Guest Post: Katie Kotting of The Unsamaritans Book Group

Book: Watching the English (Kate Fox)

Date: Thursday 12th May 2011

Venue: Clare C’s lovely new pad by candlelight

Attendees: Clare C, Clare S, Frances, Geoffrey, James S, James M, Jo, Katie

There tends to be a bit of scepticism in the group when we agree to read a non-fiction book – will anyone bother to read it? In this case, most of us had, if not all of it then at least enough. Watching the English is written by social anthropologist Kate Fox, an in depth study of average people, based primarily on observation, to try and uncover the hidden rules of being English.

For the most part, the book was well received, with one notable exception which we’ll get to later. James S, had enjoyed the book so much on first reading a couple of years ago he had brought it to the group’s attention. Frances, one of the few non-English members of the group present (interestingly neither of our Scottish members attended), noted that it helped her to see the bits of ‘Englishness’ that she had adopted over the years. Katie also found that reading about the characteristics that were suggested as quintessentially English helped her to differentiate between her English and German heritage. Clare C wondered whether some of the behaviours attributed to ‘Englishness’ were really ‘English’ or could they have been more universal?

There was much discussion about her comments regarding class – how did we feel about this? The general consensus was that her observations were interesting, astute and inoffensive as she was not judging or commenting on her findings, merely stating them.

Geoffrey, on the other hand, was thoroughly unimpressed with the book. He thought it was an overwritten 50 page loo-book/stocking-filler. He found it long-winded, self-indulgent and smug. There was a general agreement that perhaps the book could have been a bit shorter, but that many of the insights and nuances would have been lost or over-simplified in a stocking-filler version. Ultimately she is an academic and the book bears the hallmark of this.

As an in depth study of the rules of English behaviour it certainly resonated with us and we could all recount times when we had witnessed or displayed the behaviours that Kate Fox singled out as being common to English folk. So what was her conclusion about the essence of Englishness? If you’re keen to know I suggest you either follow her lead and spend the best part of ten years watching and listening to people’s conversations and interactions in pubs, busses, business meetings, tea-parties, work places and more, or take the easier option and read ‘Watching the English’.

James Frey at Lutyens & Rubinstein

My scribbled notes from James Frey's first event promoting The Final Testament of the Holy Bible, at Lutyens and Rubenstein in Notting Hill.

1) The tiny downstairs of L&R converts into an event space when they part the bookcases and reveal their office space, complete with framed jacket artwork. Genius!

2) Someone brought a miniscule sausage dog which, distractingly, snored exactly like an old man, throughout.

3) James was influenced by Joseph Campbells's Hero With a Thousand Faces, which apparently shows the phases common to all messiah myths.

4) Quotes of the evening:

"Is it at all autobiographical?" - Felicity Rubinstein, tongue firmly in cheek.

"I would love it not to be read as a work of antagonism" - James Frey

"I thought, I want to do to somebody what that book (Tropic of Cancer) did to me" - James Frey on his influences

"I also wrote a book called The Wind Howls Ha!" - James Frey

Towpath Cricket

A friend introduced me to Towpath Cricket, invention of Times columnist Robert Crampton. This friend clearly mis-remembered it slightly, but in fact improved on the original.

Towpath Cricket (Oppenheimer Variation) is played thus: every pedestrian you overtake on a towpath scores you a run. Dogs are two, other cyclists four and a boat six. If you yourself are overtaken, you're out, lad.

My first erm match took place as I cycled to Barnes from Battersea with H, loyally clutching her toy lion Daddy Rara, in the seat on the back.

Our first innings was a scratchy 13, entirely composed of singles and twos, and brought to an end by a silver haired chap on a rusty hybrid. What can I say? I had luggage.

Our second innings was much more dashing. We started with a Sewagesque flourish, scoring a six off a small sailing boat tacking mid-stream, perhaps a degree off perpendicular and thus counting as an overtake. You have to make a few decisions about your rules in this game - stationary pedestrians for instance - but in this case, as with our subsequent boundary off a two year old on a Tweenies bike with stabilisers, I have to say, I'm all, like: read it in the book, pal; they all count.

