Bright Young Things discussion

Welcome to one of February's non-fiction group reads: Christopher and His Kind by Christopher Isherwood.

Enjoy!

Frank, and beautifully written, however I was less captivated than I'd expected

Immediately prior to reading "Christopher and His Kind" by Christopher Isherwood I read, and really enjoyed, "Mr Norris Changes Trains”, so I was excited to find out more about Christopher Isherwood’s life during the 1930s.

"Christopher and His Kind" is an autobiographical account of Christopher Isherwood's life from 1929, when he left England to spend a week in Berlin and decided to stay there indefinitely, through to 1939, when he arrived in America. I hoped "Christopher and His Kind” would provide new insights into both Berlin in the 1930s and, in particular, the events related in "Mr Norris Changes Trains".

The first thing that struck me was the use of the third person. Christopher Isherwood wrote "Christopher and His Kind" in the early 1970s and so I assume he decided to treat “Christopher” (his younger self) as a separate character. If so, whilst I understand the rationale, I found it both distracting and confusing.

Christopher Isherwood explains how he kept himself out of the Berlin stories as he thought his homosexuality would distract from the narrative and, understandably given the attitudes of the era, he was guarded about being explicit. There is no such evasiveness or coyness in "Christopher and His Kind" - he is frank and open about his sex life and his relationships. As such "Christopher and His Kind” also reflects the era in which it was written (the early 1970s) as gay liberation was gaining momentum whilst Isherwood was writing this book.

I didn’t enjoy this book as much as I hoped or expected. As always, Christopher Isherwood writes beautifully about the pre-war era, however it was too detailed for my level of interest and, as I said at the outset, the use of the third person did not work for me.

I enjoyed reading about Gerald Hamilton, the real life Arthur Norris from "Mr Norris Changes Trains", and who was every bit as venal and morally bankrupt as his fictionalised version, and there are also some interesting anecdotes involving Isherwood’s friends W.H. Auden, Stephen Spender, and E.M. Forster.

Overall though I was less captivated than I had hoped and expected but I think it's still a worthwhile companion read and I look forward to this discussion. Here's to a good one.

Nigeyb wrote: "The first thing that struck me was the use of the third person. Christopher Isherwood wrote "Christopher and His Kind" in the early 1970s and so I assume he decided to treat “Christopher” (his younger self) as a separate character. If so, whilst I understand the rationale, I found it both distracting and confusing."

You are probably correct about his reasons for writing about himself in the third person. I am also finding it distracting, although I should get used to it as I read more of the book.

Val wrote: "You are probably correct about his reasons for writing about himself in the third person. I am also finding it distracting, although I should get used to it as I read more of the book. "

I notice you rated it four stars Val - so I assume it got less distracting. Or was it that the book's other qualities compensated?

I can see why he wrote it that way. Young Christopher is politically naive, he sees what is going on in Germany politically, economically and socially, but does not put it all together. He was probably enjoying the decadence and irresponsibility too much. It needs the hindsight and insight of the older Christopher to make sense of it. Writing them as if they are two different people splits the experiences from the consequences.

Val wrote: "Writing them as if they are two different people splits the experiences from the consequences."

I'm sure you're absolutely right Val. I never quite got used to it - despite understanding and appreciating why he chose to do it.

Looks like it might just be Val and me who read this. Anyone other takers?

Not yet. Probably after I finish Mr. Norris ( 50 pp left!) and Goodbye to Berlin (probably about half left). And I do have All The Conspirators - but I've had it for years and haven't really started yet. Although maybe I am getting more in the mood for it.

And I dvr'd Cabaret when it was on the other week. So I can watch that again. (I've seen it a number of times already)

^ Thanks for your reply Jan - please do let us know if and when you get to it.


I was hoping we might get a bit more discussion going for this book. Ah well.