What do you think?
Rate this book
Köpekler
İlkel ve vahşi bir tecrübenin olağanüstü ifadesi... Yuva dokunulmazlığı duygusu... Erkeğin, karısının saygısını kazanmak uğrunda verdiği savaşı olanca çarpıcılığıyla anlatan çok güçlü bir roman... -Newsweek
217 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1969
48 people are currently reading
828 people want to read
About the author
Gordon M. Williams
22 books17 followersAka P.B. Yuill, joint pseudonym with Terry Venables.
Gordon Maclean Williams was a Scottish author. Born in Paisley, he moved to London to work as a journalist. He has written for television and is the author of over twenty novels including From Scenes Like These (1968), shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1969, Walk Don't Walk (1972) and Big Morning Blues (1974). Other novels include The Camp (1966), The Man Who Had Power Over Women (1967) and The Upper Pleasure Garden (1970).
He ghosted the autobiographies of association footballers Bobby Moore, Terry Venables and manager Tommy Docherty.
In 1971, his novel The Siege of Trencher's Farm was controversially filmed as Straw Dogs. Sam Peckinpah's cinematic treatment marked a watershed in the depiction of sexual violence in the cinema though the most controversial scenes are absent from the book. Other film work includes The Man Who Had Power Over Women, from his own novel, and Tree of Hands, as scriptwriter from a Ruth Rendell novel. Williams also wrote the book of Ridley Scott's film The Duellists.
While working as commercial manager of association football club Chelsea, he renewed his collaboration with Venables, resulting in four co-written novels. From the novels grew the 1978 TV series Hazell, which the pair co-wrote under the shared pseudonym P. B. Yuill. Under the name "Jack Lang", Williams also wrote paperbacks "for £300 a time."
Gordon Maclean Williams was a Scottish author. Born in Paisley, he moved to London to work as a journalist. He has written for television and is the author of over twenty novels including From Scenes Like These (1968), shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1969, Walk Don't Walk (1972) and Big Morning Blues (1974). Other novels include The Camp (1966), The Man Who Had Power Over Women (1967) and The Upper Pleasure Garden (1970).
He ghosted the autobiographies of association footballers Bobby Moore, Terry Venables and manager Tommy Docherty.
In 1971, his novel The Siege of Trencher's Farm was controversially filmed as Straw Dogs. Sam Peckinpah's cinematic treatment marked a watershed in the depiction of sexual violence in the cinema though the most controversial scenes are absent from the book. Other film work includes The Man Who Had Power Over Women, from his own novel, and Tree of Hands, as scriptwriter from a Ruth Rendell novel. Williams also wrote the book of Ridley Scott's film The Duellists.
While working as commercial manager of association football club Chelsea, he renewed his collaboration with Venables, resulting in four co-written novels. From the novels grew the 1978 TV series Hazell, which the pair co-wrote under the shared pseudonym P. B. Yuill. Under the name "Jack Lang", Williams also wrote paperbacks "for £300 a time."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
May 16, 2025
Civilization meets its discontents.
George is a man steeped in sublimation, his wife resentful of his bookish-over-brutish behavior, taunting and emasculating him as almost admitted subconscious punishment for his passivity.
Trenchant is this tale of Trencher’s Farm; of a professor pushed to the brink, unleashing aggression hitherto channeled solely through intellectual pursuits; a modern, civilized man (as he must constantly remind himself) concerned with justice and compassion—even for the most vile among us—relinquishing that notion (facade?) with his home and family under hostile siege by what he comes to see as ravenous animals at the door.
*I’m going to have to mull this one over. There are many perspectives to consider, a couple cinematic adaptations to compare, and more psychological, societal, politically incorrect, and uncomfortable themes to wade through than Freud could shake a poker at. I’ll be back.*
George is a man steeped in sublimation, his wife resentful of his bookish-over-brutish behavior, taunting and emasculating him as almost admitted subconscious punishment for his passivity.
Trenchant is this tale of Trencher’s Farm; of a professor pushed to the brink, unleashing aggression hitherto channeled solely through intellectual pursuits; a modern, civilized man (as he must constantly remind himself) concerned with justice and compassion—even for the most vile among us—relinquishing that notion (facade?) with his home and family under hostile siege by what he comes to see as ravenous animals at the door.
*I’m going to have to mull this one over. There are many perspectives to consider, a couple cinematic adaptations to compare, and more psychological, societal, politically incorrect, and uncomfortable themes to wade through than Freud could shake a poker at. I’ll be back.*
August 15, 2011
This is a reissue of the long out of print novel that was the basis for the 1971 Sam Peckinpah film STRAW DOGS, which starred Dustin Hoffman and Susan George. The film was banned for 26 years in England for it's graphic violence(what else could you expect from a Peckinpah film) and treatment of women.
American professor George Magruder and his British wife, Louise, along with their daughter Karen, take a six month lease on an isolated home known locally as Trencher's Farm in order for him to finish his book.
It's nearing Christmas and things are not going well for the Magruders. He's not accepted by the locals when he stops in a pub for a beer. "Rich American!" Louise and he are arguing, the kind where both parties say hurtful things they don't really mean.
They attend a local Christmas party in an attempt to heal things. It doesn't go well. Santa scares a young local girl, mentally challenged, and she rushes out into the snow storm, quickly getting lost. Hunting parties are organized to find her. George decides to take his family home and return to help look for the girl.
At the same time, a car wreck his freed a convicted murderer, Henry Niles, of three little girls, brought into the village for a medicinal shot. With the mind of a small child himself, he's been a patient at a mental asylum down the road for nine years.
George and Louise are arguing on the way home when a severely cold Niles rears up in front of their car and is struck. Not realizing who he is at first, they get him into the car and get home where they can call the doctor. By then they have learned his identity.
The phone call sets in motion a number of things. The roads are snowed in and the police can't get there for a while. Word quickly spreads about Niles and a small party arrives demanding the child-like killer. They are easily fended off. Then the missing girl's father joins the party, with a shotgun. All are drunk and still drinking.
Then begins the siege.
And George Magruder, an academic and a mild mannered man is called upon to do things he never would have imagined. When a neighbor tries to disarm the father, he's accidentally killed and the four men realize something. Prison faces them and one has already served a stretch. Memories of an incident told them by their parents, a rapist brutally slain by a pack and never caught because no one talks, tells them what they have to do.
The police are walking in from nine miles away, the phone lines have been cut, and George Magruder stands between an armed mob and his family.
I've never seen the movie, but a Wikipedia entry shows there were considerable changes, though the basic plot is there. The new film moves the location to Los Angeles.
I was caught up in the action in this one.
American professor George Magruder and his British wife, Louise, along with their daughter Karen, take a six month lease on an isolated home known locally as Trencher's Farm in order for him to finish his book.
It's nearing Christmas and things are not going well for the Magruders. He's not accepted by the locals when he stops in a pub for a beer. "Rich American!" Louise and he are arguing, the kind where both parties say hurtful things they don't really mean.
They attend a local Christmas party in an attempt to heal things. It doesn't go well. Santa scares a young local girl, mentally challenged, and she rushes out into the snow storm, quickly getting lost. Hunting parties are organized to find her. George decides to take his family home and return to help look for the girl.
At the same time, a car wreck his freed a convicted murderer, Henry Niles, of three little girls, brought into the village for a medicinal shot. With the mind of a small child himself, he's been a patient at a mental asylum down the road for nine years.
George and Louise are arguing on the way home when a severely cold Niles rears up in front of their car and is struck. Not realizing who he is at first, they get him into the car and get home where they can call the doctor. By then they have learned his identity.
The phone call sets in motion a number of things. The roads are snowed in and the police can't get there for a while. Word quickly spreads about Niles and a small party arrives demanding the child-like killer. They are easily fended off. Then the missing girl's father joins the party, with a shotgun. All are drunk and still drinking.
