Scan barcode
zefrog's review
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
It is always a gamble for an author to decide to create what is euphemistically called an anti-hero. The writer runs the risk of repulsing the reader.
In Man on the Rock, King is taking just such a gamble. Spiro Polymerides has what we are told is the most important for a Greek youth. More important than power or money or brains, he has beauty. Physical beauty that is, because of moral or internal beauty he shows none at all. He is "hard, and selfish, and mercenary" (p152). He is a parasite, who, in the course of this circular journey of self-discovery, attaches himself to three people and ruins their lives in the process. Just as as he ruins his, realising too late that he had in fact loved those people.
But it is not just Spiro that is a turn off for the reader. None of the characters in the gallery presented to us by King is particularly. All are in fact at least a little contemptible. And the portrait he creates of the Greek character and society is no less unflattering.
It is mildly satisfying to see Spiro receive a very limited form of come-uppance, but it is too rapid and elusive a moment at the end of the book, and something of too fleeting a nature to justify the time spent on following Spiro's most mediocre turpitude. He isn't even a good villain but rather a lost kid lacking self-awareness of who he is and what his callous behaviour does to others.
The book is not a gripping yarn - in the end not very much happens at all. It is not entertaining; it is not particularly informative; it is not morally enlightening. Which rather begs the question of why King decided to take this gamble.
In Man on the Rock, King is taking just such a gamble. Spiro Polymerides has what we are told is the most important for a Greek youth. More important than power or money or brains, he has beauty. Physical beauty that is, because of moral or internal beauty he shows none at all. He is "hard, and selfish, and mercenary" (p152). He is a parasite, who, in the course of this circular journey of self-discovery, attaches himself to three people and ruins their lives in the process. Just as as he ruins his, realising too late that he had in fact loved those people.
But it is not just Spiro that is a turn off for the reader. None of the characters in the gallery presented to us by King is particularly. All are in fact at least a little contemptible. And the portrait he creates of the Greek character and society is no less unflattering.
It is mildly satisfying to see Spiro receive a very limited form of come-uppance, but it is too rapid and elusive a moment at the end of the book, and something of too fleeting a nature to justify the time spent on following Spiro's most mediocre turpitude. He isn't even a good villain but rather a lost kid lacking self-awareness of who he is and what his callous behaviour does to others.
The book is not a gripping yarn - in the end not very much happens at all. It is not entertaining; it is not particularly informative; it is not morally enlightening. Which rather begs the question of why King decided to take this gamble.
More...