
I kinda looked forward to watching the just released movie - Atonement. I then changed my mind because -
1) K is not big on watching epic romances, especially in the theater
2) I am trying to clean up my finances before the new year, and need to be frugal ($1 for renting the DVD in the library as opposed to $20 for movie tickets and popcorn)
3) Keira Knightly is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO effing thin. She has so crossed the line between sexy to sick skeletal skinny that she can no longer see the line. The line is a dot to her! (to quote Joey)
4) Movies are almost never as good as the novels they are adapted from
So, I just read the book by Ian Mcewan and found it disappointing despite all the rave reviews. The novel's premise is intriguing - The mistakes of a misguided child prompted by a confluence of events happening on a single day causes the destruction of two innocent adults.
The first section should be prescribed reading for any aspiring novelist. Ian describes the old english house in such detail, it almost becomes another living character in the book. He draws elaborate character sketches. Even though the writing is borderline-boring, the characters come alive in your mind.
After setting the stage so elaborately, Ian succeeds in describing the psychology behind Briony's act (a mistake around which the entire book revolves). But what follows later is a disappointment. Rather than delving into the psyche of the three main characters (Robie, Cecilia, and Briony), Ian plunges into many pages of sobering world war imagery. These chapters are written excellently, but detract from the overall effect of the novel.
You do not get a sense of the immense tragedy behind Robbie and Cecilia's forced separation. And the author does not dedicate a single paragraph to their reunion upon Robbie's return to England from France. While the 13 year old Briony's thought process has been beautifully delineated, the grown up Briony's "atonement" (by volunteering as a nurse) comes across as half baked and insincere, especially when, in a callous display of egotism, she creates a novella out of the sequence of events and submits for publishing (all this during her self imposed exile from the family). The book could have succeeded if Ian had infused Briony's character with irony, and made something like a black comedy. However, he simply glorifies her "atonement", when really, all you see is the lack of. Ian spends way too much time describing characters who play almost no part in the book (like Emily), while paying absolutely no attention to Cecilia's life during the years when she waits for Robbie.
Towards the end of the book, Ian completely loses direction. He gets carried away by his perceived power as a writer who can create worlds and lives at whim. His hubris is blatantly evident in the last page of the book. It was as though Ian was thumbing his nose at every critic and reader, by conveying the message "hey, i am the writer, i can do anything i want with the characters". My criticism may sound harsh, but, after patiently plodding through every page, I could not come to any other conclusion. This book was published (in 2001) after his Booker winning novel Amsterdam (in 1997). Big award...big ego?
Speaking of Booker awards, there are way too many similarities between Atonement, and Arundhathi Roy's "The God of small things". Roy's book won the Booker in 1997, a full 4 years BEFORE Atonement was published.
I googled the two novels to find out if other readers had caught on to this. Unfortunately, I could not find any such web articles. If you have read both the books, please let me know what you think. The core concepts are the same - one person acting on prejudices, blaming an innocent man for a crime that he did not commit, destroying a romance (that was anyway doomed by class differences), and events complicated by runaway twins and cousins. Even the writing techniques are similar - the intricately detailed description of the old house where the main events take place, and the slow but steady building up of dread in the reader's mind, leading up to the catastrophic event.
Roy's book succeeds where Ian's fails. Her tale does not offer any redemption for the sinner(s), and there is no pretense of atonement either. With no grandiose war scene descriptions and distractions, Roy crafted a heartfelt drama, leaving every reader with an overpowering sense of loss and heartbreak.
I am now rather curious about the movie. The reviews proclaim that this is one of the best movies of the year. Maybe the director would have capitalized on the positive aspects of the book, and filled in the holes left behind by the author?
PS: After writing my review, in a moment of self doubt, I checked out Amazon's reader reviews, and clicked on the critical reviews link (which groups all the 1 and 2 star reviews). Thankfully, there are people that feel the same way. The first review is especially good.
Check it out here (warning - loads of spoilers, do not read if you plan to watch the movie)