Februrary book review: 'A God in Ruins', by Kate Atkinson

Image credit: www.waterstones.com

Book: A God in Ruins, Kate Atkinson


Publication date: 2015


WCRG meeting: 24 February 2016


Group rating: 6.5


A particularly large and lively group of members, new and old, gathered to discuss Kate Atkinson's latest bestseller, A God in Ruins. This hugely successful book, which saw Atkinson win the Costa book award for the third time, met with very passionate and mixed responses from our readers. While some members loved the book, most were less commendatory in their assessment, feeling that Atkinson had produced an enjoyable but flawed novel. The discussion opened with debate as to the meaning of the title, with some believing that Teddy represents the god who crashed down to earth and lived a rather dysfunctional life thereafter. It was remarked that the Emerson quotation at the beginning sums up the novel pretty well: 'A man is a god in ruins. When men are innocent, life shall be longer, and shall pass into the immortal, as gently as we awake from dreams.' One reader observed that the novel represents the universal condition of man and depicts an 'allegorical rather than a personal journey.'

Many of the members were frustrated by the unsympathetic character of Viola and the lack of light and shade in her portrayal. It was felt that her bitterness and cruelty as a mother and daughter were never truly explained, and that the awful death of her mother Nancy (aided by Teddy) could have been explored in more depth. One reader noted that Viola may have been named after the wrong Shakespearean character, bearing more resemblance to Goneril; while Bertie occupied the Cordelia role in the story. Viola's relationship with her father was very one-note and her rebellion against everything her father held dear was sustained unrelentingly throughout the novel. It was also noted that, despite the implication that Nancy's death had a huge impact on Viola, Nancy herself was a very vague, one-dimensional character, with no real sense of her character being evoked. The potential emotional impact of her death was lost as a result of the failure to bring the character to life.

Atkinson is known for her interest in stylisation (as evidenced in her previous work, Life After Life), but it was largely felt by the group that she wasn't as successful with her experiments in this novel. The chapter focusing on Sunny was described by one reader as 'grotesque' and 'over-the-top' and by others as an unsatisfying imitation of the Gothic genre. The influence of other works on Atkinson's writing was also remarked upon, with all present agreeing that her allusions to a broad sweep of writers from the literary canon were clunky and obtrusive, serving to show off her erudition rather than add anything meaningful to the narrative. Only one of our overseas readers appreciated the wealth of literary allusions, describing it as a 'veritable literary education'.

Disagreement arose as to the success of the chapters which focused on Teddy's WWII experience. Some readers found them over-long and drawn-out, with the novel wearing Atkinson's research too heavily. However, others found the war scenes gripping and realistic, and some of the most substantial portions of the novel. Readers also disagreed on the topic of the novel's controversial ending. For some, the reading experience was enriched because of the final reveal, which poignantly captures the reality of war: that lives full of possibility can simply disappear from time and memory. Many members were moved by this final twist, while others felt 'cheated' and believed that the ending 'negates' the rest of the novel. Some found the ending to be an 'amateurish trick' and an unsatisfying return for their investment in Teddy's story. All agreed that the inclusion of the Augustus story was unsuccessful and 'slightly irrelevant', as the message that Augustus represents Teddy immortalised was already clear from reading the novel. Atkinson remarked in an interview that A God in Ruins was a novel about fiction, but it was thought by some that she was being too meta in her use of literary tricks, sacrificing sincerity for cleverness.

Those who most enjoyed the novel seemed to be the readers who had not read Life After Life, the novel to which Atkinson wrote A God in Ruins as the companion. For some who had read and loved Life After Life, Atkinson's follow-up was thought to be vastly inferior. These readers were dismayed by Atkinson's lack of thoughtfulness, craft, and commitment in A God in Ruins, a 'lazy' novel with 'flat' characters and insufficient editing. This response was in stark response to two readers in particular, who were captivated by the pace of the novel and Atkinson's 'skilful' narration, and gave it high scores as a result. One member commented that the overwhelmingly positive critical reception of A God in Ruins was puzzling given the frank and, at times, critical appraisal of it by the Wolfson Contemporary Reading Group. It certainly led to one of the Group's most divisive reviews of a novel, a divide somewhat reflected in the score of 6.5.