Poll

I've read most of My Brilliant Friend, but it wasn't one that got to me as it did others. I'm excited to give it another shot, since I do like Ferrante quite a bit.

I've never read Wizard of the Crow, though. Every year I think it's the year I get to know Ngugi wa Thiong'o's work, but that still hasn't happened!

I don't know anything about this Ngugi book. Hopefully some of you can help me out with this vote.

My Brilliant Friend - or actually the tetralogy because let's be clear this is one novel in four parts - where do I start.

Pros:

a) looking at my personal rankings (outside of GR) this is I think the highest rated, certainly in terms of enjoyment, of any book in the tournament, albeit that is partly due to us having picked the "wrong" book for several other authors.

To quote from Elena's publisher's reaction to the draft of her second novel, a novel that tells much the same story as these books:

"It is from the first line to the last, pure pleasure of narration"

It is such a favourite that to celebrate our collective 98th birthday, Gumble's Yard and I are going to see the new play of the book next month.

b) it has got people reading translated literary fiction in huge numbers who normally would never do so.

c) Elena Ferrante's desire to remain anonymous is commendable

"I won’t participate in discussions and conferences, if I’m invited. I won’t go and accept prizes, if any are awarded to me. I will never promote the book, especially on television, not in Italy or, as the case may be, abroad. I will be interviewed only in writing, but I would prefer to limit even that to the indispensable minimum

I believe that books, once they are written, have no need of their authors. If they have something to say, they will sooner or later find readers; if not, they won’t."

d) it has a handy list of characters, updated to follow the action from one book to the next

e) the memorable Lenu and Lila pairing

And the pleasure of memorable female characters created by a female writer - unlike as Lenu points out in the historical literature, starting from the biblical creation story through to the great 19th century novels - Flaubert's Bovary and Tolstoy's Karenina (see elsewhere in this tournament):

"I discovered everywhere female automatons created by men. There was nothing of ourselves, and the little there was that rose up in protest immediately became material for their manufacturing"

Cons - mostly other side of the corresponding pro:

a) the prose is not at all special, at times quite poor. Jonathan will I am sure expand on this but his review says it nicely:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...?

Ferrante's own response to that:

I publish to be read. It’s the only thing that interests me about publication. So I employ all the strategies I know to capture the reader’s attention, stimulate curiosity, make the page as dense as possible and as easy as possible to turn.

But once I have the reader’s attention I feel it is my right to pull it in whichever direction I choose. I don’t think the reader should be indulged as a consumer, because he isn’t one. Literature that indulges the tastes of the reader is a degraded literature. My goal is to disappoint the usual expectations and inspire new ones.

b) is this just upmarket beach-read chick lit. It is certainly the way Europa Editions seem to have decided to market it with those dreadful covers.

c) Elena's Ferrante's publishers decision to milk her anonymity for extra publicity is lamentable. As is the decision to drip feed certain info on her bio - that her mother was a Neopolitan seamstress for example - which rather invites journalists to play stop the author / prove the bio is false.

d) it needs the handy list of characters. And is "the neighbourhood" really so insular that the same group of 16 people of a similar age from 9 families date / marry / murder / feud with each other all their lives.

There is a scene at the start of Book 4 where some characters meet in the Solara's shoe-shop. Trying to remember who was who, I realised that here is Elena's boyfriend sweetheart Antonio who some years later, as a hired thug, beat up Elena's new lover, Nino because at the time Nino was Lila's lover. Lila was then married to Stefano who was business partners with the Solano brothers, for whom Antonio worked and who were both infatuated with Lila. Antonio's sister is now Stefano's new partner but later becomes the lover of Lila's estranged husband. Antonio's mother lost her mind many years ago after a love affair with Nino's father, who later was Elena's first lover .......

e) the ultra-cheesy device in books 2 on where Lenu finds Lila's diary and so is able to tell her story

This is apples and oranges, if anything in this tournament is.

I liked the Ferrante better than I expected, but it wasn't so superlative that another great book might not trounce it in my estimation.

I've never read Ngugi wa Thiong'o, and hadn't heard of him before maybe three years ago, but have since heard loads about him as a potential Nobel winner, and as someone who makes a stand for writing in indigenous languages as opposed to potentially bland World English. (I've posted this article on GR about half a dozen times now, so apologies to those who've seen it before: Tim Parks on The Dull New Global Novel)

I believe that Ngugi wa Thiong'o is a writer worth backing against Ferrante Fever if one has read neither - as others have said about other authors, Ferrante doesn't especially need another boost - but if someone loves her work, then absolutely fair enough, I can see why, even if I liked more than loved the two I've read.

