What do you think?
Rate this book
Zeilenkrieg
Hochpolitische Reportagen versus locker-flockige Unterhaltung: Honor Tait, 80, und Tamara Sim, 27, sind beide Journalistinnen, doch sie verkörpern völlig verschiedene Welten. Zwei Generationen, zwei Charaktere und ein atemberaubender Showdown. Ein Roman, bei dem es nicht nur um das gedruckte Wort, sondern auch um die Schicksale zwischen den Zeilen geht.
Paperback
First published April 14, 2011
26 people are currently reading
635 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 85 reviews
July 30, 2012
Writers really shouldn't write reviews, Readers should write reviews even though writers are also readers. It's an ethical quagmire out of which I crawled momentarily because this book is such a delight!
THE SPOILER, packed with wry wit in nearly every sentence, is in actuality a stealth Aristotelian tragedy. Except the “flawed character” lies not in the protagonist(s), but in a populist voyeurism that devours celebrity scandals like popcorn while remaining unable to find Pakistan on a map. THE SPOILER freeze-frames that tottering moment of critical mass in the late 1990’s, just before “news,” along with the Western social contract, changed overnight.
The novel is a tale of two journalists – 79-year-old Honor Tait, in her time a brilliant war correspondent famous both for her reports from now-iconic fronts and for her dazzling beauty, three husbands and countless affairs, and Tamara Sim, a ditzy young freelancer of seemingly deranged educational background who ekes out a living writing tabloid fill like, “The Pits: Underarm Hair Horror of the Stars!”
In a basement cubicle, Tamara pens shock-jock for Psst!, the Saturday sleaze column of The Monitor, a fictional London newspaper whose denizens and business practices are described with a droll, satiric edge. (If Virginia Woolf were to come back as a humorist, she would write this book.) In contrast, the savaged-by-time Honor struggles alone in a cluttered apartment to confront personal secrets shared with no one now alive. Through an email programming glitch, Tamara is given the plum assignment – a single, coveted interview with the arrogant, reclusive “doyenne of British journalism.” What ensues is a contemporary comedy of errors through which the reader laughs appreciatively on every page while remaining sensible of an underlying sadness. Something is vanishing. It will not be seen again.
American readers will stumble over some of the British idioms and cultural references, and a melodrama-style tendency toward unlikely coincidence occasionally jars, but these are quickly subsumed in the sheer delight of the narrative voice. This is a writer’s novel, the structural scaffolding dead obvious and elegant, the insider intelligence fairly shimmering. The most inconsequential sentence turns out to be quotable.
Honor’s third (jealously possessive and American) husband Tad, for example, is captured in a tiny vignette about the choice of a frame for a Cocteau sketch given to Honor by the artist during their brief affair. “But the proprietorial husband, furious that his wife, whom he had married in their middle years, had ever been close to anyone else, lost out to his peculiarly American deference to fame. It was Tad who eventually chose the unwieldy ebony frame, after a degree of contemplation and dialogue that would not have discredited Plato…”
Annalena McAfee, veteran journalist and editor, knows the world whereof she writes, and writes of it dashingly. But the “pity and terror” are also there, understated and without fanfare, in the hidden lives of both Honor and Tamara. The end of THE SPOILER brings no Aristotelian catharsis; it can’t. The end of this story is the beginning of a new one, the one we’re in.
THE SPOILER, packed with wry wit in nearly every sentence, is in actuality a stealth Aristotelian tragedy. Except the “flawed character” lies not in the protagonist(s), but in a populist voyeurism that devours celebrity scandals like popcorn while remaining unable to find Pakistan on a map. THE SPOILER freeze-frames that tottering moment of critical mass in the late 1990’s, just before “news,” along with the Western social contract, changed overnight.
The novel is a tale of two journalists – 79-year-old Honor Tait, in her time a brilliant war correspondent famous both for her reports from now-iconic fronts and for her dazzling beauty, three husbands and countless affairs, and Tamara Sim, a ditzy young freelancer of seemingly deranged educational background who ekes out a living writing tabloid fill like, “The Pits: Underarm Hair Horror of the Stars!”
In a basement cubicle, Tamara pens shock-jock for Psst!, the Saturday sleaze column of The Monitor, a fictional London newspaper whose denizens and business practices are described with a droll, satiric edge. (If Virginia Woolf were to come back as a humorist, she would write this book.) In contrast, the savaged-by-time Honor struggles alone in a cluttered apartment to confront personal secrets shared with no one now alive. Through an email programming glitch, Tamara is given the plum assignment – a single, coveted interview with the arrogant, reclusive “doyenne of British journalism.” What ensues is a contemporary comedy of errors through which the reader laughs appreciatively on every page while remaining sensible of an underlying sadness. Something is vanishing. It will not be seen again.
American readers will stumble over some of the British idioms and cultural references, and a melodrama-style tendency toward unlikely coincidence occasionally jars, but these are quickly subsumed in the sheer delight of the narrative voice. This is a writer’s novel, the structural scaffolding dead obvious and elegant, the insider intelligence fairly shimmering. The most inconsequential sentence turns out to be quotable.
Honor’s third (jealously possessive and American) husband Tad, for example, is captured in a tiny vignette about the choice of a frame for a Cocteau sketch given to Honor by the artist during their brief affair. “But the proprietorial husband, furious that his wife, whom he had married in their middle years, had ever been close to anyone else, lost out to his peculiarly American deference to fame. It was Tad who eventually chose the unwieldy ebony frame, after a degree of contemplation and dialogue that would not have discredited Plato…”
Annalena McAfee, veteran journalist and editor, knows the world whereof she writes, and writes of it dashingly. But the “pity and terror” are also there, understated and without fanfare, in the hidden lives of both Honor and Tamara. The end of THE SPOILER brings no Aristotelian catharsis; it can’t. The end of this story is the beginning of a new one, the one we’re in.
July 11, 2015
It's the late 90's in London. Two women, one the grande dame of journalism. She has witnessed and reported on every war, dictator, international crisis since WWII with a Pulitzer prize. The other, an up and coming journalist who creates celebrity lists each week (Best soap cat fights, worst dental makeovers, etc.). They cross paths and great writing ensues. McAfee pokes fun at tabloid journalism in those days just before the internet takes over. Actually, more than pokes fun--serves as a warning, sendup, and cautionary tale of what passes for reporting today. Yes, the Cruise/Holmes divorce was in the "hard news first half hour" of Today and GMA this morning. The writing is fantastic, the vocabulary incredible, and very funny, especially when mining the depths of current celebrity journalism. And what is a spoiler? When a competing news organization spoils another's exclusive story by beating them to it or discrediting it before it hits the press. Spoiling is what has happened to news so that it stinks more than the fish it wraps.
February 24, 2012
The story of two delightfully detestable journalists: a callow young philistine, and a cynical old pro. The inside-baseball details about newspaper life are wonderful, as is the black humor. But the plot drags along like a dying cat. There are two central mysteries: what horrible thing did the old lady do as a young writer? And who is the mysterious young man she keeps meeting with? Both solutions are 1) extremely dull, and 2) entirely predictable. Not recommended.
June 4, 2012
Loved the sentences with nary a padding, every word tells, counts for something. Rhythm of writing great with changes for two points of view. And so sobering, this book, how tabloid attacks made of curdled-whipped-cream lies can ruin lives and leave sterling reputations tarnished--we know it, but watching it hurts a lot. The way old age shreds the ego of the public achiever, or any of us, leaving a competent, renowned person a shell, yes, like the film, "The Artist." The way feckless youth can scythe through a worthy life and go drink champagne after. Respect as a lost concept. Dignity as a cape. Honor and Tamara --memorable in torment. Well done!
July 8, 2012
This book was recommended by NPR so I thought ,I'll try it. I was so disappointed that I didn't finish it. I would read a paragraph and then say what did I just read and have to go back and read it again.I wasn't impressed with McAfee's McWordiness. I think a good newspaper editor would have cut out half of what she wrote before going to press.
One word:
pretentious!
One word:
pretentious!
June 26, 2025
Such a disappointment but great if you want to read a book with a dictionary by your side to look up the meaning of all the unusual words that occur every few pages. It felt forced. unnecessary and as if the author was showing off. It added nothing to the text so I gave up.
September 26, 2012
Spoiler! This book has a dull, repetitive, plodding plot that almost grudgingly builds up to a predictable climax.
February 24, 2025
Gemeinhin heißt es ja, dass, wer als Schriftsteller reüssieren will, zunächst aus Bereichen des Lebens berichten sollte, in denen er oder sie sich auskennt. So mag es also nur nahegelegen haben, dass Annalena McAfee als Sujet ihres Debutromans das Zeitungswesen Großbritanniens wählte. Die Autorin war, bevor sie sich der Prosa zuwandte, jahrzehntelang im britischen Journalismus zuhause, arbeitete als Kunst- und Literaturkritikerin für die Financial Times und gründete die Saturday Review, die Kunst- und Literaturbeilage des Guardian, welche sie sechs Jahre lang leitete.
In ZEILENKRIEG (THE SPOILER, Original 2011; Dt. 2012) ist es die Diskrepanz zwischen dem klassischen Journalismus des 20. Jahrhunderts, der Reportage, und der modernen Boulevard-Variante, die eher auf Emotionalisierung setzt denn auf Fakten, Genauigkeit oder Kenntnis. Gerade in Großbritannien, genauer: in London, spielt die Boulevard-Presse eine enorme Rolle und hat immense Macht auch im Bereich der Politik oder der Kultur. Im Sport sowieso. Und doch wundert es die nahezu 80jährige Honor Tait, als eines Tages mit Tamara Sim eine waschechte Vertreterin eben dieses Boulevard-Journalismus vor ihrer Türe steht um ein Interview mit ihr zu führen. Tait, die von der jüngeren als „Doyenne des britischen Journalismus“ bezeichnet wird, war eine der großen Figuren unter den Auslandskorrespondent*innen und Reporter*innen der britischen Presse. Sie berichtete wenige Tage nach der Befreiung des Lagers aus Buchenwald, sie berichtete aus den Kriegen in Korea und Vietnam, aber auch von den Krisenschauplätzen verschiedener Konflikte in Afrika und Lateinamerika. Auch unter den Reichen und Schönen war sie vernetzt, hatte jede Menge Vertraute in Hollywood – Liz Taylor soll zu ihren engeren Bekannten gehört haben – und war selbst dreimal verheiratet, darunter zuletzt mit Tad Challis, Regisseur etlicher britischer Erfolgskomödien der 50er und 60er Jahre. Tait versteht nicht, weshalb sich eine junge Leserschaft ausgerechnet für sie interessieren sollte? Tamara Sim ihrerseits verspricht sich von diesem Auftrag einen Aufstieg innerhalb des Print-Konzerns, in welchem sie in bisher untergeordneter Rolle angestellt ist. Und sie ist bei all ihren Defiziten bereit, sehr, sehr weit zu gehen, um mit diesem Auftrag zu reüssieren.
McAfee führt diese beiden Antipoden des Journalismus auf den ersten gut Einhundert Seiten als wahre Duellanten während des Interviews ein. Damit nimmt dieser Nachmittag in Honor Taits Wohnung, die die Dame zuvor von etlichen, in ihren Augen verräterischen Details befreit hat und während dieses Vorgangs in Erinnerungen schwelgte – wobei „bitteren Erinnerungen nachhing“ womöglich die bessere Bezeichnung ist – knapp ein Viertel des Romans ein. Das ist teils sehr komisch, manchmal glattweg zynisch, wenn uns die Gedanken der alternden Journalistin hinsichtlich ihres Gegenübers zuteilwerden, die sie keinen Moment ernst nimmt, allerdings ist es auch zäh insofern, als dass McAfee vor allem in der Zeichnung der Jüngeren der beiden nicht viel mehr als Klischees zu bieten hat.
Tamara Sim, wie sie hier dargestellt wird – auch vorgeführt wird, wenn man ehrlich ist – ist einfach nur als dumm zu bezeichnen. Sie trägt ihre Unbildung, wenn auch oftmals nur im Geiste, geradezu stolz vor sich her, missversteht die Äußerungen ihrer Interview-Partnerin am laufenden Band und begreift nicht, wann diese sie auf den Arm nimmt, sich schließlich sogar offen über ihr Unwissen lustig macht. Im Gegenzug entspricht Honor Tait – für die, laut der Autorin, Marguerite Higgins noch am ehesten Pate gestanden hat; definitiv sind aber auch Anteile von einer Fotografin wie Elizabeth Ann Miller in die Figur mit eingeflossen – so dermaßen jenen Kriegsreportern, wie Romane und Filme sie seit dem 2. Weltkrieg beschrieben und verherrlicht haben, dass auch ihr eine gewisse Klischeehaftigkeit nicht abzusprechen ist. Was sich dann zwischen den beiden abspielt, ist nicht originell genug, um die Leser*innen wirklich zu fesseln. Denn auch das, was sich da abspielt – überlegene, gebildete Dame lässt Dummerchen abblitzen – ist zu häufig schon beschrieben worden, ist zu vorhersehbar, als dass es packen könnte.
McAfee bricht dieses Interview dann glücklicherweise noch gerade rechtzeitig ab und geht dazu über, eine weiter ausgreifende Geschichte zu erzählen, bevor das Publikum sich tatsächlich gelangweilt abwendet. Indem sie Tamara einen drogenabhängigen Bruder zur Seite stellt, um den die junge Frau sich sorgt und dem sie helfen will, bekommt diese Figur etwas mehr Tiefe, wird besser verständlich. Doch wirkt diese Wendung arg konstruiert, zumal sie später im Roman eine wesentliche, arg dem Zufall geschuldete Rolle spielt um die Handlung voranzutreiben. Honor Tait hingegen bleibt das, als was sie eingeführt wurde, lediglich wird der Raum um diese Protagonistin erweitert, wenn es Tamara gefällt, ihre Story um eine Räuberpistole zu bereichern, die von jungen Liebhabern und seltsamen amourösen Abenteuern handelt. So wird die Story zunehmend spannender, allerdings fesselt sie auch in den späteren Entwicklungen nie wirklich.
Was hier sicherlich gut gelingt, ist die Darstellung des Journalismus in den 90er Jahren (der Roman spielt um 1996/97) in einer Medienstadt wie London. Wie hier einzelne Mitarbeiter gegeneinander ausgespielt werden, wie gnadenlos und auch zynisch mit den Träumen und Hoffnungen anderer, meist Untergebener, gespielt und im Grunde gehandelt wird, um zu bekommen, wonach der Leser angeblich lechzt, wie hier alle Register gezogen werden, um andere zu manipulieren, sie sich hörig zu machen, sie auf Spuren zu setzen, die vielversprechend sind und wie diese – eine Nebenfigur wird von Tamara dabei erwischt, wie sie die Mülltonnen des Anwesens durchsucht, in welchem Tait lebt – bereit sind, ihre Würde, ihren Stolz aufzugeben, um irgendwie am medialen Spiel teilzuhaben, das ist schon brutal und grauenerregend. Und schlimmer Weise ist es leider auch komisch. Zwar ist der Witz in McAfees Roman ein sehr bärbeißiger, zwar bleibt den Leser*innen das Lachen doch meist im Halse stecken, dennoch entbehrt das alles nicht einer gewissen Komik. Der Mensch reduziert auf sein kaltes, kapitalistisches Begehren, den anderen hinter sich zu lassen, das zu erreichen, was der andere gerne gehabt hätte, selbst dann, wenn es dem eigenen Ich nichts bringt, außer Ärger. Im Übrigen weitet McAfee diesen Blick auch auf das Verlagswesen aus, denn dass Honor Tait überhaupt in ein Interview eingewilligt hat, ist der Tatsache geschuldet, dass ihr neues Buch – eine Anthologie früher Texte – beworben werden muss.
ZEILENKRIEG ist deutlich ein Debutroman, allerdings einer, der von großer erzählerischer Lust und auch Verständnis für das Metier zeugt. Das ist ja nicht zwingend immer so. Nicht jeder Kritiker, nicht jeder Literaturwissenschaftler ist ein guter Romancier. Doch Annalena McAfee hat mittlerweile mit zwei weiteren Romanen bewiesen, dass sie durchaus das Zeug zum Romancier besitzt. Dies auf jeden Fall ist ein guter, wenn auch noch nicht perfekter Beginn einer schriftstellerischen Karriere gewesen.
In ZEILENKRIEG (THE SPOILER, Original 2011; Dt. 2012) ist es die Diskrepanz zwischen dem klassischen Journalismus des 20. Jahrhunderts, der Reportage, und der modernen Boulevard-Variante, die eher auf Emotionalisierung setzt denn auf Fakten, Genauigkeit oder Kenntnis. Gerade in Großbritannien, genauer: in London, spielt die Boulevard-Presse eine enorme Rolle und hat immense Macht auch im Bereich der Politik oder der Kultur. Im Sport sowieso. Und doch wundert es die nahezu 80jährige Honor Tait, als eines Tages mit Tamara Sim eine waschechte Vertreterin eben dieses Boulevard-Journalismus vor ihrer Türe steht um ein Interview mit ihr zu führen. Tait, die von der jüngeren als „Doyenne des britischen Journalismus“ bezeichnet wird, war eine der großen Figuren unter den Auslandskorrespondent*innen und Reporter*innen der britischen Presse. Sie berichtete wenige Tage nach der Befreiung des Lagers aus Buchenwald, sie berichtete aus den Kriegen in Korea und Vietnam, aber auch von den Krisenschauplätzen verschiedener Konflikte in Afrika und Lateinamerika. Auch unter den Reichen und Schönen war sie vernetzt, hatte jede Menge Vertraute in Hollywood – Liz Taylor soll zu ihren engeren Bekannten gehört haben – und war selbst dreimal verheiratet, darunter zuletzt mit Tad Challis, Regisseur etlicher britischer Erfolgskomödien der 50er und 60er Jahre. Tait versteht nicht, weshalb sich eine junge Leserschaft ausgerechnet für sie interessieren sollte? Tamara Sim ihrerseits verspricht sich von diesem Auftrag einen Aufstieg innerhalb des Print-Konzerns, in welchem sie in bisher untergeordneter Rolle angestellt ist. Und sie ist bei all ihren Defiziten bereit, sehr, sehr weit zu gehen, um mit diesem Auftrag zu reüssieren.
McAfee führt diese beiden Antipoden des Journalismus auf den ersten gut Einhundert Seiten als wahre Duellanten während des Interviews ein. Damit nimmt dieser Nachmittag in Honor Taits Wohnung, die die Dame zuvor von etlichen, in ihren Augen verräterischen Details befreit hat und während dieses Vorgangs in Erinnerungen schwelgte – wobei „bitteren Erinnerungen nachhing“ womöglich die bessere Bezeichnung ist – knapp ein Viertel des Romans ein. Das ist teils sehr komisch, manchmal glattweg zynisch, wenn uns die Gedanken der alternden Journalistin hinsichtlich ihres Gegenübers zuteilwerden, die sie keinen Moment ernst nimmt, allerdings ist es auch zäh insofern, als dass McAfee vor allem in der Zeichnung der Jüngeren der beiden nicht viel mehr als Klischees zu bieten hat.
Tamara Sim, wie sie hier dargestellt wird – auch vorgeführt wird, wenn man ehrlich ist – ist einfach nur als dumm zu bezeichnen. Sie trägt ihre Unbildung, wenn auch oftmals nur im Geiste, geradezu stolz vor sich her, missversteht die Äußerungen ihrer Interview-Partnerin am laufenden Band und begreift nicht, wann diese sie auf den Arm nimmt, sich schließlich sogar offen über ihr Unwissen lustig macht. Im Gegenzug entspricht Honor Tait – für die, laut der Autorin, Marguerite Higgins noch am ehesten Pate gestanden hat; definitiv sind aber auch Anteile von einer Fotografin wie Elizabeth Ann Miller in die Figur mit eingeflossen – so dermaßen jenen Kriegsreportern, wie Romane und Filme sie seit dem 2. Weltkrieg beschrieben und verherrlicht haben, dass auch ihr eine gewisse Klischeehaftigkeit nicht abzusprechen ist. Was sich dann zwischen den beiden abspielt, ist nicht originell genug, um die Leser*innen wirklich zu fesseln. Denn auch das, was sich da abspielt – überlegene, gebildete Dame lässt Dummerchen abblitzen – ist zu häufig schon beschrieben worden, ist zu vorhersehbar, als dass es packen könnte.
McAfee bricht dieses Interview dann glücklicherweise noch gerade rechtzeitig ab und geht dazu über, eine weiter ausgreifende Geschichte zu erzählen, bevor das Publikum sich tatsächlich gelangweilt abwendet. Indem sie Tamara einen drogenabhängigen Bruder zur Seite stellt, um den die junge Frau sich sorgt und dem sie helfen will, bekommt diese Figur etwas mehr Tiefe, wird besser verständlich. Doch wirkt diese Wendung arg konstruiert, zumal sie später im Roman eine wesentliche, arg dem Zufall geschuldete Rolle spielt um die Handlung voranzutreiben. Honor Tait hingegen bleibt das, als was sie eingeführt wurde, lediglich wird der Raum um diese Protagonistin erweitert, wenn es Tamara gefällt, ihre Story um eine Räuberpistole zu bereichern, die von jungen Liebhabern und seltsamen amourösen Abenteuern handelt. So wird die Story zunehmend spannender, allerdings fesselt sie auch in den späteren Entwicklungen nie wirklich.
Was hier sicherlich gut gelingt, ist die Darstellung des Journalismus in den 90er Jahren (der Roman spielt um 1996/97) in einer Medienstadt wie London. Wie hier einzelne Mitarbeiter gegeneinander ausgespielt werden, wie gnadenlos und auch zynisch mit den Träumen und Hoffnungen anderer, meist Untergebener, gespielt und im Grunde gehandelt wird, um zu bekommen, wonach der Leser angeblich lechzt, wie hier alle Register gezogen werden, um andere zu manipulieren, sie sich hörig zu machen, sie auf Spuren zu setzen, die vielversprechend sind und wie diese – eine Nebenfigur wird von Tamara dabei erwischt, wie sie die Mülltonnen des Anwesens durchsucht, in welchem Tait lebt – bereit sind, ihre Würde, ihren Stolz aufzugeben, um irgendwie am medialen Spiel teilzuhaben, das ist schon brutal und grauenerregend. Und schlimmer Weise ist es leider auch komisch. Zwar ist der Witz in McAfees Roman ein sehr bärbeißiger, zwar bleibt den Leser*innen das Lachen doch meist im Halse stecken, dennoch entbehrt das alles nicht einer gewissen Komik. Der Mensch reduziert auf sein kaltes, kapitalistisches Begehren, den anderen hinter sich zu lassen, das zu erreichen, was der andere gerne gehabt hätte, selbst dann, wenn es dem eigenen Ich nichts bringt, außer Ärger. Im Übrigen weitet McAfee diesen Blick auch auf das Verlagswesen aus, denn dass Honor Tait überhaupt in ein Interview eingewilligt hat, ist der Tatsache geschuldet, dass ihr neues Buch – eine Anthologie früher Texte – beworben werden muss.
ZEILENKRIEG ist deutlich ein Debutroman, allerdings einer, der von großer erzählerischer Lust und auch Verständnis für das Metier zeugt. Das ist ja nicht zwingend immer so. Nicht jeder Kritiker, nicht jeder Literaturwissenschaftler ist ein guter Romancier. Doch Annalena McAfee hat mittlerweile mit zwei weiteren Romanen bewiesen, dass sie durchaus das Zeug zum Romancier besitzt. Dies auf jeden Fall ist ein guter, wenn auch noch nicht perfekter Beginn einer schriftstellerischen Karriere gewesen.
August 14, 2013
London in the late 1990s. Honor Tait, a Martha Gellhorn-style pioneer woman journalist who covered WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and interviewed heads of state and celebrities, is nearing 80 and has a publisher who is trying to revive interest in her by republishing her major stories.
Tamara Sim is a 20-something journalist more comfortable with writing lists about celebrities than committing serious journalism, which she finds boring and out of date. But she is ambitious, and takes on what she thinks will be her ticket to a better life -- a profile of Tait for the classy Sunday section of her newspaper.
Out of these materials Annalena McAfee fashions a waspish look at the decline of modern journalism, while also creating sharply drawn characters. Tamara Sim is easy to sneer at, with her lack of historical knowledge (she wants to make sure to include a reference to TS Eliot as the man who wrote "Cats") and her shaky grasp of ethics. But McAfee manages to make us care for her, in part because she is trying to rescue her drug abusing brother and in part because she suffers so many indignities in her quest for status. And while Honor Tait is much easier to like at a journalistic level, she is not so sterling as a person, having been every bit as ambitious, and having shown very little common sense in her choice of husbands or her most momentous personal decision, revealed as the book goes along.
The "spoiler" in the title is a scoop in which one British news organization undercuts another's exclusive by getting there first or ruining the other paper's angle. Tamara becomes both the victim and perpetrator of spoilers in this novel. And while the big reveal that is driving the plot is not particularly surprising or salacious, that doesn't really matter, because McAfee's main goal seems to be to satirize the state of the industry as it emerged into the Internet age, and she does that with acidic vigor.
January 21, 2013
Honor Tait is a elderly, renowned war correspondent; Tamara Sim is a freelance tabloid journalist who is used to doing stories on “The & Worst Bad Hair Days.” They meet for an interview when some of Ms. Tait’s journalism is to be re-issued and they don’t get along. Ms. Tait feels that Ms. Sim doesn’t know anything. She’s right of course. When Tait mentions the 38th parallel, Sim can only wonder “Parallel to what?”. But Sim feels Tait is just as ignorant. She’s right as well. Tait is ignorant of what is currently fancied by the newspaper reading public. They want juicy details of private life. What could a readership raised on a steady diet of people who are famous for being famous care about real achievement and reporting on events they don’t remember?
Anxious to make a mark at a glossy, prestigious magazine supplement, Tamara is determined to dig up some dirt. There is dirt of a sort to be dug. However, the story she breaks is not true and is not significant to Honor Tait. Honor’s shame is attached to something did (or failed to do) as a journalist.
This is a funny serious book. The interplay between journalists (if you can call them that) in the newsroom and the relationship between Honor and Tamara are fascinating.
And Tait’s observation that the people currently covering what they see as news combine great ignorance with great confidence seems to me right on the mark.
Anxious to make a mark at a glossy, prestigious magazine supplement, Tamara is determined to dig up some dirt. There is dirt of a sort to be dug. However, the story she breaks is not true and is not significant to Honor Tait. Honor’s shame is attached to something did (or failed to do) as a journalist.
This is a funny serious book. The interplay between journalists (if you can call them that) in the newsroom and the relationship between Honor and Tamara are fascinating.
And Tait’s observation that the people currently covering what they see as news combine great ignorance with great confidence seems to me right on the mark.
November 3, 2011
Upon the first reading of this book I was struck by how unsympathetic and unlikable the main characters were. However I read this book twice and having gained more distance towards the characters on the second reading I was more accepting of their faults and transgressions. I enjoyed this in depth study of the newspaper world and its protagonists - the journalists. I cringed at the methods used by contemporary tabloid producers whose main goal is to find a scandal and implicate their victim by all means and measures. However the iconic Honor Tait, the intrepid woman reporter whose credits included interviewing Franco and reporting from the trenches of many different wars, turned out to be utterly human and consequently full of faults. The contrasting of the two women reporters, old hand Honor Tait (character that could be loosely based on life of Martha Gellhorn given the many similarities) and young and flaky Tamara Sim who gets the assignment to interview the famous Honor, worked really well. When we meet them they appear as if belonging to two different universes but In the end we find out that both women harbor dark secrets and are not exactly as dissimilar as they appear on the surface. I enjoyed the dark humor in the book and the beautiful prose. I found the portrayal of the decline and old age as represented in embittered Honor Tait quite devastating.
September 19, 2011
9/19/11: In my ongoing quest to know ever more about Ian McEwan, I read The Spoiler, by his wife, Annalena McAfee. I learned nothing about McEwan, or McAfee, as far as I can tell (beyond her thank you to him in the Acknowledgements), though I am glad I read it--if only to say I did. McAfee is a competent, articulate writer, but her story, which is supposed to be darkly comic and archly melodramatic, was a bit lost on me. Too much inside understanding of the British world of journalism is required, and I know I missed a lot. And it dragged a bit, especially the first half; while I get that she was trying to set up the great conflagration at the end very carefully (not a spoiler to say so, I think), she didn't need to do so quite so carefully. She did a too good job of making Honor Tait almost completely unloveable, and of making Tamara Sim slightly pathetic--while I think she meant to do that, in the name of satire and sendup of the whole business, it backfired on me--I didn't care about them, or what happened to them, so why read the book? Still, I enjoyed the story, and the end was very satisfying, and McAfee has a good sense of language and humor. (or should I say humour?)
June 24, 2012
A period piece about Journalists...
If that sounds interesting, you will enjoy this book.
As a time capsule of when new media and the Internet was beginning to transition into super power it is engaging; and doubly so as a contrast of journalistic styles.
Told from a point of view of a up-and-comer bred on gossip & the cult of celebrity and a former in-the-trenches award winning Journalist in the twilight of her life.
I used the iPad dictionary quite a bit... at least as much as the author used a thesaurus, but I enjoyed that.
The story gets more interesting and twisty but it is totally worth reading. It begins a bit slow but once I got into it was a real page turner.
If that sounds interesting, you will enjoy this book.
As a time capsule of when new media and the Internet was beginning to transition into super power it is engaging; and doubly so as a contrast of journalistic styles.
Told from a point of view of a up-and-comer bred on gossip & the cult of celebrity and a former in-the-trenches award winning Journalist in the twilight of her life.
I used the iPad dictionary quite a bit... at least as much as the author used a thesaurus, but I enjoyed that.
The story gets more interesting and twisty but it is totally worth reading. It begins a bit slow but once I got into it was a real page turner.
October 10, 2012
Ugh, I cannot recommend this book at all. The main character was snobby and unlikeable, the writing was dense, and the author used so many elaborate SAT words and references I felt like I needed a dictionary next to me for every paragraph. I kept waiting for something to happen, bearing through this novel, and nothing did. The "cliffhanger" at the end was the most obvious reveal. Such an odd way to treat a reader by trying to impress him/her with this ridiculously elitist writing then dumbing down a narrative by making it the easiest "mystery" in the world. I do not know how it received such great reviews.
October 21, 2012
This started well but was ultimately disappointing. I really enjoyed reading about British journalism in the late 1990s, esp. since I was involved in American journalism at that time. I also thought it would be fun to read about a female journalist in the 1940s & beyond. However, the "doyenne of British journalism" turned into the same kind of disappointing writer that the tabloid chick was -- or maybe it was just McAfee who couldn't write well. I'm not sure - but I wanted to like this much more than I did.
March 6, 2013
What a disappointment. This could have been wonderful but McAfee didn't develop her characters or the story line enough to make them at all believable. I did learn some new vocabulary words:
hermeneutic
chthonic
crepuscular
I always appreciate good vocabulary but in this case it seems as if McAfee was showing off her vocabulary to mask her prosaic and hackneyed plot (right back at you, McAfee)
hermeneutic
chthonic
crepuscular
I always appreciate good vocabulary but in this case it seems as if McAfee was showing off her vocabulary to mask her prosaic and hackneyed plot (right back at you, McAfee)
August 11, 2012
The story gave interesting insight into the media machine, but I found Tamara to be more of a caricature than a character. Honestly, could someone be so completely vapid and unself-aware? Probably, but I'd hate to believe it. Honor rang a little more true, but the Tamara's character was so cartoonish that it pulled me out of the story.
June 25, 2012
I was so disappointed in this book. I read multiple good reviews, but the plot didn't pick up until page 200 (out of 200!). Don't waste your time on this one.
January 15, 2014
I loved it. My family found it too erudite.
December 23, 2020
London's tabloids are in a cut-throat competition to scoop one another in the late 1990s, just as the age of the internet is dawning. The book's protagonist, Tamara Sims, is caught in the rush when she is commissioned to write a piece on the life and times of Honor Tait, one of the country's great war correspondents.
Several times I was tempted to give up on The Spoiler altogether, but then I'd turn it over and read the reviews: "A cracking plot, alive with twists and turns and meaning" - The [London] Times and "Extremely funny and sharply observed" - the Guardian and "...a darkly, deliciously witty read" - The Independent. The reviews (and NPR) couldn't all be wrong. Could they? Unfortunately, for me, the answer was yes.
More than once I found myself wondering what I was missing. Was this a farce, in the style of Confederacy of Dunces? (Now there's a book I never should have read.) Every so often I would decide that it was, and then The Spoiler became almost funny, but then I'd change my mind and decide that this book really was intended to be taken seriously. To farce or not to farce? I still don't know. Equally frustrating was that Annalena McAfee alternates between clearheaded, fabulous writing and truly tying her sentences in knots. Several times I skipped entire paragraphs or skimmed multiple pages simply because I couldn't take anymore of the meandering, let's-play-thesaurus prose. (I should add that never once did I need to go back to see what I'd missed - evidently, you can skim heavily and still get the gist.) Also, there are many, many characters who seemed to exist entirely for McAfee's amusement (or word count). That is, they didn't appear to have any real relevance to the story (such as the Monday night salon gang), and their stories neither started, stopped, or intertwined in any meaningful way. Other characters seemed to have stories with real direction, but then they just disappeared in the last pages, leaving me wondering what the point was. Similarly, both Tamara and Honor Tait seemed to have back stories that were never fully revealed and didn't serve a great deal of (any?) purpose. Even more, I found the most interesting plot line - the coming Internet age - to be the least explored and, therefore, the most disappointing. Finally, I really did not like either Tamara or Honor, but given my litany of other complaints, it seems that hardly matters.
You've probably gathered, but I was tremendously disappointed in this book. There was a lot of promise here, and McAfee clearly has the chops for it, but the book was dragged down by unsympathetic characters and plodding prose.
Several times I was tempted to give up on The Spoiler altogether, but then I'd turn it over and read the reviews: "A cracking plot, alive with twists and turns and meaning" - The [London] Times and "Extremely funny and sharply observed" - the Guardian and "...a darkly, deliciously witty read" - The Independent. The reviews (and NPR) couldn't all be wrong. Could they? Unfortunately, for me, the answer was yes.
More than once I found myself wondering what I was missing. Was this a farce, in the style of Confederacy of Dunces? (Now there's a book I never should have read.) Every so often I would decide that it was, and then The Spoiler became almost funny, but then I'd change my mind and decide that this book really was intended to be taken seriously. To farce or not to farce? I still don't know. Equally frustrating was that Annalena McAfee alternates between clearheaded, fabulous writing and truly tying her sentences in knots. Several times I skipped entire paragraphs or skimmed multiple pages simply because I couldn't take anymore of the meandering, let's-play-thesaurus prose. (I should add that never once did I need to go back to see what I'd missed - evidently, you can skim heavily and still get the gist.) Also, there are many, many characters who seemed to exist entirely for McAfee's amusement (or word count). That is, they didn't appear to have any real relevance to the story (such as the Monday night salon gang), and their stories neither started, stopped, or intertwined in any meaningful way. Other characters seemed to have stories with real direction, but then they just disappeared in the last pages, leaving me wondering what the point was. Similarly, both Tamara and Honor Tait seemed to have back stories that were never fully revealed and didn't serve a great deal of (any?) purpose. Even more, I found the most interesting plot line - the coming Internet age - to be the least explored and, therefore, the most disappointing. Finally, I really did not like either Tamara or Honor, but given my litany of other complaints, it seems that hardly matters.
You've probably gathered, but I was tremendously disappointed in this book. There was a lot of promise here, and McAfee clearly has the chops for it, but the book was dragged down by unsympathetic characters and plodding prose.
September 5, 2014
Annalena McAfee's "The Spoiler" is the type of tale that I found increasingly hard not to live-blog, let alone blurt all of my thoughts and commentary into a premature feature. And if I'm being really honest, I was reluctant to keep reading at times because I am pretty quick (a friend in junior high nicknamed me Speedy Gonzalez), and the world she depicts is so engrossing, even though it's so close to my own actual world, I didn't want it to be over.
I feel it necessary to point out that I was tipped off to McAfee, a U.K. writer, by Entertainment Weekly's book review section in their magazine. Through a short blurb about "The Spoiler," in which they focused on the dueling narrators-- one a seasoned, hardened journalist from war-torn times and one an eager, up-and-coming "fluff" writer. Entertainment Weekly didn't seem to want to address the "meta" nature of reviewing a book like "The Spoiler" in their publication-- a publication at which the former character would subjectively turn up her nose. Nor did they call out just how much the issues of sensationalized journalism are still at play today. Entertainment Weekly is a consumer-facing magazine, so they didn't make the assumption that the readers of their review would see their own stories identified within those characters in "The Spoiler." And yet, I can't help but wonder if the reviewer herself did and was inspired to look at how she goes about writing her own stories because of it.
I know I was.
"The Spoiler" is a work of period fiction (set in 1997, right around the time the "World Wide Web" finally stopped being written off as a "fad" and started being taken seriously in business, especially that of delivering news), but it might as well be plucked from the "then" of the '90s and dropped into the "now" of social media and consumer journalism. It is a novel that every journalist or blogger-- or writer in general-- should read. Brilliantly written from two very distinct generational points of view, "The Spoiler" is a study of just how far a reporter should be willing to go for the story.
On one end of the spectrum, there is Honor Tait, a legend of political reporting from a time that cared about cold reporting hard news stories. In her later years, she released a book compiling her experiences gathering some of her most famous stories, and it is that book that finds her on the other side of the interview hot seat, paired up with a wet behind her ears, young tabloid reporter named Tamara Sim. Honor's life, once revered for her work as a female in a male-dominated profession, and still studied as a great example of the profession in universities, is all about her work, and she wants to keep it that way. Yet, Sim, known for penning flowery non-news stories just wants to get to the gossip-- what Honor's interactions with only the most well-known celebrity subjects were really like. And her definition of celebrity does not include government leaders or political activists or philanthropists of any kind. They all bore her. She wants the dirt on Frank Sinatra, Marilyn Monroe, and Liza Minnelli. She feels she doesn't have a story if she doesn't have quotes on that or on Honor's difficult upbringing.
Honor and Tamara come from two completely different worlds, though they share the same business card title. Honor is a staunch believer of keeping herself out of the story, and though her life is the story now, she is reluctant to accept it, let alone let this uneducated stranger into it. Tamara, on the other hand, writes herself into the story better than she actually captures her subjects. She doesn't truly listen to their stories-- too focused on meeting her deadlines and taking the angle she wants at all cost. Both women may be shrewd and diligent about getting their stories, but their sensibilities will never allow them to "meet in the middle," so to speak.
Honor finds Tamara immature and insincere (and once she realizes Tamara never even read the book she is there to talk about, she begins to mess with her), while Tamara finds the older woman too hard to work with (it is notable that the woman doesn't actually want to talk about anything, yet agreed to do an interview in the first place). Both have great disdain for the other; both write each other off almost immediately at first interaction-- though it's important to note that neither would have a place in the industry without the other. The world depicted within "The Spoiler" is utterly fascinating, and spot-on in accuracy, but it admittedly it is extremely niche.
As a member of these ladies' industry, I went into the reading assuming I would automatically identify with Honor's plight, even though I am much closer to Tamara in approach. I consider myself old-fashioned when it comes to what I even consider important news, after all. But McAfee is too clever a writer for such simplicity. Upon further inspection, it actually appears that both women have a lot more in common than either of them might be willing to admit. In many ways, Tamara's gumption and willingness to dig deep and get at the story she knows is in there (even if some of us would say "Who cares!?" about the subject matter) is directly indicative of Honor's own glory days. And in many ways, Honor's unwillingness to change with the times serves as a cautionary tale for Tamara, who finds herself facing such a thing much earlier in her career than Honor-- not in type of content but in medium itself. There are times in the story you will root for and respect Honor, but there are equal times you may find yourself doing so with Tamara. Admittedly, depending on your own baggage and point of view brought to the story, you will most likely lean toward one woman more than the other, though arguments could be made for being on either "Team." Neither woman is perfect, nor is the environment in which they have chosen to live, breathe, and work, and both are more reactionary that you might expect. But it is in the reveal of the "whys" behind their behaviors-- Honor's guardedness and Tamara's sheer ambition-- that makes them most relatable and manages to capture a little bit of us all in this very specific story.