Then begins the siege.
And George Magruder, an academic and a mild mannered man is called upon to do things he never would have imagined. When a neighbor tries to disarm the father, he's accidentally killed and the four men realize something. Prison faces them and one has already served a stretch. Memories of an incident told them by their parents, a rapist brutally slain by a pack and never caught because no one talks, tells them what they have to do.
The police are walking in from nine miles away, the phone lines have been cut, and George Magruder stands between an armed mob and his family.
I've never seen the movie, but a Wikipedia entry shows there were considerable changes, though the basic plot is there. The new film moves the location to Los Angeles.
I was caught up in the action in this one.
December 8, 2021
Perros de paja de Gordon M. Williams es la novela en la que se basó Sam Peckinpah para rodar la película del mismo título en 1971. Vi la película hace ya muchos años y solo recordaba fragmentos de violencia, terror, horror y una escena muy explicita de violación.
Despues de haber leído la novela llego a la conclusión que Sam Peckinpah hizo una película bastante diferente a la novela, la base es la misma, pero los nombres del matrimonio protagonista son otros lo que me hizo dudar de mi memoria ¿será la edad o el tiempo que ha pasado entre ver la película y leer la novela? Mejor no salgo de dudas…
He visionado unos fragmentos de la película en youtube y me han ayudado a ver las diferencias entre la novela y la adaptación al cine y situar mejor a los personajes y su entorno.
Me ha gustado mucho la novela, la razón del matrimonio de pasar unos meses en la Inglaterra profunda, en un pueblo en medio de la nada, donde el silencio es la base de la relación de sus habitantes y la llegada de una pareja, ella inglesa y él estadounidense, descoloca a ambas partes, unos con su rechazo y otros por la falta de comprensión y el no entender donde se han metido.
Un accidente de tráfico y añadido a una gran tormenta de nieve hace que la vida de ese pequeño y aislado pueblo se descontrole hasta llegar a limites insospechados, violencia, horror, agresiones, defensas, todo mezclado con alcohol que hace que los ánimos se encrespen mucho más, en ambos lados, los sitiadores y los sitiados.
Me ha gustado mucho ver la evolución del matrimonio, como sus ideas progresistas se van diluyendo según avanza la novela y la situación parece impensable de solucionar.
Voy a intentar ver la película y así comprender las diferencias entre lo que transmite el autor de la novela con lo que interpretó Sam Peckinpah en su adaptación al cine.
Despues de haber leído la novela llego a la conclusión que Sam Peckinpah hizo una película bastante diferente a la novela, la base es la misma, pero los nombres del matrimonio protagonista son otros lo que me hizo dudar de mi memoria ¿será la edad o el tiempo que ha pasado entre ver la película y leer la novela? Mejor no salgo de dudas…
He visionado unos fragmentos de la película en youtube y me han ayudado a ver las diferencias entre la novela y la adaptación al cine y situar mejor a los personajes y su entorno.
Me ha gustado mucho la novela, la razón del matrimonio de pasar unos meses en la Inglaterra profunda, en un pueblo en medio de la nada, donde el silencio es la base de la relación de sus habitantes y la llegada de una pareja, ella inglesa y él estadounidense, descoloca a ambas partes, unos con su rechazo y otros por la falta de comprensión y el no entender donde se han metido.
Un accidente de tráfico y añadido a una gran tormenta de nieve hace que la vida de ese pequeño y aislado pueblo se descontrole hasta llegar a limites insospechados, violencia, horror, agresiones, defensas, todo mezclado con alcohol que hace que los ánimos se encrespen mucho más, en ambos lados, los sitiadores y los sitiados.
Me ha gustado mucho ver la evolución del matrimonio, como sus ideas progresistas se van diluyendo según avanza la novela y la situación parece impensable de solucionar.
Voy a intentar ver la película y así comprender las diferencias entre lo que transmite el autor de la novela con lo que interpretó Sam Peckinpah en su adaptación al cine.
February 4, 2016
Probably most people that have an interest in this book will have been drawn to it by an interest in the films (Straw Dogs) which it inspired. It's therefore probably worth establishing straight away that the films (at least the first one - I haven't seen the remake) divert from the book quite substantially. Some main differences (note - some of the following might be considered spoilers) are:
- In the film (as I recall), the village was the wife's childhood home. In the book this is not the case. She was from England, but not from this village.
- In the book, the protagonists have a young daughter who is living with them.
- In the film, some of the local ruffians are working on the house - this doesn't happen in the book.
- Likewise, The shooting expedition with the protagonist and the ruffians doesn't take place in the book.
- Part of the story in the film involves the rape of the wife. This is absent from the book.
There are plenty of other differences, but I think you get the idea. Addressing the book independently of the film/s, first I have to point out that this was definitely a page-turner. I don't generally read thrillers, so the experience of getting no sleep due to not being able to put a book down, was pretty new to me. I found it very engaging.
Secondly, its core concepts, in the context of present-day gender politics, seem embarrassingly archaic. So much so that I expect there will be readers who will be uncomfortable and possibly even angry, or maybe bemused by some of the old-fashioned attitudes that are pivotal to this book. One of its central themes is that the wife does not respect the husband until he:
A) Discards his consistently patient and reasonable approach to her, and starts instead, exercising old-fashioned brute male power over her, and
B) Discards his faith in pacifism and intellectual rationality, and instead embraces his violent potential, to meet the violence that surrounds him.
As a male, born and raised during the time this novel was written, I personally felt quite self-conscious about the gut-level attraction I felt for it. It probably worked on my reptilian brain, or something. I related to the male protagonist and felt excitement with each new milestone he met on his personal journey from ineffectual egghead to supra-violent alpha male. Yet at the end of the novel I had to reconcile my enjoyment of reading it with my overwhelming rejection of its thesis. The set of values that provide direction to my life are founded on the same reasonable, rational and pacific ideals our hero comes to eventually leave behind in the book.
And therein lies its strength: The novel is fundamentally about the dichotomy between reasoned approach and gut instinct. And if, having read it, you are compelled to question yourself along these lines; if you need to have a slightly uncomfortable dialogue with your own psyche and look into what it is that actually motivates you, then I think it can probably be said to have succeeded, at least on one level.
- In the film (as I recall), the village was the wife's childhood home. In the book this is not the case. She was from England, but not from this village.
- In the book, the protagonists have a young daughter who is living with them.
- In the film, some of the local ruffians are working on the house - this doesn't happen in the book.
- Likewise, The shooting expedition with the protagonist and the ruffians doesn't take place in the book.
- Part of the story in the film involves the rape of the wife. This is absent from the book.
There are plenty of other differences, but I think you get the idea. Addressing the book independently of the film/s, first I have to point out that this was definitely a page-turner. I don't generally read thrillers, so the experience of getting no sleep due to not being able to put a book down, was pretty new to me. I found it very engaging.
Secondly, its core concepts, in the context of present-day gender politics, seem embarrassingly archaic. So much so that I expect there will be readers who will be uncomfortable and possibly even angry, or maybe bemused by some of the old-fashioned attitudes that are pivotal to this book. One of its central themes is that the wife does not respect the husband until he:
A) Discards his consistently patient and reasonable approach to her, and starts instead, exercising old-fashioned brute male power over her, and
B) Discards his faith in pacifism and intellectual rationality, and instead embraces his violent potential, to meet the violence that surrounds him.
As a male, born and raised during the time this novel was written, I personally felt quite self-conscious about the gut-level attraction I felt for it. It probably worked on my reptilian brain, or something. I related to the male protagonist and felt excitement with each new milestone he met on his personal journey from ineffectual egghead to supra-violent alpha male. Yet at the end of the novel I had to reconcile my enjoyment of reading it with my overwhelming rejection of its thesis. The set of values that provide direction to my life are founded on the same reasonable, rational and pacific ideals our hero comes to eventually leave behind in the book.
And therein lies its strength: The novel is fundamentally about the dichotomy between reasoned approach and gut instinct. And if, having read it, you are compelled to question yourself along these lines; if you need to have a slightly uncomfortable dialogue with your own psyche and look into what it is that actually motivates you, then I think it can probably be said to have succeeded, at least on one level.
January 13, 2012
The Siege of Trenchers Farm, a very good book that inspired a great film. Though half the book was about two or three hours on Christmas in the village of Dando, Gordon Williams manages to make it exciting and extremely tense. The book is clearly written and I particularly liked the way the "locals" spoke in their own dialect. The only criticism I have is that i found the end a little anti-climatic, but having said that I enjoyed reading the journey.
November 25, 2019
Straw Dogs
یا همان سگهای پوشالی با نام دیگر محاصره مزرعه ترنچر رمانی عمیق و روانشناسانهای از گوردون ویلیامز است.که فیلمش دوبار در سالهای ۱۹۷۱ و ۲۰۱۱ ساخته شده من فیلم جدید را ندیدهام اما بازی داستین هافمن در نسخه قدیمی شاهکار است.
داستان کتاب شرح حضور یک خانواده آمریکایی را در یکی از مناطق انگلستان حکایت میکند .
برف، سرما، تجاوز، قتل، درد غربت، بیگانهستیزی، و...
از مولفههای این کتاب میباشد.
یا همان سگهای پوشالی با نام دیگر محاصره مزرعه ترنچر رمانی عمیق و روانشناسانهای از گوردون ویلیامز است.که فیلمش دوبار در سالهای ۱۹۷۱ و ۲۰۱۱ ساخته شده من فیلم جدید را ندیدهام اما بازی داستین هافمن در نسخه قدیمی شاهکار است.
داستان کتاب شرح حضور یک خانواده آمریکایی را در یکی از مناطق انگلستان حکایت میکند .
برف، سرما، تجاوز، قتل، درد غربت، بیگانهستیزی، و...
از مولفههای این کتاب میباشد.
August 27, 2016
Gordon Williams, The Siege at Trencher's Farm (Dell, 1969)
[originally posted 17Sep2001]
Sam Peckinpah and Dustin Hoffman immortalized Williams' little morality tale in the early 70s with the film Straw Dogs. In true Peckinpah style, the source material was gutted, twisted, and ripped to shreds. The Siege at Trencher's Farm itself, while not exactly a model of stiff-upper-lip British reserve, is to Straw Dogs what Saving Private Ryan is to the sanitized war films of the fifties.
Williams gives us a bookish professor who's taken a year's sabbatical to the British countryside to finish the final draft of a book on a remarkably minor figure in British letters, a sabbatical that gives his (English) wife an opportunity to go home for a year and give the kid a chance to experience life outside the good old U. S. of A. Through a series of misunderstandings, a coincidence or two, and a few very bad misreadings of the British class structure (all of them, predictably, by the highborn), events bring us to the bookish professor needing to call on the primal side of his nature in order to defend home and family. There's nothing surprising here, certainly not when the book is looked at in relation to the period in which it was written. However, it's a good read, a quick one, and with the exception of a grievous contemporaneous historical error (Williams, writing in 1969, tells us America pulled all its troops out of Vietnam that year!), it's well-grounded and a bit of guilty fun. Just don't go in expecting the Peckinpah version. ** ½
[originally posted 17Sep2001]
Sam Peckinpah and Dustin Hoffman immortalized Williams' little morality tale in the early 70s with the film Straw Dogs. In true Peckinpah style, the source material was gutted, twisted, and ripped to shreds. The Siege at Trencher's Farm itself, while not exactly a model of stiff-upper-lip British reserve, is to Straw Dogs what Saving Private Ryan is to the sanitized war films of the fifties.
Williams gives us a bookish professor who's taken a year's sabbatical to the British countryside to finish the final draft of a book on a remarkably minor figure in British letters, a sabbatical that gives his (English) wife an opportunity to go home for a year and give the kid a chance to experience life outside the good old U. S. of A. Through a series of misunderstandings, a coincidence or two, and a few very bad misreadings of the British class structure (all of them, predictably, by the highborn), events bring us to the bookish professor needing to call on the primal side of his nature in order to defend home and family. There's nothing surprising here, certainly not when the book is looked at in relation to the period in which it was written. However, it's a good read, a quick one, and with the exception of a grievous contemporaneous historical error (Williams, writing in 1969, tells us America pulled all its troops out of Vietnam that year!), it's well-grounded and a bit of guilty fun. Just don't go in expecting the Peckinpah version. ** ½
September 15, 2011
Since when is a civil society looked upon as a bad thing? I’m not sure I agree with the whole outlook, but somehow, Williams makes this perspective on life work for the story.
Intriguing concepts of civility kept the wheel in my head turning like a hamster in a cage. In contrast, the explicit aggression and hunger for violence that the townspeople have is jaw-dropping and eye-popping. In short, this is anything but a dull read.
Intriguing concepts of civility kept the wheel in my head turning like a hamster in a cage. In contrast, the explicit aggression and hunger for violence that the townspeople have is jaw-dropping and eye-popping. In short, this is anything but a dull read.
June 21, 2009
I thought it was really good. Good action sequences, very visceral and visual.
August 26, 2014
Okay, so this book isn't for everyone. There is a lot of violence and cheating and aggression and uber-creepiness in it.
Now that THAT'S out of the way.
I. Love. This. Book.
Which is a surprise, because I absolutely HATED both movies. HATED, with a passion, like they had called my momma fat, hated. Even Alexander Skarsgard in all his glory could not save the modern remake. The only good thing in the entire movie was the siege at the end, and Mr. Marsden. Even then, I pretty much just wanted to vomit for most of the film, that's how much I disliked it.
Then I found out it was re-make. What? And Dustin Hoffman was in the original - I love Dustin Hoffman! And the film was so controversial it was BANNED from the UK!? Holy crap, I'm gonna watch that NOW! It MUST be better!
Wrong. It was exactly the same. Such a waste of time. But one thing came out of it - I noticed in the credits that the screenplay was based on a little book called "The Siege of Trencher's Farm". So sick curiosity made me look it up, and it looked ..., different. I loved the concept of the film, a siege, protecting a house, blah blah, so maybe with a couple tweaks, the book could be good?
The book, to me, was completely different from the movie. I just cannot understand why the movies deviated SO MUCH from the book! The ONLY similarities are the fact that a group of people converge on a house with the intent to break in and cause harm.
THAT IS IT. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DIFFERENT.
I liked George. I hated his wife, but I could understand her feelings.
This book is an intense, wild ride. I really liked it a lot. If you don't mind being taken out of your comfort zone and you like a book that kinda wraps around your brain like a fog and creeps you out and makes you think about it long after it's done, whether in a bad way or a good way I'm not sure, then this book is for you.
Now that THAT'S out of the way.
I. Love. This. Book.
Which is a surprise, because I absolutely HATED both movies. HATED, with a passion, like they had called my momma fat, hated. Even Alexander Skarsgard in all his glory could not save the modern remake. The only good thing in the entire movie was the siege at the end, and Mr. Marsden. Even then, I pretty much just wanted to vomit for most of the film, that's how much I disliked it.
Then I found out it was re-make. What? And Dustin Hoffman was in the original - I love Dustin Hoffman! And the film was so controversial it was BANNED from the UK!? Holy crap, I'm gonna watch that NOW! It MUST be better!
Wrong. It was exactly the same. Such a waste of time. But one thing came out of it - I noticed in the credits that the screenplay was based on a little book called "The Siege of Trencher's Farm". So sick curiosity made me look it up, and it looked ..., different. I loved the concept of the film, a siege, protecting a house, blah blah, so maybe with a couple tweaks, the book could be good?
The book, to me, was completely different from the movie. I just cannot understand why the movies deviated SO MUCH from the book! The ONLY similarities are the fact that a group of people converge on a house with the intent to break in and cause harm.
THAT IS IT. EVERYTHING ELSE IS DIFFERENT.
I liked George. I hated his wife, but I could understand her feelings.
This book is an intense, wild ride. I really liked it a lot. If you don't mind being taken out of your comfort zone and you like a book that kinda wraps around your brain like a fog and creeps you out and makes you think about it long after it's done, whether in a bad way or a good way I'm not sure, then this book is for you.
Read
August 1, 2018An effeminate American professor and his shrewish, beautiful wife, find themselves besieged by inbred English peasants. It can be a thin line between examining our instincts for violence indiscriminately glorifying in them, and this taught little thriller, the basis for the Peckinpah classic Straw Dogs (and, apparently, a no doubt horrible remake), doesn’t quite meet the line. The first three quarters are a razor-sharp dissection of the fears and anxieties which are the core of masculine self-identity, as well as being relentlessly plotted and bitterly funny. But the end wraps the thing up in so neat a package that one almost feels uncomfortable – of course, everyone dreams about saving their wives from rampaging savages – that there are, these days, so few savages (or perhaps so many) is one of the essential problems of modernity, how to excise masculine energy in a healthy rather than self-destructive fashion. Then again, that might be asking a lot of an awfully slender text. Still, the it starts a lot stronger than it ends.
September 27, 2011
Rating: 4.5 stars
The movie Straw Dogs was based on this book - the original with Dustin Hoffman (1971), and the new remake with James Marsden, Kate Bosworth, and the hot guy from True Blood (2011). I haven't seen either movie yet, so I don't know how they compare to the novel.
Young married couple George and Louise Magruder are considered outsiders when they rent an old farmhouse in a small English town for the winter. Just like your typical rednecks in any small southern U.S. town, the locals don't take kindly to outsiders. Events unfold that cause a standoff between the Magruders and the townsfolk, testing the individual strength of George as a husband, father, and man, as well as the bounds of George and Louise's marriage. Plenty of suspense and tension lead up to a good dose of action as the Magruders fight to protect their family and home.
Half a point subtracted for talk of killing animals - I always hate that!!!
The movie Straw Dogs was based on this book - the original with Dustin Hoffman (1971), and the new remake with James Marsden, Kate Bosworth, and the hot guy from True Blood (2011). I haven't seen either movie yet, so I don't know how they compare to the novel.
Young married couple George and Louise Magruder are considered outsiders when they rent an old farmhouse in a small English town for the winter. Just like your typical rednecks in any small southern U.S. town, the locals don't take kindly to outsiders. Events unfold that cause a standoff between the Magruders and the townsfolk, testing the individual strength of George as a husband, father, and man, as well as the bounds of George and Louise's marriage. Plenty of suspense and tension lead up to a good dose of action as the Magruders fight to protect their family and home.
Half a point subtracted for talk of killing animals - I always hate that!!!
January 22, 2022
An American bookworm gives a right pasting to a mob of yobbish moorbillys.
What got him so cheesed off? The disloyal British bitch that he married.
How was he able to do it? Because he grew up watching cowboy movies and playing baseball. USA, USA, USA, ...
What got him so cheesed off? The disloyal British bitch that he married.
How was he able to do it? Because he grew up watching cowboy movies and playing baseball. USA, USA, USA, ...
March 13, 2015
Στο goodreads το βιβλιαράκι αυτό παίρνει αρκετά μέτριες κριτικές... και δεν μπορώ να καταλάβω γιατί. Εντάξει, δεν είναι και από τα καλύτερα βιβλία του είδους, αλλά σίγουρα είναι καλό και αξίζει καλύτερη βαθμολογία και να διαβαστεί περισσότερο. Βέβαια πολλοί μπορεί να έχουν δει την ταινία του Πέκινπα και έτσι να νιώθουν ότι το βιβλίο δεν φτάνει το επίπεδο της ταινίας, αλλά είναι άδικη μια τέτοια σύγκριση.
Το λοιπόν, η ιστορία είναι αρκετά γνωστή, ο Αμερικάνος καθηγητής Τζορτζ Μαγκρούντερ, η Αγγλίδα γυναίκα του Λουίζ και η κόρη τους Κάρεν, νοίκιασαν ένα μεγάλο σπίτι στην φάρμα των Τρέντσερ, στο χωριό Ντάντο, κάπου στην αγγλική εξοχή, έτσι ώστε ο Τζορτζ να τελειώσει το γράψιμο του βιβλίου του μέσα σε ηρεμία και ησυχία. Η οικογένεια Μαγκρούντερ είναι λίγο πολύ ανεπιθύμητη στους κατοίκους του χωριού, οι οποίοι έχουν ζήσει όλη τους τη ζωή στο χωριό και δεν συμπαθούν ιδιαίτερα τους ξένους. Λίγο πριν τα Χριστούγεννα όμως, συμβαίνουν κάποια δυσάρεστα γεγονότα: Μετά από ένα τροχαίο ατύχημα ένας δολοφόνος παιδιών με μυαλό οχτάχρονου ξεφεύγει, ένα διανοητικά ανάπηρο κοριτσάκι εξαφανίζεται από την γιορτή του χωριού και το χιόνι έχει αποκλείσει το χωριό από τον έξω κόσμο. Κατά μια διαβολική σύμπτωση ο δολοφόνος που ξέφυγε συναντιέται με τον Τζορτζ, με τον Τζορτζ να τον πηγαίνει σπίτι του. Και ο πατέρας του χαμένου κοριτσιού, ένας μεθύστακας αγροίκος, μαζί με άλλους φίλους του, θέλουν να σκοτώσουν τον δολοφόνο. Και έτσι αρχίζει η πολιορκία του σπιτιού της οικογένειας Μαγκρούντερ. Και τα πράγματα γίνονται όλο και χειρότερα...
Αργεί κάπως να πάρει μπρος, αλλά όταν παίρνει δεν μπορείς ν'αφήσεις το βιβλίο κάτω. Η όλη σκιαγράφηση των κατοίκων του χωριού, του ίδιου του χωριού, αλλά και της οικογένειας Μαγκρούντερ είναι πολύ καλή και με βάθος, που κάνει την ιστορία να φαίνεται ιδιαίτερα ρεαλιστική. Οι σκηνές της πολιορκίας του σπιτιού είναι πολλές και αρκετά δυνατές. Η γραφή είναι πολύ καλή, απλή αλλά με ρεαλιστικές περιγραφές και πειστικούς διαλόγους.
Η μετάφραση είναι από τον Ερρίκο Μπαρτζινόπουλο και είναι φυσικά πολύ καλή. Αν πετύχετε το βιβλίο αυτό, μην διστάσετε να το αγοράσετε, αξίζει μια ανάγνωση. Έχω την ταινία του Σαμ Πέκινπα στην ταινιοθήκη μου, που κάποια στιγμή θα την δω κι αυτή. Η ταινία και το βιβλίο μου κόστισαν συνολικά 1,50 ευρώ. Ούτε τυρόπιτα.
Στα ελληνικά κυκλοφόρησε το 1972 σε έκδοση τσέπης από την Άγκυρα, με τον τίτλο "Αδέσποτα σκυλιά".
Το λοιπόν, η ιστορία είναι αρκετά γνωστή, ο Αμερικάνος καθηγητής Τζορτζ Μαγκρούντερ, η Αγγλίδα γυναίκα του Λουίζ και η κόρη τους Κάρεν, νοίκιασαν ένα μεγάλο σπίτι στην φάρμα των Τρέντσερ, στο χωριό Ντάντο, κάπου στην αγγλική εξοχή, έτσι ώστε ο Τζορτζ να τελειώσει το γράψιμο του βιβλίου του μέσα σε ηρεμία και ησυχία. Η οικογένεια Μαγκρούντερ είναι λίγο πολύ ανεπιθύμητη στους κατοίκους του χωριού, οι οποίοι έχουν ζήσει όλη τους τη ζωή στο χωριό και δεν συμπαθούν ιδιαίτερα τους ξένους. Λίγο πριν τα Χριστούγεννα όμως, συμβαίνουν κάποια δυσάρεστα γεγονότα: Μετά από ένα τροχαίο ατύχημα ένας δολοφόνος παιδιών με μυαλό οχτάχρονου ξεφεύγει, ένα διανοητικά ανάπηρο κοριτσάκι εξαφανίζεται από την γιορτή του χωριού και το χιόνι έχει αποκλείσει το χωριό από τον έξω κόσμο. Κατά μια διαβολική σύμπτωση ο δολοφόνος που ξέφυγε συναντιέται με τον Τζορτζ, με τον Τζορτζ να τον πηγαίνει σπίτι του. Και ο πατέρας του χαμένου κοριτσιού, ένας μεθύστακας αγροίκος, μαζί με άλλους φίλους του, θέλουν να σκοτώσουν τον δολοφόνο. Και έτσι αρχίζει η πολιορκία του σπιτιού της οικογένειας Μαγκρούντερ. Και τα πράγματα γίνονται όλο και χειρότερα...
Αργεί κάπως να πάρει μπρος, αλλά όταν παίρνει δεν μπορείς ν'αφήσεις το βιβλίο κάτω. Η όλη σκιαγράφηση των κατοίκων του χωριού, του ίδιου του χωριού, αλλά και της οικογένειας Μαγκρούντερ είναι πολύ καλή και με βάθος, που κάνει την ιστορία να φαίνεται ιδιαίτερα ρεαλιστική. Οι σκηνές της πολιορκίας του σπιτιού είναι πολλές και αρκετά δυνατές. Η γραφή είναι πολύ καλή, απλή αλλά με ρεαλιστικές περιγραφές και πειστικούς διαλόγους.
Η μετάφραση είναι από τον Ερρίκο Μπαρτζινόπουλο και είναι φυσικά πολύ καλή. Αν πετύχετε το βιβλίο αυτό, μην διστάσετε να το αγοράσετε, αξίζει μια ανάγνωση. Έχω την ταινία του Σαμ Πέκινπα στην ταινιοθήκη μου, που κάποια στιγμή θα την δω κι αυτή. Η ταινία και το βιβλίο μου κόστισαν συνολικά 1,50 ευρώ. Ούτε τυρόπιτα.
Στα ελληνικά κυκλοφόρησε το 1972 σε έκδοση τσέπης από την Άγκυρα, με τον τίτλο "Αδέσποτα σκυλιά".
December 6, 2017
Finally found a copy of this book to solve the mystery of the title "Straw Dogs" after all these years. And of course, this phrase is never mentioned in the text! In the Peckinpah movie, it was the baffling tagline on the poster, "In the eyes of every coward burns a straw dog," while in the remake, David talks about "an ancient Chinese ritual where 'straw dogs' were treated with reverence until they were no longer needed and tossed aside." Apparently like... the former high-school football stars working on his roof? Bit of a stretch, but it did help make sense of how a former coach rather than a former soldier leads the assault on the hero's house in that remake. Anyhow, it didn't solve the mystery of the title (which a Google search could probably do in seconds), but how was the book that inspired decades of manly home invasion movies? Not a complete waste of time, but not as rowdy or ferocious as Gordon Williams' other books (like the sordid page-turner The Last Day of Lincoln Charles, for example). Both film adaptations play around with the question of whether David/George is actually a coward or merely committed to some unpopular principles, which then magically line up with heroic deeds to finally make his courage recognizable to his wife and the town. But the book doesn't ponder this much at all. The notorious "double rape" scenes from the movies are also nowhere to be found, and the wife is unfaithful instead, which the author felt was enough punishment/motive for everyone? Peckinpah obviously disagreed. So, essentially, in this novel, George simply reacts in (mostly) reasonable ways to what the world throws at him, and there's less to really solve about his character. Also, the inclusion of a daughter here (something the films jettisoned for obvious reasons) makes it more about saving a family than a marriage, which makes the big siege of the house (a full final third of the book) much more straightforward but far less messy.
September 24, 2018
Gordon Williams' novel is full of allusions to ancient blood and hidden rites of England's West Country. Its moody, threatening atmosphere established in just a few pages, The Siege of Trencher's Farm goes on to describe a terror that takes place over just a few hours one night, in the midst of a winter snow storm, just before Christmas.
Williams has a gift for describing visceral situations, as we see the rational George Magruder, an American professor of English, plunged into a primal fight for survival in which only his instincts will matter. The wimpish Magruder becomes transformed. From a henpecked husband, he turns into a one man combat team, defending his home, wife, and daughter. The novel seemingly flies in the face of contemporary feminism (1969) and reexamines the role of masculinity in modern life. Magruder has literally allowed himself and his family to become vulnerable to murder because of his commitment to "civilized values" that dismiss the evolutionary needs to protect home and family from wild intruders.
The novel provides a cathartic experience. Not just for the reader but for Magruder as well. Only at the end, upon vanquishing his foes, does he regain his manhood--literally.
It is easy to see how Sam Peckinpah became enthralled with this book as the subject for his film, Straw Dogs. Peckinpah was an enthusiast of Robert Ardrey and Ardrey's notions of Territoriality. Ardrey himself was a screenwriter, but his true interest remained in ethology, where he was a populizer of such academicians as Konrad Lorenz. According to Ardrey's explanation of Territoriality, animals, especially primates, gained a sense of self identity through their association with a home territory, for which they would always be able to leverage greater psychological advantages over intruders in defending it to the death. Much of that seems to be at work in both Peckinpah's film and in Williams' novel.
Williams has a gift for describing visceral situations, as we see the rational George Magruder, an American professor of English, plunged into a primal fight for survival in which only his instincts will matter. The wimpish Magruder becomes transformed. From a henpecked husband, he turns into a one man combat team, defending his home, wife, and daughter. The novel seemingly flies in the face of contemporary feminism (1969) and reexamines the role of masculinity in modern life. Magruder has literally allowed himself and his family to become vulnerable to murder because of his commitment to "civilized values" that dismiss the evolutionary needs to protect home and family from wild intruders.
The novel provides a cathartic experience. Not just for the reader but for Magruder as well. Only at the end, upon vanquishing his foes, does he regain his manhood--literally.
It is easy to see how Sam Peckinpah became enthralled with this book as the subject for his film, Straw Dogs. Peckinpah was an enthusiast of Robert Ardrey and Ardrey's notions of Territoriality. Ardrey himself was a screenwriter, but his true interest remained in ethology, where he was a populizer of such academicians as Konrad Lorenz. According to Ardrey's explanation of Territoriality, animals, especially primates, gained a sense of self identity through their association with a home territory, for which they would always be able to leverage greater psychological advantages over intruders in defending it to the death. Much of that seems to be at work in both Peckinpah's film and in Williams' novel.
September 16, 2011
From civility to brutality – that is the backwards evolution of this book. And, instead of giving a feeling of recession, this change in character is portrayed as a means of progression. Since when is a civil society looked upon as a bad thing? I’m not sure I agree with the whole outlook, but somehow, Williams makes this perspective on life work for the story.
George is an educated man who believes in being rational. Succumbing to brute force with people is animalistic in his eyes. Of course, when he is faced with either dying or protecting the lives of his family against barbaric men, George’s natural will to survive kicks in, like a giant boot to the butt.
As a great means for literary discussion, the story entertains how hundreds of years of people’s evolution and sophistication gets thrown out the window lives are threatened. Survive at any means necessary – that’s what was figuratively and literally beaten into George. Beat or get beaten.
Then again, what other choice does George have when he resides in a town that’s so backwards its townspeople can’t help tripping on everything in their path. The odd part is watching George and his family think more highly of themselves for reducing themselves to physical violence. Pride and admiration seem odd prizes for brutality, but really, what other choice is there when his home is under attack.
Intriguing concepts of civility kept the wheel in my head turning like a hamster in a cage. In contrast, the explicit aggression and hunger for violence that the townspeople have is jaw-dropping and eye-popping. In short, this is anything but a dull read.
- EZRead Staffer, Amelia
Watch the video discussion: http://vimeo.com/29104913
Like the review? Buy the book: http://www.ezread.com/book.asp?EAN=97...
George is an educated man who believes in being rational. Succumbing to brute force with people is animalistic in his eyes. Of course, when he is faced with either dying or protecting the lives of his family against barbaric men, George’s natural will to survive kicks in, like a giant boot to the butt.
As a great means for literary discussion, the story entertains how hundreds of years of people’s evolution and sophistication gets thrown out the window lives are threatened. Survive at any means necessary – that’s what was figuratively and literally beaten into George. Beat or get beaten.
Then again, what other choice does George have when he resides in a town that’s so backwards its townspeople can’t help tripping on everything in their path. The odd part is watching George and his family think more highly of themselves for reducing themselves to physical violence. Pride and admiration seem odd prizes for brutality, but really, what other choice is there when his home is under attack.
Intriguing concepts of civility kept the wheel in my head turning like a hamster in a cage. In contrast, the explicit aggression and hunger for violence that the townspeople have is jaw-dropping and eye-popping. In short, this is anything but a dull read.
- EZRead Staffer, Amelia
Watch the video discussion: http://vimeo.com/29104913
Like the review? Buy the book: http://www.ezread.com/book.asp?EAN=97...
April 12, 2013
I was engrossed in this book from beginning to end. A man is simply trying to finish a book, moves to England, his wife's home, and finds himself in the middle of a culture that is isolated with quirky folks, volitile twists, and a writer who finds himself and his family in a demanding situation!
Book is excellent, movie was a winner!
Book is excellent, movie was a winner!
Want to read
June 10, 2010Copyright 1969, original title, "The Siege of Trencher's Farm".....In front, floorplans of the farmhouse.
July 5, 2017
George Magruder is an American Professor of English who is working on a book. It seemed like a good idea at the time to leave America and rent a remote country house in the Cornish countryside, a quiet and restful place where he might concentrate on his writing. It's many years since he and his English wife, Louise, visited England and Louise could introduce their eight-year-old daughter, Karen, to a different nationality and culture. It's a different culture all right. The locals of the Cornish village of Dando Monachorum don't care for outsiders, particularly a rich American who they think considers himself above the village's far less wealthy and educated residents. As George's resentment at being rejected and isolated builds, as his dislike of the English intensifies, his wife begins to despise him for his weakness. Then, as if the locals don't resent the outsiders enough, the worse thing happens: two separate incidents in the snow bound countryside directly trigger the angry siege of Trencher's Farm.
The Siege of Trencher's Farm by Gordon Williams (Amazon link) was first published in 1969 and is 225 pages long. As it says on the book cover, this is the novel that inspired the movies Straw Dogs (1971) and (2011). The movies were certainly exciting, but it takes a third of the novel before the book starts to become anywhere near interesting and any real 'action' is in the last 20 or so pages.
The characters in the novel are far from likeable and often unbelievable. Aside from the locals, who one would be forgiven for thinking they are as inbred as the hillbillies in Deliverance (1972), Louise is quite a bitch towards George and we are told she has an extramarital 'thing' about a poet with bad breath, body odour, and who 'farts in public'. Really? Doesn't say much for George, does it? George acts like a male version of a Prima Donna with a tendency towards OCD and for the most part complains about everything and everyone. There is page after page of illogical bickering between George and Louise, or we are privy to their illogical or unpleasant thoughts.
George likes to think of himself as non-violent yet several times considers smacking his wife in the face. An easier target I assume than dealing with hostile locals. He is tempted to strike her for being hysterical, yet it is George who is hysterical. It really is all too much, too farcical, and instead of adding to the plot, it detracts from it. Instead of rooting for the George and Louise Magruder, a reader could be forgiven for taking the siegers' side.
I'm not sure if there is supposed to be some kind of moral to this story, about the way a man who is obsessed with trivialities, who cringes at wearing someone else's footwear, is repelled by violence and death, turns into some kind of self-doubting, anti-violence yet protective 'hero'. If you thought someone was about to take your life, would you worry about seriously hurting them? Louise, who seemed to have the balls of the family, turns into some kind of 1930s movie victim. She did everything but swoon. It's quite absurd how the characters develop towards the end and I am confused by what we are supposed to glean from all this; that even a worm will turn? That Cornwall isn't the best place to go for your holidays?
A goof seems to occur where, on page 78, George Magruder sets off in the snow to walk to a local school where his wife and daughter are attending a children's Christmas party. A crazy man is on the loose. On page 84, George arrives at the school and insists on driving his family home. But George, you've walked to the school, remember?!
The Siege of Trencher's Farm is available at Amazon. Personally, I think you should just watch the movies.
http://movies-and-books-world.blogspo...
The Siege of Trencher's Farm by Gordon Williams (Amazon link) was first published in 1969 and is 225 pages long. As it says on the book cover, this is the novel that inspired the movies Straw Dogs (1971) and (2011). The movies were certainly exciting, but it takes a third of the novel before the book starts to become anywhere near interesting and any real 'action' is in the last 20 or so pages.
The characters in the novel are far from likeable and often unbelievable. Aside from the locals, who one would be forgiven for thinking they are as inbred as the hillbillies in Deliverance (1972), Louise is quite a bitch towards George and we are told she has an extramarital 'thing' about a poet with bad breath, body odour, and who 'farts in public'. Really? Doesn't say much for George, does it? George acts like a male version of a Prima Donna with a tendency towards OCD and for the most part complains about everything and everyone. There is page after page of illogical bickering between George and Louise, or we are privy to their illogical or unpleasant thoughts.
George likes to think of himself as non-violent yet several times considers smacking his wife in the face. An easier target I assume than dealing with hostile locals. He is tempted to strike her for being hysterical, yet it is George who is hysterical. It really is all too much, too farcical, and instead of adding to the plot, it detracts from it. Instead of rooting for the George and Louise Magruder, a reader could be forgiven for taking the siegers' side.
I'm not sure if there is supposed to be some kind of moral to this story, about the way a man who is obsessed with trivialities, who cringes at wearing someone else's footwear, is repelled by violence and death, turns into some kind of self-doubting, anti-violence yet protective 'hero'. If you thought someone was about to take your life, would you worry about seriously hurting them? Louise, who seemed to have the balls of the family, turns into some kind of 1930s movie victim. She did everything but swoon. It's quite absurd how the characters develop towards the end and I am confused by what we are supposed to glean from all this; that even a worm will turn? That Cornwall isn't the best place to go for your holidays?
A goof seems to occur where, on page 78, George Magruder sets off in the snow to walk to a local school where his wife and daughter are attending a children's Christmas party. A crazy man is on the loose. On page 84, George arrives at the school and insists on driving his family home. But George, you've walked to the school, remember?!
The Siege of Trencher's Farm is available at Amazon. Personally, I think you should just watch the movies.
http://movies-and-books-world.blogspo...
March 2, 2018
This book was well written and fast paced once I got past the first few pages. The movie and book are quite a bit different but both are very good in there own way. Definitely worth a read. I really enjoyed this story.
January 9, 2012
After watching the 2011 Straw Dogs, I knew I had to read this book. In all honesty, it was a little disappointing. I knew it wouldn't be too much like the film, but I was expecting something I couldn't put down.
