The Driver’s Seat by Muriel Spark x2

Um…. I read this all the way through 2 times now.  I upped the rating half a point the second time for literary value but …  they’re not today’s values.   Back in 1970 post-modern lit was all the rage like wearing hippie clothes and smoking on airplanes.  This book feels a lot like that and the movie even more so.

driver's seat

*******
The Driver’s Seat
by Muriel Spark
1970 / 107 pages
rating 8.5 /  classic literary crime –   
******* 

It’s basically a who-done-it, then it turns into a why-done-it  and concludes with a who-done-it again.   It comes complete with enough red-herrings to make dinner.  On a more literary level there’s  a lot of  self-reflexive stuff for a side course with patterns and symbolism for desert –  I even had left-overs what with the religious undertones  – (groan).

And there is too much coincidence and a couple of glaring omissions which aren’t quite covered up with the abundance of repetition and an obsessive compulsive disorder plus a problem with motivation.  (“Why-done-it?”)  You see this stuff for what it is on a second reading – most of it anyway.  Bottom line,  it’s not really satisfying because there’s too much literary fluffing for the meat.

On the good side,  the foreshadowing that our protagonist will be murdered (not a spoiler at all)  is worked into a really interesting structure creating  a great deal of tension.

I liked it kinda-sorta – but I don’t think it’s for today’s crime reader – times have changed in fiction as well as in fashion.    Making the real sense of it is tough going –  even the title is edgy and fraught with possible meanings.  It’s ambiguous and dark with a surprise ending – the first time round anyway.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Driver’s Seat by Muriel Spark x2

  1. Lisa Hill says:

    Twice! You are a glutton for punishment!
    But I think I can guess why. This is a book that gets under your skin. I was baffled as to why it was praiseworthy. I’d read a fair bit of postmodernism by the time I read it, and I still didn’t understand the book or why critics said it was great. So, yes, reading it twice might have clarified things, though in my case I substituted watching the movie.
    But do you tempt me to read it again now?
    *chuckle* No…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s