Is it OK to admit to this being my first Kevin Brooks? Well, a witch has to start somewhere. I’d half thought Kevin mightn’t be my cup of tea, but that turned out to be wrong. I think more emphasis should be put on the fact that this is crime. Because it is, in a thrillery sort of way.
I’d expected gritty realism and lots of hard teenagers. It is gritty, and there are hard teenagers, but that’s not all. In Black Rabbit Summer a crime is committed. Perhaps. We don’t know. Or two crimes? It’s hard to tell. And with today’s press involvement in anything attractive and juicy, there is an unfair slant to the interest given the two, possibly connected, events.
Pete, the 16-year-old narrator, is a very courageous character, who feels strongly about his group of old friends, one way or another. As an adult I raged quietly over his seeming stupidity in trying to do everything himself, but I can see his point.
At times it seems impossible for this nest of deception and violence to sort itself out. Kevin doesn’t sell his readers short by having a magic solution to everything.
4 responses so far ↓
Lee // February 5, 2008 at 7:58
There’s a lot I appreciate about Kevin Brooks’ work, and I think him a very talented writer, which is why Black Rabbit Summer was something of a disappointment. It’s interesting that you’ve posted about him right after your Melvin Burgess interview, because the work of the two bears comparison - in several ways, of course, but I’ll just mention the question of versatility, as Nick Green put it in a comment. Despite obvious differences, far too many of Brooks’s novels are beginning to sound alike, particularly what I call the first-person narrator’s ‘dreary droning’, whereas Burgess succeeds, each time, in crafting entirely different voices. I don’t think this will bother many teen readers of Black Rabbit Summer, who will likely adore its gritty realism, hard characters, and twisty plot, but I wonder if the essential sameness of so many - if not all - of his narrators has something to do with the book-a-year pressure on authors in the current publishing climate - especially if they care to eat! There are excellent prolific writers, but a real danger in terms of literary development exists nevertheless.
Of course, as mentioned in your post about M & B, some readers prefer the pleasures and comfort of sameness. But as a writer, I ask myself how Burgess has managed so well to avoid this pitfall.
bookwitch // February 5, 2008 at 8:15
Interesting. So maybe I needn’t hurry to read another one? Sameness can be very comforting, but only if it’s exactly your favourite thing. And you can have too much of a good thing, too.
It’s hard to tell if a writer sticks to the same because he/she can’t do anything else, or because the readers want it.
You’re right about Melvin. He keeps surprising the reader with something new, and you can’t fit him neatly into one slot. And I noticed the similarities between them, seeing as I was thinking about both at the same time.
In contrast to many other writers, Kevin Brooks can write, which is always a bonus.
Lee // February 5, 2008 at 8:32
I don’t know if everyone agrees with me about the sameness in Brooks, so perhaps you should make up your own mind. Superficially, at least, the characters arequite different, the settings and plots too.
Anna // March 6, 2008 at 18:27
I actually don’t agree about the sameness. I think every book has a distinct Brooks style to it. You can’t misatke them for anything other than a Brooks book. But I also think that all of the narrators are very different and not at all alike.
Perhaps the most different (I’ve read: The Road of the Dead, Lucas, Kissing the Rain, Martyn Pig and being) is Moo in Kissing the Rain. But I do feel all of them has their own voices. But as I said, there’s still a very Brooks-y feel to all of the books. The only book I’ve been somewhat disappointed in so far is Being, but the other four books are amazing so I’m not complaining.
Leave a Comment