What do you think?
Rate this book
Lord Jim en casa
Cuando Lord Jim en casa se publicó por primera vez en 1973, fue descrita como «sórdida y sorprendente», «horriblemente cruel» y una «parodia monstruosa» de la vida de la clase media alta inglesa. La obra cuenta la historia de Giles Trenchard, que crece aislado en una atmósfera de privilegio y violencia oculta; que va a la guerra, y vuelve; y entonces, un día –como el protagonista del clásico de Joseph Conrad Lord Jim– comete un acto que pone en tela de juicio su pasado, su carácter, todo su mundo.
Descatalogada durante casi medio siglo (y nunca hasta ahora publicada en castellano), Lord Jim en casa revela a una escritora audaz que debería haber sido revalorizada hace tiempo, y cuya obra ha conservado toda su originalidad y poder. Como escribe Ottessa Moshfegh en su prólogo a la nueva edición, Brooke evoca la vulnerabilidad infantil y la crueldad adulta «de un modo que la buena gente es demasiado educada para confesar que lo ha entendido».
Descatalogada durante casi medio siglo (y nunca hasta ahora publicada en castellano), Lord Jim en casa revela a una escritora audaz que debería haber sido revalorizada hace tiempo, y cuya obra ha conservado toda su originalidad y poder. Como escribe Ottessa Moshfegh en su prólogo a la nueva edición, Brooke evoca la vulnerabilidad infantil y la crueldad adulta «de un modo que la buena gente es demasiado educada para confesar que lo ha entendido».
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1973
31 people are currently reading
2196 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 - 30 of 122 reviews
October 10, 2023
In the last three books I have read, I have had several moments of open-mouthed horror so my October has been quite spooky enough already. It started with Radcliffe by David Storey, then Black Narcissus by Rumer Godden, and now continuing with Lord Jim At Home by Dinah Brooke, a perfect example of 'domestic horror'.
Lord Jim At Home, originally published in 1973 and re-issued in 2023, follows Giles Trenchard from his infancy to adulthood as he grows up in a privileged English household though his upbringing is far from privileged and bordering on outright abuse. We see a psychopath being made.
This book is a portrait of upper-class hypocrisy and its rules, rituals, all of which seemingly make up civilized society, but is teeming with something almost animal-like underneath. It's also a portrait of power dynamics and exploitation of authority - the power of a parent over their child, the husband over the wife, the master over his servant. Reading this book reminded me of the experience of watching a Yorgos Lanthimos movie. One is shocked at times, sad at others, and then there are times, one wants to laugh really hard but can't because something absolutely sickening is happening right then. It's that kind of a disorienting ride. All of this is delivered through a distant, clinical writing though what one experiences is almost an uncomfortably intimate look at manifestations of violence in an ordinary domestic space.
This is for fans of Mariana Enriquez, James Purdy and Shirley Jackson. I am excited to read more from McNally Editions.
Lord Jim At Home, originally published in 1973 and re-issued in 2023, follows Giles Trenchard from his infancy to adulthood as he grows up in a privileged English household though his upbringing is far from privileged and bordering on outright abuse. We see a psychopath being made.
This book is a portrait of upper-class hypocrisy and its rules, rituals, all of which seemingly make up civilized society, but is teeming with something almost animal-like underneath. It's also a portrait of power dynamics and exploitation of authority - the power of a parent over their child, the husband over the wife, the master over his servant. Reading this book reminded me of the experience of watching a Yorgos Lanthimos movie. One is shocked at times, sad at others, and then there are times, one wants to laugh really hard but can't because something absolutely sickening is happening right then. It's that kind of a disorienting ride. All of this is delivered through a distant, clinical writing though what one experiences is almost an uncomfortably intimate look at manifestations of violence in an ordinary domestic space.
This is for fans of Mariana Enriquez, James Purdy and Shirley Jackson. I am excited to read more from McNally Editions.
November 1, 2023
goes so hard
October 31, 2023
Guess u guys (England in the 70s) aren’t ready for this one yet…. But your kids are gonna love it
July 8, 2024
Este título captó mi atención en la newsletter de libros de The New York Times, que me gusta mucho porque nunca recomiendan novedades, siempre recomienda dos títulos relacionados de una manera muy laxa con un tema y siempre son libros de hace años que puedes encontrar de segunda mano. Esta novela de Dinah Brooke venía recomendada, creo recordar, por estar relacionada con la maternidad y, por algo que no puedo explicarte, me llamó la atención y la compré online en una librería de Irlanda porque no está traducida.
Es una novela rarísima con un estilo preciso y acerado en la que cada frase se siente como un corte de bisturí, como una nueva herida. Es como leer un informe policial, una autopsia pero peor, porque destila una crueldad que casi casi está a la par con la de Claus y Lucas, de Agota Kristof. No es un libro para pusilánimes. Lo que nos cuenta Dinah (que publicó esta novela en 1973 y poco después se hizo budista, se cambió el nombre, se metió en la secta de Osho y pasó seis años en la India) es la historia del joven Gilles, el primer hijo de una acomodada familia inglesa, como esas que todos hemos visto mil veces en series y películas. Dinah opta por una narración en presente, casi a ojo de águila, con cero implicación emocional por parte del narrador. Hasta la página 63 no conocemos a nadie por su nombre: conocemos al Príncipe, al Rey y la Reina, al Abuelo, a la Enfermera, al Chófer y a la Otra Enfermera. Todo eso contribuye a la sensación de estar leyendo un atestado policial porque, además, lo que se retrata son una serie de hechos crueles, perversos y malvados sin justificación alguna por parte de los protagonistas más allá de su poder para cometerlos. El maltrato infantil disfrazado de educación esmerada es terrorífico. A partir del momento en que sabemos que El Príncipe se llama Gilles salimos de la infancia y acompañamos al muchacho durante su vida, en un internado también terrorífico, luego durante la Guerra Mundial (primero en el Ártico y luego en el Pacífico), la vuelta a casa y su vida como un diletante al que su padre, El Rey, pretende enderezar y no lo consigue. El final llega de golpe y de una manera brutal. ¿Es Gilles así por su educación o es intrínsecamente malvado? Es una novela que, si bien no se puede decir que «guste», porque es incómoda de leer por lo que provoca, se lee con admiración por el punto de vista que la autora adopta y que no es fácil de mantener: ese narrador equisciente que en las primeras páginas incluso le permite hablar desde el punto de vista de un bebé, de sus pensamientos y sus sentimientos.
Es una novela rarísima con un estilo preciso y acerado en la que cada frase se siente como un corte de bisturí, como una nueva herida. Es como leer un informe policial, una autopsia pero peor, porque destila una crueldad que casi casi está a la par con la de Claus y Lucas, de Agota Kristof. No es un libro para pusilánimes. Lo que nos cuenta Dinah (que publicó esta novela en 1973 y poco después se hizo budista, se cambió el nombre, se metió en la secta de Osho y pasó seis años en la India) es la historia del joven Gilles, el primer hijo de una acomodada familia inglesa, como esas que todos hemos visto mil veces en series y películas. Dinah opta por una narración en presente, casi a ojo de águila, con cero implicación emocional por parte del narrador. Hasta la página 63 no conocemos a nadie por su nombre: conocemos al Príncipe, al Rey y la Reina, al Abuelo, a la Enfermera, al Chófer y a la Otra Enfermera. Todo eso contribuye a la sensación de estar leyendo un atestado policial porque, además, lo que se retrata son una serie de hechos crueles, perversos y malvados sin justificación alguna por parte de los protagonistas más allá de su poder para cometerlos. El maltrato infantil disfrazado de educación esmerada es terrorífico. A partir del momento en que sabemos que El Príncipe se llama Gilles salimos de la infancia y acompañamos al muchacho durante su vida, en un internado también terrorífico, luego durante la Guerra Mundial (primero en el Ártico y luego en el Pacífico), la vuelta a casa y su vida como un diletante al que su padre, El Rey, pretende enderezar y no lo consigue. El final llega de golpe y de una manera brutal. ¿Es Gilles así por su educación o es intrínsecamente malvado? Es una novela que, si bien no se puede decir que «guste», porque es incómoda de leer por lo que provoca, se lee con admiración por el punto de vista que la autora adopta y que no es fácil de mantener: ese narrador equisciente que en las primeras páginas incluso le permite hablar desde el punto de vista de un bebé, de sus pensamientos y sus sentimientos.
February 23, 2025
How will things be after the war, when we get back...Will the ordinary bloke have more of a chance, or will the spivs take over...Are we being the mugs, allowing ourselves to be smashed, burned, our wives left widows, weeping real tears, our children orphans, so that some bright young idiots can dance the night away on some lawn by the Thames? Has the simple offering of our lives made any difference?
November 22, 2023
Finally, an exception to prove the rule. A re-published novel that didn’t feel like an overhyped cash grab and that finally seems to make the swathe of resurrected duds worth it. ‘Lord Jim at Home’ has restored my faith in anything with the label rediscovered slapped onto it. A scathing criticism of the hypocrisy and arbitrary torture of life in the British upper-middle class, ‘Lord Jim at Home’ is a novel that still feels impressively fresh and powerful today.
My favourite thing about ‘Lord Jim at Home’ was how exceptionally well written I found it to be. Its characterisation was well done, not in a traditional in-depth almost character study kind of a way, but in a clever sketching out of the outlines of characters who therefore become universal or allegorical. Those that you can trace and transpose to so many stories and situations to tell a wider criticism of a type of person, rather than just one specific individual. It’s just as hard to do this as to spend the time to make a character feel individual and vividly real (not that they don’t here), and I was impressed by how much Brooke gave and withheld to execute this masterfully. The prose generally was pretty magnificent too, riveting and insightful, cutting exactly where it intended to. I also thought it was well measured too, with just the right amount of horrific for the necessary effect, but never gratuitous (I’m looking at you ‘American Psycho’). The other thing I really enjoyed was the ending, not even the final turn of the novel, but really those last few pages where Brooke pulled back the curtain of the story itself to really bring home the crux in a more abstract, yet somehow even more lucid way. The effect of changing the narrative style like this just briefly, right at the end, really cemented how much I had enjoyed it, and how fresh and different it felt overall as a novel.
I’d say maybe my only kind of criticism is the book kind of feels like it’s cleft in two at a certain point, and these parts feel more separate than I would have liked. It’s not that both parts aren’t individually great, or even that they don’t fit. I suppose it’s rather that it feels like Brooke went so far out on a thread that she almost started a different, slightly separate novel, but had to reign herself in and bring it back into focus. There are vast parts of her describing the horrors of war when you almost forget who Giles is at all; he seems such an afterthought. Thankfully, the section is gripping enough without him and so this is a pretty petty gripe all thing considered, given that I still thought the entirety of the content was exceptionally good, and it didn’t really affect the novel negatively overall.
I would suppose that this novel really was a victim of being misunderstood in its time, and I’m sure the fact that it was written by a woman didn’t help it much back then either. It definitely seems unfathomable to me that something so well conceived and executed would be dismissed and forgotten in this way. I suppose there’s always just garden variety bad luck, and many novels have been lost this way too, but that might be a little too convenient. I hope this restores some of Brooke’s lost but well earned reputation, and I hope her other books see some sort of resurgence as well. I know I would love to read them.
My favourite thing about ‘Lord Jim at Home’ was how exceptionally well written I found it to be. Its characterisation was well done, not in a traditional in-depth almost character study kind of a way, but in a clever sketching out of the outlines of characters who therefore become universal or allegorical. Those that you can trace and transpose to so many stories and situations to tell a wider criticism of a type of person, rather than just one specific individual. It’s just as hard to do this as to spend the time to make a character feel individual and vividly real (not that they don’t here), and I was impressed by how much Brooke gave and withheld to execute this masterfully. The prose generally was pretty magnificent too, riveting and insightful, cutting exactly where it intended to. I also thought it was well measured too, with just the right amount of horrific for the necessary effect, but never gratuitous (I’m looking at you ‘American Psycho’). The other thing I really enjoyed was the ending, not even the final turn of the novel, but really those last few pages where Brooke pulled back the curtain of the story itself to really bring home the crux in a more abstract, yet somehow even more lucid way. The effect of changing the narrative style like this just briefly, right at the end, really cemented how much I had enjoyed it, and how fresh and different it felt overall as a novel.
I’d say maybe my only kind of criticism is the book kind of feels like it’s cleft in two at a certain point, and these parts feel more separate than I would have liked. It’s not that both parts aren’t individually great, or even that they don’t fit. I suppose it’s rather that it feels like Brooke went so far out on a thread that she almost started a different, slightly separate novel, but had to reign herself in and bring it back into focus. There are vast parts of her describing the horrors of war when you almost forget who Giles is at all; he seems such an afterthought. Thankfully, the section is gripping enough without him and so this is a pretty petty gripe all thing considered, given that I still thought the entirety of the content was exceptionally good, and it didn’t really affect the novel negatively overall.
I would suppose that this novel really was a victim of being misunderstood in its time, and I’m sure the fact that it was written by a woman didn’t help it much back then either. It definitely seems unfathomable to me that something so well conceived and executed would be dismissed and forgotten in this way. I suppose there’s always just garden variety bad luck, and many novels have been lost this way too, but that might be a little too convenient. I hope this restores some of Brooke’s lost but well earned reputation, and I hope her other books see some sort of resurgence as well. I know I would love to read them.
Read
November 2, 2023I demand that all of Dinah Brooke's books are republished STAT.
January 11, 2025
Stunningly good - thanks to Biblioklept for the rec
January 12, 2025
4.25⭐️
Wowzas. This is ruthlessly nasty in the most engrossing way. I came for the horror and stayed to satisfy my morbid curiosity. I can see why Otessa Moshfegh wrote the introduction for Lord Jim at Home, Dinah Brooke clearly influenced her writing in Lapvona.
This was written back in 1973 and deemed too risqué for publishing in the US. Ummmmm, wasn’t Marian Engel’s Bear published in the US in 1976? Apparently a woman f*ucking a bear is just fine but the content in Lord Jim is not. Anyway….not sure what it says about me that I enjoyed both of these weird fiction reads. More like these please!
Wowzas. This is ruthlessly nasty in the most engrossing way. I came for the horror and stayed to satisfy my morbid curiosity. I can see why Otessa Moshfegh wrote the introduction for Lord Jim at Home, Dinah Brooke clearly influenced her writing in Lapvona.
This was written back in 1973 and deemed too risqué for publishing in the US. Ummmmm, wasn’t Marian Engel’s Bear published in the US in 1976? Apparently a woman f*ucking a bear is just fine but the content in Lord Jim is not. Anyway….not sure what it says about me that I enjoyed both of these weird fiction reads. More like these please!
Read
January 21, 2024Oh how good it is to be an underdog! To be incorrigibly, unmentionably stupid. To stupid to get up in the morning without a kick up the arse, too stupid to think, too stupid to understand. Too stupid to be responsible for your own life or death.
August 18, 2025
He estado buscando reseñas negativas pero a todo el mundo le ha gustado???
A mí me ha parecido criminal, sobre todo la primera parte: te describe a la familia y te cuenta cómo maltratan al pobre chiquillo -muy explícitamente y encima lo narra como si fuera una especie cuento infantil ¿?-. Las escenas del trozo de carne pocho y la del abuelo y la criada asustan al diablo, horror.
Luego, cuando se va a la guerra y vuelve y tal pues mejora un poco -quiero decir que se vuelve menos perturbador-, pero ni la historia ni la forma de escribir -va cambiando a lo largo del libro y a veces no me enteraba del todo- me han motivado nada.
El final me ha parecido sin más, no me ha sorprendido nada que el “crimen atroz” que comete el chaval acabe siendo el que es.
En resumen, pelos de punta con la primera parte y lo demás bien, se puede leer, pero a mí no me ha dicho nada. 3/10.
A mí me ha parecido criminal, sobre todo la primera parte: te describe a la familia y te cuenta cómo maltratan al pobre chiquillo -muy explícitamente y encima lo narra como si fuera una especie cuento infantil ¿?-. Las escenas del trozo de carne pocho y la del abuelo y la criada asustan al diablo, horror.
Luego, cuando se va a la guerra y vuelve y tal pues mejora un poco -quiero decir que se vuelve menos perturbador-, pero ni la historia ni la forma de escribir -va cambiando a lo largo del libro y a veces no me enteraba del todo- me han motivado nada.
El final me ha parecido sin más, no me ha sorprendido nada que el “crimen atroz” que comete el chaval acabe siendo el que es.
En resumen, pelos de punta con la primera parte y lo demás bien, se puede leer, pero a mí no me ha dicho nada. 3/10.
September 18, 2025
This twisted little book would be incredible if it had been published in 1956, or even in 2025, but in 1973? That's kind of random
March 11, 2024
(3.5)
I am so conflicted about this book!!! First part: LOVED. Literally from the first page it was so creepy and strange and gripping. And then there was this 75 page ish interlude that was so boring I was actually irritated. In the final 50 pages it picked back up again and i enjoyed it, but by that point i was sort of out of it.
Sooooo it was great, kind of.
I am so conflicted about this book!!! First part: LOVED. Literally from the first page it was so creepy and strange and gripping. And then there was this 75 page ish interlude that was so boring I was actually irritated. In the final 50 pages it picked back up again and i enjoyed it, but by that point i was sort of out of it.
Sooooo it was great, kind of.
February 22, 2024
The chicken-and-egg of privilege and monstrosity. Unlike anything I’ve ever read before
December 1, 2025
Welcome back to this week's episode of Jaden's depressing demistic horror power hour in the morning (Really rolls off the tounge, eh?). This week's episode is brought to you by Therapy. Therapy. "Heal your inner child...or else"...
This week we take a look at Lord Jim At Home. A distressing and taxing journey through the life of a child, to boy, to man, to monster. The life of Giles Trenchard
Jaden: Say, Boogerbutt, (my co-host) what did you think of that display of subtle, and not so subtle, emotional adolescent abuse?
Boogerbutt: Ah, it was crushing. The withholding of affection is cruel punishment to inflict on a child. They dont know any better. Most of the time they dont even realize they did anything wrong. That confusion doesn't just go away. It grows. Adapts. Becomes what we hate within ourselves as adults.
Jaden: Not as cruel as the things I did to your mom last night Boogerbutt! *Kazzoo soundbite*
Boogerbutt: OHHHH! You got me! *womp womp* How about you Jaden? How do you think the way Giles father wielded his unbridled control and contempt over his son throughout the book eventually played into the man Giles would become? The actions he commited?
Jaden: I mean, isnt that the whole crux of this book here Boogerbutt? We always like to say "our parents did their best". But did they? Did they grow past the toxic cycles thrust onto them by their own parents? Grow past their own self hatred, insecurity, and need for the things that they lacked as a kid so they could give that to us? Truly, give that to us? Or did they fall in line. Become the person, the parent, that their parents taught them to be. The adult that society told them to be. And what of those expectations that crushed them to be cast onto the next generation? Because thats what they endured so we are to endure it as well. Is that their best Boogerbutt? Or was it just the simplist route to take?
Boogerbutt: Sound the daddy issues alarm! *wee woo wee woo*. You barely even answered my question! Clearly you needed that more than we did Jaden, geez. Haha!
Jaden: Ah, Boogerbutt, you're always busting my balls, man! *incoherent mans scream* hahaha
Boogerbutt: You got anything else you want to say about this book?
Jaden: Not really, I got most of it out of my system.....Say, Boogerbutt. I never asked, man. Why do you keep doing this show? Reading these depressing fucking books week in and week out? Is this fun for you?
Boogerbutt: Yeah, Jaden. In a lot of ways it is. I dont know, theres something about these stories that make me feel at home. Like any of my own trauma or my own suffering is...normal. Makes me feel like the hurt wasn't for nothing. Suffering becoming a shared human experience. Something that connects us. Just like love. Just like happiness. Just as we have to allow ourselves the right to feel love, we have to allow ourselves the same right to hurt. In a way, it brings us together. Makes us whole...makes us human...*sigh*. How about you Jaden?...Why do you do this every week?
Jaden: Oh, I just like the attention.
This week we take a look at Lord Jim At Home. A distressing and taxing journey through the life of a child, to boy, to man, to monster. The life of Giles Trenchard
Jaden: Say, Boogerbutt, (my co-host) what did you think of that display of subtle, and not so subtle, emotional adolescent abuse?
Boogerbutt: Ah, it was crushing. The withholding of affection is cruel punishment to inflict on a child. They dont know any better. Most of the time they dont even realize they did anything wrong. That confusion doesn't just go away. It grows. Adapts. Becomes what we hate within ourselves as adults.
Jaden: Not as cruel as the things I did to your mom last night Boogerbutt! *Kazzoo soundbite*
Boogerbutt: OHHHH! You got me! *womp womp* How about you Jaden? How do you think the way Giles father wielded his unbridled control and contempt over his son throughout the book eventually played into the man Giles would become? The actions he commited?
Jaden: I mean, isnt that the whole crux of this book here Boogerbutt? We always like to say "our parents did their best". But did they? Did they grow past the toxic cycles thrust onto them by their own parents? Grow past their own self hatred, insecurity, and need for the things that they lacked as a kid so they could give that to us? Truly, give that to us? Or did they fall in line. Become the person, the parent, that their parents taught them to be. The adult that society told them to be. And what of those expectations that crushed them to be cast onto the next generation? Because thats what they endured so we are to endure it as well. Is that their best Boogerbutt? Or was it just the simplist route to take?
Boogerbutt: Sound the daddy issues alarm! *wee woo wee woo*. You barely even answered my question! Clearly you needed that more than we did Jaden, geez. Haha!
Jaden: Ah, Boogerbutt, you're always busting my balls, man! *incoherent mans scream* hahaha
Boogerbutt: You got anything else you want to say about this book?
Jaden: Not really, I got most of it out of my system.....Say, Boogerbutt. I never asked, man. Why do you keep doing this show? Reading these depressing fucking books week in and week out? Is this fun for you?
Boogerbutt: Yeah, Jaden. In a lot of ways it is. I dont know, theres something about these stories that make me feel at home. Like any of my own trauma or my own suffering is...normal. Makes me feel like the hurt wasn't for nothing. Suffering becoming a shared human experience. Something that connects us. Just like love. Just like happiness. Just as we have to allow ourselves the right to feel love, we have to allow ourselves the same right to hurt. In a way, it brings us together. Makes us whole...makes us human...*sigh*. How about you Jaden?...Why do you do this every week?
Jaden: Oh, I just like the attention.
October 25, 2025
No entiendo cómo no se convirtió en un libro de culto cuando se publicó en 1973. Mucho más brillante, original, profundo, perverso y complejo que 'El guardián entre el centeno', 'A sangre fría' o 'Escupiré sobre vuestras tumbas'.
O sí. Escrito por una mujer que deja a sus hijos en Londres con el padre para unirse a un ashram en la India, la historia que narra Dinah Brooke --con esos bruscos cambios de punto de vista entre el dentro y el fuera del yo, y entre las diferentes capas del mismo yo-- no es solo la historia particular de Giles Trenchard y su crianza cruel y privilegiada, sino que retrata los complejos y dolorosos mecanismos de la socialización por la que todo el mundo hemos pasado.
Una obrita maestra que se lee con fascinación y desagrado, sabiendo casi desde el primer momento (una vez superada la sorpresa por el estilo) hacia dónde se encamina sin que eso le resto ni una pizca de interés.
O sí. Escrito por una mujer que deja a sus hijos en Londres con el padre para unirse a un ashram en la India, la historia que narra Dinah Brooke --con esos bruscos cambios de punto de vista entre el dentro y el fuera del yo, y entre las diferentes capas del mismo yo-- no es solo la historia particular de Giles Trenchard y su crianza cruel y privilegiada, sino que retrata los complejos y dolorosos mecanismos de la socialización por la que todo el mundo hemos pasado.
Una obrita maestra que se lee con fascinación y desagrado, sabiendo casi desde el primer momento (una vez superada la sorpresa por el estilo) hacia dónde se encamina sin que eso le resto ni una pizca de interés.
March 12, 2024
What a bizarre book. I’m not sure I really liked it but it was interesting. I read along with the audio and I’m not sure I would have managed on my own, honestly. The writing style is very different than I like, but the audio helped, though I wish it were narrated by a Brit. Very strange book…
January 19, 2024
I came across a stray recommendation for this book from some author or other and bought it on a whim. I was glad I did. It reminds me of the best of Patricia Highsmith: the writing is cool and detached, yet strangely captivating. The story is well told and builds to an unexpected climax (no spoilers here!). Some of the scenes are on the disturbing side, and the whole paints a less than flattering picture of English society, or rather, perhaps chronicles the decline of that society in a number of different ways. Well worth a read.
June 12, 2024
4.5 I think but I really loved this so rounded up. This is such a strange book and the foreword by Ottessa Moshfegh really sums it up well- this is a character study of a character that is barely a character; Giles is such a nonentity in his own life it’s deeply fascinating.
July 7, 2025
difícil clasificación, tiene ironía, macabro, crítico con la alta sociedad inglesa previo y durante la segunda guerra mundial, pero esperaba más.
September 22, 2023
Love what McNally is doing with these out of print editions. I thought the brashness in Dinah’s writing was something I don’t remember reading. Decades old this book still resonates. I don’t necessarily agree with Otessa Moshfegh’s foreword that it took her 3 weeks to read the first 75 pages cause she had to put the book down and walk around. I felt the opposite, I didn’t put it down. It moves fantastically. Well worth the read!!!
April 1, 2024
a very nasty piece of work on the horrors of bourgeois good behaviour that is also totally engrossing. Coldly clinical prose that I have encountered very little analog to; every word is exactly where it should be. As for the plot: Giles operates by an internal logic that both 1) alienates the reader, hopefully and 2) tracks completely perfectly. Not wanting to spoil anything here, but, why shouldn't he behave exactly as he does?
Was actually smiling while reading the final pages of this one, talk about sticking the landing. Hoping that Brooke's other novels find their way back into publication in the near future.
Was actually smiling while reading the final pages of this one, talk about sticking the landing. Hoping that Brooke's other novels find their way back into publication in the near future.
November 2, 2025
“The ship fries in the heat. Day after day the sun rises, a perfect round red ball over a sea as smooth as milk, The sun and the ship sail serenely on, each alone in an immense and silent circle, their paths forming a cross. At night the men sleep on deck, under the heavy, brilliant stars. Their voices are hushed, their movements slow.
Hypnotised by the sea-serpents they forget the war again.
This time the sun is their enemy. It sucks their souls. The only signs of their passage are trails of black smoke and white wake, which separate with infinite slowness and dissolve into blue.”
Hypnotised by the sea-serpents they forget the war again.
This time the sun is their enemy. It sucks their souls. The only signs of their passage are trails of black smoke and white wake, which separate with infinite slowness and dissolve into blue.”
December 1, 2023
Picked this up at a bookstore because I liked the cover and oh my god it’s a new favorite. It’s so alarmingly and unapologetically English and the writing is unlike anything I’ve read before. Somehow both sensuously clear yet elusive and dreamlike, I couldn’t put it down. Not sure I would recommend it to everyone as it’s quite particular but I loved it.
May 14, 2025
Jag kan svära på att Ottessa Moshfegh - som skrivit förord och läst in boken - var inspirerad av denna när hon skrev Lapvona. Den utspelar sig i en helt annan tid och efter en helt annan ramberättelse men det är något med självklarheten i språket, det känns som en konstig saga. Där Lapvona handlar om en fattig herdepojke handlar Lord Jim at Home om en pojke från en välbärgad familj. Istället för en berättelse som utspelar sig under ett år så följer vi karaktären Jim från födsel upp till vuxen ålder. Och ändå! Känslan finns där. Det är inte en snabbläst bok men den är mycket suggestiv, trots ett distanserat språk. Det kliniska i språket gör de saker som inträffar än mer obehagliga. Om man vill läsa en origin story för hur en psykopat kan skapas, look no further! En fantastisk studie i hönan/ägget som verkligen får konkretiseras i sitt oundvikliga slut
November 14, 2025
It's called a parody of the upper class; it isn't. It's mimicry of its actual behaviour, and a parody of the editorialisation that behaviour receives. What is pictured here isn't aberrant, but rather the exact logical conclusion of such nurture, both within the family (the specific family, and family as an institution) and wider society.
Moshfegh called this a torture device AND SHE'S RIGHTTTT and it was the best torture I've ever endured. Sign me up for 50 more!
Moshfegh called this a torture device AND SHE'S RIGHTTTT and it was the best torture I've ever endured. Sign me up for 50 more!
May 6, 2024
One of the most disturbing and shocking books I've read in a long time. Truly dark and with fantastically inventive and provocative writing. The middle section of the book sometimes dragged a little for me but this was still an excellent, albeit deeply strange, read.
December 23, 2023
4.5 ⭐️
Read
August 4, 2024tbh I skimmed half the book then skipped to the end this shit was so boring sorry
August 17, 2025
hell yeah
Displaying 1 - 30 of 122 reviews