Tuesday, 2 June 2026

Bibliography, May 2026

BOTM: V. Evans, The Correspondent (2025)

A. Citchens, Dominion (2025)
L. Doucet, The finest hotel in Kabul (2025)
D. Fancourt, Art Cure (2026)
E. Guevara, The Motorcycle Diaries (2004)
M. Houlihan, Tripe: a most excellent dish (1987)
M. Hutchinson, The Mercy Step (2026)
R. Kelly, Kingfisher (2025)
L. King, Heart the lover (2025)
J. Mackrell, Artists, Siblings, Visionaries (2025)
A. Roy, The God of small things (1997)
A. Roy, Mother Mary comes to me (2025)
J. Rogoyska, Hotel Exile (2026)
K. Rundell, Explorer (2017)
E. Temelkuran, Nation of Strangers (2026)

Due to the generosity and organisation of a very good friend, I am going to the announcement of the women's prize this year. In preparation for this, I read the shortlists for both the fiction and non-fiction prizes. In honour of this, I am continuing to read only women till then. Somewhat unexpectedly, this seems to have made me very swift in my reading. It may be that the books nominated for the Women's prize are shorter.

Non-fiction shortlist
Disappointingly, I found the non-fiction shortlist weak. There was lots of interest (fascinating on Heinrich Mann, evocative on Afghanistan), but too many of them just weren't tight and clear enough - I have very firm views about this - even the good ones. I was very interested by Art Cure, but it really needed to define art better and distinguish between consuming and creating art. Meanwhile Hotel Exile was all over the place. Is it an history German exiles in France? Is it about the Hotel? Who knows. And I found the conceit around Temelkuran's letter format terrible (see below) as well analytically unsound. My favourite was Roy's memoir, partly because it's spendidly written, partly because it has a fascinating central character, partly because it kept focus. 

Ranking

  1. Roy
  2. Doucet
  3. Fancourt
  4. Mackrell
  5. Rogoyska
  6. Temelkuran

Fiction
This was much better. I loved The correspondent. It was the best of all. It's expertly observed, especially about old people - the protagonist is the same age as my parents. It also uses the format properly. As an epistolary work, it uses the letters to reveal something about writer and receiver as well as advance the plot (unlike Temelkuran). I also, somewhat to my surprise, like Kelly's Kingfisher a lot, though the start was shaky, I thought the end unsettling and moving, and the whole thing done well. Hutchinson I wanted to like more than I did, but I felt it couldn't decide if it wanted to a child's view account, or something weirder (first section is in the womb etc). It fell between two stools for me, though the voice was great. I liked them all though, even Dominion which I felt really failed to show what was driving it all.

Ranking
  1. Evans
  2. Kelly
  3. Hutchinson
  4. Choi
  5. King
  6. Citchens
Other
Amazingly, I managed to squeeze a few others in. I reread The God of small things after the memoir and it's a slightly odd experience when so much is stolen, but so much not. It's 25 years since I read it first and I remember basically nothing, certainly nothing of the plot. But then, it's really an atmosphere book anyway. I liked it a lot, though I didn't think it was outstanding. I am a little annoyed with myself that I failed to finish Guevara in April so do not have a perfect month of women, but I did finish him on May 1st.





Tuesday, 5 May 2026

Bibliography, April 2026

BOTM: M. Lefkowitz and J. Romm (ed.), The Greek plays: sixteen plays from Aeschulyus, Sophocles and Euripides

E. Bulwer-Lytton, Vril: the power of the coming race (1871)
P.L. Fermor, Mani (1958)*
P. Pullman, The Northern Lights (1995)*
_______, The Subtle Knife (1997)*
_______, The Amber Spyglass (2000)*
S. Runciman, The lost capital of Byzantium (1980)*
Thucydides, tr. Lattimore, The Peloponnesian war*
Xenophon, tr. Warner, Hellenica

It's wildly unclear how to rate this month's reading, two third of which were rereads anyway. I love Mani and I loved rereading it, but I can't just keep giving it Book of the Month for that reason. I also really enjoyed rereading Runciman's book on Mistra partly because we went, but also because it has a briskness and refreshing approach that I didn't appreciate the first time I read it, seven years ago. Then I described it as 'solid', but I don't think that's fair. It's much more fun than that, though probably less solid than I thought. I also revised, on rereading, Philip Pullman's books, which I read because my son and I are watching the BBC series, and thought were a lot weirder this time than they were before.*

After all that, I plumped for a book that I initially wondered shouldn't be a book at all, and that's the excellent collection of Greek tragedies (and that's partially a reread because I've seen several of these). However, I found it genuinely mind expanding to go back to the (albeit translated) text and plots. It also came with good essays to frame it for novices. The plays themselves remain the star though, both in terms of what they illuminated and about their own quality. This didn't make me wish I'd done classics, because I already think that, but it did make me want to read and see much more Greek tragedy.


*This didn't belong above, but I really liked them on publication. I think that's because the world is great and the religion narrative intriguing, but also because I was young and didn't know anything. In reality, while the first one is the best and the world is superbly built in that novel. After that it's hampered by a) the breakdown of that worldbuilding, which doesn't hold true later, b) the inconsistency of the religious angle, which I felt was lacking in texture when it could have been so much better (and also literally referred to a major plot device as working through 'grace', without a hint of irony), and c) what now feels quite creepy about adolescence and love as THE major plot driver.

Friday, 24 April 2026

Reading Mani in the Mani


I remember buying my copy, but my memory is wrong. I remember buying it in Hay on Wye in Summer 2004, back in its glory days for second-hand books. I can even see the shelf. But I didn't go to Hay on Wye till the October. Who knows where I bought it. I certainly didn't know what it was. I was at the end of my Byzantine masters, caught up in the labyrinthine seductions of medieval Greece. I had barely read any travel literature at all, half of which other people had bought for me. I certainly hadn’t heard of its author, and I couldn’t have placed the peninsular on a map (this last is perhaps most embarrassing). I read it immediately, and I loved it. I bought pretty much the rest of the Fermor corpus in the months that followed. I even have the mediocre novel. And while the Constantinople trilogy is the most famous, it is to Mani that I keep returning. It is absolutely my favourite.

Because of this, I engineered taking my family to the Mani this Easter, and I reread it in the Mani, fifteen years after I last read it; more than twenty since I first did. And, as well as visiting his house in Kardamyli, we stayed in Areopoli, and drove to the southern tip. The roads were too terrifying to drive all the way round, but Fermor took a boat for most of that bit too, so I don’t feel bad about that. I got most of the locations, except that I forgot one of the nearest villages to where we were staying. It was superb. I even got to read out sections of it on location, which did not endear me to my children.

And we did it in a day. The astonishing thing about reading Mani is that the whole itinerary can be driven in less than three hours, if you don't stop. There are whole sections where they take mules up tracks; there are whole sections where Fermor doesn’t even take the track because it’s impossible and he takes a boat. In both cases, there is now a road, much of which isn't even single track. I don't know where you would source a boat, or for that matter a mule. In some villages, it's not clear where you would source anything. Some of the villages are pretty much empty; all of them are tamed. Kitta, famous for the last bloodfeud in the region, is now central for its supermarket. 

And yet, the geography is still the geography, and the history isn't very far away. Kitta was silent when we visited (apart from a couple of cars coming to the supermarket), but the towers of Nomia are still just across the valley. It is not a dramatic feat of imagination to take yourself back to those battles. The past lingers longer in empty backwaters than in bustling modern cities. It is easier to project back where there is little there. However, no matter how much was there, it would not be possible to change the absolute insanity of Vatheia’s hilltop towers, which have to be approached to be believed. The road was newer there – and I was profoundly grateful for it.

But the Mani itself isn't the only reason it is easy to scrape back the layers of history to the book; it's also because the book is already doing that for you. Fermor spends much more time talking about his sense of culture and history of where is than the experience of being there. Kitta's last feuds, which he evokes with such immediacy, happened in the 1870s. No one alive then was alive when he visited. This is not a thing you would know from reading the book. This blurring of past and present happens a lot. A shaky drawing of the coat of arms he sees in the church at Areopoli is presented with a rhetorical flourish as possibly imperial and Byzantine. In Areopoli, I went to the church. The board outside tells me it is the coat of arms of the most famous family in the Mani - the Mavromichalis. He will have known that, but it's a much better myth if the fact is left untold.

The precision of sites and locations in Areopoli is at the start of the book and the location of the coat of arms is testament to the clarity of description he was capable of. Only when looking to recreate the route, does it become very clear how skeletal the route actually is in the writing. Certainly the sequence of visits is uncertain. A string of villages get no more than namechecks in the text; he visits precisely one village on the east coast before doubling back to the west and then sailing up the Gytheio. Thre are great descriptive sections (I enjoyed reading Fermor's description Mezapos bay), and there are superb set pieces (I fell in love with it years earlier in the Byzantine flight of fancy right at the start), but the act of travel is very minimally present.

I've seen complaints about this. That Mani suffers in comparison to the Constantinopolitan trilogy because of their propulsion of their narrative. But it's clearly deliberate. This is a book about his Greece and the Mani is an exemplar of that. An extraordinary about Mani is the amount of time that is devoted to essentially atmosphere, a pleasing amount of which is about getting drunk. I remembered the sections where he goes off on tangents about his thoughts on (e.g.,) icon painting. I didn't remember the narrative asides where he directly addresses the reader apologising for those tangents. It's an act of course - we know every word was carefully weighed and edited - it's why his books took so long to write - but it's a very good act.

And it works. Reading Mani in the Mani gave me a loose itinerary, but it also suffused the whole trip with a distinctive vision of Greece that is hugely compelling. Every sight carried both the present and layers of past with it, and all of it evoked a world already gone when Mani was written, but still accessible because it was.

Tuesday, 14 April 2026

Bibliography, March 2026

BOTM: L. Colley, The gun, the ship and the pen (2021)

C. Adiche, Americanah (2014)
R. BeatonGreece: biography of a modern nation (2019)
S. Biddulph, Raising boys in the 21st Century (2018)
R. BregmanHumankind (2020)
A. Ghosh, The Glass palace (2000)
A. Hirsch, Brit(ish) (2018)
B. Pym, Less than angels (1955)
A. Trollope, The West Indies and the Spanish main (1858)
P.G. Wodehouse, The little nugget (1913)

All about the historians this month. They avoided the trap that Bregman falls into of just knitting your theory together with anecdote and actually did analysis. I read Beaton on the way to Greece and it was an engaging and helpful companion to our holiday and to a history where I knew bits, but had never joined them up. It's worth reading even if you're not about the visit. The best though was Linda Colley. I don't necessarily think the central thesis - that constitutions (the title is slightly misleading) enabled a lot of the emergence of the modern world - is completely true. However, there is a lot there and it's a fresh spin on the period. I was very pleased to see the prominence of global, connected, warfare as a driver of change. And I am convinced from this that constitutions mattered - as well as surprised by how many there were. She's very good on Britain and its constitutional status - something most people get wrong - and I very much enjoyed the Polynesian sidebar. I'm making it sound quirkier than it is. At its heart it is a book about how the big forces that shifted the world in the late eighteenth and nineteenth century happened, and it's a fascinating lens to look at it. The case is also very well put, and I think people underrate the importance of doing that.

Monday, 13 April 2026

Bibliography, February 2026

BOTM: B. Pym, Jane and Prudence (1953)

B. Denton, Buddy Holly is alive and well (1992)
K. Harl, Empires of the Steppe (2023)
M. Jasanoff, Liberty's exiles (2011)
I. Kadare, Broken April (1978)
L. Maiklem, Mudlarking (2019)
G. Maguire, Wicked (1995)
G. Milton, Paradise lost (2008)
A. Saini, Superior: The Return of race science (2019)

A lot of these were a bit shit. Wicked was terrible (all credit to the creators of the musical - this is nor promising work). Harl and Saini weren't great either. They could have been a lot better. Plenty of the other were decent, though. I liked Denton's very silly Science Fiction. I think more of it should be funny. I really liked Milton, who told the story of Smyrna and the apocalypse of Greek hopes in the 1920s very well. It's a fascinating story, told well, but a little too long and not quite tight enough. As a result it lost out to Barbara Pym's very much shorter, tighter, novel. I to like a well observed, well put together novel, and this does not disappoint. It helps that it's about vicars and villages, but it's really about disappointment (though not despair) and things not quite coming off. It's a pleasure to read. 


Friday, 27 February 2026

Bibliography, January 2026

BOTM: B. Dylan, The philosophy of modern song (2022)

K. Altenberg, Island of Wings (2011)
L. Hughes-Hallet, The Scapegoat (2024)
S. King, The Dark Tower: the gunslinger (1982)
J. Le Carre, Call for the Dead (1961)
R. Putnam, American Grace (2010)
K. Rundell, Wolf wilder (2015)
S. Sinek, Start with Why (2025)
A. Trollope, Rachel Ray (1863)
M. Twitty, The cooking gene (2017)
M. Piercy, Body of glass (1991)
R. Whippman, Boymuns (2024)
D. Zetland, Living with water scarcity (2014)
T. Wolfe, From Bauhaus to Our house ( 1981)

A lot of this wasn't great. That said, Trollope and Rundell did not disappoint - as ever, and I also enjoyed Wolfe's rant about modern architecture and King's opening book in the Dark Tower saga. It is also good to read a seventeenth century analysis around the commemoration of Charles I, and Lucy Hughes-Hallet was good on Buckingham too. Best, though, was Dylan's book on songs. It was very well observed, easy to reach and funny. I have written up at length my thoughts on that last point.

Joke philosophy




A few years after winning the Nobel prize for literature, Bob Dylan published this curious book of essays on songs. It has had mixed, largely positive, reviews, though with some dissent. Almost all of them talked about Dylan's knowledge of song and insightful listening. Sometimes, reviews talked about 'invention' and 'joyful zest'; if you liked it less, I think they used the word 'perversity'. What they didn't do, and I think really missed, was to say that these are funny

There isn't enough analysis of Bob Dylan's humour. I think that it is easy to miss this, especially if you tend to see him through the prism of protest, but he always been funny. Bob Dylan's 115th Dream is a funny song. In Love and Theft, one of his songs includes the line 'Calls down to room service, says, "Send up a room". '  It's just often forgotten. He's not the only one. There's a convincing analysis out there that Okie from Muskogee is also meant to be funny and everyone got caught out by the reception.

This book is a joke from the start. He knows this isn't a philosophy book. It's a joke. Nor is it the only one. Here he is on The Great Pretender - 'like many things even pretenders got devalued between the fifties and the seventies.' On Sony Bono - 'his greatest achievement was as a congressman, where he helped pass the Sonny Bono Act, which extended copyright terms for all songwriters.' Some of the jokes need a bit of a build up. Like this on Don't take your guns to town - 'Stories are simple. We all know them. Boy meets girl. Boy loses girl. Boy steals crust of bread. Boy gets gunned down in town square. Girl kills boy’s wife. Child grows up searching for father’s murderer. Girl marries boy. Boy burns down town.' These are all jokes.

And there are more elaborate, madcap sections too. Like this line on Your Cheating Heart - 'This song can be taken a couple of different ways. In one, for instance, you’re a psychic....' Equally, there is an elaborate set up about the distinction within I've always been crazy, when he imagines the following scenario - 'Suppose Waylon was on trial for murder and this song is Waylon telling his lawyer that he does not want to use the insanity plea when going in front of the judge. He’d rather be crazy and just take it like a man. The insanity plea would cut him off from the world.'

My favourite of all though is his analysis of Little Richard's Long tall Sally, where he writes, and this is the entire section 'Long Tall Sally was twelve feet tall . She was part of the old biblical days in Samaria from the tribe called the Nephilim. They were giants that lived back before the cataclysm of the flood. You can see shots of these giants’ skulls and such. There were people as tall as one-story buildings. They’ve uncovered bones of these giants in Egypt and Iraq. And she was built for speed, she could run like a deer. And Uncle John was her counterpart giant. Little Richard is a giant of a different kind, but so as not to freak anybody out he refers to himself as little, so as not to scare anybody.'

Someone here is laughing, though possibly not as much as Bob Dylan. We don't need to find these funny, though I did, but Dylan certainly does. That's what he's doing. Note that his portrait of Johnny Cash notes that 'his best records are playful and full of wordplay and humor, miles from the august solemnity of the murder ballads, hardscrabble tales and Trent Reznor covers that his fans came to expect.' Bob Dylan likes people be playful, because so is he. 

As an aside, I also thought much of it was acutely well observed. I loved his description of Ruby, are you mad at your man as 'this song is church Latin, has plenty of backbone, and pieces of the whirlwind in it.' It really really is.