My first sighting of Simon Mawer’s booker-shortlisted The Glass Room was on A Common Reader’s blog back in February. I fell in love with the cover and bought the book even before I’d read Tom’s effusive praise. Since then readerly applause has been ringing louder and louder: KevinfromCanada, Farmlanebooks, and both Wonderang and My Spy In Edinburgh (my Edinburgh book festival buddies) awarded 5-star accolades. It appears the Booker judges agree and so Lizzy finally opened the pages, settled down comfortably and began to read.
416 pages later I wondered what the fuss is about. In theory I should have adored it. A historical novel revolving around the drama of mid-20th century Europe. Most of it set in a German-speaking area with informed asides on the German language. The English title “The Glass Room” not conveying the ambiguities of the German equivalent. While it places emphasis on the architectural beauty of the house that is built during the first section of the novel, the English phrase lacks the concept of space (German Raum)- an area where all things are open and transparent. Echoes too of the Nazi concept of Lebensraum – a space in which to expand and, of course, the novel’s event show what that led to in Czechoslovakia.
I have issues with the structure. Is this a history of a house? If so, there are far too many pages offsite. Or is it an examination of the impact of history on the individuals living through it? If so, there are too many pages focusing on the house. It’s a tough balancing act which Mawer achieves admirably in an absorbing first half. However, that balance is disturbed when the Landauers go into exile, and the novel loses a sparkle which only ever returns (for me at least) when Hana flirts with danger during her affair with Dr Stahl (Eng. Dr Steel – is this clever or just lazy given the emphasis on steel and glass as building materials?)
I have an even bigger problem with the characters. Not with the fact that their hidden and deceptive love lives challenge the inherent openness and transparency of The Glass Room. But with the fact that I never believed that they would be so accepting of each other’s sexual foibles. I found it so dull that Mawer repeated the pattern of Hana’s relationship with Liesel in the final section of the novel.
I realise that this review is becoming a hachette job. That’s because I’m pinpointing the reasons why I’m unconvinced of the novel’s 5-star brilliance. However I should balance this piece with the good things that are to be found otherwise my star rating is going to seem inconsistent.
I liked the ambitious timeframing and the concept of using the house as a focal point from which to depict the havoc wrought during these traumatic times. This prevented a wallowing in the excesses that have been catalogued time and time again, preserving a distance from Nazi cruelty without losing the point that the dark forces of history are more powerful than the individual; that one’s roots (in this case Jewishness) aren’t so easily escaped. The affair between Hana and Dr Stahl was always threatening and, interestingly, it was the only time when Hana emerged as a real flesh and blood character. The foreshadowing of Hana’s fate in the story of Dr Stahl’s marriage well-judged. The prose flowed well throughout and, as you would expect from me, brownie points were awarded for the German language sections.
Unfortunately though my memories of this book are of the weight of expectations unfulfilled. There’s no doubt that, on Lizzy’s Literary Life at least, this novel is a victim of its own success with others.
I’m in the process of reading Simon Mawer’s “The Fall”, and I must say that your comments ring very true, especially about the characters. I’m finding Mawer’s dealing with his characters way too facile and predictable, almost to the point of bestsellerdom rather than literature. I’m just not finding any depth of character in this novel. Mawer is definitely a smooth writer, too smooth for his own good. Because the writing is so smooth and interesting in its own way, I probably will keep reading the novel to the end, but I find the characterization lacks real depth. Stay tuned for my full review at my new website
http://anokatony.wordpress.com/
I’m only on page 140 out of 370 pages, so my opinion may change by the time I complete the book.
I’m sorry to hear that you didn’t enjoy this as much as I did. I think our expectaions were reversed – I was expecting it to be a book I wouldn’t enjoy – perhaps you had too much hype?
This is my favourite book on the Booker shortlist and I am really hoping it wins (although I expect Wolf Hall will)
I’m pleased to read anokatony’s comment about The Fall being similar to this one – I am so excited about reading it now!
Jackie
My review is more negative than it should be. As indicated by my *** rating, I enjoyed it. Only it didn’t blow my mind. Nor can I remember much of the post-war section apart from a coincidence that I can’t really believe in.
That said, I picked up a copy of Mawer’s “Mendel’s Dwarf” from the charity shop. There’s evidence that things are as bad as my pen is painting.
I’ve since seen John Self’s review at the Asylum. Now that says exactly what I wanted to say only in a much kinder way.
anokatony
Welcome to my literary notebook. I’ve taken a look at yours and I’m happy to meet another short story fan.
I didn’t actually give it 5 stars, only 4 due to the following: I couldn’t believe he added that last chapter (the jump to 1990) when the one before it would have served as the perfect ending. I don’t mind coincidences in books but that one was too much and completely unnecessary.
Agreed Colette/Wonderang.
Sebastian Barry was pilloried for an unnecessary coincidence in The Secret Scripture even though it can be argued that his was a thread woven throughout the book.
Why there hasn’t been more said about The Glass Room‘s final chapter? Perhaps because it is a very emotional piece, suggesting that the wounds of the past may mend after all?
I’m surprised that more people don’t have a problem with that final chapter. Half way through it, I was thinking, “No, surely not.” I agree with you that it is completely different than what Barry did with The Secret Scripture – that was not coincidence at all – a character from their past had contrived to bring them together. I could have accepted that kind of contrivance at the end of The Glass Room, but not the complete impossibility we were presented with.
Sums up my feelings exactly. You say my review is kinder than yours, but I must admit that the further I go from having read The Glass Room, the more I wonder what there was to like about it at all.
Colette, for me the reason the last chapter didn’t bother me was because I had stopped caring by that point. In The Secret Scripture, the book was very good but for that silly ‘surprise’.
I loved the last chapter! I’m soppy though – I loved the way it all came full circle and thought it just added to the emotions.
I’m going to try to find his other books. I hope they are as good as The Glass Room. I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts on Mendel’s Dwarf.
Hmmm interesting thoughts. I sort of loved it and was sort of not bothered by it which always leaves me feeling slightly odd about a book. I sort of want to pop to the authors house and say ‘as a reader could you have done…’ I must post my review soon!
I’ve just published my take on Simon Mawer’s “The Fall”. at
http://anokatony.wordpress.com/
The Glass Room holds many things: war, turmoil, loss, joy, and love in its many shades, “tastes and scents”. The glass room becomes the physical container of these things, a stage. The lucid prose and tight storyline ensure that the book does not labour under the weight of its symbolism.