(Authorhouse, 2013)
Having the opportunity of reading a draft of a book that has
not yet been published means you are conscious of reading in two different ways
– firstly, as a draft, weighing it up and seeing what is good and what could be
improved; and secondly, as a book, in terms of plot, characters, style, etc.
You realize what hard work it is to write a whole book! Just to do all
that writing, and keep all the different elements of the plot in one’s head at
the same time!
Descriptions
The descriptions are really striking and in many ways better
than the action. Especially the food – the tea, the roti, etc. The author would certainly also make a good restaurant
critic!
Characters
All the characters spoke in exactly the same way. Nadim,
Samir, David…, all have the same voice. The women in particular, Priyani,
Danika, and the others, are all exactly the same, there is nothing to tell them
apart. Yet they are supposed to be from different backgrounds and cultures.
Also, when they meet, they just make friends, carry on as if they’ve known and
trusted each other all their lives, and that’s the end of the story. Very
unrealistic indeed. Plus David and Priyani falling in love, Samir and Danika…
both couples made for each other, all settled in no time, no kind of development.
Publishing
Most of us came to the conclusion that the book is so long,
and gives such vivid pictures of some episodes, that it would actually make a
good film – in fact a better film than book, in many ways.
Plot
Good story. Completely convincing (unlike The Olive
Grove or The Guernsey Literary
and Potato Peel Pie Society) – this is someone who really does seem to have
experienced what he is writing about first hand, both David’s life in Sri
Lanka and Sami’s guerrilla fighting in Beirut and Sri Lanka. From the problems
and the way they tackle them, right down to Asilin’s coconut-scraper (which
almost all of us picked on for special note!).
Style
A lot of the book reads very well, but many other parts of
it are very badly written. It needs a thorough re-write (sorry!) for
punctuation and grammar, which is often poor (particularly the absence of
commas), and, even more importantly, for the very amateur-sounding explanatory
sentences and clauses right the way through. Not the fact that
sentences are almost always short and simple, or the frequency of one-sentence
paragraphs, in the actual narrative: those are the way this kind of book should
be written, because they convey the protagonists’ level of thought effectively. The parts that need re-writing are the sort of sentence that occurs on virtually every page, that suddenly bring
the movement of the narrative to a grinding halt – to take one example
completely at random:
David looked across at the
Colonel waiting for permission to speak. The Colonel nodded his head signalling
David to begin. (p. 349)
This revising should be done not by the author, but by
someone who has professional experience in writing, editing and proof-reading.
It would be really worth it – though it would cost a fair amount of money.
Detail
The wealth of detail is brilliant, but this too slows up the
whole story. It seems to move so slowly that most if not all readers soon
started speed-reading or skimming through the book, rather than reading every
page properly.
None of us could explain the title of the book. The only part it seemed to be relevant to was the massacre at the Temple.
Episodes
David and Charmaine (Chapter 4). This episode showed a
relationship that was totally typical of the difference in attitudes between
men and women. “What they had suited David perfectly.” But as soon as Charmaine
realised that that was all he wanted, that he was not interested in any kind of
commitment, let alone in marrying her, she broke off the relationship and went to
Australia. Unlike David, she had seen their relationship as implying, and
leading to, genuine commitment. I’m not suggesting any change is needed here,
though it could be interesting to bring out the difference between the way
David saw Charmaine, and the way he saw Priyani, even if he didn’t reflect on
that difference himself.
Father Daniel (or Daniels) and chastity (Chapter 8):
“chastity is a choice, there is nothing in God’s law that forbids us to have
wives.” But Catholic priests in general, and Jesuits in particular as members
of a religious order, take a solemn vow of celibacy. Is Father Daniel/s
supposed to have somehow forgotten it, or convinced himself that it doesn’t
matter? Has he been set a bad example by other priests and has he not had
anyone to put him straight? Is he not in contact with any of his superiors? Something
more needs adding here.
