I thought I'd shake things up a bit in my continuing quest to read all of Ian McEwan's novels, so I got Amsterdam* as a book on CD and have been listening to it. And now, on the fourth and final CD, I can confidently say...
I have no idea what the hell is going on in this book.
Well, that's not true. I've just about figured out which character is Clive, and which one is Vernon, and how they're both semi-involved with getting pictures of a cross-dressing politician published in the newspaper. Oh, and there's also something about a woman they both loved, Molly, and how she was involved with the cross-dressing politician, and that's why Clive and Vernon want to take him down.
Okay, when you can't keep two main characters in mind, you know you're just not following the audio book. So now my question is, am I just not enjoying the book, or do I just not enjoy listening to novels? Usually, when I listen to books, they are nonfiction books, I'll admit. And when I listen to books, I'm typically doing the dishes or cooking--evidently I don't have enough brain power to both follow a storyline AND scrub plates? Interesting.
So I'm going to do a little experiment; I got McEwan's book Saturday on tape, and I'm going to try that too. Maybe it's just Amsterdam. Maybe it's just McEwan. Or maybe it's any fiction on tape. I'm going to find out!
*I was just reading about this book at Amazon, where I was reminded that this is the book for which McEwan won the Booker Prize. What? My long tradition of not enjoying Booker Prize-winners continues. Which hurts me, because it's a British award, and as such, I should be all over it.
I had a hard time following Atonement when I listened to it. Some books work on tape; some not so much, I think.
Posted by: laura | 25 November 2008 at 12:18 PM
The only Booker winner that I've hands-down loved is JG Farrell's Siege of Krishnapur. It's very darkly funny look at the Sepoy rebellion. I'm a little twisted, since I also loved the Flashman version of the same event.
Posted by: rachael | 25 November 2008 at 01:04 PM
Huh. That's interesting.
I've liked all the Booker winners I've read, although that's only 6 winners and 10 off the short list. Maybe we just read different ones? Will you do a post on the Booker winners you've read and didn't like? Could be funny.
My especial favorites were "The Remains of the Day," "Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha," and "Never Let Me Go." Oh, and "Darkmans," but nobody ever seems to like that book but me.
Posted by: Jessica | 25 November 2008 at 01:12 PM
I go back and forth on the Booker, but I am not really a fan of Amsterdam. I like McEwan a lot, but not that book.
Posted by: Tripp | 25 November 2008 at 01:31 PM
It's funny you mention that you have difficulty following the story when listening to fiction on audio. I find I have that problem when I'm listening to nonfiction! I think nonfiction requires more attention and I find it too hard to pay attention and drive/cook/knit at the same time. So I've given up on nonfiction audiobooks-with the exception of Frank McCourt. I could listen to him over and over.
Posted by: Melissa | 25 November 2008 at 04:43 PM
Laura,
Thanks for the reassurance. This one is sure not working for me.
Rachael,
This is how uninformed I am: Sepoy rebellion? JG Farrell? I've never heard of either (how embarrassing) but now I will have to look them up. Thanks for the tip!
Posted by: Citizen Reader | 25 November 2008 at 05:22 PM
Jessica,
Damn, of course you would have to list some Bookers that I HAVE enjoyed--I really liked both "Remains of the Day" and "Never Let Me Go," and I never read Paddy Clarke, but it's got one of the best covers ever (and I like Roddy Doyle too). Thanks for the reminder that I have liked some Bookers--I'll have to peruse the old list to jog my memory of what I didn't like. Didn't "Life of Pi" win it once? I didn't understand that novel AT ALL.
Posted by: Citizen Reader | 25 November 2008 at 05:24 PM
Tripp! Thanks for chiming in. Did you have an opinion on "Saturday"? That's next on my list; I tried "Enduring Love" but couldn't get very far and decided to revisit it later.
Melissa,
Maybe it has to do with what you're more used to--I tend to read more NF, so maybe it's easier for me to track it on audio (although sometimes with history books I'll admit it's jarring not to be able to see proper names).
Posted by: Citizen Reader | 25 November 2008 at 05:26 PM
Hmmm, interesting to think about what works or doesn't as an audiobook vs. a (plain, old-fashioned, read it) book.
Currently listening to AND reading and reading about Moby Dick and I couldn't be happier! Took the audio to finally suck me WAY in and then all kinds of delights have ensued.
McEwan, I have happily just plain read all. I loved Amsterdam (and so can you? well, I hope you do! if the audio fails, try the um, you know, kind of manual page-turning thingy)
Read a news article where book groups were grousing that members who listened to the audio were "cheating". Current co-worker who hosts 5 library book groups was aghast, because listening takes so much longer!
You have raised a terrible and delicious question here, on audio vs. reading of books. Thanks, I am off to ponder!
tl
Posted by: Merry Laundress | 30 November 2008 at 10:43 PM
Laundress!!
Yes, I find the audio book/real book question an interesting one. I can't really say I LOVE listening to books on tape, but they are nice when I am otherwise occupied doing boring house-y stuff, including dishes and dusting. Your co-worker is right, they DO take longer than just reading a book, which also makes it a different experience.
I'm glad you're enjoying Moby Dick! Maybe that's one I'll have to try on tape, as I've never been tempted to read it.
As I think back on Amsterdam, interestingly, the more I like it. Trust McEwan to make a slightly nasty story seem perfectly normal.
Posted by: Citizen Reader | 01 December 2008 at 09:06 AM