Reading

Efraim’s Eye

Posted by

0

Efraim's Eye

My third novel, Efraim’s Eye, has now been published and is available from Amazon and Barnes & Noble. 

Briefly, it is about a lone wolf terrorist who has a fanatical hatred of the British, and who is financed by his half-brother.  Efraim intends to destroy the London Eye and kill the eight hundred passengers.  Standing in the terrorist’s way are a middle-aged British financial consultant and a beautiful Israeli charity worker.

A (nearly) full synopsis is as follows:

Efraim has designed a plan to sever the supporting cables of the London Eye, using shaped charges, causing the Eye to fall over into the River Thames.  All 800 passengers will be killed or drowned in their capsules.

But first, he must call on his half-brother to provide the funds with which he will buy the ingredients for the shaped charges.  Having obtained the money, he travels to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Chechnya, where he obtains the RDX high explosive, the polymer binder, and he has the casings manufactured.  He kills two Taliban who try to steal from him, and a Russian agent who tries to entrap him.  He visits prostitutes and agonises over the Qur’an’s proscription of ‘unclean women’.

Efraim’s half-brother, Yusuf, is chief executive of the Moroccan chapter of the British charity, Global Youth Enterprise.  GYE provides loans and mentors to young entrepreneurs who have a business idea, but no funding.  The CEO of the British GYE suspects that all is not well in his Moroccan chapter, and he engages Paul, a senior financial consultant, on a pro-bono basis, to assess the Moroccan chapter.

Paul is a well-to-do, widower in his late fifties.  He has worked in large practices, has joined Charitable Consultants LLP., and now has his own practice in the City.

Paul is joined in Marrakesh by Naomi, the operations director of the parent GYE.  An Israeli by birth, in her mid-thirties, and beautiful, she speaks seven languages, including Hebrew, Arabic and English.  In their week-long assessment of the Moroccan GYE, they find much that is wrong, including lack of financial and operating procedures, lax board governance, and rumours of fraud and embezzlement.  But they can’t find proof of illegality.  Yusuf’s evasiveness and hostility frustrate them at every turn.  Efraim appears threateningly, and his malevolence reminds Naomi of events in her childhood.  She draws close to Paul and they become lovers. 

Reportedly, Efraim is a fiery, fundamentalist imam at a minor mosque, and secretly, Paul and Naomi attend Friday prayers.  Paul records Efraim’s talk and Naomi confirms its venomous intent.

On his return to England, Paul informs Sarah, his divorcee lady friend, of his affair with Naomi, and Sarah leaves him.  On hearing Paul’s report, the Accreditation Board of British GYE decides that the books and bank accounts of Moroccan GYE should be properly audited, and Paul is sent back to Marrakesh to perform the audit.  A careful inspection of the bank statements reveals that fraud has been committed, but they lack the evidence of embezzlement until Naomi finds it.  Paul and Naomi secretly hear Efraim speak again; he gives clues that his target is the Eye. Just before fleeing to England, Naomi is abducted and severely beaten by Efraim.

Paul succeeds in convincing Scotland Yard of the seriousness of the threat, and a thorough plan of prevention is set in motion.  The attack is expected on Sunday.  Paul decides that he and Naomi should visit the Eye on Saturday.  They find Efraim hurriedly laying out the shaped charges. 

(You’ll have to read the book to discover the conclusion.)

Criticism

Posted by

0

In The Daily Telegraph of 9 October, there was an article in which Sir Peter Stothard argues that discerning readers should pay attention to established critics rather than comments posted on the internet by amateurs.  He went on to say, “There is a general trend – and it’s certainly very prevalent online – for replacing argued literary criticism that allows you to compare books, to put them in context, to analyse how they work.  That kind of traditional criticism is very easily replaced by unargued opinion.  Storytelling is fine but it doesn’t require Man Booker judges to decide what people are going to enjoy taking on holiday and reading on the beach.  What the Man Booker judges can do is apply traditional literary criticism and try to identify what people will still want to read in 20 years’ time.  That was the aim of the prize and it’s important to hold on to it.”

Sir Peter is the editor of The Times Literary Supplement and chairman of this years’ Man Booker Prize judges.

While I would certainly agree that one should respect the opinions of recognised literary critics, Sir Peter’s argument strikes me as somewhat self-serving.  Is he saying that “we recognised literary critics are members of an elite guild, and you readers should pay no attention to anyone who is not a member of the guild”?  I hope not.

Sir Peter told Radio Times that the Man Booker Prize judges were increasingly required to identify books that were mot immediately easy to read because they were the ones that would eventually reward readers most.  Why the correlation between being difficult to read and being ‘eventually most rewarding’?  I think that most of us who have read Ulysses would agree that it is difficult to read, but is it more rewarding for being difficult?  I  think not.  It is a landmark piece of literature, and for that reason it  is interesting, but in what sense is it rewarding?

It seems to me that the guild of recognised literary critics is encouraging the creation of obscure, difficult literature.  But why does a novel have to be obscure and difficult to be valuable?  I would argue that the hallmarks of a really good novel are that it captures both the emotions and the intellect of the reader in a unique and memorable way.

What about ‘argued criticism’ vs. ‘unargued opinion’?  Taking the adjectives first, ‘argue’ – according to my dictionary – means ‘to discuss with reason’.  The implication seems to be that the recognised literary critic gives reasons for his/her views while the internet blogger simply expresses an opinion without reasons.  This is clearly not universally true.  Turning to the nouns, criticism is defined as ‘the art of judging, especially literature and the arts’.  But since criticism is an ‘art’ not a science, in what sense is it different than expressing an opinion?

My question, therefore, is what does it take to become a member of the guild?  Does one have to have the title of ‘Editor’?  What if one had the title of ‘Author’?  “No! No!”  I can hear the members to the guild protesting, “an Author is biased toward his/her style of writing and cannot be an independent judge.”  But if s/he, the Author, is well educated and has read widely, might not s/he be able to appreciate the styles of others?  Besides, the Author, particularly if s/he has enjoyed some success in writing, knows something about the craft of writing, and may be a better judge in some respects than the unpublished, appointed Editor.   

The day after Sir Peter’s views were published, The Daily Telegraph ran a column by Jon Stock entitled “How I survived an online literary mauling” and “Far from throttling serious criticism, internet reviews can be helpful to authors”.  Mr. Stock has written a series of spy thrillers, and one review of his work began, “Stock: misogynist and serial killer”.  He went on to say that he tracked down the reviewer and found that she is a professor of English at the State University of New York.  The professors’ principal objection was to the deaths of three women in four of his novels.  He agreed that perhaps this was a bit lopsided and she mentioned much else that she liked in his writing.

In his conclusion, Mr. Stock says, “For me, the whole exercise was an example of  the internet working as it should, a place where people with wildly differing opinions, in this case about books, can engage in constructive dialogue.  The literary critic, as championed by Sir Peter Stothard, has its place, but so do online reviewers, even the hostile ones.”  I agree.

Should Kids Read?

Posted by

0

I happened on this subject the other day when I was riding on a London bus.  There were two boys sitting in the seats across from me.  One was about ten and the other was probably twelve.  Were they brothers?  I guess so, but it doesn’t really matter.  They were at least friends.  The younger boy was playing with his Gameboy (or whatever it was).  He was concentrating to the extent of  moving his upper body to coax the hero in the game to move in the right direction.  His fingers were flying over the keys, and occasionally, when the hero got in a tight spot, his tongue would dart out to better express his tension.  Now and then, he would emit a groan as – I  suppose – either the hero wasn’t as heroic as he had hoped, or his time was up.  When this happened, he would sigh with frustration, and drop his hands into his lap.  There was one occasion when the boy emitted a shriek of delight, nudged the older boy, and said something triumphant.

The older boy was reading a paperback book.  I have no idea what kind of a book it was, except that I’m pretty sure it wasn’t a text book.  He was reading for pleasure.  He was quite absorbed, paying no attention to his younger companion, to the other passengers on the bus, or indeed to where the bus was going.  (I guessed the boys were going from one familiar place to another.)  Deliberately, he would turn the pages, following the text with complete attention, but he showed none of the emotion of his younger companion.  He did, however, shrug off the attempts of the younger boy to involve him in the electronic game.

The boys reminded me of my own grandchildren.  Several of the older ones are a dedicated readers; some of the younger ones are addicted to electronic games.  Does it matter?  I suppose I have a bias on the subject, which is that by the age of about 12 kids should be into books, and out of hand-held electronics (unless it happens to be an e-book reader).  Why?  I suppose that e-games are great for helping develop hand-eye co-ordination, for improving concentration and dexterity, and for building problem-solving skills.  But, they do nothing for developing language skills (vocabulary, grammar, etc.), nor do they teach much about the real world.  And they have very limited ability to build intellectual skills.

How do we as parents help to stimulate the transition from games to books?  When I was about 10, there were no electronic games.  The games that were available were card games, and games like Parcheesi and Monopoly which you played with other people.  My big distraction was comic books (which I had to read), and serial Western programs on the radio, which I could listen to while I did my homework.  Both my mother and my maternal grandmother liked to read to me.  They read the great children’s classics like Treasure Island, and I remember sitting or lying nearby, with my head full of the imagined action.  I knew that books were good!

I’ve tried the same strategy with my children, with mixed results.  Some like to be read to and others couldn’t be bothered.  Of the five ‘children’ two are readers.  My oldest daughter is a committed reader of fiction.  My son reads mostly business literature, although an interesting bit of non-fiction may catch his eye.  Not a great batting average for me.

But, I’m not sure what I could have done to stimulate more interest in reading.  I’m sure, though, that it’s an important role that every parent has.

Why read fiction?

Posted by

0

Many of us have different ways of learning about life and the world.  Some people particularly like to share experiences with friends; others have favourite TV programs to watch; and still others like nothing better than to read a particular magazine or newspaper.  Perhaps there are people who have a preference for a special radio station or program.  And, I’m sure you can think of other preferences.

How about books as a means of learning about life and the world?  Hmm.  Well, I’m sure there are people who would say ‘books are passe – they are obsolete’.  Are the social media (like Facebook and Twitter) making books a thing of the past?  Are the sales of books, including e-books, declining?  An article by Julie Bosman published in the New York Times last summer revealed that publishers sold 2.57 billion books, in all formats, in 2010.  This represented an  increase of 4.1% over 2008.  Not only did the volume of books increase over those two years, but industry revenues increased by 5.6% to $27.9 billion.  Interestingly, the growth of e-books was very significant: e-books represented 0.6% of the market in 2008, but they represented 6.4% in 2010.  Their market share will almost certainly increase again in 2012.

As an aside, I should point out that Sin & Contrition is available in various e-book formats (including Kindle).  Fishing in Foreign Seas is currently available in hard copy only, but I am considering making it available as an e-book.  Comments?

So, it is fair to say that books are not obsolete or dying out.  In his article “Is Fiction Relevant to the Real World?”, Sydney M Williams says: “There are people who never read anything but fiction. Nevertheless, it has always seemed to me that the addition of some history and biography helps broaden the mind. However, much of history written today has the purpose of furthering a particular political agenda. . . . In contrast, with fiction there is no hidden agenda. Its purpose is to entertain, but with the added value of providing insight to a complex and ever-changing world, and to the people who inhabit it. Novelists come with political agendas, but we know upfront what they write is fiction.”  He also says: “Novels have long been lauded as a form of entertainment that activate the brain, provide insight into character and present a version of events that we know to be fictional, yet are based on human emotions and reactions we know to be real.”

In her article “Your Brain on Fiction”, Anne Murphy Paul says: “The brain, it seems, does not make much of a distinction between reading about an experience and encountering it in real life; in each case, the same neurological regions are stimulated. Keith Oatley, an emeritus professor of cognitive psychology at the University of Toronto (and a published novelist), has proposed that reading produces a vivid simulation of reality, one that “runs on minds of readers just as computer simulations run on computers.” Fiction — with its redolent details, imaginative metaphors and attentive descriptions of people and their actions — offers an especially rich replica. Indeed, in one respect novels go beyond simulating reality to give readers an experience unavailable off the page: the opportunity to enter fully into other people’s thoughts and feelings.”

The opportunity to enter fully into other people’s thoughts and feelings is, in my opinion, an opportunity not to be missed!