coming /from/ - their childhood experiences etc) that is barely brought out in the film - or not at all (nothing about April's childhood and being passed from one aunt to another). I also felt that the film focused even more on the Wheelers, and especially on April, whereas in the book, one gets more insight into other aspirations and motivations (eg, we get to know much more about Frank and his relationship to his father, and more background information about Shep and Milly).
-
Message 16
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Saturday, 23rd January 2010
Sat, 23 Jan 2010 17:31 GMT, in reply to Bette in message 15
Talking of April's childhood, didn't you find that one of the most poignant and powerful scenes in the book? The part just before April decides effectively to end her life and the narrative suddenly switches to those memories of being with her Aunt (part 3, chapter 7)and the visit of her father, whose drink-sodden life is sketched so effectively by the simple expedient of his giving her the "present" of a white horse from a whiskey bottle?
It reminded me a bit of those lines of Philip Larkin: "Man hands on misery to man./ It deepens like a coastal shelf." And from what we can see in this book, it might well be a sentiment that Yates shared. -
Message 17
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Saturday, 23rd January 2010
Yes, I did find that very poignant. I shall /have/ to read the whole book again as I keep modifying my feelings on the characters. Having re-watched the film last night, I /did/ find that Mrs Givings seemed to represent the worst of 'suburbia' at the end, though I found her request to April to meet her son (and her gratitude when April accepted readily) also terribly poignant. What came out to me more strongly too was how much people are unsettled when 'one of their own' does something dramatically different (or, in this story, intends to). I would have liked to know more about Milly and her background. I have to say (sorry if I'm repeating myself) but I found the acting all round /so/ good in the film - which probably accounts for my having more sympathy with the characters than if I had read the book first. I see that Michael Shannon, who played Johnny, was nominated for an Oscar for 'Best Supporting Actor'.
Do people think that April and Frank loved each other? I think they /did/ - in their own ways. April certainly seemed to me to have plenty of 'issues' she hadn't overcome. -
Message 18
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Monday, 25th January 2010
I watched the DVD yesterday and that it was very good. I think it was the right decision to focus on Frank and April Wheeler. Even so, I think one caught the essence of the other characters: Shep's wordless frustration and unhappiness, Milly's anxiousness to please; also of course the Givingses, especially John and his mother Helen (the incomparable Katy Bates).
Although diCaprio is not a favourite of mine, he was wonderful as Frank. Maybe the fact that I disliked Frank helped! (Actually I disliked him and felt far less compassion for him in the film than in the book.)
Did April and Frank love each other? On reflection, no. They were in love with their first impressions of each other and early projections of what their lives would be I think.
Something made them unable to let go of each other though. Divorce was no big deal but emotional withdrawal/abuse seemed to be as far as they got.
Rusty -
Message 19
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Monday, 25th January 2010
I didn't dislike Frank, though of course his behaviour towards Maureen was rather despicable. He /tried/ in his own way to get through to April - and only succeeded in antagonising her more. I can't dislike him for that! I think he /did/ love her, but simply didn't know how to deal with her (she was a very prickly and unpredictable person).
btw, I don't know /what/ happened to my OP: All the quotes have changed into question-marks! -
Message 20
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Monday, 25th January 2010
Yes, April was prickly, and no doubt not always easy to live with (understatement) but Frank was a patronising so-and-so and always seemed to be thinking how best to "handle" her. And he Never Shut Up.
Rusty -
Message 21
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Monday, 25th January 2010
Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:30 GMT, in reply to Rusters in message 20
You're right, of course - April was "prickly" and Frank could be "patronising."
But do you not think that these characteristics developed out of the growing disparity between their dreams? April seems to have held on to that early idealism, that yearning to do something or to be someone special. In that big scene at the end of part 1 she says that in order to agree with Frank's opinion that the plan to uproot to France were unrealistic "I'd have to have a very strange and very low opinion of reality," which clearly she hasn't. Or she thinks she hasn't.
Whereas Frank increasingly becomes trapped in the suburban life he initially despised. He says at one point in that same chapter "who ever said I was supposed to be a big deal?" It's almost as if he has accepted his limitations.
I think this is one of the themes that makes this book so good: the growth of these two central characters in ways that confound expectations. One thing you could certainly not say of them is that they are one- or even two-dimensional. They are full-blooded human beings caught in traps partly of circumstance, but partly also of their own devising. And to that extent I feel that the book moves into the realm of literature rather than simple fiction - it has an almost mythic quality about it. -
Message 22
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Wednesday, 27th January 2010
I was thinking again about the traps that Frank finds himself in and it struck me that a lot of the time it has to do with his own inability to contain or channel the emotions he feels.
Like many men would, perhaps, Shep, when he learns about the insanity of John Givings, wants a "plain, hard-headed discussion of the practical aspects," and to leave Milly to "explore the thing from a woman's angle." But Frank clearly does not share this view, partly because it does not allow him to control the social gathering, but also because it arouses in him feelings that he finds difficult to articulate. True, he launches into a rant about the mental state of the nation, but this falls completely flat. Could this be a sign of his psychological unravelling?
