Farrell makes his arguments rather bluntly, and I got tired of it at the end. Characters are carefully drawn to counterpoint each other to make these points - the Collector vs the Magistrate, the Collector vs The Padre, Dr Dunstable vs Dr McNab, Fleury vs Harry, Miriam vs Lucy, etc. Farrell, who sounds like a lovely, well-meaning, person, with his heart firmly in the right place, has set out to make a broad ranging satire on culture, society, art, policitics, religion, science, sexism, the kitchen-sink, etc., and uses the siege as a backdrop for his points. The main characters are all caricatured, flat, 2D archetypes, and have little narrative arc, apart from Fleury, whose arc is unconvincing. Sometimes it hits the mark, and makes you laugh, and think, but mainly it falls rather flat. It tries too hard to be funny and poignant and philosophical all at the same time. I could see straight away why I hadn't finished it first time around. I saw it on my bookshelf in 2022 and decided to give it another go. I read about 50 pages and then got distracted. I'd recently read Dalrymple's majestic "The Last Mughal", and thought this would be a good companion piece. Shortly after this was shortlished for the "the Best of the Booker" award in 2008 I picked up a copy in a second-hand bookshop, probably around 2010.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |