The Rachel Papers

[Bill]

I read this book when I was around the same age Martin Amis was when he wrote it. I remember that, as I turned the pages, I was burning with envy - and admiration that someone so young could write with such confidence. However, in retrospect, the 'hero' was a bit of an arrogant git with not many redeeming features. Definitely one to be read by an 18 to 25 male demographic, as the marketing people would put it.


<IFRAME src="http://rcm-uk.amazon.co.uk/e/cm?t=bookgrouponli-21&l=st1&search=amis%20rachel%20papers&mode=books-uk&p=33&o=2&f=ifr&bg1=C6EFF7&lc1=082984&lt1=_blank" frameBorder=0 width=180 scrolling=no height=180> <table border='0' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='468' height='362'><tr><td>http://</IFRAME>

(http://<a href=)

[Deinonychus]

I still feel it's one of his best: uncluttered with the occasionally burdensome metaphor of his later novels (many of which I rate, incidentally). Sure, he was an 'arrogant git', but it felt like pure writing - straight from the 'loins', if you like. (His brother-in-law was an even bigger git, I seem to recall?)

It took me a while before I figured the significance of the indecisive heroine's name (Rachel Noyes), as well...

[Bill]

Perhaps you could enlighten us. What is the significance of the name Rachel Noyes? No relation to Kenneth?

[Deinonychus]

No? Yes?

So 'Bill' - where do you stand on 'Time's Arrow'? Inspired dissection of reptilian Nazi power-abuse or self-conscious writing for its own sake?

(Or do I need to start a new thread for this?)

[Bill]

I'm afraid the last Martin Amis novel I really liked was Money - which I really really liked. By London Fields, I felt he was writing about people he didn't really know any more. They had become types. I remember reading an interview with him at his tennis club where he was pictured dressed in white shirt and shorts, and thought how out of touch he seemed. That's all right as long as you're not trying to write about 'life on the street'.

I haven't read Time's Arrow. I did read that detective book with the female detective, but it was very mannered, artificial, not to mention a little bit pretentious: "I am Police".

Other People: A Mystery Story was the first novel of his I read, and I thought it was superb. I wonder if I would now.

[Deinonychus]

I have 'London Fields' and have still not read it. This thread has inspired me to do so - but who knows when? Certainly not while there are all these 'dead pop star' biogs out there to be lapped up. (Besides, I'm supposed to be reading Sylvia Plath's 'The Bell Jar' next and will begin a thread on that when I've done so...)

Sorry - not much on Martin Amis in this post...

[Bill]

Perhaps this will make up for it:

<iframe width="180" height="180" scrolling="no" frameborder=0 src="http://rcm-uk.amazon.co.uk/e/cm?t=bookgrouponli-21&l=st1&search=amis%20other%20people&mode=books-uk&p=33&o=2&f=ifr&bg1=C6E7DE&lc1=082984&lt1=_blank"> <table border='0' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='468' height='362'><tr><td><A HREF='http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/redirect-home/bookgrouponli-21' target=_blank ><img src="http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/G/02/associates/recommends/default_180x180.gif" width=180 height=180 border="0" access=regular></a></td></tr></table></iframe>

<iframe width="180" height="180" scrolling="no" frameborder=0 src="http://rcm-uk.amazon.co.uk/e/cm?t=bookgrouponli-21&l=st1&search=amis%20time%27s%20arrow&mode=books-uk&p=33&o=2&f=ifr&bg1=C6E7DE&lc1=082984&lt1=_blank"> <table border='0' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='468' height='362'><tr><td><A HREF='http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/redirect-home/bookgrouponli-21' target=_blank ><img src="http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/G/02/associates/recommends/default_180x180.gif" width=180 height=180 border="0" access=regular></a></td></tr></table></iframe>

<iframe width="180" height="180" scrolling="no" frameborder=0 src="http://rcm-uk.amazon.co.uk/e/cm?t=bookgrouponli-21&l=st1&search=martin%20amis%20money&mode=books-uk&p=33&o=2&f=ifr&bg1=C6E7DE&lc1=082984&lt1=_blank"> <table border='0' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='468' height='362'><tr><td><A HREF='http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/redirect-home/bookgrouponli-21' target=_blank ><img src="http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/G/02/associates/recommends/default_180x180.gif" width=180 height=180 border="0" access=regular></a></td></tr></table></iframe>

[Mireia]

I'm a solid, devoted Amis fan. I enjoy his books enormously - love the twisted language, the loaded names, the slightly surreal conceits - all of it. And The Rachel Papers and Dead Babies are in my all-time top 10. Dead Babies - pure genius.