Anto's points about Ngugi are pushing me that direction, Paul. Your post makes me think that you're okay with that even if you love these books.

I really must get to all of them . . .

On balance I will vote for Wizard of the Crow, partly to honour an off-market agreement relating to Correction/OHYOS and partly because it is ultimately a far more important book.

and don't let the length put you off - Wizard of the Crow it is a very enjoyable read.

Two books I have never read again but I did like the one Thiong'o I read years ago (The River Between) and black Africa is underrepresented here...

Another thing in favour of Wizard of the Crow - the translation.

I am a big fan of translated literature, but there is always the issue that one is hearing the author's voice through a filter.

But here one has the best of both worlds. A book originally written in Gikuyu - but then translated into English by the author himself.

Seeing that it's a comic novel is another point in its favour. Both in this tournament, and in African Literature - most of you here will probably have seen articles about how what's published and promoted in the US and UK is typically serious and concentrates on depictions of newsworthy topics such as war and poverty, neglecting that there's a whole lot more to culture in African countries.

Well the underlying topic matter is pretty serious - but it is done with a satirical, farcical, touch.

Trevor wrote: "I've read most of My Brilliant Friend, but it wasn't one that got to me as it did others.

I have no knowledge of The Wizard of the Crow, and hence my observations are purely a (strongly negative) view on My Brilliant Friend.
Paul has sat on the fence and praised and criticised the book in some detail, in equal measure.
Paul also slips in his view (and quotes) that this is a four book vote. It's not. We voted on Wolf Hall and not Wolf Hall/Bring up The Bodies. We vote for individual books and not the whole body of a particular author's works.
I didn't think the story line, or character development, was anything more than averagely average. What really struck me though was the translation from Italian. Surely the great translaters produce something that's so good that you would hardly know it's a translation? Like a great refereeing performance where you don't notice his/her presence.
I am very interested to hear a view of My Brilliant Friend from contributors on this board who rejoice in reading translated fiction. I found so many sentences and paragraphs that were so clunky as to be unreadable.
My review (which Paul kindly hyperlinked) draws attention to a couple, but what adds further grist to my mill is the extract Paul took as one of his supposed points in favour- it's horrible.

"I discovered everywhere female automatons created by men. There was nothing of ourselves, and the little there was that rose up in protest immediately became material for their manufacturing"
material for their manufacturing??????

Trevor, of all the books you could have chosen for this competition, and given the strength and diversity of 63/64ths of them, why did you decide to include My Brilliant Friend? I'm intrigued. You say in your comments here that you didn't particularly warm to it. Dare I suggest that it's the combination of a female writer, and of the Italian nationality that were the main incentives, giving gender diversity and internationalism to the overall list?

Jonathan - you have successfully persuaded me not to support my favourite book and I think I did my best (through gritted teeth) to point out that all its apparent strengths have offsetting flaws.

But to take issue with one point:
Paul also slips in his view (and quotes) that this is a four book vote. It's not. We voted on Wolf Hall and not Wolf Hall/Bring up The Bodies. We vote for individual books and not the whole body of a particular author's works.

Not sure it will impact anyone's opinon but there I disagree. Ferrante has made it very clear this is one novel which happened to be serialised i.e. published in four parts. One may as well argue that Bleak House, say, is actually 19 different books, as that is how it was originally published. The English publishers chose to brand them as separate novels - the originals are numbers as parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Paul wrote: "Ferrante has made it very clear this is one novel which happened to be serialised i.e. published in four parts. One may as well argue that Bleak House, say, is actually 19 different books, as that is how it was originally published. The English publishers chose to brand them as separate novels - the originals are numbers as parts 1, 2, 3 and 4. ."

Ah, shame it wasn't suggested to include the whole "quartet" as there is a listing: The Neapolitan Novels
That would seem a fairer fight in terms of book magnitude.

That listing should of course read The Neopolitan Novel (singular) - my librarian fingers are twitching!

Although as Jonathan correctly points out on the comments on his review of part I, one's opinion isn't going to be changed much either way by parts II-IV.

Indeed in a way that's why it is one novel not four because they are the same story, written in the same style. Albeit inevitably as the characters age the canvas broadens a little and more of Italian society and politics comes into play.

Antonomasia wrote: "Ah, shame it wasn't suggested to include the whole "quartet" as there is a listing: The Neapolitan Novels
That would seem a fairer fight in terms of book magnitude."

Thank heavens for small mercies

As far as the prose in Ferrante's Neopolitan Novel(s), I agree it is not special or (perhaps) even clunky at times, but there was something very powerful for me in how strong & direct it was. I also thought it managed to not fall into chick-lit completely because the tone was not overly emotional. The covers were absolutely dreadful though.

