I first heard of Martin Amis through the fellationary (I refuse to accept the unreality of this word) anecdotes of late friend, and tireless polemicist, Christopher Hitchens. Now Hitch, for those who don’t know, is a man of such virility that the normal rules for using lugubrious in a sentence (which is to say; don’t) do not apply. So hearing all his praise for Amis sank an image into my psyche, into the binary operations of my most atavistic operating systems, a conceptual depth charge descended, bobbing a giant rotten apple on black streams of lizard consciousness. The picture of a man in a gimp suit, leaning over a bowl of cereal which, instead of confections in the shape of happy iconography, is heaping with words : tumescent, postprandial, scabrous, emetic, detumescence, termagant, extempore, pubical (okay, that’s not a real word either). Fiendish spoonful's disappear into the grim aperture of his executioner’s mask. His hunger — never sated.

Needless to say, I’ve been in a state of confused arousal since that time. So, I thought, it’s time to explode this mine using the soft, water logged, organic tissues which comprise my being to muffle the detonation. Thus have I ridden The Rachel Papers the proverbial Texas Rattlesnake with my thighs gripping all the while with force enough to explode a field pumpkin.

What’s it about? Well, it’s about a self obsessed twat with a frail constitution (and ego) who meticulously chronicles his manipulative hijinks, the bulk of which are directed towards obtaining a rather ordinary girl who has etched herself large in his imagination due to the difficulty in obtaining her. Not to be thwarted by what he views as her simian boyfriend, he draws upon his self aggrandizement to further self aggrandize, using notebooks to codify mannerism, affect, ambient lighting conditions, and speeches which beg, borrow, steal, and sometimes confabulate insights he has gained from being a bed ridden book worm in the past, all in order to loom equally as large in Rachel’s mind.

All of this was humorous and oddly charming from a self insertion perspective. Where I couldn’t help but imagine being Rachel and breaking this conniving little shit from sucking eggs using my own diabolical snares. Which, funnily enough, made me sympathize with him, because maybe we’re cut from the same cloth and he just has the unfortunate tic of scribbling out his machinations an action item list. After all, I have set up vignettes within my own room to evoke certain impressions in visitors. Leaving an art pad out with Boltzmann’s equations scribbled on it, and stained just so with Rorschachs of Jägermeister, will, in equal measure, attract and repel prospective mates. So if I can accuse him of anything, really, it’s being unbearably fastidious and going to pieces when the bottom falls out. Roll with the punches you insecure, phlegm ridden weasel! Break ‘em from sucking eggs, I will... But on the other hand, maybe I would’ve pity shagged. He’s a bit adorable, in a horrible person kind of way.

Anyway, the story wasn’t terribly interesting to me, if not for the fact that it was written by Martin Amis.

Allow me to clarify. If the writing style of the book can be imagined as a window, then it can range from opaque to completely transparent. Sometimes Spot jumps over the fence, and sometimes Spot luxuriates in rich prose, doesn’t manage to clear the hurdle at all, and snags his beanie babies in an unceremonious landing. Which is a thinly veiled commentary on the pursuit of happiness. See what I mean? No? Forget it! You’re a terrible dog anyway!

Now, with Amis, it’s a bit a foggy mirror in the loo. You see shapes being traced in real time by someone on the other side. Something beautiful and impossibly detailed, defying the normal restrictions of phalangic art. You’re astounded to see the nervous system of Hyena Matriarch materializing slowly. This also allows you to glimpse something of the responsible party.

“Wait. Is he...”

Next to this beautiful cross section of Crocuta crocuta of the Hyaenidae family. The Queen’s arterial branches coalescing and terminating in a frighteningly large clitoris which she uses to absolutely terrify the males of the pack any time there’s a row that needs sorting. (Look this up if you’re curious). There’s something else taking shape.

“Is that a penis on a... skateboard? Wait! Is that the author over there rubbing one out?!”

And that’s pretty much Martin Amis. What a treasure.68 s Steven Godin2,550 2,677


First novel of lock down 2.0 didn't turn out to be as bad as I thought it would be. In fact, it surprised me just how much I ended up liking this. Generally, I don't reading about teenagers now at my age: in this case a nineteen-year-old, let alone their sexual exploits, but I just felt something different for a change, and always wanted to read more Amis but just never got around to it. One of the reasons It worked so well for me is that Amis at the time wasn't far off the same age as the protagonist Charles Highway, and the first person narrative worked a treat. This is the portrait from a male perspective of someone young, selfish, someone absorbed by sex and whacking off, and the idea of mastery, and that's how the book reads. That's the whole point. Go into it thinking about romance then don't. When it comes to the self-aware Highway, Amis doesn't hold back on all the little personal details and pungent smells: he is a pimple-squeezer, a sniffer of panties, a dirty handkerchief and used condom inspector, obsessive of bodily functions, someone who generally feels grubby, and who also suffers from asthma. Whilst we're not dealing with a virgin: him having quickies with another girl, Gloria, It's the seduction of the older Rachel: a sort of social experiment, who he describes as 'the pull' that takes centre stage, and with his confidence bolstered by recurrent consultations of a folder titled Conquests and Techniques, it leads up to a bedroom sex scene between the two that plays out so acutely realistic compared to a lot of other sex scenes I've come across elsewhere in literature. Despite Charles' conquest for wanting to bed an older woman, funnily, it turns out, Rachel was barely much older than he was. With Charles now more focused on getting into Oxford, and despite initially falling in love with her, he palms her off back to the incompetent American boyfriend Deforest after she wets the bed and gets the odd spot or two. What's missing here overall is the capacity to bring to life the other characters so that they appear more than just projections of Charles, but as a surveillance of bedroom/bathroom antics it was fun. Got a couple more of his novels to follow.fiction great-britain63 s Anthony Vacca423 294

Vacca’s Complaint:

I am inconsolably jealous when I consider that Martin Amis published his first book at 24 and had actually done the writing at least a year before, also I am disgusted with how much talent and confidence the bastard already had at my age. Here I am approaching my first quarter of a century and I have no first novel. I have no fame. I’m not deflecting pertinent questions from feminist reviewers by flirting with them. I have accomplished nothing with my life. Nothing!

The Rachel Papers, Martins Amis’ debut novel, is a snide and rude bildungsroman about an insufferably pretentious and over-articulate git named Charlie Highway, who, in the final hours before making that magical transformation into a twenty year-old, proceeds to ruminate over the past three months and his brief romance—his first experiences with love—with a posh bird named Rachel. The exact and expansive details of the relationship have been obsessively complied in a series of documents (Charlie collects material and produces portfolios for all the women in his life) called, you guessed it, the Rachel Papers. Over the course of this playfully metafictional novel, the reader gets to learn firsthand all of Charlie’s overbearing opinions on sex, literature, classism, youth, aging, zits, self-loathing, farts, art, music and poetry, and all of this is further compounded by his snarky resentment for the entirety of the adult world, by which I mean his carelessly cruel and cavalier father. This book is by no means a great book but there is no denying the deep well of talent Amis is working with as he convincingly gives voice to his wannabe academic of a teenage boy. Yes, Rachel’s portrayal is as thin as the paper on which she is deconstructed in excess by Charlie, who is very much a crude and shallow narrator. The Rachel Papers is a genuinely funny and cynical look at youth and childish notions of love, and how (most) young people don’t really have shit to say about anything meaningful. Apologies Holden and whateveryournamesare in John Green’s novels.
52 s Vanessa470 315

3.5 Often crude and rude but highly entertaining if not easily offended. The main thing I took from this book is Martin Amis has a unique way with words. I also learnt that teenage boys are extremely gross. He does well to capture the selfishness and insecurities of adolescence, if it wasn’t as funny as it was this book would have been so cringeworthy.30 s Jonfaith1,944 1,564

If Philip Roth is correct and life is misunderstanding people, then I remain awed by the riddle which is Martin Amis. His first novel The Rachel Papers injects self-awareness into satire, leaking a fecund foam which changes everything about how we regard the way we live now. The insecurity of adolescence is illustrated by our protagonist, one Charles Highway, who diagrams said angst and provides cross-references from the literary canon. One can imagine the reader or protagonsit saying bugger Holden Caulfield, then recognizing that Highway has ly compiled a list of ten reasons as to his superiority over Mr. Caulfield.

During a lazy gap year Charles writes, drinks and woos the titular Rachel. Life doesn't meet his precis. Plans have to change. Matters become a little Meta and we are left a little uncertain about what is actual and what is fictive. This is one of the most hilarious novels I've read. Numerous passages left me almost convulsing with laughter. 28 s Ian "Marvin" Graye897 2,376

Almost Entranced

Charles Highway is a 19 year old student who has two obsessions with entry. One is to pass his Oxford entrance exams and the other is to sleep with Rachel Noyes before he [Charles] turns 20 in three weeks.

This isn't a quest to lose his virginity (that has already happened with Gloria or someone before her) or to have sex with an Older Woman (Rachel is only a month older than Charles).

It's more about an over-sexed, literary white English male arbitrarily setting out to enter the sexual realm that a new female acquaintance has theoretically made available to him (even if she already has an American boyfriend called DeForest Hoeniger).

Charles doesn't perceive anything special in Rachel. She will just be another “pull”, his “last teenage fuck", another success or notch in his bedpost. The description of his first sight of her is unenthusiastic, uninspiring and lacking in romance:

“She was fairly formidable, a bit out of my league really. She didn't belong to the aggressively sexy genre...However: tallish, nearly my height, shoulder-length black hair conventionally shaped around strong features, she made much of her eyes, her nose made much of itself, black boots and black cowgirl skirt met at the knee, manly white blouse, expensive handbag, few bracelets, one insignificant ring, rather stern no-crap stance, intelligent lower-middle class with a good job, something bossy public relations, living alone, older than me, possibly half Jewish.” (She turns out not to be Jewish.)




Ione Skye and Dexter Fletcher in the 1989 film of the novel (which I haven't seen)

The Techniques of Conquest

Charles scores high marks for observation and description, though in reality it resembles perving or preparation for a kidnap (a la John Fowles' “The Collector").

Charles uses the same approach for both entrance exams. He has a folder into which he inserts notes, quotes, diary entries, diagrams, lists, plans, poems, speeches, letters, prose, portraits and sketches. One folder is more academic, the other more literary (and pretentious). The latter is labelled “Conquests and Techniques: a Synthesis". His seductions, therefore, seem to be a self-conscious exercise in sexual praxis. By the time Charles has finished, he can more or less submit an extract from “Conquests and Techniques" in satisfaction of his course requirements. Hence, “The Rachel Papers".

All This Wanky, Intellectual Shit

Charles rarely accomplishes anything beyond his “adolescent egotism". The more you learn about him, the less appealing he becomes. His friend, Geoffrey, counsels him:

“No, man, don't get too wanky with her. And cut out all this intellectual shit. Chicks don't want to be over-awed.”

Still, he persists, and we get the novel in its current form (“a sorry jumble of cold facts and free-associative prose"). It under-awes. It's mildly amusing, so it's not quite awful. You have to wonder whether it’s a self-help manual for a chronic masturbator or an egregious exaggerator (Charles keeps a meticulous multiple orgasm count, whether or not they're achieved single-handedly).


SOUNDTRACK:

The Beatles – “Within You Without You"

https://youtu.be/HsffxGyY4ck

"We were talking, about the space between us all
And the people, who hide themselves behind a wall of illusion."

The Velvet Underground – “Heroin"

https://youtu.be/qFLw26BjDZs

amis read-2020 ...more22 s Clare63 142

This is a bit of a curate's egg of a reading experience. I began finding Charles Highway's escapades mildly amusing, took a detour into down and out hatred of vacuous Rachel and odious Charles and ended up in a state of turbulent hilarity. This is basically a book about being a teenage boy - obsessed with phlegm, spunk and pulling girls. At times Highway is intensly disable - wading through a teenage boy's room in fact - but he is undeniably fascinating. However, the prize for most disable character must surely go to Norm, who Charles pales into insipidity beside. Even in the comic interludes, in which he holds centre stage, he is difficult enough to give reading room to.
As to the writing, this was one of Amis' early novels - apparently published when he was 24. Some of the structure is a little rough - particularly the eccentric use of the "you" character later in the book (perhaps I read it too haphazardly to recognise it's true significance). The "papers" to which the title refers are an interesting literary conceit but seem to get sidelined and are never fully fleshed out or used particularly cleverly. (The Night Train uses a similar idea with a lot more success).

However, the character of Charles is entirely believable. Perhaps Amis's relatively youthful age meant that he held nothing back in sticking a nail into the embarrassments of adolescence(after all he had had none of the intervening years to develop the nostalgia for make-believe youth.) Recommended to anyone who thinks they may experience a mid-life crisis and thinks they need talking down.21 s Eleni117 11

I haven't read other Martin Amis novels. I have read analyses about Martin Amis, I have read interviews of Martin Amis and I have read raving of OTHER novels of Martin Amis and I believe everybody who praises his talent. Unfortunately I should have also believed the people who praise his talent and who warned me not to choose The Rachel Papers as an introduction to his work, on the grounds that – surprisingly enough - it sucks.

I didn't and it was a big mistake. I chose The Rachel Papers in the hope that it would turn out to be my High Fidelity of the 70s (without the music), or at least a light version of it, because to actually match High Fidelity is too ambitious even for comparable books that chronologically precede it. I also hoped it would turn out to be an easy and fun read about teenage lust, which would be GREAT. Give me the Footloose and Pretty In Pink videotapes ok it’s dvds, anytime and I’ll watch them, never mind the dozens of times I already have done so. For each of these movies.

/end of synopsis of (laughable in retrospect) expectations.

Well. This was no fun read for sure. It wasn't even an easy read and it's a short one, and suffice to say, I won't dignify that book with the slightest comment on potential proximities to a 70s version of anything even remotely related to the Hornby universe.

So what is The Rachel Papers?
The Rachel Papers is an incredibly B-O-R-I-N-G and badly written coming of age novel about some Charles 20-year old who, similarly to the entire book, is completely humourless. Charles doesn't give a fuck about anything in life except getting laid, preferably with the number one popular Rachel girl, with whom he is obsessed. Which is fine. And completely understandable if you’re not even 20, Charles.

Unfortunately, at least for a human (can’t vouch for extraterrestrials), Charles also features a remarkably rare combination of all of the following: inferiority complexes, delusional ideas of grandeur, sinister feelings for his father, lack of trustworthiness, self-esteem instability, lack of empathy towards everybody, hallucinational – apparently - ideas that planetary systems where being a complete arsehole is cool are already known to man and a desperate need for attention. He is exactly the kind of person who will try to sell their half-knowledge of the Dostoyevsky wikipedia entry (and maybe of one of those short stories by Pushkin) as expertise on Russian literature. You know how it goes.

Of course, lovely books where the main character is a complete jerk are not only perfectly possible, but also in existence, in abundance. In fact, 1984 and Crime And Punishment have to be my two most favourite books ever (so far anyway), and the protagonists in both books suck. They suck. One of them is also a murderer! So that's clearly not an issue for me.

The issue is that Charles both sucks and has nothing to share with the reader, good or bad. Top this up with a bunch of extra two-dimensional underdeveloped characters – yes; that means Rachel too – and an obnoxiously crude writing style and that's it.

Does this sound tempting to you?
I didn't think so.19 s lorinbocol261 367

sono più che mai convinta che un charles highway nella vita andrebbe frequentato almeno un po'. e proprio in virtù delle di lui smisurate cadute di stile, degli inciampi, delle fobie. delle gambe storte, della condotta variamente laida e - peggio che mai - della voce stridula e nasale. perché fatti salvi taluni repentini moti di disappunto, ci si divertirebbe un tot.
(forse con ragazze perbene si intendono semplicemente quelle a cui son toccati in sorte ragazzi appena troppo noiosi).19 s Ailsa179 255

Hell yeah.

