Hamish stated this was not exactly what he was expecting as it was a different kind of crime book. Hamish described it as elegantly written, clever, interesting and he enjoyed it. He awarded it with 7/10.
Nigel described the book as "a minor masterpiece". Despite not having any first hand knowledge of Russia, Nigel felt it evoked powerfully the "Wild East" of post-Glasnost Russia - and this is one of the book's great strengths. The other being that the story is a compelling, well written page turner.
The book is written as if Nicholas, the English expat lawyer protagonist, is writing a confession to his fiancé who is unaware of this particular story. Nigel felt this device was a bit clunky and was one of the few weaknesses of the book.
Nicholas does not start the book as a particularly moral individual (he describes his job as "smearing lipstick on a pig"), however his gradual corruption is extremely credible. Nigel enjoyed the way the book hints at a dark crime which, as it turns out, whilst still dreadful, also appears to be - by modern Russian standards - fairly mundane. Nigel identified a number of vivid moments: the extreme Moscow winters; the aggression and rudeness of the average citizen; the horrible nightclubs; the two con tricks - one involving an apartment, the other millions of dollars; and the visit to the dacha. 8/10
Robin described the book as a "slow burn". Memorable if a little stereotypical. Robin was struck by how the weather dominates Russians' lives through the course of the almost unbearably long and cold winter and the all too short hot summer. Robin loved the descriptions of places "the ice on the (Moscow) river was buckling and cracking, great plates of it rubbing and jostling each other, as the water shrugged it off, a vast snake sloughing of its skin." Overall Robin felt it was an impressive 'first novel' - quick, absorbing, mildly thought-provoking and moving. 7/10
Keith described an "entirely linear plot" and "the inevitable forward motion" of one man's failure to swerve any of the moral hazards he encounters while working as an expat lawyer in Russia. The narrator is a flawed and cowardly man. Despite this Keith wanted to read on because of the insights he got about Russian culture and society - and this coming from a man whose screen saver is a picture of him standing in Red Square.
Keith felt the book really nailed that heady sense of possibility that comes with the early stages of living abroad; the feeling that you can be who you want to be, run risks you never would normally take because you've stepped out of time for a bit. Nick, the narrator, wanted his fiancé to forgive his depraved past and moral indifference. Keith stated that the the novel occasionally veered rather too much towards caricature and for this reason he felt he could only award it with 6/10 using his new harsh marking system (in which a ten is an impossibility).
Tristan really enjoyed the book. It was an easy read, but quite a page turner. Tristan knows next to nothing about modern Russia (other than a rather dubious take on it from James Hawes' Rancid Aluminium), so he rather enjoyed the author's personal assessment of Russia and the Russians. Having said that, it did sometimes feel like point-scoring as he revealed yet another observation about Russian life, but on balance Tristan liked it, and especially the comparisons with the UK.
The author's bleak view of the seediness, hopelessness and corruption is no doubt exaggerated for literary effect, but Tristan was sure there must be some grains of truth in there somewhere. Tristan enjoyed the characters, especially the embittered foreign correspondent, and the neighbour who spoke in aphorisms ("only an idiot smiles all the time", "invite a pig to dinner and it will put its feet on the table"). Tristan also liked the sense of foreboding created by his revealing in advance that things weren't going to work out well, although the whole concept of him writing to his fiancé was an annoying distraction.
In terms of the character of the protagonist, Tristan liked his strained relations with his family ("we sat looking at the children, willing them to do something adorable or eccentric"). The one thing he wasn't convinced about was his motivation: if he knew what was going on, how come there wasn't a bigger sense of fatalism? ie how could he be naive and knowing at the same time? In this sense, his motivation seemed unclear, and the ending felt a bit weak. Overall, though, Tristan concluded it was a good, if light, read, and gave it 6.5/10.
A very respectable overall rating of 7 out of 10 for AD Miller's debut novel from Hove's Premier Book Group.
"Brother" directed by Aleksei Balabanov
To compliment Snowdrops, Hamish had also selected a film called "Brother" which was directed by Aleksei Balabanov.
Hamish observed that "Brother" is the only one of Balabanov's films to be set in a socially articulated contemporary Russia, and it effectively delineates the contradictions between the provinces and the big city, between the penurious old Russia and the new Russia of petty mafiosi and feckless youth. It shows the casual contemporary Russian racism towards Jews, Chechens and other "black-arsed" trans-Caucasians. The film's protagonist Danila symbolises the beginning of the backlash against total cultural Americanisation.
Hamish felt that the the film also gave a wonderfully resonant picture of modern St Petersburg, the most ambiguous and multifarious of Russian cities. When Danila arrives we are given brief glimpses of its classical centre, including the statue of the Bronze Horseman by the Neva, but we also get the tenement blocks of 19th-century Petersburg, inhabited by the heroes of Gogol and Dostoevsky. (Indeed the whole film can be seen as an ironic subversion of Crime and Punishment, with the killing but without the repentance.) And, cheek by jowl, we also see the Soviet Leningrad of communal flats and the new, bourgeois Petersburg of the glamorous rock elite.
Tristan found this an interesting film to watch, mostly because of its portrayal of Russia around the turn of the millennium. He liked the moral ambiguity of the protagonist, and his descent into violence. However, it did feel rather ham-fisted in a lot of places, and he found the protagonist's love of the music of Nautilus Pompilius somewhat silly. Pros: learnt a new way to eat an egg. Cons: the bullet proof CD player stretched his credulity.
Nigel thought it was interesting to see Leningrad/St Petersburg depicted in a film set in the late 1990s. Nigel described the film as "watchable and reasonably entertaining if barely credible". Ultimately he felt the film was a disappointment - it was directed in a very routine manner with average cinematography. Whilst providing a few insights into the grimness of Russia post-Communism and the bleakness of life there was very little to elevate it above average. Enjoyable tosh.
Thereafter we discussed all manner of interesting topics - the suitability of the book and film "Hunger Games" for ten year old girls; the extent to which Roy Hodgson would make a good England manager; the London Mayoral election; the film "Il divo" (2008) - the story of Italian politician Giulio Andreotti, who has served as Prime Minister of Italy seven times since the restoration of democracy in 1946; how much we miss Nick Smith; the history of the world; poker tournaments; prostate pain; Arthurian legend; Model T Fords; Sasa Papac; and just how cold it can get in Moscow.
Nigel then introduced his idea for a Patrick Hamilton themed discussion based around his book "Hangover Square", and - with that in mind - here's a couple of items to set the tone for our forthcoming Hamilton Fest...
Patrick Hamilton - introductory video
nigeyb's imagined soundtrack to the book 'Hangover Square' by Patrick Hamilton
