The week has completely run away with me, so here’s a very belated book report:
No-one at the get together (in nice new venue, worth another trip we think) felt that passionately about The Sisters Brothers, either in terms of loving it or hating it. Carole, Jill & Judith enjoyed it the most, especially the sparse but highly descriptive narrative and the relationships between the central characters. I appreciated the book’s style, and ability to bring 1850s ‘wild west’ to life in a very innovative way, but it was just too ‘male’ to be a real favourite. Anna & Chris both found themselves feeling very indifferent (it even took Anna a while to realised that she’d already read most of it before she’d read Human Skin!). Chris thought it could be adapted for screen by the Coen brothers. Most of us enjoyed the ‘vignettes’ e.g. the tooth brushing scenes, the book-keeper ‘romance’ & the healthy eating attempts by Eli. We also loved the description of San Francisco – its chaos and the rollercoaster fortunes of its residents. There was an even split about the plot line involving Warm & his gold seeking invention, some people getting much more into the book because of it, and others feeling it detracted. The role of the horses was also controversial of course ...Here’s what Caroline thought:
I quite enjoyed it but generally, as that suggests, feel a bit lukewarm about The Sisters Brothers. I think it was a very slight story and did find myself getting into a bit of a mental rant about why it was short listed. I think this is because it was a macho book by a male author. This sort of literary fiction seems to get taken more seriously, whether it warrants it or not. Something of a comparable standard of skill by a woman, with less violence, probably wouldn’t have made the Booker shortlist*. I found the violence off putting in a way that I really didn’t with the Book of Human Skin (would love to know how you find this, Anne). It had the air of a Quentin Tarantino movie for me and left me with the same aftertaste. Nasty violence done stylishly and with humour can be entertaining. But it is still nasty.
I thought the characterisation was pretty good – Eli was a great mix of psycho and good guy!
I found the storyline with the Warm invention a bit daft and it lost my interest a bit.
Overall, this was okay but I wouldn’t read another by this author. It deserves a six out of ten because it’s well written but the whole business of the Booker short listing irritated me so much it has knocked off points! And while that isn’t Patrick De Witt’s fault of course, it doesn’t change the score!
... and Jacqui
Would give the book 8.5, didn’t enjoy the middle section! Loved the ending, all the tragedy and sibling rivalry. Would like to know why called Sisters’ brothers – is it him being a bit of a sissy, the power reversal in the brothers as they went from one being the strong to the other one weak, or the oneness of humanity & we’re all sisters and brothers man!
All this will be entered on the blog when I apply myself to learning how to use it…
Our next month’s book, chosen by Carole is The Earth Hums in B Flat by Mari Strachan, and our next date is Tuesday 17th April, back at Waterloo Bar & Grill on Waterloo Road. Look forward to seeing you all there
Annie x
PS Carole was the winner of the 60th book anniversary quotes quiz, she didn’t get a prize.
No comments:
Post a Comment