The main thing that REALLY irritated me was the British author's depiction of Americans. It was offensive or anything, it just wasn't realistic in the slightest. Don't get me wrong, I love British books - Georgia Nicholson is one of my favorite characters (albeit that is YA writing and this book was in a different category). George, the American husband, would frequently say British things, which wouldn't have been that annoying except that on occasion the author would try to make George sound more American by saying things like, "You guys are going to pay for this!" Not only does that sentence sound stumbly and awkward, but you'd be lucky to hear a 12 year old American boy say it.
Aside from the awful depiction of American language, the book got much more interesting towards the end. Although it is sexist, I did rather enjoy the part about Louise thinking George wasn't a real man until he slapped her. I was glad he slapped her, she was getting really annoying! Karen sort of felt like an afterthought, but I think the author was pretty accurate in showing how George kept forgetting she and Niles were there - he was too hell-bent on protecting his domicile. I think the story in general was very plausible. One thing I liked compared to the film is that you actually get some background info on Niles (his name is different in the film, Jeremy I think?). In the movie, he seemed like a random character that only served as an ignition for the siege or whatever you want to call it. In the book, however, you actually learn what happened to him, why he's a child molester, all that. He is also a complex character because the others feel both pity and disgust towards him. I like how the author made George into a guy protecting his home, not defending Niles. Truly, Niles is not a major part of the story. George even mentions it a few times that he is simply pissed they're trying to force their way into his home uninvited, and no matter who Niles is George isn't letting those jerks inside. I like that, and I like that he doesn't just give Niles up.
As the situation increases in intensity, George really does change. He gets more confident and he gets over his aversion to violence. He really does turn into a man, those reviews are true. Both he and Louise become far less annoying and almost admirable as the story unfolds.
So overall, I would say this is a good book. I didn't really get pulled in until the last thirty pages or so, but then again I wouldn't normally pick up this type of book. I like the idea a lot and I think Gordon Williams is a good author - aside from George saying very British things or very butchered American things, it wasn't terribly obvious it was a British novel. So I would say I liked it, but it wasn't really what I was expecting, which is why it gets three stars.
The main thing that REALLY irritated me was the British author's depiction of Americans. It was offensive or anything, it just wasn't realistic in the slightest. Don't get me wrong, I love British books - Georgia Nicholson is one of my favorite characters (albeit that is YA writing and this book was in a different category). George, the American husband, would frequently say British things, which wouldn't have been that annoying except that on occasion the author would try to make George sound more American by saying things like, "You guys are going to pay for this!" Not only does that sentence sound stumbly and awkward, but you'd be lucky to hear a 12 year old American boy say it.
Aside from the awful depiction of American language, the book got much more interesting towards the end. Although it is sexist, I did rather enjoy the part about Louise thinking George wasn't a real man until he slapped her. I was glad he slapped her, she was getting really annoying! Karen sort of felt like an afterthought, but I think the author was pretty accurate in showing how George kept forgetting she and Niles were there - he was too hell-bent on protecting his domicile. I think the story in general was very plausible. One thing I liked compared to the film is that you actually get some background info on Niles (his name is different in the film, Jeremy I think?). In the movie, he seemed like a random character that only served as an ignition for the siege or whatever you want to call it. In the book, however, you actually learn what happened to him, why he's a child molester, all that. He is also a complex character because the others feel both pity and disgust towards him. I like how the author made George into a guy protecting his home, not defending Niles. Truly, Niles is not a major part of the story. George even mentions it a few times that he is simply pissed they're trying to force their way into his home uninvited, and no matter who Niles is George isn't letting those jerks inside. I like that, and I like that he doesn't just give Niles up.
As the situation increases in intensity, George really does change. He gets more confident and he gets over his aversion to violence. He really does turn into a man, those reviews are true. Both he and Louise become far less annoying and almost admirable as the story unfolds.
So overall, I would say this is a good book. I didn't really get pulled in until the last thirty pages or so, but then again I wouldn't normally pick up this type of book. I like the idea a lot and I think Gordon Williams is a good author - aside from George saying very British things or very butchered American things, it wasn't terribly obvious it was a British novel. So I would say I liked it, but it wasn't really what I was expecting, which is why it gets three stars.
August 25, 2019
One of the 100 best Scottish Books.
I have not seen the film into which this was made and which provides the title for this reprint of the original text of Williams’s novel The Siege of Trencher's Farm. The subject matter did not attract me. It still doesn’t. I only read this for completeness, because it’s on that 100 best list.
In the run-up to Christmas a snow storm cuts off the village of Dando Manchorum in the English West Country. At a do in the village a young girl, Janice Hedden, goes missing. Search parties are organised. George Magruder, a US citizen, decides to take his English wife Louise and daughter Karen back home to Trencher’s Farm for safety before returning to the search. In the meantime Henry Niles, convicted child molester and murderer, has been thrown out of the van in which he was being transported from a hospital procedure back to the local prison for the criminally disturbed and is wandering the roads. Magruder’s car hits him and the family takes him back to the farmhouse till a doctor can come out to see him. When George finds out who Niles actually is he phones the police but due to the snow drifts they won’t be able to get there for hours.
Several of the locals, especially Tom Hedden, the missing girl’s father, convinced Niles must have abducted her, hear the news Niles is at the farm and they decide to take justice into their own hands. The siege of the title is their attempts to get in and those of George and, less so, Louise, to resist them. The beseigers are partly inspired by the tale of Soldier’s Field when some of their ancestors collectively killed the rapist and murderer of a young local girl but as none would talk weren’t subsequently prosecuted.
Niles himself, portrayed here as a bewildered, inadequate soul and of course totally innocent of abducting or killing Janice Hedden (though not the crimes for which he was incarcerated,) plays an off-stage part for most of the novel, locked in the Magruder’s bathroom before being stuffed into the loft.
The relationship between George and Louise is gone into in some detail but in the end reduces to the kind of sexual politics reflective of the decade in which The Siege of Trencher’s Farm was written (the 1960s.)
There isn’t really much insight into the human condition in these pages. The locals are depicted as very insular (which may be true to life) but the besiegers are more or less unthinking yokels - or else disturbed. I wouldn’t recommend the book to anyone unless they like descriptions of violence. It’s yet another crime book on that 100 best list. Presumably it’s only on there due to its – or the film’s – notoriety. It certainly hasn’t much by way of literary merit.
I have not seen the film into which this was made and which provides the title for this reprint of the original text of Williams’s novel The Siege of Trencher's Farm. The subject matter did not attract me. It still doesn’t. I only read this for completeness, because it’s on that 100 best list.
In the run-up to Christmas a snow storm cuts off the village of Dando Manchorum in the English West Country. At a do in the village a young girl, Janice Hedden, goes missing. Search parties are organised. George Magruder, a US citizen, decides to take his English wife Louise and daughter Karen back home to Trencher’s Farm for safety before returning to the search. In the meantime Henry Niles, convicted child molester and murderer, has been thrown out of the van in which he was being transported from a hospital procedure back to the local prison for the criminally disturbed and is wandering the roads. Magruder’s car hits him and the family takes him back to the farmhouse till a doctor can come out to see him. When George finds out who Niles actually is he phones the police but due to the snow drifts they won’t be able to get there for hours.
Several of the locals, especially Tom Hedden, the missing girl’s father, convinced Niles must have abducted her, hear the news Niles is at the farm and they decide to take justice into their own hands. The siege of the title is their attempts to get in and those of George and, less so, Louise, to resist them. The beseigers are partly inspired by the tale of Soldier’s Field when some of their ancestors collectively killed the rapist and murderer of a young local girl but as none would talk weren’t subsequently prosecuted.
Niles himself, portrayed here as a bewildered, inadequate soul and of course totally innocent of abducting or killing Janice Hedden (though not the crimes for which he was incarcerated,) plays an off-stage part for most of the novel, locked in the Magruder’s bathroom before being stuffed into the loft.
