UKC

Finally got round to reading this book. Not really sure about it... I kind of enjoyed it whilst I was reading it but I found it a bit strange. I wasn't really sure what the ending was all about. Can anyone enlighten me?

In reply to Nao:

oooooo it's aaaace!

it made me jump up and down on the sofa with excitement - but then I am partial to a bit of Ali Smith.

er...

iirc (brain is mushy today) it's perhaps about the unresolvability of things and how we find ourselves pushed by circumstances into different, not necessarily better or worse, places. Amber was just the catalyst. It had a faint tinge of (is this the right term (I'm a dumbarse with these things) magic realism in her character.

will explain more when less brain-mushy.

In reply to CJD:

I didn't really understand what was the sudden switch in the family from Amber to post-Amber. Why everything changed. Obviously the children were still in love with her, and it was only really Eve/the mother who changed her mind... which confused me as it seemed like she flipped after Amber kissed her, even though she might have quite enjoyed it... which seemed weird because she didn't have a problem with it when she thought she might be boffing her husband.

Also how did Amber fit in with the house burglary thing - did she have anything to do with it or not?

In reply to Nao:

I reckon amber sorted out the burglary because it was right down to the very fabric of the house - she forced them to confront what they held dear, and then destroyed it - like with Astrid's video camera that she was using as a crutch, a one-step-removed from reality.

I think the kiss was the pivotal moment that caused Eve's deceptions (her writer's block (hah!)) to be faced - kind of dismantled her false sense of self and she was horrorstruck by the reality of her own mind, motivations and desires.

there was pre-amber as well as amber and post-amber, remember.

In reply to CJD:
Yes, I guess. I found the ending perplexing mainly because there didn't seem to be any proper conclusion (and I like a good conclusion, ha).

Also, throughout, I found Amber really annoying. Obviously she was meant to be bewitching and wonderful but she was just really irritating (perhaps that was the point).

And really, if she was just a cipher or something, then she didn't really force them to confront and undergo meaningful learning; it was all kind of capricious and (ahem) accidental... and did they really benefit from it? Michael would've got his comeuppance. Magnus MAYBE got saved from suicide, but did he really? (I thought he was just playing most of the time. And was lost without Amber once she left, no?) Astrid would've been fine anyway. And Eve... well, she was a bit pathetic and forgiving anyway, so did she really learn anything? Wasn't the round the world trip just an escape from having to confront the reality of Michael's cheating?

In reply to Nao:

but life's not like that! neatly tied up conclusions don't allow for the story to keep living after you've closed the book, so for that reason I like un-conclusions, because they allow me to believe the people are out there carrying on with it all, and that the book was just a home movie of a certain time.


and that, I suspect, is the point of it all...

we (often) like to attach meanings to otherwise or ultimately insignificant events or moments, we like our turning points, our moments of realisation, and perhaps they're just illusions. She was just whatever that person wanted or needed her to be at that time, and I don't think she so much changed them as perhaps created the opportunity for them to move themselves on from the places they were in beforehand (if that makes any sense at all).

In reply to Nao: Must refrain from reading this thread. Bought 'The Accidental' yesterday from a charity shop - cost me 35p!

In reply to CJD:


Yes, I suppose. I can think of other books that are like that, that don't have a particular conclusion or obvious final message that I do like (maybe something like The Virgin Suicides? Or Milan Kundera, or some of Kazuo Ishiguro.)


Yes, I suppose so. Although the moving on part takes place AFTER the conclusion of the book, the main bulk of the book being about the life-changing (or not) encounter(s)?

I suppose the other thing for me is that it falls into that genre of books-with-multiple-voices and I'm always a bit offput by those (thinking A Long Way Down, Nick Hornby!) and I was oscillating between thinking it was good characterisation and finding it really annoying (Astrid, maybe - the vocabulary, the rhythm? And I quite liked Magnus' voice, all the full stops and unfinished sentences... but Eve and Michael were less enjoyable for me, apart from maybe the bit where Michael goes poetic).

I'm just interested really, as it got nominated for all the awards, and I did think it was original but maybe not as wonderful as I was expecting from the accolades it achieved.

In reply to Nao:

i have to say that I found the first quarter quite hard going - I didn't much like Astrid, but I thought that was quite good as I quite like disagreeable characters - but then I just got really overexcited by the writing style and I had to race through the rest of it.

In reply to CJD:
Yes, she's a bit annoying but only in a precocious, repeating certain words and turns of phrase type thing, and she's meant to be twelve so I would expect her to be a bit irritating like that. Like the id est thing! Ha ha.

Not as annoying as Eve though, with all her wishy washy ramblings...

In reply to Nao:

eve pretending to write and just lying there in the summerhouse trying to avoid astrid - ha ha! and all the families wanting to sue...

In reply to CJD:
I would try to avoid Astrid if she were my kid!
From the Eve POV I think Amber was just an unpaid babysitter.
I still don't quite understand what Amber was *in her POV* - was she trying to teach them all something or was that just a by-product of being a freeloader? (And was the bit about her killing the child just one of those things that didn't really mean anything? Or was it the reason for her nomadic/pseudo-didactic existence?)
Also by the end of it I was wondering if Amber even existed.

In reply to Nao:

oooo yes, that was a thought I had too.

most cunning.

will think more intelligently (is that even a word?) later.

In reply to CJD:


Reminds me of this..

What thou lovest well remains,
the rest is dross
What thou lov’st well shall not be reft from thee
What thou lov’st well is thy true heritage

Ezra Pound

In reply to John Wood:

oo I like that - what poem is it?

In reply to CJD:

Cantos,

Must get round to reading the whole thing one day...

In reply to Nao:

Its a great book. I always assumed the sections about the cinema fire etc tried to explain a bit of Ambers "backstory" but shes still nicely enigmatic. I liked her version of poetic justice ie: saving magnus, breaking micheal, freaking out the bullies who pick on astrid etc

Its really well written too. Unlike this post.

In reply to Nao:

I have this book sitting on my shelf...Haven't read it...But I *have* met Ali Smith, and she read from the opening of the book. She's a terrific writer and a very nice person too.

Sorry, no help whatsoever, but a small claim to fame!

In reply to Heidi:

you've met Ali Smith?

oh my god!

<faints>

I'm jealous. Though i suspect that if i met her I'd only try to nick her brain, and that would never do.