Idle Thumbs Bookcast

This thread is for discussion about books selected for the Idle Thumbs Bookcast. Please use spoiler tags for key spoils, blah blah blah.

The first book selected is Sense of an Ending by Julian Barnes. Thoughts?

Books? What are they?

So, I ordered that book before I moved and now I'm not sure where it ended up. I hope it's with me and not in storage.

What is book?

UCRC wrote:

What is book?

Nice.

I'm hoping someone else will get the ball rolling, especially if they are mid-book. I finished the book and, without just going on and on at this point, I did really like how the author dealt with the idea of trying to capture his past memories- I felt at times like he captured the idea of grasping fist fulls of sand. Despite having a firm grip on many clear recollections, the desperateness in trying to prevent the falling grains of sand from escaping- was something I liked.

I read it a few weeks ago at this point- hope my leaking memory isn't misleading me- but this was at least a thought I recall toying with at the time.

It's killing me how long we have to wait for the first book cast, and I kind of wish they hadn't announced the book so much in advance.

Anyway, I really liked "The Sense of an Ending". Some very general, very minor spoilers lie ahead (any review of the book would include as much information, but if you want to know absolutely nothing about what to expect, skip ahead).

Spoiler:

This is an "unreliable narrator" book - the narrator even qualifies much of what he says as being "to the best of his recollection" (or similar) right from the start. In many books, "unreliable narrator" is just a euphemism for "full of plot holes" or "breaking the established logic of the universe," but the fact that Tony is so cognizant of the limitations of his own memory makes this a very different sort of thing. It's a book about how we're all unreliable narrators, and how our own memories are so quick to contort themselves when it is convenient for them to do so.

This book is short, but it also reads quickly. It's very approachable, which was a bit surprising to me considering how "British" it is. If you're intimidated by the apparent literary weight of the book, you shouldn't be; the detective story hooks work well and keep the pages turning.

I like how

Spoiler:

much of a douche the main character is. And he's a douche in recognizable ways, not in supervillian 80's bad guy stereotype ways. He's a jerk in the way that people kind of are to each other sometimes, and it really clouds how he thinks the world works and what he understands.

gore wrote:

This book is short, but it also reads quickly. It's very approachable, which was a bit surprising to me considering how "British" it is. If you're intimidated by the apparent literary weight of the book, you shouldn't be; the detective story hooks work well and keep the pages turning.

It's a detective story and it's short. Why didn't you say so in the first place?!

*searching*

Nice, only 176 pages. What's this now? $12 for an ebook. Riiight. :/

demonbox wrote:

I like how

Spoiler:

much of a douche the main character is. And he's a douche in recognizable ways, not in supervillian 80's bad guy stereotype ways. He's a jerk in the way that people kind of are to each other sometimes, and it really clouds how he thinks the world works and what he understands.

Yes, I very much agree.

Real spoilers below.

Spoiler:

A lot of Tony's "unreliability" as a narrator covers over the worst parts of his personality, which are only fully revealed once he receives the letter later in the book and pieces together the impact it had on everybody around him. The reader and Tony are on the same arc of discovery, and the reader generally sees Tony as he sees himself (a view which evolves dramatically as the mystery unravels).

So although Tony's detective story is ostensibly about learning what happened all those years ago, it's also about figuring out who he was all those years ago, and his shared process of discovery with the reader worked really well for me.

The most powerful element of all this was, for me, the fact that although Tony did some douchey things, he is no senor superdouche, and I find myself wondering just how much like young Tony I was at that age. I don't remember writing a letter like that... but Tony didn't, either, which is kind of the point. It's not much of a stretch to imagine that I could have been as much of a jerk as Tony at some point, and that my own memory is simply protecting me from myself in the same way Tony's did.

Finished the book a couple weeks ago, and already its (fittingly) slipping out of my memory.

The really lovely reflections on the nature of memory, especially the errors of memory, reminded me of the deeply moving and incredible Radiolab podcast on memory. It's about an hour and is shockingly good.

Hangdog wrote:

The really lovely reflections on the nature of memory, especially the errors of memory, reminded me of the deeply moving and incredible Radiolab podcast on memory. It's about an hour and is shockingly good.

You just sold it to me by making this comparison. Thanks!

(I'm a sucker for any book with memory, remembering and forgetting as a theme. That's why Sebald and Proust are my two favourite authors over past year, I think.)

edit: weird that ebook is that expensive, I just bought it for €6,10 incl. shipping (from bookdepository, which is my favourite source for paperbacks)

FYI, looks like that book and audiobook is available on Overdrive for free download via a lot of public libraries. The audiobook is only 4 hours and 38 minutes. The ebook can be transferred to Kindle and about any epub readers (nook, Sony, etc).

I've been listening to it via audiobook from the library. I'm about a quarter of the way through, and very much enjoying it (though I wish I hadn't popped into this thread - I hadn't realized yet that it was a detective story, and that's colouring my impressions a bit). I don't normally do audiobooks, but it seems to work for this one, and the reader they got is quite good.

4dSwissCheese wrote:

I've been listening to it via audiobook from the library. I'm about a quarter of the way through, and very much enjoying it (though I wish I hadn't popped into this thread - I hadn't realized yet that it was a detective story, and that's colouring my impressions a bit). I don't normally do audiobooks, but it seems to work for this one, and the reader they got is quite good.

I would say it's a detective story by proxy, not that it's actually one (for a number of reasons). I think that provides an interesting lens to view the story through, but I would not fully agree with the sentiment that it really is a detective story.

demonbox wrote:
4dSwissCheese wrote:

I've been listening to it via audiobook from the library. I'm about a quarter of the way through, and very much enjoying it (though I wish I hadn't popped into this thread - I hadn't realized yet that it was a detective story, and that's colouring my impressions a bit). I don't normally do audiobooks, but it seems to work for this one, and the reader they got is quite good.

I would say it's a detective story by proxy, not that it's actually one (for a number of reasons). I think that provides an interesting lens to view the story through, but I would not fully agree with the sentiment that it really is a detective story.

Yeah, it's not literally a "detective story" in the traditional sense, so please don't let that color your perception of it.

Spoiler:

So as not to do any more damage, I only meant to say that it shares some similarities with detective stories - Tony's methodical research and slow unraveling of the truth, the mysterious fragment of a letter, the odd encounters with a mysterious woman, stalking strangers in a bar, etc. Of course, it's all pieced together into a very different sort of package with a very different focus.

I do think those elements make it a much better read than it might otherwise have been, which is really all I meant to get at. This simply doesn't read like some dense, impenetrable literary thing to me - it's very accessible.

gore wrote:
Spoiler:

So as not to do any more damage, I only meant to say that it shares some similarities with detective stories - Tony's methodical research and slow unraveling of the truth, the mysterious fragment of a letter, the odd encounters with a mysterious woman, stalking strangers in a bar, etc. Of course, it's all pieced together into a very different sort of package with a very different focus.

I do think those elements make it a much better read than it might otherwise have been, which is really all I meant to get at. This simply doesn't read like some dense, impenetrable literary thing to me - it's very accessible.

Spoiler:

Oh, I totally agree and I think it is a good lens to view the book through- I could just tell a couple of peeps were getting the wrong idea about the story. I didn't think about it that way- more focusing on the ethereal and escaping nature of memory than anything else- but I do agree with you.

So what is this Bookcast thing?

Imagine a book being cast into your face... forever.

UCRC wrote:

Imagine a book being cast into your face... forever.

With memes.

UCRC wrote:

Imagine a book being cast into your face... forever.

Two Ultraboost-scented tears just trickled down the sides of my nose.

Finished. I liked it, but with some reservations.

Spoiler:

It really is great at evoking the feeling of remembering, and of constructing the narrative of our personal history, and how the passage of time changes or solidifies our memories. And I like the idea of thinking of it as a detective story. Tony's present day meetings with Veronica have an unreality to them that I found much more compelling when filtered through that sort of genre convention.

On the other hand, the whole thing felt a little too mechanically and obviously constructed for my tastes. It feels like the author really wants the novel to be taught in Grade 11 English classes. The opening sentence may as well have read "I remember, in no particular order, these seven images of light and water that I will be using as metaphors for memory and the passage of time throughout this novel..."

BTW there is a new download for the bookcast. Haven't dled it yet- but putting it out there all the same!

demonbox wrote:

BTW there is a new download for the bookcast. Haven't dled it yet- but putting it out there all the same!

It's Episode 0, where they basically talk about what they want the book podcast to be, announce the October book (Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell), and some other stuff. They also said the plan is to cast the pod into our faces the first Friday of every month, meaning that we can expect the Sense of An Ending podcast this week!

True to form, they barely talked about books in their bookcast. I assume that will change once they start talking about an actual book but I hope it doesn't.

Well, I gotta say, I enjoyed reading the first book and look forward to the cast, but peg me down as being somewhat underenthused with the first selection.

Spoiler:

For starters, I found the entire premise kind of hard to swallow. I am well aware of the elasticity of memory. I'm actually fascinated with psychology and neurology and the weird way the brain works. But this was a little much. Can I believe the protagonist remembering certain things pretty clearly but being really vague on the details of other equally important events of his past? Or reimagining the past in a way that paints him in the most positive light possible? Certainly. What I can't believe is someone handwriting an extremely angry and mean-spirited letter to his first ex-girlfriend and friend (and the circumstances surrounding it) that goes on for multiple pages, mailing it, and then forgetting that entire incident completely, while also remembering a second letter he wrote afterwards with extreme clarity.

Veronica felt even more far-fetched. When you take into account everything she says and does as well as everything the character learns, her actions seem wholly unbelievable. I could imagine her ignoring his communications completely. I could imagine her being confrontational about the truth when he is being so thick-headed. I can't imagine her sporadically reaching out to him multiple times to meet, just so that she can be as needlessly obtuse as possible and re-iterate 'You just don't get it, do you?" when he reasonably enquires about her doing so.

I liked a lot of the first half of the novel and considering the quality of the prose, I guess I was expecting a more subtle approach to how we tend to shape our memories as we see fit. Instead, it just made the second half fall flat, as I felt invested in characters who suddenly behaved in exactly the method neccessary to keep a big mystery going.

I agree (especially with what you say in the last paragraph). Although him forgetting the whole letter affair doesn't seem to be too far-fetched to me... I'm only in my (early!) twenties and I'm already so confused when trying to remember major twists and turns in my serious teenage relationships and who did what to whom.

kuddles wrote:

Well, I gotta say, I enjoyed reading the first book and look forward to the cast, but peg me down as being somewhat underenthused with the first selection.

Spoiler:

For starters, I found the entire premise kind of hard to swallow. I am well aware of the elasticity of memory. I'm actually fascinated with psychology and neurology and the weird way the brain works. But this was a little much. Can I believe the protagonist remembering certain things pretty clearly but being really vague on the details of other equally important events of his past? Or reimagining the past in a way that paints him in the most positive light possible? Certainly. What I can't believe is someone handwriting an extremely angry and mean-spirited letter to his first ex-girlfriend and friend (and the circumstances surrounding it) that goes on for multiple pages, mailing it, and then forgetting that entire incident completely, while also remembering a second letter he wrote afterwards with extreme clarity.

My memory is now several months stale (perhaps an appropriate state in which to discuss this book!), but

Spoiler:

I was of the impression that he only wrote a single letter (the contents of which he misremembers completely in Part 1).

Spoiler:

Veronica felt even more far-fetched. When you take into account everything she says and does as well as everything the character learns, her actions seem wholly unbelievable. I could imagine her ignoring his communications completely. I could imagine her being confrontational about the truth when he is being so thick-headed. I can't imagine her sporadically reaching out to him multiple times to meet, just so that she can be as needlessly obtuse as possible and re-iterate 'You just don't get it, do you?" when he reasonably enquires about her doing so.

Spoiler:

Veronica's behavior in part 2 is definitely odd, but I think it works because she is consistently odd. Part of what makes her compelling is that she is always a mystery to Tony (and, by extension, a mystery to the reader). While I personally know nobody who would have behaved as she does, I find it credible.

Also, I think Veronica's underlying intention is to hurt Tony as thoroughly as possible, and she does this by forcing him to examine the role he played in events. For her, it's a game (in the same way that unraveling the "mystery" is a game for Tony), and she gives him just enough information to ensure that he "gets it" on his own.

Spoiler:

I don't buy that, because "getting it" on his own required a ridiculous amount of assumptions, time-consuming work, and especially towards the end when he spends all that time in the one specific pub, the right set of coincidences and overheard conversations. To me, the whole thing felt like the twist ending of a clumsily written crime thriller glued onto a much more interesting novel.

I may have the order messed up, but I'm pretty sure there were two letters. My kindle broke yesterday though so I can't double check that.

kuddles wrote:
Spoiler:

I don't buy that, because "getting it" on his own required a ridiculous amount of assumptions, time-consuming work, and especially towards the end when he spends all that time in the one specific pub, the right set of coincidences and overheard conversations. To me, the whole thing felt like the twist ending of a clumsily written crime thriller glued onto a much more interesting novel.

Spoiler:

Well, the novel is couched in detective story terms. It's not meant to be overly realistic; I guess you could say it's a gimmick, but I think it's an appropriate metaphor for Tony unraveling the mysteries of his own personality through those common tropes.

I guess I just didn't have an issue suspending disbelief myself, since the novel is unabashedly referential to a specific genre, and the logic is consistent with what you would expect from that genre.

Most of this thread is going to contain

Spoiler:

spoilers.

demonbox wrote:

Most of this thread is going to contain

Spoiler:

spoilers.

DON'T TELL ME!

demonbox wrote:

Most of this thread is going to contain

Spoiler:

spoilers.

The more I think about it, the more I think the spoiler thing is really going to become an issue over time. I suspect it will become frustrating and confusing to have to keep deciphering spoiler tags for multiple different books in the same thread.

I'm wondering if perhaps we could also have a spoiler thread for each book, with this thread as a meta-discussion about the book club itself (using spoiler tags where appropriate)? I think that would be best from a practical perspective for us, but we'd be cluttering up Everything Else with a new thread each month that likely only a few people will be interested in.

Of course, I think you could make the case that these books are interesting and important enough to warrant their own threads, and people who may not even be interested in the cast might have read them and want to chime in.

EDIT: I liked my idea so much that I just made a thread for The Sense of an Ending.