What do you think?
Rate this book
At Fever Pitch
From Time Magazine (1961): "The central character of his first novel, set in a British colony on the edge of independence, is Lieut. Michael Glyn, an English lad of good family and education who has no sense of vocation for his job and is emotional to the point of hysteria. This is the sort of man who has the hopeless task of working out an orderly turnover to a native government after the new country's first election."
- GenresFiction
201 pages, Paperback
First published September 24, 1959
1 person is currently reading
11 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 22, 2023
Pros: clever treatment of colonialism, post-colonialism, racism and race relations. Stream of consciousness segments are well-done. Good twist at the end, which almost made me award it 4 stars.
Cons: Too many of the secondary White characters are barely distinguishable from one another. I got quite confused about who was who a lot of the time. I suppose a compounding factor is that I remained quite uninterested in them, for there is not one single truly likeable character in the whole book (least of all the principal ones). Flawed characters are fine with me, but I have problems handling a book where all characters turn out despicable, if only episodically. To top it all up, the model of same-sex desire that the book presents is one based on power, where a social superior seeks to emasculate a social inferior, thereby 'corrupting' the latter for life. The twist at the end does qualify this negative model a little, but only a little.
Cons: Too many of the secondary White characters are barely distinguishable from one another. I got quite confused about who was who a lot of the time. I suppose a compounding factor is that I remained quite uninterested in them, for there is not one single truly likeable character in the whole book (least of all the principal ones). Flawed characters are fine with me, but I have problems handling a book where all characters turn out despicable, if only episodically. To top it all up, the model of same-sex desire that the book presents is one based on power, where a social superior seeks to emasculate a social inferior, thereby 'corrupting' the latter for life. The twist at the end does qualify this negative model a little, but only a little.
July 9, 2024
"(This) book is an essay in disillusionment and disgust. The way he gets inside the skins of his large cast of characters would be an achievement in any novelist; that the author was only twenty when he wrote this book makes it a remarkable achievement." The Sunday Times
"The first novel of a young and very talented writer...Mr. Caute has applied a genuinely creative imagination to his African experience, and has written an interesting and intelligent novel which deserves commendation for its ambition alone." The New Statesman
"This is that rare and beautiful thing, a novel to short for its content...A most impressive piece of work." The Observer
"The tale of a young subaltern serving with a native regiment in an African colony which is on the verge of independence. The subaltern's sex life is a mess He hankers after his coloured soldier servant; but success in this quarter leads to revulsion and guilt. He then achieves a double by managing, after protracted labour, to acquit himself manfully with a dance hostess. Meanwhile, his Brigadier has started to make insinuating remarks through the mosquito net...When I think of some of the wafer-thin confections now masquerading as novels, I bless the name of Caute for this generous first offering." Simon Raven (An author of some reputation in the UK once).
All these quotes come from the 1965 Panther paperback edition of this book. All of them were written
in 1959 when this novel was first published.
I have quoted all of the above because it is useful to know how novels, particularly ones like this that have passed into obscurity, were viewed when first published. The only reason I, and probably most of those who have read and then rated or reviewed the novel, was attracted to the novel was the 'gay' (please see my footnote *1 below) plot line but even for its time it is not a 'gay' novel, though it is interesting to see how 'homosexuality' in a 1950s British novel differed from US novels. It is more matter-of-fact though that is not to suggest any acceptance. But this isn't a novel about homosexuality, which is really only a subplot, what the novel is really about is colonialism, decolonisation and what that would mean for Britain or British people (men of course) and their changing role vis a vis colonised people, particularly black ones. Despite its setting both geographically and historically this is really a novel about Britain and its changing role in the world (please see footnote *2 below).
When this novel was published it was this examination of Britain's changing role that caught reviewers' interest and why they thought the novel was significant. It is worth remembering that although Suez debacle in 1956 is now seen as the British empire's last gasp when this novel was published the only African colony that was independent was Ghana (in 1957). Everyone knew that things would change but nobody really understood how quickly.
As a final word on the gay/homosexual subplot - it is about power and relations between white and black. Even if the theme had been developed further it was never a tale of two people trying 'to connect' as E.M. Forster might have put it.
A curiosity that says more about race relations and power and how they were viewed and understood in the 1950s. It is not a lost or forgotten 'gay' classic.
I read the book when I bought, maybe twenty years ago. I haven't reread and I probably won't, though from lack of time rather than lack of interest.
*1 Of course applying the term 'gay' to a 1959 novel is absurd but is the easiest term to use.
*2 I would compare it to all those novels/films about Vietnam which aren't about Vietnam but about America and Americans in Vietnam.
"The first novel of a young and very talented writer...Mr. Caute has applied a genuinely creative imagination to his African experience, and has written an interesting and intelligent novel which deserves commendation for its ambition alone." The New Statesman
"This is that rare and beautiful thing, a novel to short for its content...A most impressive piece of work." The Observer
"The tale of a young subaltern serving with a native regiment in an African colony which is on the verge of independence. The subaltern's sex life is a mess He hankers after his coloured soldier servant; but success in this quarter leads to revulsion and guilt. He then achieves a double by managing, after protracted labour, to acquit himself manfully with a dance hostess. Meanwhile, his Brigadier has started to make insinuating remarks through the mosquito net...When I think of some of the wafer-thin confections now masquerading as novels, I bless the name of Caute for this generous first offering." Simon Raven (An author of some reputation in the UK once).
All these quotes come from the 1965 Panther paperback edition of this book. All of them were written
in 1959 when this novel was first published.
I have quoted all of the above because it is useful to know how novels, particularly ones like this that have passed into obscurity, were viewed when first published. The only reason I, and probably most of those who have read and then rated or reviewed the novel, was attracted to the novel was the 'gay' (please see my footnote *1 below) plot line but even for its time it is not a 'gay' novel, though it is interesting to see how 'homosexuality' in a 1950s British novel differed from US novels. It is more matter-of-fact though that is not to suggest any acceptance. But this isn't a novel about homosexuality, which is really only a subplot, what the novel is really about is colonialism, decolonisation and what that would mean for Britain or British people (men of course) and their changing role vis a vis colonised people, particularly black ones. Despite its setting both geographically and historically this is really a novel about Britain and its changing role in the world (please see footnote *2 below).
When this novel was published it was this examination of Britain's changing role that caught reviewers' interest and why they thought the novel was significant. It is worth remembering that although Suez debacle in 1956 is now seen as the British empire's last gasp when this novel was published the only African colony that was independent was Ghana (in 1957). Everyone knew that things would change but nobody really understood how quickly.
As a final word on the gay/homosexual subplot - it is about power and relations between white and black. Even if the theme had been developed further it was never a tale of two people trying 'to connect' as E.M. Forster might have put it.
A curiosity that says more about race relations and power and how they were viewed and understood in the 1950s. It is not a lost or forgotten 'gay' classic.
I read the book when I bought, maybe twenty years ago. I haven't reread and I probably won't, though from lack of time rather than lack of interest.
*1 Of course applying the term 'gay' to a 1959 novel is absurd but is the easiest term to use.
*2 I would compare it to all those novels/films about Vietnam which aren't about Vietnam but about America and Americans in Vietnam.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews