Rating: 
Summary: Good Book
Review: A solid effort turned in by Amis. I keep reading his work dilligenty and have been rewarded everytime.
Rating: 
Summary: ...at the speed of Clive
Review: Beautiful writing, not at all enjoyable. Not for me, at least. I find it difficult to enjoy a book where I don't care at all for the characters. Vividly portrayed characters. The only person I cared at all for in the book was under a year old, and she does not get much time on the page. A book without a character to like is a song without a melody. Some people may enjoy this, but I found it difficult to read.But what makes London Fields different from, say, 'Lolita' which I enjoyed a great deal. They share a lot - beautiful writing, despicable characters. The difference is Nabokov somehow possible to empathize with Humbert Humbert. Obviously this was not the author's goal - but perhaps it should have been. I'm giving this three stars because it is technically amazing and my objection really boiled down to a matter of personal opinion.
Rating: 
Summary: A cartoonish novel of ideas
Review: I hate LONDON FIELDS more than life itself. And the reason is simple. It's a pretentious novel-of-ideas populated by cartoon characters. In fact, Nicola Six is so sub-cartoonish she manages to be a stick-figure who's trotted out at the end to spout Mart's own opinions about a Keats poem. Which brings up another complaint. It's too literary. It's a piece of wankerature by virtue of its overabundance of lit-chat.
I knew Amis was in trouble when he started publicizing his idolatry of Saul Bellow. Bellow's shmaltz was imported into LONDON FIELDS in the form of the narrator's relationship with Baby Kim Talent. It's a buttload of forced sentimentality that would compel even Charles Dickens to vomit himself hollow.
It's not at all a complete loss, however. There are 2 good things going for it. One is the running joke about Keith's mystagogical relationship with darts. The other worthy thing is Amis's short-sentenced Americanesque prose style. (So-used because the narrator is American.) I find it preferable to the long-winded approach that Amis used in THE INFORMATION. And it's far preferable to the rancid baroque archness of YELLOW DOG.
The reason I call it a novel-of-ideas is because of its characterological symbolism. Nicola's precognition of her own death is a metaphor for Mankind's Knowledge Of The Inevitability Of Nuclear War. It's Nicola's hopelessness which motivates her to be a villain. This is analogous to mankind's real-life scenario. Amis's theory is that modern-day villainy is motivated by the threat of nuclear war.
Amis articulated this theory in a shortfic called BUJAK. Which is also narrated by Samson Young (the narrator of LONDON FIELDS). From BUJAK: "Gratuitous or recreational crimes of violence, the ever-less-tacit totalitarianism of money (money---what *is* this sh-t anyway?), the pornographic proliferation, the nuclear collapse of the family (with the breeders all going supercritical, and now the children running too), the sappings and distortions of a mediated reality, the sexual abuse of the very old and the very young (of the weak, the weak): what is the hidden denominator here, and what could explain it *all*?"
Rating:
Summary: Dark, funny and murderous, but ultimately empty
Review: I really enjoy the voice and the spirit of this story, but its overwrought construction is too distracting. Set in the late 90s and imbued with apocalyptic dread of the approaching millennium, it is still just a murder mystery (minus, unfortunately, the mystery.) Still, I can't deny that I had a lot of fun reading the first two-thirds of the book, and that I found its narrator as engaging as some of his subjects -- notably Keith the darter. Ironically, however, it is this same narrator who finally undoes the story's magic, and it hurt me to watch the story sputter and die over the last 50 to 100 pages. At turns bawdy, comic, tragic and caustic, Amis's narrative style almost overcomes the story's crash landing. I frequently found myself laughing out loud and shaking my head over his ingenious monologue, but in the end it isn't enough. The real disappointment is that it could easily have been a masterpiece.
Rating: 
Summary: The best book ever?
Review: I've read this book five times now and the precision with which Amis chooses his words never fails to amaze me. Unlike some of his earlier books, he doesn't flex his undoubtedly huge vocabulary just to try and impress - in London Fields it is hard to see how the progress of Nicola Six towards the inevitable November 6 rendezvous could be better described. Apparently the structure of the novel, which is superficially very simple (girl wants to die, and does) yet incredibly complex, evolved rather than being planned from the start; Amis originally intended this as a short story rather than the weighty opus it is now. Although Keith was in the original draft, neither Guy nor Sam, the narrator, had yet been created. The use of the narrator as a character in his own right is, however, common to most of Amis' work and the novel would not ring true to type without him (read The Information afterwards to see what is missing from the later book). Other typical Amis features are the slightly odd character names and, as in Money, he can't resist a reference to himself (the wholly absent character of Mark Asprey, only revealed in his 'fantastically offensive' letters to Sam). As far as the final denouement is concerned, it must be one of the most delicious twists ever devised in fiction. The novel can be read as an account of Samson Young's spiritual redemption, in which he realises at the eleventh hour that what he has been writing is wrong - which is, of course, what Nicola had always known would happen. Rather naughtily, Amis throws his readers a teaser towards the end of the book (in one of Sam's tortured dreams) that hints at a different surprise ending to the true one. If there is a weak or clumsy spot in the book, it is Guy's failure to recognise the significance of Nicola's imaginary friend Enola Gay and her son Little Boy ('a little knowledge here just might have saved him'). Presumably this was done in order to contrast Guy's naivete further with Nicola's deviousness and Keith's working-class savoir-faire. There are some great comedy moments, including of course Keith's darts obsession, his late-night video viewing (six hours' worth fast-forwarded in 20 minutes while looking for images of sex/violence/money), his women and his appalling diet of ready-meals. His succinct explanation of why darts players only drink lager is so logical that it almost has to be true. Overall, though, London Fields becomes progressively darker in tone and the humour vanishes abruptly in the last act as Sam realises too late that 'a cross has four points, not three'. Nevertheless, the endpapers are not entirely bereft of hope, particularly for Kim Talent, Keith's baby daughter, whom Sam has rescued from abuse by her mother, herself abused by Keith. There is a final 'whydoit' question at the end of the book, addressed to Mark Asprey, who it transpires was, and still may be, Nicola's lover. Did Asprey set up the whole thing? You will have to make up your own mind, for, as with Fielding Goodney in Money, Amis leaves no real clues as to a possible motive.
Rating:
Summary: Evil Woman
Review: Martin Amis is a wonderful and entertaining novelist. In his best novels, which, in my humble opinion, are "Money" and "The Information", he crafts hilarious and insightful narratives, mostly about modern urban life. These feature highly credible, albeit sometimes crazed characters, and a stylistic slash-and-burn brilliance. Read them and see what life is like without money or success in modern New York and London.
Having shown my respects to Mart, I'd call "London Fields" a less satisfying book, although definitely worth the read. In this novel, Mart writes about the hostility that a woman can harbor toward men and the ability of some women to captivate and then destroy the men they attract. To explore this theme, he creates Nicola Six, a femme fatale nonpareil, who makes one man love her and two depend on her as they struggle for self-worth. Then, the ruthless Nicola destroys them. Mart, by the way, presents this dynamic as a mystery, telling the reader from the very start that Nicola expects to be murdered by one of these men at book's conclusion. Who will it be, is Mart's not-great conceit.
So why is this book a notch below Amis's best work? In this narrative, I feel that Amis develops a fully credible dependency on Nicola for two of his male characters --the low life Keith Talent and the dying writer Samson Young. But this is not the case for the character Guy Clinch--an upper class English twit whose devotion to Nicola requires a level of naivete that makes no sense to me. (This devotion also requires odd patches of ignorance, since erudite Guy, who knows his Keats, is unable to place the name Enola Gay.) Here, my theory is that upper class Guy makes sense to the English reader. But it doesn't translate for Americans. Bottom line, the subplot featuring Guy goes beyond satire for this Yank and feels like a cruel cartoon.
Nonetheless, I highly recommend this book. But I'd place it in the Amis queue, where it becomes a must-read for those who have enjoyed Mart's total brilliance in other novels. I wonder, by the way: Was Amis going through a rough patch in his own life when he wrote "London Fields", since the book shows men hopelessly entangled with evil women.
Rating:
Summary: The Speed of Light
Review: Okay, so Martin Amis has this thing about language, and it's undeniably impressive whether you can stand it or not. I personally enjoy reading the work of someone who has such command of the language, especially when it reads so well -- page-turning like Stephen King, but with substance like Henry James. (excuse me for that comparison, I'm sure it's bound to get a lot of sneers) Maybe I just like it because it makes me feel smart. (more sneers) I like Amis in general, but this is by FAR my favorite. Granted: It's wordy. It stretches believability at times. There are places where author ego creeps through. And the subject matter is reeeeally depressing. BUT... I've read it twice, and both times I have come away in the end feeling inspired, sated, and joyously uplifted. It's sick, hilarious (oh my god), peopled with incredibly vivid characters, and peppered with typical quoteworthy Martin Amisisms. Not only is it a satisfying read because of the mastery with which the story is told, but because of the story itself. Strange, I don't see anyone mentioning what I see as, finally, the most crucial thematic element of the book. It's supposedly about "the death of love," and this point is driven home ruthlessly from the beginning. And yet, even when the foretold ending comes about, Amis manages to put a gorgeous, beautiful little twist on what has been a pretty cynical, harrowing story. In the midst of all this nasty darkness there is, finally, at least one brilliant beam of pure sunlight. That, to me, is what London Fields is really about. "Love happens at the speed of light." It takes courage and a little patience, but I recommend London Fields with as many stars as you've got.
Rating:
Summary: Amis delivers a lovely stroll through the urban apocalypse.
Review: Please ignore the comments by "A Reader" which occurred on August 15th of 1999, I believe. This person has some sort of puerile vendetta going on against Mr. Amis. "A Reader" may not have even read these books: the same critique is posted to every one of Amis's books on Amazon, without an actual comment on any particular book. London Fields is a wonderful read. I read it several years ago and elements of the book still rumble around in the back of my admittedly impressionable mind--especially Keith Talent, vulgar sportsman that he is. Words and phrases from LF even worked their way into my vocabulary, and as a college student with a passable IQ and access to a dictionary I had no problem eventually digesting any of the multisyllabic constructs Amis threw my way. Reading a book with a dictionary on hand really isn't a bad thing, innit?
Rating:
Summary: Ambitious
Review: This is a book that challenges its readers. When you finish this novel you feel as if you have completed something. It is often times confusing and hard to read, but the language is fantastic. The story allows you to really dig deep inside the minds of the characters.
Rating:
Summary: Concept and Style but with Lackluster Ending
Review: This is my first Martin Amis novel and in spite of 4 stars will more than likely be the last. The literary structure of the novel is extremely compelling, the interspersing of narrator into his own story allows for multiple views on the described world. This creative window allows each character to be embelleshed and detailed from many points of view - you get to see the inner circle from both within and outside the group. The overall plot is established early and progresses fluidly with each chapter introduced. The notion of the chapters being introduced is is where the book truly succeeds in bringing you into the novel in an almost perverse voyeuristic way; you feel like you are looking over the shoulder of a great writer at work whilst "seeing" what he is writing.
Storyline: Murderer / Murderee character interplay all leading to a culmination that is the "Murder". Whilst each character is detailed in glorious stereo detail you are not supposed to know the Mudered whilst you do know the Murderee. It is an interesting idea but I found the ending to be disappointing. Marting Amis seems to insist on being "erudite", a kind of Dennis Miller on educated steroids. I find this somewhat tedious though I had got used to it......and this is why I could not fathom why at the end he summarises the book's metaphor/symbol in less than a page like he thinks we aren't educated enough to figure it out. Other than that, the ending was not a surprise to me and left me feeling kind of..well..let down.
It is a dark, moody (very) book that I would recommend to anyone who doesn't want to read something throw away and simple.
|
