HHhH
Length of Time In Possession : 3 weeks
So I follow C, with another book with just a letter for the title. In this case HHhH stands for 'Himmlers Hirn heisst Heydrich' - meaning Himmler's Brain is called Heydrich, the phrase which circulated in Nazi Germany to indicate that though Himmler had more power, Heydrich was the brains behind the outfit.
Written by French author Laurent Binet, it won the Prix Goncourt (the French version of the Booker Prize) in 2010. This translation by Sam Taylor has since made a splash over this side of the Channel, selling well and was chosen by my book club this month.
HHhH is an odd book. Ostensibly the story of two Czech heroes Jozef Gabčík and Jan Kubiš, sent by British Intelligence to assassinate Heydrich, then the Protector of Bohemia and Moravia. (now known as the Czech Republic and Slovakia) One of Hitler's highest operatives Reinhard Heydrich was also the brains behind The Final Solution.
On the one hand the novel is this story and on the other it is the story of Binet himself reflecting on the process of writing the novel as he goes along, and on the nature of historical fiction itself.
Oddly, the novel has been marketed as fiction, which as it is about a) a historical event and b) a writers autobiography on the process of writing it, seems a slightly strange marketing decision, unless as a classic example of metafiction, what the author presents about the writing process is actually untrue.
Binet talks at length about wanting to keep imagination and supposition out of HHhH which would make the novel not a work of historical fiction but a history book.
The trouble was that the more Binet discussed the differences between what he was doing and a work of historical fiction : inventing the clothes people wore or their conversations for literary effect etc, the more I wished I was reading the book he didn't want to write!
I found myself thinking of Wolf Hall, Hilary Mantel's imagining of Thomas Cromwell and wishing I was reading or could read the same style of novel about Reinhard Heydrich. Suggestions welcome.
Whilst discussing the writing process with the reader as you go is an original thing to do, (I know there may be other examples of this but HHhH was a first in this regard for me) Binet unfortunately becomes quite irritating the more you go on throughout the book.
The first example of this is discussion of a book that only exists in German about Heydrich that he is considering using for research, after some debate he decides he doesn't need it. Two sections later he makes reference to its content, and then says he changed his mind, whilst this is an intriguing insight into the thought process of any and all writers, it becomes very repetitious throughout the novel.
Ultimately it detracts from the story of Jozef Gabčík and Jan Kubiš, which is whatever way you look at it an amazing tale of bravery and heroism, of which I was hitherto unaware. Throughout, Binet's central desire is that he wants to do these two heroes real justice and part of me feels in a way that he failed to do so, by the over insertion of himself into this narrative.
That said, from a point of view of challenging how we talk about historical figures in literature and in challenging accepted form and style, you have to admire and respect this book on an intellectual and artistic level. Ultimately my problem was that whilst I admired it, I ended up wishing the book hadn't been this way.....
Verdict : 8/10
Destination : Charity Shop
Showing posts with label Prix Goncourt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prix Goncourt. Show all posts
Tuesday, 30 April 2013
Thursday, 9 June 2011
Book #43 The Patience Stone by Atiq Rahimi
The Patience Stone
Atiq Rahimi was awarded the Prix Goncourt, the French equivalent of The Booker in 2008 for his Afghanistan based novella The Patience Stone. The novella joins the ranks of The Bookseller Of Kabul and The Kite Runner of literature telling the stories of a country and its people often shrouded from the West hitherto the outbreak of war in 2001.
This story is the story of a couple who I have only just realised remain nameless throughout the novel as do all other characters...I think perhaps this anonymity seeks to reflect the idea of "Somewhere, A Couple" the depersonalisation seeking to amplify the potential of the universality of experience.
A young mother nurses her husband as he hovers between life and death on a mattress in one of the rooms of their house. The Afghan war rages around their neighbourhood. As the frustration and despair at her situation begins to build, the woman makes a series of personal revelations to her dying husband.
What did I think of it? Well, the point is clear. Rahimi takes the "nameless, voiceless, veiled, Afghani woman" and voices her giving her a chance to vent her frustrations at her unhappiness at her station in life. But, whilst it is true that such women exist within the culture, these women have also become something of a Western, particularly American, media cliche. Whilst it is of the imperative that such voices be heard, this, we must remember is a fictionalised voice.
The book gave me pause for thought too in the sense that it is French, with an English translation by Polly McLean whose translation I think may have harmed some of the books poetic qualities, it is never easy to be certain about translations unless you are capable of reading the book in its native tongue in order to make comparison. The reason it gave me pause for thought by being French is, that the understanding I receive from our media is that Islamophobia is high and on the rise in France, and that tolerance of Islam is fairly low. Did it win the Prix Goncourt partly because it is so critical of Afghan and Islamic lifestyles?
The revelations that the woman makes to her husband involve the use and the breaking of many things truly seen as taboo within Islam, I had to wonder whether this was an act of artistic necessity or a deliberate in-your-face attempt to court controversy and notice. I would imagine that there are many devout Muslims, male and female who would find aspects of this book and therefore possibly the book as a whole deeply, deeply offensive.
As a reader, I felt that Rahimi succeeded in evoking a suffocating, claustrophobic atmosphere. You can almost smell the rotten stench in the mans sick room. But, sympathy for the womens plight is eroded by her whiny, erratic repetitiveness and behaviour I would classify as not only vindictive but a little unrealistically absurd.
I didn't really enjoy reading this on any level. Sometimes even though a book is difficult, you gain something in the reading of it and that in itself is pleasurable, but this was no such experience for me. It makes me remember how I similarly did not enjoy the highly praised Kite Runner for its highly graphic depiction of child sexual abuse and found it unpleasant as a reading experience regardless of its worthiness.
I wouldn't say read this book, not unless you are terribly interested in its story or conceit. To be blunt, it's depressing. 4/10
Atiq Rahimi was awarded the Prix Goncourt, the French equivalent of The Booker in 2008 for his Afghanistan based novella The Patience Stone. The novella joins the ranks of The Bookseller Of Kabul and The Kite Runner of literature telling the stories of a country and its people often shrouded from the West hitherto the outbreak of war in 2001.
This story is the story of a couple who I have only just realised remain nameless throughout the novel as do all other characters...I think perhaps this anonymity seeks to reflect the idea of "Somewhere, A Couple" the depersonalisation seeking to amplify the potential of the universality of experience.
A young mother nurses her husband as he hovers between life and death on a mattress in one of the rooms of their house. The Afghan war rages around their neighbourhood. As the frustration and despair at her situation begins to build, the woman makes a series of personal revelations to her dying husband.
What did I think of it? Well, the point is clear. Rahimi takes the "nameless, voiceless, veiled, Afghani woman" and voices her giving her a chance to vent her frustrations at her unhappiness at her station in life. But, whilst it is true that such women exist within the culture, these women have also become something of a Western, particularly American, media cliche. Whilst it is of the imperative that such voices be heard, this, we must remember is a fictionalised voice.
The book gave me pause for thought too in the sense that it is French, with an English translation by Polly McLean whose translation I think may have harmed some of the books poetic qualities, it is never easy to be certain about translations unless you are capable of reading the book in its native tongue in order to make comparison. The reason it gave me pause for thought by being French is, that the understanding I receive from our media is that Islamophobia is high and on the rise in France, and that tolerance of Islam is fairly low. Did it win the Prix Goncourt partly because it is so critical of Afghan and Islamic lifestyles?
The revelations that the woman makes to her husband involve the use and the breaking of many things truly seen as taboo within Islam, I had to wonder whether this was an act of artistic necessity or a deliberate in-your-face attempt to court controversy and notice. I would imagine that there are many devout Muslims, male and female who would find aspects of this book and therefore possibly the book as a whole deeply, deeply offensive.
As a reader, I felt that Rahimi succeeded in evoking a suffocating, claustrophobic atmosphere. You can almost smell the rotten stench in the mans sick room. But, sympathy for the womens plight is eroded by her whiny, erratic repetitiveness and behaviour I would classify as not only vindictive but a little unrealistically absurd.
I didn't really enjoy reading this on any level. Sometimes even though a book is difficult, you gain something in the reading of it and that in itself is pleasurable, but this was no such experience for me. It makes me remember how I similarly did not enjoy the highly praised Kite Runner for its highly graphic depiction of child sexual abuse and found it unpleasant as a reading experience regardless of its worthiness.
I wouldn't say read this book, not unless you are terribly interested in its story or conceit. To be blunt, it's depressing. 4/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)