It is also difficult to vote solely on the quality of MBF rather than on the 4 together. I did think the books got better as they went along, so I can see not loving the first book by itself.

Paul - Is the play MBF alone or is it combining the books? I would love to see that but the ocean makes it difficult. I was a bit surprised you did not vote for MBF - come back to the light Paul!

The play is all of the books - although it is quite long - split into two separate 2.5 hours parts, so becomes almost an all day affair (5 hours in total). Indeed rather like the Harry Potter play - an analogy that Jonathan will like.

Here are the details for anyone in the UK - I suspect it will end up touring:
https://www.rosetheatrekingston.org/w...

As for the vote - Wizard of the Crow was my suggestion to include in the March Madness, and does seem to be surprisingly underread - e.g. less than 2% of my GR friends (who I would think as a self-selected bunch of fans of world literature) have it marked as read. So I'd like to see it progress.

Paul wrote: "The play is all of the books - although it is quite long - split into two separate parts, so becomes almost an all day affair. Indeed rather like the Harry Potter play - an analogy that Jonathan wi..."

good point. I also marked it as to-read now!

After reading the opening of Wizard of the Crow I can't wait to read the whole thing - for those undecided, give it a try...

Jonathan wrote: "Trevor, of all the books you could have chosen for this competition, and given the strength and diversity of 63/64ths of them, why did you decide to include My Brilliant Friend? I'm intrigued."

It wasn't on the basis of my own estimation but rather on how well the book has done, both with the general reading public and with readers of world literature specifically. It was actually one of the easiest to choose when I was thinking of what recent books to put on. Thinking back, I can hardly think of another book from 1990 to now that hit both groups as hard as this one did. Not that all of the books in the tournament have done this, so it wasn't a requirement, but it was nice to find one that did!

Also, I do like Ferrante. I think Days of Abandonment is a masterpiece, but not one many have read so My Brilliant Friend it was!

Lastly, the voting above suggests people love it despite the flaws that drove you away . . . :-)

It's notable that the voting on this one has a big gender divide. This is possibly not a big surprise given the book subject matter focussing on two girls in the macho male environment that it Naples.
So, of the six votes garnered for My Brilliant Friend, we have five female votes, oh, and Gumbles Yard.

Do you think it was the translation that generated the most anger in you, Jonathan? I'm curious if that was what started tipping the tree in the wrong direction for you, and once a tree has started tipping it's mighty hard to get it to fall the other way.

By the way, I saw Paul bring up Harry Potter in this context; is that because you are a super fan or are you super down on it as well?

I ask because I'm a big fan of the Harry Potter books, even though I think I understand the reasons people criticize them. I feel the many strengths make the weaknesses insignificant. Perhaps that's what happened here with My Brilliant Friend.

Reference Harry Potter, no not at all negative.
Paul was gently poking fun at my review of Master and Margarita which I read this week (direct consequence of this competition). I noted in my review that high speed broomsticks feature in both, while Voldemort and Woland struck me with their similarities.
Absolutely loved Master and Margarita.

You passed my test!

Just kidding -- I never let someone's differences in taste affect my feelings toward them . . . unless, as we shall see, the author in question is Edith Wharton!

My review
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

Much as I love The Neapolitan Quartet - re-reading my review and remembering how much I admired "Wizard" has caused my to change my vote.

Jonathan wrote: "... the extract Paul took as one of his supposed points in favour- it's horrible.
"I discovered everywhere female automatons created by men. There was nothing of ourselves, and the little there was that rose up in protest immediately became material for their manufacturing"
material for their manufacturing??????

How would you have phrased it instead? (Genuine question, not trying to be snippy; somewhere in the group is a post where I rewrote a couple of sentences of a Maureen Freely Pamuk translation I considered disappointing.)
I think the above is pretty good because it extends the metaphor from the previous sentence whilst showing the recursive nature of the way the women felt trapped. If I've any argument with it, it's that one can't actually have "little" of "nothing", even if the words do both emphasise paucity.

Antonomasia wrote: "Jonathan wrote: "... the extract Paul took as one of his supposed points in favour- it's horrible.
"I discovered everywhere female automatons created by men. There was nothing of ourselves, and the little there was that rose up in protest immediately became material for their manufacturing"."

Gosh, no pressure here! I guess I've brought this on myself for being rather strident on Ferrante.
Here goes:

"All around me I discovered female stereotypes created by men. There was nothing of ourselves, and the little there was that rose up in protest, and became material for the perpetuation of those prejudices".

For a less radical change I would at least say manufacture rather than manufacturing.

