The Collaborators

by Pierre Siniac

A noir set in the seediest backwaters of the French publishing industry, The Collaborators tells the story of a hapless drifter who, after years of not particularly heroic effort, finally manages to write a book. A good book? A bad book? Well, it's complicated - and soon the complications he's set in motion spiral entirely out of control. Praised by Pierre Bayard in How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read , and finally available in English by one of our greatest translators, The Collaborators is both a sinister thriller and a comedy of outrageous proportions.

Under the title Ferdinaud Céline , The Collaborators was published in French in 1997 to great acclaim.

Genres: France, Fiction, Mystery, French Literature, Novels

Paperback

First published April 20, 2010

Reviews

[MJ Nicholls · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this hilarious literary satire and noir (apparently), a hack writer is blackmailed into co-authoring his masterpiece with an obese hack publisher. The book hits the target in its literary satire and descriptions of the writing process—from the hack writer’s miserable plodding through his opus to the portrayal of publishers as drunks and critics as guttersniping egomaniacs. Written at the end of Siniac’s career, the novel has the recklessness of a writer past caring and shows a talented crime novelist at the peak of his plotting powers. A devilish and marvellously witty delight.

Appendix: Marcella’s review

Sorry, but this review is unacceptable, especially on a book that pokes such fun at writers, critics and—ironically—readers who do not (cannot) read. Let me suggest the following revisions:

“a author” = an author.

“Its satire and paraody that attempts to put mock importance on the litterati” = It’s a satire and a parody that attempts to put mock importance on the literati. Incorrect. It satirises the self-importance of the literati, it doesn’t place “mock importance” (what?) on them.

“I think a joke . . . literary terrorism is right.” = Extremely poor syntax. The meaning of this is too fuzzy to decipher.

“the book didn’t have a lot to say” = Were we reading different books? The book meticulously disassembles the writing process and cleverly sends up the publishing world from a book’s composition to being top of the bestseller lists. It has a large, loud voice with plenty to “say.”

“could have been a decent beach read” = This review is a parody. It must be. I promise I didn’t write it.

“the novel’s story could be told entertainingly in 250 pages” = Ah! So you are the master of crime fiction and not Siniac! Pray tell how all the threads so cunningly weaved together in those essential 489 pages could come together so well in such a miniscule space?

“None of the characters are particularly likeable” = Irrelevant. Not a valid criticism. The standard for all books is not “likeable characters” and a “pageturning plot.” These are not (k) constants.

“first 80% of the book could have been trimmed” = If you trimmed the “first 80%” you’d be left with 97.8 pages. So all you want is the “decent twist” and none of the masterful, hilarious satire, dialogue and hardboiled parody? Why can’t books cut all the extraneous crap and lead straight to their “decent twists?” Why do we need scene-setting or world-building when we could give the reader all the plot points and then leap straight to the end? Ridiculous!

[Jonfaith · Rating 5 out of 5]

I 'm not sure if it is an apt testament to his novel, but I was saddened by the discovery that Pierre Siniac had passed away. It should be noted that it was on the back of the novel, that I discovered this mortality. My stupidity often baffles me. I suppose that such is the point of being stupid.

Likely 4.5 stars, I would've swept through it in three days had I not switched gears with Shah of Shahs and then experienced a subsequent absence of focus. Waiting in line at a book sale last night, I thought it due time to return to The Collaborators which is a farce stuffed into a tragedy. The tragedy being The Occupation and the subsequent revisionism of the nationwide Resistance myth. Oh well. Rather than being a novel length homage to Celine, I found The Collaborators to be an admirable updating of Balzac's Lost Illusions.

[Ronald Morton · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s a running joke – in my head – that all Dalkey books are about writers and/or writing. It’s obviously not 100% true, but Dalkey seems to have a really high percentage of their books where the main character is a writer, or the process of writing is a focus. And, once I started noticing it, it just jumps out at me every time.

So, this book is about a writer, with a large focus on him writing. I know, I’m as shocked as you are.

This is one of those odd (to me) Dalkey books that plays everything completely straight. I’m so used to Dalkey publishing difficult/experimental books that I tend to be surprised when one of theirs is just a straightforward book. This is one of those. It’s really (really) good, so I don’t want that to come off as criticism, it’s just not what I tend to expect from Dalkey.

This is a darkly humorous book (a biting satire), with a well-crafted and elaborate plot, and a handful of very colorful characters. It’s a bit of mystery, but mostly is just about a couple authors and a massively successful book. I enjoyed it, and found myself compulsively wanting to read it even though my schedule this week has been a bit shit, but don’t really feel the need to explore it further than that in this review.

Oh, and is it just me who’s bothered when a book’s title is changed in translation? I understand that it’s sometimes necessary when the original title might not have the proper nuance when translated, but the original name of this book is just one of the character’s names, and I’m not sure what was gained by rechristening it with the new (fairly bland) title.

[Paul Dembina · Rating 3 out of 5]

This one's a bit of an oddity. Dalkey Archive are known for publishing literary and experimental fiction often in translation.
Although this novel is a translation from the French and is concerned with literary matters it's basically a bit of a caper story. None too sophisticated at that.
By the way I much prefer this English title for the book over the original French version which was the name of one of the central characters

[Leila · Rating 5 out of 5]

HILARIOUS and insightful and just plain AMAZING.
I just can't explain myself, really.

[Marcella · Rating 2 out of 5]

Essentially the story of a author who writes awful literature and is tricked into publishing a novel to great acclaim. Its satire and paraody that attempts to put mock importance on the literatti. I think a joke by one of the characters that investigation into the mystery would have the character too deeply invovled in literary terrorism is right.

Ultimately the book didn't have a lot to say and could have been a decent beach read had it not been so long. The novel's story could be told entertainingly in 250 pages, not 489. None of the characters are particularly likeable, but they work in a story where you want no one to win. The first 80% of the book could have been trimmed, but part 4 (where all is revealed) provided a decent twist. All and all, there are better novels to spend your time on.

[Russell]

Only read 1/3 of it.

[patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

funny.

[Alejandro Sosa · Rating 5 out of 5]

I bought this primarily because it was in the Dalkey Archive section of the bookshop really; I had no real idea who Pierre Siniac was at the time or this book. Though I had expectations, just because of proximity and all that. And what I received was a good experience and I'm going to use the word good because 'amazing' or 'outstanding' would be a bit too decadent of a response to this.

Firstly, the characters were pretty interesting: Dochin, Gastinel and the Bitch of Drancy. All full characters that come across as researched and well formulated. The story weaved quite well between the characters and what the author seemed to want to convey. Although I did slightly clench my butt checks when I realised that it is ever so slightly a 'crime novel' or can be categorised as such. As I do not like such novels whatsoever, mostly because the whole storyline can pretty much be summed up before the book has been finished: a crime, an inability to solve it, some twist and a resolution. However, being that '2666' by Bolano is currently giving me so much joy and it has elements of the 'crime novel' genre I decided to venture on with Siniac's effort.

Secondly, it was a resounding good, because I was not disappointed by my decision to read on due to its sense of humour. And it does try. I am not saying its efforts were always on point and funny but it had elements of a giggle here and a laugh there. It has this downright association with Ferdinand Celine because a character is called 'Ferdinaud Celine' and it is about the publishing industry in France and the politics of war.

Finally, I would not ardently say you should read this right now. But it's a decent read and I enjoyed the few months I spent with it. Sometimes it came across as a little dry and I found the ending as if the Author suddenly remembered: 'Oh my gosh I must resolve everything' and then somehow found a way to do it with all the gaps slightly haphazardly filled in. Why did he not let the end blend in as much as he allowed the relationship with Dochin and Celine Feuhant to mature? Also of the prose I felt that, without being harsh, it was not able to be held up to classic novels, as a Celine's Journey or a Knut Hamsun, because you ultimately can't say who narrated the book in totality, as some of the book is written from the first person, some from the third person, though the difference between a knockout book and a good book is that it ties together in this regard more closely. I liked it.

[Mesut Bostancı · Rating 3 out of 5]

At first the mystery as to whether or not the novel at the center of the story "dancing the brown java" was a good book or not was an intriguing mystery. It was as though subjective tastes, and the cult of the great novel was the stuff of suspense. I was really enjoying it. That gets traded out in the end however for a conventional crime plot. I don't read a lot of crime novels, and I was distracted for almost the whole novel waiting for the twist, the gotcha that would make all of the strange details and characters come together in a brilliant ending, or would even more deflate what I thought of the book. It was the latter. The novel should just be cut off 2/3 the way through. Also, a majority of the "jokes" in the novel are just fat jokes, which I don't know if that's a French tradition, but it was just nasty and tired. Describing someone as a pachyderme could have been funny exactly once. I believe the author does it 200 times.

[Dan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A hard book to describe, but it's worth tracking down if you can. It's kind of a back-assward whodunnit, cartoonish frequently, and the main character/narrator is a bit of a drag but the supporting characters -- there's a sea of colorful one-off sideshows drifting in and out of the narrative along with everyone who's not the narrator -- save it.

[Chris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Funny and dark crime novel about the French publishing business. Authors, critics, publishers, and readers are hilariously skewered, sometimes fatally, in this off-the-wall work. I would have enjoyed it even more if I was more familiar with French literature since the references and allusions are everywhere. I did, however, create a short list of books that I want to read.

[Oriana]

Wow, Dalkey Archive has a slew of exciting books coming out this season. Sweet!

[Kobe Bryant · Rating 3 out of 5]

This should have been way, way shorter