What did you think of this? If I liked Remains of the Day, would I like this?
yes but it's not as good as remains
read the buried giant instead and then read the unconsoled
I loved both. if you were ever in love as a teenager or kid you will like never let me go. it makes you realize how short life could be.
>>7884271
I'm reading it now and just came here to break after about 150 pages, I like it. It's giving me my depressing fix I was looking for.
>>7884271
Ishiguro is great in general. This was the first of his I read. I would actually only suggest reading it if you don't know what happens. I loved it, then watched the movie (which was pretty bad), tried reading it a second time and found myself not nearly as invested. Still some beautiful prose for sure, but all the mystery had been removed and made for a much less enjoyable read.
yes. it's great. Remains is his masterpiece but this is a close second. have also read Buried Giant and Unconsoled, both also brilliant in different ways. he's one of my favorite living writers
it's a great book
it's really hard to read it unspoiled, but even without the major twist it's a nice book about growing up and remembering your childhood and regrets and shit
the unconsoled is his absolute masterpiece though
>tfw years of diligent unconsoled-posting here finally led to other people lauding it
Feelsgoodman
>>7886087
are you the guy who always calls me your nigga when i post it?
The book was total shit. The reveal at the end was cringeworthy. I can't believe you lend actually like it
>>7886095
possibly. sounds like the kind of thing i would post desu
>>7884303
>if you were ever in love as a teenager
>>7887581
what you got to say faggot
>>7884303
OP here. Does having a massive crush and then never even holding her hand count?
The first part of this novel is exceptionally well written. But to be honest, it's worth just reading part 1 and then putting it down because after that the novel does nothing but repeat things you already know, or have already guessed, over and over again. And the end of the novel is just awful, even with a bond-villain like conversation that explains the entire plot to you again, as if you somehow missed it the first three times. I'll be coming back to this writer, as I've heard good things about him, but ... that second half was such a disappointment when the first part was so good.
>>7887791
I read Remains of the Day and it is really similar. Characters in his books seem to be built around not changing no matter what, probably as a critique of the British stiff upper lip ideal. I think the reader is supposed to be increasingly incredulous at the stubbornness/unawareness.
>>7888054
At least now I won't be meme'd into reading anymore of his trash
>>7888322
you're dumb
ishiguro is one of the best living writers and he's not even done yet. if he writes another book as audacious as the unconsoled and continues pushing the convergence between "genre" and "literary" fiction he could definitely secure a spot in the all-time greats list.
>>7887593
lmao so tru
It's great.
The novel's atmosphere is creepy as fuck.
The writing style got boring fast. I stopped reading after 80 pages since all that happened was a bunch of kids traded some shitty arts and crafts they made.
>>7889091
>he didn't read NLMG for the subtext
lmao pleb
>>7888336
>you're dumb because you don't like an author I like
>>7890040
no you're dumb because you cant appreciate good literature and make sweeping judgments about an author based on one book and some shitposts on /lit/
>>7890042
>everything that doesn't agree with what I think is dumb or a shitpost
How long should we keep this up, lad?
>>7890048
Not him but you sound like you have downs right now.
>>7890048
lol ok
>>7890060
He's berating someone for having an opinion, and then says he's dumb because he has his own, opposite, opinion.
>>7887791
Didn't you love the part where they search for her possible? That's way late into the book. Anyway it's so short already I can't imagine a version of the book that cuts things down even more. And I think the final discussion is effective just because the characters ARE being told things that we, and mostly they, knew all along, but are finally having to confront it directly in a way they never had before in their lives.
I haven't read Never Let Me Go yet, but I loved Remains of the Day and A Pale View of Hills, so I imagine it would be odd for his other work to be anything less than stellar.
No it's properly cringe
>>7890042
You are actually dumb though because you like Ishiguro. If he were a director he'd be...like Noah Baumbach but much worse...like Zack Braff or the guy from How I Met Your Mother when he made a film.
> u dumb
>>7889112
What subtext? It's a weepy snooze fest with a ridiculous premise.
1) Obviously no one would be ok with growing clones for their organs and if they were the narrative would have to be a lot more cleverly spun than it is in NLMG - The gallery was to show them clones are people, cus, you know, people all think clones are just stormtroopers or some shit.
2) FUCKING RUN AWAY YOU REATRD. Hmm can I defer giving my last organs away and dying? sorry hun, no dice. Ok I guess I'll just go home and prepare for the operation, cheers for trying WTF
>>7890167
I always wonder if people who didn't get why they don't run away actually read the book, the entirety of which is about why they accept their place rather than running away.
>>7890266
Yeah but it's stupid. The novel utterly fails to convince me as a reader of that aspect of them. There's no substantial investigation of the beliefs and attitudes that would lead them to accept their fate rather than run away.
>>7890584
it sounds like you need worldbuilding and explicit motivations. might i suggest r/fantasy?
>>7890584
it's an enhanced version of the nature v nurture argument. Artificial humans were created to serve as organ farms. People thought it was unethical and tried to prove that the clones were humans because they had souls. However it is impossible to prove something that does not exist (regardless of personal beliefs, there has been no documented evidence of the discovery of a 'soul'.) Without any proof to back up the claim that the practice is unethical, clones are allowed to keep being made and all of the soul-testing facilities were shut down because they couldn't get funding.
Now, this book posits that while the clones don't have 'souls', regular humans don't either. So there is nothing inherent in either group of living beings that separates each from the other. They are both biologically identical. So, the nature argument is thrown out the window, and we turn to the nurture argument. The clones are groomed and taught from day one what their lives will be and what their purpose is. While they aren't explicitly told they are clones until much later in their life, even from the beginning they are molded to behave and respond to authority in certain ways. They don't fight it or run away because that is not the purpose they serve. It is not a possibility for them. They don't even consider it until the true love rumor begins to circulate. As soon as a glimmer of hope appears on the horizon, the clones become very determined to try and fight against their destiny. But, as evidence when Tommy and Kathy discover the truth about Hailsham, once that dream is dashed, they revert back to their obedience. It is difficult for us as the reader to picture ourselves resigning to such a gruesome fate because we have grown up in an environment that allows at least some degree of autonomy.
tl:dr - What makes the clones 'non-human' is the environment created for them by, and the denial of, their creators, not anything inherently in their make-up, ironically making 'real humans' the monsters. Sorry the book is 2deep4u
>>7890653
Basically it's subjective. For me the book didn't do enough to construct the character's consciousness in the manner you're describing. Also though, the society one must infer is rather silly. We are not overly concerned with souls, we live in a secular society and the book very much based itself in modern Britain. The idea that the book attempts to illustrate the fact that "regular humans don't have souls either" I think is right. I just think that's a rather facile theme and not enough to sustain a whole novel.
>>7890584
It's speculative sociology. Honestly I think you need to read it again - the entire book is about how powerful socially constructed attitudes are. The teachers aren't freaked out by the possibility that the kids might want to escape, so they don't want to.
Ever heard of this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_syndrome But really you don't need to read it. It's all in the book. It literally IS the book.
>>7891166
pfff I did read it about 7 years ago...I suppose I feel validated in my criticism because my mother, who is quite patrician, thought the same thing...might read it again.
Would you mind telling me some other books you've recently enjoyed. If I agree with you on other stuff perhaps I really should re-read.
>>7890152
>using ellipses
>>7891220
good stuff I've read recently: an Elena Ferrante novel (Days of Abandonment), a Saul Bellow novella (Remains of the Day), and an Iain M. Banks novel (Look to Windward, my first of his).
Blessings to you and yours either way.
>>7891106
Except you're not taking into consideration that the story doesn't take place in the modern day. It's taking place in a timeline where cloning was not only invented but also put into mass practice at some point during the 1950s. Your problem is a lack of suspension of disbelief and willingness to play by the novel's rules on your part.
>>7890167
>What subtext?
Actually, I've written my Bachelor thesis on the "subtext". The conditions about Cathy and her friends being caught in the dystopian world of NLMG is reflected in the use of language. I'm not happy with the term "subtext" but that's probably what the user meant.
>>7890167
You = autist who has never heard of allegory
