Source
r/books•
seductive_monkey

Finished The Casual Vacancy last night, thought it was excellent. What did you guys think?

I found myself mourning the characters throughout the day, especially Krystal.

I was reading through the "reviews" on Amazon and on an earlier thread here on r/books and was disappointed to see so many people talking about Harry Potter.

I thought the book was excellent and I became extremely involved with the characters in this rather short novel. Reading through, I found that I knew people like this. Like all of them and had no trouble identifying with them or seeing them as real people. The character development was just fantastic and leave it to Rowling to illuminate a setting and make it feel like you're right there, observing their life like a ghost in the room.

There was no magic, no crazy plot twists, nothing really out of the ordinary. An ordinary couple of months in an ordinary village with more or less ordinary people. Rowling walks us through their lives with ease ends the book as effortlessly as it had begun.

What did you guys think?

Posted Oct 5, 2012, 2:52 AM UTC

1122
WillWeisser•

500+ pages is rather short now?

11
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
Dark_ph0enixRobert Galbraith - The Cuckoo's Calling.•

I thought it was tediously dull, with a plot that could fit on the back of a postage stamp, and adult characters who were neither interesting or engaging. Her observations of middle class England - in particular with regards the issues of socio-economic mobility and attitudes to addiction, were interesting and pretty accurate, and her writing felt more developed than it was in the Harry Potter series.

But on the whole? I wouldn't recommend it to people.

11
seductive_monkeyOP•

It definitely wasn't plot driven and therefor the plot carried little weight for the book. But I did find the characters engaging in so far as they showed the dirty side of humanity more than anything. I loved Fats, Samantha, Kay and, of course, Krystal.

5
fegh00t•

a plot that could fit on the back of a postage stamp

A lot of classics--and great non-classics--can be described in this way. Is plot that important?

3
RtimesThree•

I just finished it. I thought it was absolutely fine. I have a guilty pleasure of books about small towns with plots that meander along and all sorts of things going on behind closed doors, so it didn't bother me that the plot was stretched out or tedious at points. Usually I reserve those kinds of books for lazy poolside reading but I thought this one was a lot more engaging than that.

Some of it was banally cliche. The gorgeous teenage girl whose life isn't actually perfect, the aging mom longing for her youth again, the pimply boy gazing from afar at his crush...I think I actually groaned when Sukhvinder pulled out the razor. Some of the metaphors and descriptions fell really flat, too. Like the pages she took to describe how much Fats values authenticity. It seemed weird for her to spell it out to us like that-- total telling, not showing, if that makes sense. I really liked what happened to his character at the end, though. The whole book he tried to play himself off as that too-cool-for-everyone-else teenager who thinks he and only he knows how the world works, but found himself way over his head and punished for his brazenness and immaturity.

Another problem for me was that hardly any of the characters were sympathetic. The only ones I really felt for were Andrew and Tessa.

8
seductive_monkeyOP•

I did find that there were a few cliche's and some poorly written passages. The ones that pop out the most to me was when Simon was setting up the new computer and she referenced the "hard drive" as opposed to "the tower" or simply "the computer" although I later question whether it may be an English colloquialism. I also felt the same disconnection when, as you mentioned, fats's personal philosophy of "authenticity" was described. I completely understand what you said about telling us rather than showing us.

On the whole I found the characters to be likable and relatable, which appear to be polar opposite opinions.

1
[deleted]•

I got a kind of Holden Caulfield impression form Fats, his obsession with authenticity was quite similar to Caulfield's labelling of phony... I like the book too, but yeah some of the characters could have been more complex. Although I do think Sukhvinder and Andrew were more nuanced then you give credit.

2
thesecondkiraThe Christmas Carol•

I also loved it, and after reading reviews on Goodreads and Amazon felt that a lot of people missed the point. One of my favorite things about the novel was that the protagonist died in the first chapter. You could see how Barry Fairbrother, although not perfect (see: Mary Fairbrother), could have saved Krystal, could have changed so many lives around him for the better. I had this thought while reading the book and then watched an interview with JK Rowling to hear her say the same thing! That is masterful to me. She wrote something, subtly, and I noticed it.

Some say the book has a sad ending, but to me the book is an inspiring argument for the power of one person to change a community.

Characters I loved reading about: Fats - even though he was rotten, he was amusing. I sympathized with him wanting to make a mark of his own, out of the shadow of his anxiety-wracked father. Samantha - I am nothing like her and yet the boy band obsession was entertaining and oddly relatable. Andrew - having had an overbearing father, some of those moments were so poignant to me. Like when Andrew was riding his bike away from home, he could feel his father watching him, waiting for him to screw up somehow. And the elation when he was finally out of sight. Gavin - delightfully helpless.

6
arcade_13Science Fiction•

Your first paragraph is spot on! That's what had me so interested. He left such a hole and so much potential when he died.

3
seductive_monkeyOP•

I completely agree in that many people missed the point. The book isn't so much about the election, or the town but rather the people who live in it. Who these people are within their own lives and how everybody's actions and attitudes affect those around them and, in turn, shape who they are despite their best efforts to get away and separate themselves from it.

2†
arcade_13Science Fiction•

I really enjoyed it! I think I've come to realise that I definitely enjoy her writing style. When reading HP, I was sometimes confused about whether it was the plot or the writing that engaged me so much. But this proved to me that she's a great writer.

I really loved the characters as well. In saying that, I wouldn't want to meet anyone like them. But she made people who otherwise would have been counted as dull or mundane into complex individuals.

My only criticism is that I sometimes found that there were too many characters. I eventually had to write up a little list to refer to, which I don't feel that I should have to do. Other than that, though, I thoroughly enjoyed it and I squeezed out a tear or two at the end!

3
mitchluvscats•

I got the ebook but haven't started it yet...glad to see some people liked it.

2
pajunior•

I just finished it last night (3.00am!) Took me three days to read as well as working so that sums up what I thought, really really brilliant.

I thought it was really interesting that the most like-able and far reaching character died a couple of pages in. The hole he left was so big it caused nearly every single event in the book afterwards. All the other characters were either pityfull or bad, not necessarily a bad thing. All of the teenagers were interesting to read which isn't surprising since Rowling has been writing teenagers since 97. Some of the adults left a lot to be desired but Samantha was perfect while Shirely, Gavin and Colin were interesting.

One thing that got at me was the lack of resolution in the Price home. Maybe Rowling was making a point that some things don't change.

1
[deleted]•

https://requireshate.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/the-casual-vacancy-jk-rowling-still-cant-write/

:)

-4
seductive_monkeyOP•

Lovely.

2
BritishHoboWolf Hall•

So you (or whoever wrote this) has not read the book, but started out with a bias against JK Rowling and took all of their facts/views from very negative reviews of the book? Well that's not worth anyone's time.

2
[deleted]•

You do understand that lit critique can be done in this manner right? Grab a passage and critique it? If she can draw male gaze and hum drum writing aimed to excite middle class readers loins, then she has validity in doing that. What is not "worth" anyone's time is dismissing it not based on it's content.

I find resistance to this article is mainly due to the readership that have difficulty grasping at their own mediocrity.

0
BritishHoboWolf Hall•

But the article makes it really quite clear that the author had absolutely no intention of ever liking the book. That 'male gaze' paragraph is the only one quoted in the article, and it just so happens to be the only real prominent example in the whole book.

Lit critique can be done like that, but this isn't lit critique. It's cherry-picking (and really sparse cherry-picking too) to 'prove' a point that the author already held before the book came out, and would have held no matter what the book was like.

The resistance to the article is not because the readership's opinion is wrong because it's different to yours or whatever the hell, the resistance to the article is mainly due to the fact that it's an openly biased piece from somebody whose only contact with the story and the writing has been from specifically seeking out negative reviews.

2
[deleted]•

It's biased like everything. She's a POC critic, and as such, regards any book written by a whitey to be trash (IMO). And I agree. How many more white middle class books do we need in the world? The answer to that is none. They should be in a gulag with their readership.

1
gaiety•

worse than trash.

-4