Matthew Ted’s Comments (group member since Sep 02, 2020)

Matthew Ted’s comments from the The Obscure Reading Group group.

No Covid thankfully, but I know what you mean. Rumour has it our fool of a PM has been saying some pretty horrendous things about letting bodies pile up. I'm holding onto any compassion I can these days and there's plenty of it on Goodreads thankfully.

I've had some difficulties with the notifications too. I was ill yesterday and never managed to send off anything for the poll but the choices made by everyone else look great. Glad to be going into another one.

My entire generation have read Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, that is the book in English classes at the moment. I did Shakespeare's The Tempest and Titus Andronicus. My brother did Animal Farm, but sadly I did not. I'm a big Orwell fan. In later years, I studied a lot more, but school was somewhat lacking on the novel front. We also studied Tennyson and some Priestley plays.

I have it on my bookcase, Kathleen. It's actually one of those elusive books that for whatever reason you never get around to reading.

I wouldn't choose Hemingway as my go-to American writer, but I did, and I suppose still do, like him. I haven't read him for a few years now as I read way too much at once and, I think, damaged my view of him by simply being sick of his all too recognisable prose.

Love Faulkner and Fitzgerald, Yvonne. One of my big true American loves is Jack Kerouac, though there aren't many of us out there who appreciate him. I've been told countless times I'll grow up and dislike him.

I agree with Ken. I never saw the appeal for his For Whom the Bell Tolls. I had a professor say she had to put it down from crying so much and soaking the pages! I was bored stiff throughout.

I love Hemingway for all his flaws, and have been nurtured by a die-hard Hemingway-fan professor too. Yes, he did have some odd fetishes alright. I think a few things were slightly odd in that posthumous novel, The Garden of Eden. I, mostly, prefer his short stories.

The double M in Hemingway always used to get on my nerves. May as well call him Lemmingway. He was macho enough to jump off cliffs too, no doubt.

Hemingway has a sensitive side through all the bravado. The Old Man and the Sea is a beautiful novel, as are many of his short stories. Sadly, yes, he is mostly remembered for that macho persona he often adopted. I think around the War, that macho side was far more common in men, there was a lot expected of those poor souls who fought in the Wars.

Bionic Jean wrote: "Matthew - You know, I found the style refreshing! Many novels of the 1840s are very dense, and by this I mean sentences are many-layered, and these were not, usually. They flowed, and it was a ligh..."

My "even Dickens" wasn't meant to be damaging to Dickens, I love him. I think Great Expectations is one of the most well-plotted novels. Interesting how you found it an easy read, I was the opposite. This novel was like chewing gravel for me, and I could only manage a few pages at a time before dropping it.

Comparing her to Eliot is a disservice, but I was proving that I wasn't comparing Anne to any sort of modern era as you were suggesting. Anne didn't live as long, you're right, and I think she might have written a good novel, but sadly I don't think this was it. Ironically, what Henry James said about Dickens' novels being "loose baggy monsters"... that applies more aptly here for me. David Copperfield and Tom Sawyer were both published in the 40s, and were far more readable and enjoyable for me. I only wish Anne had lived longer and proved what she was really capable of, this certainly wasn't the height of her power, I'm sure.

Bionic Jean wrote: "I was hoping a few might have enjoyed the book more, but since I've commented so much on the first three threads, I'll just add a couple of thoughts: a few facts, not critical detail. I do have a p..."

I am a big lover of 19th century literature and have been reading a lot of it recently. My judgements were not at all to the modern epoch, that would be ridiculous, but to other books of the time, and for me, personally, this was one of the weakest I've read. I can see why you and others loved it and don't want to take away from that, of course. But, as Kathleen has suggested, the style was what bothered me the most. I found the writing bland, there were no lines that made me want to underline them (I spend a lot of time underlining books) and nothing that made me think, I want to read that again: it was quite the opposite, I was counting the pages for the chapter to end.

I also read Middlemarch recently and I know John is in the process of reading it presently. Eliot's writing was quite telling as this was, because that was the style of the time, as you suggested, Jean, that's what is expected, but Eliot also had these beautiful philosophical moments, truly stunning thoughts, and wonderful poetic lines of prose too. These completely enriched her novel. Or Dickens, even, the beauty of his prose, his characters, the humour and wit... All these things add to narratives. For me, Anne had none of this: the characters were not compelling to me, their stories were slightly more interesting (I respect the themes as I have said previously) but on the whole this novel sparked nothing in me. It had no kick, a bit like tasteless food, perhaps. Having said that, of course, I am so glad that others found something in it. I love books that others hate, that's the joy of reading: if we all liked the same things then Goodreads wouldn't last very long would it?

I quite liked Jane Eyre too, but never loved Wuthering Heights much. I studied them both at University and the general consensus was that people preferred the former, I think. I need to re-read the latter, but from what I can remember of it, it was still better than Tenant. Sad that Emily wrote only one novel, Anne two and Charlotte... Well, several.

I second Nick's comment, thanks for all your moderating again, Ken. The book-club runs like a dream.

I finished it down to obligation too. As much as I respect the themes of the novel... I did not think it was a good novel. In fact, the ideas in the novel were its only merit for me. Had she lived longer than 29, she might have written a great book, but sadly her career ended here. I found it unnecessarily convoluted and bland.

I read some facts the other day and wanted to share: according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "cardboard" first appeared in this novel. I don't remember reading it, but that's quite the feat. On top of that, the term "tied to the apron strings" was also coined here, the quote from the novel goes:

"Even at his age, he ought not to be always tied to his mother’s apron string."

So a novel of new words, if nothing else, it seems.

I've just got to the end of part 2 and am enjoying it slightly more now. I am struggling to read large amounts at once because I find the writing quite bland; I think Ken previously said about "poetic" language and what that meant for him and I agreed with it: none of the lines here stop me and make me want to read them again. It's entirely dialogue and only small mentions here and there of movement, or else internal description. As my own preferences go, I prefer more poetic language and without it, everything else suffers a little in my mind.

Had Anne lived longer than she did, I have no doubt that some of the very interesting themes in this novel would come out again in a better novel, one that is more mature, and written far better.

I think it entered into the "mainstream" in the 90s. Perhaps it's more commonly used in England? It is used very often here on the News. In fact, I only read about "grooming" as in grooming a horse in Victorian novels and always presume it is the other meaning whenever I hear it today.

I suppose English is infamous for having words with multiple meanings, maybe that's why my friends born outside of the UK complain about how stupid our language is!

Grooming in the other sense of the word is sadly done a lot today. As I teach ages from 4 up to teenagers it is something I have to learn about extensively in Safeguarding. "Grooming" is establishing a relationship with a child, building their trust, only to then betray them by using them. In my area, it is mostly building relationship with teenagers to then use them to sell and distribute drugs. There are worse uses for it too. I'm not sure why it is called "grooming", perhaps the term comes from the idea of tending to them, like a beard, by slowly gaining their friendship and trust. I'm not sure.

Interesting, I didn't see it as a memoir at all but rather a diary. It was very commonly used in the time period, there are countless books that are done through diary entries. Most recently I read Dracula which used this form too. I think, as with all writing, one reads with the suspension of disbelief: we know that one cannot write entire conversations verbatim in a diary hours after the fact, but it doesn't really matter in the end, we are reading for the story and can look past the implausibility of it.

Well maybe not so opposite, Nick. Dostoyevsky is tough reading, I agree with you there, but I find him rewarding. Crime and Punishment was a good page turner for me but Notes From Underground was like chewing rubble. So far Tenant has been one of those books you continually put down and don't realise until you've done it. Tolstoy is absolutely dreamy to read though.