First of all, I’m uneasy about discussing a book with the author in the forum. Knowing this, I wish I could say that I really liked the book. I can’t say that. 
I’m only posting since I bought the book in order to take part in a discussion, and now I will put in my two cents worth, although the discussion seems to have died, and some other people have made the similar points.
Characters make or break a book for me – so that’s what I will focus on here. I think character should always be revealed in what the character does and says, never in the author’s judgment. The lack of character development in this book is evident when comparing it to the characters in Andrea Levy’s book, which is also up for discussion. Levy never once tells you that they are good or bad, and never makes that judgment for the reader. You are to make that call yourself by what the author reveals of her characters in their actions and how they behave in certain circumstances. And her characters are so rich and full that it isn’t always easy to decide – they have the kind of depth you find in real human beings. The author has made them real for us.
In the early chapters of Small Island, Hortense is revealed through her husband, Gilbert, to be something of a pill. Gilbert does not need to tell us she is a pill, but we know she is by the way she behaves. We also know something about Gilbert by the way he responds to Hortense.
We are told Tayson Pierce is a “selfish prick” in the first paragraph about Tayson. A little later “…he waited patiently at the bar as each new victim sat next to him and then abruptly left in disgust.” To prove that point he deliberately insults every occupant of the neighboring bar stool and they predictably leave in disgust. Predictably. The author has made his own book predictable with this technique. The initial description of Tayson was superfluous – and only would have worked for me if one of the occupants of the neighboring stool was more than a match for him, a surprise. Or, leave the initial judgments out, and let the reader decide for himself based on Tayson’s behavior.
Like mehastings I did not finish the book. This might be a flaw of mine – but I don’t finish a book if I don’t like it. I’m not in school anymore, haven’t been in a loooong time, so I read something because I enjoy it, or I don’t read it. I stopped reading on page 86, and I only got that far because I bought it and kept hoping that I would find something I liked about it.
I realize that people have different expectations of a book and judging from the comments on Amazon there are people who totally disagree with me. Sirmyk is quite young, and his writing will get better as he matures, but he evidently has readers who enjoy his work now. There may be a wide audience of these readers. So, I will happily send my copy to someone on a limited budget who would like to give “Palindrome Hannah” a chance. Just send me a personal note with your address. I’ll supply postage. First come, first served, no limitations on geographic location.
I’m only posting since I bought the book in order to take part in a discussion, and now I will put in my two cents worth, although the discussion seems to have died, and some other people have made the similar points. Characters make or break a book for me – so that’s what I will focus on here. I think character should always be revealed in what the character does and says, never in the author’s judgment. The lack of character development in this book is evident when comparing it to the characters in Andrea Levy’s book, which is also up for discussion. Levy never once tells you that they are good or bad, and never makes that judgment for the reader. You are to make that call yourself by what the author reveals of her characters in their actions and how they behave in certain circumstances. And her characters are so rich and full that it isn’t always easy to decide – they have the kind of depth you find in real human beings. The author has made them real for us.
In the early chapters of Small Island, Hortense is revealed through her husband, Gilbert, to be something of a pill. Gilbert does not need to tell us she is a pill, but we know she is by the way she behaves. We also know something about Gilbert by the way he responds to Hortense.
We are told Tayson Pierce is a “selfish prick” in the first paragraph about Tayson. A little later “…he waited patiently at the bar as each new victim sat next to him and then abruptly left in disgust.” To prove that point he deliberately insults every occupant of the neighboring bar stool and they predictably leave in disgust. Predictably. The author has made his own book predictable with this technique. The initial description of Tayson was superfluous – and only would have worked for me if one of the occupants of the neighboring stool was more than a match for him, a surprise. Or, leave the initial judgments out, and let the reader decide for himself based on Tayson’s behavior.
Like mehastings I did not finish the book. This might be a flaw of mine – but I don’t finish a book if I don’t like it. I’m not in school anymore, haven’t been in a loooong time, so I read something because I enjoy it, or I don’t read it. I stopped reading on page 86, and I only got that far because I bought it and kept hoping that I would find something I liked about it.
I realize that people have different expectations of a book and judging from the comments on Amazon there are people who totally disagree with me. Sirmyk is quite young, and his writing will get better as he matures, but he evidently has readers who enjoy his work now. There may be a wide audience of these readers. So, I will happily send my copy to someone on a limited budget who would like to give “Palindrome Hannah” a chance. Just send me a personal note with your address. I’ll supply postage. First come, first served, no limitations on geographic location.