I've got a copy of Yellow Dog in my to-read list. Someone told me it's not very good but I don't believe them. Has anyone here read it?

[Lady Lazarus]

I have to say I really enjoyed The Information and Money (especially the "John Self" character). Night Train less so, and London Fields I hated so much I couldn't even finish it. I have Time's Arrow, but have never read it yet. London Fields put me off so much that I didn't buy Yellow Dog.... is it worth a read?

[Adrian]

The Rachel Papers was a great read but like a lot of his, it dates badly. Money and London Fields are his favourite of mine but when I reread them I think I'm back in the 80's.

Never read Time's Arrow. Must get that some time. Still, I did love his earlier work.

[Grammath]

I read this at exactly the right age (whilst doing A Levels) and became an Amis convert, although its much more straightforward than most of the other books of his I have read.

He's also the only author who has prompted me to abandon a book because I found his lead character so unpleasant (John Self in "Money") - I found him even more repulsive than his American counterpart Patrick Bateman in "American Psycho"!!!! I do want to have another go at "Money", though.

I've found most of his recent fiction a bit disappointing, all clever tricks and no substance. I reckon he lost his edge around "The Information". I've never read any of his non-fiction so don't know if this is better or not.

[Artegall]

'Money' was/is fantastic, same for 'Time's Arrow'. I appear to be the only person in the country who enjoyed 'Koba the Dread'. Agree with everyone else about the other books though, most of which I gave up on.

[jarvis]

Why does everyone give London Fields such a hard time? It's easily Amis' most accomplished book and Keith Talent is pure comedy gold. Success and The Information are up there too, but i really don't see that much to Money or Time's Arrow. As for Yellow Dog, it's been in my 'to read' pile since Christmas but i still haven't summoned up enough courage to attempt it.

[David]

London Fields is indeed quite superb. I understand previous comments about being a little out of touch with the underclass world of Keith Talent, but really the book is so much more than a portrait of 80s 'types'. I have always loved literature that anatomises the process of writing, and that is done here in a very clever fashion, with a narrator who is involved in the story, yet knows what is going to happen and in turn has a relationship with the author. This reaches back to The Canterbury Tales, even, and - also like Chaucer's masterpiece - is very funny.

Time's Arrow is utterly brilliant. I came to it in younger days ready to blast it out of the water with my friends as pretentious nonsense; I mean, a story told backwards? That can only be smug posing, eh?

How wrong I was. For me it was a seminal work, actually managing to come up with an entirely new satirical form, using a blackly comical approach to analyse the atrocities of the Holocaust. It sounds like it should be tasteless and sickening, but it is not, and that is testament to Amis's skill.

Amis the man makes it easy to dismiss his work, but if you look at it objectively it has a worthy place in the achievements of contemporary fiction.

[Atom]

The Rachel Papers was a great read but like a lot of his, it dates badly.

I agree with that. I loved the book but think it's something that you have to read at the right age. In my 40s I'm afraid it no longer connects.

[hamletbb]

I agree with that. I loved the book but think it's something that you have to read at the right age. In my 40s I'm afraid it no longer connects.

I read "The Rachel Papers" earlier this year. I'm in my 42nd year and so I also found it to be a bit dated, but no less interesting for that reason. I tried to imagine myself as an 18 year old back in the early 70s, the issues of their day, and, remembering what I've learned through things like television-documentaries about the social revolutions of the 60s and 70s. Such documents helped put into context what Amis's protagonist was going through, what he was up against, what other kids of his age were experimenting with and the liberation that they, as a generation, were going through at the time.

In short, it's more interesting to read "The Rachel Papers" if you're at least passingly familiar with the novel's historical context. I enjoyed the novel as much for its story as the fact that reading it was like entering some sort of time-capsule: a bit like watching an original episode of, say, "The Avengers".
:D