fictionfan's review
4.0
Hidden histories...
Two strangers in Paris for very different reasons meet, and through them the reader is taken to two important parts of France’s past – the Nazi occupation of France and France’s own colonial occupation of Algeria. Hannah is a post-doctoral student, in Paris to research a chapter for a book on women’s experiences during the Nazi occupation. Tariq is a 19-year-old from Morocco, who has left his comfortable home to try to find out more about his mother, a Frenchwoman who died when he was an infant.
I have very mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, I knew very little about either of the parts of history Faulks discusses, and found them interesting and well written, with a feeling of having been well researched. On the other hand, the whole framing device of Hannah and Tariq and their experiences is completely unconvincing – so much so that I had to jump over an almost insurmountable credibility barrier before the book had got properly underway.
I’ll get my criticisms out of the way first, then. Hannah has just arrived in Paris, on her own, when she comes across a homeless girl in the street, a complete stranger, who appears to be ill. So she takes her back to her flat, looks after her, leaves her there while she goes out to work and doesn’t mind when the girl moves a friend in – Tariq. Well, that’s all lovely, and nobody robs her or trashes the place and Tariq becomes the perfect lodger. But. Seriously? It simply would never happen, unless Hannah was nuts and we’re not led to believe that she is. Nor did I feel that a young man in Paris for the first adventure of his life would want to spend his time living with a thirty-something landlady.
The other thing that jarred was Faulks attempt to bring a kind of ghostly vibe into the story, as each becomes consumed by the history they are researching. I could have accepted it if there were only one of them – one could have put it down to overwork, stress, over-active imagination, etc. But both beginning to see and hear people and events from the past? Partly my problem with this was that it reminded me a little of how Hari Kunzru brought the past into the present supernaturally in White Tears, and that comparison worked to Faulks’ disadvantage, since Kunzru did it so much more effectively.
But once Faulks begins to let us hear the stories of the women during the Occupation, his storytelling rests on much firmer grounds. He does this by having Hannah listen to tapes made as a kind of living history project, when the women were elderly and looking back at their experiences. I found these stories compelling and often moving, and they carried me through my problems with the framing story. He is making the point that this is a period which France prefers not to examine too closely and tends to somewhat distort by suggesting that most people were either actively or passively resisting the Germans. Faulks suggests that in fact most people were willing to go along with whoever looked like they’d be the winner – their over-riding desire was to not have the same massive loss of life as in WW1 and they didn’t think much more deeply than that. It was only after the tide of war turned against Germany that women were vilified for associating with the German soldiers – Faulks suggests that before that it was commonplace and most people weren’t overly concerned about it.
The other side of the historical aspect – France’s troubled relationship with Algeria – isn’t done quite so well, with an awful lot of info-dumping. However, since I didn’t know a lot of the info I still found it interesting reading. Faulks is obviously comparing the two episodes as opposite sides of occupation, but I felt that was a little simplistic. More interesting was the comparison of how both events are downplayed in France – a hidden past that, Faulks seems to be suggesting, must come fully into the light before France can reconcile itself with its own history and properly understand its present.
I rather wish that, instead of having the present day framing and the double history, Faulks had simply taken us back to the days of the Occupation and told a straightforward story of the women caught up in events. Somehow, the art of plain storytelling seems to be considered old-fashioned at the moment, and books become unnecessarily complex as a result, laying themselves open, as this one does, to having parts that work and parts that don’t. Overall, the good outweighed the less good for me with this one, but I feel it could have been excellent had it been more simply told. Nevertheless, recommended.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Random House Cornerstone.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
Two strangers in Paris for very different reasons meet, and through them the reader is taken to two important parts of France’s past – the Nazi occupation of France and France’s own colonial occupation of Algeria. Hannah is a post-doctoral student, in Paris to research a chapter for a book on women’s experiences during the Nazi occupation. Tariq is a 19-year-old from Morocco, who has left his comfortable home to try to find out more about his mother, a Frenchwoman who died when he was an infant.
I have very mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, I knew very little about either of the parts of history Faulks discusses, and found them interesting and well written, with a feeling of having been well researched. On the other hand, the whole framing device of Hannah and Tariq and their experiences is completely unconvincing – so much so that I had to jump over an almost insurmountable credibility barrier before the book had got properly underway.
I’ll get my criticisms out of the way first, then. Hannah has just arrived in Paris, on her own, when she comes across a homeless girl in the street, a complete stranger, who appears to be ill. So she takes her back to her flat, looks after her, leaves her there while she goes out to work and doesn’t mind when the girl moves a friend in – Tariq. Well, that’s all lovely, and nobody robs her or trashes the place and Tariq becomes the perfect lodger. But. Seriously? It simply would never happen, unless Hannah was nuts and we’re not led to believe that she is. Nor did I feel that a young man in Paris for the first adventure of his life would want to spend his time living with a thirty-something landlady.
The other thing that jarred was Faulks attempt to bring a kind of ghostly vibe into the story, as each becomes consumed by the history they are researching. I could have accepted it if there were only one of them – one could have put it down to overwork, stress, over-active imagination, etc. But both beginning to see and hear people and events from the past? Partly my problem with this was that it reminded me a little of how Hari Kunzru brought the past into the present supernaturally in White Tears, and that comparison worked to Faulks’ disadvantage, since Kunzru did it so much more effectively.
But once Faulks begins to let us hear the stories of the women during the Occupation, his storytelling rests on much firmer grounds. He does this by having Hannah listen to tapes made as a kind of living history project, when the women were elderly and looking back at their experiences. I found these stories compelling and often moving, and they carried me through my problems with the framing story. He is making the point that this is a period which France prefers not to examine too closely and tends to somewhat distort by suggesting that most people were either actively or passively resisting the Germans. Faulks suggests that in fact most people were willing to go along with whoever looked like they’d be the winner – their over-riding desire was to not have the same massive loss of life as in WW1 and they didn’t think much more deeply than that. It was only after the tide of war turned against Germany that women were vilified for associating with the German soldiers – Faulks suggests that before that it was commonplace and most people weren’t overly concerned about it.
The other side of the historical aspect – France’s troubled relationship with Algeria – isn’t done quite so well, with an awful lot of info-dumping. However, since I didn’t know a lot of the info I still found it interesting reading. Faulks is obviously comparing the two episodes as opposite sides of occupation, but I felt that was a little simplistic. More interesting was the comparison of how both events are downplayed in France – a hidden past that, Faulks seems to be suggesting, must come fully into the light before France can reconcile itself with its own history and properly understand its present.
I rather wish that, instead of having the present day framing and the double history, Faulks had simply taken us back to the days of the Occupation and told a straightforward story of the women caught up in events. Somehow, the art of plain storytelling seems to be considered old-fashioned at the moment, and books become unnecessarily complex as a result, laying themselves open, as this one does, to having parts that work and parts that don’t. Overall, the good outweighed the less good for me with this one, but I feel it could have been excellent had it been more simply told. Nevertheless, recommended.
NB This book was provided for review by the publisher, Random House Cornerstone.
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
georgie_mb's review against another edition
4.0
This book didn’t completely blow me away, but it also didn’t leave me bored either!
I loved the storyline from the perspective of both characters that shifted from one to another in each chapter. They certainly are flawed (which I love) and a real contrast from each other. I did find the character of Hannah a little flat, but that is part of her nature. I think I just wanted a little more sometimes, even when she talks about her failed romance with the Russian poet.
I really loved how at different points, the smaller characters and events find their way subtly into the main characters chapters, it’s very cleverly done!
The main thing that kept me reading was the portrayal of Paris!! I’m a sucker for travel, and being restricted from being able to do that right now is hard. So this book with all its descriptions of this wonderful city had me yearning to jump on the Eurostar ASAP!
I loved the storyline from the perspective of both characters that shifted from one to another in each chapter. They certainly are flawed (which I love) and a real contrast from each other. I did find the character of Hannah a little flat, but that is part of her nature. I think I just wanted a little more sometimes, even when she talks about her failed romance with the Russian poet.
I really loved how at different points, the smaller characters and events find their way subtly into the main characters chapters, it’s very cleverly done!
The main thing that kept me reading was the portrayal of Paris!! I’m a sucker for travel, and being restricted from being able to do that right now is hard. So this book with all its descriptions of this wonderful city had me yearning to jump on the Eurostar ASAP!
thebooktrail88's review
4.0
Visit the locations in the novel
The story is separated into chapters each of them named after a metro station or area of the city. (It’s actually a really fun and quirky way of finding your way around as well) Paris is the city for reading its history through the names of its stations and streets. Some of them reveal historical battles, figures and a moment in time. Every one is a chapter in Tariq and Hannah’s stories.
I found the characters of Tariq and Hannah to be very interesting in how they give such unique viewpoints of a time and place, a setting and the people of the city over time.Both are outsiders but each wander the streets looking for something, answers, a history, a clue …..Two lost souls in a city lost to them.
Hannah’s story looking into the women during the war and how they reacted to the German occupation was interesting. Often a part of history forgotten. There were some tough ‘scenes’ to read and it made me think of all those stories women never got to tell, that we still don’t know about.
This was like a history lesson told via the metro stations with a good strong message. Two people wanting to find answers talk and help each other to form a bigger picture so they both find their own story. The city, and the past are full of surprises but it’s only by looking into the past and learning from it that we can really continue and move forward. How we deal with war, how we fall into the trap of following the crowd, drowning out individual voices, how war shapes a person…there’s lots in here to explore.
It does read a bit heavy handed at times and doesn’t flow in parts. The story also sometimes
rosannajhunt's review
4.0
17.30
For a Faulks fan/Francophile, this novel was like catching up with an old friend. I’m not sure that the travels through time and history always totally worked, but it was an enjoyable and thought-provoking journey in any case.
For a Faulks fan/Francophile, this novel was like catching up with an old friend. I’m not sure that the travels through time and history always totally worked, but it was an enjoyable and thought-provoking journey in any case.
sunflower_reads's review
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
1.5
henry_allsebrook's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
I picked this up for the setting. I was not disappointed. The choice of language was beautiful. It didn’t go too far into the cliché direction I was fearing- a nice change- but it felt like it didn’t have a direction to begin with. The historical and literary anecdotes were intriguing, and maybe focused on a bit too much, with regards to their place in the story. But I did overall enjoy it, even if the plot wasn’t the most exciting, as the language the book consists of, more than makes up for it.
joli_folie's review
2.0
I chose this book because of where it was set, the author, and the story that I thought it was going to be. Since we lived in Paris, I loved imagining in my mind the streets that were named and that made it better for me. For non-familiars to Paris, it might not have been.
I thought the story was going to focus on the researchers findings of stories of women during WW2 in Paris. It deviated way too far off the track for me to say I enjoyed it.
A real pity, as I loved Faulks' Charlotte Gray and it was set around the same period.
I thought the story was going to focus on the researchers findings of stories of women during WW2 in Paris. It deviated way too far off the track for me to say I enjoyed it.
A real pity, as I loved Faulks' Charlotte Gray and it was set around the same period.