Troubles by J.G. Farrell: A Memorial Group Read in Honor of JanetinLondon

A few people have expressed interest in reading Troubles by JG Farrell, one of his trilogy of novels exploring the realities of the British empire from the mid-19th to mid-20th centuries. I had originally focused on reading this book as part of a year-long reading tribute to Janet (JanetinLondon); it's one of the many books she and I shared on our shelves, and it's one that I've been meaning to read for some time; recently, some other folks here have voiced some interest in reading it as well.

I'd suggest that we begin our voyage of joint discovery on March 1, and perhaps establish a rough guideline for how to structure this? It obviously is a book that is not only reasonably long but also dense in terms of content, so while everyone of course is free to read at their own rate, a discussion that spreads itself over 8 plus weeks might be appropriate?

Pls throw in your thoughts on this, and sign up if you'd be interested in joining this group read...

Having never been part of a group read before, I don't have any wisdom to contribute on structure. But I would like to participate and March 1st will work well for me.

I probably won't be able to join, but I did add this thread to the wiki.

Thanks, Jim! Although too bad you won't be able to read along. Do drop in from time to time if you're able. Ditto for anyone who has already read the novel.

Linda, some of the group reads I've seen try to break the novel into digestible pieces and then allocate each group of chapters or pages a certain number of days or weeks. I'll have to take a look at the book and find a way to do it.

btw, if anyone wants to join in and doesn't have a copy of the book -- it's not in their library, it's too pricey -- let me know. I have an extra copy for some reason that I can send out in response to a PM.

Suz - I'm in - but you'll be finished on 1 March too right?!

Erm, nope... Sorry, Paul! I probably will reach a point where I read straight through to the end, but will keep pace with the discussion as it unfolds! and even then, I'd imagine it would be a week or two.

I've never read any Farrell, and don't yet have a copy, and am bad at sticking to schedules with group reads... but I am interested, so I'll check my library to see if there is a copy.

Edited to add: library has Siege of Krishnapur but not Troubles, and as I'm meant to be cutting down on book acquisitions I'd better not start looking on eBay/Amazon. So I may have to pass on this one for now, but will keep my eye on this thread to see what others make of the book, and hope to get to it one day.

I'll follow along with this discussion, since I've already read Troubles, but I wouldn't rule out reading it again with you.

Going UP ...

Sorry to have let this lapse...

And I'll have to take a look at the book tomorrow to figure out a way to break it into digestible chunks.

I know Linda is interested, and possibly Ilana. Anyone else joining in, if we kick off this weekend?

Yes, found you! I'm starting on it tonight, but given how late it is, doubtful I'll make much progress. Still, I'm in.

Haven't gotten all that far (maybe 30-40 pages in) but so far I'm absolutely loving it. Speaking of which, I should head off and make some reading time.

Must put in an appearance as it is one I am reading at the moment...100 pages or so in (a quarter done) and the similarities in style to Singapore Grip are apparent. Thank you also to dear Janet for leaving us this one from her shelves to go at.

Suggest that since it's broken roughly in half, we think about discussing the first half of the book beginning next Sunday, and then the second half at the end of the month? Comments before that welcome, but no spoilers? Sorry, I have participated in almost no group reads and not led any at all, so without going over a lot of other threads, not really sure what format to follow. Suggestions??

I think your suggestion is fine, Suz. It seems that we are a small group, so I think it is okay to not be too structured. I am about 70% through at this point, so I will stay away from spoilers, although so far, it doesn't seem to be that kind of a book.

Meant to start reading this weekend, but was derailed by a friend's ill-health. Need to wrap up three other books, most of which I'm about halfway through, then I can launch into this.

Hi all. I finished Troubles last week and am anxious to discuss it. It will definitely be one of my top reads for 2012. But no spoilers here about the second half and I will hold off on my review also. I will be gone most of the day to a chamber music concert (pianist Nareh Arghamanyan), so I thought I'd start early.

I had assumed from the title that Troubles would deal much more directly with the actual conflict and was pleasantly surprised at the subtly with which Farrell addresses these issues. I thought his use of newspaper articles to introduce the events occurring in the background was very clever and provided an interesting contrast to the preposterous nature of daily living at the Majestic. The "folksy" style of the articles also helped to set the story in time, location and way of life in the area.

One of my strongest first impressions was - and remains - that I need to become more knowledgeable regarding Irish history from this period. I kept encountering names and other references that sent me scrambling to Wikipedia. I had not been aware that the history of Sinn Fein went as far back as this. And I had also never thought before about the similarities occurring between Ireland and India, related to the dismantling of the British Empire, and the parallels between the Sinn Fein and Bolshevic movements. But I am still unclear on his statement that Sinn Fein sided with Germany during WWI. Any history buffs among us?

I am also wondering about Farrell's own political leanings. I understand he was of both English and Irish ancestry. But the book's one-sided view and negative comments about the Irish puzzle me a bit, as I have yet to decide whether he was taking a position of sorts or did so simply for the purposes of further developing his farcical portrait of the Anglo-Irish.

I'm looking forward to your thoughts!

Linda, I'm just about a third into the book and found your comments above to be very helpful. I, too, am feeling like I need to learn more about Irish history from this period (although some of that is happening via my reading of Troubles and the associated research I'm having to do along the way). I'm embarrassed to admit that I didn't have a good understanding of the colonialist attitude of England in Ireland.

The book is reminding me, in tone (and possibly also because of the mental images of the huge old hotel), of The World According to Garp, although I think that is perhaps an odd associated to be making.

I finished the book a couple of days ago and thought it was rather brilliant. I'm assuming the newspaper items, though based on facts, were all fictionalized to a certain degree since there was no bibliography included?

I loved Troubles when I read it a few years ago, and I would read it again now except I have so many other books I want to read . . .

>17 EBT1002: Hi Ellen. I'm glad you were able to join us. The book is reminding me, in tone (and possibly also because of the mental images of the huge old hotel), of The World According to Garp

Funny you should say that. The scene in the Palm Court when Major Archer first meets Angela seemed extremely familiar to me - almost like deja vu. I assumed the feeling was from something I have read, but I am still wondering about that. Is there a similar scene in Garp? I can't remember...

>18 Smiler69: thought it was rather brilliant Well said, Ilana. I had assumed that the news articles were fictionalized, although he does repeatedly refer to the Major reading the Irish Times.

I'm assuming fictionalized, too, and agree that they give some good broader context for the events of the novel. Brilliant -- yep, I think so too!

Linda, what I can say is that Ferrell's voice is reminiscent of John Irving's voice, but I bet I'm remembering (vaguely) Hotel New Hampshire. It's been many years since I've read either that or Garp so the truth is that I don't recall either in great detail. But I recall tone, emotion, setting, and voice.

Linda, Ellen, Ilana, Rebecca, Darryl and Genny,

Almost there with Troubles and agree that there are subtle shades of brilliance there. I particularly like the way he plays with a very serious issue (the fight for independence, the differences between catholic and protestant, the waning of empire) by juxtaposing the basic misunderstandings and ineptnesses of ordinary people as a proxy for the Troubles. Having read The Singapore Grip I don't think these books have an authentic feel of being in any way a trilogy - more like one novel is a companion piece to the other.

I've read all of them and they are a thematic trilogy in that they all deal with the impact of the British empire on both the colonizers and the colonized. I guess that's another way of saying they're companion pieces to each other. (One character from Troubles does show up in The Singapore Grip, if I remember correctly.

I particularly like the way he plays with a very serious issue (the fight for independence, the differences between catholic and protestant, the waning of empire) by juxtaposing the basic misunderstandings and ineptnesses of ordinary people as a proxy for the Troubles.

You have summarized his approach perfectly, Paul.

Paul, I agree with Linda. Nice nutshell (as usual).
I'm almost done with the novel; it's keeping me up rather later than usual at night because I'm engaged (and I want to finish). Last night I read the section about the ball they throw at the Majestic, and it was a bit brutal at places. He doesn't pull punches in his effort to expose the rawness of the characters, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum.

The Major is often portrayed as a relatively middle-of-the-road thinker, largely a pacifist, but with prejudiced personal attitudes toward the Irish. Farrell does a nice job of exposing that rawness: political moderation with personal bigotry. And all that with a bit of irony and humor thrown in.

Since discussion seems to be winding down here, I have posted my review of Troubles on my thread and on the book's page. But I would still love to discuss reactions about the ending. I found it very jarring and quite unsettling, and felt that it unfairly skewed sentiments in favor of the Anglo-Irish, after only lightly mentioning the suffering of the Irish masses. Strange that it made me feel almost personally betrayed at the end, my ancestors having been Irish Catholic. But that did not make me love the book any less and I can't wait to read the rest of the trilogy.

Linda, I just completed reading Troubles a couple of days ago and I was struck by the bigotry towards Irish Catholics. The Major seemed, at times, to represent the voice of reason and moderation and (I hate this word in this kind of context, but it fits for the time in which Farrell was writing) tolerance. And then his visceral anti-Irish sentiment rears its head and I didn't know what to do with that. One interpretation is that Farrell was exploring the visceral bigotry and the intellectual overcoming of that early-ingrained hatred, but I don't know if I'm giving him too much credit there. Maybe not. It does seem that Farrell has a grasp of the complicated nature of -isms.

I also found the ending to be somewhat jarring; everything got kind of brutally wrapped up and I wasn't sure what I was supposed to be taking from that. The Major's resolution of his love for Sarah resonated for me, though, even if Farrell seemed to be in a hurry to articulate it.

Sounds like we had similar reactions, Ellen, and I like the way you say it: I didn't know what to do with that.

I just can't get the picture of that scene on the beach out of my mind, which is exactly what I think Farrell wanted. It is such an unexpected and brutal event that I can't help but see it as hinting at his own politics.