Keep the Aspidistra Flying.

[The Atheist]

Another of Orwell's lesser lights, which isn't one of his more highly-regarded novels, yet it offers great insight into Orwell himself.

Like most of Orwell's main characters - apart from George Bowling and in Animal Farm - Gordon Comstock is a partially autobiographical creation. Along with Gordon, Dorothy Hare of A Clergyman's Daughter and Flory in Burmese Days and Winston Smith himself, Orwell made a habit out of making his heroes out of cloth cut from his own clothes.

I think I understand more about Orwell from gleaning details from these characters than I have from all of his actual auto-biographical books and all of the biographies added together. In Down & Out, Wigan Pier and Homage, I don't feel the sense of being inside Orwell's own mind that I get from Gordon Comstock. In those books, Orwell is the fly on the wall rather than dissecting motives and it's only when he places the thoughts into a fictional character that he can give them full rein.

Keep the Aspidistra Flying is an otherwise quite unremarkable book, with few redeeming features - slow, of little action and even less object, I really do think that Orwell wanted to get his mind down on paper more than exposing the seedy world of second-hand bookshops.

It's not an easy read, the relentless poverty and squalor of Gordon's life makes for heavy going, but if you persvere, the gems of Orwell's own mind shine through, giving a fresh insight into the life of a dedicated writer. Lack of tobacco, lack of food, lack of love - all things which Orwell experienced first hand, yet hardly mentioned, although the physical aspects are discussed in Down & Out.

I won't suggest that you read and enjoy, it's too bleak for that, but read and get another insight into Orwell's mind.

[lukgem]

hi atheist,
i thought the book gave a fascinating insight into orwells mind and raised some interesting questions,
1. can only moneyed people have principles?
2. does lack of money starve a man of his humanity?
3. is surrender to the money god inevitable?
4. if capitalism was decayed in the 1930s what system do we have now?
5. is the conclusion of the book "happy"?
6. is popular literature vulgar and an insult to intellect?(i know you raised a similar question recently,comstock seemed to receive it with utter contempt)
7. do you think london pleasures was real,and he did bin a collection of work?

any response would be received with much appreciation,
many thanks.

[The Atheist]

hi atheist,
i thought the book gave a fascinating insight into orwells mind and raised some interesting questions,

Yep, having read several biographies on Orwell, I'm convinced that Gordon Comstock is him to a "t".

It almost seems that Orwell wrote the book as though his life would've been had he not been caught up in political causes. He still managed to live some of it though, as the close similarity between Down & Out, which is autobiographical, and KTAF.

1. can only moneyed people have principles?

I'll tell you if I ever have enough money to tell!

No, I don't think they do. It depends on what the principles are for starters. I'd certainly agree that lots of non-moneyed people don't get the chance to display the kind of principles I think you mean, because of economic necessity.

2. does lack of money starve a man of his humanity?

Nope. Again, it might be a minority position, but I think lots of real humanitarians were actually pretty poor. I suspect money might rob man of it rather than the other way. That's Orwell's position.

3. is surrender to the money god inevitable?

Appears to be, mainly because we've made it that way. The world's population precludes a moneyless society. You can live on the fringe of society without it, but unless you have that humanitarian aspect as above, it ain't gonna be much fun.

4. if capitalism was decayed in the 1930s what system do we have now?

Well, up until the last couple of months, we've still had capitalism. Any decay in the '30s might have just been a realignment, because if capitalism's dead, we saw them bury it in October 2008.

5. is the conclusion of the book "happy"?

Yeah, it is. Cast off a few principles attainable only by saints and Gordon realised that life was actually pretty good.

6. is popular literature vulgar and an insult to intellect?(i know you raised a similar question recently,comstock seemed to receive it with utter contempt)

Which pretty much reflects Orwell. I have an entirely interesting thread going on this very subject in General Lit right now - but it's pretty damn long.

7. do you think london pleasures was real,and he did bin a collection of work?

He might have done! I always had the impression that Orwell himself would've been much happier if he'd been able to write poetry. Would've been a terrible poem going by what he had!

[lukgem]

hi athiest,thanks very much for your communications,its a great thing to get ones thoughts onto paper(all be it electronic)and have someone of your calibre take the time to respond,thankyou!!!!!!!!

[The Atheist]

Flattery will get you everywhere!



(you're most welcome!)

[A Siege]

I enjoyed this book. Very thought provoking, as lukgem illustrated. My problem with it, though, were that Rosemary seemed unbelievably good-natured, patient and devoted. I doubt such a woman exists, or could exist. Maybe I'm just jaundiced, though.

I thought Orwell was prescient in predicting World War II.
"Corner Table grins at you, seemingly optimistic,
with a flash of false teeth. But what is behind the grin?
Desolation, emptiness, prophecies of doom. For can you not see, if
you know how to look, that behind that slick self-satisfaction, that
tittering fat-bellied triviality, there is nothing but a frightful
emptiness, a secret despair? The great death-wish of the modern
world. Suicide pacts. Heads stuck in gas-ovens in lonely
maisonettes. French letters and Amen Pills. And the reverberations
of future wars. Enemy aeroplanes flying over London; the deep
threatening hum of the propellers, the shattering thunder of the
bombs. It is all written in Corner Table's face." (Chapter 1)

I think it was a chilling way of explaining that thoughtlessness allows for catastrophes very well with the preceding excerpt.

"The sleep of reason produces nightmares."

[Blanket Heist]

GREAT BOOK.

The caps were necessary.

[Janine]

I haven't read the book; but I loved the movie based on it, even if they did take some liberties. It made me want to read the book or story. I thought it also gave a good glimpse into Orwell and how he thought and wrote.

[Blanket Heist]

I haven't read the book; but I loved the movie based on it, even if they did take some liberties. It made me want to read the book or story. I thought it also gave a good glimpse into Orwell and how he thought and wrote.

I had no idea that there was a movie based on it. Was it of the same name?

[Janine]

I had no idea that there was a movie based on it. Was it of the same name?

Blanket Heist, I think it might have been released under the novel's name in the UK, but here it's known as

A Merry War (1998)
Starring: Richard E. Grant, Helena Bonham Carter
Director: Robert Bierman

http://www.amazon.com/Merry-War-Rich...ef=wl_it_dp_o?

Unfortunately, it's not easy to find a region 1 DVD; I had to settle for a tape but I may replace it soon with the DVD. It's probably a bit lighter than the book/story; but it's a delightful little film and it does make one think. The actors make it work perfectly....both top grade British actors.