"My Revolutions" (2007) by Hari Kunzru

"My Revolutions" (2007) by Hari Kunzru 

Nigel explained how his "nu-lad" theme (see June 2015 discussion) was a goodie but the associated choices (Keith Nixon - The Fix/Iggy/A Prophet) were let down by the book and he wanted to put that right, whilst still retaining a coherent overarching theme that effectively linked the choices together

Various other excellent books had led to Nigel's book choice for this month...

• Jake Arnott - Johnny Come Home
• Stuart Christie - Granny Made me an Anarchist
• Francis Wheen book - Strange Days Indeed: The Golden Age of Paranoia

So, this era has inspired some great writing, but how would "My Revolutions" fare...?

Nigel primarily hoped to evoke the era, including the paranoia, revolutionary fervour etc - a time when some people really cared about radical politics, and the possibility of a socialist world felt more tangible

Also, by happy coincidence, this was a good follow on from "The Bottle Factory Outing" (see last month) as we were in a similar era

Nigel liked the different concurrent plot lines, which cleverly intertwine various aspects of Mike/Chris life and which primarily focus on his quiet, present day life as a middle class house husband in Chichester, and his former life as an ex-student who drifts into a hardline revolutionary group in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Other plot lines include Chris’s childhood, a few years recovering from addiction in Thailand, and a few more - all are absorbing. 

The present day story gradually comes more and more to the fore and this is what drives the slow burn narrative. Nigel was captivated by both primary plot lines, but especially the descriptions of squats, political meetings in various London locations and beyond, demonstrations, bombings, safe houses, encounter groups, festivals, discussions etc. Mike finally realises the dreams of liberation he'd fought for were illusory, and impossible.

The novel’s elegiac tone perfectly celebrates the era of armed revolutionary struggle, whilst also exploring the madness of extremism, personal identity, relationships, radical politics, violence, gender politics, family, and today’s political landscape. It’s an incredible achievement, brilliantly written and, if you have any interest in the revolutionary armed struggle of the 1970s, you will find much to enjoy.

Cleverly Kunru convinces us that (like all gang members?) Mike/Chris is looking for a new family or somewhere to fit in and thus is very suggestive e.g. Anna at the party encouraging him to call guests pigs, or the transgressive sex.  Mike is always, right until the very end, working to someone else’s agenda - even as a househusband in his modern incarnation - and even more so with Miles using him for his own ends.

Where this book really scores - and what Nigel was hoping for - was in its credible evocation of the era and the revolutionary milieu

The elegiac tone encapsulated by this aside from Miles to Chris when discussing radical politics…

"You were irrelevant, don't you get that? History doesn't care about what you did. Who's even heard of you? Ideology is dead now. Everyone pretty much agrees on how to run things” 

Tristan was very enthusiastic about this book lavishing it with fulsome praise.

Keith raced through the book but struggled to retain much about it

Nick would have enjoyed it much more if he had read it 15 years ago when he lapped up books about the 1970s.  

Hamish loved the revolutionary theme but felt the book was the least good selection of the three choices we discussed.

Scores on the doors...

Nigel 8/10

Tristan 9/10

Keith 8/10

Nick 6/10

Hamish 7/10

MUSIC: Hazy Cosmic Jive presents "Something in the Air”

"Because the revolution's here, and you know it's right…"

This mix aims for an early 70s, mournful, melancholy, wistful, post-hippy comedown vibe.  I’m hoping you’ll be able to smell the unmistakeable tang of a wet Afghan goat, partially masked by patchouli and joss sticks, whilst a news bulletin reports the latest activity of urban guerilla’s The Angry Brigade.  

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO IT ON MIXCLOUD

Tracklist:

Thunderclap Newman - Something In The Air

Brian Protheroe - Pinball 

Faces - Glad and Sorry 

David Bowie - Eight Line Poem 

Bread - The Guitar Man 

Roxy Music - Chance Meeting 

America - A Horse With No Name 

The Rolling Stones - Coming Down Again 

Elton John - Goodbye Yellow Brick Road 

Faces - Debris 

Lesley Duncan - Everything Changes 

Cat Stevens - Where Do The Children Play? 

Jonathan Kelly - Madelaine 

The Rolling Stones - Wild Horses 

Mott The Hoople - All The Young Dudes 

David Bowie - Quicksand 

Faces - If I’m On The Late Side 

Slade - Everyday 

Nigel explained he was hoping to create a movie type soundtrack to a book he hadn’t read. If he was doing it again, having read the book, he would have thrown in a few more 60s tracks - didn’t realise so much was in the 60s - however he still felt it worked well with its post-hippy comedown vibe.  Key track is  - Thunderclap Newman - Something In The Air - though it is all fukkin ace.  Obvs.

Fortunately everyone was of the same mind: a great musical accompaniment to the book

FILM: One Day In September (1999) directed by Kevin Macdonald

Nigel was looking for a coherent choice to complement the book and the music.

The consensus was that this documentary was a direct hit.  A balanced film that brought home the tragedy and the politics.  The mix of footage from the olympics and more recent interviews was great.  Michael Douglas narration worked well and the music was very effective.  The gross incompetence of the Germans has to be seen to be believed.  Perhaps understandable given their desire to reinvent themselves after Nazism, plusthis was a relatively early example of this type of terrorism.

ENDORSE IT

Tristan: Wild Tales (Argentinian film)

Keith: The Rat Pack (iPlayer)

Nick: What we do in the Shadows (film - on Netflix)

Hamish: Perdido Street Station - novel by China Miéville 

Nigel: Creed (film directed by Ryan Coogler) -  spin-off and sequel to the Rocky series

"Remainder" by Tom McCarthy

The Hove Book Group gathered together on Thursday 22nd November 2012 to discuss Keith's choices.

First up was "Remainder" by Tom McCarthy.

"Why Keith?  Why?"

Keith replied that he wanted something modern, new and unknown, and that's what he got from this book.  Original, intriguing, intense, and humorous.

Tom McCarthy couldn’t get Remainder published in the UK at first. He eventually sold it to a French house who marketed it through art galleries rather than bookstores. It proved a critical hit and so was then picked up for a more traditional UK release.

Keith thought it was "an excellent book" and lavished it with an excellent 9/10.

As Keith is a fan of alternative scoring systems, Hamish emailed through a different approach for his review.  Using Kurt Vonnegut's eight rules for story writing he had this to say:

Hamish: alternative scoring system 

Use the time of a total stranger in such a way that he or she will not feel the time was wasted: Was Hamish's time wasted?  The novel was certainly readable enough, dramatic action took place, the story progressed and Hamish kept turning pages.  It wasn’t hard work.  Sadly Hamish felt little emotional attachment to the novel though. Half a Vonnegut

Give the reader at least one character he or she can root for: The narrator totally dominated the book.  None of the other characters were developed enough.  The narrator suffered some mental illness or was just self obsessed and didn’t care.  Either way, Hamish found him vaguely irritating and difficult to relate to.  No Vonneguts 

Every character should want something, even if it is only a glass of water:  The narrator wanted to be real.  Naz initially wanted money but, as the book went on, wanted to feed his addiction to making things run like clockwork.  The other characters presumably just wanted money.  So they did all want something.  But Hamish gave no points because both the narrator and Naz’s desires seemed contrived and plain daft.  No Vonneguts

Every sentence must do one of two things—reveal character or advance the action: Hamish felt that no sentences revealed character.  The action was regularly and dramatically advanced however, although to what end?  Half a Vonnegut

Start as close to the end as possible: The narrator started with the accident and ended with the last re-enactment.  We learned nothing superfluous about his earlier life.  There were no offshoots from the plot, cameo appearances or flowery Rushdiesque descriptions of nearby vegetation.  It was succinct and to the point.  Whatever the point might have been.  One Vonnegut

A sadist

Be a Sadist. No matter how sweet and innocent your leading characters, make awful things happen to them—in order that the reader may see what they are made of:  Sadly nothing awful happened to the narrator.  No Vonneguts

Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia: Mr McCarthy cannot possibly have written this hoping to make love to the world surely?  The self obsession suggests he wrote it just for himself.  Which is of course how it should be and Hamish scored it  One Vonnegut

Give your readers as much information as possible as soon as possible. To hell with suspense. Readers should have such complete understanding of what is going on, where and why, that they could finish the story themselves, should cockroaches eat the last few pages: The opening page telling us of some awful accident, but the book then actively refuses to give further details.  Early hopes were that things would be explained, it became increasingly evident that they would not.  The narrator/McCarthy actually took some pleasure in not explaining things.  Tom McCarthy utterly failed to make his story similarly believable.  No Vonneguts

So overall, Hamish awarded a grand total of 3 Vonneguts out of a potential 8.  In summary, "a fairly readable pile of complete old tosh".  Tristan converted the "Vonneguts" into the traditional HBG scoring system to reveal a dismissive 4/10.

Nick - used to live in Brixton

Nick, as an ex-Brixton resident, enjoyed the book's Brixton setting.  It was a way in for him.  Alas, after getting in the book never took off.  Too many reconstructions and re-enactments.  Remainder is a novel of ideas. It was clear to Nick that to have any chance of understanding what this book might be about he'd have to pay attention more to the themes than to the events: repetition; the barrier of consciousness from direct experience; the intransigency of matter.  Alas, this approach merely resulted in Nick concluding that this book was Iain Banks-lite.  5/10

Don, quickly got into the book, so much so that he was buoyed.  It was a page turner.  Akin to Blindness.  Don loved the cats...part of the re-enactment of the building and old apartment includes the view from it of a sloping tiled roof on which cats would lie in the sun. This part doesn’t work out so well as the cats placed on the roof keep falling off it and dying. The cats were not enough for Don though.  He demands more than dead cats from his reading, and - as he read on - the book's lack of characters started to annoy, and - at the conclusion of the book - he felt it was only worthy of 6/10.

A cat

Nigel, whilst a fan of Kurt Vonnegut, was not convinced by all of his rules (See Hamish's review above).  Nigel enjoyed the way the book allowed the reader to fill in the blanks.  Nigel was not really sure what it was all about, however he found it beguiling and it sparked off many thoughts and ideas around memory, feelings, experience, time, and life.  

As the book's mysterious councillor reminds the reader towards the book's conclusion: "No less than one hundred and twenty actors have been used. Five hundred and eleven props — tyres, signs, tins, tools, all in working condition — have been assembled and deployed. And that’s just for the tyre shop scene. The number of people who have been employed in some capacity or other over the course of all five re-enactments is closer to one thousand.” He paused again and let the figure sink in, then continued: "All these actions, into which so much energy has been invested, so many man-hours, so much money — all, taken as a whole, confront us with the question: for what purpose?"  For what purpose indeed?  8/10

Tristan

Tristan found the book irritating.  Was it meant to be irritating?  Where was the cleverness?  Tristan felt that the only cleverness was in the madness of the narrator.  Where was the humour?  To what extent is the narrator trustworthy? Is he awake? Was the book a dream? At one dizzying juncture the narrator admits that a conversation he just described didn’t actually happen. Later the narrator is dogged by a smell of cordite. Nobody else can smell it except for one man.  We can’t trust the narrator.  Who can we trust?  4/10

Robin explained he didn't like the book.  Robin recently went to an exhibition in London. By chance he got talking to one of the curators of the exhibition - a sculptor. Robin mentioned that he was reading Remainder. Was sculpture a theme?  The cutting away of stuff until what remains is revealed? Michelangelo spoke of the statue being inside the block of marble already. Cut away the excess material and the statue will be revealed. 3/10

Robin - chance encounter with a sculptor

So, in summary, a book that inspired a mixed set of reactions, and a great discussion.  The average score from Hove's finest - 6/10.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Keith & Nick

With his second choice, Keith wanted to push his own boundaries, and having obsessively perused numerous obituaries he was inspired to find out more about Chris Marker (RIP), and specifically La Jetée (The Pier, 1962).  It's a c30-minute post-third world war story, made up entirely of stills, except for one brief moving shot of a woman opening her eyes. This futuristic photo-novel film was semi-remade by Terry Gilliam as 12 Monkeys in 1995.

Keith felt that La Jetée abstracts cinema almost to its essence in bringing to life the story of a post-apocalyptic man obsessed with an image from his past.  "A little wonder" with fantastic style and excellent images.  Those images endured for Keith.  8/10

Hamish thought that for a short slideshow of photos backed by sounds and narration, this was highly effective.  It reminded him of Godspeed You Black Emperor for some reason.  Hamish enjoyed it.  Five Godspeeds out of a possible seven.  Tristan converted this into a score of 7/10.