The relationship between George and Louise is gone into in some detail but in the end reduces to the kind of sexual politics reflective of the decade in which The Siege of Trencher’s Farm was written (the 1960s.)
There isn’t really much insight into the human condition in these pages. The locals are depicted as very insular (which may be true to life) but the besiegers are more or less unthinking yokels - or else disturbed. I wouldn’t recommend the book to anyone unless they like descriptions of violence. It’s yet another crime book on that 100 best list. Presumably it’s only on there due to its – or the film’s – notoriety. It certainly hasn’t much by way of literary merit.
May 27, 2018
American professor George Macgruder has traveled to England with his British wife and daughter in hopes of finding a quiet place to finish his book. They rent an old house known as Trencher's Farm in a small village. It's the holiday season and in the middle of a snow storm on their way home, they accidentally hit a child killer who's escaped from a mental institution. Being the nice people that they are, they bring the man home and await the arrival of the police and a doctor. But a group of locals learns that they're holding the killer and a chain of events begins to unfold that will leave George fighting for his life as well as that of his family.
This chronicles a man who is in the fight of his life, for both his own life and his wife and daughters. And it was just...okay. It was fantastic and it wasn't horrible either. You spend the first half of the book leading up to the accident, then everything after that goes downhill.
Louise, George's wife, is pretty much a giant bitch. This book is as much about their relationship as it is about these crazy things that are happening. Louise feels like she's been taking care of George for years and now she has all sorts of resentment towards him and even their daughter.
There were some transitions in this that I really hated. One minute you're in the Macgruder home and you're with Lousie and Karen, and the next paragraph you're in the local pub. Normally, there will be an elongated space or a little marker, showing a change is perspective and there wasn't anything like that, so there were moments of super confusion.
But, it was pretty suspenseful. There were moments where you really wondered if George would do anything to defend his family or if he would let them all get killed. Then you are wondering what the hell the crazy people are going to do next, so that made the suspense worth it.
Like I said, this book was okay. If you like suspense, then you should give this book a shot. I can't compare it to the movie, so if that's what you were hoping for, sorry. 2.75 out of 5 stars, which I rounded up to 3. If I had a hard copy of this book, I'd swap it, or sell it to a used bookstore.
This chronicles a man who is in the fight of his life, for both his own life and his wife and daughters. And it was just...okay. It was fantastic and it wasn't horrible either. You spend the first half of the book leading up to the accident, then everything after that goes downhill.
Louise, George's wife, is pretty much a giant bitch. This book is as much about their relationship as it is about these crazy things that are happening. Louise feels like she's been taking care of George for years and now she has all sorts of resentment towards him and even their daughter.
There were some transitions in this that I really hated. One minute you're in the Macgruder home and you're with Lousie and Karen, and the next paragraph you're in the local pub. Normally, there will be an elongated space or a little marker, showing a change is perspective and there wasn't anything like that, so there were moments of super confusion.
But, it was pretty suspenseful. There were moments where you really wondered if George would do anything to defend his family or if he would let them all get killed. Then you are wondering what the hell the crazy people are going to do next, so that made the suspense worth it.
Like I said, this book was okay. If you like suspense, then you should give this book a shot. I can't compare it to the movie, so if that's what you were hoping for, sorry. 2.75 out of 5 stars, which I rounded up to 3. If I had a hard copy of this book, I'd swap it, or sell it to a used bookstore.
December 8, 2012
George Magruder is a civilized man, a man who doesn’t believe in violence or guns. He believes in the advancement of mankind, using debate and discussion to address problems. George is an American. He married a Brit named Louise and together they have a young impressionable daughter. The Magruder family has been living in Louise's country for several months as George works on a research paper. They have bypassed the civilized city, renting a sprawling home called “Trencher’s Farm” inside a mysterious village in the fringes of England, miles away from London, miles away from the rest of the world.
As George, the civilized outsider, complains to his wife about the uncivilized village surrounding him, a storm begins brewing. George is about to clash with a group of locals who wants to bury him and his family along with the other secrets plaguing this backwater village.
During a series of bizarre mishaps, George finds himself harboring a legally insane pedophile as a group of hostile men, under the influence of not only alcohol, but years of repression, attempts to breach his house. A blizzard has crippled this small village, but it hasn’t crippled the action unfolding at Trencher’s Farm. George has the simple yet very powerful objective of protecting his home and his family. The last half of the book plays out in near real-time. This is the book’s best and, conversely, most critical feature. It's literary genius to see George transform right in front of your eyes. He becomes a "man," at least in his wife's eyes, and uses his book smarts to defend, and ultimately attack, these intruders. Every man has his breaking point and Mr. Williams provides us with a window into George’s transformation from a coward, to a strong man, to an inhuman animal.
If you enjoy action and becoming immersed into the details of an elaborate plot, then you must read this classic. Two films have spawned from Mr. Williams' words. This book has similarities in characters and form, but it’s nothing like the film adaptations. Read it! -Jonathan Sturak 9/30/2012
As George, the civilized outsider, complains to his wife about the uncivilized village surrounding him, a storm begins brewing. George is about to clash with a group of locals who wants to bury him and his family along with the other secrets plaguing this backwater village.
During a series of bizarre mishaps, George finds himself harboring a legally insane pedophile as a group of hostile men, under the influence of not only alcohol, but years of repression, attempts to breach his house. A blizzard has crippled this small village, but it hasn’t crippled the action unfolding at Trencher’s Farm. George has the simple yet very powerful objective of protecting his home and his family. The last half of the book plays out in near real-time. This is the book’s best and, conversely, most critical feature. It's literary genius to see George transform right in front of your eyes. He becomes a "man," at least in his wife's eyes, and uses his book smarts to defend, and ultimately attack, these intruders. Every man has his breaking point and Mr. Williams provides us with a window into George’s transformation from a coward, to a strong man, to an inhuman animal.
If you enjoy action and becoming immersed into the details of an elaborate plot, then you must read this classic. Two films have spawned from Mr. Williams' words. This book has similarities in characters and form, but it’s nothing like the film adaptations. Read it! -Jonathan Sturak 9/30/2012
February 16, 2018
Fun read that is breakneck in speed.
July 23, 2017
AHA! The book that Straw Dogs (2011) was based on. I really wanted to get this down, I knew it was a loose adaptation so I wasn't going to get a lot of insight into Amy's mindset in the first part of that movie where she more or less just goes berserk, in her bet to provoke David into a passion about something, anything!
I really liked how the characters develop over the course of the book. The change in both George and Louise throughout the book is phenomenal and amazing to watch. Especially, after the Siege begins George's change from no violence to violence to outwitting Scutt to getting them all!
Apart from the main two characters, Bert Voizey is definitely the one I am most fond of. The moment George replies to Scutt with some confidence and tells him to clear out of the house, his behaviour comes out in this incredibly good line:
I can't get enough of that line and more that describe who Bert really is.
At 200 pages, I wasn't expecting to love the characters so much. (Psst, psst, so much so that I wrote a rather long blog post analysing George and Louise and their movie counterparts, Amy and David.
I really liked how the characters develop over the course of the book. The change in both George and Louise throughout the book is phenomenal and amazing to watch. Especially, after the Siege begins George's change from no violence to violence to outwitting Scutt to getting them all!
Apart from the main two characters, Bert Voizey is definitely the one I am most fond of. The moment George replies to Scutt with some confidence and tells him to clear out of the house, his behaviour comes out in this incredibly good line:
The third man - Bert Voizey - never felt comfortable in this kind of fancy house. Like one of his own ferrets, he had a natural instinct for creeping about in darker corners. He was not at ease with loud, confident people who stared you straihgt in the eye when they talked to you.
I can't get enough of that line and more that describe who Bert really is.
At 200 pages, I wasn't expecting to love the characters so much. (Psst, psst, so much so that I wrote a rather long blog post analysing George and Louise and their movie counterparts, Amy and David.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews