"As children, Ruth, Kathy and Tommy spend their childhood at a seemingly idyllic English boarding school. As they grow into young adults, they find that they have to come to terms with the strength of the love they feel for each other, while preparing themselves for the haunting reality that awaits them. Never Let Me Go is an unforgettable story of love, friendship and the fragility of life."
Whilst Never Let Me Go is sometimes ethically intriguing, it's also rather dull. Like the film, it was slow, quiet and hard to get into. I'll be honest, there were occasions when I really had to force myself to pick the book up and continue reading - yet despite my efforts I feel like I got nothing out of it. At times there wasn't as much dialogue as I'd like, especially between Kathy and Tommy; whose relationship deserved to be established and explored in more depth than it ever was in the book. This is probably why the film adaption of the novel takes the edge for me, considering it leads you to believe Kathy and Tommy spent a lot more time together than they were actually written to have. One thing that does annoy me about the film though is that Kathy is made to appear a virginal, shy type. In the book she has many fleeting relationships, which, again, are never explored in any detail but are vital to mention when it comes to her characterisation.
Although the blurb makes this big thing about "an unforgettable story of love", I'd argue against it. If Tommy had never said to Kath, "We loved each other all our lives," then you may not have realised that was ever the case. Even when they (SPOILER ALERT!) become a couple, there's never a soft caress; Tommy never pushes her hair behind her ear... you know, all the things you'd expect from two people who have, supposedly, been longing to be together all their lives. Even then, it's just "sometimes, we had sex." And, yes, that is an exact quote, which I believe is said more than once. I shouldn't judge him seeing as I've only read one of his books, but as far as I can gather, Ishiguro's talent does not extend to creating complex loving relationships. It's all very minimalist and he doesn't go too far in his descriptions. In fact, I have never seen such disparity when it comes to describing characters and what they look like, either! In his defence, though, I'm not sure if his lack of description of the clones was to emphasise their unimportance in the eyes of the humans.
One clever thing about the novel though, being dystopian, is that it really does make you think - even without posing a single question. You do consider what you'd like the fate of the clones to be. On the other hand, it is very forgettable. Nothing really happens, and nothing ever shocked me - although I suppose I had some sort of idea about the ending because I'd already watched the film. Nonetheless, if I saw someone about to read it, I'd direct them to put it back where they got it. That may seem a bit harsh, but I'm a big believer in that books are supposed to make you feel. Ishiguro just doesn't do it for me.
To keep up with what books I'm reading, visit my Goodreads page at: https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/32076954-meaghan
No comments:
Post a Comment