tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post5438379099034239541..comments2024-03-28T05:13:13.921-04:00Comments on Books, Inq. — The Epilogue: Ian McEwanFrank Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18410473158808750903noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-3668269369641778352018-07-01T16:55:05.370-04:002018-07-01T16:55:05.370-04:00I completely agree, Lee, as it pertains to Amsterd...I completely agree, Lee, as it pertains to Amsterdam. I was confused by all the praise there. <br /><br />And you make a fair point about "consistency": maybe that's my issue, in the end, with McEwan: that he's too consistent, too insistent on beauty. Because you're right: there's flourish at the expense of character, particularly in Chesil Beach (which, as I wrote in my original post, stops just at the moment the going gets good)...<br /><br /> Jesse Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13626277740665307336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-91188910511177447882018-07-01T16:53:29.722-04:002018-07-01T16:53:29.722-04:00Isn't the big problem with McEwan – and perhap...Isn't the big problem with McEwan – and perhaps it's the result of all the others – that he can start a novel brilliantly, but after that simply can't go anywhere much with either the narrative or the characters?Nigehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13314891387515045404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-61158360867957751592018-07-01T14:02:51.814-04:002018-07-01T14:02:51.814-04:00Probably not worth it, Vikram. There are so many o...Probably not worth it, Vikram. There are so many other things to read! I'm on a Helen Dunmore spree at the moment and recommend her both for her style and her understanding of people, especially women.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13770069472552779217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-15787512675219836722018-07-01T14:01:36.438-04:002018-07-01T14:01:36.438-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13770069472552779217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-55706299378924315212018-07-01T10:41:03.123-04:002018-07-01T10:41:03.123-04:00Lee, I read "Amsterdam" a long time ago ...Lee, I read "Amsterdam" a long time ago and should return to it, but I have a feeling I will agree with you when I do.Vikram Johrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12016674284703056882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-30030695214384632602018-07-01T02:52:16.254-04:002018-07-01T02:52:16.254-04:00Vikram, I find 'contrived' is precisely th...Vikram, I find 'contrived' is precisely the right word for some (much?) of McEwan's work. Have you read <i>Amsterdam</i>? I came close to throwing it against a wall by the end. <br /><br />I'm not sure the problem with McEwan is one of language, except in so far as all fiction is a matter of language. It's rather the problem of flourish at the expense of character and plot. Somehow, I've often felt that McEwan doesn't think deeply about his characters. To me, many of them don't feel real, and their actions feel 'set up' as a consequence. <br /><br />Jesse, I don't understand what you mean by 'employing language with consistency', particularly in this context. If anything, McEwan's language use is overly consistent. And what's wrong with inconsistency? I like a mix of high and low, for example. Or am I missing what you mean?Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13770069472552779217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-6964369146517038572018-07-01T02:02:10.437-04:002018-07-01T02:02:10.437-04:00Thanks for your response, Jesse. I understand now ...Thanks for your response, Jesse. I understand now what you were getting at.Vikram Johrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12016674284703056882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-2986281164241126262018-07-01T00:32:17.360-04:002018-07-01T00:32:17.360-04:00Yes and no, Vikram.
By "style," you...Yes and no, Vikram. <br /><br />By "style," you're right: I do mean the way authors use language to weave a narrative. But I also mean it in the sense of employing language with consistency, with more than flourish. <br /><br />A somewhat predictable example of this would be Henry Miller: now he wielded a sentence with style, with intensity. I suppose you could say McEwan has a style; it'd be one built on beauty. But for me, that's not enough; the language just doesn't move. <br /><br />Thanks for your commentary here, by the way. Much obliged. Jesse Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13626277740665307336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10178279.post-52366232730593465152018-06-30T23:55:58.358-04:002018-06-30T23:55:58.358-04:00Hi Jesse, I recently read his "The Children A...Hi Jesse, I recently read his "The Children Act" and felt somewhat the same. The novel is about a judge who decides the case of a boy who for religious reasons is denying the blood transfusion that can save his life. The judge is battling a domestic crisis -- her husband cheated on her -- and McEwan joins these two strands to focus on the misery of the protagonist while relegating the more important story of the sick boy to second status. I found something deeply contrived about this.<br /><br />As an aside, I would be interested in hearing more about your use of "style" here. I can see that you do not mean it in the way that writers employ language but as something to do with plot and narrative cohesion. Vikram Johrihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12016674284703056882noreply@blogger.com