By Chris Cleave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Other_Hand
Wednesday 21 November 2012
From Helen:
The author Chris Cleave grabbed my attention with the first paragraphs of “Little Bee”: I was
delighted by the writing and the character being revealed. Because I prefer to plunge into a book
without any prior background, so that I can meet the characters and story in the way the author
designed, my first guess was that “Little Bee” was written by a woman with an African
background. Only 1/3 of the way through the story did I read the publisher’s blurb about
Cleave on the back cover and discover he is a male Guardian journalist.
I loved Cleave’s writing through about 60% of the book: I found Little Bee’s reflections and
comments on British/Western life vs. that of her African village and culture witty, well observed,
and emotionally moving. I was so touched by the dialogue and descriptions of the four women
who “escaped” from the detention centre together, and the way each reacted to the events that
passed. I loved the way Cleave created the persona of Yevette, and the plastic bag of yellow
that the Indian girl carried with her.
I very much liked the characters of Sarah and Charlie, and found them believable through much
of the plot. I found the relationship between them and between Little Bee and each of them
touching and beautifully crafted by the author, being built in my mind through the characters’
actions rather than through the author’s descriptive words.
Sarah’s love affair with Lawrence and the way it started was credible to me. As was the
atmosphere and ambiance in her editorial office, though painted in exaggerated tones. For
me the scene on the Nigerian beach where Sarah cuts off her finger though outrageous was still
believable, given some of the horrible incidents which have occurred in recent years (e.g., pirates
capturing couples, killing honeymooners, etc.)
Where I found the plot and the writing style begin to unwind was the point where Lawrence comes
to Sarah’s house. From that point very little in the story seemed believable to me. And perhaps it
was then that I turned to the back cover of the book to try to determine why things changed.
My own opinion is that the plot and characters became more exaggerated and less believable
because Cleave decided to sell this novel to the film studios. His first book, “Incendiary”, has
been made into a feature film, so he probably smelled the chance to do the same with this book.
At that point part of me became annoyed with Cleave, for depriving his characters of a realistic
series of events to close their story and “ours”, because I had become so engaged in their lives.
This annoyance is similar to the one I felt towards Dostoevsky with “The Idiot”, because I felt
that so many pages of his book were written to earn money rather than to build characters and
events that would reveal and share life insights with his readers.
From Richard:
“I think it was an interesting and compassionate novel, but rather flawed by a lack of
editorial rigour. For example, and most importantly, although the author purports to have
consulted immigration experts, from my personal knowledge this girl would not have been
held in a closed environment for two years from the age of 14. She would have been
obliged to go to school and certainly would not have been held in a cell in a detention
centre. She would have been in some kind of juvenile facility or maybe fostered in a
family home or group home. No person under age 18 is ever sent back to their country
of origin, and they are obliged to attend an educational facility until age 18, when their
case is then reviewed.
Also, the whole story in the book about the four women’s release from “custody” does
not ring true. The reason is because case histories for asylum seekers are judicially
reviewed according to EU directives and there are too many checks that would have
had to be made prior to them being allowed to walk out the door.
Additionally I don’t think the story on the beach about cutting Sarah’s finger off rings
true. The other thing that doesn’t ring true, in my opinion, is that a child of four does
not constantly say “I is” after being corrected all of the time.
One must remember that the author is a Guardian journalist, which is a left-leaning
newspaper which is very critical of some UK social policies.
All these examples tend to detract from the reality of the book, even though the main
point it is making about social justice is well made.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Other_Hand
Wednesday 21 November 2012
Present: Anne Van Calster (hostess), Susan Sameni, Blanka Persinova,
Paulette Duncan, Christa Haberer, Gitte Westergren, and Vibeke Roosen Bell.
Consensus that this is a
very good book. Important because it opens our eyes to how we treat asylum
seekers in our countries and for its illustration of the culture clash between
the West and the developing world. And illustrative because once we get to know
this “other” person, our prejudice disappears – at least to a certain extent.
This is not truly the case for Lawrence, Sara’s lover. The book is moving, but not uplifting
dealing as it is with serious issues like our abuse of the third world for
their natural resources, and our lack of understanding of the plight of those
who become victims in the process. The book doesn’t have a happy ending. And
yet, the thoughtfulness and compassion of Little Bee, Charlie, Sarah’s loveable
son constantly filling out his batman costume, who is delighted with his new
playmate, the friendship which develops between Little Bee and Sarah, and Little
Bee’s revealing and funny observations of the quirkiness of our society in the
West – it all combines to give the book a certain lightheartedness and humor
which makes it easier to digest the gloomy parts.
Certain criticism came from several ladies of the
incredulity of the maturity and insights of Little Bee, and the suicide of
Sarah’s husband which is not very well explained. Furthermore Sarah’s decision
to take Charlie and go back to Nigeria when Little Bee is deported – and on the
same plane - is not probable either. However, there was also an understanding
of the fact that these elements perhaps were not so important when viewed in
the context of what Chris Cleave seems to want to achieve with this book:
challenging us on our moral values.
All in all, a brilliant book certainly worth the read.
25 November 2012.
VRB
Contributed by Vibeke
From Helen:
The author Chris Cleave grabbed my attention with the first paragraphs of “Little Bee”: I was
delighted by the writing and the character being revealed. Because I prefer to plunge into a book
without any prior background, so that I can meet the characters and story in the way the author
designed, my first guess was that “Little Bee” was written by a woman with an African
background. Only 1/3 of the way through the story did I read the publisher’s blurb about
Cleave on the back cover and discover he is a male Guardian journalist.
I loved Cleave’s writing through about 60% of the book: I found Little Bee’s reflections and
comments on British/Western life vs. that of her African village and culture witty, well observed,
and emotionally moving. I was so touched by the dialogue and descriptions of the four women
who “escaped” from the detention centre together, and the way each reacted to the events that
passed. I loved the way Cleave created the persona of Yevette, and the plastic bag of yellow
that the Indian girl carried with her.
I very much liked the characters of Sarah and Charlie, and found them believable through much
of the plot. I found the relationship between them and between Little Bee and each of them
touching and beautifully crafted by the author, being built in my mind through the characters’
actions rather than through the author’s descriptive words.
Sarah’s love affair with Lawrence and the way it started was credible to me. As was the
atmosphere and ambiance in her editorial office, though painted in exaggerated tones. For
me the scene on the Nigerian beach where Sarah cuts off her finger though outrageous was still
believable, given some of the horrible incidents which have occurred in recent years (e.g., pirates
capturing couples, killing honeymooners, etc.)
Where I found the plot and the writing style begin to unwind was the point where Lawrence comes
to Sarah’s house. From that point very little in the story seemed believable to me. And perhaps it
was then that I turned to the back cover of the book to try to determine why things changed.
My own opinion is that the plot and characters became more exaggerated and less believable
because Cleave decided to sell this novel to the film studios. His first book, “Incendiary”, has
been made into a feature film, so he probably smelled the chance to do the same with this book.
At that point part of me became annoyed with Cleave, for depriving his characters of a realistic
series of events to close their story and “ours”, because I had become so engaged in their lives.
This annoyance is similar to the one I felt towards Dostoevsky with “The Idiot”, because I felt
that so many pages of his book were written to earn money rather than to build characters and
events that would reveal and share life insights with his readers.
From Richard:
“I think it was an interesting and compassionate novel, but rather flawed by a lack of
editorial rigour. For example, and most importantly, although the author purports to have
consulted immigration experts, from my personal knowledge this girl would not have been
held in a closed environment for two years from the age of 14. She would have been
obliged to go to school and certainly would not have been held in a cell in a detention
centre. She would have been in some kind of juvenile facility or maybe fostered in a
family home or group home. No person under age 18 is ever sent back to their country
of origin, and they are obliged to attend an educational facility until age 18, when their
case is then reviewed.
Also, the whole story in the book about the four women’s release from “custody” does
not ring true. The reason is because case histories for asylum seekers are judicially
reviewed according to EU directives and there are too many checks that would have
had to be made prior to them being allowed to walk out the door.
Additionally I don’t think the story on the beach about cutting Sarah’s finger off rings
true. The other thing that doesn’t ring true, in my opinion, is that a child of four does
not constantly say “I is” after being corrected all of the time.
One must remember that the author is a Guardian journalist, which is a left-leaning
newspaper which is very critical of some UK social policies.
All these examples tend to detract from the reality of the book, even though the main
point it is making about social justice is well made.
No comments:
Post a Comment