Customer Reviews:
 Point, not counterpoint August 25, 2008
5 out of 7 found this review helpful
Aldous Huxley's 1928 novel opens with a grand London party given by Lady Edward Tantamount. Music plays. Dozens of characters cross the stage, meet briefly, argue, and part. Some go on to a restaurant that stays open past midnight; there, they meet still more characters and argue some more; several of them continue to yet another party in the early hours of the morning. We are now 100 pages into the book, a quarter of the way through. The numerous characters will continue to bump into each other over the next days and months, but the essential texture of the opening will not change.
If you Google the title, the question comes back "Did you mean Point Counterpoint?" Well, no. Counterpoint is a musical term implying line and movement: two or more voices, intertwining with one another, echoing, developing, but never standing still. Huxley certainly understands that music implies movement -- his descriptions of actual music are superb -- but his method as a novelist is essentially static: to set characters off against one another, each of whom represents a different point of view. The book is thus a series of debates, some funny, some serious, all clever. But the characters ricochet off one another like balls on a pool table; this is truly a matter of point clashing with point; there is no line, little movement, and almost no plot.
Oddly enough, Huxley has one of his characters, a writer, criticize his own method: "Novel of ideas. The character of each personage must be implied, as far as possible, in the ideas of which he is the mouthpiece. In so far as theories are rationalizations of sentiments, instincts, dispositions of soul, this is feasible. The chief defect of the novel of ideas is that you must write about people who have ideas to express -- which excludes all but about .01 per cent of the human race." And again: "The great defect of the novel of ideas is that it's a made-up affair. Necessarily; for people who can reel off neatly formulated notions aren't quite real; they're slightly monstrous. Living with monsters becomes rather tiresome in the long run." He has it right; this book IS a made-up affair, it IS tiresome, and its .01 percent of the human race consists of a handful of English aristocrats and intellectuals -- Huxley as a kind of egghead Evelyn Waugh.
Several times, I almost tossed the book away, yet kept on reading -- why? The first time was when Huxley introduces Mark Rampion, a painter and would-be novelist closely based on his friend D. H. Lawrence. Here is a character who does not come from the upper classes, whose thoughts are three-dimensional and fully worked out, and whose unconventional yet bracing morality serves as a touchstone for the other characters in the book. The chapter describing his courtship is one of the few passages where the novel of ideas becomes one of feeling, and it was riveting. Although nothing quite like that chapter comes again, I kept on because I was often amused, sometimes challenged (Huxley is an erudite author who almost demands footnotes), and increasingly aware that I was reading something that was as close to source material on the period as I was likely to find. For Huxley does not confine himself to the social and amorous goings-on typical of an early Waugh book such as A HANDFUL OF DUST. He also addresses politics (both fascism and communism are represented), religion and its substitutes, philosophy, the arts, and science. Even sex gets analyzed with an almost scientific detachment: there is a long disquisition by one of the more despicable characters on the techniques of seduction, perversion, and spiritual degradation; another embarks on what must be the first examination in literature of the phrase "sleeping around". As a reference work, this is fascinating; I just wish it were a better novel. Interesting though the numerous points are, I could have done with some genuine counterpoint.
Where's the Story? June 2, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
This book is fascinating, and Huxley's genius is evident on every page. However, his effort to create a giant contrapuntal mosaic of different voices fails in that it has almost no driving motion to propel it forward. In music, that motion is created by the beat. In writing, it is created by the story.
While this book can be appreciated for its deep insight into human nature and exquisitely drawn characters, it remains more of a static work such as that of a photo or painting, and requires the reader to move through it, rather than moving the reader along. In a shorter book, this might work. In a work of this size, it leaves the vast majority of readers unsatisfied or abandoning the book. There is a reason why this book has so few reviews. It is not the fault of some readers that that Point Counter Point is not as popular or accessible as some of his other novels. It's because he has only appealed to the intellect capable of looking within a painting for an hour, and not the intellect who can listen attentively to an entire Mahler Symphony. To the musical intellect, this book teases with its occasional brief advances in action, then jerkingly stops the microscope repeatedly to focus on the characters. Huxley is unable in this book, like a true master, to keep the microscope moving.
 This is fantastic. July 18, 2007
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
Like all of Huxley's other books, this one requires that you have some intellect before embarking on reading it. Once you finish it you will feel as though you have done more than just read a novel, but rather you will have a better understanding of the human psyche, this being a product of the novel's rich characterizations and dialog.
 Point Counter Point - I'm waiting April 29, 2007
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
Oh, Aldous Huxley. You're a fabulous writer, but couldn't you just take that talent and put it towards something substantial?
"Point Counter Point" has no plot. It's that simple. Instead it has many characters. We follow them around and see how their lives are rather empty and bland. Because we're only seeing moments in time, we don't actually have a storyline or a plot, and therefore nothing to describe here. Right?
Not exactly. Huxley obviously wanted readers to gain something from his book. I saw that he probably didn't really like the wealthy upper classes (he spends a lot of time describing them, their habits, and their lives) or at least didn't like their attitude. He writes about so many secret relationships, about many lies, and about difficulties. Dramas. It's almost like a soap opera at times, but because of Huxley's writing talent, it's actually enjoyable.
I suppose that's the best way to describe this book. It's ENJOYABLE. It's fun to read, even if it doesn't really have a point. Though some parts are quite predictable (of COURSE this person will cheat on their girlfriend), other parts are entirely shocking (how did those two characters just DIE?). This gives the book a whole lot more intrigue and more of a reason to read it.
While perhaps "Point Counter Point" isn't spectacular, it IS an enjoyable, well-written book. It's not nearly as good as "Brave New World", but it's difficult to live up to such a masterpiece. Huxley created a fascinating world in "Point Counter Point". You may like it - you may not. I think it's a pleasant read, but nothing more. I recommend it to people who liked "Brave New World" and want to read more Huxley. It's very different (more society, less science), but still well-written and good, despite the lacking plot.
Literature .... January 14, 2007
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
Every time I write a review of a book which is considered "literature" I am afraid that some Pulitzer Prize winner dude with 2 PhDs is going to track me down and hit me over the head with his cane, but, since I move once a year, I will take my chances. I wish the rest of the book tasted like the first 20 pages. It starts with a series of insights of the minds of the characters which is just exquisite, but then it dilutes onto other things, which are much, much more mundane and I just do not see the same quality of thought put into the writing until some chapters ahead.
My 2 cents.
|
