What do you think?
Rate this book
De kern van de zaak
Londen in de jaren negentig. Nicola gaat even naar buiten om sigaretten te halen. Wanneer ze terugkomt, treft ze een vreemde man in haar woonkamer aan. Toegegeven, hij ziet eruit als haar Jonathan, hij klinkt als haar Jonathan, maar die zou haar toch nooit zomaar de deur wijzen met de woorden: ‘Het werkt gewoon niet.’ Haar wereld staat op zijn kop. Nicola vraagt advies aan haar getrouwde vrienden, die er ook niets van begrijpen.
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
53 people are currently reading
1156 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 166 reviews
February 14, 2020
In the early 1990s, America fell in love with the theory of "genderlects" - the separate dialects of men and women.
First, Deborah Tannen published "You Just Don't Understand." Her plain-style descriptions of how men and women talk differently jumped onto the bestseller list, stayed there for months, and sold millions in paperback.
But - to engage in some competitive male-talk - her success pales next to John Gray's "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus." The marriage counselor's "practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in your relationships" has roosted permanently on the bestseller list since it was published in 1992, spawning an industry of knockoffs and sequels.
All this, of course, distresses English teachers and lovers of literature who thought novels had been exploring the way men and women communicate for hundreds of years.
"The Essence of the Thing," a new novel by British writer Madeleine St. John, may satisfy the literati and the self-helpi.
St. John's story opens at the moment Jonathan tells Nicola that he wants her to move out. "There's no nice way to say this," he says coolly. "But I've decided - that is, I've come to the conclusion - that we should part."
"I don't understand," Nicola says and repeats, all in perfect harmony with Deborah Tannen's linguistic theory.
The rest of this witty novel is a series of conversations between these two ill-matched lovers, their friends, and parents. The brief, wry chapters read like those freeze-frame photos of a hummingbird in flight or a drop of milk hitting the table. Jonathan and Nicola's breakup itself is common, practically cliche, but the remarkable clarity of St. John's snapshots make her novel a fascinating study.
Peremptorily asked to leave her own flat but still in love with her evictor, Nicola seeks refuge in the habits of domestic routine, ironing his shirts and shampooing the rug. Fortunately, her friends rally around, give her a place to live, and debate whether Jonathan is a rat or a prat. These people know the desire to be left alone shouldn't always be respected.
In the perfectly captured dialogue between these friends, St. John explores a sad gulf between those secure in relationships and those who consider themselves adrift. Despite her own sophistication and her friends' protests, Nicola thinks of herself as a failure because she's lost her man. More than she loves Jonathan, however, she loves being part of "a nice couple ... better off in every significant way together than alone ... with their own jokes, their own memories, and their own impregnable psychic space."
Gradually, Nicola admits that Jonathan isn't ready for commitment. In the solitude forced upon her, she slowly realizes the little stratagems of denial that she used to keep her relationship alive.
As a successful lawyer, Jonathan carries all the trappings of stability, but he remains tragically cautious, too cautious to risk loving someone or losing his dear privacy. Even while Nicola's friends mock him, there's something tragic about Jonathan's chilliness, his determined indifference, and the horrible isolation he courts and then curses.
On the fulcrum of her attention to the way people talk, St. John maintains a remarkable balance between wit and sadness. The men and women in this novel don't need to realize they're from different planets. They need to realize they're from the same one. St. John knows that.
Published in The Christian Science Monitor, Aug. 20, 1998.
https://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/...
First, Deborah Tannen published "You Just Don't Understand." Her plain-style descriptions of how men and women talk differently jumped onto the bestseller list, stayed there for months, and sold millions in paperback.
But - to engage in some competitive male-talk - her success pales next to John Gray's "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus." The marriage counselor's "practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in your relationships" has roosted permanently on the bestseller list since it was published in 1992, spawning an industry of knockoffs and sequels.
All this, of course, distresses English teachers and lovers of literature who thought novels had been exploring the way men and women communicate for hundreds of years.
"The Essence of the Thing," a new novel by British writer Madeleine St. John, may satisfy the literati and the self-helpi.
St. John's story opens at the moment Jonathan tells Nicola that he wants her to move out. "There's no nice way to say this," he says coolly. "But I've decided - that is, I've come to the conclusion - that we should part."
"I don't understand," Nicola says and repeats, all in perfect harmony with Deborah Tannen's linguistic theory.
The rest of this witty novel is a series of conversations between these two ill-matched lovers, their friends, and parents. The brief, wry chapters read like those freeze-frame photos of a hummingbird in flight or a drop of milk hitting the table. Jonathan and Nicola's breakup itself is common, practically cliche, but the remarkable clarity of St. John's snapshots make her novel a fascinating study.
Peremptorily asked to leave her own flat but still in love with her evictor, Nicola seeks refuge in the habits of domestic routine, ironing his shirts and shampooing the rug. Fortunately, her friends rally around, give her a place to live, and debate whether Jonathan is a rat or a prat. These people know the desire to be left alone shouldn't always be respected.
In the perfectly captured dialogue between these friends, St. John explores a sad gulf between those secure in relationships and those who consider themselves adrift. Despite her own sophistication and her friends' protests, Nicola thinks of herself as a failure because she's lost her man. More than she loves Jonathan, however, she loves being part of "a nice couple ... better off in every significant way together than alone ... with their own jokes, their own memories, and their own impregnable psychic space."
Gradually, Nicola admits that Jonathan isn't ready for commitment. In the solitude forced upon her, she slowly realizes the little stratagems of denial that she used to keep her relationship alive.
As a successful lawyer, Jonathan carries all the trappings of stability, but he remains tragically cautious, too cautious to risk loving someone or losing his dear privacy. Even while Nicola's friends mock him, there's something tragic about Jonathan's chilliness, his determined indifference, and the horrible isolation he courts and then curses.
On the fulcrum of her attention to the way people talk, St. John maintains a remarkable balance between wit and sadness. The men and women in this novel don't need to realize they're from different planets. They need to realize they're from the same one. St. John knows that.
Published in The Christian Science Monitor, Aug. 20, 1998.
https://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/...
June 10, 2020
she was beginning now to see – to realise – to understand – that the thing which was truly wrong was not so much the dreadful scene into which she had just been precipitated, as the misapprehension …. which had given rise to it:
I read this book after joining a Goodreads group re-reading the 1997 Booker shortlist. After deciding to join the readalong and ordering all the book I then researched the 1997 Booker to see that (even discounting the perennial Booker trend to bemoan either the state of English language literature or the incompetence of the judges’ selections, the 1997 year does seem to have been universally acknowledged as something of a low point – even by the judges themselves) and that I was mistaken if I had felt this re-read would introduce me to six classics of literature.
And this book in particular seems to have been a particularly uninspired choice – beginning with an opening when Nicola (who works “in the publications department of a famous, but not quite medium-sized arts organisation”) returning to the Notting Hill flat she shares with her lawyer lover Jonathan (his career taking off due to the Lloyd’s scandal) that he wishes to end their relationship as he can see not future in it.
I am all for books which capture period detail – but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect them to capture the period in which the book is actually set rather than some odd amalgam of the previous 30-40 years (a particularly "whizzy" low point is when Nicola says she and Jonathan had been ”walking out for slightly less than a year” – to which I could only say “cor”).
With an arts-working protagonist, a lawyer love interest, the comfort of various girlfriends and a dialogue heavy book driven entirely around relationship breakup and male/female communication issues, there is quite a heavy resemblance to “Bridget Jones” – published a year previously: but whereas one book captured the zeitgeist and inspired a whole genre, the other seems to have misplaced it altogether and mainly inspired my amazement as its inclusion on the Booker shortlist.
A book which features Lloyd’s, high net worth valuables insurance and which uses compound interest at the crucial point of the book (where Nicola suddenly gains insight into the “accumulation of doubt and fear” which has built up in Jonathan’s mind to and beyond the point of crisis) might have been expressly designed to appeal to my professional interests.
Unfortunately, the leaden and dated writing may as well have been expressly designed to offend my literary sensibilities.
In the opening quote of my review, Nicola expresses eloquently my own feelings (on the book and on the idea of reading the 1997 shortlist).
Upgraded my one star though for a clever reference to her own debut novel (the rather more appropriately chronologically set “Women in Black”) as Jonathan listens to a recording of a book.
”The story began, and went on: some footling tale about some shop assistants in an antipodean department store, fretting about their wombs and their wardrobes and other empty spaces”it
June 5, 2020
Shortlisted for the Booker Prize 1997
My second book from the 1997 shortlist revisit - this one is fairly entertaining but rather lightweight. St John was an Australian based in London, and her London seems rather dated over 20 years later.
Her heroine Nicola starts the book at home - her partner Jonathan announces out of the blue that he wants to end their relationship and buy her out of the mortgage on their shared flat - a flat that was originally rented by Nicola but which they bought together. Much of the book revolves around Nicola's relationship with friends and family - when she does move out she moves in with friends, and these relationships are sharply observed and at times funny. As the story develops, Nicola is allowed an element of revenge, as she takes her first few tentative steps towards a more fulfilling life.
One idiosyncracy is that her characters frequently use the word "whizzy" as a conversational reaction - not a word I have ever heard used this way. Another is that Nicola finds a job working for a Scunthorpe Literary Festival - this sounded rather incongruous to me, but maybe that was deliberate.
Overall quite an enjoyable read, but I can't really see why it was shortlisted.
My second book from the 1997 shortlist revisit - this one is fairly entertaining but rather lightweight. St John was an Australian based in London, and her London seems rather dated over 20 years later.
Her heroine Nicola starts the book at home - her partner Jonathan announces out of the blue that he wants to end their relationship and buy her out of the mortgage on their shared flat - a flat that was originally rented by Nicola but which they bought together. Much of the book revolves around Nicola's relationship with friends and family - when she does move out she moves in with friends, and these relationships are sharply observed and at times funny. As the story develops, Nicola is allowed an element of revenge, as she takes her first few tentative steps towards a more fulfilling life.
One idiosyncracy is that her characters frequently use the word "whizzy" as a conversational reaction - not a word I have ever heard used this way. Another is that Nicola finds a job working for a Scunthorpe Literary Festival - this sounded rather incongruous to me, but maybe that was deliberate.
Overall quite an enjoyable read, but I can't really see why it was shortlisted.
November 29, 2008
It can only have been a very, very slow year in the offices of the Booker Prize in 1997. There's no other way to explain why this preternaturally dull and astonishingly constipated novel could have wound up on the Booker short list or on any list, for that matter -- save, perhaps, for the list entitled, "Additional Reasons Why British Women Writers Must Be Compelled to Stop Reading Jane Austen, On Pain of Death, If Necessary." There's no way to write a spoiler for this novel -- unless it would spoil it for you to know that absolutely nothing happens: "Jonathan dumps Nicola. Nicola whinges to her friends. Her friends ride it out. Nicola, who, like every other human being in the same situation, has absolutely no alternative, moves into a new apartment and gets a new job. The End." I mean really; that's it. Along the way, St. John ordered about a dozen stock characters from the Modern Brit Lit warehouse: Stiff Upper Lip Bores - 5; Steel Rod Up their Backsides Parents - 4; Promiscuous London Queen, Xenophile - 1, and so forth. Instead of giving her characters emotional depth or having them respond in any meaningful way to what we are evidently supposed to consider a Serious Life Moment, St. John has them make tea. At least 47 times, which is quite a lot in a book this short. The world view here is so tiny you could fit it onto a postage stamp and still have room to do aerobics. Claustrophobic and painfully, utterly irrelevant. I'd like five hours of my life back, please.
October 5, 2023
Brilliant portrayal of male/female differences on a relationship dissolution. St John has an acute ear for language and conversations drive the narrative.
This was shortlisted for the Booker in the year that Arundhati Roy won for God of Small Things, and is at least as good as a number of other winners.
This was shortlisted for the Booker in the year that Arundhati Roy won for God of Small Things, and is at least as good as a number of other winners.
August 12, 2010
I did not read such an honest description of relationships for a long time. In a very simple language this book touches the most important issues in modern dating, here is the impossibility to express your true feelings, the "Great Wall of China" that divides the sexes, the selfishness of modern life and the fear to commit in view of so many other options. Young couples are faced today with the same old challenges - when to have children, what's more important work or relationships, the distance form one's parents and the value of friendship at the time of crisis. Beautifully written through a numerous dialogues this book brings an important message that we can easily loose most important things in life because we often detached from our feelings.
June 7, 2020
There was a moment’s silence, and then Geoffrey spoke.
‘I think,’ he said slowly, ‘you’ve just made a serious point. How disconcerting.’
The Essence of Things by Madeline St John was a worthy shortlistee for, indeed a would have been a worthy winner of, the 1997 Bollinger Everyman Wodehouse Prize for comic fiction, even if it resorted to some unsubtle product placement (he opened a half bottle of Bollinger) to catch the sponsor's attention.
Particularly notable was the author's own swipe at her own previously most famous novel Ladies in Black, which is indicative of the self-satirical tone of this masterpiece, with Jonathan, the male protagonist, listening to an audiobook given to him by his partner:
It was a bootlegged talking book which he vaguely remembered some BBC employee friend of Nicola’s having given to her. ‘It might be handy for long journeys,’ she’d told him, putting it in the glove box.
The story began, and went on: some footling tale about some shop assistants in an antipodean department store, fretting about their wombs and their wardrobes and other empty spaces – ye gods! No wonder women were for ever peering into one’s soul! They were compensating for their own innate emptiness. Perhaps, truly, they had no souls of their own.
But even besides this the novel has a number of moments that genuinely made me laugh out loud such as this exchange after the man of a couple has come close to a moment of emotional tenderness.
‘Listen. Don’t ever tell anyone I said that, will you? About nothing being as serious as love. I’ll never be able to show my face on a squash court again.'
‘When did you ever show your face on a squash court?’
‘Well, you know what I mean. It’s the principle of the thing.’
‘Alright. I mean, when all’s said and done, what would I want with a man who had no squash court credibility?’
‘Exactly.’
Unfortunately, the Wodehouse Prize didn't actually exist until the year 2000. Albeit fidelity to a particular historic time period (which characters who seem to act as if they are in the 1950s but live in the 1990s) is not exactly a feature of this novel (they had been anomalies in the narrative as she understood it:), so that is perhaps no barrier to the author having anticipated and being retrospectively awarded the prize. The author would also not live to see an inferior version of her book, novels from Helen Fielding's Bridget Jones series, instead go on to be shortlisted for and then later win the Prize in 2014 and 2017.
But given the lack of a suitable award in 1997 this was instead, rather oddly, shortlisted for the Booker Prize instead (‘It’s an utter mystery.’ ‘Yes, it is. An utter mystery.’).
Generally I'm not a fan of mixing overt comedy and literary fiction - the only book to win both the Wodehouse Prize and Booker Prize, Vernon God Little is much the worst ever winner of the latter prize.
But approaching The Essence of Things as the comic novel that the author achieved (whether this was the authorial intent is beside the point), it was a quick and very funny read and one that very neatly skewers both the tradtional gender roles in relationships and also a certain type of quintessential Englishness, the gruesome, yet frequently hilarious, saga of the island people who had given the planet its common language and virtually all its games.
2.5 stars. ‘Well, that was painless enough wasn’t it?’
Some favourite quotes:
And although she was still in a state of extreme shock, and still trembling, she was beginning now to see – to realise – to understand – that the thing which was truly wrong was not so much the dreadful scene into which she had just been precipitated, as the misapprehension (whatever it might be) which had given rise to it: she was beginning now to understand – and she became more certain by the minute – that Jonathan’s ‘conclusion’, however rational in itself, could have derived only from a hugely wrong, a wholly false, initial assumption, and that all that was now necessary was the careful discovery of this assumption and the calm revelation of its falseness. - the bravura introduction to Nicola's story, where St John demonstrates her ability to write a great and complex sentence before slipping into her more whizzy style for this novel.
Later on that day Susannah gave Geoffrey a shopping list and he went to Sainsbury’s and got everything in, plus some caramels.
‘What’s this?’ said Susannah, unpacking.
‘Caramels.’
‘What for?’
‘For you.’
‘Me?’
‘Yes, why not?’
‘Why?’
‘A token of my esteem.
‘Oh, I wish.’
‘And my love, admiration, gratitude, etcetera.’
‘Oh, yeah. Want one?’
‘Well, since you ask. Just one.’
The clever child, a boy of nine, at this moment came home from school. ‘Cor!’ he said. ‘You’re eating sweets! Cor!’
‘Well, we’ve been good today,’ said his father. ‘So what else is new?’ said the child, whose name was Guy.
‘Give me a kiss,’ said his mother.
‘Alright,’ said Guy, and obliged.
‘Want one?’ she asked, offering the caramels.
He took one. ‘Do you want to see my poem?’ he asked them. He was invited to read it to them, and did so.
‘Cor!’ said Susannah. ‘That’s really whizzy. Well done!’
‘I wish I could write like that,’ said Geoffrey. He meant it, too: any adult might have wished as much. But there you were. - the cor, whizzy family who provide much of the comic relief
I don’t think [he]’s met anyone of my age before. - the child Guy talking about Jonathan, but likely a self-satirical barb aimed at herself at the author given her interesting characterisation of his speech.
‘Would you like some more tea?’ she said.
And so the subject, dark and fearful as it remained, was closed. - one of a number of very true-to-life moments where a cup of tea serves both to relieve but also avoid confronting an emotional moment.
Wrong is one of those words which sound like what they signify, not by virtue of onomatopoeia, but by virtue of a more subtle correspondence: the same being true, to a lesser degree only, of right. There is right and there is wrong: the knowledge that there is right and wrong is part of one’s English-speaking birthright: these attributes could not imaginably achieve the same terrible finality in another formulation. This is right, said the Anglo-Saxon warrior, and that is wrong. And to be in the wrong is to be cast into a waste of ice and darkness which is the ultima Thule of devastation. One might nevermore return. ‘Is anything wrong?’ She could see as she uttered the word that something was, indeed, wrong. The ice and darkness filled the room. - an Englishman - or woman - 's innate sense of right and wrong with some delightfully mixed metaphors to boot.
Too bad about the marmalade. The balance between bitter and sweet was the essence of the thing. - giving the book it's title, but the WI-inspired marmalade generally serving as a key symbol throughout the novel.
‘I think,’ he said slowly, ‘you’ve just made a serious point. How disconcerting.’
The Essence of Things by Madeline St John was a worthy shortlistee for, indeed a would have been a worthy winner of, the 1997 Bollinger Everyman Wodehouse Prize for comic fiction, even if it resorted to some unsubtle product placement (he opened a half bottle of Bollinger) to catch the sponsor's attention.
Particularly notable was the author's own swipe at her own previously most famous novel Ladies in Black, which is indicative of the self-satirical tone of this masterpiece, with Jonathan, the male protagonist, listening to an audiobook given to him by his partner:
It was a bootlegged talking book which he vaguely remembered some BBC employee friend of Nicola’s having given to her. ‘It might be handy for long journeys,’ she’d told him, putting it in the glove box.
The story began, and went on: some footling tale about some shop assistants in an antipodean department store, fretting about their wombs and their wardrobes and other empty spaces – ye gods! No wonder women were for ever peering into one’s soul! They were compensating for their own innate emptiness. Perhaps, truly, they had no souls of their own.
But even besides this the novel has a number of moments that genuinely made me laugh out loud such as this exchange after the man of a couple has come close to a moment of emotional tenderness.
‘Listen. Don’t ever tell anyone I said that, will you? About nothing being as serious as love. I’ll never be able to show my face on a squash court again.'
‘When did you ever show your face on a squash court?’
‘Well, you know what I mean. It’s the principle of the thing.’
‘Alright. I mean, when all’s said and done, what would I want with a man who had no squash court credibility?’
‘Exactly.’
Unfortunately, the Wodehouse Prize didn't actually exist until the year 2000. Albeit fidelity to a particular historic time period (which characters who seem to act as if they are in the 1950s but live in the 1990s) is not exactly a feature of this novel (they had been anomalies in the narrative as she understood it:), so that is perhaps no barrier to the author having anticipated and being retrospectively awarded the prize. The author would also not live to see an inferior version of her book, novels from Helen Fielding's Bridget Jones series, instead go on to be shortlisted for and then later win the Prize in 2014 and 2017.
But given the lack of a suitable award in 1997 this was instead, rather oddly, shortlisted for the Booker Prize instead (‘It’s an utter mystery.’ ‘Yes, it is. An utter mystery.’).
Generally I'm not a fan of mixing overt comedy and literary fiction - the only book to win both the Wodehouse Prize and Booker Prize, Vernon God Little is much the worst ever winner of the latter prize.
But approaching The Essence of Things as the comic novel that the author achieved (whether this was the authorial intent is beside the point), it was a quick and very funny read and one that very neatly skewers both the tradtional gender roles in relationships and also a certain type of quintessential Englishness, the gruesome, yet frequently hilarious, saga of the island people who had given the planet its common language and virtually all its games.
2.5 stars. ‘Well, that was painless enough wasn’t it?’
Some favourite quotes:
And although she was still in a state of extreme shock, and still trembling, she was beginning now to see – to realise – to understand – that the thing which was truly wrong was not so much the dreadful scene into which she had just been precipitated, as the misapprehension (whatever it might be) which had given rise to it: she was beginning now to understand – and she became more certain by the minute – that Jonathan’s ‘conclusion’, however rational in itself, could have derived only from a hugely wrong, a wholly false, initial assumption, and that all that was now necessary was the careful discovery of this assumption and the calm revelation of its falseness. - the bravura introduction to Nicola's story, where St John demonstrates her ability to write a great and complex sentence before slipping into her more whizzy style for this novel.
Later on that day Susannah gave Geoffrey a shopping list and he went to Sainsbury’s and got everything in, plus some caramels.
‘What’s this?’ said Susannah, unpacking.
‘Caramels.’
‘What for?’
‘For you.’
‘Me?’
‘Yes, why not?’
‘Why?’
‘A token of my esteem.
‘Oh, I wish.’
‘And my love, admiration, gratitude, etcetera.’
‘Oh, yeah. Want one?’
‘Well, since you ask. Just one.’
The clever child, a boy of nine, at this moment came home from school. ‘Cor!’ he said. ‘You’re eating sweets! Cor!’
‘Well, we’ve been good today,’ said his father. ‘So what else is new?’ said the child, whose name was Guy.
‘Give me a kiss,’ said his mother.
‘Alright,’ said Guy, and obliged.
‘Want one?’ she asked, offering the caramels.
He took one. ‘Do you want to see my poem?’ he asked them. He was invited to read it to them, and did so.
‘Cor!’ said Susannah. ‘That’s really whizzy. Well done!’
‘I wish I could write like that,’ said Geoffrey. He meant it, too: any adult might have wished as much. But there you were. - the cor, whizzy family who provide much of the comic relief
I don’t think [he]’s met anyone of my age before. - the child Guy talking about Jonathan, but likely a self-satirical barb aimed at herself at the author given her interesting characterisation of his speech.
‘Would you like some more tea?’ she said.
And so the subject, dark and fearful as it remained, was closed. - one of a number of very true-to-life moments where a cup of tea serves both to relieve but also avoid confronting an emotional moment.
Wrong is one of those words which sound like what they signify, not by virtue of onomatopoeia, but by virtue of a more subtle correspondence: the same being true, to a lesser degree only, of right. There is right and there is wrong: the knowledge that there is right and wrong is part of one’s English-speaking birthright: these attributes could not imaginably achieve the same terrible finality in another formulation. This is right, said the Anglo-Saxon warrior, and that is wrong. And to be in the wrong is to be cast into a waste of ice and darkness which is the ultima Thule of devastation. One might nevermore return. ‘Is anything wrong?’ She could see as she uttered the word that something was, indeed, wrong. The ice and darkness filled the room. - an Englishman - or woman - 's innate sense of right and wrong with some delightfully mixed metaphors to boot.
Too bad about the marmalade. The balance between bitter and sweet was the essence of the thing. - giving the book it's title, but the WI-inspired marmalade generally serving as a key symbol throughout the novel.
June 7, 2020
I may have done this book a disservice in my initial review (see below). I really didn't enjoy the experience of reading the book and I rattled off a very short and condemnatory review without thinking about it.
However, I read it as part of The Mookse & The Gripes group read of the 1997 Booker shortlist. What this means is that I get to discuss it with a group of people many of whom enjoyed the book. In fact, nearly all of them enjoyed it more than I did. This discussion has been a lot of fun and has given me a bit of a fresh perspective on the book. What seems especially pertinent is the short comment I made below where I said that it got a lot better when I started reading it as a spoof. I am really not sure that is what the author intended, but it does make some bits quite funny (just not funny in the way the author probably planned it).
It still feels very strange reading a book clearly set in the 1990s (see Lloyds references) but where couples refer to "walking out" together and people say things like "that's the ticket". Every time you think events have locked the book into the 1990s, someone says something that makes you think it is actually the 1950s. Then you decide on the 1950s and someone starts using a word processor.
For me, it is simply the fact that the style didn't work that means a low rating. I have to acknowledge that every time I turned the page and saw that it was yet another section of dialogue with no description, my heart sank. Not because there's anything wrong with dialogue and no description as a thing, but just because the dialogue in this book really didn't do it for me.
I'm grateful to The Mookse & The Gripes for giving me some pleasure out of this book that I wouldn't have got otherwise.
---------------
ORIGINAL REVIEW
---------------
‘So I’ll book a table for tomorrow week.’
‘Whizzy.’
‘What’s whizzy?’
‘Oh, there you are. Nicola’s taking us out to dine in an amusing new restaurant next Saturday night.’
‘Me too?’
‘Yes, you too!’
‘Wow, that’s whizzy. Shall I go and tell Dad?’
‘You do that.’
Guy ran off, and came back a minute later.
‘Did you tell him?’
‘Yes.’
‘What did he say?’
‘He said, whizzy.’
‘Truly?’
‘Yes, truly, he did. Whizzy, he said.’
‘That’s whizzy.’
Yes, this really and truly is a direct quote from this book. I could write a lot more, but I don’t feel I need to. About halfway through, my repeated cries of incredulity meant my wife suggested I read it as a spoof rather than a serious piece of literature. That did make it more entertaining in a weird kind of way.
How this made the shortlist for a Booker prize will forever be beyond me.
However, I read it as part of The Mookse & The Gripes group read of the 1997 Booker shortlist. What this means is that I get to discuss it with a group of people many of whom enjoyed the book. In fact, nearly all of them enjoyed it more than I did. This discussion has been a lot of fun and has given me a bit of a fresh perspective on the book. What seems especially pertinent is the short comment I made below where I said that it got a lot better when I started reading it as a spoof. I am really not sure that is what the author intended, but it does make some bits quite funny (just not funny in the way the author probably planned it).
It still feels very strange reading a book clearly set in the 1990s (see Lloyds references) but where couples refer to "walking out" together and people say things like "that's the ticket". Every time you think events have locked the book into the 1990s, someone says something that makes you think it is actually the 1950s. Then you decide on the 1950s and someone starts using a word processor.
For me, it is simply the fact that the style didn't work that means a low rating. I have to acknowledge that every time I turned the page and saw that it was yet another section of dialogue with no description, my heart sank. Not because there's anything wrong with dialogue and no description as a thing, but just because the dialogue in this book really didn't do it for me.
I'm grateful to The Mookse & The Gripes for giving me some pleasure out of this book that I wouldn't have got otherwise.
---------------
ORIGINAL REVIEW
---------------
‘So I’ll book a table for tomorrow week.’
‘Whizzy.’
‘What’s whizzy?’
‘Oh, there you are. Nicola’s taking us out to dine in an amusing new restaurant next Saturday night.’
‘Me too?’
‘Yes, you too!’
‘Wow, that’s whizzy. Shall I go and tell Dad?’
‘You do that.’
Guy ran off, and came back a minute later.
‘Did you tell him?’
‘Yes.’
‘What did he say?’
‘He said, whizzy.’
‘Truly?’
‘Yes, truly, he did. Whizzy, he said.’
‘That’s whizzy.’
Yes, this really and truly is a direct quote from this book. I could write a lot more, but I don’t feel I need to. About halfway through, my repeated cries of incredulity meant my wife suggested I read it as a spoof rather than a serious piece of literature. That did make it more entertaining in a weird kind of way.
How this made the shortlist for a Booker prize will forever be beyond me.
June 21, 2017
Given that St John is one of those Australians who leave and declines ever to come back, I was in an uneasy state whilst reading Women in Black. Is the satire affectionate or spiteful? One might assume the latter. And yet, thinking enough of it to try another, The Essence of the Thing set in the London in which she spent most of her adulthood, it is evident that she does have the necessary sympathy for her subjects to keep the reader onside.
rest is here: https://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpre...
rest is here: https://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpre...
May 21, 2009
If you want to know what it's like to go through a horrible break up in London, this is the book for you. It was a very quick read. I finished it in 3 hours, and I am not a fast reader. Some of the descriptions and imagery ran very deep, and I found myself crying at one point. My favorite aspect of the novel was that every chapter changed points of view, from the girlfriend to the boyfriend, two sets of their friends, their parents, etc. It really does show that a hard break up doesn't just affect the couple, but also the other people in their lives that love them.
September 1, 2016
This is a spare dialogue-driven book. It is pitch perfect. There are only so many ways to describe falling out of love and the harsh ending of a relationship, but Madeleine St John's voice adds a pithy note and a fresh briskness to the inevitable. She avoids sentimentality and manages a fine balancing act between humour and pathos. It is tender without being mawkish. I see plainly why it was short-listed for the Booker Prize.
September 16, 2021
Anche se ho amato molto Le Signore in Nero, al punto da precipitarmi ad acquistare anche i due romanzi successivi (questo è l'ultimo), ho sempre pensato che la ragione della tardiva scoperta di Madeleine St. John dipendesse dal fatto che fino ad allora avevamo avuto di meglio. (qui ci starebbe bene una lunga digressione sul "meglio", da Mary MC Carthy a Roma Jaffe e Barbara Pym, per tacere dell'immensa, la Parker, ma IG odia le parole😀). Il secondo romanzo aveva confermato il mio giudizio (bravina, ma c'è di meglio), sul terzo DIMENTICATEVI TUTTO perché wow, questo è il più bello, dei tre finora pubblicati e anche dei tanti firmati da donne che ci hanno raccontato come ci si risolleva quando quel maledetto bastardo ci lascia.
Il maledetto bastardo stavolta ha le fattezze di un rampante avvocato londinese che si innamora di quella che, nel bel mezzo di una festa, riordina la cucina. Graziosa, sempre disponibile, l'eterna figura da sfondo. Lei abita in un appartamento a Notting Hill da cui dovrà essere sfrattata, in mancanza del denaro per comprarlo. Lui le offre la metà e da qui inizia la loro convivenza, fatta di progetti a breve termine - il divano di lusso, il weekend in barca- con lei perfettamente calata nel ruolo di "seconda". Tant'è che quando lui la lascia, lo fa invitandola a prendere le sue cose e a liberare l'appartamento- quello che era stato il suo, che lei aveva trovato-abitato-addomesticato, e che lei aveva reso possibile acquistare ad un prezzo conveniente. "Non hai i soldi per pagare la mia parte, ti do io la tua" è il modo spiccio e infastidito del bastardo di turno che in quel momento incarna tutti i bastardi di turno che ci hanno prosciugato lacrime, sistema nervoso e spesso conti in banca. Da lì in poi, il romanzo segue le orme dei due, nei mesi immediatamente successivi alla separazione. E lo fa con una tale capacità di indagine dell'animo umano che verrebbe da paragonarlo ad un bisturi, ad una chirurgia dell'anima, se mi passate il termine. Tanto che il ritorno alla superficieè tanto più soddisfacente quanto più è stato sondato l'abisso, in tutti i suoi anfratti.
Consigliatissimo
Il maledetto bastardo stavolta ha le fattezze di un rampante avvocato londinese che si innamora di quella che, nel bel mezzo di una festa, riordina la cucina. Graziosa, sempre disponibile, l'eterna figura da sfondo. Lei abita in un appartamento a Notting Hill da cui dovrà essere sfrattata, in mancanza del denaro per comprarlo. Lui le offre la metà e da qui inizia la loro convivenza, fatta di progetti a breve termine - il divano di lusso, il weekend in barca- con lei perfettamente calata nel ruolo di "seconda". Tant'è che quando lui la lascia, lo fa invitandola a prendere le sue cose e a liberare l'appartamento- quello che era stato il suo, che lei aveva trovato-abitato-addomesticato, e che lei aveva reso possibile acquistare ad un prezzo conveniente. "Non hai i soldi per pagare la mia parte, ti do io la tua" è il modo spiccio e infastidito del bastardo di turno che in quel momento incarna tutti i bastardi di turno che ci hanno prosciugato lacrime, sistema nervoso e spesso conti in banca. Da lì in poi, il romanzo segue le orme dei due, nei mesi immediatamente successivi alla separazione. E lo fa con una tale capacità di indagine dell'animo umano che verrebbe da paragonarlo ad un bisturi, ad una chirurgia dell'anima, se mi passate il termine. Tanto che il ritorno alla superficieè tanto più soddisfacente quanto più è stato sondato l'abisso, in tutti i suoi anfratti.
Consigliatissimo
October 11, 2018
It is an amazing book. Nicola runs out for cigarettes and comes back home to find her boyfriend of several years, breaking up with her. Rather, he's decided, offers no explanation and tells her he's ready to buy out her share in the apartment they've been living in for some years. She cannot comprehend what just happened.
Her friend Susannah offers her comfort and a place to live until she picks herself up. What upsets Nicola is that she didn't see this coming. They made love a few days before, which Jonathan confirms was not love, he stopped loving her a while back. Devastated and confused, she doesn't know what to do. Now, reading this you might think, ah what a worn out topic. Maybe. But it's the simplicity and starkness of the prose that brings out the raw feelings, that's beautiful about the book. The conflict between love and self-esteem, is beautifully portrayed. I read some very poor reviews of the book, but I loved it. We cannot always talk about greater things. Everyday happenings deserve capturing and beautifully at that.
Her friend Susannah offers her comfort and a place to live until she picks herself up. What upsets Nicola is that she didn't see this coming. They made love a few days before, which Jonathan confirms was not love, he stopped loving her a while back. Devastated and confused, she doesn't know what to do. Now, reading this you might think, ah what a worn out topic. Maybe. But it's the simplicity and starkness of the prose that brings out the raw feelings, that's beautiful about the book. The conflict between love and self-esteem, is beautifully portrayed. I read some very poor reviews of the book, but I loved it. We cannot always talk about greater things. Everyday happenings deserve capturing and beautifully at that.
September 16, 2021
Londra. Nicola (anche se in Italia questo nome viene usato al maschile in questo romanzo è al femminile) vive con Jonathan nel quartiere di Notting Hill, stanno insieme da cinque anni e sono una coppia all'apparenza serena e tranquilla.
Un giorno di ordinaria normalità, Nicola esce per comprare le sigarette ma quando torna a casa trova un uomo completamente diverso: Jonathan improvvisamente le comunica che il loro rapporto è finito e che rileverà la quota della casa in cui vivono, dato che lei con il suo lavoro nel settore editoriale non ha sufficienti liquidità.
Di punto in bianco la protagonista si trova senza un compagno e una casa, genitori, amici e conoscenti offrono la loro opinione sulle probabili motivazioni della rottura, che restano del tutto oscure a Nicola.
Perché Jonathan l'ha lasciata a un passo dalle nozze? Possibile che non ci sia stato alcun campanello d'allarme? O lei non si è resa conto che fossero in crisi?
📖Il romanzo presenta una scrittura scorrevole con molti dialoghi e i brevi capitoli si alternano con frequenti flashback che coinvolgono, oltre a Nicola e Jonathan, anche tutti coloro che conoscono e hanno frequentato la coppia, come i genitori di entrambi e gli amici in comune.
Ricostruiremo quindi gradualmente la storia d'amore dei protagonisti e il suo "improvviso" declino.
📖L'autrice inserisce nella trama una piccola e piacevole autocitazione: Jonathan infatti si trova ad ascoltare in auto un audiolibro che è chiaramente il famoso romanzo di Madaleine St. John "le signore in nero" e appare quasi infastidito dalle vicende delle protagoniste.
Molto apprezzabile questo punto di vista "maschile" inserito con notevole ironia.
📖Madeleine St. John analizza, attraverso il personaggio di Nicola, tutte le fasi che si attraversano in seguito ad una rottura: lo sgomento, la sofferenza, la rabbia, la casa vuota dove ogni oggetto ricorda la persona amata, la solitudine, la paura di non farcela da soli.
Ma, come dice Madeleine St. John, bisogna stare bene con se stessi affinché si possa amare ed essere amati.
📖Lettura perfetta se cercate un romanzo di evasione semplice e fluido ma con notevoli spunti di riflessione sulle relazioni e l'importanza dell'amicizia.
Un giorno di ordinaria normalità, Nicola esce per comprare le sigarette ma quando torna a casa trova un uomo completamente diverso: Jonathan improvvisamente le comunica che il loro rapporto è finito e che rileverà la quota della casa in cui vivono, dato che lei con il suo lavoro nel settore editoriale non ha sufficienti liquidità.
Di punto in bianco la protagonista si trova senza un compagno e una casa, genitori, amici e conoscenti offrono la loro opinione sulle probabili motivazioni della rottura, che restano del tutto oscure a Nicola.
Perché Jonathan l'ha lasciata a un passo dalle nozze? Possibile che non ci sia stato alcun campanello d'allarme? O lei non si è resa conto che fossero in crisi?
📖Il romanzo presenta una scrittura scorrevole con molti dialoghi e i brevi capitoli si alternano con frequenti flashback che coinvolgono, oltre a Nicola e Jonathan, anche tutti coloro che conoscono e hanno frequentato la coppia, come i genitori di entrambi e gli amici in comune.
Ricostruiremo quindi gradualmente la storia d'amore dei protagonisti e il suo "improvviso" declino.
📖L'autrice inserisce nella trama una piccola e piacevole autocitazione: Jonathan infatti si trova ad ascoltare in auto un audiolibro che è chiaramente il famoso romanzo di Madaleine St. John "le signore in nero" e appare quasi infastidito dalle vicende delle protagoniste.
Molto apprezzabile questo punto di vista "maschile" inserito con notevole ironia.
📖Madeleine St. John analizza, attraverso il personaggio di Nicola, tutte le fasi che si attraversano in seguito ad una rottura: lo sgomento, la sofferenza, la rabbia, la casa vuota dove ogni oggetto ricorda la persona amata, la solitudine, la paura di non farcela da soli.
Ma, come dice Madeleine St. John, bisogna stare bene con se stessi affinché si possa amare ed essere amati.
📖Lettura perfetta se cercate un romanzo di evasione semplice e fluido ma con notevoli spunti di riflessione sulle relazioni e l'importanza dell'amicizia.
April 28, 2015
Description: Nicola only went to buy cigarettes and upon returning finds a stranger in her apartment. He looks like her live-in boyfriend, Jonathan, but he can't actually be the dependable known quantity whom Nicola loves that goes by the name of Jonathan. Can he? Before Nicola stands a man who is strong and adorable just like the old Jonathan, only this one is no longer hers! This sad tale of love gone south still has its funny side. You have either to laugh or cry when you see, as acutely and elegantly as St John captures it here, the things women will do to hold on to love, and the things men will do to escape it.
Opening: Nicola was still standing in the doorway when Jonathan began to speak: she hadn’t had time even to take off her coat. It was a cold spring evening: one still needed a coat out of doors after dark.
She was standing there in the sitting-room doorway, her hands in her pockets, holding onto the packet of cigarettes she had gone out to buy, and the loose change, and the keys; she hadn’t had time even to put these things on the table, and take off her coat, and sit down, because Jonathan had called out to her as soon as she’d shut the front door behind her
The title lends itself from this passage about homemade marmalade on page 149:
But M St John hits us over the head with it again on the very next page.
A quick yet ultimately purposeless read.
For Judith McCue
Opening: Nicola was still standing in the doorway when Jonathan began to speak: she hadn’t had time even to take off her coat. It was a cold spring evening: one still needed a coat out of doors after dark.
She was standing there in the sitting-room doorway, her hands in her pockets, holding onto the packet of cigarettes she had gone out to buy, and the loose change, and the keys; she hadn’t had time even to put these things on the table, and take off her coat, and sit down, because Jonathan had called out to her as soon as she’d shut the front door behind her
The title lends itself from this passage about homemade marmalade on page 149:'He remembered, now; he remembered eating it straight from the jar. It was angels’ food. It was emblematic food. It was true that the commercial variety did not taste even remotely the same; it failed to achieve the balance between bitter and sweet which was the essence of the thing.'
But M St John hits us over the head with it again on the very next page.
A quick yet ultimately purposeless read.
January 20, 2016
I was completely captivated by this book. A tragicomic tale of love gone wrong, it had me hooked from the moment I started reading it, and I read it all in one go (till way, way past the midnight hour).
I have to admit that I had never heard of Madeleine St John until Text Publishing republished her delicious first novel, The Women in Black, in the Text Classics series. (See my review). The ANZ LitLovers reading group read that one a couple of years ago and enjoyed its sly wit and Austenesque social commentary. The Essence of the Thing – St John’s third novel which was shortlisted for the Booker in 1997 – is darker in tone but a more satisfying novel, with a more developed central character.
Nicola and Jonathan have been a couple for long enough for his mother to hope that she can at last pass on the antique ruby ring that she’s been hoarding, but the novel opens with Jonathan’s blunt announcement that the relationship is over and that Nicola should move out. Nicola is stunned: she had no idea that there was trouble was looming and blunders around in an emotional fog trying to deal with it.
To read the rest of my review please visit http://anzlitlovers.com/2013/07/20/th...
I have to admit that I had never heard of Madeleine St John until Text Publishing republished her delicious first novel, The Women in Black, in the Text Classics series. (See my review). The ANZ LitLovers reading group read that one a couple of years ago and enjoyed its sly wit and Austenesque social commentary. The Essence of the Thing – St John’s third novel which was shortlisted for the Booker in 1997 – is darker in tone but a more satisfying novel, with a more developed central character.
Nicola and Jonathan have been a couple for long enough for his mother to hope that she can at last pass on the antique ruby ring that she’s been hoarding, but the novel opens with Jonathan’s blunt announcement that the relationship is over and that Nicola should move out. Nicola is stunned: she had no idea that there was trouble was looming and blunders around in an emotional fog trying to deal with it.
To read the rest of my review please visit http://anzlitlovers.com/2013/07/20/th...
June 2, 2020
I read this as part of a Good Reads group read of the 1997 Booker Prize list. It actually seemed rather dated to me in light of the last two decades of feminist thought and activism. The woman in the partnership seems to be automatically accepted as the one “acted upon”, the one emotionally devastated by the ending of the relationship and the one making the least amount of money professionally. While her job is barely mentioned it is often told that he is a successful lawyer.
I so wanted to say all through the book “Get your BIG GIRL PANTS on and get on with your life”! I won’t spoil the ending but DO READ IT!
I so wanted to say all through the book “Get your BIG GIRL PANTS on and get on with your life”! I won’t spoil the ending but DO READ IT!
October 30, 2012
"That was Nicola’s marmalade, and they were not now in a shared-marmalade situation. He knew he’d been right in principle, in essence: it was just the mundane details which took a bit of getting used to. Too bad about the marmalade. The balance between bitter and sweet was the essence of the thing."
It’s a typical day. Nicola pops out of her Notting Hill flat for some cigarettes and returns to a stranger. Her boyfriend Jonathan is telling her something she can’t understand, saying that he has made a decision. He has come to a conclusion: they have to part. He doesn’t want to talk about it, about why, and wants Nicola to move out unless she wants to buy him out of their co-owned flat. He’s a lawyer, she’s, well, not. So she has no choice.
"Having been cast out by him, she now found – as she had found before – that she was capable only of speaking and acting, even to a degree apparently of feeling, like a stranger. But struggling, terrified and helpless, a loving and trusting Nicola shrieked in anguish from the depths of this stunned and frozen stranger."
But Nicola still isn’t over her shock. She wants an explanation. Of course, who wouldn’t? But most of all she wants things to go back to the way they used to.
"She had thought her tears were all shed. She had assured herself that once the ironing was done, and the evening had fallen, and Jonathan had returned, and she and he had talked, properly talked, to each other, everything would be normal again. Normal and nice. They would be a normal, nice couple again, and could make amicable arrangements again, and accept amicable invitations, as normal…"
Madeleine St John tells Nicola and Jonathan’s story in punchy chapters, making this a quick read. And while the main storyline is a heartbreak, the support Nicola receives from her good friend Susannah (and her accommodating husband Geoffrey and precocious son Guy) is so full of warmth and, at times, humour. This was, for me, a great read filled with great writing and observations about relationships. However, while I quite liked Nicola and her friends, Jonathan just seemed so cold, so heartless, so the type of guy who would give a dead fish handshake. There wasn’t much – if at all – to like about him, he seemed to be written quite one-sidedly that the reader has no choice but to not like him. Well at least that’s what it was like for me.
“The Essence of the Thing, is probably her masterwork: “a further chapter”, as one of the characters remarks, “in the gruesome, yet frequently hilarious saga of the island people who had given the planet its common language and virtually all its games”.”
- Madeleine St John’s obituary in The Independent
This review was first posted on my blog Olduvai Reads
It’s a typical day. Nicola pops out of her Notting Hill flat for some cigarettes and returns to a stranger. Her boyfriend Jonathan is telling her something she can’t understand, saying that he has made a decision. He has come to a conclusion: they have to part. He doesn’t want to talk about it, about why, and wants Nicola to move out unless she wants to buy him out of their co-owned flat. He’s a lawyer, she’s, well, not. So she has no choice.
"Having been cast out by him, she now found – as she had found before – that she was capable only of speaking and acting, even to a degree apparently of feeling, like a stranger. But struggling, terrified and helpless, a loving and trusting Nicola shrieked in anguish from the depths of this stunned and frozen stranger."
But Nicola still isn’t over her shock. She wants an explanation. Of course, who wouldn’t? But most of all she wants things to go back to the way they used to.
"She had thought her tears were all shed. She had assured herself that once the ironing was done, and the evening had fallen, and Jonathan had returned, and she and he had talked, properly talked, to each other, everything would be normal again. Normal and nice. They would be a normal, nice couple again, and could make amicable arrangements again, and accept amicable invitations, as normal…"
Madeleine St John tells Nicola and Jonathan’s story in punchy chapters, making this a quick read. And while the main storyline is a heartbreak, the support Nicola receives from her good friend Susannah (and her accommodating husband Geoffrey and precocious son Guy) is so full of warmth and, at times, humour. This was, for me, a great read filled with great writing and observations about relationships. However, while I quite liked Nicola and her friends, Jonathan just seemed so cold, so heartless, so the type of guy who would give a dead fish handshake. There wasn’t much – if at all – to like about him, he seemed to be written quite one-sidedly that the reader has no choice but to not like him. Well at least that’s what it was like for me.
“The Essence of the Thing, is probably her masterwork: “a further chapter”, as one of the characters remarks, “in the gruesome, yet frequently hilarious saga of the island people who had given the planet its common language and virtually all its games”.”
- Madeleine St John’s obituary in The Independent
This review was first posted on my blog Olduvai Reads
May 22, 2015
‘I went out last night to buy some cigarettes.’
Nicola left the flat briefly to buy a packet of cigarettes, but when she returns her live-in boyfriend Jonathan tells her their relationship must end. Jonathan says that he no longer wants to be with her, and it would be best if she moved out. Disbelief is Nicola’s first reaction. Then, as realization sets in and her world falls apart, she is devastated. Nicola turns to her friends, particularly Susannah, for advice. While most think that Nicola would be better off without Jonathan, she isn’t convinced.
While this novel is the story of a relationship breakup, it has some very humorous aspects. The breakup of a relationship does not just affect the couple involved, it has an impact on friends and family as well. The friends (mostly couples) and parents of Jonathan and Nicola are each ready to offer their opinions.
'Let's say he's a prat. But he's the prat I love.' She paused. 'Actually, I've never been absolutely sure what prat means, exactly.'
Much of the story unfolds via conversation, with each chapter offering a different point of view. This enables us to appreciate the differing perspectives and, importantly, to see how Nicola and Jonathan react. It may have been Jonathan’s choice to end the relationship, but it soon becomes clear that Nicola is more able than Jonathan to move on. Has Jonathan made the right decision? Does he really want Nicola to move out of his life?
‘Too bad about the marmalade. The balance between bitter and sweet was the essence of the thing.’
In this short novel, Ms St John managed to dissect a particular relationship in order to demonstrate its numerous and various components. Control may start with Jonathan, but it certainly doesn’t stay with him. Friends and family members have views, but Nicola and Jonathan need to negotiate their own paths through it. I enjoyed this novel, with its flashes of humour and neat depictions of relationships and their perils.
‘The Essence of the Thing’ was shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1997.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
Nicola left the flat briefly to buy a packet of cigarettes, but when she returns her live-in boyfriend Jonathan tells her their relationship must end. Jonathan says that he no longer wants to be with her, and it would be best if she moved out. Disbelief is Nicola’s first reaction. Then, as realization sets in and her world falls apart, she is devastated. Nicola turns to her friends, particularly Susannah, for advice. While most think that Nicola would be better off without Jonathan, she isn’t convinced.
While this novel is the story of a relationship breakup, it has some very humorous aspects. The breakup of a relationship does not just affect the couple involved, it has an impact on friends and family as well. The friends (mostly couples) and parents of Jonathan and Nicola are each ready to offer their opinions.
'Let's say he's a prat. But he's the prat I love.' She paused. 'Actually, I've never been absolutely sure what prat means, exactly.'
Much of the story unfolds via conversation, with each chapter offering a different point of view. This enables us to appreciate the differing perspectives and, importantly, to see how Nicola and Jonathan react. It may have been Jonathan’s choice to end the relationship, but it soon becomes clear that Nicola is more able than Jonathan to move on. Has Jonathan made the right decision? Does he really want Nicola to move out of his life?
‘Too bad about the marmalade. The balance between bitter and sweet was the essence of the thing.’
In this short novel, Ms St John managed to dissect a particular relationship in order to demonstrate its numerous and various components. Control may start with Jonathan, but it certainly doesn’t stay with him. Friends and family members have views, but Nicola and Jonathan need to negotiate their own paths through it. I enjoyed this novel, with its flashes of humour and neat depictions of relationships and their perils.
‘The Essence of the Thing’ was shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 1997.
Jennifer Cameron-Smith
October 18, 2025
Le storie semplici di Madeleine St. John mi piacciono tanto. Lei racconta di vite semplici e situazioni che possono accadere a tutti in modo frizzante.
In questa storia Nicola deve affrontare l'abbandono da parte del compagno Jonathan. La loro storia viene ripercorsa con dei flashback dei loro primi incontri e dei commenti da parte di coppie di amici. I genitori di ciascuno dei ragazzi sono anche coinvolti con i loro pensieri e consigli sulla situazione. anche i commenti sulla situazione attuale di Nicola e delle coppie è spassoso facendo riflettere. Il tutto innaffiato da litri di te, qualche birra e buon vino.
Nel libro le parti descrittive sono ridotte al minimo e i dialoghi diretti sono preponderanti.
La coppia di amici Susannah e Geoffrey mi piace tanto e i loro dialoghi sono spassosi.
All'inizio la reazione di Nicola all'annuncio di Jonathan mi sembra esagerato e plateale, ma dopo aver capito le motivazioni date dal compagno anche in lei qualcosa si rompe e ha il coraggio di riprendere in mano la sua vita. Per tutto il libro l'autrice mi ha fatto oscillare tra la voglia romantica di un finale da principessa, retaggi di una cultura dove pur di tenersi l'uomo della vita si accetta ogni tipo di compromesso e la determinazione più consapevole di mandarlo a quel paese e non perdere più tempo del dovuto. La scena dell'ascensore è TOP e non l'avrei per niente associata al personaggio così remissivo e triste. La protagonista è fantastica in questo e il finale è proprio bello. Forse è aperto? Non credo proprio. Le parole sono importanti e quelle pronunciate da Jonathan sono macigni che fanno perdere la fiducia, prima ancora dell'amore.
In questa storia Nicola deve affrontare l'abbandono da parte del compagno Jonathan. La loro storia viene ripercorsa con dei flashback dei loro primi incontri e dei commenti da parte di coppie di amici. I genitori di ciascuno dei ragazzi sono anche coinvolti con i loro pensieri e consigli sulla situazione. anche i commenti sulla situazione attuale di Nicola e delle coppie è spassoso facendo riflettere. Il tutto innaffiato da litri di te, qualche birra e buon vino.
Nel libro le parti descrittive sono ridotte al minimo e i dialoghi diretti sono preponderanti.
La coppia di amici Susannah e Geoffrey mi piace tanto e i loro dialoghi sono spassosi.
All'inizio la reazione di Nicola all'annuncio di Jonathan mi sembra esagerato e plateale, ma dopo aver capito le motivazioni date dal compagno anche in lei qualcosa si rompe e ha il coraggio di riprendere in mano la sua vita. Per tutto il libro l'autrice mi ha fatto oscillare tra la voglia romantica di un finale da principessa, retaggi di una cultura dove pur di tenersi l'uomo della vita si accetta ogni tipo di compromesso e la determinazione più consapevole di mandarlo a quel paese e non perdere più tempo del dovuto. La scena dell'ascensore è TOP e non l'avrei per niente associata al personaggio così remissivo e triste. La protagonista è fantastica in questo e il finale è proprio bello. Forse è aperto? Non credo proprio. Le parole sono importanti e quelle pronunciate da Jonathan sono macigni che fanno perdere la fiducia, prima ancora dell'amore.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 10, 2013
I read this book in an afternoon and I was surprised at how much was drawn into this novel. This is a book about relationships, those that fail, those that manage to exist and those well you are just not sure why people are together. The story focuses on Nicole and Jonathon and it is a beautiful character study. You see the parents trying to encourage marriage by gifting rings and other items. You see the reactions of friends to the break up and how quickly they can take sides.I liked the humour, I mean she even makes fun of her novel when referring to an audio book and some of it is so subtle. I know people who have told me that after a break up they focus on the silliest of things like a two dollar gift and it takes on even greater significance.
This book is not for everyone but it captured me at just the right time and I really did enjoy it.
This book is not for everyone but it captured me at just the right time and I really did enjoy it.
October 15, 2025
This is a small, elegant novel about the emotional aftermath of a relationship’s collapse. Told in a series of short, dialogue-driven chapters that feel almost like scenes from a 1970s sitcom (The Good Life kept coming to mind), it captures with wry precision the English middle-class world of restraint, politeness and emotional understatement.
St John’s brilliance lies in her restraint. There’s no melodrama — only the recognisable confusion, grief and self-questioning that follow when love ends. Both Nicola and Jonathan are drawn with empathy and balance: she feels everything, he feels little but doesn’t know why. His emotional withdrawal reads less as cruelty than as a kind of immaturity, a man conditioned to composure rather than self-knowledge.
The novel’s brevity adds to its intensity. It can be read in one or two sittings And the irony of Jonathan’s remark about marmalade (“the balance between sweet and bitterness is the very essence of the thing”) neatly sums up his failure to understand that this balance is what relationships require too.
If the ending feels slightly predictable, it’s at least free of sentimentality. A quiet, precise, and very English dissection of heartbreak.
St John’s brilliance lies in her restraint. There’s no melodrama — only the recognisable confusion, grief and self-questioning that follow when love ends. Both Nicola and Jonathan are drawn with empathy and balance: she feels everything, he feels little but doesn’t know why. His emotional withdrawal reads less as cruelty than as a kind of immaturity, a man conditioned to composure rather than self-knowledge.
The novel’s brevity adds to its intensity. It can be read in one or two sittings And the irony of Jonathan’s remark about marmalade (“the balance between sweet and bitterness is the very essence of the thing”) neatly sums up his failure to understand that this balance is what relationships require too.
If the ending feels slightly predictable, it’s at least free of sentimentality. A quiet, precise, and very English dissection of heartbreak.
Read
December 4, 2017kỳ quặc ngay từ đầu, đến cái kết thì sến sụa như anh marc levy
June 15, 2020
I read this because it was shortlisted for the 1997 Booker prize. The novel doesn't stand out but gives a fairly realistic picture of a woman's experience after her significant other terminates their relationship.
July 4, 2012
The book appealed to me because, like almost everyone, I've been through a relationship break up. It's not an original concept I know, but the novel still appealed. The story follows twenty-something Nicola through the weeks that follow an unexpected end to her long term relationship with lawyer Jonathan.
I appreciate the short chapters and the conversational style, as there were times when it was effective at emphasising a narrative or a concept without it being outlined for the reader in what would have been a more patronising manner. The blurb suggests that the short chapters are reflective of middle class pretence, and I can appreciate this too. That none of the other characters but Nicola are really predominantly focussed on her break-up also emphasises the perhaps self centered, busy-body attitude of the London-ite middle class 'status' families she is (for some reason) friends with.
Generally however, the story disappointed me with its pace, its reasoning, its perspective and its character...Sorry Ms St John. I was given no reason to believe that Nicola and Jonathan would have even been a couple, and a happy one at that. That Nicola manages herself so gracefully and modestly throughout her turmoil indicates that she is not stupid, or shallow, or unreasonable. But for her to have been involved for so long with a man so apparently emotionally void really confuses me. Also, for Nicola to be transformed to a blubbering wreck of woman to a proudly single and defiant one over the space of one night in a night club (with two fabulous gay guys; complete with montage makeover if it were a movie, I'm sure) is a depressingly stereotypical and lazy way to give some illusion of progression.
If I was a guy, I think I'd find the book a little offensive if I'm honest. Jonathan is portrayed as a shallow, dull, selfish, and irresponsible man; the stereotypical 'bad guy' in a relationship break down. I was hoping that this stereotype would be diffused throughout the story as we perhaps found out why or how he had adopted this attitude. But no, he continues to be a dull and lifeless sod until the very end, when (randomly) he starts to beg for Nicola to come back- this is where I had to stop reading. Anyone who has gone through a horrendous breakup, and thinks that they can identify with this story obviously needs closure. People don't just become dicks overnight because they are men. There is reasoning and explanation behind every relationship breakdown. I'm not saying that it can never not 'be someone's fault', but this was an extremely one-dimensional perspective of relationships, people and particularly men.
So much about the book seemed completely unnecessary (maybe this was supposed to add to the 'realistic' tone; that we were literally just watching a series of events unfold), and yet so many necessary explanations seemed to have been completely forgotten.
Oh, also.: I don't know when the book is set but everyone talks like it's 1945 ("Whizzy!"). It was published in 1997 and there is no indication it was set in a different era to this. Upon then reading that the author is Australian, and then noticing the number of pointless 'Oh look, we're in London' references, it's just all very embarrassing to read.
No thanks, please avoid.
I appreciate the short chapters and the conversational style, as there were times when it was effective at emphasising a narrative or a concept without it being outlined for the reader in what would have been a more patronising manner. The blurb suggests that the short chapters are reflective of middle class pretence, and I can appreciate this too. That none of the other characters but Nicola are really predominantly focussed on her break-up also emphasises the perhaps self centered, busy-body attitude of the London-ite middle class 'status' families she is (for some reason) friends with.
Generally however, the story disappointed me with its pace, its reasoning, its perspective and its character...Sorry Ms St John. I was given no reason to believe that Nicola and Jonathan would have even been a couple, and a happy one at that. That Nicola manages herself so gracefully and modestly throughout her turmoil indicates that she is not stupid, or shallow, or unreasonable. But for her to have been involved for so long with a man so apparently emotionally void really confuses me. Also, for Nicola to be transformed to a blubbering wreck of woman to a proudly single and defiant one over the space of one night in a night club (with two fabulous gay guys; complete with montage makeover if it were a movie, I'm sure) is a depressingly stereotypical and lazy way to give some illusion of progression.
If I was a guy, I think I'd find the book a little offensive if I'm honest. Jonathan is portrayed as a shallow, dull, selfish, and irresponsible man; the stereotypical 'bad guy' in a relationship break down. I was hoping that this stereotype would be diffused throughout the story as we perhaps found out why or how he had adopted this attitude. But no, he continues to be a dull and lifeless sod until the very end, when (randomly) he starts to beg for Nicola to come back- this is where I had to stop reading. Anyone who has gone through a horrendous breakup, and thinks that they can identify with this story obviously needs closure. People don't just become dicks overnight because they are men. There is reasoning and explanation behind every relationship breakdown. I'm not saying that it can never not 'be someone's fault', but this was an extremely one-dimensional perspective of relationships, people and particularly men.
So much about the book seemed completely unnecessary (maybe this was supposed to add to the 'realistic' tone; that we were literally just watching a series of events unfold), and yet so many necessary explanations seemed to have been completely forgotten.
Oh, also.: I don't know when the book is set but everyone talks like it's 1945 ("Whizzy!"). It was published in 1997 and there is no indication it was set in a different era to this. Upon then reading that the author is Australian, and then noticing the number of pointless 'Oh look, we're in London' references, it's just all very embarrassing to read.
No thanks, please avoid.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 30, 2014
Opening line: “…Nicola was still standing in the doorway when Jonathan began to speak: she hadn’t even had time to take off her coat…”
Nicola only popped out to buy a packet of cigarettes at the local shop but when she gets back she finds a stranger in her apartment instead of her live-in boyfriend. Oh he looks like Jonathan but he doesn’t act like the man that she knows and loves. This Jonathan tells her that he no longer wants to be with her and that the relationship must come to an end and that it would be best if she moved out straight away.
“…Then he looked up at her again. ‘There’s no nice way to say this,’ he said. ‘But I’ve decided – that is, I’ve come to the conclusion – that we should part.’…”
THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is the tale of a breakup of a relationship, but it has a very humorous edge to all the drama. Nicola’s first reaction is disbelief, followed by utter devastation as her world just falls apart. She turns to her friends for advice and support, thay all seem to think she is better off without Jonathon, in fact the consensus of opinion is that he’s a bit of a cold fish and she can do better, but Nicola is not ready to see this herself quite yet.
"...'Let's say he's a prat. But he's the prat I love.' She paused. 'Actually, I've never been absolutely sure what prat means, exactly…"
There are a lot of characters in the book, mostly couples who are either her friends or his, along with both sets of parents. All terribly middle to upper class and willing to give their point of view which gives author Madeleine St John the opportunity to show that the breakup of a relationship just doesn’t affect the couple, it also affects the other people in their lives. THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is not a lengthy book and the chapters are very short with a lot of conversation rather than lengthy scene settings. Each chapter had a different point of view, whether it was Nicola or Jonathon, their parents or friends. Yet with minimum fuss St John explores the human emotion that is wrapped up in a separation, the various mood swings that occur as the relationship is split from one entity to two, the realisation of how irrevocable the decision is. There was also the truism that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone. As I mentioned before, despite the terrible bleakness of the breakup, THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is actually full of hope, warmth and humour and there comes the point in the story where Nicola found herself laughing at something and forgetting about Jonathon for a moment and that was the point where her life moved on, she had turned the corner and is no longer crippled by misery, she has hope for the future. In contrast though it is about this time that Jonathon realised what he had done and he finds himself unable to move on, and wanting to turn around and make things return to the way they were. For Jonathon the table has turned.
C – Above average. Was very readable and I really liked it but was easily able to put it down and walk away for a while.
Nicola only popped out to buy a packet of cigarettes at the local shop but when she gets back she finds a stranger in her apartment instead of her live-in boyfriend. Oh he looks like Jonathan but he doesn’t act like the man that she knows and loves. This Jonathan tells her that he no longer wants to be with her and that the relationship must come to an end and that it would be best if she moved out straight away.
“…Then he looked up at her again. ‘There’s no nice way to say this,’ he said. ‘But I’ve decided – that is, I’ve come to the conclusion – that we should part.’…”
THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is the tale of a breakup of a relationship, but it has a very humorous edge to all the drama. Nicola’s first reaction is disbelief, followed by utter devastation as her world just falls apart. She turns to her friends for advice and support, thay all seem to think she is better off without Jonathon, in fact the consensus of opinion is that he’s a bit of a cold fish and she can do better, but Nicola is not ready to see this herself quite yet.
"...'Let's say he's a prat. But he's the prat I love.' She paused. 'Actually, I've never been absolutely sure what prat means, exactly…"
There are a lot of characters in the book, mostly couples who are either her friends or his, along with both sets of parents. All terribly middle to upper class and willing to give their point of view which gives author Madeleine St John the opportunity to show that the breakup of a relationship just doesn’t affect the couple, it also affects the other people in their lives. THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is not a lengthy book and the chapters are very short with a lot of conversation rather than lengthy scene settings. Each chapter had a different point of view, whether it was Nicola or Jonathon, their parents or friends. Yet with minimum fuss St John explores the human emotion that is wrapped up in a separation, the various mood swings that occur as the relationship is split from one entity to two, the realisation of how irrevocable the decision is. There was also the truism that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone. As I mentioned before, despite the terrible bleakness of the breakup, THE ESSENCE OF THE THING is actually full of hope, warmth and humour and there comes the point in the story where Nicola found herself laughing at something and forgetting about Jonathon for a moment and that was the point where her life moved on, she had turned the corner and is no longer crippled by misery, she has hope for the future. In contrast though it is about this time that Jonathon realised what he had done and he finds himself unable to move on, and wanting to turn around and make things return to the way they were. For Jonathon the table has turned.
C – Above average. Was very readable and I really liked it but was easily able to put it down and walk away for a while.
December 11, 2017
I loved St John's debut novel The Women in Black but had no idea what I would think of her other books. The Essence of the Thing (shortlisted for the Booker in 1997) starts with the abrupt end of a marriage of a well-heeled Notting Hill professional couple when 30-something Nicola comes back from buying cigarettes to be told by her lawyer husband Johnathon he wants her to leave.
What may at first appear to be a slight comedy of social manners set in 1990s London turns out to be a deeply touching, acerbically funny, compassionate and smart novel about a woman's painful stumbling towards independence and reluctant surrender of self-sacrificing love. With the most delicate of touches (much of the story is told in rapid-fire dialogue and a sustained tone of breezy understatement), St John sketches portraits of a spectrum of upper middle class Londoners who negotiate emotional situations with suppression, evasion and a peculiarly English kind of infantilism (such as Billy-Bunterish exclamations of "whizzy"!).
Her close women friends offer her words of comfort ("we should kill him") and practical help (a place to stay) but it is two homosexual friends who transform Nicola into a new woman by treating her to a spliff-smoking, fashion-make-over night of dancing and fun.
The writing is very funny. On her big night out, Nicola meets Jean Claude "a young man beautiful and elegant in the standard-issue French style". At breakfast Johnathon realises his marriage to Nicola is over when he acknowledges that "they were not now in a shared marmalade situation". St John has a gift for tightly intertwining humour and pain in such acute observations of life's bitter disappointments and agonies. There is a sadness at the heart of this novel that sneaks up and haunts you even as you smile at the clever and witty prose.
What may at first appear to be a slight comedy of social manners set in 1990s London turns out to be a deeply touching, acerbically funny, compassionate and smart novel about a woman's painful stumbling towards independence and reluctant surrender of self-sacrificing love. With the most delicate of touches (much of the story is told in rapid-fire dialogue and a sustained tone of breezy understatement), St John sketches portraits of a spectrum of upper middle class Londoners who negotiate emotional situations with suppression, evasion and a peculiarly English kind of infantilism (such as Billy-Bunterish exclamations of "whizzy"!).
Her close women friends offer her words of comfort ("we should kill him") and practical help (a place to stay) but it is two homosexual friends who transform Nicola into a new woman by treating her to a spliff-smoking, fashion-make-over night of dancing and fun.
The writing is very funny. On her big night out, Nicola meets Jean Claude "a young man beautiful and elegant in the standard-issue French style". At breakfast Johnathon realises his marriage to Nicola is over when he acknowledges that "they were not now in a shared marmalade situation". St John has a gift for tightly intertwining humour and pain in such acute observations of life's bitter disappointments and agonies. There is a sadness at the heart of this novel that sneaks up and haunts you even as you smile at the clever and witty prose.
January 6, 2010
Oh,whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy did I read this book to the end? Gaaaahhhh! A potato is more interesting.
From the first page Madeleine St John sets the scene for on overly verbose, boring, word pudding. She is not content to say something once, she must say it at least three times on the one page (sometimes she got adventurous and used her Thesaurus). How did this get published, much less win an award?? I mean, a page and a half devoted to describing the emptiness of a wardrobe???? Come onnnnn!
Her main characters of Jonathon and Nicola are exceedingly dull although I will allow that the 'extras' gave the book some light with their dryly humourous conversation. Sadly this little boon was negated by the pitiful ending, which reminded me of a deflating balloon - complete with farting noise.
I'm giving this debacle one star for the author's commendable use of "disoriented" rather than "disorientated".
From the first page Madeleine St John sets the scene for on overly verbose, boring, word pudding. She is not content to say something once, she must say it at least three times on the one page (sometimes she got adventurous and used her Thesaurus). How did this get published, much less win an award?? I mean, a page and a half devoted to describing the emptiness of a wardrobe???? Come onnnnn!
Her main characters of Jonathon and Nicola are exceedingly dull although I will allow that the 'extras' gave the book some light with their dryly humourous conversation. Sadly this little boon was negated by the pitiful ending, which reminded me of a deflating balloon - complete with farting noise.
I'm giving this debacle one star for the author's commendable use of "disoriented" rather than "disorientated".
June 5, 2020
Nicola's partner announces without warning that they are splitting up and that Nicola should move out of the flat they shared (which was formerly hers). Nicola is shocked and upset, and does not understand what has gone wrong with their relationship. Neither she nor we ever really find out, other than almost everyone who knows Johnathan calling him various names and blaming him.
There is some entertainment value in the banter between various other characters, but this is an insubstantial book and only worth reading if you wonder what it was doing on the Booker shortlist for the year (1997) and want to continue to wonder.
There is some entertainment value in the banter between various other characters, but this is an insubstantial book and only worth reading if you wonder what it was doing on the Booker shortlist for the year (1997) and want to continue to wonder.
May 10, 2018
I can't believe this was shortlisted for the Booker in 1997 - it seems far more dated than that. It could have been a really interesting book - the shock of a relationship falling apart, the callousness and coldness of one partner is portrayed quite well- but it's mostly dialogue and a lot of the dialogue is just awful. Did anyone in 1997 - even an eight year old boy - run around saying 'Cor!' and 'Whizzy!' Books like this make me wonder why I bother to read anything on the Booker list.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 166 reviews