Great review! 'Mike the Cynic' is now on my list of favorite cultural critics.

@mikegseclecticreads

7 ай бұрын

Thanks!

Hope you have a good Christmas! (Unlike Poirot’s.) Looking forward to your next book review.

Well crafted and balanced book review! Regarding the happily ever after romance, I think this gets back to your point that the novel is un-apologetically Nigerian at times. In the West, I think readers often view romances as frivolous and a distraction from the main story. Nice and tidy romantic endings are not "literary" enough. In Nigeria, especially Nollywood film, melodrama *is* the story. Romances have happily ever afters. Perhaps the ending was to cater to the author's Nigerian readership?

@mikegseclecticreads

7 ай бұрын

Wow, that's a great observation! Maybe it is just American of me to overthink this aspect of the story so much instead of having fun with it like with many of the other parts :)

An interesting perspective. I know I am not presently the following well, but it is off-the-cuff. Your point about Ifemelu returning to Nigeria but not having become a version of herself (as well as Obinze's return, but from a different country) I think highlights the perspective of being an 'Americanah'. I think it is very American (of you) to think a happy ending is required, and that of course, coming to America is going to make her a better person. In fact, I think the opposite happens. Even if she returns "rich' (by Nigerian standards), she has become a worse person and no longer fits in her Nigerian society. Even the critique that the book "slips into a level of a simple romance" seems to me to the point Where Ifemelu (and the story) becomes truly american: who cares about morals and the things that were important before; now it is all about (American) dreams of riches and romance (which is really anti-climatic if that is your view on life, and thus mirrored as the anti-climatic in the book). As per the ending, people do make bad choices. Not everything has a Hollywood ending. One could argue that might be the point of the novel (being rich and having worldly experiences and perspectives such as understanding race from an American viewpoint) does not necessarily make one a better person. You are reading from an American point of view. What if you were reading from a Nigerian point of view. The unsatisfying ending is perhaps the whole point. Maybe Adichie was writing in part for her Nigeria audience? (eg. you don't want to be come Americanized because it'll make you a worse person where you can no longer fit into either society). Or maybe I am inserting intent of the author that was not intended? But, well, there it is. If nothing else, it is discussion worthy.

@mikegseclecticreads

6 ай бұрын

Yes, this makes me want to specifically seek out some Nigerians' or Nigerian-born Americans' reviews of the book to hear what they thought.

Another excellent review and long-awaited! While on the subject of race - what do you make of colour-blind casting, which is the current trend? In the latest Agatha Christie TV adaptation, Murder is Easy, the investigator of a series of murders in an English village is a former policeman back from the colonies - Luke Fitzwilliam - a white Englishman - but he has become a black policeman now. The novel was written and set in 1939 - it hasn’t been updated as the trailer shows - yet it would have been impossible for this to happen in the late 30s. A lot of viewers don’t seem to mind such instances of ‘diversity’ - some, including me, do. History is being changed through cultural misrepresentation. (Same with an English Queen Anne Boleyn and Mr Jaggers, the lawyer, in Great Expectations - in the respective tv dramas - both are played by black actors.)

@mikegseclecticreads

7 ай бұрын

Thanks! Hoping to share another video before too long ... "Cat Among the Pigeons" is on its way next. That's an interesting question and definitely one with a lot of aspects to it. I haven't thought about it super deeply, but generally I don't really mind colorblind casting. I agree it may not be historically accurate, but I mostly just consider it an artistic liberty, similar to other liberties taken with historical films that don't detract from the overall story for me and sometimes make the experience enjoyable in other ways. E.g., actors and actresses are selected and costumed to be physically attractive to a modern audience even if this is inconsistent with the conventions of the time, or important historical events or battles are dramatized in a way that is more imaginative and romanticized than historically faithful. Of course, since we're not in a world in which people simply don't notice race, I do agree that such a casting choice is more realistic within the context of a modern retelling, as opposed to within a story set in a supposedly historical context, in which it does stick out as inconsistent with the actual realities of the time, but I also just don't find it too jarring. And although I think trying to rewrite history is concerning in many contexts, in this case I'm not usually too worried about that aspect as long as there isn't an overt implication that the history being depicted is actually the real history. Obviously if we think for even a moment about it, Anne Boleyn was white, but I'm guessing the producers of that show aren't trying to revise history to say that she wasn't (and I would find concerning if they were; I definitely don't support modifications made intending to push a narrative contradictory to historical evidence and portray it as reality). I also kind of understand this colorblind casting as an expression of aspiration towards a world in which an actor's skin color being historically incorrect is no more remarkable to us than, say, other aspects of their physical appearance or the language they speak being historically incorrect, which I personally rarely pay attention to even though I generally still know they are historically inaccurate. Sure, we're not in that world and I can't even be sure we ever will be, but I can see why this concept is appealing to modern audiences and I don't see it as doing any major harm. Just my thoughts though -- it's definitely a complex topic and I think a lot depends on the context as well.

@58christiansful

7 ай бұрын

@@mikegseclecticreads Many thanks for airing your views! I don’t mind colour-blind liberties with Shakespeare, for example - as his predominant themes of love, power, treachery, etc are relevant to all nationalities and cultures - hence the Samurail version of Macbeth and others. Or with Marlowe and others of that ilk. But as you know Agatha Christie is so very English and unchanging - her characters and settings are instantly recognizable - to the point of being ‘English - and that’s one of the reasons for her perennial appeal - hence my objection to racial changes to her very stylised whodunits. I also think it is patronizing to intelligent, educated black people who will recognize a historical impossibility or incongruity when I see one - it is as tho they are being humoured or pacified or made up to because of their past - but the the past is the past - a foreign country - they do things differently there! I look forward to Cat Among the Pigeons. Wonder what you make of there being two different murderers. And Poirot coming late and only peripherally. If you haven’t read Murder is Easy, do so - it is the archetypal English village mystery about a series of seemingly unconnected murders and one of the most interesting. My favourite Poirot is Cards on the Table, which you haven’t yet reviewed.