The Book in 3 Sentences

In an alternative near-future, the UK has come through the far side of Cold War-related nuclear holocaust by establishing a fascist state with extensive surveillance, propaganda, and law enforcement arms. A man driven insane by experiments performed on him in a concentration camp (run by this government) carries out a series of terrorist attacks, including the murders of all those involved in his detainment and torture. Throughout the book, special emphasis is put on artistic expressions, through his house, which is an museum of now-banned art, music, and films from the 20th century, and through the use of TV, radio, and performance dialogue woven behind and between character conversations.

How I Discovered It

I picked up a used copy of this book at Half Price Books

Impressions

What struck me most is how different the message of the book is from the message of the movie. The movie, essentially, conveys “domestic terrorism is good, sometimes, and torturing Natalie Portman may be justified.”

The book gives no such blessing to the actions of the protagonist: by my perception, he’s portrayed as certifiably insane, and his tactics are destructive and futile. The goal of his terrorism, as articulated near the end of the book, is to start the rebuilding of Britain through the destruction of the current, corrupt & cruel, order. But no such rebuilding occurs, or is even hinted at- the book ends with the streets in chaos, conflict, and exhibiting the dark elements of human nature.

What’s great, though, is that no one is portrayed as noble, and no ideology is portrayed as both benevolent and functional.

Who Should Read It?

It’s a classic postmodern ending, designed to say “f you” to the reader. But, usually to redeem that sort of ending, I expect a more engaging journey. This book is a great art piece, but is a lot slower than it needs to be, and is frankly boring at times. I wouldn’t discourage people from picking it up, but I would say it’s not for everyone.