I was so impressed with Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day (so aptly described by Salman Rushdie as "a story both beautiful and cruel") that I was all for reading more of his stuff. When We Were Orphans really intrigued me--I bought it as a birthday gift with the (not so) veiled intention of borrowing it after the recipient was done. Hey, everybody wins, right? The story is set in the 1930s. Christopher Banks is the most celebrated detective in England, having solved a number of high-profile cases--but the one case that continues to haunt him is his parents' disappearance when he was just nine years old. It tracks his return to Shanghai--the scene of the crime--decades after he was orphaned, to try and find some resolution once and for all.
Similar to his style in The Remains of the Day, Ishiguro employs a first-person narrative in When We Were Orphans. The story is told from Christopher's perspective, and makes use of plenty of flashbacks, for the only clues he has to go on are his memories. It is more than a mere crime novel though; in reviewer Simon Leake's words, it's a novel that uses the "conventions of crime fiction to create a moving portrait of a troubled mind." Also like Remains, this book explores the character's skewed self-perception, and his inner turmoil (and efforts at keeping it at bay) as the world around him falls apart.
It sounds like a fascinating read but I personally thought that it seemed more like a good idea on the book jacket. The story didn't engage me or touch me the way The Remains of the Day did; I didn't think the narrative was as tight or as beautifully written; and the big reveal was, well, a bit of a letdown. I don't regret reading it though—Booker Prize-winner or not, Ishiguro's books seem like they would always be worth one's time.
0 Comments
Add Comment