Good news for Don

Nick watched the film in French, despite not speaking the language.  When questioned, he was a bit vague on the plot.  He still loved it though.  8/10

Don watched a different film by Chris Marker - San Soleil.  The good news for Don was that the film featured some cats.  Cats and owls were Marker's favourite animals and were a central theme of Sans Soleil.  Don explained that San Soleil also focuses on the weird and the titillating (taxidermied animals in sex poses, an animatronic JFK in a shopping mall).  Marker explains what he sees with the curiosity and empathy of an anthropologist.  San Soleil also has an uneasy relationship with truth.  Don explained that it undermines itself at every opportunity. What is stock footage and what is original? Are scenes separated by geography also separated by years?  Don was unsure.
7/10.

Robin - shocked

Nigel explained the reasons for his high tolerance for art cinema.  These included a woman called Lemmy, carrot cake, coffee in polystyrene cups, and The Electric Cinema in Notting Hill Gate.  Nigel liked the photography and the film's dream-like quality.  7/10

Tristan marvelled at how the still images traced one man's attempt to reclaim an image from his past, and in particular, the poetic, provocative meld of global catastrophe and human frailty.  Why isn't there more of this stuff?  8/10

Robin was also enthused, so much so that he watched both the French version and the English version.  Robin was shocked by the moment the woman blinked - the only moving image in the film. 7/10.

"Planet of the Apes" by Pierre Boulle

Hove Book Group came together, once again, on the evening of Thursday 6th September 2012 at The Poets Corner pub.

We discussed Robin's choices.  The first book under discussion was "Sum" by David Eagleman.

Robin had heard about the book whilst enjoying an arts programme on his radiogram.  He was attracted to it because it was short and interesting.  Like so many of the best things in life.  Robin was keen to understand which of the group were believers in the afterlife (sadly none of us).   Robin felt that, in terms of the afterlife, most of the world’s major religions have fairly prosaic stuff on offer. Only occasionally will a cosmology be really colourful, as it is in Greek mythology, where some interesting eschatological options are available. In terms of this book Robin felt that after a while the stories - whilst enjoyable and provocative - started to merge into one. 7.5/10

Nigel explained that it was the second time he'd read this book.  The first time was just after it was published.  The short stories that comprise the book are clever, occasionally funny, and generally thought provoking.  Those stories that offer life lessons, and ideas about enjoying a fulfilling life, were the ones he enjoyed the most.  Nigel confessed that towards the end of the book the cleverness started to pall, and the stories started to merge together.  Ultimately it's enjoyable and interesting but not quite as wonderful as many of the reviews suggest.  7/10

Don... didn't read it.

Keith was impressed by how the book attempted to do something different with complex issues.  "We are our interactions with other people" resonated.  Speculating about who, if anyone, created us and what lies ahead of us can be intellectually engaging and entertaining too.    Another example that delighted Keith: “There are three deaths,” Eagleman writes. “The first is when the body ceases to function. The second is when the body is consigned to the grave. The third is that moment, sometime in the future, when your name is spoken for the last time.” In this scheme, when we die, we go to a cosmic waiting room where we mark time until our name is never again mentioned. The famous are trapped here, of course, for a very long time; they wish for obscurity, but it may take an eternity to arrive. 7/10

Tristan was also coming to the book for a second time.  Quirky and original, was his pithy summary.  Although Tristan did not actually say this, Sum invites comparison with two great books, which offer visions of the limitations and unbounded possibilities of imagination: Michael Frayn’s satire Sweet Dreams, a bourgeois liberal vision of heaven, and Italo Calvino’s fantastical gazetteer, Invisible Cities. 7/10

Nick enjoyed reading a book on the afterlife that was neither by a Dawkinsesque staunch atheist, or a person with strong religious convictions.  "How does anyone believe in only one story?" queried Nick.  By combining scientific knowledge with creativity and an inventive imagination, Eagleman has written a book worthy of a massive 9/10.

A very respectable average rating of 7.5/10

After a pause for some refreshments, we pressed on with Robin's second choice: "Planet of the Apes" by Pierre Boulle...

Unexpectedly Robin confessed that he was expecting the book to be "complete trash".  His main motivation for selecting the book had been his passion for saving animals around the world.  Most days Robin is involved in cutting free and caring for dancing bears in India; rescuing primates from animal traffickers in Indonesia; and treating stray dogs and cats in developing countries.  

Planet of the Apes begins with Jinn and Phyllis sailing across space in their small craft on holiday and eventually coming across a bottle drifting in the void -- a bottle that they get on board, only to discover a manuscript in it. It is the manuscript, an account by the journalist Ulysse Mérou, that makes up the bulk of the novel, though the book closes with Jinn and Phyllis again, after they have finished reading it.  Whilst flawed, Planet of the Apes is nevertheless an entertaining read. Boulle simplifies a few too many ideas in the book, but the action is good and the book entertains.  Robin "loved it".  8/10

Nigel

Nigel had high hopes having read some excellent science fiction from the 1960s - and having concluded it was something of a golden age for the genre.  Nigel also had fond, albeit hazy, memories of the Planet Of The Apes television series, and the original films, which he'd enjoyed as a child.

The first couple of chapters were very promising however by the end of the book Nigel had concluded this was, at best, a short story that had been stretched to a 200 page novel.  The basic idea is a good one, and the book highlights issues like slavery, animal experimentation, racism and closed-mindedness, but Pierre Boule labours these themes and the story.  After finishing the book Nigel discovered that Pierre Boulle was a Prisoner of War during World War 2, being held captive by the Japanese.  He wrote 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' based on his experiences.  Nigel wondered about the extent to which his wartime experiences might have informed Planet of the Apes. 6/10

Don

Don also recalled the popular seventies films starring Charlton Heston and Roddy McDowell.  Don's edition included a pair of 3D glasses and this ensured his rating was automatically increased by one extra point.  Don decreed that it was a quick, fun read, with some poignant scenes where the intelligent human witnesses his fellow humans  subjected to degrading biological and mental experiments.  Don forgave the book its saggy middle and concluded by lavishing the Monkey Planet with 7/10.

Tristan

Tristan described the book as "cheesy shit" before condemning the tale to a sub-Asimov genre.  This book does not bear comparison with the titans of the 1960s - take a bow Michael Moorcock, Kurt Vonnegut and even (and whilst not to Tristan's taste) Philip K Dick.  To Tristan this book felt Victorian.  As a science fiction fan Tristan was disappointed, however - he was willing to concede - the book placed humankind under a lens and raised a few interesting issues.  Tristan then lambasted the idea that this monkey business was floating around in space in a bottle.  When did the narrator write out his account of the journey? Did he fly back into space to launch his bottle?  Tristan neither knew nor indeed cared.   5/10 (just).

Keith

Keith's opening gambit was that this book was "a neat little choice" going on to describe  it as "a decent yarn".  Keith felt the scientific detail was flimsy, often implausible and frequently illogical.  When someone suggested that the story was an allegory, Keith retorted that "it might be allegory but it was shit allegory".  That's you told Pierre Boulle. 5/10

Nick... didn't read it.

An average rating of 6.2/10

And so concluded another enjoyable gathering of Hove's premier book group.  Next time out we will be discussing "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain.

"Snowdrops" by AD Miller

Hamish decided to chose a crime book and so visited The Kemp Town Bookshop where his eyes were drawn to "Snowdrops" by AD Miller.  "Ah ha", he thought "This will continue last month's Russian theme as well as meeting my idea for a crime novel".  And so it was that we all read "Snowdrops".

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

Hangover Square: nigeyb's imagined soundtrack by Nigeyb on Mixcloud

'A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man' by James Joyce

On 23rd February 2012, Hove's premier book group gathered at The Poets Corner pub for another evening of cultural discourse, ale, insight and bonhomie.

The biggest shock, and biggest disappointment, was that Nick - who had made the selections - had to unexpectedly work late and so we were not able to hear his thoughts about the text he had set us.

At Nick's behest we read 'A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man' by James Joyce.

Nick would probably have said something like, "James Joyce’s 'A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man' is a novel of complex themes developed through frequent allusions to classical mythology.  The myth of Daedalus and Icarus serves as a structuring element in the novel, uniting the central themes of individual rebellion and discovery, producing a work of literature that illuminates the motivations of an artist, and the development of his individual philosophy."  Probably.  Alas, we'll never know for sure.

