― Serena (Halo Derain), Thursday, 17 October 2002 18:09 (twenty-three years ago)
― fields of salmon (fieldsofsalmon), Thursday, 17 October 2002 18:43 (twenty-three years ago)
― rosemary (rosemary), Thursday, 17 October 2002 18:53 (twenty-three years ago)
― Serena (Halo Derain), Thursday, 17 October 2002 20:21 (twenty-three years ago)
I liked the fact she was so scabby.
I enjoyed it. I enjoyed The Courage Consort and The Hundred and Ninety Nine Steps a lot more, though. He certainly writes fine sentences.
― Tim (Tim), Thursday, 17 October 2002 22:14 (twenty-three years ago)
― Nicole (Nicole), Friday, 18 October 2002 00:32 (twenty-three years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 18 October 2002 00:44 (twenty-three years ago)
After "Under The Skin" I'm a bit wary of MF's capacity for clunky metaphor, and the end of "TCPATW" goes a bit that way. I think he manages to carry it off without too much clunk this time.
― Tim (Tim), Friday, 18 October 2002 07:50 (twenty-three years ago)
― Tom (Groke), Friday, 18 October 2002 08:43 (twenty-three years ago)
Also, worst sentence in a reviewers lexicon: "[xXx] could give Cheever, Nabokov, Fitzgerald, [etc.] a run for their money at writing the perfect sentence"?
I have no intention of reading this book until it becomes a paperback, it is large.
― david h (david h), Friday, 18 October 2002 09:14 (twenty-three years ago)
― david h (david h), Friday, 18 October 2002 09:15 (twenty-three years ago)
― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Friday, 18 October 2002 09:17 (twenty-three years ago)
― david h (david h), Friday, 18 October 2002 09:24 (twenty-three years ago)
David: the copy I read was a paperback, I wouldn't fancy hefting a copy of the hardback around.
― Tim (Tim), Friday, 18 October 2002 09:30 (twenty-three years ago)
I think Faber's intent was to write a Victorian novel using all the information it was not possible for Victorian-era writers to reference, whether through a lack of knowledge about what those poxy sores were, or for reasons of social propriety. He does really well with researching the area of St Giles (a 10-minute walk from my flat) and the (often hypocritical) social mores of the time. What isn't so satisfying is some of the clunkier bits of dialogue, but it's nowhere near as bad as Morley made out.
Under The Skin is still a bazillion times more phenomenal, though.
― suzy (suzy), Friday, 18 October 2002 11:28 (twenty-three years ago)
His writing in Under the Skin IS concise, not a superfluous word in the volume.
― Serena (Halo Derain), Friday, 18 October 2002 14:11 (twenty-three years ago)
I'm interested in why suzy thought UTS was phenomenal, I struggled my way through it after Amliss Vess appeared, zZz.
― david h (david h), Friday, 18 October 2002 17:29 (twenty-three years ago)
so this was turned into a miniseries. which I spent 4 hours watching. ending was so annoying. I do eventually want to go back and read the novel but am already wary of the ending. (Under the Skin was similarly annoying).
― akm, Sunday, 16 September 2012 15:34 (thirteen years ago)