I have reservations that Ferrante, or her translator, can have meant to associate "automaton" with female. I've come across many descriptions of women by men, some of them derogatory, but "automaton" is not one of them. The main association of 'automaton'is that of being mechanical, or mechanical and unemotional. The charge sometimes made against women is that they are too emotional. Automaton is mostly used in futuristic sci- fi writing. I doubt there are too many description in prose, in any published work of fiction, that combine automaton with the female sex, that aren't in a robotic sense.

So the continuation of the automaton metaphor via the word manufacturing is, to my eye, flawed at the outset.

Ah, I read "automaton" as an allusion to The Stepford Wives.

Thanks for posting your version!

Antonomasia wrote: "Ah, I read "automaton" as an allusion to The Stepford Wives."

I see what you mean, where Stepford Wives is referred to as a satire on compliant wives. The book/film does have android/ robots too!

As an aside, on the subject of book names becoming a stand alone part of the English language (from The Trial thread), the term "Stepford Wife" is an example of this (and supports your response reference automaton and female caricature).

Has anyone got the Italian original - seems a bizarre translation discussion otherwise?!

I do know that the original does include the phrase "Automi di donna fabbricati da maschi" - which seems pretty much word-for-word "female automatons created by men." I know that because academic seminar have been held just on the very importance of this phrase e.g. https://www.leeds.ac.uk/arts/events/e...

Don't forget the concept - it isn't about women being emotional or unemotional. It is the narrator (not the author!) arguing that most famous women in fiction are written - manufactured - by men who don't understand how women feel and experience emotion (see the Marias vs Fitzgerald thread). I don't think stereotypes actually quite works.

I do agree that the 2nd sentence in English is clunky including a lack of commas, but don't have the original to check.

This book is generating such a fascinating discussion that we ought to put it through to round 2!

This is a great discussion. I think "material for their manufacturing" reads awkwardly, but not incorrectly. And I'm not sure how I'd change it to keep the sense of raw materials and fabrication. Automatons, though, works well for me. An automaton can be manipulated to do what the manufacturer wants, even if that is being overly emotional, in need, dependent, etc.

I just finished Goldstein's translation of Baricco's The Young Bride last night, and her translation/the writing was the best part of the book, so I think she's capable.

I don't remember feeling the prose in My Brilliant Friend was anything special, but I also didn't feel distracted by it.

I really don't want to labour the point, and the analysis of "manufacturing" was a response to the selected prose in Paul's set-up message st the start of this thread.

A sentence that I referred to in my original review reads:

"But a wedding was, above all, an occasion where no one should make a bad showing, especially girls without fiancés, who there would have a chance of finding one and getting settled, marrying, in their turn, within a few years" (p303)

" who there would have a chance of finding one"??

I appreciate that many books if subject to microscopic scrutiny might fail the pure English test, and I'm not suggesting that I took advice at the feet of FR Leavis, or Harold Bloom.

I originally voted for My Brilliant Friend simply because the other is 768 pages, but you've convinced me to change my vote.

My Brilliant Friend is 1700 pages!

Ha ha.

Couple of things for completeness:

I found the full Italian for the passage whose translation we discussed.

Scoprivo dappertutto automi di donna fabbricati dagli uomini. Di nostro non c’era nulla, quel poco che insorgeva diventava subito materia per la loro manifattura.

So automatons and their manufacturing does exist in the original - so any fault lies with the author, not the translator (unless they have a different nuance / read more naturally in Italian - the translation does seem almost too literally word for word).

Also dug out my copy of La frantumaglia, where Ferrante does indeed make it clear there is one 1700 page book.

"I consider the four installments of My Brilliant Friend to be a single story ... the story was conceived and written as a single narrative."

I'm sad to see this vote end in a bit less than a day. The conversation has been great!

Trevor wrote: "I'm sad to see this vote end in a bit less than a day. The conversation has been great!"

Well 90% of it has been about Ferrante so one obvious way to keep it going in the next round.... Will give Jonathan time to read the whole book as well :-)

Incidentally for those who haven't read Ferrante, are intrigued to do so but find a 1700 page novel a tad off putting her earlier novels are worth seeking out. E.g. The Lost Daughter is 130 pages long and essentially the prototype for My Beautiful Friend, a taster if you like.

I didn't plan on voting in this tournament, then I saw that The Tin Drum lost in round one (shame on you!) and got in invested. So, Wizard of the Crow is a great book, and a really fun read. Don't let the length put you off. It's quick, a surprisingly easy read and funny to boot. You could read this one, or two mediocre books instead. Speaking of, I also read My Brilliant Friend...