Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.81 AVERAGE
3.81 AVERAGE
Ein guter Krimi, all die Straßen, in die ich mich in diesem Sommer verliebt habe und die schottische Stimme des Autoren. Ein perfektes Hörbuch!
A good thriller, all the streets, into which I fell in love with this summer and the Scottish voice of the author. A perfect audiobook!
A good thriller, all the streets, into which I fell in love with this summer and the Scottish voice of the author. A perfect audiobook!
This book was written in 1977. Boy, times have changed. It seems noirish now. When Laidlaw was written, it was probably considered cutting edge.
This is perhaps the best 3-star book I’ve ever read.
A quick explanation of my star system: 5 I give out semi-frequently to books I genuinely consider to be great. I’m not snobby with it, plenty of 5 star books are better than others but it’s my ratings system and I can do what I want. 4 is my most frequently distributed number, that’s for books that simply rise to the level of good. 3 is for books that are competent or perhaps almost good but fatally flawed. 2 is terrible. 1 is unreadable.
Laidlaw should be a 4-star read. I liked large parts of it. I loved the titular character; I found I could relate to him a lot in terms of our respective worldview. I enjoyed the atmosphere of 70s Glasgow; well-described without being gratuitous (::cough cough:: Bloody January, an ersatz version of this that I now want to go back and take away a star). I liked how William McIlvanney took a broad view of all the characters.
But there are two main problems with this book. They’re big ones and I can’t get over them…
1. The chapter-by-chapter shifting narrative made it tough to appreciate the story. I would get invested in one character and then immediately be jerked to another and have to reorient myself. Plus, there’s no indication as to whose perspective you are gleaning from in the beginning of the chapter, which leads the reader to have to figure it out. Not my favorite storytelling device.
2. The sexual politics of this would be considered progressive for its era. But it’s not the 1970s. And considering how brutal the world still is against women and LGBTQIA+ folk…well my threshold is much lower than it used to be. I can overlook it sometimes. I couldn’t here. I’ve just seen the “tragic” plot points of being a woman or gay person too many times. It’s an exhausting repetition of the cishet patriarchy, no matter how good the writer’s intentions are.
It really feels unfair to dock it a star for these issues when I’ve liked other books that have similar ones. But I give out too many 4-stars. Still, I want to read the rest of the series. I loved Laidlaw the character. I wish the book had focused on him alone.
A quick explanation of my star system: 5 I give out semi-frequently to books I genuinely consider to be great. I’m not snobby with it, plenty of 5 star books are better than others but it’s my ratings system and I can do what I want. 4 is my most frequently distributed number, that’s for books that simply rise to the level of good. 3 is for books that are competent or perhaps almost good but fatally flawed. 2 is terrible. 1 is unreadable.
Laidlaw should be a 4-star read. I liked large parts of it. I loved the titular character; I found I could relate to him a lot in terms of our respective worldview. I enjoyed the atmosphere of 70s Glasgow; well-described without being gratuitous (::cough cough:: Bloody January, an ersatz version of this that I now want to go back and take away a star). I liked how William McIlvanney took a broad view of all the characters.
But there are two main problems with this book. They’re big ones and I can’t get over them…
1. The chapter-by-chapter shifting narrative made it tough to appreciate the story. I would get invested in one character and then immediately be jerked to another and have to reorient myself. Plus, there’s no indication as to whose perspective you are gleaning from in the beginning of the chapter, which leads the reader to have to figure it out. Not my favorite storytelling device.
2. The sexual politics of this would be considered progressive for its era. But it’s not the 1970s. And considering how brutal the world still is against women and LGBTQIA+ folk…well my threshold is much lower than it used to be. I can overlook it sometimes. I couldn’t here. I’ve just seen the “tragic” plot points of being a woman or gay person too many times. It’s an exhausting repetition of the cishet patriarchy, no matter how good the writer’s intentions are.
It really feels unfair to dock it a star for these issues when I’ve liked other books that have similar ones. But I give out too many 4-stars. Still, I want to read the rest of the series. I loved Laidlaw the character. I wish the book had focused on him alone.
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Glasgow Noir
Grim. The Glasgow of forty-five years ago in all its implacable hardness and despair, even before the depredations that heroin would visit on it in the 80s and beyond. McIlvanny’s quarrelsome philosopher polis is an interesting creation if you can handle the mean streets of Calton and Govan.
Grim. The Glasgow of forty-five years ago in all its implacable hardness and despair, even before the depredations that heroin would visit on it in the 80s and beyond. McIlvanny’s quarrelsome philosopher polis is an interesting creation if you can handle the mean streets of Calton and Govan.
"Laidlaw" was originally published the year I was born. I've heard of William McIlvanney's work over the years but assumed he was an auld duffer. How wrong was I? This novel is a masterclass in Scottish literary crime fiction. McIlvanney's prose is exquisite. His characters leap from the page. I'm stunned by his workmanship and feel an utter fool for not sampling it sooner.
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
dark
emotional
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes