REVIEW - High John the Conqueror by Jim Younger - 12/20

Strange Horizons have just put up my review of Jim Younger's High John The Conqueror.

While I enjoyed the book quite a bit when I first read through it, it's one of those books that loses its appeal the more you think about what you've read.  In an attempt to find an angle from which to discuss the book I went off and read a couple of interviews of Younger and found him to be a man who clearly considers himself above genre and part of mainstream literature.

The thing about genre is that while it's something of a creative crutch, it's also a defensive wall.  If you write an unoriginal fantasy novel you can always turn around and say that you were merely paying homage to the genre greats and giving your readers what they want.  However, when you write a piece of mainstream literature that borrows from Hogarth and poorly apes Joyce then you're in trouble.

Given that the review takes in Hogarth and Joyce, it's one of the more artistically erudite reviews I have written.  My background is as an analytical philosopher rather than in the humanities so what knowledge of literature and literary criticism I have is entirely self-taught.  Writing this review actually reminded me of an old review of Ian McDonald's superb River of Gods I wrote ages ago because that review featured a discussion of Vedantic philosophy and McDonald's use of names.

Anyway, if given a choice, read River of Gods rather than High John the Conqueror, it's far more intelligent and far better researched, even if it is genre.

Comments

[Jim Younger]

Hi Jonathan. Thanks for the review of High John the Conqueror, which was actually far more positive (final paragraph excepted) than you're letting on here. Perhaps people who visit this site should go and read it. Unless of course you're now retracting what you wrote?

Where's your evidence that I consider myself 'above genre'? Interviews on the web? Citation, please.

As a reader and writer, I'm an admirer of Joyce, in the way that as a musician I'm an admirer of Bach - in other words, he's way out of my league.

By the way, I admire 'Dubliners' (although have I said this in print?), but the idea that High John the Conqueror in any way resembles it, or borrows from it, is ludicrous. Do you know Joyce's work at all? There are a couple of allusions in HJC to another work of Joyce's, but I'll leave you to puzzle them out.

Awra best

Jim

[Jonathan McCalmont]

Hi Jim, nice to hear from you.

Absolutely, people should read the review rather than limit themselves to the brief remarks I've made here.

Actually, when I first submitted the review, the more negative remarks, which come from stepping back from genre to a wider and more demanding frame of reference, weren't included. However, there was a delay between my submission of the review and the second draft as gone over by the Strange Horizons people.

During that time I read your online interviews and learned a bit about your influences (Joyce gets mentioned 2 or 3 times, including 'Dubliners'), your background as an English teacher and what you're trying to achieve with your next novel.

It became clear to me that you're not a genre novelist, you're familiar enough with genre to borrow from it convincingly (as I said in the review), but you don't see yourself as a genre writer and your methods aren't those of a genre writer.

The first version of the review judged the book as a weird genre piece (because the book filtered to me through a genre website) and if seen as a work of genre it's everything positive I said about it. HOWEVER, if you did not intend the piece as a work of genre then you lose that protective shell and the book's issues suddenly become much bigger.

If you say the structure with its intentionally disjointed narrative, superficial realism and "slice of life" elements was not influenced by Joyce then fair enough, I was wrong to hold that over you, but I'm right about the rest of it :-)

I definitely enjoyed the book though and look forward to your next one. H.E. Bates meets de Sade eh? All I know about H.E. Bates is that line in 'Withnail & I' about discussing butter and I'm sure the good Marquis knew what to do with butter.

[Jim Younger]

Hi there Jonathan - thanks for the reply. I don't get back to reviewers usually. (It's supposed to be bad form to do so, but what the hell.) I did enjoy the review, and I thought it was well written - perceptive and shrewd. The Hogarth connection is spot on. But Hogarth's influence is subliminal, it wasn't a conscious thing. I remember I used the word 'hogo' on the first page in an earlier draft, since deleted - bit of a clue there, I now realise.

I guess I must have mentioned 'Dubliners' after all, so apologies for misrepresentation. The question of influences is a thorny tangled thicket though for anyone (a wee splash of 'purple' for you there ...)

Best wishes

Jim

[Jonathan McCalmont]

Hi Jim,

(sorry, thought I'd replied to this)

I'm glad you liked the review and thanks for the kind words.

My googling tells me that "Hogo"'s an old word meaning something along the lines of fragrant or having a strong taste. Aside from possibly being a good nickname for Hogarth, it also seems to perfectly fit High John, and possibly Jeffrey Archer's wife ;-)

Thanks again.