Chris

The Idle Book Club 1: The Sense of an Ending

Recommended Posts

I agree with everything you've just said - but the fact that a piece of media makes you think about a thing isn't really a reflection on the media, it's a reflection on you. I too thought "Oh man the stories that I tell myself in 60 years could be mostly self-pleasing bullshit", but I also wondered about the political and social ramifications of a Hunger Games-esque competition being brought into our modern society having reading that series.

Don't worry, we'll all be radioactive ash before that has a chance of happening.

(In actually contributing to the discussion, currently reading the book.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, wasn't it supposed to be one book per month? Or is the book club only starting when the podcast gets made ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, wasn't it supposed to be one book per month? Or is the book club only starting when the podcast gets made ?

Their plan is to launch the podcast and the bookcast into your face at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with everything you've just said - but the fact that a piece of media makes you think about a thing isn't really a reflection on the media, it's a reflection on you.

Do you genuinely believe this? It seems pretty self-evident to me that if some art makes you think about something, that says something about the art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you genuinely believe this? It seems pretty self-evident to me that if some art makes you think about something, that says something about the art.

I do. And while what you say is true, different audiences can have different interpretations of the same piece of art, no? Does that not say something about the audience's traits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A book that I think would generate a ton of discussion for the Thumbs guys is Space by Stephen Baxter. I read it when I was younger without a lot of previous scifi reading baggage, so some of the common themes were fairly fresh to me. But, a lot of the reviews and such, say that he takes the "future of the human race" scifi genre and updates it to a more modern pace and technology.

I thought it had some fantastic ideas, and different ideas, about where were heading as a species and what the end state for modern politics and policy might quite likely be.

It really opened my mind to different outlooks and styles of writing and science fiction. And Baxter is also a really great writer, who's easy to read and does a fantastic job of putting across complex ideas about technology and physics.

Also its called Space for goodness, have you ever heard anything more idlethumbs in your life? It might as well be called Video Games and be written by Jeff Goldgame.

I really think the book show shouldn't be too influenced by us as listeners, but even if you don't have it on the show, I think its well worth a read on its own.

Also, you should totally discuss The Man in the High Castle by Philip K Dick. Classic, brilliant, parrallel universe, IDLE THUMBS!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do. And while what you say is true, different audiences can have different interpretations of the same piece of art, no? Does that not say something about the audience's traits?

I don't think anyone is saying it says NOTHING about the audience. But it seems bizarre to suggest that the work itself doesn't play an extremely strong part. If numerous peopl experience similar emotional reactions when reading a work, do you think that's merely coincidence, rather than the author tapping into some common human experience, even if that experience is more likely to resonate with a particular audience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone is saying it says NOTHING about the audience. But it seems bizarre to suggest that the work itself doesn't play an extremely strong part. If numerous peopl experience similar emotional reactions when reading a work, do you think that's merely coincidence, rather than the author tapping into some common human experience, even if that experience is more likely to resonate with a particular audience?

But surely that's just a result of the subject matter? This, being a book about the fallibility of human memory, and the complex natures of human relationships, has caused its readers to think about those topics. I'm not saying for a second that I could write a better book about such topics, nor do I know of any way that it could be done, but it still felt very aimless. I could have the same result by sitting in a pub with some friends, chatting about whatever, and the topics naturally occurring. Would've saved an awful lot of time, too.

(My last sentence is rather trollish, but I do think that the overall point stands - I really don't think much of the writing itself, or that Barnes as a storyteller has made his piece particularly well-designed, but the subject material is interesting I guess.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely that's just a result of the subject matter? This, being a book about the fallibility of human memory, and the complex natures of human relationships, has caused its readers to think about those topics. I'm not saying for a second that I could write a better book about such topics, nor do I know of any way that it could be done, but it still felt very aimless. I could have the same result by sitting in a pub with some friends, chatting about whatever, and the topics naturally occurring. Would've saved an awful lot of time, too.

(My last sentence is rather trollish, but I do think that the overall point stands - I really don't think much of the writing itself, or that Barnes as a storyteller has made his piece particularly well-designed, but the subject material is interesting I guess.)

I can't possibly disagree more strongly. My opinion of myself is not so inflated that I believe that simply by sitting around bullshitting with friends I will explore topics of human nature and the way we live in this world with the same degree of nuance and empathy as a skilled author who has poured a significant amount of time and mental energy into crafting a work. That's not to say my conversations with friends won't be immensely valuable or raise interesting topics. But I've certainly not been wrenched into the kind of reflection this book prompted in me in that context. If I felt I were able to regularly come to meaningful (and novel) reflection about myself and my world just by reading a bunch of topics on a list, I would be concerned I'm thinking about things much too shallowly, or too guardedly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I certainly think it's unfair to imply that I have an inflated opinion of myself, but I think the main part where we disagree is the quality of this particular author's work, so I won't take it personally.

The reason why I mention a group of friends is this: with one author, you get his view of a particular topic - in this case, memory - and undoubtedly this is more in-depth than you would get in a pub w/ friends; but with a group of friends, you'd get multiple opinions, each helping to sculpt your own. And I'm also not saying that I come out of every pub session feeling like I've explored the deepest topics of life, the universe and everything (normally I come out a little bit tipsy) but whenever the topics become deeper and more meaningful, I feel far more fulfilled psychologically than I did while reading this book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked it but felt I have read all this before bar one thing in books like Steven Erikson's Malazan books of the Fallen and psychology studies.

Like Speedy I wonder is it my young age that is part of the reason for kinda shrugging shoulders at it and not just the feeling of nothing new under the sun in regards to what the book explores.

That one thing that I haven't thought of reading the book was what Chris posted on the goodreads on the lack of information we have about others, the things that effect them and the

asymmetry of said events

is something I didn't think of but is something I will be now. This thing I never would have thought of it why I am so excited about the book club.

This idea reminds me of Old boy and how a unimportant act on the narrators part lead to so much. Did the letter end up serving the same purpose in this story particulary the suggestion Adrain talk to "the Mother", is that the if or is it if Tony and Veronica didn't break up

Some of the stuff the author touched on (remorse and realism as justification for certain choices) are coincidentally relevant to certain decisions I've made these past few weeks, especially the thoughts on what remorse is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I skimmed a few of your posts Speedy and I think you might be focusing too much on the 'twist'. The difference between a well done plot twist and an amateurish one, in my opinion, is that the well done plot twist is designed to impact the character and the amateurish one is designed to impact the audience. For us as an audience, perhaps, the twist is hardly a revolution, but imagine what it represented to Tony and how it recontextualizes everything for him. Personally, I found it gut-wrenching. The story wasn't about what it seemed to be about, which was, I think, what the story was about.

I don't really want to get into spoiler territory until after the cast. I'll just say, though, that the artistry of the description of the chip blew me away; even though I could clearly recognize the author's intent and hand there, it was just such a perfect way to communicate the impact of the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I skimmed a few of your posts Speedy and I think you might be focusing too much on the 'twist'. The difference between a well done plot twist and an amateurish one, in my opinion, is that the well done plot twist is designed to impact the character and the amateurish one is designed to impact the audience. For us as an audience, perhaps, the twist is hardly a revolution, but imagine what it represented to Tony and how it recontextualizes everything for him. Personally, I found it gut-wrenching. The story wasn't about what it seemed to be about, which was, I think, what the story was about.

I don't really want to get into spoiler territory until after the cast. I'll just say, though, that the artistry of the description of the chip blew me away; even though I could clearly recognize the author's intent and hand there, it was just such a perfect way to communicate the impact of the moment.

This is an incredibly concisely-put observation that I wasn't able to communicate very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's certainly a fair enough belief -- I prefer my reading to impact me, however, and think your characterisation of amateurish vs pro is slightly unfair. I'd say it's just two different approaches; some prefer one, and others the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's certainly a fair enough belief -- I prefer my reading to impact me, however, and think your characterisation of amateurish vs pro is slightly unfair. I'd say it's just two different approaches; some prefer one, and others the other.

I think there's a distinction between the reading in aggregate affecting you, and the details of a particular plot twist affecting you. I think the point is that while the revelation itself is principally of great impact to Tony, the way in which he came to understand it, and the fallout of it, and the retrospective understanding of how it has informed his relationships with others--those are the things that affect the reader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's certainly a fair enough belief -- I prefer my reading to impact me, however, and think your characterisation of amateurish vs pro is slightly unfair. I'd say it's just two different approaches; some prefer one, and others the other.

I may have been a bit careless in my phrasing. Here's what I mean: The part of your story which people interact with emotionally is the characters. Without a character going through the events in a story, it's just a bunch of things that happened. A twist that isn't filtered through a character won't be an emotional experience for the audience- it can be surprising, yes, and it can get them to think, but that's more the functionality of a riddle or something than a story. I don't have anything against riddles, but I don't go to them for emotional involvement.

The reason why the ending of The Sixth Sense was a big deal wasn't because we didn't know he was dead, it was because he didn't know he was dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A book that I think would generate a ton of discussion for the Thumbs guys is Space by Stephen Baxter. I read it when I was younger without a lot of previous scifi reading baggage, so some of the common themes were fairly fresh to me. But, a lot of the reviews and such, say that he takes the "future of the human race" scifi genre and updates it to a more modern pace and technology.

I thought it had some fantastic ideas, and different ideas, about where were heading as a species and what the end state for modern politics and policy might quite likely be.

It really opened my mind to different outlooks and styles of writing and science fiction. And Baxter is also a really great writer, who's easy to read and does a fantastic job of putting across complex ideas about technology and physics.

The Xeelee sequence by him is also fantastic, some awesome concepts and a great story. I should pick up some more of his work, i've got a few Culture novels to read first though.

As for 'The Sense of an Ending', I did not enjoy it. I found it really dull, there was just nothing there to grab my attention. The protagonist was not interesting, or even likeable and basically nothing at all happens in the book. Not to say I can only enjoy a book if it's whizz bang spaceships, i've read things like Darkness Visible by Styron and of course Catcher in the Rye, and enjoyed them. But I just did not connect with Tony at all. I also didn't like how scant the detail was. He spends a while recounting his school days, and then fast forwards 40 years, really abruptly. I was like, but you skipped the interesting parts! Then the rest of the book is him moping around sending emails and thinking about all those years ago, but the thing is, you never get to revisit them properly. It's only him talking about his memories and how unreliable they are and so on. Yeah I get that that's the theme of the book or whatever, but I don't see how that decision was a good one.

What's the old movie adage? Show, don't tell. All he does is tell, and it's fucking boring. The twist at the end did not interest me at all. I don't really understand how a book like this wins a literary prize, I mean I guess the judges are all 60 year old men so they probably thought it was amazing? I don't know.

I have read a book with a similar premise to this, but done in a far more engaging way- 'Past Imperfect' by Julian Fellowes (of Gosford Park, Downton Abbey etc fame). He also has a late middle aged character going back and trying to retrace his past, or rather his old friend's past and also his. But the characters are interesting, you get a lot of flashbacks to the parties of the 60's and a real sense of a feeling of the time. Rather than the little sketch you get at the beginning of 'The Sense of an Ending'. He does have a bit of an obsession with talking about class and so on, which gets a little grating, but overall the book is a lot more enjoyable than this literary wankfest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Xeelee sequence by him is also fantastic, some awesome concepts and a great story. I should pick up some more of his work, i've got a few Culture novels to read first though.

As for 'The Sense of an Ending', I did not enjoy it. I found it really dull, there was just nothing there to grab my attention. The protagonist was not interesting, or even likeable and basically nothing at all happens in the book. Not to say I can only enjoy a book if it's whizz bang spaceships, i've read things like Darkness Visible by Styron and of course Catcher in the Rye, and enjoyed them. But I just did not connect with Tony at all. I also didn't like how scant the detail was. He spends a while recounting his school days, and then fast forwards 40 years, really abruptly. I was like, but you skipped the interesting parts! Then the rest of the book is him moping around sending emails and thinking about all those years ago, but the thing is, you never get to revisit them properly. It's only him talking about his memories and how unreliable they are and so on. Yeah I get that that's the theme of the book or whatever, but I don't see how that decision was a good one.

