ManBookering discussion

Hi all,

Max is taking a little internet holiday, so it's my pleasure to announce that our February 2017 ManBookering read is: The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro, the 1989 winner.

We will be reading and discussing the novel all month long. As always, please be conscious of spoilers. If you are going to comment a spoiler, preface it with the chapter you are discussing so others can avoid being spoiled.

Happy reading everyone!
Britta

reply | delete | flag *

Having just launched myself into the mammoth (880 pages!) 4 3 2 1, I am not sure when/whether I will get to this, although I have read it before about 18 months ago. However, I do have the movie version stored on my Sky box that I've been intending to watch for a while but never got round to. So, I will definitely watch that soon which will enable me to contribute to the conversation here and maybe to add a slightly different perspective.

Neil wrote: "Having just launched myself into the mammoth (880 pages!) 4 3 2 1, I am not sure when/whether I will get to this, although I have read it before about 18 months ago. However, I do h..."

The movie is pretty good but as they say, the book is better :). How's 4321?

I've read Remains of the Day quite a few times so I'll be taking a backseat this month but it is indeed a great novel with plenty of food for thought.

DID THIS WIN!? AWESOME! Just got a paperback of it, and *just missed it* as the read for a Jan Group; so now I can use it, and rearrange my actual, physical shelf in my Hub. Yup. Way beyond excited. I collect Booker winners. -Jen from Quebec :0)

Robert wrote: "Neil wrote: "Having just launched myself into the mammoth (880 pages!) 4 3 2 1, I am not sure when/whether I will get to this, although I have read it before about 18 months ago. Ho..."

I really liked the book - as you say, plenty of food for thought. It will be interesting to see how the movie compares with my memories of the book.

(4 3 2 1 was only released today and my copy arrived a couple of hours ago. As I'm at work, I haven't had chance to start it yet. I'll post a couple of status updates as I get going.)

This was one of the better Booker winners. I must admit that when I read it a couple of years ago, I had memories of the film which inevitably affected the reading, but what surprised me most about the book was how much humour there is in it (more than in a lot of Ishiguro's novels). I probably won't find time to reread it this month, but will definitely follow the discussion and chip in where I can.

I read this many years ago but revisited it two years ago in advance of a Guardian bookclub talk by Ishiguro himself.

Couple of things from that which I found interesting (and spoiler free):

He seemed surprised, if pleased, at the reception of the book as he saw it largely as a re-write of Artist of the Floating World but transposed to the UK.

Although he did say that the very restrained narrative voice in his first two novels was simply his natural style, not a deliberate attempt to portray emotional repression. But when reviewers picked up on what they assumed was a deliberate style, Ishiguro decided to adopt and exaggerate the effect in the character of Stevens in Remains of the Day - indeed he sees the character as intentionally comic (to Hugh's point). His attempts to master "banter" are hilarious.

I had always assumed that the setting in 1956 at the time of the Suez crisis was deliberate (Britain makes disastrous foreign policy decisions every 60 years!) but apparently it was a fluke. Although I was struck how much Ishiguro was prepared to accept critics opinions of his work as just as even more valid that his own, which isn't something all writers do.

This has been sitting on my shelf waiting to be read for a couple years! Looking forward to reading it for the first time!

I've read the book and watched the movie. Both are enjoyable. Looking forward to reading it again. Then, of course, I'll want to snuggle in and watch the movie again as well. Cozy winter nights! Happy reading everyone, whatever book you have your nose in.

I've just watched the movie. What a great performance by Anthony Hopkins.

What the butler refused to see.

I think I may get chance to re-read the book this month after all, which I think might be interesting after just watching the movie.

I've started the book yesterday, and am trying very hard not to see Anthony Hopkins all the time :-)

Yes, I plan to re-read it later this week and I think I may have the same problem now that I've watched the movie! Although, I think that's partly because Hopkins plays Stevens almost exactly how I imagined him from my first reading of the book.

I have just finished the book for the first time. I have not yet seen the film so I didn't have 'Hopkins' issue and think I imagined Stevens to be rather a tall and striking figure much like his father. I enjoyed the conversations in this book, especially between Stevens and the godson. Looking forward to watching the film now to see if it mates up to my imagination.

Holz wrote: "I have just finished the book for the first time. I have not yet seen the film so I didn't have 'Hopkins' issue and think I imagined Stevens to be rather a tall and striking figure much like his fa..."

I like to hear from readers who have been 'unspoiled' by seeing the movie first. I wish I could say I was in this case. Anthony Hopkins was the most excellent choice to play Stevens.

I've finished the book this weekend, and really enjoyed re-reading it. The quiet language & atmosphere are so engaging. I especially love how Ishiguro intertwines the historical and the personal.

I've just finished my re-read. I found it far funnier than first time round and immensely sadder. Mr Stevens is such a lonely, repressed man it is hard not to feel for him. It's a beautiful book.

Just finished it. Loved it.. left with a little pause and sadness in its wake.

Can't imagine how, with so much internal dialogue and reflective prose this could be translated faithfully into a film?!

I just finished reading it. It is a brief read but what tremendous weight does it carry with its conciseness. And this kind of conciseness in manner, too, of Stevens as a professional -- as what was expected of him as a butler -- overdetermined his life.

Ishiguro had practiced perfect courtesy in his prose like his butler in his vocation, and 'The Remains of the Day' is his showcase of masterful command and control of language. As Stevens is straightforward in suppressing inquisitiveness and practicing forbearance -- the overbearing absence of emotion to transcend the requirements of his profession -- so is Ishiguro in his unceasing quietude. His writing was never excessive as may be the usual tendency in attempting to be consistent with tone but always automatic and understated. Truly the novel is exemplary, Ishiguro the butler of fine prose.

(I have not watched the film adaptation but the promotional poster, with the images of Anthony Hopkins as Stevens, stern as a steel, and Emma Thompson as Miss Kenton, is definitive of what a perfect synopsis for the book and the film could be.)

Riddick wrote: "I just finished reading it. It is a brief read but what tremendous weight does it carry with its conciseness. And this kind of conciseness in manner, too, of Stevens as a professional -- as what wa..."

Nicely said, Riddick. This is my second reading of the book and I'm not hurrying through it this time. The 'voice' in which Ishiguro writes demonstrates his authority as a writer. He captures Stevens' personality and dignity (there's that word...) with precision. If you decide to watch the film, I believe you'll find Hopkins and Thompson portrayed their respective characters well.

In reply to Paula:

Yup, there's that word! -- and I believe the ways in which Ishiguro wrote what he wrote and how he wrote are also, in a sense, with dignity. However can one maintain such a single characteristic in style without losing the development of Stevens as a complex character? Ishiguro is really something. Impressive tone, impressive control. I'm looking forward for Hopkins' Stevens and Thompson's Miss Kenton!

Riddick wrote: "In reply to Paula:

Yup, there's that word! -- and I believe the ways in which Ishiguro wrote what he wrote and how he wrote are also, in a sense, with dignity. However can one maintain such a sing..."

Riddick, I have to admit that, as a writer, I can be almost 'impossible' when I talk about what is referred to as "voice." So many people do it well. Not to go off on a tangent, but especially listen for it when you read a book with a child narrator. Room was one of those books in which the child's voice was authentic. I agree with you that it must be difficult to maintain.

In reply to Paula:

I've heard about Room too and its language: I'll definitely check into it. I've never been interested in tone and overall atmosphere of a novel until I read TROTD. I've read Never Let Me Go before too. Ishiguro is beguiling.

I went in blind with this book, knowing of it through the man booker rather than the movie, and found myself pleasantly surprised!

While I can't say it's a favourite (and that's mainly due to the fact that I didn't really like Stevens, even in the end) I look forward to picking up the rest of Ishiguro's books now!

Like most other readers, I really fought to get Anthony Hopkins out of my head when reading it. But I thoroughly enjoyed how absolutely spot-on Ishiguro got Stevens's language, mannerisms and character traits. Exquisite wording. I'm more of a fan of shorter, tight novels than epics so this is definitely in my top few favourite winners. I sense I'll be reading more Ishiguro...

A word of warning: although all of ishiguros books are about memory some are experimental and can be frustrating reads. Never let me go and artist of a floating world are highly recommended

Good tip, thanks.

I am really enjoying all your comments. It seems we had a good pick this month!