I feel it necessary to point out that I was tipped off to McAfee, a U.K. writer, by Entertainment Weekly's book review section in their magazine. Through a short blurb about "The Spoiler," in which they focused on the dueling narrators-- one a seasoned, hardened journalist from war-torn times and one an eager, up-and-coming "fluff" writer. Entertainment Weekly didn't seem to want to address the "meta" nature of reviewing a book like "The Spoiler" in their publication-- a publication at which the former character would subjectively turn up her nose. Nor did they call out just how much the issues of sensationalized journalism are still at play today. Entertainment Weekly is a consumer-facing magazine, so they didn't make the assumption that the readers of their review would see their own stories identified within those characters in "The Spoiler." And yet, I can't help but wonder if the reviewer herself did and was inspired to look at how she goes about writing her own stories because of it.
I know I was.
"The Spoiler" is a work of period fiction (set in 1997, right around the time the "World Wide Web" finally stopped being written off as a "fad" and started being taken seriously in business, especially that of delivering news), but it might as well be plucked from the "then" of the '90s and dropped into the "now" of social media and consumer journalism. It is a novel that every journalist or blogger-- or writer in general-- should read. Brilliantly written from two very distinct generational points of view, "The Spoiler" is a study of just how far a reporter should be willing to go for the story.
On one end of the spectrum, there is Honor Tait, a legend of political reporting from a time that cared about cold reporting hard news stories. In her later years, she released a book compiling her experiences gathering some of her most famous stories, and it is that book that finds her on the other side of the interview hot seat, paired up with a wet behind her ears, young tabloid reporter named Tamara Sim. Honor's life, once revered for her work as a female in a male-dominated profession, and still studied as a great example of the profession in universities, is all about her work, and she wants to keep it that way. Yet, Sim, known for penning flowery non-news stories just wants to get to the gossip-- what Honor's interactions with only the most well-known celebrity subjects were really like. And her definition of celebrity does not include government leaders or political activists or philanthropists of any kind. They all bore her. She wants the dirt on Frank Sinatra, Marilyn Monroe, and Liza Minnelli. She feels she doesn't have a story if she doesn't have quotes on that or on Honor's difficult upbringing.
Honor and Tamara come from two completely different worlds, though they share the same business card title. Honor is a staunch believer of keeping herself out of the story, and though her life is the story now, she is reluctant to accept it, let alone let this uneducated stranger into it. Tamara, on the other hand, writes herself into the story better than she actually captures her subjects. She doesn't truly listen to their stories-- too focused on meeting her deadlines and taking the angle she wants at all cost. Both women may be shrewd and diligent about getting their stories, but their sensibilities will never allow them to "meet in the middle," so to speak.
Honor finds Tamara immature and insincere (and once she realizes Tamara never even read the book she is there to talk about, she begins to mess with her), while Tamara finds the older woman too hard to work with (it is notable that the woman doesn't actually want to talk about anything, yet agreed to do an interview in the first place). Both have great disdain for the other; both write each other off almost immediately at first interaction-- though it's important to note that neither would have a place in the industry without the other. The world depicted within "The Spoiler" is utterly fascinating, and spot-on in accuracy, but it admittedly it is extremely niche.
As a member of these ladies' industry, I went into the reading assuming I would automatically identify with Honor's plight, even though I am much closer to Tamara in approach. I consider myself old-fashioned when it comes to what I even consider important news, after all. But McAfee is too clever a writer for such simplicity. Upon further inspection, it actually appears that both women have a lot more in common than either of them might be willing to admit. In many ways, Tamara's gumption and willingness to dig deep and get at the story she knows is in there (even if some of us would say "Who cares!?" about the subject matter) is directly indicative of Honor's own glory days. And in many ways, Honor's unwillingness to change with the times serves as a cautionary tale for Tamara, who finds herself facing such a thing much earlier in her career than Honor-- not in type of content but in medium itself. There are times in the story you will root for and respect Honor, but there are equal times you may find yourself doing so with Tamara. Admittedly, depending on your own baggage and point of view brought to the story, you will most likely lean toward one woman more than the other, though arguments could be made for being on either "Team." Neither woman is perfect, nor is the environment in which they have chosen to live, breathe, and work, and both are more reactionary that you might expect. But it is in the reveal of the "whys" behind their behaviors-- Honor's guardedness and Tamara's sheer ambition-- that makes them most relatable and manages to capture a little bit of us all in this very specific story.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 30, 2017
Finished this a few days ago and here's what I think after letting it simmer on the back burner. The writing was great, witty, dark humor. The look behind the curtains of the journalism was clever, and the contrast between our aging, serious, war journalist and the young up can coming journalist who seems perfectly happy to settle for tabloid journalism is well done and they are perfectly happy to use the other to their own ends. But in the end I just did not like this book. It was slow, the characters while interesting to observe were unlikable and the big secret was not a surprise. But the book only set me back 50 cents so at least there's that.
December 3, 2017
this book is a light read, relatively entertaining, with two well-drawn, humanly flawed, protagonists. however despite the potential for some really interesting plot twists, the revelations are in the end predictable and mundane. it's really a lost opportunity, as the life of the retired journalist hannah tait is rich with possibilities, and the young gutter journalist tamara sim embodies so much of what is rotten in contemporary britain. so in the end it was somewhat disappointing.
January 4, 2019
I’m DNF’ing this book at page 124. I gave it it shot, but pages of inside baseball about English news publishing with two main characters that were both unsympathetic and dull just isn’t for me. The book was also full of unnecessary polysyllabic words, which made reading a lot less fun. In different hands this maybe could have been a light, gossipy book about the changing newspaper industry in the 90s. But unfortunately it isn’t.
July 7, 2023
Boring is too nice a word. I wish I wasn’t someone who had to finish every book I start. I would never have finished this book otherwise. I knew from the get-go how it would end, and just wished it was over.
March 15, 2018
Pretentious and boring.
June 9, 2020
Trop de mots et pas assez d’intrigues
October 21, 2020
Got about 1/2 through this & realized I didn’t care enough about either protagonist.
April 13, 2021
If only i had been more interested in the older journalist sooner- decent though once it started to go somewhere.
May 3, 2025
garbage -
Displaying 1 - 30 of 85 reviews