Take a photo of a barcode or cover
kristinana 's review for:
The Night Watch
by Sarah Waters
Stayed up late reading yet another Sarah Waters novel... Something about her writing helps me recapture the excitement about reading that has diminished somewhat since I've become an academic -- reading in a kind of fever, staying up late, etc.
That said, this novel (as other reviewers have noted) is quite different from her others. The plot is certainly not as fast-paced or full of "twists" as the earlier novels; the setting has moved from Victorian to WWII (which makes a big difference to me as a Victorianist); and the voice has changed from first person to third, with four main characters instead of one or two. Perhaps the biggest but not as obvious change is an overall difference in tone and writing style; although she hasn't really captured a Modernist tone as she caught the Victorian tone of past novels, she is clearly working in a mid-twentieth century style, one that's more concise (other reviewers might say "less flowery," though I take issue with the description of Victorian style as flowery). I'm always impressed with the subtle differences in the feel of her novels and her ability to make her characters sound different from one another, but this departure is to me the most impressive of all.
I didn't give the novel the highest rating, only because I'm trying to reserve that if possible for my very favorite novels, but I did like this very much. Although it was slower than others, I still was drawn in emotionally right from the beginning (perhaps I felt this more keenly coming in right from The Thirteenth Tale, into which I was, sadly, not drawn). I really felt for the characters. At first I wasn't sure about the chronology (the first part takes place in 1947, the next in 1944, and the final in 1941), but as I thought more about the novel, I liked it because I felt like the structure reinforced the story. That is, the story is about trauma on a number of levels, and the only way to approach trauma is to work backward. Ultimately the reader is left hanging somewhat -- even if you re-read the early sections you're not sure exactly what will happen to the characters -- but this really works for the story, since the characters themselves are stuck, unsure if they can really get past their situations. Some of them see a way out, but will they be able to get there? We're not entirely sure.
One of the things Waters writes about best, in my opinion, is betrayal. And she does a wonderful job in a number of the books with showing the other side of a betrayal -- what made a person do what they did. But even if she doesn't show the other side, she's so good in any case at making you feel the chill of a lover's betrayal. If anyone can defend Reggie's behavior, please leave a comment. His betrayal is one of the worst I can think of. Man, I hated that guy. And kinda enjoyed hating him, too.
That said, this novel (as other reviewers have noted) is quite different from her others. The plot is certainly not as fast-paced or full of "twists" as the earlier novels; the setting has moved from Victorian to WWII (which makes a big difference to me as a Victorianist); and the voice has changed from first person to third, with four main characters instead of one or two. Perhaps the biggest but not as obvious change is an overall difference in tone and writing style; although she hasn't really captured a Modernist tone as she caught the Victorian tone of past novels, she is clearly working in a mid-twentieth century style, one that's more concise (other reviewers might say "less flowery," though I take issue with the description of Victorian style as flowery). I'm always impressed with the subtle differences in the feel of her novels and her ability to make her characters sound different from one another, but this departure is to me the most impressive of all.
I didn't give the novel the highest rating, only because I'm trying to reserve that if possible for my very favorite novels, but I did like this very much. Although it was slower than others, I still was drawn in emotionally right from the beginning (perhaps I felt this more keenly coming in right from The Thirteenth Tale, into which I was, sadly, not drawn). I really felt for the characters. At first I wasn't sure about the chronology (the first part takes place in 1947, the next in 1944, and the final in 1941), but as I thought more about the novel, I liked it because I felt like the structure reinforced the story. That is, the story is about trauma on a number of levels, and the only way to approach trauma is to work backward. Ultimately the reader is left hanging somewhat -- even if you re-read the early sections you're not sure exactly what will happen to the characters -- but this really works for the story, since the characters themselves are stuck, unsure if they can really get past their situations. Some of them see a way out, but will they be able to get there? We're not entirely sure.
One of the things Waters writes about best, in my opinion, is betrayal. And she does a wonderful job in a number of the books with showing the other side of a betrayal -- what made a person do what they did. But even if she doesn't show the other side, she's so good in any case at making you feel the chill of a lover's betrayal. If anyone can defend Reggie's behavior, please leave a comment. His betrayal is one of the worst I can think of. Man, I hated that guy. And kinda enjoyed hating him, too.