Comments on: The Quickening Maze, by Adam Foulds

By: Guy Savage

Guy Savage — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 01:10:27 +0000

I didn’t like this one at all. I tried.

By: KevinfromCanada

KevinfromCanada — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:46:29 +0000

I think my initial problems were more about my style of reading, than the book itself. Sometimes I tend to rush past language, when I should be paying more attention. I am happy to see this one go forward since I think Foulds takes more risks than most of the longlist authors. I’d be surprised to see it win but Booker juries have certainly surprised me before.

By: offmytrolley

offmytrolley — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:36:38 +0000

Hello Kevin. I finished this one last weekend and had no particular problems getting into it. I have to confess that I really liked this book and wouldn’t be surprised if it goes on to win. (So that’s the kiss of death then!)

By: KevinfromCanada

KevinfromCanada — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:26:02 +0000

Look forward to your thoughts, dgr.

By: dovegreyreader

dovegreyreader — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:10:49 +0000

Kevin, I’ve just finished this one today, also struggled to get into it on about three occasions before making myself read on.
More on it soon when I’ve had time to think it all through.

By: KevinfromCanada

KevinfromCanada — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:09:42 +0000

One of the questions I have about my reaction is how much the confusing abundance of story lines, all of them pretty thing, influenced my discomfort with the language. Again, there is a similarity in my reaction to Lane’s Red Dog, Red Dog — at the halfway point in both books I was wondering why I was continuing and then things started to come together. Far more frequently, I get to the midpoint with some excitement and the rest goes downhill. With both these books, the opposite happened. I will be interested in which memory prevails a month or two down the road.

By: Max Cairnduff

Max Cairnduff — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:43:33 +0000

It’s nice that on returning to it, you got more from it. It sounds though, well, flawed.

Alphabet of the Night, which I read recently, was a poet’s novel and that does raise issues. If you can soak into the language, it can be very rewarding, but if you become too aware of the language I think it becomes a barrier instead. This sounds like it maybe comes a little too close to that particular divide.

By: KevinfromCanada

KevinfromCanada — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:22:21 +0000

Will: I do think that previous exposure to Foulds would probably have made it easier for me to appreciate his language — I suspect both you and John have that edge when it comes to this book. Given the general thrust of the Booker longlist, I will be surprised if this one goes to the shortlist.

By: Isabel

Isabel — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 23:22:10 +0000

Kudos for going outside your comfort zone and trying again.

Hope your next Booker read is more fun and not difficult.

By: William Rycroft

William Rycroft — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:45:42 +0000

Great to read your thoughts Kevin and very admirable that you gave this one a second go. As you know I liked it, and often because of the language. I think this was because I expected something more like it when I read and was disappointed by his debut ‘The Truth About These Strange Times’. I can absolutely appreciate however that it isn’t the easiest book to read and wonder too like John whether that is the very quality which will help it to mature well with the judges.
I don’t think it’ll win though.