I've just posted my review of Coetzee's Slow Man. Originally, it was slated to appear in the London Evening Standard on Monday, but it was pulled when Coetzee wasn't shortlisted.

As the complete-review note, "considerable displeasure" seems to be the overridding critical view. I disagree, saying:

Coetzee's prose is often matter-of-fact, almost rugged. His work is compelling nonetheless because of the way, in scenes like the awful and affecting rape in his Booker winning Disgrace, he investigates calamities and confrontations and our responses to them. Coetzee is an ethicist. We read him for his incisiveness. But a great writer - and Coetzee is such - also knows that pacing, narrative and form are vital parts of their work ... Slow Man is the work of a peerless writer working out via his writing the value of what he does. Writing is always a set of ethical choices. Choosing Coetzee means that we, as readers, need to involve ourselves in those difficult choices too.

[Click to read the whole of my Slow Man review.]

Readers Comments

Leave a Comment

If you have not posted a comment on RSB before, it will need to be approved by the Managing Editor. Once you have an approved comment, you are safe to post further comments. We have also introduced a captcha code to prevent spam.




Enter the code shown here:   [captcha]

Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above image, reload the page to generate a new one.