Oh yeah, I see what you’re saying. I think I wouldn’t ever really have noted they were specifically Stalinists, just class them in that Bernie Bro / Ultra-left / Lexit / fuckwit box.

1 Like

agree.

a lot of the guys you’re on about, even if they don’t self-identify as stalinists, they’re generally middle-class, comfortable white boys talking about destroying “the state” in the same way stalin and lenin did, where the suffering that’ll cause will only happen to other people so it’s nothing to really worry about cos it isn’t happening to “your” guys, the “correct” people. that and apologising for totalitarian regimes totally undermines their claim to being socialists and they can’t seem to grasp that. nihilist dickbags.

i’m ranting now :slight_smile:

plus all this revisionism for machines that persecuted minorities within minorities…:nauseated_face:

2 Likes

ive never seen a biography of the author written by the author under a book on amazon before. is this a new thing? its definitely not a good thing

Officially, I’ve been a writer of non-fiction for the last twenty years. But when I’m excited by what I’m writing about, what I want to do with my excitement is always to tell a story – and every one of my non-fiction books has borrowed techniques from the novel, and contained sections where I came close to behaving like a novelist. The chapter retelling the story of Captain Scott’s last expedition at the end of “I May Be Some Time”, for example, or the thirty-page version of the gospel story in “Unapologetic”. “Red Plenty” was a kind of documentary novel all the way through. Now, though, I’ve completed my shy, crabwise crawl towards fiction, and have a book coming out which is an honest-to-goodness entirely made-up story. No foot-notes, no invisible scaffolding of facts holding it up: “Golden Hill” (Faber, 2 June 2016) is just a novel. More specifically, it’s an eighteenth century novel. It’s set in the winter of 1746, in what was then the very small British colonial town of New York; but it’s also written like a novel from the eighteenth century. So the story of the charming but unreliable-seeming young Mr Smith, who turns up from London with a document in his pocket that may be a fraud or may be worth a fortune, is as hectically stuffed with event as it would have been if Fielding or Smollett had written it. Eighteenth-century readers expected to get their money’s worth, and “Golden Hill” contains (among other things) a mystery, a political intrigue, a love story, a ball, a duel, a high-stakes card game, a trial, a dash of horror, a play-within-a-play, some surprisingly graphic sex and a rooftop chase. As a slow writer, I enjoyed working on something that runs fast. It was intricate fun devising and winding up the book’s clockwork. But I hope it’s also a story that feels alive, and makes the past feel alive too, while Mr Smith runs for his life, and the snow falls on Manhattan Island. There is a tumblr for it at golden-hill.tumblr.com.

(Okay, biography. I was born in 1964, I’m married with a ten-year-old daughter, and I teach on the MA in Creative and Life Writing at Goldsmiths College, London.)

I don’t know, lots of authors have pages on Amazon with some biographical info, maybe this is a new thing that pulls it through to a specific book page? And his just happens to be a bit idiosyncratic?

He’s married to my favourite tutor I had at uni, great bunch of lads :+1:

8 Likes

Anyone seen this? I have. Review follows. It was good.

I was underwhelmed

Yep, me too. Was pretty good but I definitely lost interest about 2/3 of the way through.

That bit where they were rolling Stalin into the bed though.

It was good I thought. Made better by Peter Hitchens being a massive baby about it the day after I saw it.