The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

The Bee Sting by Paul Murray (Hamish Hamilton)

Melodramatic. Maudlin. Flabby.

My only Booker wish at the moment is that it doesn't get any worse than this.
...I just finished How to Build a Boat & did not get my wish.
...finished the longlist and I ranked 3 lower than this. Very depressing!

Lascosas wrote: "Melodramatic. Maudlin. Flabby.

My only Booker wish at the moment is that it doesn't get any worse then this."

That's depressing to hear. Have you read any other Murray books and did you get a similar feeling?

In my view it gets worse - but I would say that, very unscientifically, this is the book getting the most love from those on I stagram reading through the longlist. Getting lots of tips as likely winner.

Al though I haven't read this, the problems mentioned above were the exact same ones I had with Skippy Dies

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "In my view it gets worse - but I would say that, very unscientifically, this is the book getting the most love from those on I stagram reading through the longlist. Getting lots of tips as likely winner."

There was a contingent on Instagram that really liked A System So Magnificent It Is Blinding back in the spring. I wonder if there's overlap. I suppose it's nice to be reminded there are different perspectives about what makes a book good.

Yes, I read Skippy Dies because I've read the Booker longlist for a very long time. I didn't hate it like I hated Bee Sting, but I wasn't a fan.

I should clarify my prospective on this book, and the longlist. I'm not a fan of most contemporary English language literature, and often the only things I read from that genre are the Booker longlist. My preference is translated fiction.

Maybe part of my dislike is that I am not hip or au courant enough to appreciate what the author is trying to do. But I simply can not see an argument for this book that would justify the lack of an editor slashing the size of this thing.

David wrote: "Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "In my view it gets worse - but I would say that, very unscientifically, this is the book getting the most love from those on I stagram reading through the lo..."

I did not enjoy that book and will still argue it was the wrong Swedish book to end up on the list (Collected Works is my choice)

I love the Bee Sting. I am not hip or au courant either so I don't know.

I am curious. What did you like about it. And of course opinions vary on every book. I in no way mean to suggest that I am the last word on the worthiness of this book, or any other, to be on the longlist.

I find it interesting that there is such thing as an Instagram discussion. As someone without a cell phone, I don't even know what that means.

I honestly loved the writing, I thought it was sharp and funny without going overboard. I grew attached to the characters which, to me, says how good Murray is at writing at different ages. And the man knows how to handle a plot.

Am i correct in recalling this switches to second person at one stage - possibly the end?. That’s two books on the longlist that do that after last year’s winner was written in the second person

yes, the last quarter of the book is second person

Both books end that way then.

I do not normally like second person but in this case I survived you.

I found the lack of periods and commas for certain portions to be an affectation . The second person I didn't care about one way or the other except that it was a way of (trying) to tie things together.

I thought that chapter was referencing Ulysses, specifically Molly

I got the sense all the characters felt out of control in the second person section

Well that one passed me by and seems like way of a stretch by the author. Yet something else for me to dislike about it. I should simply remove my grumpy self from this discussion.

Yes it’s supposedly referencing Molly but I think you need to do a lot more than remove full stops. The language is nothing like it

no, but Imelda's beauty is always commented on and compared to Dickie (and even the kids) she's not educated. Cass says her mom's mind is always racing and is very random. the chapter shows us this, but also shows there's more to Imelda and surprises us with the why of her mind.

I'm not trying to say this is Ulysses, just that it reminded me of it. and no one needs to leave the chat because they didn't enjoy a book lol

Yes I thought it captured that part very well

I am surprised though that the author has kind of alluded to the Molly comparison

Has he? Do you have a link? I haven't seen him talk about it yet

I think I have remember wrong - as although he has discussed it it’s more to say it was not something he had initially considered. It’s more reviews I can see where I had noted the comparison.

I was planning to “read” this one as an audiobook here in the U.S., but it looks like the audiobook has not released over here?! I never expected that would happen. Anyone have any intel on why the audiobook release is lagging in the U.S.? I may have to read this in print after all…not sure I’ll have time for that.

Reading the comments above, I think we must have read a different book, because I found The Bee Sting utterly compulsive, addictive and immersive.

The voices of the different characters are captured particularly well.

Imelda's chapters lack punctuation not as an affectation, but because of her lack of formal education:

“He [Dickie] found crumpled-up drafts of cover letters she’d written for jobs, almost illegible even with spellcheck and autocorrect”.

Cass's chapters, by contrast, are more lyrical because of her poetic leanings.

To me, the book brilliantly captures the vast chasm between the self we project to the world, and what is actually going on inside us (as explored in Willie's speech).

There is also a lot of symbolism to unpack here - the bees, the red and grey squirrels, the tale of the traveler into elf land, the Pet Semetery and the barking dog with saucer eyes.

That’s correct re the voices although I think for Murray the bigger contrast was more with Dickie’s voice - highly educated and as a result careful and elegant.

I agree a lot of your comments and loved the book at first but I found it not able to justify its length and it was the ending that put me off as I found it unnecessarily full of coincidence (at the least of timing) and drama.

I would be surprised if this does not make the shortlist.

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I agree a lot of your comments and loved the book at first but I found it not able to justify its length and it was the ending that put me off as I found it unnecessarily full of coincidence (at the least of timing) and drama."

I thought the ending was so clever, particularly how all the elements of the book foreshadow the ending (as discussed in the questions thread for the book), including how (view spoiler)[it ties in with the very first paragraph of the book (hide spoiler)].

Whereas for me that was a little clunky - I guess this is like the discussion on Study for Obedience and what makes a great book - for me it’s definitely not plot.

Lascosas, I just read the last paragraph in the description of The Bee Sting, Where did it all go wrong? A patch of ice on the tarmac, a casual favor to a charming stranger, a bee caught beneath a bridal veil―can a single moment of bad luck change the direction of a life? And if the story has already been written―is there still time to find a happy ending? and wondered if you’ve read A Little Luck from Charco Press translated by Frances Riddle. It’s a tidy 208 page novel that explores the same ideas: fate or luck, how one deals with a stroke of bad luck, which decision was the catalyst for things going wrong, and are happy endings possible. It’s a solid 4 star for me, (losing one star only because Elena Knows was even better.)

This is Murray's interview:

https://thebookerprizes.com/the-booke...

It is funny that he is reading Soldier Sailor, a novel that I will happily swipe it with his in the longlist hahahaha

My thoughts exactly.

I haven't gotten around to penning a review, but here is Bob the Bookerer capturing what I loved about The Bee Sting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-vhV...

I’m 200 pages in and , so far, I’m enjoying it - I’m getting John Irving.vibes

Robert wrote: "I’m 200 pages in and , so far, I’m enjoying it - I’m getting John Irving.vibes"

John Irving vibes is high praise Robert. I have only read the first chapter so far. Hoping for meaningful reading time this weekend.

I finished this late last night with very mixed feelings. It wasn't at all what I was expecting, and while I liked it, I did not come even close to loving it. We don't hear from Dickie, one of the main characters, for close to half the book, and up to that point, I disliked Imelda and Cass and felt sympathy for but no connection with PJ. The arrival of Dickie's voice and backstory revived my interest in the story, and I did not mind the switch the second person at all (I thought it was fairly powerful).

I remain a fan of Murray's writing, but this one was so much darker than I was expecting (why is every book on this list so grim) and for me not even close to the joy of Skippy Dies. It's certainly too long, although I admire the writing talent on display. I keep thinking about it and thinking: "On the one hand" and then "On the other hand." A very complicated book.

https://youtu.be/apPAgaRa8GI?si=zjRPM...

This one may convert me to Paul's view on long books. Still nearly 500 pages to go and I am getting bored.

I have read it twice now - I would say Hugh it does speed up a lot towards the end as every single character suddenly reappears via a string of unlikely coincidences and misunderstandings

Yes, the last 100 or so pages are very hard to turn away from, although it spirals a bit at the same time.

Although by the same token the last 100 pages are what marred the book for me - at least as finest fiction.

Yes, I can understand that completely. I think that's what I meant by "spiral." Perhaps "unravels" would have been better?

i completely agree, it is unraveling towards the end. I was really impressed with the tone of the prose, but felt very let down by the uber-convenient revolution that felt lazy.

Sorry, but for me it didn't really get better. The whole thing just felt ludicrously contrived and rather silly. Must be missing something - it will probably win...

I think we agree Hugh - I meant it sped up and was no longer drifting/boring but in a way as you say that was ludicrously contrived.

One could, more charitably, describe the ending as Shakespearean. With so many Shakespeare fans on the judging panel, it makes sense to me why they selected it.

That does make a lot of sense.

Shame though to pick a book which draws on the Bard’s greatest weakness - hokey plots - and not his strength of innovative language.

This ended very low in my rankings (although higher than Hugh) but I still think it might win

https://www.instagram.com/p/CxKYpvygp...

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "This ended very low in my rankings (although higher than Hugh) but I still think it might win

I'm trying to get to grips with what kind of books win the prize. What is it about this book that makes you think it's a winner?

Generally a booker winner has:

The ability to be read many times and the reader will discover new details.

Some form of experimentation- different voices, interconnected timelines

Will focus on issues that embody a zeitgeist of sorts

Robert wrote: "Generally a booker winner has:

Thank you. I'll keep that in mind when I re-read the short list.

But every Booker jury has different ideas...

And this one seems to have a very odd idea of what finest fiction means.