who chooses the books?

__________________
when that bitch breathes, the air comes out crooked.

Anyone can make suggestions and then a few of us make up a short list and decide via pm. We are always looking for suggestions so any ideas for the next one would be great.

Yeah, I finished and am waiting. I know some people are finding it hard to get a hold of, but because it's such a short one, I don't mind waiting a while for everyone to get a copy.

I loved the ending. There was a line that I found extraordinarily beautiful there, and I don't remember it, but it was so fitting and yet far removed from the rest of the book's style.

__________________

Woo! my copy has finally arrived
Will hopefully get through very quickly and then hopefully other people will have got their copies

How is everyone getting on with the book? I'm itching to discuss whenever we are all ready

Me too! Who's still on board?

__________________

i've not started it yet, haven't been motivated. But it's basically a one sitting story so if you get started discussing anyone can join in soon enough.

Hey everyone! I've finally read the book-in one sitting, it was that readable! ready when everyone is to discuss it!

Right as some of us are finished I'm going to start the discussion. If you haven't finished yet be warned that there might be spoilers so proceeded with caution!




Did people assume that the characters were human until 'oscillating membranes' and 'brains falling on the floor' were mentioned?

I for one did and so quickly had to change how I imagined the characters to be. But I loved how they were not human because of the inventive descriptions of them, I started imagining these crazy beings, with cogs and holes and bit and bobs making them up.


Did you find the book's political comment effective?

Obviously politics is the book's major subject and theme, but I just wondered how people felt about if when they had finished? I thought it was a very simple and effective way of showing the human need to destroy and conquer, but I don't think I learnt anything new or changed my perspective on the darker elements of human nature. That's not to say the author failed in his intentions; just that I was expecting perhaps a more complex and original viewpoint, but what I read was something that was very effective at illustrating an established idea.

Who was more to blame; Phil or the people that followed him?

Here we go, a nice blame game question! I'm in two minds really, of course Phil took advantage but then if the Outer Hornerites were such fools to blindly follow him then I don't have much sympathy for them.

If you are interested here is a link the book's website.

Did people assume that the characters were human until 'oscillating membranes' and 'brains falling on the floor' were mentioned?

I was very confused by this, as early as the author started mentioning these inhuman features my images and my view of the characters had to change. As a metaphor they are very useful, in a way the mechanical side of people was shown and the issue with Phil's brain, i thought, was effective in showing how disastrous mindless thoughts and decisions were.


Did you find the book's political comment effective?

I liked how the author used metaphor and the caricatures effectively showed sides of politics, the media and human interaction. I think the author's angle is very original and effective. But, like Pacific said, I wouldn't say it showed more of a darker side to such aspects more it just showed it in an interesting way which is easy to relate to i suppose.

Who was more to blame; Phil or the people that followed him?

I think it's apparent from the start that the Outer Hornerites aren't exactly nice people, for whatever cultural/historical reasons. The already set mind set made it easier for Phil to assume power and play on these set prejudices. Phil's succession to power, though, seems very single minded, and in some ways i blame the one character, for his own superiority complex and feeling of apparently untouchable power which made him stretch too far and create disastrous consequences.

I did not, but that is probably just because I had read reviews of it during the selection process. At first I thought it was just a dumb gimmick, b/c except for their quirky physical attributes they really were portrayed no differently than human characters would be, but then it paid off when the disassembling came into play. But certain things annoyed me, like oh gee: When Phil's brain falls off, that's when he expresses the most extreme, stupid, jingoistic crap. It's like a bad movie where a guy is impotent and the camera cuts to a drooping vegetable or hose or something.

I thought, wow thanks for stating the obvious; like everyone else so far, I didn't learn anything new. It's partially a case of preaching to the choir... I'm already lefty, liberal. But I don't think it would open any righty, conservative person's eyes either. Maybe it would impress (I don't mean awe, but literally impress/form) very young people who still have amorphous political views. I remember looking at reviews and so many of them asked, "Is this written for kids?" and I think that's why.

I think in this sense, the author did a good job of not simplifying it so that you could isolate any one factor as contributing to the mad injustice of Outer Horner vs. Inner Horner... The national histories, which formed the citizens' views of themselves and their enemies (on both sides) contributed, then Phil's personal history which planted the seed of anti-Inner-Hornerism, combined with a predisposition to be a bullying jerk... The happy accident of corrupt political officials and brainless strong-arms who could assist him. The everyday cowardice of individuals; those Inner and Outer Hornerites who were uncomfortable with Phil's line very easily could have merged forces and overcome him, but they were controlled by these artificial constructs.

__________________
You deceive yourself. Suffering is amusing and may even do work in a situation where two people are connected with each other. Where there is no mutual connection it is undignified, grotesque and ugly. It is seen to be something totally pointless and unnecessary, like all the rest of the suffering human beings do every day. There is now no relationship between us and I find your contortions merely embarrassing.

So you weren't a fan then Perfidia? I must say now I've had a chance to look back I was slightly disappointed with the book, as I had pretty high expectations because of everything I had read about it. I think the political idea could have been pushed further and I actually wish it had been a bit longer - or at least slightly more substantial. However, I am glad I've read it and I did appreciate the humour. What are other people's thoughts overall?

I know I sound really negative! I guess I was just disappointed and that's how it came out... They never should have put that blurb comparing it to Animal Farm on the back. Whenever I stopped to think about the book, the first thing I would think is "It's no Animal Farm!" I'd like to read his other things because it doesn't seem this was really representative. I do think it would be a good think for an early teenager to read. What it had to say was good, but it was superfluous to me as an adult already aligned with its views.

I'm trying to think of where I laughed. I have to admit I identified with the circle walking people.

__________________
You deceive yourself. Suffering is amusing and may even do work in a situation where two people are connected with each other. Where there is no mutual connection it is undignified, grotesque and ugly. It is seen to be something totally pointless and unnecessary, like all the rest of the suffering human beings do every day. There is now no relationship between us and I find your contortions merely embarrassing.

I feel the same. i was expecting political allegory of a more specific nature. I knew that the book was short, so I don't know how much depth I thought it could've gone into, but yeah, it just felt like a modern fable with a vaguely political message.

I agree again - I think probably because the depth and drive behind Animal Farm is specific to an even, or at least a historical period the two are not comparable. Obviously though there are lots of ways they're not comparable! I think that TBAFROP is worth reading - it is probably best for a young teenager who is just getting to grips with political alignments, but even as a 21-year-old pretty politically aware person I think that it is valuable.

Aside from the politics of it, what did people think of the writing style, and the illustration?

__________________