Give Them Another Chance

Nobody wants to be that inflexible critic who makes a snap judgement and sticks to it, refusing to consider any further evidence. Yet as a reader, I've decided to beware of this tendency, because if there's one thing our pastime encourages it's this type of rigidity. Perhaps we read one book by a specific author, give it the thumbs down, then avoid their body of work from then on. For all we'll ever know, their other books might be fantastic. It seems generous to at least make allowances for talent development, or further improvement. I don't want my eyes to glaze over when I hear certain authors' names mentioned, so I've decided to push past a dozen one-book-verdicts, and give their authors at least a second chance.  


G.K. Chesterton
I thought The Napoleon of Notting Hill crossed a line into wacky and weird. It's so ludicrous that any John Doe can be crowned king in this version of Victorian London, let alone the uproar that followed. Chesterton stretched the concept of a sense of humour to snapping point. My verdict was 'too ridiculous for many stars but too thought provoking for few', and I didn't intend to read any more from him. But his reputation as a great mind and top theologian lingers on over a century after he wrote, so I've decided to try The Man who was Thursday.

Robert Louis Stevenson
Strange Case of Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde was a tad too predictable of course, which I admit isn't Stevenson's fault. He can't help it if everyone knows big spoilers for his story before we even turn a page. What he was responsible for though, is creating shallow characters we didn't spend long enough with to care for. For example, we only really got to know the eyepiece of the story, John Gabriel Utterson, in his lawyer capacity. And of course, Stevenson isn't an author who includes many females in his stories. Male-heavy stories are a bit... well, male-heavy. It was more than enough for me at the time, but I've decided it's too hasty to dismiss a great classic author on the basis of such a short story. So I'll try Kidnapped or Treasure Island.  

Truman Capote
The plot of Breakfast at Tiffany's didn't wow me. The whole story revolves around the charisma of Holly Golightly, but I found her to be a condescending pain in the neck. The up-in-the-air conclusion was presumably meant to intrigue readers, but I wasn't invested enough in this girl to be care what happened to her. It was disappointing after I'd built myself up to expect something enjoyable, but I've had In Cold Blood recommended to me as Capote's real masterpiece. So I'll give him another chance and add it to my reading list.

Frances Hodgson Burnett
I was so peeved by the moralistic tone and horrific subtext of The Secret Garden that the wholesome beauty, and healing nature of the garden wasn't enough to make up for it. The fact that a 10-year-old boy like Colin, with basically nothing wrong with him, could lie in bed all that time, coddled by resentful adults and thinking he's an invalid was appalling! All the author interjections about what unpleasant children Mary and Colin were rubbed me the wrong way too. Look what they'd been through! Mary was the sole survivor of a cholera epidemic! They had good reason not to be the sweet little kids everyone seemed to expect. So I finished the story feeling irritated instead of charmed, as we were meant to be. But perhaps I'll see what Burnett delivers in A Little Princess.

Alexandre Dumas
The Black Tulip was amusing and farcical, with an exaggerated cartoonish quality, but not necessarily a real page turner. I was prepared to just grin whenever I thought of Dumas in the future, and say no thanks to any more opportunities to read him. But perhaps it's unfair to judge a man on the basis of one of his less famous works, when he's written so many more big name titles. I'm going to try The Three Musketeers. 

John Steinbeck 
When I was in Year 12 at school, I had to read the tragic trio that was The Grapes of Wrath, Of Mice and Men and The Pearl. The last one especially was too traumatic for my teenage heart, and upset me for ages. It was a tough year, and having to wade through Steinbeck didn't make it any easier. Writing essays about these books was a continual drain on my time and energy. It left me with a prejudice against him that's lasted for decades. But perhaps I should make allowances for the stress of the final year of school, and give him another try. I've been recommended to tackle The Grapes of Wrath again, but I might start with East of Eden.

Jules Verne
Phileas Fogg's attitude in Around the World in 80 Days simply annoyed me. He struck me as a demanding fop, plain and simple. Perhaps the fact that I'd love to travel around the world has something to do with it. Closing the train windows so he couldn't see any of the wonderful scenery that zipped past, because he was so intent on his wager, just capped it off for me. Come on man, if you get a chance to be a tourist, then see the sights! Or give the opportunity for extensive travel to someone who'll be at least interested enough to look! He was fortunate to have such a good-natured man servant as Passepartout. But I'll risk being annoyed by character quirks again and read Journey to the Centre of the Earth. 

Ernest Hemingway 
The Old Man & the Sea struck me a very easy win of a Pulitzer Prize, and Hemingway seemed very grouchy in his response to readers adulation. The book itself is short, anti-climactic, sort of uneventful, and plain depressing. But I've heard A Moveable Feast spoken highly of, so might read it.

Kazuo Ishiguro
The Remains of the Day was an okay read, but the reflective, melancholic, anti-climactic feel to the story didn't make me want to rush out and find his other works. It might be easy to never look for another one again, unless I remind myself to with a personal challenge like this. I think The Buried Giant and Nocturnes have had plenty of praise, so might choose one of them.

Chaim Potok
I simply didn't feel I was the target audience for
Diane Setterfield
This is my bravest forage out into the field of second chances, because I really, really, many times really disliked her first book, The Thirteenth Tale. I found it melodramatic and tedious in the extreme, with an improbable and ludicrous twist readers could never foresee, stealing even the fun of guessing the mystery from us. She's one author I was prepared to never read again. But because I really want this challenge to stretch my risk factor, I'm going to read her more recent offering, Once Upon a River.    


This will be one of my personal challenges for the coming year, and I'll start already without setting a time limit. Here's some personal evidence that second chances sometimes do pay off. I found J. D. Salinger's Franny and Zooey rather strange, and felt like I was reading it in a smog of smoke. But I enjoyed The Catcher in the Rye far more. And Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca fell flat for me, but Jamaica Inn was more to my liking. I hope you'll keep track of my personal progress, and if you dare to try the challenge yourself with books of your choice, please join in and let me know.