Feel free to start discussing...

It was dark, often disgusting, and I hated the dialect but by the end I found myself really appreciating the characters. I actually cared what happened to a bunch of junkies who didn't have many redeeming qualities. I have to applaud the author for that.

I thought the author did a great job getting his point across. Taking a dark, serious subject matter and communicating that in a humorous, lighthearted manner is a difficult and delicate process. For that I commend Welsh wholeheartedly.

I include this excerpt from the 2006 edition of this group's eponymous list book--have I said that right?

"It is, though, the tone of Trainspotting that really catches the reader's attention. The lack of any authorial, moralizing voice naturalizes the internal universe of the text so that the protagonists' immediate needs, for heroin, sex, or money, become the sole logic driving events."

This passage in the Boxall et al book also points out that the HIV/AIDS death toll in Trainspotting is high.

I can't remember now whether I read the book or saw Danny Boyle's film first, I think I saw the movie first, but I loved the scene where the girls say that they were talking about "shoppin" and the guys say "fitbol."

just picked it up from the library this afternoon - i've been out of the discussions for the past couple of months, but i'm completely amused that in the last year we've hit so much of the gen X required reading. Palahniuk, Burgess, Brett Easton Ellis, and now Irvine Welsh.

i'm a huge fan of the movie because i think it's such an accurate picture of addiction. there's a part therein where rent says that everyone's "just say no" platitudes fail to take into consideration the WHY of drug addiction - that it does indeed feel incredible. what i liked about it is what you've mentioned about the book, Emma, that it has that lack of moralizing that allows real life to actually happen. people get gloriously high, AND they die of AIDS. very much looking forward to how the story plays out in text.

Just joined the club last month and as luck would have it, Trainspotting was the first book up for discussion...I've slogged through some 50 pages and so far I'm not a fan (have yet to see the movie). I agree there is shock value in the depiction of these lives bent on self-destruction and sans moral compass, but is that sufficient to sustain reader interest through the entire book? By rendering the story in Scottish dialect, Welsh turns the story into a hybrid of oral history and stagecraft. While this is effective, the innovation cannot make up for the lack of compelling, evolving drama and dramatic structure, which for me, so far, seems like the main problem with the book. We are being asked by the writer to understand that the liberal use of 'fuckin cunt', 'right cunt' and other verbal ticks in the storytelling establishes authenticity -- it's the way these boys and girls think and talk. But if everything equates to a handful of slang tokens, the point of view and the crafting of the narrative through the language becomes inherently self-limiting instead of enriching. I'm soldiering on in the hope my initial take on the book is cursory and there are rewards at the end of this very dark and -- so far -- empty literary passage...(10/30)..Finished the book several days ago, but my initial impression is only marginally improved...Agree with Michelle that somehow every mini-story is delivered at the same pitch, underscoring the absence of drama. I was surprised by how the dialog and inflections in the movie did not match what I 'heard' as I was reading. By dropping some episodes -- the culinary revenge of Kelly, the dying AIDS patient -- the movie has more continuity, is tauter and technically more consistent (the book strays often from the dialect and 'voice' at work in the earlier sections). I did find myself laughing, in spite of myself, at the persistent references to 'wee bairn' and at the party karioke ala Neil Diamond..all in all, though, I could not work up much interest for either the story or the characters...

Like Frank H., I too, just joined the club last month, and also, “as luck would have it”, Trainspotting was the first book.
The back jacket of my copy of Trainspooting describes the book as hilarious. These are my memories of Trainspotting: Mark fishing around in a toilet stool of the grossest waste imaginable, searching for two suppositories, almost wiping of the feces in order to ingest them by mouth but changing his mind at the last minute; Davie hurling a bed sheet full of feces on unsuspecting girlfriend and her parents; and Sick Boy antagonizing a pit bull, only to run out in the street after the dog is enraged and kill him by twisting his neck with a baseball bat. Oh, and let’s not forget Kelly’s revenge as a waitress upon some unpleasant customers. Yup, hilarious?
As Emma wrote, I would have a “moralizing voice” in my criticism. The reference Emma cited, indicated that a lack of such voice was a unique feature of the book. But, you know what? I miss that voice. Yet, in a weird way, I do agree with Eliza, I find myself caring for and rooting for this bunch of junkies. I only wish I found the glossary at the end of the book, sooner! This book required work to read, which I guess is good thing. It was definitely exercise for the brain, I had to work hard to read it!

My link to this book is that I moved into Edinburgh around the time this was set and in a neighbouring district. Though a far from perfect novel it accurately depicted the dark underbelly of Edinburgh.

Stuart wrote: "My link to this book is that I moved into Edinburgh around the time this was set and in a neighbouring district. Though a far from perfect novel it accurately depicted the dark underbelly of Edinb..."
So was the dialogue easy for you to read and understand? If it's not too personal why Edinburgh?

The dialogue was reasonably easy, but not to easy as I am originally from England. I moved to Edinburgh for a college course.

finished this one yesterday, and i've got to stash this with the others on the very short shelf of books that were improved by being filmed.

for some reason, this book being written in dialect was really distancing to me. didn't feel that way about the bizarre made-up lingo in 'a clockwork orange', where a similar technique worked wonderfully to haul me into the unpleasant world those characters inhabit. in 'trainspotting', though, the the unconscious running translation in my head flattened this one out for me, or else it was the nearly stream-of-consciousness rambling. either way, things just didn't make impacts of varying emotional intensity. the dead baby and the pit bull killing are at the same volume as every other conversation in the pub.

I have to say that I was not looking forward to this book. An entire book on drug addicts and written in such a strong dialect that a glossary was necessary?? But, by the middle of the book I was hooked. I got to like (and hate) many of the characters and really wanted them to escape the depressing downward spiral of drugs, crime, HIV and worse. It definitely paints a vivid picture of the world of drug addiction - wow - the things an addict will do to get a fix. There are chapters I'll never forget.

Julie at All Ears wrote: "I have to say that I was not looking forward to this book. An entire book on drug addicts and written in such a strong dialect that a glossary was necessary?? But, by the middle of the book I was..."

As far as never forgetting: I watched the movie Seven, and it still haunts me! I think this book will do the same. Which part of the book was the worst for you? For me it is a toss up between the suppositories in the toilet and Kelly's revenge as a waitress.

I agree that the film was better than the book on this one! I recommend those struggling with it go and rent the dvd, then go back to it. Just a thought....

Barbra wrote: "Which part of the book was the worst for you? For me it is a toss up between the suppositories in the toilet and Kelly's revenge as a waitress. ..."

Definitely the scene where Rents was fishing the suppositories out from the toilet. It was early in the book and I was not used to the brutal honesty and gritty descriptions. The other part that I'll always remember is when Johnny has his leg amputated from shooting up in an artery because all of his veins had collapsed. In the hospital, he is thinking that his leg stump might be a good injection site - just another place to get heroin into his body. Unbelievable!

Definitely lots of shock value. The first 40-50 pages were really slow to read, just because of the Scottish dialect. By the time I got to page 100 or so, I was able to read at nearly my normal pace.

There were so many good chapters, I can't pick a favorite. At first the discontinuity between the stories confused/bothered me a little, but I started to like it that way.

Never saw the movie, but now I'd like to watch it, if only to hear if the characters talk the same way that they did in my head.

First post. :)

I'm not sure what to make of this one. Quite a change of scenery from Middlemarch! I never saw the movie (only saw bits of it a few years ago) so I did not really know what to expect.

I would definitely agree that the book has lots of shock value. It has been awhile since I've read something that actually made me gasp out loud.

On the other hand, the brutal honesty was something that got me hooked on the story and its characters. (I hope no waitresses were inspired by Kelly!)

It's not a book that I would have picked up myself but am now glad that I made the effort.

Anne wrote: "First post. :)

I'm not sure what to make of this one. Quite a change of scenery from Middlemarch! I never saw the movie (only saw bits of it a few years ago) so I did not really know what to expec..."

As far as "glad I made the effort," I feel that way too, now that it is OVER!

I've read this book a couple of times and actually like it quite a bit. It took me about a hundred pages the first time to be able to understand the dialect but once I got it I was pretty engrossed. I think it's a great depiction of the mind of an addict and doesn't glamorize it in the way that the movie did even though I enjoy it as well). I also loved the way that Welsh was able to make distinct voices for the different narrators. I read it the second time to try to go back and get some of what I missed the first time around just trying to absorb the vernacular.

I tried other books by Welsh since but none have been worth the effort.

Now if I could just get around the dialect in Mason and Dixon I might enjoy it as well.

Dean, i totally agree re: different voices! even though everything is written in dialogue, i could easily tell within the first page of a chapter section if rent was narrating instead of begbie, for example. that's a really hard trick to do in plain english, even more so in this technique.

having seen (and loved) the movie, most of the shock value was reduced - i was expecting it, instead of being blindsided by it. the toilet scene in the movie is utterly hilarious while still being disgusting. that being said, the worst scene for me was definitely the dog-shooting bit: in the movie, it's more of a silly lark, and the dog doesn't get coldly killed - that one did in fact come as an unpleasant shock.

ha! I have to say Eliza's first comment is the best. Made me laugh.

Toilet scene - definitely the most disgusting stomachach-wrenching thing I have ever read or seen.

The differing voices startled me as well. I don't think I realized they were different until the third or fourth chapter. How did you all do with figuring out who was speaking?

And is there one character everyone found more compelling than the others? Or were they more or less interchangeable? If they were why did Welsh choose this style?

I'm only about 30 pages in, but I am surprised to be enjoying the book so much. I don't feel like the language is holding me back anymore, although I do occasionally check the glossary in the back of my edition. I found the changes in voice to be pretty obvious, but now I wonder if I missed some changes in the very beginning.

Dean wrote: "I've read this book a couple of times and actually like it quite a bit. It took me about a hundred pages the first time to be able to understand the dialect but once I got it I was pretty engrosse..."

Barbra wrote: "Anne wrote: "First post. :)

I'm not sure what to make of this one. Quite a change of scenery from Middlemarch! I never saw the movie (only saw bits of it a few years ago) so I did not really kno..."

Dean wrote: "I've read this book a couple of times and actually like it quite a bit. It took me about a hundred pages the first time to be able to understand the dialect but once I got it I was pretty engrosse..."

Barbra wrote: "Anne wrote: "First post. :)

I'm not sure what to make of this one. Quite a change of scenery from Middlemarch! I never saw the movie (only saw bits of it a few years ago) so I did not really kno..."

Dean,wish I was smart enought to say otherwise, but Mason Dixon is sitting in the unreadable section of my personal library

I'm starting to struggle with the characters. There are a lot of them, and they all seem to have multiple names. Maybe I should watch the movie, or make a list.

Kristi, the multiple-name thing hung me up for a good chunk of it, too. fortunately, as things go on, everyone's nicknames get explained - it might take a while before it all makes sense, but it did eventually.

Mara, it definitely took a few chapters before i could fig out those different voices. begbie & rent were the most clearly different ones (begbie always sounds the roughest of a rough-edged bunch, rent always feels the need to toss out a multi-syllable proof of his higher intellect even in his inner monologue).

Although I enjoyed this book, I have to wonder if it would be on the 1001 list if it hadn't been made into such a great movie. Since I actually put the book down for a week, one thing that was helpful was the book's wikipedia page, which helped me track the characters and episodes. I highly recommend it as a refresher course after having read the entire book.

I do like the style of linked short stories, and I have to put in a plug for the great Vietnam War novel, The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien, which pulls it off even better than Trainspotting.

My main gripe with Trainspotting is that while most of the stories were interesting, I never felt like the characters were fully realized. Also, although many of the characters, especially Rent Boy, were highly intelligent people, I could in no way identify with them. Because their way of thinking was so alien to me, I always felt safe and never felt that I could sink as low as these characters. Other chronicles of addiction have made me feel less comfortable, because I could imagine it happening to me.

I just finished reading Trainspotting and must admit that as far as I remember, I liked the movie better (watched it a couple of times 10 years ago or so). To some extent I think that is caused by the reduced shock value of reading the book when you've already watched the movie.

I had a lot of trouble in the beginning of the book with separating the different characters. I found them all to sort of blend into each other and I found the whole reading experience rather chaotic. But after finishing it, I actually think that Welsh was able to really show how junkies are.

I started to like the book better with the scene with Rent's parents trying to help him get clean. I thought this was so well written how they fought and fought to help their son even though they really knew nothing about drug addiction - and how he just wanted to get out of there, even though he felt sorry for them. Great scene!

For me, the most disturbing scene was the alleged abuse of wee Kevin. Even though I kind of knew nothing happened to him, I still felt the scene was really disturbing - and made even more disturbing by the fact that the guy who was out to get his revenge, seemed so decent in a lot of ways - but just was so depraved and almost a sociopath with his going straight after the revenge and being willing to sacrifice a little child to get his revenge. Even though he felt guilty afterwards, he still just went for it...

I liked the book, didn't love it, but I found it very interesting.

I love this book to absolute pieces and will probably read it again very soon.

I find it interesting that every drug but heroin is acceptable in their definition of 'clean'. Even if they don't take any drugs, they're always drinking.

I finally finished, and I feel quite depressed now! It's hard for me to believe that there are people in the world that actually live like this. I actually enjoyed reading this book, though, if only for insight into a world I hope I never have anything to do with. I probably wouldn't have picked it up without this group. I might even try to read more Irvine Welsh!

I would approach more Welsh with caution. I loved Trainspotting but everything else I've attempted to read wasn't very interesting. I'm starting to think he just captured lightning in a bottle with this book. The rest just reads too much like a Scottish Palaniuk and I'm not a fan of his books either.

If the descriptions of this lifestyle are accurate, I see why addiction can make one do such animalistic, crazy things! Welsh's description of Mark shooting in the train was so real, I almost felt the needle prick myself. Having never tried the "skag" myself, I can't imagine the pull... other addictions vouch for how hard it is to put something down that has become a habit, or craving. But to go to the ends these characters did proves the power of the drug.

Sad ... wee Dawn, Tommy, Billy, Spud ... wish there had been some way to save them. Given them a new life.

Thanks for the advice, Dean. Just looking at the titles of Welsh's other works has made me think twice about it.