Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I like the small link with Wandering Stars where Jude Star is given Huck Finn to read."

Yes! That was a nice link to see.

In addition to what's been said, I think the twist was also important in adding complexity to Huck Finn, a character who has been portrayed countless times in film and other media and is often presented as a symbol of American boyhood.

There are three things that I am still mulling over in considering whether this novel is deserving of the Booker.

The first is the "twist." There has always been scholarship on Huck Finn's origins, racial and otherwise, mostly due to the dialect he speaks and his place in comparison to the white characters in town before his running away. The best example on this is Was Huck Black?: Mark Twain and African-American Voices by Shelley Fisher Fishkin and I have linked an info sheet below.

So I did not find Everett's angle unpredictable, but actually predicated by the questions that prompted the book. So while the twist seems less original, Everett's building off the academic discussion seems quite clever.

Second is the issue of the use of the taboo word. Earlier when I responded to the question of whether James would find a place in the canon, I felt I did a disservice to GY in quoting him where people seemed to take that as a criticism where I consider it fact. Huckleberry Finn is IMO, on the way out of the canon since the use of that word makes it almost impossible to teach at any level beyond upper level university English literature. Without the secondary school exposure, I see this book almost completely disappearing, despite its merits, and Twain reduced to a lesser status of prominence. So Everett, was only just putting another nail in the coffin so to speak. This might change if the word loses its taboo, but I don't see any indication of that now. With Huck Finn of less importance, I see no reason why we would read James, but the big reason I see it as a problem is the use of the same word. We have a bit of silliness occurring right now where the word is taboo for some but acceptable for others but I wouldn't teach a book that used the word now simple out of common sense, to avoid any potential debate that could arise. So James IMO is echoing Twain's coarseness, with his use. That use does not dignify the Booker.

The third issue is where Everett takes the ending. It is okay for a novel and satire but I feel the expected outcome of such an uprising is understated and it leaves the interpretation of the ending in question. Some may see the behavior of responding with violence to injustice as heroic but usually it results in swift and repressive retribution on a brutal much wider scale. A present day example would be Gaza. I am not sure I feel I can accept comfortably Everett's ending, and that makes me question whether the book is appropriate for the Booker.

Sam wrote: "There are three things that I am still mulling over in considering whether this novel is deserving of the Booker.

The first is the "twist." There has always been scholarship on Huck Finn's origins..."

I agree with your post, Sam. But I am no longer mulling it over. I guess I'm the outlier, but I will be disappointed if this book wins the Booker. I think Everett is a good writer, and I will probably read the next book he publishes, but while I enjoyed James, I don't think it's an outstanding book, and I certainly don't think it's Booker win-worthy. I don't think it was an extraordinary book, and I sort of feel like half the work was done for Everett by Twain. All he had to do was turn Twain's views on their head, so to speak. To those who are rooting for a win for James, I appreciate your opinion, I just don't share it, and I'm willing to say maybe it's something in me, not the book, or maybe it just wasn't the book for me. I didn't mind the twist, but I don't buy it. It's a popular book, and it certainly doesn't need me to love it. If it wins, I'll congratulate Mr. Everett and think about next year's Booker. I do think it's Pulitzer-worthy. I'm not trying to say the book doesn't have value, It does. I just don't see it as a Booker winner. I'd rather Let Us Descend had made the longlist, but had it done so, I wouldn't have been cheering it on for the win, either.

Just read this again and really loved it again.

I particularly appreciated this time the way the Civil War comes in - I don’t think it does in Huck Finn does it (I could not face reading that again as I thought it poor first time) and how it means Everett can both examine his running theme of white saviour complex and link it to American history up to the present day.

Quite telling though that the back cover of the Uk edition has a blurb (I had not seen this before as the ARC did not have blurbs) from Ann Patchett saying “Who should read this book? Every single person in the country�. And I am pretty sure she does not mean the UK.

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I particularly appreciated this time the way the Civil War comes in - I don’t think it does in Huck Finn does it (I could not face reading that again as I thought it poor first time)..."

You are right, Huck Finn takes place before the Civil War, Everett moved it forward in time by a decade or two.

Fascinating! I completely missed that shift in time, even though I read James back to back with Huck Finn.

Just finished James now and I still have to collect my thoughts - I'll write a review and record a video tomorrow. To date I've read 4 Percival Everetts, and I would say this is his least funniest novel but it's the one that drives it's message home and savagely. I also read The Adventures of Huck Finn for the first time and I do strongly recommend that should be read as you're getting two points of view.

As someone who is interested in philosophy language, I will say I focused on that aspect on the book, even being the focal point towards the end - the scene in the judge's office. I'll expand tomorrow.

Powerful

Robert wrote: "Just finished James now and I still have to collect my thoughts - I'll write a review and record a video tomorrow. To date I've read 4 Percival Everetts, and I would say this is his least funniest ..."

Anxious to read your review because I liked the book, but I didn't think it was anything special. Very good, but not Booker-worthy, in part because Everett already had a framework, i.e., Twain's novel. He just had to tell it from a different point of view. But that's just my opinion, and I know a lot of people are rooting for this book to win.

Here’s the video:

I enjoyed your video Robert and the time you took to talk about Huck Finn. I agree that James is lacking the dark humor that is threaded through many of Everett's other novels, but I don't feel that the novel needs that. As you suggest, he had a different goal in mind. A solid 10 indeed.

Thanks!

Cindy wrote: "I enjoyed your video Robert and the time you took to talk about Huck Finn. I agree that James is lacking the dark humor that is threaded through many of Everett's other novels, but I don't feel tha..."

I think I'm the only person in this group who really doesn't like James. For me, it's derivative even if it does present a different point-of-view, and I guess, as a writer myself, I feel like Twain did half the work for Everett. That doesn't mean I don't think Everett is a good writer. I do. I just don't like retellings. This story has been told before and told better, I think. I know all the racism that's in Huck Finn, and I'm not in the slightest racist, but racism was a part of the US when Twain wrote.

I guess there's always one outlier, and this time I'm it.

Nothing wrong with that really - I mean I could discuss constructively (I’m saying this because I tried on the booker fb page and it blew up badly and it sounded like I was scathing)

At the end though so what if you’re the outlier

Bella (Kiki) wrote: I think I'm the only person in this group who really doesn't like James."

I didn't *dislike* James but I'm definitely more on the dissenting side. I thought there were two brilliant interludes (code-switching at the beginning, then the minstrel show) but the rest felt oddly underwritten and derivative. I'm an Everett fan, but I didn't love this one.

Robert wrote: "Nothing wrong with that really - I mean I could discuss constructively (I’m saying this because I tried on the booker fb page and it blew up badly and it sounded like I was scathing)

At the end t..."

Thank you, Robert. I liked what you said about Huck Finn, too. I liked the dark humor in that book, and I, too, find it lacking in James. I'm not saying it has to be in James, but I think it would have improved the book.

Laura wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: I think I'm the only person in this group who really doesn't like James."

I didn't *dislike* James but I'm definitely more on the dissenting side. I thought there were two bril..."

I feel like you do, Laura. I didn't actively dislike the book, it was a fairly quick read, but I also found quite a bit of it derivative. I usually like Everett, though I think he does have a problem with endings, and yes, I'm thinking specifically of The Trees. I don't James as Booker material, but I wouldn't mind if it won the Pulitzer.

I really enjoyed this book, it was the first Percival Everett novel I have read. I will look out for others.
I agree it is a solid 10, has a very important message and as someone said earlier the narrative was very propulsive.
I didn't see the twist coming but then thought, why not.
This would make a personal shortlist of those I have read.

Bella (Kiki) wrote: "Cindy wrote: "I enjoyed your video Robert and the time you took to talk about Huck Finn. I agree that James is lacking the dark humor that is threaded through many of Everett's other novels, but I ..."

Well if it is a sort of comfort you're definitely not a sole outlier. I have not been so disappointed in a novel as hyped as this one for many years.
The first part is decent, though a pale imitation of the original. Which I do think you need to have read to really get the most out of this one. At times it reads like a simplified version of HF something akin to a "junior" version. The attempt at vernacular writing I found clumsy. Especially in comparison to writers like James Kelman who really knows how to do it.

Then we get to Part 2. Well for me this is where it just starts to completely unravel. I can see why the film rights have been sold. I can see a sort of mission impossible type of film with lots of stunts turning into a sort of mad cap thriller.

Part 3 deals with some heavy themes but the ending is just bonkers frankly. The ending of The Trees was shambolic but this is even worse.

Having said all that I did enjoy it in a weird sort of way and I fully expect it to make the shortlist and to quite possibly win but it didn't impress me much.

BookerMT2 wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: "Cindy wrote: "I enjoyed your video Robert and the time you took to talk about Huck Finn. I agree that James is lacking the dark humor that is threaded through many of Everett's..."

Thank you for letting us know your thoughts. I agree with everything you wrote except that I don't think this one will win. But I've been wrong many times before and will be again. The prepublication hype made me expect something spectacular, and I thought this was, as you stated, just a pale imitation of HF. I didn't hate reading it, but I didn't like it at all, either, if that makes any sense.

Interesting - I must admit the disappointment for me was reading HF for the first time � I found it very poor at least judges as a book for adults.

I have to say that I never thought of James as a imitation, pale or otherwise, of HF. I thought it was a response to HF, and in many ways a far superior novel.

I agree with you Cindy - James, as a book isn’t an imitation in the lest

Adding my voice to the side that favors James over Huck Finn. I first read Huck Finn a few months ago (not sure how I made it this far, growing up in the US educational system, without reading Huck Finn before now, but there you have it). I thought it was a clunky novel, and the final third goes off the rails entirely, at least for me. James was so much better than Huck Finn, even if viewed entirely separate from that American classic. Viewing James as a response to (or in conversation with Huck Finn) further elevated James to a solid 5- star read for me.

For me, and I'm just speaking for myself, the test is: Would James have any relevance if HF had never been written? For me, it wouldn't. But that's just me. For me, too, it was ludicrous to think James could educate himself to that degree by simply reading in his master's library, or did I miss something about his education?

I'm not racist at all and don't care what color a person is, and I certainly don't believe in slavery. I'm appreciative of all the contributions African American people make to the world, e.g., Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Jesmyn Ward, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, thousands more.

Twain was being faithful to the times. He couldn't see into the future and see how things have changed. He could have portrayed James or Jim as highly educated, but it wouldn't have been believable or reflective of the times. It's kind of like saying Plath was off the mark when she wrote The Bell Jar. Well, sure, treatments for mental and emotional breakdowns are better now, but Plath was reflective of the times in which she wrote. Same for Twain. HF is not elevated literature, Twain didn't write that way, but HF is more authentic. I guess that's why I favor it.

I think James is a good book, but definitely not Booker worthy. I do think it's Pulitzer worthy, though. I view the Pulitzer as a prize reflecting a very different kind of book, a more popular one rather than a more thoughtful one. I feel sure James won't win, but as I said before, I've been wrong before and I certainly will be again.

As a poet and novel writer myself, my personal favorite is Held, but I'm pretty sure it won't win, either, though I hope it makes the shortlist. To be honest, I think Playground will win.

As of now, I am also in the camp of not really getting the hype. I am a third in, having read HF first, and James seems like an incredible blunt instrument. Some things, like the code switching in the beginning, were fun and interesting, but the rest so far feels like taking the HF plot beats and adding neon signs declaring "slaves are people too" and "James is a very smart guy understanding everything". I do not disagree with the sentiments expressed, but the style seems more suited to a shorter text.

I was not a fan of HF, but as of now, I don't think I am a fan of James' either. Some ideas are great, but I can't stop feeling like the book is making a point without any finesse. Slavery is bad, agreed - but the rewriting produced a weird imbalance between the character James and the time he is supposed to live in. I'll see if my impression changes, but I am disappointed. reading HF was a chore, and this seems like a paltry reward for my pain.

I am not sure - at least based on the 3 of his I have read - that Everett does finesse : The Trees and Dr No were even less subtle

I enjoyed the narrative in the book a lot both times I read it - probably the most of any longlisted book which is why it remains very high on my list (even though I really don’t want it to win).

I do like the idea of judging the book on how much recompense it delivers for having to read HF - I feel your pain.

Anna wrote: "As of now, I am also in the camp of not really getting the hype. I am a third in, having read HF first, and James seems like an incredible blunt instrument. Some things, like the code switching in ..."

I wound up giving it four stars, but had the same feelings as you, Anna. For me the problem was the satiric element, which also tied it too too literally to Twain's book. It made the characters seem flat and trope-y. I'd have preferred this book written more as a 'straight' historical novel that wasn't constrained to follow the events in Huckleberry Finn. Something more in the vein of The Underground Railroad (with or without the alternate history). But that's not the book Everett wanted to write, just the book I wanted to read ;)

I actually liked the ending. However, with the 'twist' announced ages before it happened and the heavy-handed introduction of highly topical issues - touching hair, for example - the book just left me cold. It is a highly political novel, so I can understand the call for a Pulitzer, but if I am honest, I just did not find it an impressive book. In the end, it is not subversive, funny, dark or original enough for me. At least, it goes down easy!

Nadine in California wrote: "Anna wrote: "As of now, I am also in the camp of not really getting the hype. I am a third in, having read HF first, and James seems like an incredible blunt instrument. Some things, like the code ..."

Since Huck Finn is a classic of American literature, I don't see how Everett could have written a book similar, but different. As I see it, he had to follow the events in HF as long as he was going to use the characters of HF and Jim, or James. He could have written his own book if he had invented new characters, but then all the hype would have been lost.

Like Anna, I did prefer the ending in this book to the chaotic ending in The Trees. I'm not as impressed with Everett's writing as most seem to be. He's a good writer, but I don't think he's a great writer. He certainly has a problem with originality and with endings. Frankly, I hope this doesn't even make the short list, though I feel it will. I don't feel it will win, though, and if it does, I'm going to be disappointed in the Booker. There are other books on the longlist that are much better. If James wins the Pulitzer, I won't mind. The Pulitzer seems more based on popularity than excellence in writing.

Edit: My last sentence is idiotic. I meant to say the Pulitzer is more political. I must have been in a rush when I wrote that. Sorry.

Just out of curiosity- how many books of his did you read to make such general statements as the ones you made above?

Laura wrote: "I can't help but wonder if this book is going to be added to the conversation of future studies of Huckleberry Finn in the way that Wide Sargasso Sea is included in studies of Jane Eyre currently."
I do think it will be seen as a companion piece. I don’t see James as being anti-Huckleberry Finn at all, more of a postscript to the original novel.
When I was growing up, Huckleberry Finn was popular in the UK, more as a children’s book than an adult novel. It was a class read at junior school. However, even then, back in the 1960s, it was seen as a bit iffy Although I think it was clear it was anti-slavery, there was a general ‘let’s not go there� feeling. It then fell from favour as did many other works that conflicted with changing mores.
I did reread Huckleberry Finn before reading James. I didn’t find it made as much difference to my reading of James as I expected - possibly because I had the gist of it already.
I enjoyed James, it’s the first of Everett’s work I’ve read. I didn’t think it was a great novel though & it wouldn’t have got as much attention if it weren’t for the theme.
It depends how you view Huckleberry Finn - I’m aware of its significance in terms of its use of the vernacular. Things like that tend to get lost in the mists of time though & become of less interest to the general reader. I think that, to most people, Huckleberry Finn will be seen more as social commentary &, as such, James is a worthy addendum. I believe Twain would approve.

David wrote: "For anyone coming to this from outside the US, it may be helpful to have familiarity with Daniel Decatur Emmett, who shows up as a character in the book (and in the opening of James): ..." thank you for this!

Robert wrote: "Just out of curiosity- how many books of his did you read to make such general statements as the ones you made above?"

I've read all of Everett's books. I don't see any general statements, just my own opinion, which is all I can give. I have no problem accepting the opinions of others if they differ radically from mine. I think that's fair to Everett. No one's going to please everyone, and I do enjoy most of his books, even if I don't find them outstanding. I prefer Held to win, but if James does, well, it does, and I'll be happy for Everett, though I'd rather he win the Pulitzer. I admit to prejudice: I don't like rewritings, especially of classics.

Bella (Kiki) wrote: "I've read all of Everett's books."

Impressive!

Anna wrote: "I actually liked the ending. However, with the 'twist' announced ages before it happened and the heavy-handed introduction of highly topical issues - touching hair, for example - the book just left..."

I feel the same, Anna. I really enjoyed reading James, but I didn't find anything outstanding about it. Like you, I found it heavy-handed at times and political. I enjoyed reading The Trees more until that chaotic zombie ending.

Lesley wrote: "Laura wrote: "I can't help but wonder if this book is going to be added to the conversation of future studies of Huckleberry Finn in the way that Wide Sargasso Sea is included in studies of Jane Ey..."

I don't think James will be a companion piece because it's not reflective of the times like HF is. But that's just my opinion. I also don't believe Twain would like James. He seems to be thought of as a relaxed, jocular man, but I've read several books about him, and he's said in them to have been contentious and hard to get on with. This is just my opinion after reading Everett and Twain and about Twain. It's not a blanket statement. Since instructors have varying tastes, perhaps some might assign both books, but I don't think any book will ever displace HF. Yes, HF contains darkness and some downright ugliness, but it was written about a very dark time in US history, maybe the worst, except for maybe now, of course, when the US is more divided than during the Civil War in some ways. I'm Italian, though I live in the US now. I spent time living in Switzerland and the UK, too, so my remarks are reflective of that as well. Maybe James just isn't the book for me. The only book on the shortlist I actively disliked is Creation Lake.

Cindy wrote: "I have to say that I never thought of James as a imitation, pale or otherwise, of HF. I thought it was a response to HF, and in many ways a far superior novel."

If it's not a rewriting of HF, then why do you think Everett didn't create his own characters and situations? (I don't think it's an imitation, but I do think it's a rewriting.)

David wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: "I've read all of Everett's books."

Impressive!

"

Thanks so much for the link David, so helpful.

Don't think I'd appreciated the breadth/depth of his output.

David wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: "I've read all of Everett's books."

Impressive!

"

I wouldn't say it's impressive by any stretch of the imagination. I'm just a fast reader with a lot of time on my hands since I've been recovering from a devastating accident and surgery two years ago. I have much more time than most and had to learn to walk again, so, not being much interested in TV, I've been reading a lot of books. I find Everett very entertaining and intelligent even though I'm not particularly a fan of James. I'd much rather see it win than Creation Lake, though, or The Safekeep. I really liked the atmosphere of The Safekeep, but the twist in that was clear to me just from reading about the book, before I even read one page. And Everett has written a lot. I'd rather see him win than a debut author unless that debut author has written something truly outstanding. Everett has put in the work. I especially like his reviews and trust them.

Anyone who's a moderately fast reader and has had to spend the last two years mostly lying down, could have done what I did. He's one of the few authors I've read exhaustively. There are a few more, but they haven't written as much or as varied as Everett.

When you think about my circumstances - two surgeries, one on each leg and two surgeries, one of each foot, and an emergency cholecystectomy for a ruptured gallbladder, then four more days in hospital for acute pancreatitis, anyone would have the time. (I had four eye surgeries and no longer have my own lenses or corneas. so I had to take off from reading there.) PT takes only about two hours a day. The rest of the day, I'm confined to a wheelchair or a hospital bed. It's only in the last week that I've been able to walk again with a walker, and then only across a room. Plenty of time to read, unfortunately. LOL

Gwendolyn wrote: "Vesna wrote: "That twist was also jarring for me at first but then I thought it could be open to different interpretations and my thoughts went in a different direction that satisfied me though it ..."

I thought it felt like something James had always known, but I suppose we'll never know unless Everett chooses to tell us.

Bella (Kiki) wrote: "Lesley wrote: "Laura wrote: "I can't help but wonder if this book is going to be added to the conversation of future studies of Huckleberry Finn in the way that Wide Sargasso Sea is included in stu..."
I see James more as a response from the future.to Huckleberry Finn. It may not reflect the mores of 19th century America but I see it as a 21st century perspective on the way Jim is represented in Twain’s novel. It’s in that context that I personally would include it as an addendum in any class I was I was teaching. It’s not that I think James is a landmark work in the way that Huckleberry Finn is viewed by many but, as it’s a direct response, I feel it merits a note. As an aside, the link included in Marc’s October email on ‘what lasts & mostly doesn’t last� is an interesting read.
Yes, I am going on a stereotyped view of Twain. Although, I’m aware of his causticity I know little about him - or American literature in general. Maybe it’s more I can imagine, if such a setting were possible, the discussion at the lunch Everett has said he would very much like to have with Twain.
Sincere best wishes on your continuing recovery. Even if you don’t consider your reading of all of Everett’s work to be impressive, your fortitude certainly is.

Lesley wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: "Lesley wrote: "Laura wrote: "I can't help but wonder if this book is going to be added to the conversation of future studies of Huckleberry Finn in the way that Wide Sargasso S..."

I don't think Twain would come to that lunch, but almost anything's possible. LOL He might if it were it possible, just to argue his points. It would be very interesting.

I do think whether teachers include James along with HF when teaching will be up to the individual teacher, so I think some will and some won't. Frankly, I expect James to fade after the Booker whether it wins or not. I wouldn't teach it, but if I were in a class and it was assigned, I'd surely read it (again) and study it. I enjoyed reading it well enough, though I prefer HF and don't think James even scratched the surface of the hype.

I don't think the make up of five women and one man means James is excluded as the winner or is a shoo-in, but I don't think James will win. Then again, I was sure Playground would, and it didn't even make the shortlist, so what do I know? Very little.

Bella (Kiki) wrote: "I do think whether teachers include James along with HF when teaching will be up to the individual teacher, so I think some will and some won't. ..."

Absolutely & I wouldn’t have it any other way. I wouldn’t so much ‘teach� it alongside HF as include it in further reading.
I do agree that James will not have the longevity of HF.
I don’t have an opinion on (or even much interest in) what will win the Booker. I find the longlist a useful source of potential reading material but that’s about as far as I go.
I think if I were going to try & predict the winner, I would study the judges at least as much as & probably more than the books.
I read this thread as I’d read James & was slightly underwhelmed- I had probably set my expectations too high. Sometimes when that’s the case, I feel I must have missed something & like to see if anyone can highlight it for me.

Lesley wrote: "Bella (Kiki) wrote: "I do think whether teachers include James along with HF when teaching will be up to the individual teacher, so I think some will and some won't. ..."

Absolutely & I wouldn’t h..."

I agree about the teaching. I'd make students aware.

I thought I missed something in James. I preferred The Trees except for the chaotic ending.

I like to mine the Booker longlist for reading material, too, and I enjoyed most of the books. I'm an amateur poet, nothing I'd ever send to a magazine, so I really like Held, though I agree with GY that some of the later relationships are too tenuous, and I didn't feel much of a connection to any of the characters.

I enjoyed the atmosphere of The Safekeep, but it was very predictable for me.

I don't feel I know enough about these judges. I was shocked Playground didn't make the shortlist. I had an ARC from Net Galley and loved it.

Of the few I’ve read Held, for me, had the most depth. My reading was too sporadic to do it justice though.
I’m about 20% into Playground & am enjoying it. I usually find Richard Powers hard going but I’m finding Playground’s rhythm more intuitive.

Lesley wrote: "Of the few I’ve read Held, for me, had the most depth. My reading was too sporadic to do it justice though.
I’m about 20% into Playground & am enjoying it. I usually find Richard Powers hard going ..."

Held had the most depth for me, too, and I'd love to see it win since I love the writing of Anne Michaels. I feel it will be Creation Lake, though, a book I did not like.

Thought this was a useful article in terms of putting the novel within a wider context - it does directly reference Everett:

Thanks for sharing that article, Alwynne.

Held is still the book I want to win, but I've reread James again, and I've softened up on it. I'll be happy enough if it wins. I've reread The Safekeep, too, and I find it the weakest book on the shortlist. I disliked Creation Lake, but right now, I feel James or Creation Lake will win, though I'm still hoping for Held.