- What an extraordinary novel this is. And an absolutely riveting read as well. I simply couldn't put it down.
- It's a truly inspirational story of four young Hungarian Jewish friends in Budapest in 1938, prior to the Nazi invasion, and the family of one of the friends who made her way to Australia years later. It's set in 1938 and 2007. The friends and the Australian grandson are all brilliant mathematicians.
- The narrative structure works perfectly. There are two voices - the author’s, and one of the friends who has written a journal. The journal, written in rather plain, unadorned prose, brings 1938 alive, while Sved herself, more colourfully, tells the contemporary Australian story.
- This remarkable novel will undoubtedly win the Miles Franklin in 2020. I say that with full confidence, and you heard it here first.
- As a great fan of Ellis's novels, particularly American Psycho which was an exquisite and damning critique of late 20th century decadence, I looked forward to reading this despite its widespread condemnation by critics.
- Unfortunately, it's rather tedious, self-indulgent and dated. There are good parts, but overwhelmingly it's bad.
- He revisits phases of his life and career as a novelist, film/TV critic, podcaster, screenwriter, tweeter. His views are often astute, always intelligent, revealing, and frequently savage. He holds nothing back. It's the sort of memoir that will undoubtedly lose him a lot of friends. He quotes James Joyce: ‘I have come to the conclusion that I cannot write without offending people’.
- His movie reviews are often a little banal, eg The Imitation Game, about Alan Turing, but at other times subtle and insightful. He loathed, for example, Barry Jenkins’ Oscar winner Moonlight. His critique of this absurdly lauded film is spot on: a product of ‘liberal Hollywood’s fake-woke corporate culture’.
- But dominating the book are his generally weak and immature political reflections. Certainly many of us would share his frustrations about ‘the threatening groupthink of ‘progressive ideology’, which proposes universal inclusivity except for those who dare to ask any questions..’. ‘Victimhood’ is Ellis’s principal obsession. He doesn't think much of Millennials, who he calls 'Generation Wuss', because they 'can’t abide criticism'.
- He sees everywhere ‘a new kind of liberalism', censoring, punishing, obstructing, blocking. ‘Everyone seemed vulnerable to micro-aggressions... survivor-victims afflicted by traumas that happened years ago...It’s actually an illness...a new kind of mania, a psychosis that the culture has been coddling’. (Interestingly there is no mention whatsoever of the #MeToo movement).
- Incredibly, he’s very politically naive, showing little awareness of the rise of right wing extremist populism around the world. He's oblivious to the ugliness of Republicans and their far right trajectory over the decades since Ronald Reagan, Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich. Being ‘strenuously independent’ is his identity, whatever that means. He retreats into the lukewarm sanctuary of being an ‘artist’. He didn’t even vote in the 2016 election, for god's sake.
- With Trump in power ‘it seemed to many of us...that the Left was morphing into...a morally superior, intolerant and authoritarian party... a rage machine...’ ‘In the summer of 2018 they had turned into haters, helped by an inordinate amount of encouragement from the mainstream media, and now came across as anti-common-sense, anti-rational and anti-American’. Absurdly, he's talking about the Democrats and their supporters, and the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and other respected media outlets. He's swallowed hook, line and sinker the 'fake news' mantra of Donald Trump.
- And then he has the gall to admit that he ‘just wasn’t that interested in politics’! He thinks he has ‘the gift of neutrality’. So lame.
- He ends his book with an inane genuflection to the bombastic narcissist and ‘artist’ Kanye West and his aggressively pro-Trump views.
- Don't waste your time reading this book. I've done it for you. Read or re-read American Psycho instead, or see the movie (which Ellis liked).
- This is a very clearly written analysis of extremism in democracies around the world and how their leaders, even without majority support, come to power. It’s so good because it puts Trump in context. His populism is not new.
- In the US during the Depression demagogues had large followings: the anti-Semitic Father Charles Coughlin; Louisiana governor Huey Long; Senator Joseph McCarthy; Alabama governor George Wallace; They were all exploiting ‘plain old American rage... the old and honorable American tradition of hate the powerful’ (journalist Arthur Hadley).
- But these earlier extremists never made it to the Presidency. The major parties had become the gatekeepers and the candidate selection process of the Primaries helped filter them out. Celebrities had always fallen short.
- But then came Trump. And two new elements: money and alternative media, especially Fox News and social media.
- Across the world authoritarian governments use so-called ‘reform’ measures to their constitution to effectively kill democracy and cement their encumbrance. Wars, terrorism and faux security ‘crises’ are often the pretence.
- There are two norms fundamental to a functioning democracy: mutual toleration and institutional forbearance.
- Newt Gingrich's arrival on the scene began to change that. He initiated the Republican party's ‘no compromise’ aggression in the 80’s and 90’s. Forbearance was rejected in pursuit of victory by ‘any means necessary’.
- The Tea Party emerged. Their aggression against Obama was relentless. Extremist rhetoric became the norm: ‘Nazi Germany’, ‘socialism’, ‘dictator’, ‘a Muslim’, ‘pretending to be an American’. The ‘birther enablers’ also emerged, including Trump.
- American democracy is now at a critical juncture: ‘..if Trump were to confront a war or terrorism attack, he would exploit this crisis fully...in our view this scenario represents the greatest danger facing American democracy today’.
- Unfortunately the conclusion to this excellent analysis is a little too lame: It urges the parties to 'seek alliances', as Germany did after WW2. ‘When we agree with our political rivals at least some of the time, we are less likely to view them as mortal enemies’. This is naive. It's the sort of thing that happens after a WAR. The German ‘coming together’ of centre-right elements is hardly a model for the US. Germany was a soundly defeated country in 1945 and the destruction of a hideous Nazi regime.
- The authors are on firmer, far more realistic ground, when they outline a far-reaching economic and social agenda the Democrats must adopt to ensure their recovery, victory and long term success. This makes much more sense.
- This final sentence I have to profoundly disagree with: ‘Few societies in history have managed to be both multiracial and genuinely democratic. That is our challenge. It is also our opportunity. If we meet it, America will be truly exceptional’.
- Pity the authors know nothing about Australia, New Zealand, Canada or even the UK. They are never mentioned. Remarkably, they are not even listed in the index.
