This is the first book I’ve read in the new year and so I
was enthusiastic about it, hoping it would signal a year of great books to be
devoured. I’m not saying that I was disappointed and I’m not saying that I’m
not disappointed (wonderful grasp of English there) but I am feeling confused.
I’ll get to that though, first up I should perhaps talk a little of what the
book was about. It will definitely contain spoilers because I just cannot write
about it without doing so. If you do read it after reading this, I can’t imagine
the spoilers will really hinder your enjoyment dramatically.
Set in varying time periods (before, during, and well after
World War II) the book describes an alternate history. But then, does it
actually? Confusion from the off! The first character we are presented with,
Stuart Gratton, is attempting to find out about a ‘Sawyer’ that was referenced
by Churchill during the war and he plans on writing a book about this apparent
mystery person. Sawyer is not one person, however, but in fact identical twins
with essentially the same name: J.L. Sawyer. Parents and their perverse amusements
in keeping twins similar reigns here but obviously it was necessary to the
story in order to aid the intense confusion felt throughout.
During the war, one of the twins (Jack) becomes a RAF pilot and the other (Joe)
a conscientious objector working for the Red Cross. The twins both (separately)
spend time with Winston Churchill and Rudolf Hess throughout the book, to
different ends; one to recover important information and the other to help
negotiate peace between Britain and Germany.
However, as simple (?) as that paragraph may make it seem in
reality it is nothing like that. The book is an effort to read and not one you
can skim through if you want to follow it properly. We’re given different
strands of reality that we cannot anchor in any way to something tangible so we
have to accept the stories presented for some time until they are later
evidenced to be false. I’m not even really sure how to tackle any of it here and as
I was reading it I became increasingly aware how horrendous it was going to be
to try and review it but I shall thrash out some words anyway. We’ll start with
Jack’s story as that is the most straightforward.
Jack became estranged from his brother after an intense
argument about which I’m going to assume was Brigit, the woman they helped
escape from Germany and who Joe married. He was interested in flying from a
young age and decided to join the RAF for the war effort (despite showing no
interest in politics from earlier descriptions which made me doubt that Jack was
Jack, I thought perhaps it might have been Joe). A very successful pilot, he
survived many raids and bombed many areas of Germany for his troubles. On his
last bombing raid his plane was hit and crashed into the sea, injuring Jack but
not killing him (in this reality strand). He spends time recovering and is
later asked by Churchill to talk to Hess, who had landed in Scotland apparently
seeking peace. He complies and comes to the conclusion that the prisoner is an
imposter and not Hess himself. He also believes the Churchill he spends time
with to also be an imposter. I’m having trouble remembering what else happened
with Jack because Joe’s storyline is the one containing all the mind-boggling
confusion. He left the war behind, anyway, and worked the rest of his days as a
head of some business. Had the book just been about Jack and the events surrounding
his life, I’d have liked that. It was interesting and made me look into aspects
of the war I hadn’t even known about before. But that was obviously not to be.
Then we have Joe. He is staunchly against war and wishes to
have no part in it (but then later he is itching to have some role and continually makes reference to feeling proud to be British). He does however work for the Red Cross
and spends much of his time ferrying injured civilians to various hospitals.
His story is much more engaging in that it draws you right into the heart of
the Blitz and the descriptions of London at the time of the bombings is
haunting and emotive. While helping as best he can, he also tries to maintain a
semblance of family life with his wife but it is difficult as he is away for
long stretches of time. Upon finding a RAF cap in his home he believes his wife
is having an affair with his brother which he thinks to be confirmed when
she tells him that Jack has been visiting from time to time. He becomes
increasingly more paranoid and things aren’t helped when he suffers a
concussion that leaves him experiencing lucid delusions. As time goes on he
becomes more unsure as to what is reality and what is a delusion, and we get no
insight into either as both reality and delusion are equally probable. The only
clue we’re given is the appearance of Jack. Joe is invited to take part in the
secret peace talks taking place between Germany and Britain. He is given great
importance in the proceedings, with Hess and Churchill both taking an active
interest in him. Peace is later decided upon and he goes home to be with his
wife and newborn child. Or does he?
Joe’s delusion of playing an important role in the peace
talks between Germany and Britain make sense for his character; he is feeling
powerless and neglected in his own life, so it would be understandable that his
unconscious outlet would involve holding a significant position in the most
important event in the (alternate) history of the time. The whole way through the
book I was hoping that Jack and Joe were actually the same person and that Jack
(or Joe) was suffering a psychological crisis which would explain his
behaviour. That, to me, would’ve been a more satisfying resolution to the
various realities presented within the book but it is an easy resolution and is
used frequently within fiction. The Separation was definitely more daring than
that and for the most part I would say it was successful.
However, there was just too much happening in the book for
me. I do like being confused by what I’ve read but it’s usually followed by a
spark of understanding. With this I’m just confused. There was no resolution to
anything (which is obviously fine in itself, the author doesn’t owe anything to
the reader there) and the way it ended made it impossible to understand the
true nature of events. I’m talking Inception levels of impossibility – did the
spinning top fall or not? I dislike the “it was all a dream” trope because it robs
you of the emotion and time you’ve invested in characters and what has happened
to them. We’re taken along on this journey through an alternate history but
then it’s realised that it was all dreamt by an unconscious, wounded man. I
find that intensely frustrating because like I said, I’m robbed of my
experience of what has happened.
To add further confusion, at the very start of the book, a
woman presents Stuart Gratton with a series of notebooks that are filled with
the writings of Jack Sawyer. This suggests he survived and would lend support
to his version of events. However, another crew member on his flight that
crashed into the sea states that he died. Nothing can be accepted. If nothing
can be accepted then what is the point? Yes, the book has brilliant descriptions of life during the war and the characters are fleshed out
expertly but if every experience is a lie and can’t be trusted then really, what is
the point?
The writing was wonderful and I did enjoy reading it but I
take issue with there being no acceptable reality ever present. Looking through
the reviews on Goodreads the book does seem to polarise people and I can
see why. Definitely read it and then
maybe explain it to me because I’ve probably missed something.
7/10
No comments:
Post a Comment