Literary Award Winners Fiction Book Club discussion

Please comment on G. by John Berger, chapters 6 to 10. (Booker Prize winner 1972)

This was not my cup of tea. I found all the philosophizing a bit pretentious. The descriptions were too much. I did not care about the characters, was not engaged by the story, was not persuaded by the commentary. I was very tempted to quit this book.

Irene, you are not alone. Lots of ‘goodread’ readers didn’t like this book.

I am half way through and whilst I don’t like the protagonist, I have found the plot interesting and I have enjoyed the many thought provoking sentences. However there have certainly been moments that I just haven’t liked a particular sentence or did not totally agree with the idea being stated.

For example, sentences I liked:
‘The past is the one thing we are not prisoners of. We can do with the past exactly what we wish. What we can’t do is change its consequences.’
‘To remain innocent may also be to remain ignorant.’
‘The relation between what we see and what we know is never settled. Each evening we see the sun set. We know that the earth is turning away from it. Yet the knowledge, the explanation, never quite fits the sight.’

Sentences that just did not ring true for me:
‘Every city has a sex and an age which have nothing to do with demography. Rome is feminine. So is Odessa. London is a teenager, an urchin, and in this hasn’t changed since the time of Dickens. Paris, I believe, is a man in his twenties in love with an older woman.’
‘Yours lips, beloved, are like a honeycomb: honey and milk are under the tongue. And the smell of your clothes is like the smell of my home’.


I have enjoyed the historical detail and particularly liked the aviation event where Chavez attempts to fly over the alps.

So overall I am enjoying this quirky, original read which has some bumps along the way!

This is primarily about G, a Don Juan figure, and the desire or need in each woman who falls under his sway. But, much time is given to historical background events, such as Chavez's flight. These elements are given more attention than necessary if they are simply there to give a realistic setting. So, what is Berger doing with these social and political pieces that are not directly relevant to the sexual encounters? What is the point of Chavez's flight which crashes at the last second?

‘G’ moves through momentous historic events wth little interest in them. He is obsessed with having affairs. Weymann gets angry with ‘G’. He tells ‘G’ that there are peasants who have filled the town like pilgrims to honour the historic courage of Chavez. “And amongst these men....there is a little runt!” (Page 211, Bloomsbury paperback edition). ‘G’ is oblivious to what is really happening around him. He lacks perspective and interest in what is important.

The book is told from the perspective of the seduced. The protagonist is uninteresting and not particularly attractive. His teeth have gaps. G’s lovers come and go abruptly. Berger is analysing sex and desire, but not from a romantic viewpoint.

It is certainly an original way of writing. There is third person narration, stream of conscious narration, an unidentifiable lecturer and unidentifiable characters. There are times the reader does not know whose perspective we are reading.

I found that periodic lack of clarity about the voice of the narrator a bit disorienting. I always felt distanced from the story and the characters, less engaged in what was going on than G was in his surroundings. I never quite understood why any of the women were sufficiently attracted to him to risk so much to sleep with him, except the final woman who was using him for a very practical end. In the end, I could not say what Berger was trying to communicate about sexual desire, except maybe that it is irrational. I did find the ending uniquely satisfying.

Irene, I agree with all your comments above. The switching of the narrator was a little jarring at times. The characters were not fully developed. The novel seemed to be focussed on the subjects of sex and desire. I too am not sure how effective he was in this regard, though there are some interesting, thought provoking sentences throughout this book. The ending was satisfying.

I did like the historic detail. I was quite surprised by how 'G', in taking a slavic woman, dressed appropriately, to a ball, can be seen as offensive. It certainly highlighted the distinct class and cultural differences of that time, (1915).