What's the old movie adage? Show, don't tell. All he does is tell, and it's fucking boring. The twist at the end did not interest me at all. I don't really understand how a book like this wins a literary prize, I mean I guess the judges are all 60 year old men so they probably thought it was amazing? I don't know.

I have read a book with a similar premise to this, but done in a far more engaging way- 'Past Imperfect' by Julian Fellowes (of Gosford Park, Downton Abbey etc fame). He also has a late middle aged character going back and trying to retrace his past, or rather his old friend's past and also his. But the characters are interesting, you get a lot of flashbacks to the parties of the 60's and a real sense of a feeling of the time. Rather than the little sketch you get at the beginning of 'The Sense of an Ending'. He does have a bit of an obsession with talking about class and so on, which gets a little grating, but overall the book is a lot more enjoyable than this literary wankfest.

Well, that's said what I was thinking with far more conviction and self-assurance. I agree with all this. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's the old movie adage? Show, don't tell. All he does is tell, and it's fucking boring. The twist at the end did not interest me at all. I don't really understand how a book like this wins a literary prize, I mean I guess the judges are all 60 year old men so they probably thought it was amazing? I don't know.

This is kind of a silly claim, considering the three hosts of Idle Thumbs all loved it and are roughly half that age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the old movie adage? Show, don't tell. All he does is tell, and it's fucking boring. The twist at the end did not interest me at all. I don't really understand how a book like this wins a literary prize, I mean I guess the judges are all 60 year old men so they probably thought it was amazing? I don't know.

"Show, don't tell" is one of the pieces of advice I feel like gets wheeled out way a bit too much, as the latter can be successful when used properly. (John Williams in introspection mode is all-tell, and my favorite writer. Everyone should check out Stoner!) At the end of the day, it's become an ideological stance favoring minimalist writing. While that saying challenges the most lazy writing, it also excises an entire class of solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Show, don't tell" is one of the pieces of advice I feel like gets wheeled out way a bit too much, as the latter can be successful when used properly. (John Williams in introspection mode is all-tell, and my favorite writer. Everyone should check out Stoner!) At the end of the day, it's become an ideological stance favoring minimalist writing. While that saying challenges the most lazy writing, it also excises an entire class of solutions.

I agree entirely. In fact, one reason I love literature so much is precisely because it has so much freedom to adopt such modes of expression as much or as little as the author likes. "Show, don't tell" is merely one principle that can be applied to writing or anything else. It is not a universal stricture of creative work.

Similarly, people often get caught up in the structure of the hero's journey, as if that is the only valid premise for a story, rather than simply an observation about many stories. (Although playing a lot of video games, you could be forgiven for believing it really is the only possible framework.)

There is really no reason for any given artist, regardless of medium, to accept that any one given rule must be applied in all cases. I love that literature CAN do the "telling" part so well. It's a nice counterbalance to games, which tend to either 1) just show show show show show all the time by way of constant interactive spectacle, or 2) tell, very very poorly by way of interminable cutscenes.

All those things said, I don't even think this book abuses the telling part. I think its central character, and by extension its author, leave plenty to the reader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By telling, it's showing. The entire thing is locked into Tony's perspective, and more specifically present-time Tony's perspective. How that flavors his stories, and how the new information he gets changes them, is kind of the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's my point. When we think back on memories, we only have what's inside our head (unless, as will be increasingly likely there's a picture or video of it). But in a novel or a movie where the author or director controls what we see, you don't have to stick to that. And usually those parts are cut out and told in a conversation or something to save space or time. I don't really understand how this book would make someone think introspectively about their past in a different light, I mean unless they'd never done it before. I spend way too much time thinking about my past already, and in this book he doesn't do it in an interesting or new way.

Did you think his telling was interesting? Or fleshed out, at all? It really didn't seem that way to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everything has to make you reconsider your life or do something completely unique to be considered quality. Something can simply just be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now