Well put, Walker! The interesting thing to me is that we are so diverse as individuals we can actually read the same book in completely different genres.

I took it more as a drama than a mystery. To me, it's an orphan's inner search for wholeness expressed by his outer search for answers, and while Uncle Phillip solves "the mystery," still I saw the real issue as Christopher's quest for meaning.

It was a mystery for me, well maybe a melodramatic mystery :)

That's funny, because I actually loved that about the book. It came across as so honest and genuine to me.

Becca said something that interested me, and now I'm really curious? Do you guys think of this book as a mystery? Because I read it as more of a drama, where the main character just happens to be a detective for a living. To me, the actual story was more about Christopher's past and the effect it had on his life than trying to solve anything in particular. Guess that's why I wasn't frustrated that I couldn't solve it. I was more sympathetic with what he'd had to go through, and interested in the psychological differences it made in him as a person.

If this is a mystery, MAN did I read it wrong. HAHAHA

Oh yeah--and what are we reading for November?

I don't know why it drives me so nuts the way this book is narrated, but it does. I guess because it is a detective book and yet memories aren't fact. It is hard or even impossible to figure out a mystery that you have little to no evidence. Just sketchy memories is all he has to go on. Every thing I read, I question how accurate it is, and it is driving me nuts.

I skipped the last few comments as I have only started to read it. But I will have it finished within the next few days, I promise. (Not that anyone really cares if I do or not.)

So, sorry if I set the discussion back a little. I like the character of Christopher so far. He seems respectable, but also relatable. He struggles sometimes with being proud of his work for the attention and respect it brings him and doing it to make the world a better place. Heaven knows I enjoy being told how wonderful I am sometimes.

I bet his life isn't exactly what he imagines it to be. I love that he always is so sure of his memories (Except the episode with his mother. He admits his memory of the episode now may be partly his mothers.) He's so sure of how he presented himself to his classmates, that there must be some reason other than that he showed himself to be a bit odd to his classmates, that they knew he was odd. And he is so sure of what happened after his parents died: that he was never sad on the boat. I'm sure there's no way he is always right and everyone else is wrong. It just seems funny to me. There are memories in my life where I was so sure of what happened, and sometimes I come to find out it didn't ever happen at all! I made the whole thing up! Has that every happened to anyone else? And so maybe his narrative of what is happening in the book is not quite correct either?

How are other faring in this enterprise?

I would have to say, Meg, that you are pretty much on target when you note that virtually everyone in the novel is an orphan in some form and therefore strange scenes like the final one involving Akira serve as a psychological reflection of orphanhood (if that is a word). Still, I thought there were simply too many of those kinds of episodes. It like "OK, I got the point already..."

Interesting, your insight into that aspect of the novel makes me more and more sympathetic to Miss Hemmings. She's just looking for love much in the same way Christopher is looking for his parents -- by fits and starts and lots of cul de sacs. It makes sense that his own search is so emotionally fraught that he makes leaps of faith that simply defy what one might find believable about a successful detective.

You also make good points about the narration and especially about his willingness to question his own recollections.

Ultimately, I agree with your three-point rating.

Finished the book--I think it's about a 3-star, personally. I definitely liked it overall (thanks, Walter!). But I agree with most of the critiques going on here--particularly Elena and Walter, brilliant observations!

However, I don't consider Christopher to be an unreliable narrator. Well, actually, I do--but no more so than any other narrator, and possibly less. He's a detective. An analytical mind. And for the most part he's looking back on memories from when he was 8 or 9 (sometimes even as young as 4 or 5)--so of COURSE those impressions are unreliable. He just happens to admit it, where most narrators don't. When he says things might not have happened exactly that way... or maybe someone else said that, not mom... I just considered him to be a detective trained to second-guess everything and only accept absolutely IRREFUTABLE, empirical evidence. He sure does jump around a lot, though (as does the novel in general)--"loses track of his thoughts" as Elena said--and that's probably my #1 complaint about this novel. Often I would sit down and start to read then think... "Wait a second... I'm lost again... what happened last time I read???" I couldn't remember, or connect with, a lot of the plot.

Miss Hemmings grew on me--but I still think she got what she deserved. (I LOVE how Christopher handled her trying to sneak into that party and hated that he apologized for it! He was absolutely right.) Misguided and selfish though she might have been, she made the choices that got her where she ended up, in both bad ways and good.

I hated the house search at first (particularly the way Akira was reintroduced so randomly--I found it entirely unbelievable!)... but then I thought the house episode probably communicated the theme of the entire piece. It was a psychological glimpse into what it's like to be an orphan (loved how many of the characters seemed "orphaned from their countries," by the way--my favorite part of the book). Orphans spend their lives trying to fill some kind of void. Can they ever? Possibly not. But they keep searching... I do think Jennifer might have been introduced to be just another orphan (maybe to increase sympathy for Christopher? Turns out he actually has a heart and tries occasionally to help others?)--but I liked that she was a part of the story. I liked the image of orphans helping each other... trying to fill the void they share.

Good read!

Alrighty... so I have had a slight delay on my book reading. My husband was transferred at work, to a new state. We had 2 days to pack, 1 to drive. So I had to return the book to the library before I was finished with it. I should have a new one tonight, so I will hopefully be able to finish it before the end of the month.


Does anyone know what we are reading next month?

Yes, I too was looking forward to finding Akira again in the story and was hoping for a happy reunion.

Goodreads just ate my first two entries. Some kind of maintenance issue. I'll try again.

I finished the book today, and I confess it is not among my favorite Ishiguro works. In my honest opinion, the novel needs a good, hard edit -- to be pared down by 50-75 pages. The final escapades in Shanghai, in particular, I found annoying, and like Elena, I had no clue what was going on with the search for "the house." I thought is was an extended hallucination.

As Elena points out too, Ishiguro seems also to have conjured up a good number of dead-end characters in this narrative. Both Jennifer and Sarah, for example, need to be rescued by "The Epilogue," and I was especially displeased with the treatment of Akira when he was re-introduced, even though I understand the symbolic necessity of it (I don't want to give away too much here).

In all, I can see why this received a lower rating from Goodreads members than most of Ishiguro's other works. It's still a decent enough read, but not nearly as tightly composed as I had come to expect from him.

Just wanted you to know I am still reading it, and sill liking it, but I haven't finished it yet. I should have got it on Audio. I can read it more often that way.

I finished the book. I like it better than An Artist of the Floating World, good story, but still there is something about the author style that I don't like. Walker has put it in words for me. Unreliable narrator. It is like he looses track of this thought. The episode with Morgan is an excellent example. What was that all about?

The episode towards the end where the lieutenant leaves his post in the middle of the war also bothered me. Banks acted, and was treated like he was something bigger than a famous foreign detective. I didn't get it.

And Jennifer... it seems she was on the story just for the sake of adding another orphan character. Anybody sees it different?

As I have moved along in the book, my suspicions that Christopher Banks is an unreliable narrator have increased, initially for the reasons Becca mentioned above and then because of some further similar episodes, most notably with Anthony Morgan, another of Banks's schoolmates.

As a result, I'm not inclined to pass judgment too hastily on anyone as seen thorough his eyes, Miss Hemmings in particular.

Is he really a detective?

PS- Mer, what the **** you are moving? Where is you blog update? I want to know more.

I just finished chapter 1.

The thing that has caught my attention is how different the main character sees himself, compared to how the world views him. His friends and classmates could see his desire to be a detective, but he thought he hid it so well.

Colonel Chamber viewed him as a little squirt, that he had sniveling at his side on the boat. When Christopher describes himself, he talks about how confident he was. He says "I was positively excited about life aboard the ship, as well as the prospect of the future that lay before (him)"

I agree with Megan about Miss Hemmings. Why would you even want her? I guess it is like a states symbol. She only approves the best, so if she is on your arm, you are the best. ~ How would it be to have such power over people?

And I hate Miss Hemmings!! The bratty snob. Run, Christopher, RUN!!!!

Read chapter 1 last night, and quite enjoyed it. I love reading about the narrator wandering the streets of London. I spent 3 months in Kensington a few years ago, so I remember walking those same sites he mentioned and even doing some of the same things! It made me think... those are probably the sections people zone out on if they have no previous connection with the setting, but for someone like me who has lived there, it awakens such concrete sensual and emotional memories. So... does a personal experience with historical setting enhance the reading experience? Overall, I don't know... but in this case it does. For me, anyway. Probably because the narrator is so VERY cerebral rather than sensual or emotional. It helps that I can make a personal connection.

Which brings me to my second observation--the character of Christopher Banks. He seems so remote, detached, objective. CEREBRAL, as I said--that's probably the best word for it. And I enjoy reading in this style, though it is somewhat less emotionally-engaging. Yet underneath all his detachment, you can tell something serious happened in his past. Something he's had a severe EMOTIONAL reaction to... probably having to do with his parents, I'm guessing. And obviously something is pushing him to detective work. It's fascinating. I'm wondering if it will continue in this quintessentially "British" objective sort of style, or if our friend Banks will start something of a deep emotional journey. Guess we'll see...

Argh, I put books on hold at THREE different libraries and I'm still not successful in getting them. Am I going to have to dip into my measly funds and start BUYING all these books?! Sigh. I will keep trying. Also, welcome Elena! You have such a pretty name! And Mer, we'll see you soon! Yay!

Hey everybody, I'm moving across the country this month, so I'm going to try to get the book once I'm settled. It'll be a few weeks, but I'm really looking forward to reading it!

Welcome Elena.

Remains of the Day is by far my favorite Ishiguro novel, and I too had mixed feelings about his other works, though I would generally say that I have enjoyed reading them, especially Never Let Me Go.

Hi, I just joined the group as I see you are reading Ishiguro this month. I read An Artist of the Floating World a couple of months ago and have mix feelings as to whether I liked it or not...if that makes sense. Anyway, I want to give him another try since he intrigues me. I'll be reading the book later this month and look forward to the discutssion

I have requested the book at my library, and I am #1 on the list, My guess is it will be another day or two before I get it.

I guess it's time to kick off the October discussion, and what better time, considering I just last night finished Part One, entitled "London, 24th July 1930." So far, Ishiguro has maintained the pattern he established in two previous works (Remains of the Day and An Artist of the Floating World) and one later book (Never Let Me Go) by constructing a story -- really an unfolding mystery of sorts -- by use of the main character's (Christopher Banks) recollected vignettes. We already suspect that Banks has experienced some kind of trauma, but it is also clear that it will take time for the details to unfold, much as it takes time for him to remember.

I find this Ishiguru novel a bit more complicated (and therefore slower) than his others, in part because we are dealing simultaneously with two different settings, London and Shanghai, and also what appears to be two discrete narratives, though again I infer that they will merge at some point.

Neither Banks nor Miss Hemmings (one of the two other characters of note so far -- the other being Akira) seems particularly round as characters, but again, I trust that will change as the story uncoils.