Sadly, just as I was scoring freely on both sides of the wicket (Wandsworth Gardens) I was castled by a bloke on a Specialized that probably cost more than my car.

Back to the nets...

Guest Post: Jamie d'Ath of The Unsamaritans Book Group

Book: Alone in Berlin (Hans Fallada)

Venue: Big Geoffrey's

Story of resistance in wartime Berlin by workers Otto and Anna Quangel, stirred into action after their only son is killed in military service. Stricken by grief and filled with anger, they take it upon themselves to write and distribute postcards denouncing the Nazi regime. They remain at large for over two years, leading Inspector Escherich and the Gestapo on a merry goose chase. Along the way Fallada introduces us to a dizzying array of characters, representing a varied cross-section of life in Berlin. Whether they be a doctor, lawyer, gambler, shopkeeper, factory worker, postwoman or actor, Nazism has affected everyone deeply and themes of fear, suspicion, self-preservation and redemption run through the book.

The story is based on the true account of Otto and Elise Hampel and was written by Fallada in 24 days in 1947. On reading the epilogue it is clear many of the themes running through the book directly correlate to Fellada's own life.

We had a pretty good discussion. Jd'A felt the book was a good read, with good characterisation though lost its way through the middle of the narrative, with a sense of rushed prose and an unrealistic badly thought through weaving of the story. He felt the epilogue was an important addition to the story and helped explain certain elements of the book.

SB, (so wishing your surname was Spackman for this exercise), really enjoyed the book. She loved the rich characterisation and the very real sense of what it must have been like to live under such a torturous regime. For Frances this was a second time around read. She loved it the first time, though second time round whilst still enjoying it, felt it read a little sloppily. Agreed with SB though in terms of the characterisation. CC and Claire really enjoyed the story and raised the point about decency and the importance of morally doing the right thing. SF felt the characterisation was a little too black and white, in that the "bad guys" really were evil and the "good guys" just a little too squeeky clean. A number countered, including our esteemed host, big G, who sought to show the multi-layering of characterisation throughout the book.

The general consensus was Alone in Berlin was an entertaining and thought provoking read although one universal criticism was levelled at the translation and the possibility of the text losing a lot of its original colour. The title in German is Everyone Dies Alone, which makes a great deal more sense.

After the chin stroking, wine sniffing and big G's ratatouille munching, we got down to the serious business of celebrating the colourful characters that make up our delightful group. There were three prizes up for grabs: MVP, LR, TT. The lasses were a little perturbed with the schoolboy nature of the ceremony but got stuck in to award the following:

MVP - Frances

LR - SF

TT - Jd'A/JM

After some pretty dire speeches, ok well just mine, we moved onto the more important open vote on best book and best discussion. The former seemed to be between "The Consolations of Philosophy" and "Knowledge of Angels". The latter was picked up by, "We Need To Talk About Kevin". Worst book was universally agreed to be "The Alchemist" (or anything JM had chosen).

Next time round it is "Watching the English", so bring it on...

Sudbury, 1844.

I have a blurb-related pet hate:

"Palestine, 1941". "Leningrad, 1952". "England, 31st August 1939". "Vienna, 1939".

The opening sentences of the blurbs for Mornings in Jenin, The Betrayal, The Very Thought of You and Quiet Twin

On the paperback fiction table at Daunts on Fulham Road right now there are fifty two books. No fewer than twelve have blurbs starting either with this exact formulation - location, date - or featuring location and date somewhere in the first line. For example: "In 1901 a young frontiersman named Peter Force comes to New York City" "It is 1940, and bombs fall nightly on London" "On 19 August 1936 Hercules the boxer stands on the quayside at Coruña" "The year is 1878".

It's natural to want to set the scene, but surely we can come up with cleverer ways to do it? And is it really so important to get this information across first? Surely we can arouse a reader's curiosity better by beginning with something that's uniquely appealing about the book, letting the bare facts of its setting come later, or even not at all.

How To Win Your Book Group

Don’t kid yourself. You didn’t really join so you could “share with likeminded readers”. You want to be the boss of the book group. Here’s how:

1) Props.

Everyone always brings a copy of the book. Why? To read from it during the evening? No, that would be lame (see point 5). No one really knows why they do it. They just do. So you have a living room containing ten middle-class folks and as many identical paperbacks. Make sure yours looks the best. NO, I don’t mean it’s been carefully covered in plastic like they do in the library. I mean it’s, well, a bit f***ed. It’s warped and stained. It has dogeared pages and contains a stack of notes, scrawled on random envelopes and receipts. It says “I read this in a fast fury of intellectual vigour; I consumed it hungrily and fiercely and I’ve devoured its every significance. Whereas you, feeble sap, barely broke the spine of yours. Thus I win.”

2) Notes.

You want a great wodge of them, stuffed in your book (see point 1, do keep up). Not neat and tidy, with words underlined, because that says “girls’ school sixth form” like nothing else. No, these notes are extensive and they are messy. They say “I read fast, I think fast, I write fast. You can’t read these notes ... and in fact neither can I. Deal with it”.

Crucially, however, you must not refer to these notes during the book group, let alone read them out. No. They are your secret weapon, and they only remain powerful as long as they are secret. They are to make your opponents think “Looks like he has some really clever s**t written down there. I wonder when he’s going to use it. Perhaps if I say “I just didn’t really sympathise with any of the characters” like I was planning to, he’ll unleash the scary notes on me. I’d better keep schtum”. Result: win.

3) Research.

It’s pretty simple: if you bring a printout of the author’s Wikipedia page, you lose. If you bring a printout of the publisher’s reading group notes, you lose. If instead you bring something like a critical text about a completely unrelated author and leave it just visible under your copy of the book (see point 1) you win.

4) Opinions.

You can get away without any real ones for quite a while, but eventually you need to front up with a view or two. The golden rule is that your opinion has to be unchallengeable. Try luring your opponents in by asking something like “you remember that lovely moment at the diner where Claude notices the colour of the formica?” … or whatever; a tiny invented detail. Even if you’ve made it up everyone will inevitably nod and go “hm”. Then you’ve got them. You can load that moment; freight it, as the academics like to say, with as much significance as you please, and no one can contradict you. “It both prefigures his fall from grace and stands metaphorically for the entropy affecting the whole psychogeography of the province, don’t you think?” Nod. “Hm”. Win.

5) Quoting from the text.

Is both boring and sort of cheating. So don’t do it, lest you un-win the whole thing.


There you go. Follow those simple steps and you will leave the rest of your book group looking like a special needs catch-up class, and victory will be yours

Unsamaritans Book Group - The Books We Have Read So Far

Courtesy of James Marshall. Not entirely accurate. Can't be bothered to correct it.

'What is the What' - Dave Eggers
The Razor's Edge - Somerset Maugham
Cloud Atlas - David Mitchel
After Dark - Murikami
Cold mountain charles grazer
Toast nigel slater
The curious Incident of Dog mark haddon
The Knowledge of Angels jill Paton welch
Stuart: a Life backwards
Hey Nostradamus Douglas copeland
Year of wonders geraldine brooks
History of god Karen armstrong
Happiness
Italo Calvino baron in the trees
Brick Lane
Aunt Julia and the Scriptwriter
The Kite Runner khaled hossein
We need to talk about Kevin
Saturday ian mcewan
Black like me john Howard griffin
The inheritors William Golding
In cold Blood Truman capote
The Book Thief markus zusak
Embers
Kate winslett Nazi book
The Corrections Jonathan franzen
The Sunflower
The Consolations of Philosophy
Clever girl brian thompson
Beyond Black hilary mantel
The Handmaid's tale margaret Atwood
South shakleton
A tale of 2 Cities dickens
Dreams from my father Barack Obama
Brave new world huxley
the lovely bones Alice sebold
Persepolis
Secret history donna tart
Music and silence rose tremain
Run rabbit run john Updike
Orlando virg woolf
Alchemist paulo coelho
Wolfhall
Archidacts
Korean
Run - anne patchett
Happy book