50 Book Challenge Part Five

Tanaqui definitely not the Cazalets!

Never Let Me Go seems to me like science fiction by someone who doesn't write or read science fiction- it is frustrating to me in the same was His Bloody Project was (but re detective fiction). They are both well written, but they both take a certain genre, a trope, and use that format without following "thr rules", yet don't offer anything to replace them- they are not subverting or playing with the genre; for me they are just cheating. And I think people who like NLMG are people who generally don't read sci-fi, so just enjoy it as literature (and similar for HBP), but for me, there is something lacking.

The Cazalets- I am sure I have read them but can I do a brief plot check?! (Spoilers!). Are they the ones where one of the posh women rescues one of the char lady's daughters from being tied to a chair because she is so bright? And one women escapes from occupied France by going to a posh hotel, putting on a dress and basically prostituting herself to the ships captain? Or have I mixed them up with something else?

I understand that you are using the word "universe" in a metaphorical sense but NLMG is a sci-fI book and when you talk about SF books taking place in another universe, that has a specific meaning.

In any case, if what you say were the case then no worldbuilding would ever be necessary in any fiction, since it's all happening in another "universe" and we don't need to be told much about it, just fill in the holes according to our imagination.

Outside the specific use of 'alternative universe' in science fiction, every book is an imagined universe. The fact that it is according to you a future version of this universe doesn't stop it being allowed to have its own rules. So much of fiction allows the reader to fill in assumptions and gaps. I don't think a lack of explanation about how science now has become science then counts as a plot hole. But we clearly will disagree on this.

Yes, exactly, stitches and slightly.

"We know it's a different imagined world because children are being cloned for organ harvest and brought up in closed communities. That doesn't happen in this one, therefore the author has imagined a different universe."

No, he imagined a possible future in this universe, on this very world.

"A different universe" has a specific meaning in sci-fi - as in, a universe created separately than our own (where rules of physics are different, for example), or one which forked from ours at some point (possibly because of a paradox or multiverse interpretation).

"I don't think you need the info. You can just accept it."

Can't, really. I've never been able to suspend disbelief. Never believed in God, not even as a child.

"You can accept that science has advanced so that rejection is not the issue it was."

I'm the reader, not associate author tasked with filling plot holes to help the book make sense, though. I like a book that is well constructed into an internally constructed whole. I don't like one where there are plot holes I have to fill with somewhat plausible theories.

"I don't need an explanation of how everything in the hypothetical universe works."

It's not a hypothetical universe, though. It is this universe, our world Earth, human beings with English names.

Convincing world building is a crucial part of good science fiction though. A skilled writer, like Le Guin in The Left Hand of Darkness, builds up the picture so deftly and subtly that you don't notice the huge amount of info being conveyed.

Laptop and Kindle Ban likely to be introduced for Flights to America. I suspect it will soon be extended.
If it is is there anywhere to buy covers for Paperback's so no - one knows what you are reading.

And the alternative universe of a book doesn't need to be explicitly identified as alternative or, indeed, very different from this one (as in His Dark Materials where the main characters slip between universes that are sometimes almost identical.) We know it's a different imagined world because children are being cloned for organ harvest and brought up in closed communities. That doesn't happen in this one, therefore the author has imagined a different universe. In a similar way I don't need to know in The Left Hand of Darkness exactly how the Gethenian body biologically changes during kemmer; I accept that it does.

I think it would have made NLMG less frustrating to read if the author had worked even a vague solution in there.

Have Kathy overhear some conversation about this only being possible because of the work Dr X did in overcoming tissue rejection. Or a conversation about how there's no need to worry about the clones running off because they're lobotomised when they're x years old or whatever.

I don't necessarily need detailed explanations of everything, but some acknowledgement that this is an issue that would need to have been resolved in the book's world would have helped me to enjoy the book more.

44. The Private lives of the Tudors - Tracy Borman - another one to feed my Tudor habit . Didn't tell me much I didn't know about the actual events of the time. In fact it was a bit of a whistle stop tour in that way. This was all about the detail of their lives. I found it quite fascinating. The medical stuff was amazing. Some of it was just weird, some gruesome and some actually quite enlightened. The research was thorough and it was an easy and interesting read. Will definitely pick up her Thomas Cromwell book at some point.

May I join? I've been trying to get back into reading, with mixed results, and love reading through these threads! I used to read enough books to build a paper battleship, and reading was one of the joys of life but my health (especially OCD) has been chipping slowly away at that joy and last year I read very few new books, hence the goal to focus more on reading this year.

My list of completed books so far:

1. Ruby by Cynthia Bond
2. Whispers Underground by Ben Aaronovitch
3. Dear Ijeawele by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
4. The Island at the End of Everything by Kiran Millwood Hargrave

Ruby is the second most disturbing book I have ever read (years ago I read part of one of Marquis de Sade's which takes top spot). It hung around in my head for days, but not for good reasons. There were things I liked about it which is why I continued to the end.There were interesting characters and sometimes I found myself enjoying the descriptions. Until the next part with a disturbing supernatural occurrence or graphic description of sexual abuse. I wish I hadn't read it though.

Whispers Underground was a strong sequel and I enjoyed it.

Dear Ijeawele is not an actual book IMHO. It was born as a Facebook post and if you view it as an extended Facebook post then it's a very good one, but it's too short and not explored enough to be packaged as a whole book. I'm only counting it here to make my list look longer. I should probably read one of her actual novels.

The Island at the End of Everything was a real impulse purchase. I picked it up because it had a lovely cover and it turned out to be lovely inside too! The characters and their relationships, the prose, the plot...I have nothing to comment negatively on and I would recommend it to anyone who likes children's fiction.

I'm currently reading The Girl With All The Gifts and I'm really enjoying it!

But I don't think you need the info. You can just accept it. You can accept that science has advanced so that rejection is not the issue it was. I don't need an explanation of how everything in the hypothetical universe works. That would be a different and potentially less interesting book. The book's not about how the science works. It's about what would happen if it did work like that. And I'm ok with that.

"It [NLMG] is an alternative universe."

There is no evidence of that. It looks like this universe, this world, these very people, just a bit in the future (like the vast majority of SF).

"You obviously couldn't practically clone everyone and not everyone would ever need an organ, so you have a 'pool' of organ donors fresh and ready to give."

Increasing the number of organ donations from strangers is not that hard - [[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/french-citizens-organ-donors-france-opt-out-donation-hospital-healthcare-doctors-a7508576.html France, Spain, and Austria have a system of "presumed consent", meaning everyone is an organ donor unless they opt out.

But tissue rejection is a huge problem with stranger donation. You will continually be on immune suppressants and still your body will eventually reject it. It is just not believable that anyone would go to the trouble and expense of just making lots of clones without any effort to match them to people who need the organs. The story is just not developed enough as it is. I Need More Info

"Way too much drama in a short period of time, histrionics and heartbreak (is this what we call "feeeelliinnnggs"?). "

Yes, it is

" they are clones? They're almost like normal human children, but not quite, there's something missing. They don't feel, or react, or behave quite as a human being would in that situation"

A clone is a genetic copy of a human being, his identical twin, therefore is human. There is no reason whatsoever for them not to act, feel, or behave like any other human, unless there has been some intervention somewhere (psychological conditioning or genetic modification), but the book has nothing of the sort.

About we are all completely beside ourselves I agree, it wasn't that special (in terms of the writing). I too have a thing with 'issues' books and this was THE issue book of all issue books. At the same time, I do remember finding bits of it quite moving and tenderand parts of it have stayed in my memory, so it was definitely not a total write off for me.

Passmethecrisps me too about child in time, I remember scenes vividly so many years later. And like you, read it before becoming a parent, can't even begin to imagine what it would be like reading it as a parent. Anyway, still an 'issue' book as many have noted but one of the more memorable ones.

Woah, this thread is moving fast - my first chance to post on it!

17. Terra Nullius - A Journey Through No One's Land - Sven Lindqvist

Picked up on a whim from the library. It's an elegant condemnation of the treatment of the Aborigines since white people arrived in Australia - heartfelt and moving, but light on historical details, and I would have liked more depth.

Ah, the great Never Let Me Go throw down! I'll throw my late tuppence in; I quite liked listening to it on audiobook. I've nothing against the premise of not running away, it did not jarr with me or spoil the story.

In the 'meh' camp for WeAre All Completely Besides Ourselves. Could not understand what all the fuss was about. Slow year for The Booker.

Fatowl, the characters do come into their own more as the story develops. At the beginning, everyone seems very interchangeable but that improves :) Also she seems to narrow the cast down quite a bit in the second book.

I'm doing a bit better now ChessieFL posted the photo of the family tree, and I listened to a fair chunk on my commute today. Still a bit confused about who is who, but beginning to engage a bit more.

I think I will plod on for now, and probably finish it.

Fatowl what did you do re the first Cazalet book?? DH bought me the whole set and I must admit I struggled with the first. The second was better and by the end I was hooked and gobbled down the rest of the series; feeling rather bereft when I finished it!

Has Mumsnet started spell-checking postings or have I done something in my browser?

The reason for the snarky [sic] in the quote from Goodreads above was that truly had been misspelled. And I am sure I typed "et al" in my NLMG comment, whereas it's appeared as "et all"

[btw if it happens again, I typed it with one L but it seems to have autocorrected to have two]

I agree with Keith - that was my interpretation of NLMG. I really liked it when I read it and it is one that has stayed with me. I plan to reread it soon so will let you know if I change my view!!