You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.54 AVERAGE
3.54 AVERAGE
Meh...I LOVED Brideshead Revisited and wanted to read more Waugh. So maybe I was setting myself up for disappointment. The story was funny at parts but seemed disjointed and I really didn’t connect with any of the characters. It is meant to be satire about journalism and parts were hilariously true. Maybe if I was a journalist or more involved in the news I would have “gotten it”. If you love Waugh, it’s worth a read. It’s fast paced and fun, it just wasn’t my favorite at all!
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
cant believe i was originally annoyed that john boot didnt end up as the correspondent, i ❤️ william my simple country boy
I liked the idea of this book, he mistaken identity, he sending of headlines back to the uk for someone else to fill in the gaps and write the rest of the story. But it just didn't work for me, I didn't find myself laughing, there were so many characters I lost track, I just don't think it was a book for me.
Maybe it's because I read this book in short bursts, or maybe it's because it was written in the '30s, or maybe I'm just stupid, but I didn't really absorb this book as well as I absorb all the other novels I read. There were large parts of this book that I just did not enjoy.
Don't get me wrong, the humor didn't escape me. It was extremely blatant humor, and I'm not so dense that I didn't understand it. It was the plot that I was sometimes slow to catch up with. And there were times when the names and qualities of some characters just completely flew out of my mind, never to be remembered again. I had issues, basically.
I did not click with this book. Not enough for me to have much to say about the plot itself, or the characters. William was pretty cool. Katchen was annoying, obviously. The Boot family was strange, obviously. Most other characters were only good for a quick chuckle or two.
The writing was....not my element. I'm a teenager, and not an incredibly smart one. And this was written, and takes place in, the 1930s. So, needless to say, the 'current events' were different. The writing style was very slightly different. And all of these differences added up to just enough of a gap between this book and my usual books (books from this decade, for the most part) that it was an interesting, if slightly drawn-out experience for me.
I'll probably never read this book again, but it wasn't a waste of time, either. I wouldn't say I loved this book, but I didn't hate it, either. I'm not one for 1930s-era satires about journalism, but that's not to say it wasn't an interesting subject.
People who like 1930's-era journalism satires will likely enjoy this book more than I did.
Don't get me wrong, the humor didn't escape me. It was extremely blatant humor, and I'm not so dense that I didn't understand it. It was the plot that I was sometimes slow to catch up with. And there were times when the names and qualities of some characters just completely flew out of my mind, never to be remembered again. I had issues, basically.
I did not click with this book. Not enough for me to have much to say about the plot itself, or the characters. William was pretty cool. Katchen was annoying, obviously. The Boot family was strange, obviously. Most other characters were only good for a quick chuckle or two.
The writing was....not my element. I'm a teenager, and not an incredibly smart one. And this was written, and takes place in, the 1930s. So, needless to say, the 'current events' were different. The writing style was very slightly different. And all of these differences added up to just enough of a gap between this book and my usual books (books from this decade, for the most part) that it was an interesting, if slightly drawn-out experience for me.
I'll probably never read this book again, but it wasn't a waste of time, either. I wouldn't say I loved this book, but I didn't hate it, either. I'm not one for 1930s-era satires about journalism, but that's not to say it wasn't an interesting subject.
People who like 1930's-era journalism satires will likely enjoy this book more than I did.
Pretty amusing, but I think a lot gets lost in translation (err...from the 1930s to the 2010s, I mean), and there's sort of an uncomfortable amount of racism, although I suppose you could rationalize that by saying that Waugh makes fun of everyone...still, I guess my point is that it was a reasonably fun read, but it hasn't really aged well...
I would have happily given Scoop by Evelyn Waugh a big fat 4 or maybe 4.5 stars if it wasn't for some openly offensive and racist language and observations he uses. It really did cast a shadow over the whole story, which otherwise rolled and rollicked around like the farce it was meant to be. Poking fun at Fleet Street, politicians, foreign policy, aristocracy and "country bumpkin" folk along the way, there was real charm to be enjoyed here and of course Waugh's prose is effortless but fully effective.
Some scenes required a bit more imagination than others, but the crucial twists centring around mistaken identity and a inexperienced journalist accidentally making the "scoop" of the year, are fondly woven into the plot naturally and simply. The characters and dialogue also carry this novella, and Waugh could have gone on to write a book about at least ten of the players caught up in this satire.
My favourite line... "To a journalist all countries are rich."
Some scenes required a bit more imagination than others, but the crucial twists centring around mistaken identity and a inexperienced journalist accidentally making the "scoop" of the year, are fondly woven into the plot naturally and simply. The characters and dialogue also carry this novella, and Waugh could have gone on to write a book about at least ten of the players caught up in this satire.
My favourite line... "To a journalist all countries are rich."
I was recommended this book by a professor after reading “A Handful of Dust,” which I enjoyed. The same satirical tone is evident in this novel, which is heavily influenced by Waugh’s own time as a war reporter in Ethiopia. As a journalist, I was horrified by the ethics in this novel — understandable, since it is a satire. Honestly, that made it all the better. If you’re interested in Modernism, journalism, or satire, this book is worth a read.
funny
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Scoop
Evelyn Waugh
Scoop had its moments. As far as I can tell, many of the comic details in the characterisation of Lord Copper and Lady Stitch, for example, must have been keenly observed and very cutting, especially in the 30s when such people roamed about London. Some of these observations in other places carry through well enough to the present day, and the overall story is a decent comedy of errors. That said, it is - shall we say - a book of it's time, with definite racist overtones.
Evelyn Waugh
Scoop had its moments. As far as I can tell, many of the comic details in the characterisation of Lord Copper and Lady Stitch, for example, must have been keenly observed and very cutting, especially in the 30s when such people roamed about London. Some of these observations in other places carry through well enough to the present day, and the overall story is a decent comedy of errors. That said, it is - shall we say - a book of it's time, with definite racist overtones.
adventurous
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No