Scan barcode
A review by stephwd
Fingersmith by Sarah Waters
2.0
Sue Tinder is an unusually sensitive girl for one who has been brought up in the care of Mrs Sucksby, the infamous baby farmer. However, unlike the other children who have been farmed out, Sue has remained amidst the hustle and bustle of the fingersmiths that are entertained and do business in this den of iniquity. Despite this, Sue herself has never indulged in any serious criminal activity, but rather regards Mrs Sucksby as a surrogate mother to whom she is fiercely loyal. However, when Gentleman, a thief who supposedly derives from aristocratic origins who has now been thrown out by his own family arrives with the greatest plan of all in mind, Sue is forced to play a major role in their biggest and most daring enterprise yet. Accordingly, Sue is sent off to the peculiar manor where Maud Lilly, a seemingly naïve and delicate gentlewoman lives with her increasingly disturbed and even sadistic uncle. Whilst Sue’s instructions are clear – she must help Gentleman seduce Maud and encourage her to marry him despite her innocence- what follows is far from the plan Sue had intended particularly when she begins to find herself with feelings for Maud.
There are some fantastic qualities to this novel. I loved the characterisation, which did have a Dickensian quality: the sadistic uncle, the petty, but apparently sympathetic thieves, the innocent female heart of the novel and so forth. Moreover, her creation of London life was spectacular in places: she captured both the homely familiarity of the thieves’ parlour and its squalor simultaneously. There was something comforting in the bizarre family unity that they created from a hodge podge of biological units and yet also rather chilling in their callous criminality.
This is also a very cleverly woven plot. Just when you think you know what is going to happen next, Waters’s springs something new upon us and you suddenly find yourself literally amazed and yelling ‘what the? How can that be? No way? Now what?’ This is partly created by her clever use of a range of perspectives where the limited nature of each narrative voice that takes over the next, maintains the mystery of the narrative and keeps us in the dark so that when an unexpected twist occurs, it seems to bowl us over with its surprising nature.
So what could my problem possibly be with this novel? Well firstly there is, for me, the issue of pace; everything was just far too slow, which is a significant issue I found with her novel ‘Little Stranger’ (during which I nearly fell into a coma). Yes, there were the sudden surprises that jolted us forward, but in between these were reams of dense descriptive prose that seem to crawl past contributing nothing to plot, characterisation or setting, which had all been done before. Thus it felt more like I was in a rather old car with a learner driver who kept stalling the engine.
Secondly, there was the problem with Water’s use of multiple narrators. Now I have no issue with this technique when it is done well (take for example novels such ‘SmallIsland’). However, here, it was entirely to the detriment of the narrative and its pace. Yes, it was necessary to see events from different perspectives, but what actually happened was that we were told the story two or even three times and this ultimately became tedious.
My final issue with the novel was with the characterisation. I understand that Waterss was attempting a kind of Victorian pastiche adapting Dickensian methods in order to mirror the era in terms of literary style as much as setting. However, her central character was just too weak, too gullible, too simpering. I struggled to not merely believe in her, but care about her enough. Oh I know that sounds terribly hard hearted, but she just infuriated me rather than drawing me in.
What is more, I felt as if the lesbian aspects of the novel (which are ultimately what may have appealed to many and is certainly what brought Waters her initially fame) were simply there for titillation and added very little by way of plot. It all felt rather shallow and like a cheap, slightly voyeuristic trick to increase her readership rather than being a genuine depiction of a lesbian relationship.
However, ultimately, the test of a novel for me is whether or not I would want to read anything else by this author again and that is based on whether or not I was engaged all the way through. Well, the answer to this is a definite no. I found myself wading through this novel, checking to see how many pages I had left, wondering what book I could choose to read next that I would enjoy more. I have now read two Waters’ novel and thus feel like I have given her a reasonable crack. I know she is highly regarded, I know she is seen as a kind of feminist icon, but I’m sorry she is not for me and I really don’t think I could put myself through another dreary, repetitious text with only a few cheap thrills and tricks to see me through.
There are some fantastic qualities to this novel. I loved the characterisation, which did have a Dickensian quality: the sadistic uncle, the petty, but apparently sympathetic thieves, the innocent female heart of the novel and so forth. Moreover, her creation of London life was spectacular in places: she captured both the homely familiarity of the thieves’ parlour and its squalor simultaneously. There was something comforting in the bizarre family unity that they created from a hodge podge of biological units and yet also rather chilling in their callous criminality.
This is also a very cleverly woven plot. Just when you think you know what is going to happen next, Waters’s springs something new upon us and you suddenly find yourself literally amazed and yelling ‘what the? How can that be? No way? Now what?’ This is partly created by her clever use of a range of perspectives where the limited nature of each narrative voice that takes over the next, maintains the mystery of the narrative and keeps us in the dark so that when an unexpected twist occurs, it seems to bowl us over with its surprising nature.
So what could my problem possibly be with this novel? Well firstly there is, for me, the issue of pace; everything was just far too slow, which is a significant issue I found with her novel ‘Little Stranger’ (during which I nearly fell into a coma). Yes, there were the sudden surprises that jolted us forward, but in between these were reams of dense descriptive prose that seem to crawl past contributing nothing to plot, characterisation or setting, which had all been done before. Thus it felt more like I was in a rather old car with a learner driver who kept stalling the engine.
Secondly, there was the problem with Water’s use of multiple narrators. Now I have no issue with this technique when it is done well (take for example novels such ‘SmallIsland’). However, here, it was entirely to the detriment of the narrative and its pace. Yes, it was necessary to see events from different perspectives, but what actually happened was that we were told the story two or even three times and this ultimately became tedious.
My final issue with the novel was with the characterisation. I understand that Waterss was attempting a kind of Victorian pastiche adapting Dickensian methods in order to mirror the era in terms of literary style as much as setting. However, her central character was just too weak, too gullible, too simpering. I struggled to not merely believe in her, but care about her enough. Oh I know that sounds terribly hard hearted, but she just infuriated me rather than drawing me in.
What is more, I felt as if the lesbian aspects of the novel (which are ultimately what may have appealed to many and is certainly what brought Waters her initially fame) were simply there for titillation and added very little by way of plot. It all felt rather shallow and like a cheap, slightly voyeuristic trick to increase her readership rather than being a genuine depiction of a lesbian relationship.
However, ultimately, the test of a novel for me is whether or not I would want to read anything else by this author again and that is based on whether or not I was engaged all the way through. Well, the answer to this is a definite no. I found myself wading through this novel, checking to see how many pages I had left, wondering what book I could choose to read next that I would enjoy more. I have now read two Waters’ novel and thus feel like I have given her a reasonable crack. I know she is highly regarded, I know she is seen as a kind of feminist icon, but I’m sorry she is not for me and I really don’t think I could put myself through another dreary, repetitious text with only a few cheap thrills and tricks to see me through.