James Wood reviews Peter Carey's His Illegal Self and Hari Kunzru's My Revolutions in The New Yorker.
Ever since the attack on the World Trade Center, we have all heard a lot about “the Professor,” the chilling anarchist in Conrad’s “The Secret Agent,” who walks around with a bomb strapped to himself and one hand on the detonator. Far more attention has been paid to this ruthless fanatic—unsuggestively reprised by Cormac McCarthy as Anton Chigurh, in “No Country for Old Men”—than to Verloc, the harried, soft, pithless entity who is the novel’s actual protagonist. But Verloc is more interesting than the Professor because he is so much less confident. The Professor is an arrow; Verloc is a target, helplessly bearing the gouges of the various assaults made on him. He works for the anarchists, but he also works against them, as a double agent; he is despised by his handler at the embassy, and feels bullied into following the diplomat’s order to blow up the Greenwich Observatory, a job that he fatally bungles; he is a minor London shopkeeper, who sells pornography under the table; he moves through his shabby domestic existence sluggishly, as if under water.
I'd really like to see Wood review a work written by a female author one of these rounds. He is batting .000 there now, which is becoming distressing as it seems to say that only work by male authors, whether positively or negatively received, is significant enough to merit his critical attention.
Posted by: CAAF | February 25, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Here's a Wood review of a female author, from the Carey/Kunzru piece:
“My Revolutions” does not have the brittle elegance of Dana Spiotta’s spectacular novel about American radicalism of the nineteen-seventies, “Eat the Document.”
It's a rave! Batting .001 now.
Posted by: Amateur Reader | February 25, 2008 at 01:34 PM
Very much a fair cop, CAAF. Something he should be asked about, for sure. I know he's championed Monica Ali but is that it for living females? Actually, I think Spark was alive when he touted her. Still, not much of a track record, to be sure.
Posted by: TEV | February 25, 2008 at 09:59 PM
Oops, to clarify: I meant since he's been at the New Yorker. Where I think the mention of Spiotta's novel, quoted here by Amateur Reader, is about it.
As I said, it's not even whether he positively or negatively receives the work, it's having him write about it in the first place. Even a negative review can be a sign of arrival and being taken seriously. But to your list of championed living authors, TEV, I think he gave Munro the glowing treatment once as well ...
Posted by: CAAF | February 26, 2008 at 06:26 AM