Nick

Don kicked things off by describing the book as "dense".  He then added it was "uninspiring and turgid".  He stopped reading at page 99.  Joyce's description of hell was too disturbing.  Don had read enough.  5/10.  A pass.  Apparently.

Tristan described how the book inspired great emotion within him...anger...and irritation.  He thought James Joyce was a bit of a dick.  Whilst he liked some of the period detail and some of the prose, he wondered what was going on with James Joyce.  The Dedalus character annoyed him and he found much of the book dense and intractable. 3/10.  

Robin gave up on the book at page 200.  He observed how the book saw a mature artist look back over his youth, perceiving what was significant to his development, estimating what was vital, and what was transitory, in that evolvement.  Robin thought that by observing and graphically depicting what confines man, and how man overcomes this confinement, and he might live once he is free, James Joyce helped him to understand the motivations and the outlets for human expression.  Robin stated that - like Daedalus and Icarus - Stephen Dedalus assumed the role of "a persecuted hero" who must overcome his personal weaknesses, and the oppression of his environment, to gain spiritual enlightenment. 6/10.

Robin

Nigel wanted to like it and was excited about reading it; he was attracted by the lack of a traditional narrative and the book's reputation and Joyce's reputation. Nigel enjoyed the early descriptions of his family, the descriptions of his school days especially when he had a fever, the questioning of his faith especially the vivid description of hell (though he felt this was perhaps a few pages too long), and the way he finally overcomes the pressures of country, family and Catholicism.  Some descriptive passages were memorable and powerful, for example the play, and the evening where Dedalus ends up on the beach.

Nigel thought the book was probably of greatest interest to scholars and academics and those interested in the history of literature (and in particular the modernist phase).  He likened it to experimental music whilst it makes an important statement it doesn't necessarily make for a good listen, or in this case a good read.  Nigel felt the lengthy university conversations towards the end of the book were particularly tedious.  Ultimately he was unsure what Joyce was trying to say, and wondered about the point of the book.  He didn't feel he'd gained very much by reading it, and would not recommend it. He said, "It's perfectly fine, but vastly overrated by many." 5/10. 

Keith

Keith described it as "challenging" whilst also being "a bit of a ramble".  He conceded that, whilst many novelists choose their own young life as the subject for their first book, very few subject themselves to the intense self-scrutiny of Joyce.  Keith enjoyed the way Joyce wrestled with the pressures of his family, his Church and his nation, and yet thought the book was far from a straightforward youthful tirade. Keith concluded that the novel was "daringly experimental" and "took us deep into Stephen's psyche".  He then concluded by giving the book the highest score of the night.  8/10.  Nick would have been so proud.  

An overall rating of 5.4 from Hove's finest.

Next we discussed Nick's film choice 'The Guard'.

Keith thought it was fun, but didn't bear much scrutiny, and then awarded it with 8/10.

Nigel thought it was funny, provocative and clever, and he gave it 9/10.

Robin gave it 7/10, and added that he preferred 'In Bruges'.

Hamish thought it was a good romp and gave it 8/10.

Tristan enjoyed it very much and gave it 7.5/10.

Don........had gone home.





Finally we discussed a Simple Minds' compilation 'Early Gold'.  Nick had distributed the music under the moniker ‘Mystery Celtic Sounds’.

There was a lot of love for Simple Minds from Nigel and Hamish.  Keith was more dismissive.  We enjoyed a  great discussion on the UK/Irish bands that made it in America and those that didn't.  And what Simple Minds lost when they went "stadium".

Hamish said he was obviously initially disappointed that the ‘Mystery Celtic Sounds’ emerging from his speakers were not the opening bars to "Rattle and Hum" but he also acknowledged that "you can’t have everything".  He described how his mid-teenage years saw ample airplay for U2, Simple Minds and Big Country.  He was particularly keen on U2 back in those halcyon days.  Hamish was interested to note that Jim and Charlie said U2 had based 'Unforgettable Fire' on 'New Gold Dream'. 

Hamish could not think of another band that went from being so effortlessly cool, to being so completely and utterly uncool, as Simple Minds.  And on that bombshell we bade each other could night and wended our way out into the cool night air.

Next time we will be discussing Keith's picks.  Watch this space.