What I Have Been Reading, April 2010
April 29th, 2010
Graham Ward’s The Politics of Discipleship - I really enjoyed Ward’s earlier book, Barth, Derrida, and the Language of Theology, a careful and insightful work that responds to Derrida’s thinking with a respect that I have not often found in Christian thinkers, so I was expecting something more than I got from The Politics of Discipleship. It still carries itself with a certain care and respect in its more philosophical sections, but much of its argument ventures into sociology and economics and politics in ways that I thought were less convincing. I frequently found myself wishing that Ward would move more slowly, more cautiously, more precisely, more rigorously. Each of the book’s sections needed its own book, needed to take its time, needed to make some time for what it had to say. Even so, there was much in it that I found useful, and I have quoted one section of it on several occasions now, so it is probably worth a read. Just moderate your expectations.
John Gardner’s Grendel – I first read this book a number of years ago. I liked it very much then but even more now on my second reading. It is short, and it reads quickly, so it can feel deceptively simple, but it rewards an attentive reading with profundity. I am addicted to the Beowulf legend, so I read or watch every adaptation that I can find, but I am almost always disappointed by portrayals of Grendel. Everyone seems to want Grendel to be more human. They try to develop sympathy for him by humanizing him, and they fail to understand how essential it is that he be evil, essentially and absolutely, in order that Beowulf might become the sort of hero that he is. If Grendel is humanized, then Beowulf’s heroism is ambiguous, and this might make a perfectly good story, but it is no longer the story of Beowulf. Gardner’s Grendel does not fall into this error. Though his Grendel does inspire a certain sympathy, it is a sympathy for the role that he must play as monster rather than a sympathy for a humanity that is simply hidden behind a monstrous appearance. This Grendel is never anything than a monster, and it is precisely this that inspires our sympathy. He is my favourite portrayal of the Grendel figure outside of the original.
Charles Williams’ The Greater Trumps – I never understand a Charles Williams novel. I only experience it. I experience it as a mystery and as a pleasure and as a wonder. My capacity for description is always beggared by his writing, and I can only ever tell others to read him for themselves, so I will say it once more: read Charles Williams for yourselves.
Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake – I read this book on the recommendation of a friend, though I have never been a big fan of Atwood’s. It is not a bad book. If I had not known who the author was, I would even have said that it was a fairly good book, on the higher end of the science fiction genre with respect to its writing, though not much by the way of science fiction, seeing as it represents a futuristic world in which people are still using CD ROMs. Yes, I said CD ROMs. Unfortunately, it is not the work of some middling science fiction writer but of the most recognized name in Canadian literature, and so it stands as one more example of why Atwood simply does not deserve this status. The story is mostly interesting. The characters are sometimes engaging. The plot is well structured. All well and good, to be sure, but none of this sets Atwood above any of a dozen genre writers I have read over the years, and she offers precious little else. There is not a single sentence in the whole of the book worth savouring as a sentence, as language, as literature. It is not a bad book, as I said, and maybe it was intended to be nothing more, which I can respect, but I do wish people would stop telling me how wonderful a writer she is.
John Porcellino’s Thoreau at Walden – If I had ever imagined the story of Henry David Thoreau at Walden Pond being told in cartoon, which I assure you is a thing I have never imagined, I would have been very doubtful about the wisdom of such a project. I would have suggested that the very fine balance between romantic ideal and practical wisdom in Thoreau, a balance that too often teeters in one direction or another even in the original, would have been impossible to maintain in something as simple as a cartoon. I would also, it seems, have been wrong, since Porcellino’s book maintains the sensibility of Thoreau’s writing admirably, though its art is very simple. It was only a matter of minutes to read, but it’s effect lingered much longer.

April 30th, 2010 at 11:33 am
As a result of being forced to read The Robber Bride in high school (frankly one of the worst books I’ve ever read) I spent a good number of years being one of Atwood’s most vocal detractors. I eventually stumbled across one of her collections of short stories and more or less reversed my position.
I also quite enjoyed The Blind Assassin, which I picked up in desperation one weekend at my inlaws’ house, and which uses kind of a strange story-in-a-story format. It had something of a twist ending that actually caught me by surprise, which is something that rarely happens for whatever reason.
I don’t think she’s a great novelist, necessarily, but I do think she is often a great storyteller. There are other, better Canadian storytellers, of course, but I think sometimes she gets too much credit and sometimes not enough.
April 30th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
You’ve recommended the Charles Williams experience to me a few times, and I’ve always wanted to read one of his books. I just searched the Chapters’ catalogue, (being at Starbucks, where good students spend their leisure time) and they don’t have a single one of his books on file. Go figure. People just don’t seem to go for that kind of experience anymore.
April 30th, 2010 at 2:35 pm
Lauren,
I agree that Atwood usually tells a good story, and I am a fan of a good story. I just object to the claim that she is a writer of great literature. Compared to a Bolano, or a Marquez, or a Saramago, or a Rushdie, or a Calvino, or a Gardner, there is nothing about her writing that is very interesting literarily, at least not to me.
April 30th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
Jordan,
I have a couple of Charles Williams’ novels that you can borrow, though I have only three of the seven, and I have been looking for years now, so I understand your situation.
May 1st, 2010 at 12:57 am
I have not read Atwood, but I am curious, though I am less read, and tend to butcher English, on your terms [pun intended] we don’t often disagree on matters of taste, Dickens excluded, what precisely is it that you find so terrible about Atwood, and why do you think she is so hailed, if she is indeed so terrible?
May 1st, 2010 at 12:59 am
On A side note, I seem to be being badgered with suggestions to watch ‘The Naked Lunch’ I know it is a book called Naked Lunch, yay nay?
May 1st, 2010 at 6:09 am
Curtus,
I do not think Atwood is terrible. I think she is in many respects a good writer, but I have never found in her writing anything very literarily interesting. Maybe I have just not read the right books, but I find nothing very remarkable about her stylistically. I never stop in her novels and say, “What a perfect image,” or “That sentence is beautifully constructed,” or anything of the sort. Lay any Atwood paragraph you choose beside a Borges paragraph, beside a Lowry paragraph, beside a Mossman paragraph, and the Atwood will be word after word, sentence after sentence, and the other will be prose worth reading.
With respect to (The)Naked Lunch (the original edition has no ‘The’, but the later one edited for American obscenity laws does), I have never read any William S. Burroughs (which I know will shock and horrify some people), so I can give you no informed opinion on either him or the novel. Neither have I seen the film version, though I have seen other of David Cronenberg’s films and would recommend them with some significant reservations. I have heard, however, that the film is not so much an adaptation of the novel but a reworking of several of Burroughs’ texts along with some biographical material, so you may want to begin with the book.
May 6th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Curtis,
Re: The Naked Lunch. Watch it, if only for the William Tell routine (which is actually based on the fact that Burroughs did kill his wife in a similar fashion) and while you’re at it, watch all of Cronenberg’s films (with exception of eXistenZ and Shivers). Not a dud in the bunch.
May 6th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
All,
Not a single comment on Grendel. Is there hope Luke, is there? I wonder. Well, at least we still have the flour mill.
May 7th, 2010 at 7:31 am
John,
I guess you need to keep buying copies, giving them away, and making people read them.