Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by sidharthan
Earthly Powers by Anthony Burgess
3.0
When I started this book, I was very surprised to find that it heavily featured a gay character. Some would even say that he is the main protagonist of this book. In a way, this character was what made me go through this book in its entirety.
Even though we hear the whole story through Kenneth Toomey, it felt like the actual main character in the novel was Carlo Campanati and through him Christianity. The book has a huge scope as the title Earthly Powers suggests. We start the novel at the beginning of 20th Century and move our way almost till the end of the same. Since this covers the two major World Wars, that is quite a lot of ground. The book felt like it was mostly about reconciling these two Wars with the idea of a friendly and forgiving God.
I was initially very happy that the gay angle was done well. It gets muddled in the middle. The character inexplicably turns asexual and then turns into a pervert of sorts. There is also a lot of equating homosexuality with pedophilia. Given that this book came out in 1980 and that it is mostly set in the early 19th centuries where, I assume, this idea were very prevalent - it makes sense. But the asexuality was confounding. Somewhere in the initial pages, Toomey the pseudo-protagonist writes a virulently heterosexual novel and views it as an experiment in how his imagination works. Perhaps Anthony Burgess also tried the same with this novel. From whatever historical evidence I could gather, he seemed to have been very straight. I must say that for a straight guy from the 20th Century, the representation is surprisingly good. The few acts of the gay movement that appear are covered properly and have the right views. The problem with the book however is that this is just a small part of it. How I wish this had been the mainstay!
The main parts of the book are about religion. There are not really any new ideas that are expounded here. Man is inherently good and everything evil is perpetrated because of the Devil's action. How that can be misunderstood and misused is covered in the last part of the novel. Burgess stays away from concluding anything. He presents mysterious ailments from East and exoticizes the people there, which is nothing new. It is supposed to give a counterfoil to the logical thinking that the West expounds. He also presents Tamil people and the Tamil language as something which is very crass. As a Tamil person, I did feel a little attacked by it. He also attacks other languages and cultures while he is at it though, so I can forgive him.
I have to say that I did not feel any type of way about Carlo Campanati as a character. He just seemed so tiresomely heroic. He somehow always has the right view and the right reaction to everything. Burgess tries to compensate this with quirks like his gambling and excessive eating, but they don't really take. If you find this character fascinating, your reading of this novel might be entirely different to my own. I found him quite humdrum and not compelling enough for such a huge tome.
Having read A Clockwork Orange first, I think my expectations of this novel were widely different. This book is nothing like that one. I think part of the problem with this one is the sheer length of it. Burgess could have reduced the scope and focused on just some of the events with greater clarity. It would have made for an infinitely better book. When not pontificating about Christianity, Burgess does take the time to make the novel very humourous and that helps with the flow. It is just too many things at the same time which is the biggest deterrent.
Worth a read, partly just so you can proclaim that you've read this monstrously huge classic.
Even though we hear the whole story through Kenneth Toomey, it felt like the actual main character in the novel was Carlo Campanati and through him Christianity. The book has a huge scope as the title Earthly Powers suggests. We start the novel at the beginning of 20th Century and move our way almost till the end of the same. Since this covers the two major World Wars, that is quite a lot of ground. The book felt like it was mostly about reconciling these two Wars with the idea of a friendly and forgiving God.
I was initially very happy that the gay angle was done well. It gets muddled in the middle. The character inexplicably turns asexual and then turns into a pervert of sorts. There is also a lot of equating homosexuality with pedophilia. Given that this book came out in 1980 and that it is mostly set in the early 19th centuries where, I assume, this idea were very prevalent - it makes sense. But the asexuality was confounding. Somewhere in the initial pages, Toomey the pseudo-protagonist writes a virulently heterosexual novel and views it as an experiment in how his imagination works. Perhaps Anthony Burgess also tried the same with this novel. From whatever historical evidence I could gather, he seemed to have been very straight. I must say that for a straight guy from the 20th Century, the representation is surprisingly good. The few acts of the gay movement that appear are covered properly and have the right views. The problem with the book however is that this is just a small part of it. How I wish this had been the mainstay!
The main parts of the book are about religion. There are not really any new ideas that are expounded here. Man is inherently good and everything evil is perpetrated because of the Devil's action. How that can be misunderstood and misused is covered in the last part of the novel. Burgess stays away from concluding anything. He presents mysterious ailments from East and exoticizes the people there, which is nothing new. It is supposed to give a counterfoil to the logical thinking that the West expounds. He also presents Tamil people and the Tamil language as something which is very crass. As a Tamil person, I did feel a little attacked by it. He also attacks other languages and cultures while he is at it though, so I can forgive him.
I have to say that I did not feel any type of way about Carlo Campanati as a character. He just seemed so tiresomely heroic. He somehow always has the right view and the right reaction to everything. Burgess tries to compensate this with quirks like his gambling and excessive eating, but they don't really take. If you find this character fascinating, your reading of this novel might be entirely different to my own. I found him quite humdrum and not compelling enough for such a huge tome.
Having read A Clockwork Orange first, I think my expectations of this novel were widely different. This book is nothing like that one. I think part of the problem with this one is the sheer length of it. Burgess could have reduced the scope and focused on just some of the events with greater clarity. It would have made for an infinitely better book. When not pontificating about Christianity, Burgess does take the time to make the novel very humourous and that helps with the flow. It is just too many things at the same time which is the biggest deterrent.
Worth a read, partly just so you can proclaim that you've read this monstrously huge classic.