Elizabeth Finch “celebrates the cast of mind” – subtle, sceptical and ironic – that “Barnes most prizes”. As a teacher, Finch “blazes with vividness”, and Neil’s essay is a “bravura exercise in nimbly handled erudition”.
I disagree, said Peter Kemp in The Sunday Times. It all adds up to a “work stubbornly determined to deny us its pleasures”. The novel is further let down by its baffling middle section, which consists of Neil’s “stolid student essay” on the fourth century Roman emperor Julian the Apostate, whom Finch regarded as a kindred spirit, said Sam Byers in The Guardian. It’s the only thing that matters,” a classmate of Neil recalls.
Despite Neil’s insistence on Finch’s originality, “what she actually says tends to fall flat”. “Part of the challenge of rendering a brilliantly inspirational teacher is making them sufficiently brilliant and inspirational,” said Sameer Rahim in The Daily Telegraph. Very much a “thinky” novel, Elizabeth Finch may be “rather less fun” than most of Barnes’s books, but it “offers plenty to chew on”. Neil recalls their sort-of friendship – they occasionally met for lunch – and describes his quest, in the present day, to find out more about Finch in the wake of her death. A Previous Life: a fairly preposterous new novelįinch, who is “probably inspired” by Barnes’s friend, the late novelist Anita Brookner, is remembered as an inspirational teacher, someone “who obliged us – simply by example – to seek and find within ourselves a centre of seriousness”.Novel of the week: The Candy House by Jennifer Egan.The dogged and decent Neil knows he is much less intelligent than his subject EF - is also, much less intelligent than his creator Julian Barnes - so that, as in a late Henry James novel, the reader may believe himself to understand more than the narrator can. So the novel is in a sense a story of detection as well as a philosophical exploration of EF’s thought. He seeks help from her brother,a very different ordinary character, an amiable businessman who loved his sister, was on good terms with her, but shared none of her interests and little of her life. first made possible, though difficult, because she has bequeathed her papers to him. By the time we attain it, or don’t, it is usually too late anyway. In this paragraph I have some difficulties: We all pursue what we think is best for us, even if it means our extinction. The third part is an attempt to reconstruct her biography. Im reading Elizabeth Finch by Julian Barnes. The second is an essay he has written on the Apostate which explores some Christian myths and asks, though clearly cannot answer the disturbing question EF put to her class.
Why The obvious, normal reason would be a sense of privacy, of discretion. She’d give you the conclusion but not the narrative. The first part of the novel tells of EF’s teaching, the lunches Neil had with her and his speculation about her. What is meant by 'specialised in either the unattainable or the undesirable' in the following context from 'Elizabeth Finch' by Julian Barnes: ‘EF wasn’t like that.
0 kommentar(er)
