Scan barcode
A review by moviebuffkt
G. by John Berger
3.0
Six books in and I've just discovered this series from The Guardian on looking back at the Booker Prize winners.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2008/jan/09/lookingbackatthebookerjoh
Of G., they say that "[it] is worth reading just for its vertiginous description of the first crossing of the Alps by plane, its crushing examples of the first world war's futile slaughter and a barnstorming rendition of the Milan riots of 1898. The latter scene culminates in a suave refusal to finish describing the slaughter because stopping where he does is "to admit more of the truth".
I have to say, I partially agree. Where the novel most speaks to me is in these moments of description. How did a town mourn the death of a pilot? What were street riots like in Italy? How does scandal play out in the upper classes?
Berger makes some incredibly frustrating statements about women, and their identity as individual. Often it is discussed that a woman takes on the mantel of wife/mother/lover, and has to act in these roles. And these roles define who she is. With observations such as these, I found myself constantly amazed that this novel was published in the 1970s. So then, is Berger writing women as they were treated in the time of this book... Or commenting on modern women?
The narrative style got confusing for me, but eventually it made more sense. I kept asking myself who was narrating the story though. At times omniscient, at times commenting on the thoughts, feelings and futures of his characters, at times discussing how critics describe his (Berger's?) writing, I was just never quite sure who was telling this story. And so many, which had an impact on G.'s life, were glossed over. Oh yeah, his cousins were sleeping together, and she seduced him at age 14, but let's talk about that British Empire for awhile!
So. A novel about sex. A novel about revolution. But NOT a novel about sexual revolution....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2008/jan/09/lookingbackatthebookerjoh
Of G., they say that "[it] is worth reading just for its vertiginous description of the first crossing of the Alps by plane, its crushing examples of the first world war's futile slaughter and a barnstorming rendition of the Milan riots of 1898. The latter scene culminates in a suave refusal to finish describing the slaughter because stopping where he does is "to admit more of the truth".
I have to say, I partially agree. Where the novel most speaks to me is in these moments of description. How did a town mourn the death of a pilot? What were street riots like in Italy? How does scandal play out in the upper classes?
Berger makes some incredibly frustrating statements about women, and their identity as individual. Often it is discussed that a woman takes on the mantel of wife/mother/lover, and has to act in these roles. And these roles define who she is. With observations such as these, I found myself constantly amazed that this novel was published in the 1970s. So then, is Berger writing women as they were treated in the time of this book... Or commenting on modern women?
The narrative style got confusing for me, but eventually it made more sense. I kept asking myself who was narrating the story though. At times omniscient, at times commenting on the thoughts, feelings and futures of his characters, at times discussing how critics describe his (Berger's?) writing, I was just never quite sure who was telling this story. And so many, which had an impact on G.'s life, were glossed over. Oh yeah, his cousins were sleeping together, and she seduced him at age 14, but let's talk about that British Empire for awhile!
So. A novel about sex. A novel about revolution. But NOT a novel about sexual revolution....