Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.49 AVERAGE
3.49 AVERAGE
challenging
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Life Class returns to territory similar to that which Barker explored in the Regeneration trilogy, and I wonder if this book is meant to be the beginning of another trilogy or larger work. The book ends without any sense of resolution, and certainly Barker could delve even deeper into the themes that appear in the second half of the book: war, trauma, art, and the relationships between the three. In fact, I hope she develops this farther, as I think it would help this story to have some more meat on its bones.
The book is divided into two parts, and the division seemed somewhat strange to me. The first half concerns a group of art students in London: Paul, Teresa, Elinor, and Kit Neville. The dust jacket suggests that there is a love triangle in the group, but the geometry is more complicated than that. Elinor was the most interesting character in this part of the book, outwardly assertive but inwardly uncertain, determinedly independent, boyish, perhaps sexless... Unfortunately, the early focus was not on her but on Paul's affair with Teresa. The first half of the book felt somewhat center-less. It was interesting enough to read about the shifting affections among this group of students, and Barker included some worthwhile thought about class and gender in art, but I couldn't quite figure out why she was telling this story.
And then the war breaks out and everything changes. Paul volunteers with the Red Cross in Ypres, and instead of tracking his romantic affairs, we're suddenly following him through grisly shifts first as a dresser in a field hospital and later as an ambulance driver. Love is not gone from the book--much of the second half concerns Paul and Elinor's attempt to build a relationship--but it is forced to coexist with war and the horror of war. Barker includes a lot of correspondence between Paul and Elinor, and it's in their letters that the questions about art and war are raised.
Paul became a much more interesting character after he went to Belgium, but to my dismay Elinor became rather less interesting as the book went on. By the end she was espousing the view that art must be beautiful, must represent things that are loved and chosen (and therefore must not represent war), and she started to seem rather naive and stubborn. The best moment of the book for me came at the shift between the first and second parts. Near the end of the first part, Barker depicts the pressure to get involved felt at the start of the war by everyone at all levels of British society, and the rush to enlist among young men at the time. Reading it, I couldn't help being aware of what was going to happen to those men. And then I turned the page to the start of Part II and found myself in the midst of it: blood, dirt, bleach, and gangrene. Barker writes about atrocities of war with characteristic frankness; reading Paul and Elinor's debates about the meaning of art and war, I found myself thinking that Barker's frankness is the only real way to respect what happened.
There is one tantalizing scene near the end of the book when Paul finally starts making art based on his experiences at the field hospital and takes some of his work to his former teacher, Henry Tonks. Tonks is a real figure, both a doctor and an artist, who was involved in the pioneering use of plastic surgery on wounded soldiers, and who made a series of portraits of facially mutilated men that were never exhibited in his own lifetime. Thinking about that scene, I can only hope that Barker intends to continue this story. There is so much more to be mined from this vein.
The book is divided into two parts, and the division seemed somewhat strange to me. The first half concerns a group of art students in London: Paul, Teresa, Elinor, and Kit Neville. The dust jacket suggests that there is a love triangle in the group, but the geometry is more complicated than that. Elinor was the most interesting character in this part of the book, outwardly assertive but inwardly uncertain, determinedly independent, boyish, perhaps sexless... Unfortunately, the early focus was not on her but on Paul's affair with Teresa. The first half of the book felt somewhat center-less. It was interesting enough to read about the shifting affections among this group of students, and Barker included some worthwhile thought about class and gender in art, but I couldn't quite figure out why she was telling this story.
And then the war breaks out and everything changes. Paul volunteers with the Red Cross in Ypres, and instead of tracking his romantic affairs, we're suddenly following him through grisly shifts first as a dresser in a field hospital and later as an ambulance driver. Love is not gone from the book--much of the second half concerns Paul and Elinor's attempt to build a relationship--but it is forced to coexist with war and the horror of war. Barker includes a lot of correspondence between Paul and Elinor, and it's in their letters that the questions about art and war are raised.
Paul became a much more interesting character after he went to Belgium, but to my dismay Elinor became rather less interesting as the book went on. By the end she was espousing the view that art must be beautiful, must represent things that are loved and chosen (and therefore must not represent war), and she started to seem rather naive and stubborn. The best moment of the book for me came at the shift between the first and second parts. Near the end of the first part, Barker depicts the pressure to get involved felt at the start of the war by everyone at all levels of British society, and the rush to enlist among young men at the time. Reading it, I couldn't help being aware of what was going to happen to those men. And then I turned the page to the start of Part II and found myself in the midst of it: blood, dirt, bleach, and gangrene. Barker writes about atrocities of war with characteristic frankness; reading Paul and Elinor's debates about the meaning of art and war, I found myself thinking that Barker's frankness is the only real way to respect what happened.
There is one tantalizing scene near the end of the book when Paul finally starts making art based on his experiences at the field hospital and takes some of his work to his former teacher, Henry Tonks. Tonks is a real figure, both a doctor and an artist, who was involved in the pioneering use of plastic surgery on wounded soldiers, and who made a series of portraits of facially mutilated men that were never exhibited in his own lifetime. Thinking about that scene, I can only hope that Barker intends to continue this story. There is so much more to be mined from this vein.
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
I remember really liking Barker's Regeneration trilogy when I was in college, and was hoping I would really like this book as well. Unfortunately, it fell a little flat for me. There is some good historical tidbits, but generally the characters seem a bit wishy-washy, and for most of the book I wasnt really sure where we were going or why. It was, however, a quick and easy read, so I trundled along until the end. It made me wonder if Regeneration was as good as I remember, or if it was just my first book on WWI that caught my imagination at 18 or 19.
More of a 3.5. There was something unsatisfying about Elinor - maybe because I kept unintentionally comparing her to Dora Carrington. Still rather beautiful in its way.
Curate's egg-ish. I did enjoy the first half very much, the way Barker explores the relationships between young adults just starting out in life, uncertain where they stand, with the shadow of war hanging over them. And the art school background, based on real people, was interesting; I liked Elinor's thoroughly feminist awareness of what a second class citizen she is, and how marriage would end her career.
The second half: yes, it was well written, well researched, great descriptive writing; all the essentials were there, but there's nothing original here. WWI trench warfare has been thoroughly explored before, by many excellent writers. A good enough reads, but I doubt I'll bother with the rest of the trilogy. Good writer she may be, but Barker continues to underwhelm me.
The second half: yes, it was well written, well researched, great descriptive writing; all the essentials were there, but there's nothing original here. WWI trench warfare has been thoroughly explored before, by many excellent writers. A good enough reads, but I doubt I'll bother with the rest of the trilogy. Good writer she may be, but Barker continues to underwhelm me.
It's interesting that I've read so many negative reviews about how it was difficult to engage, because I haven't been able to put this book down ever since I've started. The characters seem realistically naive and frustrated while trying to appear intellectual and cosmopolitan on the surface - but then again that description is not too far off about any college student.
Slow to get going--I wasn't enjoying all the characters at first, but the second half was engaging and heart breaking perspective of life during wartime.