Login   Sign Up 



 




  • `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by Account Closed at 14:10 on 14 October 2006
    This novel was recommended to me as a 'mordant satire on the publishing industry'. Well, that it isn't -- nor is it intended to be, I think -- but otherwise it's simply splendid.

    It's the story of Angelica ('Angel' Deverell, who starts writing overblown romantic novels as a lonely, self-absorbed teenager, and becomes a best-selling author, successful beyond anybody's wildest dreams (except her own: she is also insufferably vain). In many ways, Angel is the kind of writer one loves to poke fun at: her arrogance is unbelievable; she considers reading a waste of time, never entertains the possibility that her own works are anything short of masterpieces, refuses to consider any suggestions by her editors and is insulted by the very idea of altering a word, etc., etc., etc. But even though she's the kind of writer none of us would like to be, I think all of us will find more than a bit of Angelica Deverell within ourselves. (I certainly did!)

    But it's a remarkable book even if you don't read it from a writerly perspective. Angelica is an essentially unsympathetic character -- not only arrogant, but insensitive, solipsistic, largely indifferent to other people's feelings, with no sense of humour whatsoever -- and yet you can't help but like her in a strange way. My description does no justice to Taylor's writing. It's understated humour combined with understated poignancy, and the result is just so very... human.

    In short: if you haven't read it already, do. Do!

    <Added>

    Argh! I do hate those smileys popping up where they don't belong. (Angel would hate it even more, though, as it seems to find her name amusing.)
  • Re: `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by CarolineSG at 19:16 on 15 October 2006
    Frede
    I also loved this book. She has such a soothing style, if that makes any sense.

    Have you ever read either of the two Philip Larkin novels? (A Girl in Winter and Jill). They don't have that much in common with ET, but I read them around the same time, and they too had a certain peaceful quality.
    Really glad you enjoyed it, anyway.
  • Re: `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by Account Closed at 07:58 on 16 October 2006
    Ooh! Jill and A Girl in Winter are both on my 'long list', actually; I'll have to upgrade them to short list immediately Which one of them is 'better'? Or are they linked and meant to be read in chronological order? I was under the impression that the stories are linked and one is supposed to read Jill first, but I may have misunderstood the review.

    Have you read Taylor's other works, by the way?
  • Re: `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by Account Closed at 08:59 on 16 October 2006
    Oh my goodness! I just found out they're adapting Angel to film:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783767/

    Romola Garai as Angel?? I'm sure she'll be good, but I couldn't have come up with an actress less resembling the character if I'd tried...
  • Re: `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by CarolineSG at 09:13 on 16 October 2006
    Frede
    I read them about 15 years ago, unfortunately, so I can't remember with the Larkin books! But they really are beautiful and I throughly recommend them.
    I seem to remember reading several ETs at the time...although I'm not sure which ones now. I'm not very helpful, really, am I!

    I confess I don't know that actress. It always gives you a bit of a shiver though, doesn't it, when you hear a loved book is going to be made into a film. Could enhance your enjoyment or have you stomping out of the cinema (the film of the Color Purple had that effect on me!)
  • Re: `Angel` by Elizabeth Taylor
    by Account Closed at 17:52 on 17 October 2006
    Well, luckily Garai has a pretty good track record with my favourites, at least: she has played Cassandra in I Capture the Castle and Gwendolen in Daniel Deronda, among others, and she's done it well...

    I think a film version of Mrs Palfrey at the Claremont was released last year? I hope this attention from filmmakers will do to Taylor what it did to Austen. She would certainly deserve to be better known.