Hello there. Hope you're feeling well today.
Regular readers of this blog will know that since I've joined the library service (staring with the one in Sully) since moving out of Bridgend to the Vale of Glamorgan I've started on an attempt to read every "relevant" adult book there (when I say relevant I mean not reading books that would be stupid for me to open, such as keeping dogs when I have a phobia of the domestic wolves).
However when it comes to fiction it's simple. I intend to read every book unless it's in large print. Which is the reason why as a fifty three year old man the Cecelia Ahern novel How To Fall In Love comes into my hands.
Unlike most fifty three year old men reading Cecelia Ahern for the first time I do have a writer to compare her with. The same regular readers will know that I've read books by Marian Keyes (I won't bore you with how here but if you click Marian Keyes on the labels tag things will be explained). On the surface to compare both writers seem fair. They after all female Irish writers marketed as chick lit.
But...
Before the but I should acknowledge that Cecelia Ahern came to this comparison with two main disadvantages. One is that I'm a fan of Marian Keyes. It's my belief that she is a far more important writer than the chick lit covers do her credit for. I suspect that she'll be one of those authors though popular in her lifetime literary critics will only "discover" decades after her death.
The other disadvantage is that I've read three Marian Keyes books and this was my first by Cecelia Ahern, so that does need to be noted.
So you should not be surprised that when I finished I still felt that Marian Keyes is better.
But (back to that) what was a surprise is how much I actually hated the Ahern novel. In fact a quarter of the way through was seriously considering breaking " the reader's code" (that follows the Mastermind principle that once a book is opened "I've started so I'll Finish").
From the beginning it's badly written. No. Very badly written. So many I's in the first chapter for example an English teacher would have thrown it out if produced as homework. But here it is in black and white assaulting my eyes with it's awfulness. Marian Keyes on the other hand can simply write in a style that perhaps is best described as hope mixed with cynicism and humour. (Don't look for any humour in the Ahern, trust me on that).
Sometimes as a reader you don't notice bad writing if a good tale is being told. Not here. Never Fall In Love is basically a meandering journey into a coma with a few jolts along the way.You had a good idea from the cover what you were going to expect. As for the characters...I didn't really care. I'd challenge anyone to read a Marian Keyes book and say they were bored.
Ahern's novel is set in Ireland, mainly Dublin. But really it was so bland you could easily transfer it to anywhere you think of. Never been to Ireland, let alone Dublin, but you feel instantly that you're there in the Marian Keyes books I've read. If somebody tried to film the Ahern it would be a made for TV movie set probably in Boston that you find after NCIS on a weekday afternoon. For Keyes I suspect a RTE/BBC co production would appear to be the most suitable.
So what can I say? Next time you're thinking of reading a Cecelia Ahern book read Marian Keyes first. That way you can say you've read quality.
Incidentally the latest library book I've borrowed is.....
 |
| Bruce Chatwin - In Patagonia |
One of those books I've been meaning to read for a while but never got round to it. Now it's time has come.
Until the next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment