alag's review
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
michplunkett's review against another edition
2.0
This book was pretty inconsistent in terms of story quality. Some were fantastic and others would drag on for far too long.
Overall: not quite my jam.
Overall: not quite my jam.
karabc19's review
Knowing little of the character or plot details, I picked up Alan Sillitoe’s short story “The Loneliness of the Long-Distance Runner” as an antidote to our current political malady. For me, with earbuds in and hat brim tucked low, running is often an activity that takes me into my own little world to help me make sense of my own little world. It’s luxurious, self-indulgent “me time” when I do some of my best thinking. And Sillitoe’s main character early on in the story voices a similar love of running for that reason: “It’s a treat, being a long-distance runner, out in the world by yourself with not a soul to make you bad-tempered or tell you what to do. . .”
As much as this story is about running, though, it is also about class conflict. And I couldn’t help making connections between the world of 1959 England for a working class youth in a juvenile detention center and the world of President-Elect Trump in 2016 U.S.
Sillitoe’s cheerfully angry young man is the English equivalent of Twain’s Huck Finn, and just as memorable. He sets up the world in a binary of “In-laws” and “Out-laws,” where the “In-law blokes” include the educated middle and upper class who, under the guise of paternal love and knowing what is best, are “all on the watch for Out-law blokes. . . waiting to ‘phone for the coppers as soon as we make a false move.” While spouting moral ideals of living an honest life, In-laws exploit working-class labor for their own profit and self-aggrandizement, patting themselves on the back for their magnanimity with one hand and keeping the working class in a chokehold with the other. But “Smith” eludes them. “They can spy on us all day to see if we’re pulling our puddings and if we’re working good or doing our ‘athletics’ but they can’t make an X-ray of our guts to find out what we’re telling ourselves.” And Smith’s narrative of his thoughts while running is this X-ray into the guts of the Out-laws.
And what does the X-ray reveal? We find the kind of critical thinking and philosophical contemplation that many do not ascribe to the working class. We find Emerson’s “Man Thinking.” In his address to Harvard undergraduates,“The American Scholar,” Emerson descries the farmer who merely pushes his plow: “The planter, who is Man sent out into the field to gather food, is seldom cheered by any idea of the true dignity of his ministry. He sees his bushel and his cart, and nothing beyond, and sinks into the farmer.” The true value of a college education, according to Emerson, whose famous essay is the foundational ideology of the liberal arts, is to make the true scholar, who is the “only true master.” Embedded in that message and the mission of many four-year universities is an elitism that suggests that those with a college degree are better citizens and better human beings. The Socratic imperative that the unexamined life is not a life worth living falls under the purview of the university, so that those without a college degree would not seem to have a life worth living. Thus it’s not difficult to understand the anger and resentment of the working class toward the exclusivity of the educated middle and upper classes.
Smith’s mission, then, is to outsmart the smart class. His X-ray shows, “I’m a human being and I’ve got thoughts and secrets and bloody life inside me that he doesn’t know is there, and he’ll never know what’s there because he’s stupid. I suppose you’ll laugh at this, me saying the governor’s a stupid bastard when I know hardly how to write and he can read and write and add-up like a professor. But what I say is true right enough. He’s stupid, and I’m not, because I can see further into the likes of him than he can see into the likes of me.” Here, then, is the heart of Smith’s (and the working class’s) mistrust and anger toward the middle and upper class: the intellectual snobbery and moral superiority that the educated elite assume with their ability to “read and write and add-up like a professor.” Smith is involved in a war, a war over what smart is and what “true right” is. Although the governors have the credentials, Smith insists that he is the deep thinker and the one who knows what is real and true.
Smith lacks the authority and the institutional support to openly resist the In-laws, but what he can do, since the race is rigged, is refuse to win it for them. And he is willing to put himself in a worse position (six months of “carting dustbins” and “spreading slops over spuds and carrots”) in order to one-up the governors. Although for Smith, it’s not just outwitting the smart guy; it’s being truly honest, which he is a better judge of than the ones who profess it. “I knew what the loneliness of the long-distance runner running across country felt like, realizing that as far as I was concerned this feeling was the only honesty and realness there was in the world. . .”
As much as this story is about running, though, it is also about class conflict. And I couldn’t help making connections between the world of 1959 England for a working class youth in a juvenile detention center and the world of President-Elect Trump in 2016 U.S.
Sillitoe’s cheerfully angry young man is the English equivalent of Twain’s Huck Finn, and just as memorable. He sets up the world in a binary of “In-laws” and “Out-laws,” where the “In-law blokes” include the educated middle and upper class who, under the guise of paternal love and knowing what is best, are “all on the watch for Out-law blokes. . . waiting to ‘phone for the coppers as soon as we make a false move.” While spouting moral ideals of living an honest life, In-laws exploit working-class labor for their own profit and self-aggrandizement, patting themselves on the back for their magnanimity with one hand and keeping the working class in a chokehold with the other. But “Smith” eludes them. “They can spy on us all day to see if we’re pulling our puddings and if we’re working good or doing our ‘athletics’ but they can’t make an X-ray of our guts to find out what we’re telling ourselves.” And Smith’s narrative of his thoughts while running is this X-ray into the guts of the Out-laws.
And what does the X-ray reveal? We find the kind of critical thinking and philosophical contemplation that many do not ascribe to the working class. We find Emerson’s “Man Thinking.” In his address to Harvard undergraduates,“The American Scholar,” Emerson descries the farmer who merely pushes his plow: “The planter, who is Man sent out into the field to gather food, is seldom cheered by any idea of the true dignity of his ministry. He sees his bushel and his cart, and nothing beyond, and sinks into the farmer.” The true value of a college education, according to Emerson, whose famous essay is the foundational ideology of the liberal arts, is to make the true scholar, who is the “only true master.” Embedded in that message and the mission of many four-year universities is an elitism that suggests that those with a college degree are better citizens and better human beings. The Socratic imperative that the unexamined life is not a life worth living falls under the purview of the university, so that those without a college degree would not seem to have a life worth living. Thus it’s not difficult to understand the anger and resentment of the working class toward the exclusivity of the educated middle and upper classes.
Smith’s mission, then, is to outsmart the smart class. His X-ray shows, “I’m a human being and I’ve got thoughts and secrets and bloody life inside me that he doesn’t know is there, and he’ll never know what’s there because he’s stupid. I suppose you’ll laugh at this, me saying the governor’s a stupid bastard when I know hardly how to write and he can read and write and add-up like a professor. But what I say is true right enough. He’s stupid, and I’m not, because I can see further into the likes of him than he can see into the likes of me.” Here, then, is the heart of Smith’s (and the working class’s) mistrust and anger toward the middle and upper class: the intellectual snobbery and moral superiority that the educated elite assume with their ability to “read and write and add-up like a professor.” Smith is involved in a war, a war over what smart is and what “true right” is. Although the governors have the credentials, Smith insists that he is the deep thinker and the one who knows what is real and true.
Smith lacks the authority and the institutional support to openly resist the In-laws, but what he can do, since the race is rigged, is refuse to win it for them. And he is willing to put himself in a worse position (six months of “carting dustbins” and “spreading slops over spuds and carrots”) in order to one-up the governors. Although for Smith, it’s not just outwitting the smart guy; it’s being truly honest, which he is a better judge of than the ones who profess it. “I knew what the loneliness of the long-distance runner running across country felt like, realizing that as far as I was concerned this feeling was the only honesty and realness there was in the world. . .”
bent's review against another edition
3.0
I went into this book thinking it was a novel but it ended up being a book of short stories. The stories were all well-done and interesting. An enjoyable read. The title story is the famous one, but I thought there were several stories that I enjoyed more. I will probably try one of Sillitoe's novels next.
viviancourtney's review against another edition
funny
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
molliepop's review
emotional
funny
reflective
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
Vivid and emotional collection of short-stories, loosely all set in working-class communities of the inter-war period. Not so much 'Angry Young Men', more 'Lonely Young Men'.
joeh's review against another edition
4.0
A collection of short stories in which some were wonderful and some were rather dull. The highlight of the book for me was Silltoe’s use of vernacular, and the humor he instilled throughout. Solid 3.5, would like to read another of his works.
peebee's review
5.0
Bummer that everyone who recommended this to me my whole life I thought was making some shallow attempt to connect with me cause I ran. Like how people try to make every analogy about football for a dumb jock.
The stuff about running (at least the race) is all wrong. It's just a good bunch of stories.
The stuff about running (at least the race) is all wrong. It's just a good bunch of stories.