This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Ian McEwan's Atonement and Enduring Love

Kura1984

So, I did read Enduring Love and was sorely disappointed by its protagonist's lack of frecking personality. I'm wondering now just how good is Atonement? I've had a very high recommendation for it from an experienced and intelligent reader, which I will take up, but I'd like people's opinions, if you don't mind disclosing them.

Thanks

Reply 1

*starry_eyed_*

14

I've read enduring love and was really disappointed by it..haven't read atonement but saturday is my curent read and have to say that is much better quality!

Reply 2

Gravastar

11

Atonement is the only book by McEwan that makes me think he's worthy of all the hype he gets.

Reply 3

glitterxsparkle

10

I enjoyed the 'Cement Garden' he wrote.

Reply 4

mousey

2

I really enjoyed Atonement, but i much prefer Saturday. xx

Reply 5

sophisti_kate

Atonement and Saturday are brilliant - can't wait for the film of Atonement!

Reply 6

Tyler Durden

17

Atonement is very different to Enduring Love - in fact Atonement is unique amongst McEwan's work in its scope and themes (its relative length is indicative of the wider scope I think). To be honest I don't think that characterization is McEwan's strongest area, but he certainly makes up for it in other departments; the energy of the opening of Enduring Love, the atmosphere and description of Atonement, the insightful look at parenting in The Child in Time, the political commentary of Saturday, etc. Also, whilst he doesn't create characters with the precision of someone like Dickens or Dostoevsky, his characters' interactions always seem incredibly authentic (which in my opinion is a greater quality than pages and pages of personality description, and paradoxically gives a better insight into the characters than a long description might).

I would definitely recommend you read Atonement. People often single it out as the only McEwan they really enjoyed which is unfortunate because, whilst being excellent, it is not typical of him.

Out of interest, you say you felt the main character (I take it you mean Joe rather than Jed or Clarissa?) lacked a personality. Do you not think this is perhaps intentional? The opening of the book says a lot about Joe; he is middle class, comfortable, rational, loves his wife etc, but there is a shift away from this and the book is ultimately about the effect of Jed on the lives of Joe and Clarissa. It's less that he doesn't have a personality (or that McEwan can't be bothered to write him one) and more that his whole existence is thrown into turmoil by Jed's obsession with him. Also, he is a rational scientist and not prone to long, profound musings which might offer insight into his character. To apply what I was saying before about interaction of characters (as opposed to "characterization" as such), Joe is written in stark contrast to his wife who is a Keats scholar (Keats being a "Romantic" poet whose work transcends the rational and scientific.) The symbolic difference is played out in what happens when they are faced with the outside influence of Jed. If you're merely saying you found Joe a boring-seeming person, then I actually agree - but that's hardly the point! The reason I recommended Black Dogs is that it is slightly better on classical characterization whilst retaining McEwans ability to pit ideologies against one another convincingly and enthrallingly.

Reply 7

cappucino07

McEwan is trash (Enduring Love in particular).

Just my opinion.

Reply 8

Tyler Durden

17

What have you read of his?

Reply 9

cappucino07

englishstudent

What have you read of his?

Saturday (not awful but not great), Enduring Love (downright awful) and Atonement (mind numbingly dull).

I shan't be venturing into his oeuvre any time again soon.

Reply 10

Tyler Durden

17

the victory james

Saturday (not awful but not great), Enduring Love (downright awful) and Atonement (mind numbingly dull).

I shan't be venturing into his oeuvre any time again soon.

Fair enough. If you ever do... :biggrin:

... then try Black Dogs - it's not even 200 pages and is quite different to all those.

Reply 11

beach surf babe

14

Don't get me started on Enduring Love...did it for A Level english and it was an utter nightmare. Did Saturday for coursework and it was ok but not great. Too medical heavy in places. I like a little bit of action and it didn't have much!

Reply 12

brains

I studied Enduring Love, didn't enjoy it at the time, but appreciate the way it's crafted looking back. I've also read Saturday (whose drama I found far too much along the lines of Enduring Love), The Comfort Of Strangers which was just weird and The Child In Time which is amazing. I've only heard good things about Atonement, just got a bit of a mind-block with the length when it comes to reading it :blush:

Reply 13

Kura1984

OP

2

englishstudent

Out of interest, you say you felt the main character (I take it you mean Joe rather than Jed or Clarissa?) lacked a personality. Do you not think this is perhaps intentional? The opening of the book says a lot about Joe; he is middle class, comfortable, rational, loves his wife etc, but there is a shift away from this and the book is ultimately about the effect of Jed on the lives of Joe and Clarissa. It's less that he doesn't have a personality (or that McEwan can't be bothered to write him one) and more that his whole existence is thrown into turmoil by Jed's obsession with him. Also, he is a rational scientist and not prone to long, profound musings which might offer insight into his character. To apply what I was saying before about interaction of characters (as opposed to "characterization" as such), Joe is written in stark contrast to his wife who is a Keats scholar (Keats being a "Romantic" poet whose work transcends the rational and scientific.) The symbolic difference is played out in what happens when they are faced with the outside influence of Jed. If you're merely saying you found Joe a boring-seeming person, then I actually agree - but that's hardly the point! The reason I recommended Black Dogs is that it is slightly better on classical characterization whilst retaining McEwans ability to pit ideologies against one another convincingly and enthrallingly.

You're right to enquire about that fleeting comment about Joe's lack of personality. I was aware that McEwan wanted to write this rational, comfortable and boring middle-class guy whose interaction with Jed would be awkward and annoying. This is precisely McEwan's intention and, to be honest, rather than empathise overly with Joe, I was downright annoyed with him and it's largely just my preference to proactive and/or insightful characters that fuelled my dislike for him. He was so far into his research but didn't have the foggiest idea how to deal with life. He was all mouth and no balls. However, I will say that this was brave move for McEwan considering that the massive majority of so-called classic literature features headstrong/proactive/tragic/reflective, etc (delete wherever). I suppose this is part of what makes his work 'contemporary'.

I agree that McEwan is very good at representing contrast and irony. I was just disappointed overall because I'd expected so much. That's my own naive fault.

Reply 14

slk999

15

i really liked 'atonement'. it was very well written and i liked the plot. i didn't like robbie and i found briony a bit frustrating, but i liked celia-will look forward to the film where keia knightley will be playing celia. but anyway, it made a nice change for 'atonement' to be put on my english reading list last summer for AS- a nice change from the likes of 'the scarlet letter' and 'the crying of lot 49', both of which i was confused by.

Reply 15

gemby!

2

it seems i am one of the few who liked studying 'enduring love'... mainly because parts of it were actually really funny, even though i'm not sure if they were meant to be :P

i read atonement and i thought it was ok, but it did drag on for bits of it. the only reason i really remember this book is because one of the teachers at college recommended this book for my WW1 synoptic paper.... i never did trust that teacher :rolleyes:

Reply 16

**noooni**

3

Kura1984

So, I did read Enduring Love and was sorely disappointed by its protagonist's lack of frecking personality. I'm wondering now just how good is Atonement? I've had a very high recommendation for it from an experienced and intelligent reader, which I will take up, but I'd like people's opinions, if you don't mind disclosing them.

Thanks

I've just started Atonement so will tell you how it goes :biggrin:

But i hated Enduring Love, i mean hated it! The fact that i had to study it for an exam probably took away any spark that the book would have had if read for pleasure, but nevertheless at the end of Enduring Love, i felt like i'd wasted my time reading it. In fact the only reason im reading Atonement is to see what the fuss all over McEwan is about, because it seems like i missed something the critics didnt about Enduring Love.

Reply 17

musicalfruit

I really enjoyed reading Enduring Love, actually. I was a little disappointed by the film adaption though but I guess it's tradition that you can only like one or the other!

I still have Atonement and Saturday sitting on my shelf, both unread as of yet, but will read them if they receive positive feedback on here :wink: