I thought the movie was okay, but I suspect it worked for me by evoking the experience of reading the book. Maybe it doesn't have much to offer on its own. I would recommend giving yourself a year to forget the movie and then trying the book. You'll know within the first hundred pages if you're going to like it or not.
Wasn't aware there was a movie. I'd have thought it'd have been a tough adaptation. To me it's quite an impressionistic piece of writing, not something that would easily translate well to cinema.
No thats alright. I'm just very tight when it comes to creative works.
Personally, on a bad day, a work that is ONLY beautifully filmed and well acted makes me spew a torrent of curses at the makers, with strange looks from those around me who don't get why I'm getting so passionate about using the word "sht" in every sentence.
And I get very annoyed when others don't acknowledge that there is some truth in what I'm saying. I realise it's the way it comes out from my mouth but seriously, cannot others agree and say "Yeah, that was sht but beautifully filmed and well acted".
Really, it was beautifuly 'filmed', good 'acting', beautiful 'actors' with promising futures but ultimately, and its ok to say it, this movie was a pile of sh*t.
If you liked this movie you will love "The Lobster (2015)", but you should never ever watch a movie with me.
I've read "The Remains of the Day" and "Never Let Me Go". Enjoyed the former.
I found the latter irritating to read -- roughly, many of the characters are "not in a great situation" when it comes to the role society has assigned them -- yet they are all accepting (perhaps that is too strong) or passive. No volition to change the status quo.
That doesn't mean it is a bad book, or bad literature, but reading pages and pages of characters focusing on interpersonal drama when they are trapped in this hideous situation pissed me off!
> That doesn't mean it is a bad book, or bad literature, but reading pages and pages of characters focusing on interpersonal drama when they are trapped in this hideous situation pissed me off!
I haven't read anything of his work beyond a bit of The Buried Giant, but this sentence makes me want to read "Never Let Me Go". I think it's easy to focus on the immediate or even use it to distract yourself from big picture problems that might not even have solutions.
One of the major themes of the book is how easy it is to accept gross injustice when it’s presented as foundational reality, as prosaic as the “who’s sleeping with whom” that the children do take so seriously.
This is a major reason I so love Never Let Me Go. So much of our dystopian fiction chronicles characters that heroically resist the terrors thrust upon them.
But Never Let Me Go tells a much more human story: these characters, like so many of us, are swept up helplessly in the torrents and terrors of their world. And it's not that they're _unable_ to change the tide -- they don't even know that it's an option.
It is, for certain, quite frustrating -- just as it is in the world outside the book's covers.
Never Let Me Go is an excellent example of the maxim that an idea is worth 1% and execution is worth 99%. It is brilliant, haunting, beautiful and tragic--one of the best books I've ever read--yet it shares its central conceit with a truly awful Michael Bay movie.
> I found the latter irritating to read -- roughly, many of the characters are "not in a great situation" when it comes to the role society has assigned them -- yet they are all accepting (perhaps that is too strong) or passive. No volition to change the status quo.
That is an incredibly useful and insightful anti-recommendation, thank you. That's consistently a property of stories that make me want to throw them away in disgust.
I interpreted that as proof that they weren't fully human. There was a constant discussion about whether they had a soul, and fruitless efforts to prove it through art, expression, love. But in the end, they all lacked the will to survive.
Most human beings, even those that are hardly extraordinary would have fought against those circumstances. But none of the Hailsham children did. They always, ultimately, accepted their fates, showing that they are more cattle than human.
Maybe that is an even more dystopian reading of an already dystopian novel, but I've read the novel twice and watched the film, and I keep coming back to it.
> yet they are all accepting (perhaps that is too strong) or passive. No volition to change the status quo.
The DVD of the film adaptation of Never Let Me Go has an interesting interview with Ishiguro. In it, he mentions that he is often asked about why the Students were so passive and accepting of their fate. From memory, he says that the book is allegorical: the students are no more able the escape their kind of mortality than we are of our (different) outcome. Nobody can escape from their own life.
I feel like a change. There’s another side of my writing self that I need to explore: the messy, chaotic, undisciplined side. The undignified side.
His next book was The Unconsoled, which is on the way to my mailbox. I'm a bit scared of it. It's supposed to be a glorious mess and impossible to enjoy if you try to make the wrong kind of sense out of it. I'm extra nervous (and also excited) because I didn't get much out of The Buried Giant (or haven't yet, anyway.)
If your part-way through The Buried Giant, it has a solid ending (IMHO) - like Never Let Me Go, the characters realize that they have made some foundational assumptions that aren't quite right, but unlike that novel they do have the opportunity to change those assumptions - for better or worse
Actually this one is my favourite, possibly because it was the first book I read from Ishiguro. It's been maybe fifteen years, but in my mind it is a kafkian rollercoaster, filled with really memorable characters. I still remember a lot of them, and hold them dearly. You'll need patience, but it's worth the effort.
In these types of threads people always jump in and suggest their favorite books of the author. In my case, it's Remains of the Day and An Artist of the Floating World, the two novels they talk about in the article. I've been such a fan of Remains of the Day after reading it a couple years ago that I've bought it a couple times and shipped it to friends to make sure they read it. I read An Artist of the Floating World earlier this summer and that stuck with me as well. Fantastic fantastic. I've also read Never Let Me Go but it didn't quite do it for me, something felt off in a way that's difficult to express and not worthy of talking about here.
I'll say this though, make sure to read Remains of the Day and then move to Artist of the Floating World. Both about WWII and people's opinions and feelings from what happened in their world. Not the longest of novels, so reading them back to back is the way to go.
21 comments
[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 58.9 ms ] threadHN'ers unfamiliar with his work might really enjoy Never Let Me Go, a very affecting novel which you could plausibly call sci-fi.
I went ahead and rented out the movie and I have to say, for me personally, I really wish I could get back the time wasted.
For what it's worth, I think it was beautifully filmed and well acted - the actor who played Tommy did an exceptional job in my opinion.
Personally, on a bad day, a work that is ONLY beautifully filmed and well acted makes me spew a torrent of curses at the makers, with strange looks from those around me who don't get why I'm getting so passionate about using the word "sht" in every sentence.
And I get very annoyed when others don't acknowledge that there is some truth in what I'm saying. I realise it's the way it comes out from my mouth but seriously, cannot others agree and say "Yeah, that was sht but beautifully filmed and well acted".
Really, it was beautifuly 'filmed', good 'acting', beautiful 'actors' with promising futures but ultimately, and its ok to say it, this movie was a pile of sh*t.
If you liked this movie you will love "The Lobster (2015)", but you should never ever watch a movie with me.
I found the latter irritating to read -- roughly, many of the characters are "not in a great situation" when it comes to the role society has assigned them -- yet they are all accepting (perhaps that is too strong) or passive. No volition to change the status quo.
That doesn't mean it is a bad book, or bad literature, but reading pages and pages of characters focusing on interpersonal drama when they are trapped in this hideous situation pissed me off!
I haven't read anything of his work beyond a bit of The Buried Giant, but this sentence makes me want to read "Never Let Me Go". I think it's easy to focus on the immediate or even use it to distract yourself from big picture problems that might not even have solutions.
But Never Let Me Go tells a much more human story: these characters, like so many of us, are swept up helplessly in the torrents and terrors of their world. And it's not that they're _unable_ to change the tide -- they don't even know that it's an option.
It is, for certain, quite frustrating -- just as it is in the world outside the book's covers.
That is an incredibly useful and insightful anti-recommendation, thank you. That's consistently a property of stories that make me want to throw them away in disgust.
I interpreted that as proof that they weren't fully human. There was a constant discussion about whether they had a soul, and fruitless efforts to prove it through art, expression, love. But in the end, they all lacked the will to survive.
Most human beings, even those that are hardly extraordinary would have fought against those circumstances. But none of the Hailsham children did. They always, ultimately, accepted their fates, showing that they are more cattle than human.
Maybe that is an even more dystopian reading of an already dystopian novel, but I've read the novel twice and watched the film, and I keep coming back to it.
The DVD of the film adaptation of Never Let Me Go has an interesting interview with Ishiguro. In it, he mentions that he is often asked about why the Students were so passive and accepting of their fate. From memory, he says that the book is allegorical: the students are no more able the escape their kind of mortality than we are of our (different) outcome. Nobody can escape from their own life.
His next book was The Unconsoled, which is on the way to my mailbox. I'm a bit scared of it. It's supposed to be a glorious mess and impossible to enjoy if you try to make the wrong kind of sense out of it. I'm extra nervous (and also excited) because I didn't get much out of The Buried Giant (or haven't yet, anyway.)
I'll say this though, make sure to read Remains of the Day and then move to Artist of the Floating World. Both about WWII and people's opinions and feelings from what happened in their world. Not the longest of novels, so reading them back to back is the way to go.
<edit> - yes I did! Thank you http://hn.algolia.com - here is my post saying that I did (lol) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7541291 - but I can't find the post which mentioned it (must've been here)