Genuinely interesting look at the construction blacklisting scandal. My initial interest was the relationship between the information gathering and the law, but it's impossible not to be shocked and moved by the stories - individuals unable to work because they had exercised their legal right to join a union. The chapters about police monitoring start to build a picture of a deeply paranoid culture spending millions on surveillance when most employees are doing nothing more radical than attending a committee meeting. This isn't the most fluently written book and it shows signs of having been assembled over a number of years but it is excellent testimony of its story.
For the first 50 pages or so I thought this book was trite and simplistic and I wondered why I once thought Jonathan Coe such a brilliant comic novelist, capable of both satire and empathy. Then I got drawn in and couldn't put it down. There was brilliant satire and lots of moving stuff too.
This took me longer than I thought it would because I had to keep putting it down. It's an intelligent, empathetic book but it does plunge you into despair. Using the testimony of 'Everday Sexism' contributors (mostly women but one very powerful contribution from a man) is powerful and moving.
A really excellent, readable and well-researched biography of a fascinating and admirable person. I haven't read any of Fanny Trollope's books and that didn't matter. I sometimes question the references to passages in novels to illuminate her life but I am also breathtaking by the cross referencing and close reading this must have involved.
I read these three novels straight after each other, which was immersive and made me very attached to the characters. Each book starts slowly but draws you in, despite the shallow lives of so many of the characters. I never expected to have so much sympathy for Soames Forsyte, who is a magnificent creation. I also loved Michael Mont, Fleur less so. The social comedy is superb, and reminiscent of Trollope. Galsworthy treats the psychology differently, and it makes sense that he was contemporary with Woolf rather Dickens. This trilogy is not as immediately enticing as the first three but is well worth persevering with. And it does have a story arc that stretches back to the first book. I was not expecting that ending! I am still trying to work out whether the symbolism of the picture gallery fire and Soames getting hit on the head with the Goya isn't too clunky and cheesy or is actually just right.
My first Rosamond Lehmann and I probably should have read 'Invitation to the Waltz' first. Most of the book is an exquisitely-observed account of a love affair, featuring a hyper-vigilant self-aware heroine with an excellent line in mental asides. There are a lot of other characters which do seem real, but which are slightly distracting from the main story arc. I have yet to reflect on how the two parts mesh. The first part of the book is dominated by a dinner party scene worthy of the ball in Il Gattopardo (the film). It does go on a bit but it's brilliant. Anyway none of this detracts from an excellent novel, well worth reading.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
This is a very good book, and has lots of touch points for me (librarianship, materiality of the book, even media monitoring) but there was something just a bit soft-centred and sprawling about it. It's highly readable though, don't let that put you off. It has echoes of Helen DeWitt's The Last Samurai which is less pageturning and more cynical, and which I preferred.