Books, Bikes, and Food

Reviews, Recipes, Rides… and some other things, too.


6 Comments

Caitlin Moran: How to be a Woman (2011)

This is another one of those posts I begin by going “I read this ages ago but never posted on it because…” This time, my excuse is that I wanted to do this review “properly”, but I’ve realised this is probably never going to happen, so I’ve decided to just post some more or less incoherent thoughts based on notes I took after finishing How to be a Woman. For more coherent thoughts, I’d like to refer you to the posts of the more put-together-than-me ladies Melissa and Iris - and there are probably a million other excellent reviews out there (if you’ve written one, please do leave a link in the comments!).

So, How to be a Woman. Honestly, it’s not often that a book produces such conflicting reactions in me. There were bits I wanted to shout from the rooftops because everyone needs to hear them loud and clear, but there were also parts where I wanted to get a hold of Moran and give her a good shake. I think the reason for this is that How to be a Woman doesn’t really know what it wants to be: a feminist manifesto, a “hilarious” autobiography, or a show of “I am Caitlin Moran and look how awesome I am”.

As it stands, it has a bit of each, and as a result, the fact that it has been heralded as the new awesome feminist manifesto is, at least in my view, a problem. How to be a Woman mixes Moran’s feminist with other views that don’t seem to be particularly well thought-out (e.g. her constant quoting of Germaine Greer, known holder of anti-transgender views – what is up with that?!*). Throw in some not strictly necessary episodes that seem to be there mostly in order to reinforce Moran’s own standing as The Coolest Woman On Earth, a.k.a. “Look at me, I party with Lady Gaga!!! Does that make me cool or what?!”), and you get a rather confusing jumble. If this is the New Feminist Manifesto Every Woman Needs To Read, I think we need to reassess our expectations, because we’re heading in the wrong direction.

Continue Reading →


7 Comments

Manuel Vázquez Montalban: Galíndez (1990)

This book had been on my reading list forever, but for some reason it was impossible to get my hands on it. Until, finally, my parents in law managed to unearth a second hand copy. You can imagine I was rather expectant.

I must say, I was a little disappointed. Galíndez is based on a real event, the murder of Basque politician Jesús de Galíndez by the Dominican Republic’s dictator Trujillo in the 1950s. He’d written a doctoral thesis on the Trujillo regime that didn’t go down to well with “El Benefactor”. Galíndez lived in New York at the time as the Basque exile government’s representative at the United Nations, where he was kidnapped off the street and shipped to the Dominican Republic where he was tortured and eventually killed. It’s a rather complex story that somewhat spiralled out of the control of the Trujillo regime and entailed the killing of several other people. You can read the rest on Wikipedia here.

That’s just the background though, although Vázquez Montalbán goes into quite a lot of detail on the torture scenes. It’s like you’re living in Galíndez’s head, the narrator addressing Galíndez as “you”. I found it strange and a little over the top as a stylistic device. That just as a side note, because the real protagonist is Muriel Colbert, another PhD student who has somehow become obsessed with the Galíndez case and is trying to find out what really happened. It’s a strange PhD project, I have to say. Muriel spends a lot of time tracing Galíndez and unearthing all sorts of information on the man, and she becomes very emotionally involved in the case, but in a strangely detached way. I can’t quite put my finger on what I find so weird about her relationship with her subject of study. It’s like she falls in love with him post-mortem, but at the same time she remains oddly analytical about it. Needless to say, there are some people who don’t want her to find out too much, and she is quick to get the US secret service on her heels. I didn’t find this very believable. Muriel seems a bit too ditzy to be a danger to anyone, to be honest.

Then there are a lot of side characters that each get their own story thread but are never fully developed. There’s a fat agent who gets put on the case and reactivates Voltaire, an old agent who’s living in Miami with lots of cats and who can’t resist doing a job for the agency every now and then. The way the different narratives are strung together is most confusing and the characters just didn’t come to life for me.

Even though this was supposed to be a thriller, for me there was never any suspense. There was no feeling of Muriel being “hunted” by the agents. Everything just sort of happened somehow. I really wanted to like this book. As it was, it took me ages to read and the best thing I can say about it was that it didn’t completely turn me off and I finished it eventually.


9 Comments

Enrique Vila-Matas: Bartleby y compañía (2000)

I read Bartleby y compañía for Richard and Stu‘s Spanish Lit Month. As always, so many smart things have been said already that I almost want to become a Bartleby myself and just shut up about the book. You can find Richard’s round-up of posts on Bartleby y compañía here. I’d particularly like to distinguish Obooki’s series of four posts, they express a lot of what I felt but do it so much more eloquently than I could.

Bartleby y compañía is fiction, but it’s not a novel. It consists of a series of footnotes to a non-existant text. The footnotes deal with writers who, for some reason, have given up writing, thus becoming artistas del No (artists of the No). According to the collector of these footnotes, a miserly civil servant who eventually gets fired for skiving off work to search for more “Bartlebys”, these writers suffer from “Bartleby syndrome”. This “illness” is named after Bartleby, the protagonist of Melville’s novel of the same name, a copyist who gives up all his tasks slowly but surely.  I may have to confess to a major omittance at this point – I’ve not actually read Bartleby (Thankfully, Obooki has).

As a book about authors and their unwritten texts (is it safe to call this meta-fiction?), I found the format of “footnotes” to an unwritten text quite fitting. Perhaps this is why Vila-Matas didn’t publish it as a series of separate essays, as Richard suggested he might have done.

Apart from not having read the original Bartleby, there are also a lot of authors mentioned in Bartleby y compañía that I haven’t read don’t even know. The book is one huge exercise in intertextuality and, as such, almost made my head explode. Thankfully, I realised at some point that some of the authors are – or may be – made up (Obooki, again, has compiled a useful list of these potentially fictional Bartlebys, although they’re hard to track down since their principal trait is the fact that they did not leave a trail of works behind). This made me feel slightly less badly read.

At this rate, I thought several times throughout, I’m next in line for applying for the job of Clément Cadou, precisely one of these maybe-or-maybe-not made-up artists of the no. Wanting to be a writer, he once met Witold Gombrowicz, an event which left him so stupefied that he felt like a piece of dining-room furniture. Cadou ended up not writing anything because he didn’t feel up to it after the strong impression Gombrowicz made on him. Bartleby y compañía is my Gombrowicz: it made me feel so poorly read that I don’t really feel up to writing much about it.

However, I do think that the fact that some of the authors are (probably) fictional is probably one of Vila Mata’s tools of irony. I suspect the guy knew full well that a lot of his writing in Bartleby y compañía would go straight over readers’ heads because they haven’t read or don’t even know the Bartlebys he’s talking about. So he included some made-up ones for good measure. He’s probably chuckling to himself somewhere about his little prank.

I enjoyed its subtle and sometimes less subtly irony – indeed, the whole book is probably ironic, since Vila-Matas himself is quite the prolific writer. But luckily, Bartleby y compañía is relatively short, as I don’t think I would’ve gotten through it otherwise. Presenting one author who has given up writing after the other gets a little old after a while, and sometimes I found it hard to focus on so much intertextuality. The most positive thing I can say about the book, I guess, is that it made me want to read (more of) some of these authors’ works.

English title: Bartleby & Co. 
German title:
 Bartleby und Co.


3 Comments

Bernardo Atxaga: El hombre solo (1993)

El hombre solo produced a variety of conflicting thoughts as I read it and thought about it afterwards, and they somehow morphed into this huge post. Bear with me, I’d really love to hear what you think about some of these issues.

But first, a little context: protagonist Carlos is a former ETA activist now living close to Barcelona, where he runs a hotel with a group of friends, all of which had formerly been active in “the organisation”. The football world cup is being held in Spain, and their hotel has become the abode of choice for the Polish football team. On the face of it, things have calmed down, but underneath the magma of their previous lives is still bubbling, both in terms of their previous activism and the emotional variable geometry within the group.

I won’t say much about the plot itself, because it gets quite fast-paced towards the end and to spoil it wouldn’t be fair at all. The gist of it is: Carlos has decided to offer shelter to two wanted ETA members  at the hotel, which is teeming with police (not only) because the football team needs protection. As the race gets closer, he is forced to dig out his former activist knowledge and take some decisions that don’t just affect him, but the whole group, which is really much more like a close-knit family than a group of “friends”.

Continue Reading →


6 Comments

Gustave Flaubert: Madame Bovary (1857)

Madame Bovary and I have a conflicted relationship. Half of the time, I absolutely hated the woman. The other half, I empathised with her. And I’m still not sure how I feel about the book; Gustave Flaubert does quite a good job at making you hate each and every single one of the characters at some point.

Emma Bovary, having grown up in rural France that is torn between the laicism prescribed by the French revolution and devout Catholicism, marries Charles Bovary, an incredibly dull medical doctor who didn’t pay too much attention during his studies and whose main fear, as a result, is that he might end up killing a patient.

Continue Reading →


6 Comments

Paul Auster: Leviathan (1992)

After not really taking to Paul Auster in the first attempt (you can read my review of Invisible here), my boyfriend decided I should give Auster a second chance and got me Leviathan for St Jordi‘s.

Well…  it was fine reading, but I have to say I still didn’t love it. It’s somewhat repetitive – although technically, ‘repetitive’ isn’t quite right since Invisible came afterwards. Leviathan is the story of a writer, Benjamin Sachs, who gets blown up in his car by the side of the road. How did he get there? The story is told by his friend Peter Aaron (spot the initials! – Also, Auster’s middle name is Benjamin…).

It’s those less-than-well-camouflaged self-references that get me. I can’t help myself, they just seem a little… cheap. In a similar vein, having read Invisible, I feel like the only thing Auster really knows how to write about is writers who live in New York and people who go/went to Columbia University, or have some other connection with it. Interestingly, Auster’s wife Siri Hustvedt does something similar in her books, and with her it doesn’t bother me at all. I don’t understand what my problem is, but I just can’t seem to warm to Auster.

The benefits of reading an earlier Auster is that the intellectualism that permeates Invisible is not quite as pronounced in Leviathan yet. The novel spans the years following the Vietnam war to the end of the Cold War, with all the bits of American history that go in between. It’s also the story of a man’s slow (and in the end, rapidly accelerating) descent into madness, ending with his death. It’s well told, Auster’s prose is incredibly fluent, and I might even be tempted to say that it gets quite thrilling at times.

Maybe it’s me. Before starting to read Auster, I had all these ideas in my head about how great his books were supposed to be. Perhaps I’d built it up too much, and would have been perfectly happy with his novels had they been by someone else who doesn’t have a huge name. For some reason, I just don’t think they are what people crack them up to be.

So… how do you feel about Paul Auster?

Evaluation: 6/10 

German title: Leviathan
Spanish title: Leviatán

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 193 other followers