Ain't that scary |
Autrement, A Concise Reading Journal by the Judge
Airports terrify me. Not for the
prospect of flying, rather because the only way to kill time in there
is to go leafing in the bookshops, and these always seem to contain
the most insulting samples of literature ever assembled in a single
place. This is, I fear, an unfortunate necessity of our civilisation:
whenever I have to go on a particularly long journey (eight plus
hours, staying away two or three weeks), I have to take a book with
me that a.) cannot possibly tire me, no matter how long I sit there
reading it, and b.) that won’t be over and done with in just one
hour. Airport novels are engineered for just that.
The thing is that there are almost no
novels that can meet those criteria and still be good. I can
think of George Martin’s Songs of Ice and Fire that do the
job wondrously, and when I was a kid I could read Michael Crichton
from dawn to past midnight. The problem with the former is the
release date of his next book (see the self-fulfilling prophecy, when
the sun rises in the west and sets in the east, when the seas go dry
and mountains blow in the mind like leaves), and I’ve kind of
grown out of the latter. So I go for whatever I can, crossing my
fingers that it’ll keep my mind distracted while I sit inside that
box ten-thousand feet above-ground.
Most recent reads: Suzanne Collins’
Catching Fire and Lynda La Plante’s Wrongful Death.
Golly. Did I steer that car into the
tree this time.
(For what it’s worth, the journey was
to Brazil – I was there for three weeks over the World Cup – and
these books certainly did not live up to the rest of the trip, which
admittedly is not a fair comparison as it would take one hell of a
novel to beat an evening spent snogging a Brazilian girl).
I suppose this isn’t a ‘review’
as much as an exorcism. These novels have made me so cynical and
morose that I'd be recounting them to my therapist, if I had one.
Yes, I could dress this up as an intelligent discussion about the
‘airport novel phenomenon’ and what it means to literature, but
the idea seems to me like that of studying tarantulas – I’m sure
there are plenty of fascinating things to be learnt, but Christ, who
the heck wants to go near those things?
Let’s start with Catching Fire.
I picked it up because its predecessor, The Hunger Games,
actually did its job more than decently as an airport novel. It’s
not exactly a difficult book to explain: the set-up is old enough
that you can almost hear Suzanne Collins yelling ‘Yabba-Dabba-Doo’
as she is pitching the novel. It’s so old in fact that this is one
of its strengths – the dystopian totalitarian future that she
represents in such crude detail is positively comforting, being after
all a trope that was tired in the early seventies, and the plot is
just The Running Man except that Arnold Schwarzenegger gets
replaced by an angsty teenage girl (just about the most
anti-Schwarzenegger type of character they could find, showing if
nothing else that this plot can run pretty smoothly without giving
two figs about its central character). Then from halfway onwards it’s
just Rambo with something like a love interest vaguely
shoe-horned into it and some references to Imperial Rome that nobody
in the USA will have picked up (oh, the capital is called ‘Panem’,
like panem et circenses, that Roman thing they used to say,
get it? Get it? Clever!).
The fun in it, from my personal point
of view, lay purely in reading about these characters slugging it out
in the woods. Everything else is just an excuse to set up the stage.
(Does anyone actually give a fuck about Prim?)
(I just typed that question into Google
and found out – SPOILER ALERT – that in the third book she dies).
Prim and proper |
And even when they FINALLY get into the
arena, the Rambo narrative is totally thrown out of the window in
favour of these ‘alliance strategies’ they decide to undergo,
which have them walking around in a goofy party comprising the angsty
teenage girl, the romantic baker who always loved her, Edward Cullen
with a trident, a mumbling hag piggy-backed onto the aforementioned
vampire, and two genius idiots (not making this up) who can’t
speak English. They don’t even fight each other much – most of
the time they seem too busy stabbing the monkeys on the island (???).
The narrative in Catching Fire feels less like Rambo
than it does an episode of It’s a Knock-Out.
I eventually lost the novel somewhere
in eastern Brazil – Vitoria, or Itabuna – and I can’t say I’ve
ever felt so indifferent about losing a book in my life. I was at
around page 330 and I might have been more engaged if I’d been
listening to a cricket match that was being narrated by a GPS reader.
But I still had to confront the flight
home, so I picked up one of those items that have always been
completely arcane to me – a crime novel.
Crime, despite being one of the most popular genres in literature (and, in terms of raw economics, certainly one of the most important), is to me a mysterious whirlpool, dark and chronically holding back all of its truths. For someone with an MA in literature, I suppose it’s kind of embarrassing that I can’t name a single contemporary crime author (is Agatha Christie still alive? Does she count? I haven’t actually read any of her books, but look! I know her name! I know it! Cookie!).
But the fact is that crime fiction is
DULL. Even in the theoretically more digestible medium of film, I can
never bring myself to give a crap as to why Dick Jones was killed
with a marble elephant tossed against his balls or how somebody ran
over the granny to inherit the stuffed Komodo dragon that she beats
herself on the face with whenever she has to read a crime novel.
This, to me, is the greatest of mysteries and the only one I’d
really like to see solved – why the hell do people read crime
fiction? It’s not just dull, it’s almost unpleasant, this
sense of reading without being told what you want to know. And why
not tell you anyway? You don’t feel any more satisfied once you
found out it was Bob Rogers than you did before. Why not skip to the
last page and just find out? (Well, because then you’ve thrown
£8.99 into the toilet – there’s your economics).
But I told myself. ‘I’ve read so
little, surely I talk out of prejudice’. These novels must at least
be entertaining. And there’s nothing else in this bookshop
other than ‘How To Make More Money’ by Rich Bastard (whose idea
seems to be that I should spend it on his book) or graphic novels
about Captain America, which cost about $45 and would scarcely
last me an hour. So I picked up the first thing I could find –
Lynda La Plante’s Wrongful Death.
Anna Travis, detective. Not looking too bad here. |
Together with the main detective, Anna
Travis, they set off to investigate a fishy suicide.
And this is where the novel goes not
just downhill but off the cliff altogether. The more I went into it,
the less could I bring myself to care whether this guy had actually
killed himself or whether he’d been murdered and why. It looks like
perhaps his wife, or the wife’s sister, plotted to kill him –
because, hmm, probably not for money as they’re already rich, some
family feud of some kind I suppose OH GOD WHO GIVES A F –
The novel started losing me around page
50, but I managed to bring myself past page 200 (out of almost 500)
before I was back home – and then I put WD on the desk and haven’t
touched it since. I doubt if I ever will. I doubt, too, if I’ll
ever read another crime novel, but that’s going to depend on
whether my next substantial holiday is going to take place before or
after George RR Martins releases his next book. The fact that both
these things are set in a future more distant than Star Wars
is a somewhat depressing prospect.
No comments:
Post a Comment
What say you?