• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Hopeful Monsters by Nicholas Mosley

Mike

New Member
A disappointing book full of potentially interesting ideas but clogged with an impassable dialogue, uninteresting characters which elicit no sympathy with the reader and implausible abstract notions of physics linked with Freudian psychology. It isn’t that as a reader I can’t grasp the idea of philosophy in literature but to link this with the politics of 1930’s Europe and Einstein’s theory of relativity and the splitting of the atom made this possibly one of the most turgid books I have ever read, never a pleasure and almost a disappointment in every chapter as I felt the narrative may be changing up a gear only to have my hopes dashed as it fell into a quicksand like mire of pretentious and unrealistic dialogue between the characters .

A story of a young man and woman growing up in the turbulent 1930’s one in Germany and one in England against a backdrop of the science and philosophy of the greatest minds of the time. Throw in the Spanish civil war and a journey across the Sahara and end it with the testing of the first nuclear bomb at Los Alamos and one may think a thrilling story could ensue. With a premise like that I for one was expecting great things; all those subjects interest me. Yet as a reader I was treated to endless quotation of Einstein’s theories and obscure German philosophers from the characters even during the most mundane of their dialogue, this gave the narrative and unreal and un-flowing style not helped by possibly the worst character dialogue style I have ever seen: - “He said – “ “ We said – “ I said – “ I thought –“ “ He said – “ -- This is how the dialogue is written, whole pages, with the “I thought – “ lines as well much of the time it was near impossible to get any sense from the dialogue couched as it is in this style with the weird mix of psychology and physics . Throw in the strange Oedipus sexual references as well as the stereotype 1930’s Cambridge intellectual homosexuals who end sentences with Ducky and I found this to be one of the most un-endearing and un-entertaining books I have ever read. Dull uninspiring characters that one felt no empathy with and situations so unreal and un-engaging that as I reader I cared little for the outcome. Sad that this book received the Whitbread Prize – a book more likely to alienate the reader I cannot think of and an irritation as to the wasted time whilst I read it. A waste of trees in my opinion, though I would like someone to try and change my mind.
 
Back
Top