Would it kill this motherfucker to use some quotation marks? Like, really? I know it's just some stylistic choice, but it's a choice that really messes with my many decades of learned behaviour when it comes to reading. It makes the analysis of each sentence become vocalised in my head as a 'is this spoken words?' process. Anyway...
The major problem with this book for me is not really that, it's that I've seen the film a couple of times and the adaptation was basically so faithful that it's now like reading the film. Theres some dynamism in the writing style here that I think maybe quite unique but because of that closeness to something I've watched, enjoyed and remember quite well, I'm never really quite sure of it. Maybe instead i'm just playing out the film in my head that is giving an added dynamism...? If I'd read the book first maybe I'd feel differently but as it stands I feel like it's an either/or situation.
Don't get me wrong. Lack of quotation marks aside, this is a damn good book, well written and an excellent story. But I'm left wondering if it would have been a better read had I not already seen the film, hell, it could well have become a favourite. But I love the film, and I'm not prepared to suggest that potentially ruining the film by having read the book first would be a better outcome. I think thats it really. The book is as good as the film it was adapted in to, the film as good as the book it was adapted from. Both work out as very good pieces of their respective art forms. That feels like it might be rare.
Anyway, I decided to read this book because I picked it up along with The Road from a charity shop. I didn't want to jump in to The Road first, because I know it has a reputation for being a tad harrowing. But at least reading this book first has given me faith in Macarthy's writing.
Finished reading - 13/04/26