This book has sparked a lot of discussion in Australia - it won the Commonwealth Writers' Prize, and was on the shortlist for a whole swag of other awards. It centres around an incident at a BBQ when 'a man slaps a child who is not his own'. This act divides friends and family (and Australia it seems) about whether he was right to slap the child, given that his own child was possibly about to be hurt by the other kid. It also creates discussion about how children should be disciplined, and what effect a lack of discipline from one set of parents has on other children and families.
I think there are plenty of interesting issues and themes in this book, but ultimately I didn't enjoy it much. Tsiolkas totally overdoes the sex (there is way more than The Bride Stripped Bare!) and swearing (I've never read so many c-bombs in one novel before). There was also not a single character I actually liked, which made it hard to care about the story.
Tsiolkas chooses an interesting set of eight points of view; I was expecting him to write about the same chronological time from each point of view (like the movie Go), but the chronology is linear, so each person's part of the story adds on where the last left off. I thought the end of the book dragged with Aish's experience at the conference and then the horrendous Bali 'holiday'. I totally didn't buy Hector as some sort of Greek Adonis. He was such a prick and so self-centred, I don't care how good looking he was, he would have been ugly.
Should Harry have slapped Hugo? No, he should have protected his own child without hurting anyone. Is Hugo a little shit? Yes. Every time I read about Hugo being breastfed, I thought of the Little Britain 'Bitty' skit...
3 stars.
i think it would have been more interesting to read had it been someone else who slapped the child, not the guy who was already beating up his wife. I think it would have made it more real in some ways and posed more of a dilemma- because I think a lot of people could identify with that and the struggle it is not to intervene. However, I do think a child who is brandishing a cricket bat should be restrained - I think an adult there did have a responsibility to restrain the kid, not necessarily just protect their own child.
ReplyDeleteThis book is controversial, there is no denying that. I will admit I found it difficult to put down, I think I read it in one sitting, but I found Hugo to be a terrible little boy and his parents to be equally horrid. I do think it shines a light on the extremes parents go to now with their kids and how it doesn't benefit anyone.
You're right, if the other kids were in danger Harry should have protected them too. Taking the bat off him would probably have done it.
ReplyDelete