Scan barcode
kingabee's review
5.0
There was a time when ‘readability’ was the least important factor which the Booker Prize Jury took into consideration. At least that must’ve been the case back 1969 when they awarded the inaugural Booker to P.H. Newby for his novel ‘Something to Answer For’. Of course back then Booker Prize was some niche award that didn’t even have its ceremony and the winner was informed by post. The jury didn’t have to worry about sparking national debate with their choices.
I see that many reviewers called this novel confusing, disjointed, with unlikeable characters and I’d like to tell them: ‘man up, please!’ Yes, it is difficult but it’s rewarding. It needs time, patience and attention. It’s like that girl who is so hard to turn on but once you dedicate some time to the task and figure it out, she’s fire.
And this book is beautiful and it’s fire. It uses the strangest literary technique of an unreliable third person narrator. The third person is nominal only because in fact we are stuck in Townrow’s, the main character’s, head. And this head receives a blow quite early on and confounds Townrow. We share some of the frustration when he tries to piece everything together and decide who is a friend and who is a foe.
The facts are few: it’s 1956, he came to Egypt to help Mrs Khoury, widow of his friend Ellie. Mrs Khoury believes her husband was murdered, so Townrow is there to offer support, help solve the mystery, con Mrs Khoury into handing all her assets to him…? It’s rather hard to say. The same events are told and retold, they change their significance as Townrow remembers whole new episodes that followed or preceded them.
As Townrow wanders around Port Said in a confused state and falls in love with Leah, a married woman, the history happens in the background. Nasser nationalizes the Suez Canal which causes a diplomatic and then a military crisis. This in turn causes a crisis for Townrow, who in his overheated head was only sure of one thing, that the British government was essentially good and just. He suspected that he himself was of rather questionable morals but he could sleep at night because he knew that the people who make all the decisions are free of such flaws.
He painfully realises that it is only his actions he can be somewhat sure of, and that he is responsible for them, because everyone has ‘something to answer for’. So there starts the most bizarre quest for redemption of a character who can’t even remember if he is British or Irish, that is, whether he is a side in the conflict or a neutral observer.
At times Townrow even suspects himself to be American, and occasionally when in her arms, he half wishes to turn out to be the estranged husband of his lover, Leah. P.H.Newby knows how to write romance and sexual tension. I know it seems unlikely when looking at his photos and remembering he was the director of BBC Three, but I am sure he could show a girl a good time. Or maybe it’s me. Maybe I just get turned on by superb writing, gentle, underlying humour, a knack for vivid description, an ear for dialogue… Yes, it could be just me.
In the end of ‘Something to Answer For’ we don’t quite know whether Townrow was good or bad and whether he redeemed himself or quite the opposite, reached the heights of moral corruption. The novel did a circle and took us to the beginning with Townrow coming to the conclusion that what he thought was his past is actually his future.
PH Newby’s main claim to fame might be the fact he was the inaugural Booker Prize winner, something irrelevant back then, but a crown achievement for a writer today. And it’s true I would’ve never got to read ‘Something to Answer For’ if it weren’t for the Booker thing, but now I want to read more Newby’s novels. And I will be kept busy for long as he wrote some twenty-three of them.
I see that many reviewers called this novel confusing, disjointed, with unlikeable characters and I’d like to tell them: ‘man up, please!’ Yes, it is difficult but it’s rewarding. It needs time, patience and attention. It’s like that girl who is so hard to turn on but once you dedicate some time to the task and figure it out, she’s fire.
And this book is beautiful and it’s fire. It uses the strangest literary technique of an unreliable third person narrator. The third person is nominal only because in fact we are stuck in Townrow’s, the main character’s, head. And this head receives a blow quite early on and confounds Townrow. We share some of the frustration when he tries to piece everything together and decide who is a friend and who is a foe.
The facts are few: it’s 1956, he came to Egypt to help Mrs Khoury, widow of his friend Ellie. Mrs Khoury believes her husband was murdered, so Townrow is there to offer support, help solve the mystery, con Mrs Khoury into handing all her assets to him…? It’s rather hard to say. The same events are told and retold, they change their significance as Townrow remembers whole new episodes that followed or preceded them.
As Townrow wanders around Port Said in a confused state and falls in love with Leah, a married woman, the history happens in the background. Nasser nationalizes the Suez Canal which causes a diplomatic and then a military crisis. This in turn causes a crisis for Townrow, who in his overheated head was only sure of one thing, that the British government was essentially good and just. He suspected that he himself was of rather questionable morals but he could sleep at night because he knew that the people who make all the decisions are free of such flaws.
He painfully realises that it is only his actions he can be somewhat sure of, and that he is responsible for them, because everyone has ‘something to answer for’. So there starts the most bizarre quest for redemption of a character who can’t even remember if he is British or Irish, that is, whether he is a side in the conflict or a neutral observer.
At times Townrow even suspects himself to be American, and occasionally when in her arms, he half wishes to turn out to be the estranged husband of his lover, Leah. P.H.Newby knows how to write romance and sexual tension. I know it seems unlikely when looking at his photos and remembering he was the director of BBC Three, but I am sure he could show a girl a good time. Or maybe it’s me. Maybe I just get turned on by superb writing, gentle, underlying humour, a knack for vivid description, an ear for dialogue… Yes, it could be just me.
In the end of ‘Something to Answer For’ we don’t quite know whether Townrow was good or bad and whether he redeemed himself or quite the opposite, reached the heights of moral corruption. The novel did a circle and took us to the beginning with Townrow coming to the conclusion that what he thought was his past is actually his future.
PH Newby’s main claim to fame might be the fact he was the inaugural Booker Prize winner, something irrelevant back then, but a crown achievement for a writer today. And it’s true I would’ve never got to read ‘Something to Answer For’ if it weren’t for the Booker thing, but now I want to read more Newby’s novels. And I will be kept busy for long as he wrote some twenty-three of them.
lindseyzwilson's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
angus_mckeogh's review
4.0
The inaugural Booker Prize winning novel from Newby. Way different than what I was expecting, but in a good way. Steeped in mystery because of the narrator's memory issues; however, the story maintains its appeal and I felt it never got so entirely strange that I couldn't follow the plot line. Rest assured everything is revealed in the end. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Recommended!
fern17's review against another edition
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
romonko's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
informative
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
I have decided to take a stab at reading all the Booker Prize winners that I haven't yet read, so started with this, the first one. This book was a slow burn. I had trouble getting into it, and the confusion of the man who was allegedly telling his story in this book. Townrow is a scoundrel, but even he's can't remember what he did. There had to be a reason for him to be in Egypt in 1956. I like how the actual historical events are woven into this story, and I like the confusion of never knowing where Townrow is coming from. The book is brilliantly written, and the total import of the story didn't hit me until the end. It was then I realized what a scoundrel Townrow was. I am sure that this book is the work of a master manipulator, and a fine example of an unreliable narrator. I am really glad I read this early work, and am looking forward to more surprises in the lengthy list of Booker Prize winners.
_tourist's review
1.0
An irritating, frustrating novel. Even the scant pleasures of amusing lines and scenes are lost to muck and history, embedded in something outdated. But perhaps its aged nature isn't even the worst part. Some people with money thought this was the best non-American English novel published in 1969. That is was somehow important to literature. If this is how the booker-prize started I'm not sure how it went on.
moviebuffkt's review
Reflections and discussion questions from The Booker Prize Book Club:
According to the Dictionary of Literary Biography’s entry on this the first Booker Prize winner, “some found the award to Newby’s novel ironic because the prize was created and given by a company that represented values questioned in the novel… Booker Brothers McConnell, a multinational conglomerate, sold popular fiction as one of its commodities along with rum, sugar, and engineering products.” The company has 51% of future rights to Fleming’s James Bond novels, as well as several other authors including Agatha Christie.
The novel has been described as “hallucinatory” and “baffling or obscure.” Honestly, I could not agree more. After Townrow’s hit on the head, the rest of the novel is incredibly disorienting. As far as a “discussion” goes, all I came up with was a series of questions, completely based on trying to figure out what was going on in the novel. So, in light of that, I’m just going to list some of my questions and observations…. Let me now what you thought!
“Probably it was an accident….” Townrow never seems to be sure of his own intentions, nationality, or thought process. How does that affect your interpretations and impressions of the storyline?
Between Mrs. Khoury and Townrow, who are we supposed to believe? What happened to Elie’s body? Why is there so much confusion around the funeral, the body, the burial, etc.?
What do you make of the concept of Townrow’s true nationality?
There is a line in the novel that says “When you’re dead, how do you know it? I might have died from that crack on the head. And how do I know I didn’t?” Did anyone else have the impression that Townrow might have actually been dead?
What did you think of the ending of the novel? Was everyone saved? What is the significance of Townrow floating off with Elie’s body?
According to the Dictionary of Literary Biography’s entry on this the first Booker Prize winner, “some found the award to Newby’s novel ironic because the prize was created and given by a company that represented values questioned in the novel… Booker Brothers McConnell, a multinational conglomerate, sold popular fiction as one of its commodities along with rum, sugar, and engineering products.” The company has 51% of future rights to Fleming’s James Bond novels, as well as several other authors including Agatha Christie.
The novel has been described as “hallucinatory” and “baffling or obscure.” Honestly, I could not agree more. After Townrow’s hit on the head, the rest of the novel is incredibly disorienting. As far as a “discussion” goes, all I came up with was a series of questions, completely based on trying to figure out what was going on in the novel. So, in light of that, I’m just going to list some of my questions and observations…. Let me now what you thought!
“Probably it was an accident….” Townrow never seems to be sure of his own intentions, nationality, or thought process. How does that affect your interpretations and impressions of the storyline?
Between Mrs. Khoury and Townrow, who are we supposed to believe? What happened to Elie’s body? Why is there so much confusion around the funeral, the body, the burial, etc.?
What do you make of the concept of Townrow’s true nationality?
There is a line in the novel that says “When you’re dead, how do you know it? I might have died from that crack on the head. And how do I know I didn’t?” Did anyone else have the impression that Townrow might have actually been dead?
What did you think of the ending of the novel? Was everyone saved? What is the significance of Townrow floating off with Elie’s body?
impla77's review
challenging
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
i liked the writing style, too bad it was virtually incoherent
davideatworld's review
4.0
Once I've read a book I like to read a few reviews and see how my thoughts stack up against what the general consensus is. There seems to be an overriding opinion that this book is too confusing and the characters aren't likable enough.
On the second point, I think Townrow especially is not very likable, but he sets himself up. He's honest all the time that he's not a very nice person, and in that sense you admire his honesty and his sense of self.
Once again in terms of the complexity, it's an intentional plot device. Townrow narrates the book from a third person perspective but is himself confunsed about a lot of the details. It's a little odd at first to have a third-person perspective that isn't really sure whats going on, but you get used to it. And Townrow's misrememberings are a constant source of amusement.
On the second point, I think Townrow especially is not very likable, but he sets himself up. He's honest all the time that he's not a very nice person, and in that sense you admire his honesty and his sense of self.
Once again in terms of the complexity, it's an intentional plot device. Townrow narrates the book from a third person perspective but is himself confunsed about a lot of the details. It's a little odd at first to have a third-person perspective that isn't really sure whats going on, but you get used to it. And Townrow's misrememberings are a constant source of amusement.