Tellingly, at the end of part 1 chapter 6, he is explicitly attributed as being emotionally illiterate: "If he'd had a year to devote to it and nothing else to do, he couldn't for the life of him have sorted out ... the emotions that filled him..." And then at the beginning of the next chapter he experiences a powerful moment of inarticulacy: "He wanted to rush outdoors and make some dramatic atonement ... Instead he shut his eyes and reached out ..."
Again, at the end of part 2, his reaction to the discovery of April's do-it-yourself abortion kit, is to storm in and confront her: "Just what the hell do you think you're going to do with this?"
Maybe this is a skewed reading, but to me all these things add up to a man who has spent so long bottling things up (particularly in his choice of career) that he is like an active volcano which has to find an outlet somewhere. But in Frank's case he has just not learned how to use that emotion productively. -
Message 23
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Sunday, 31st January 2010
Following on from what you say, HR, I was wondering what would have happened if the Wheelers had made it to Paris. My gut feeling is that it wouldn't have worked. I don't think Frank would know what to do with himself, and April would be frustated and disappointed in them.
I think the trouble with April was that she needed a life, and interest, a career even, but was forced by the constraints of the time to live life through him. Unsatisfactory for both of them.
Rusty -
Message 24
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Monday, 1st February 2010
Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:24 GMT, in reply to Rusters in message 23
That's an interesting point, Rusters, and one that I hadn't thought about before. But now that you mention it it does seem to reveal another rich strand in this fathomless work: the theme of escape.
What you said reminded me of the idea, relatively common in western literature, of the fruitlessness of fleeing one's surroundings. As early as Horace, we have 鈥淐aelum, non animum mutant, qui trans mare currunt.鈥 (Epistle 1.11 - 鈥淭hey may change the scenery, but they can't change their minds, those who run away across the seas.鈥)
There are a couple of poems by Cavafy in which this is expressed in all it's melancholy: 鈥淚thaca gave you that splendid journey ... And if you find her poor, Ithaca has not deceived you.鈥 (from Ithaca) and 鈥淵ou said, 'I shall go to another land, I shall go to another sea' 鈥 You will not find new places, you will not find other seas. The city will follow you ...鈥 (from The City).
And of course there is T. S. Eliot: 鈥淲e shall not cease from exploration/And the end of all our exploring/Will be to arrive where we started/And know the place for the first time.鈥 (from Little Gidding in Four Quartets.)
And I think that April's reasons for going to Paris (as she expresses them in chapter 7 of part 1 at any rate) are exactly as you say 鈥 she's almost living life through Frank and hopes that if things turn out well for him, then they'll turn out well for her as well. She says to him that 鈥渋t's your very essence that's being stifled here,鈥 but isn't that exactly what this theme of escape is about 鈥 you can never escape yourself, and if fulfilment is lacking in this environment, then simply changing the scenery is not likely to make much difference?
Frank at this point is much more realistic (coming slowly to terms with the fact that he is not special and that he doesn't want to move); his view of her Paris vision is very bleak: 鈥渉er face would be drawn with fatigue so that the little vertical line between her eyes would show, even when she smiled.鈥
April's idealism is necessary, I feel, as is anyone's vision of a future, but when set against Frank's increasing nihilism it is surely doomed?
So, yes, I agree that had they ever made it to Paris is looks unlikely that things would have changed that much. After all, Frank's ordeal in having to read to the children, for example (in chapter 4 of part 1), is something ingrained, it is not something that's suddenly going to change. That feeling he has of 鈥渟inking helplessly into the cushions and the papers and the bodies of his children like a man in quicksand鈥 would surely always be with him? -
Message 25
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Friday, 12th February 2010
As this thread seems to have come to the end of its natural life, I'd just like to thank Bette for introducing us to this book, and in particular to thank her for making me read something I would probably never have picked up otherwise.
While it isn't quite in the category of "books that have changed your life," it is a book that will remain with me for a long time and I feel privileged to have shared a few hours of my life in its company.
Thanks, too, for all of you who have contributed and have made me look at the book in ways I hadn't thought of before.
I've since looked at Yates' collection of short stories "Eleven Kinds of Loneliness," and have found every one of them a gem. So if you've enjoyed this book and are looking for something in a similar vein, why not give the short stories a try?
And maybe one day I'll even get to watch the film! Thanks again, Bette. -
Message 26
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Friday, 12th February 2010
Thank you for the reminder, HR, I meant to put in a request for "Eleven Kinds of Loneliness" from the library, so you have spurred me on.
Going back to an earlier post of yours, I quite agree about the fruitlessness of fleeing one's surroundings - or, as my grandmother used to say: wherever you go you take yourself with you.
Rusty -
Message 27
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 12th February 2010
in reply to Herb Robert in message 25
Gosh, what a lovely post! I'm glad you, and others, enjoyed this book as much as I did. I'll certainly read more by Yates - so will get myself of copy of the short stories you have recommended.
I'm sorry I didn't contribute with more comments in this thread but I'm afraid work commitments took over my life these last few weeks and I would really need to read the book /again/ to recall some of the details - and I've already lent my copy to a friend.
Thank you very much for /your/ comments too - which I read with interest even if I didn't reply specifically. -
Message 28
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Monday, 22nd February 2010
The February Book of the Month Club discussion, on "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee, is now open:
F2693944?thread=7319225
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or 聽to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
主播大秀 iD
主播大秀 navigation
主播大秀 links
主播大秀 漏 2014 The 主播大秀 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.