The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

Study for Obedience by Sarah Bernstein (Granta Books)

Is this the only one from the Granta list. Can't recall the piece and don't mention it in my review but I did tag the book as one to possibly by so I must have liked it

It's excellent.

Yes re Granta and the magazine featured an extract. It’s very good although not brilliant for me. I think you would like it Paul.

endrju wrote: "It's excellent."

Definitely a very interesting novel and loved the references to Ingeborg Bachmann, Beckett and Simone Weil.

Alwynne wrote: "endrju wrote: "It's excellent."

Definitely a very interesting novel and loved the references to Ingeborg Bachmann, Beckett and Simone Weil."

Okay now I'm interested in this. But it does seem too intertextual for the shortlist.

Their loss. :)

I remember this one being so weird and dense but I vibed with it

Weird and dense - the stuff great literature is made of.

endrju wrote: "Weird and dense - the stuff great literature is made of."

You've sold me on it!

Alwynne wrote: "endrju wrote: "It's excellent."

Definitely a very interesting novel and loved the references to Ingeborg Bachmann, Beckett and Simone Weil."

Malina is a wonderful book - reverseBernhardian i.e. it influenced him!

Is it best to read Malina before I read this one? It’s women in translation month, after all, and my plan is to read only Booker longlist and WIT this month.

I read it without knowing any of these references and it still worked for me

Agreed

But how do you know if you haven’t read the references (cf past Booker discussions on sequels and not being necessary to read the previous books). Ie would it be even better if?

But given these judges I rather doubt they read them - one of them seemingly doesn’t read fiction at all. So I suspect it is fine without.

NB can I count this one as Bernhardian. Her debut novel had Thomas Bernhard, Cusk and Gwendoline Riley cited on the back cover as key comparisons. And she cited Fleur Jaeggy. Have I found a new favourite author I wonder….

https://twitter.com/harriet__moore/st...

Paul wrote: "But how do you know if you haven’t read the references (cf past Booker discussions on sequels and not being necessary to read the previous books). Ie would it be even better if?

But given these ju..."

There's a lot of overlap between this and her debut novel, but this is far more assured.

is her debut worth picking up?

Yahaira wrote: "is her debut worth picking up?"

It depends on how keen you were on this one, it's very similar in terms of style and preoccupations but it's an odd mix of more grounded and more obviously dystopian - if that makes any sense whatsoever! I wrote quite a long review which should be easy to find, which may or equally may not give you an impression of what it's like!

endrju wrote: "Weird and dense - the stuff great literature is made of."

Magic words for me!

The more I see on this thread, the more I’m anticipating this one. It’s out mid August in the US.

I just finished this and liked it very much. I'm having visions of 2021, though, when the Cusk was left off the shortlist.

I had to share a link to Eric Karl Anderson's video about this novel, which is called "First DNF from the Booker Longlist 2023." I am waiting to read this when it comes out later this month, but he couldn't get more than 50 pages into it, calling it "frustrating and dismaying."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTlZr...

That does not surprise me - both that David loved it (as I suspect will many of the group) and Eric did not ; it really depends what you look for in a novel I think

Much as I like Eric I take that video as quite a strong recommendation for the book!

I’ve seen some comparisons to Cursed Bread from the Women’s Prize. I liked the Bernstein a little bit better, but my guess is the same people will like both or hate both.

Agree it may also depend on what you expect fiction to do.

I hated Cursed Bread and found the Bernstein better by a mile

I think everything else but the Bernstein will be DNF for me. "Pearl" is awful and I can't go beyond first 20 pages. Other ones don't look much more appetizing either.

You are like the antithesis of Eric!

This article by Daisy Lafarge based on the inspiration for her own novel provides an interesting perspective on what links Bernstein (based on Bernstein’s previous novel) and Marie Ndiaye and Simon Weil (two of the key references Bernstein quotes):

https://lithub.com/untouchable-disapp...

Also explains well why some readers will find this disappoints their expectations

And most important provides another Paul link for the longlist :-)

I loved this so much I immediately reread it.

It’s a great start to my longlist reading. Please tell me the other 12 books are similar?

You know the answer to that.

But there must be one judge at least with decent taste in books. Or Gaby Wood’s influence as per your review?

What did Eric not like about it? And is the riposte in the novel:

if there was one thing they could not stand, it was the obscure, they were not a people, much interested in the pursuit of meaning. They liked constancy.

Paul wrote: "But there must be one judge at least with decent taste in books."

Mary Jean Chan is my guess.

It's not unheard of for the Booker to longlist something that's nakedly literary. But books like this do tend to produce a certain reaction. That quote is a good one.

The link to Makina, a good excuse for posting my favourite quote from that book:

It has less to do with the books, above all it has to do with the reading, with black on white, with the letters, syllables, lines, the signs, the setting down, this inhuman fixing, this insanity, which flows from people and is frozen into expression. Believe me, expression is insanity, it arises out of our insanity. It also has to do with turning pages, with hunting from one page to the other, with flight, with complicity in an absurd, solidified effusion, with a vile overflow of verse, with insuring life in a single sentence, and, in turn, with the sentences seeking insurance in life.
 
Reading is a vice which can replace all other vices or temporarily take their place in more intensely helping people live, it is a debauchery, a consuming addiction. No, I don’t take any drugs, I take books.

Paul wrote: "I loved this so much I immediately reread it.

It’s a great start to my longlist reading. Please tell me the other 12 books are similar?"

I think it would stand up to rereading, I'm planning to revisit it at some point. But it does seem out of place on this particular list.

Daisy Lafarge’s book on the other hand would have been guaranteed to make the longlist had it been published this year.

I had rather missed that the author’s academic research topic of choice is the “idea of literary difficulty – what makes a text difficult? And what is difficulty for – what can it do”, including the relationship between literary difficulty and the common good.

So if anyone (eg Eric) was expecting an easy read that is rather not the point of the novel.

Paul wrote: "Much as I like Eric I take that video as quite a strong recommendation for the book!"

It was an interesting video, his reaction and mine were so vastly different. I found this compulsive reading, I liked that it was deliberately opaque and that I had to give it my complete attention. I also liked the complexity of the underlying arguments and the ambiguities as well as the issues raised around gender, history, memory, power etc

I haven't watched the video (I don't really 'do' videos) - what didn't he like about it?

Not a fan of this one. I see some have compared this to Rachel Cusk's "Outline" trilogy. I only read the final book, "Kudos", which I thought was far (far) superior to Study for Obedience.

It's the recoil to this that has me convinced of its merits.

Paul wrote: "I haven't watched the video (I don't really 'do' videos) - what didn't he like about it?"

He found it too vague, not enough to go on in terms of story/plot. Not engaging/dreary. Too much concept, not enough content/substance - interesting that he doesn't think a concept can have substance in the fictional realm. He thought the lead character was too passive compared her to a passive lead in a Joyce Carol Oates where there was more going on...And couldn't believe it won out over Demon Copperhead. He seemed pleasant enough but clearly prefers conventional mid-market lit fic which fair enough. Although the comparison to Oates was a bit weird.

Eric is a huge JCO fan (I think his favourite author) hence I guess the reference.

None if this debate surprises me - this was always a book likely to split views between some acclaiming brilliance (which seems to have been a lot of the media reviews) and others (almost as a reaction to this) calling out their belief the novel has as much substance as the emperor clothes. With then a group I think in the middle thinking it did not really leave an impression either way.

In my pre Booker speculation on my Instagram account where I discussed 25 books and why they might/might not make the list this was an excerpt from

WHY MIGHT IT BE LONGLISTED:

If the judges are drawn to enigmatic writing and to what is an oblique but memorable exploration of themes such as familial and societal pressures to conform, and the historical and present day rejection of the outsider.

WHY MIGHT IT NOT BE LONGLISTED:

If the judges want books that explain and resolve themselves. The author said of her debut "One question I struggle with most is what the book is about" - and I think the same applies here.

If you take the Granta list this book looks very much in place - there are a group of authors there that write similar fiction.

From the rest of the Booker longlist though I slightly struggle to see that a majority of the judges can be in the first camp so I do fear for the book’s chances going forwards.

I am 50 pages in and the writing is giving gooseflesh.

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "Eric is a huge JCO fan (I think his favourite author) hence I guess the reference.

None if this debate surprises me - this was always a book likely to split views between some acclaiming brillian..."

Thanks for explaining, I loathe Oates so makes sense that my tastes and Eric's wouldn't always overlap. I don't think the book is necessarily brilliant I just liked it but I also like the process of reading and the relationship between narrative and reader that Bernstein sets up. So Eric found this required focus, and a certain amount of intellectual labour and found that off-putting, whereas I found it required focus/work and found that experience pleasurable.

I'm not sure that the novel is quite as enigmatic as the debut piece, she's talked a lot more about her exploration of trauma, the links to Jewish history and her own background in interviews with publications like the Jewish Chronicle.

I'm not sure that Eric was put off by the intellectual labor that reading the novel required. It was more that he was engaged enough in the story or the writing to make putting in the effort worthwhile. Or at least, that's how I understood the video. He just was not interested enough to stay focused.

Cindy wrote: "I'm not sure that Eric was put off by the intellectual labor that reading the novel required. It was more that he was engaged enough in the story or the writing to make putting in the effort worthw..."

That may have been his intended meaning but by setting this up in opposition to Oates and to Kingsolver he opened himself up to the charge! After all like any other text his comments are open to a variety of interpretations, I'm just stating mine.

Alwynne wrote: "Cindy wrote: "I'm not sure that Eric was put off by the intellectual labor that reading the novel required. It was more that he was engaged enough in the story or the writing to make putting in the..."

Understood. Yes, without being able to ask him questions, we are left to interpret what really caused him problems in the novel.

Cindy wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "Cindy wrote: "I'm not sure that Eric was put off by the intellectual labor that reading the novel required. It was more that he was engaged enough in the story or the writing to mak..."

I think if he'd compared this to work by Catherine Lacey, for example, then I would have taken him more seriously.

Yes - Pew was the very obvious comparison to be made.