.
.
.
"I took Rachel to a French film, La Rupture, as an oblique way of indicating to her how good in bed I was going to turn out to be." 109

"University challenge: the contestants seemed to be alarmingly well informed but, on the other hand, reassuringly hideous." 13417 s Barry Pierce588 7,975

thinking about the shit streak in rachel's knickers.20th-century read-in-202317 s Rob273 9

I've given up trying to defend Martin Amis books. I tend to agree with every criticism that people offer, but to me they've missed the point. He's so wonderful to read because he has more technical mastery than any writer of the last fifty years that I've read. He can make his prose, and consequently his characters, do absolutely anything he s.

As this is his first novel the pyrotechnics are somewhat muted, making it probably one of his more accessible novels. He has focused a bit more on characterisation, creating Charles Highway, who can stand as the equal of any of the unpleasant young men of literature in my opinion. He's at once detestable and forgivable, and he's instantly recognisable to anyone who's ever anticipated the sexual act with equal measures of dread and excitement, or felt an odd pleasure at coughing up a livid green lump of mucus.

If you've never read Martin Amis, or ever wondered what goes on in the head of self-involved young men, this is a good place to start.16 s Richard Derus3,144 2,071

Real Rating: 3.5* of five

Straight-people sex isn't much fun. This book was my clue that I wasn't wrong, it really wasn't very interesting. Because good goddle mitey, reading this at fourteen was A Chore.

At fourteen. A book about sex.

A Chore.

This was decidedly NOT the feeling engendered in me by that same year's absorption of The Lord Won't Mind. Nope. Decidedly not.14 s Juan Nalerio540 116

¿Quién o qué es Charles Highway? Formalmente es el protagonista y narrador de esta historia de amor, sexo estilo 70´s y búsqueda de un lugar en el mundo. Charles es mentiroso, calculador, con actitudes de niño e inteligente y aspiraciones de entrar a Oxford.

Con mucho ironía y datos autobiográficos Amis va construyendo esta divertida historia, alejada un poco de nuestras latitudes pero con puntos en común a todo adolescente que aspiró a un gran amor y a un gran polvo sexual.

El obsesivo Charles pone por escrito toda su relación con Rachel, incluyendo sus tácticas de abordaje, las puestas en escena para aparentar lo que no es y hasta lo que le genera ansiedad de una semana a otra en formato ranking musical. Muy buena lectura.

La tapa de Anagrama 50 debe de ser de las más feas que he visto y de las que menos representa a los personajes. No la entiendo.
13 s Matthew Ted840 824

Amis' first novel. And, as many have said before, it's hard not to compare it to his father's first novel 'Lucky Jim'. In some ways, they are the same, and in many ways not. On a side note, I felt as if, having read Martin Amis' memoir earlier this year, the father figure in this novel resembled Kingsley in several ways. I wonder if they ever discussed that together. Even without that, it's a very autobiographical book. I think Amis has even admitted that it is. Charles Highway (the protagonist, the very beginning of his legacy of 'Amisian' names) is trying to go to Oxford, he has problems with his teeth (which Amis had many, and wrote a lot about in his memoir), and Highway appeared, when blabbing about Blake or whoever else, to be simply voicing Amis' views on them.

So the plot is, basically, he wants to get into Oxford and he wants to sleep with an older woman.

There are many seeds here. Amis is finding his style, his wordplay, his crudeness, but also that charm he has. There are some vulgar things in this book, not quite 'Money' vulgar, but quite so. There's also a rather long sex scene. It's uncomfortable to read. There's no doubting that Amis is a good writer and the book is enjoyable, short, but rude, crude and mildly humorous at times.

Anyway, if you are offended by rude language, don't read on.

So, Charles Highway thinks things 'you stupid bitch, you dumb clit', which presents him as being far worse, and I suppose, more modern, than the 'Lucky Jim' protagonist Jim Dixon. Highway enjoys talking about Blake and Frost and other writers, which I personally enjoy reading. He considers the 'literature of nausea, melancholy and absurdity - Satre, Camus, Joyce.' And his bedroom has posters of 'Jimi Hendrix, Auden and Isherwood, Rasputin' and his bookshelves 'retold his adolescence: Carry on, Jeeves, Black Mischief, The Heart of the Matter, Afternoon Men, Women in Love, Gormenghast, Cat's Cradle, L'Etranger.'

Here's some other great little Amis lines that tickled me.

'with a forehead the size of a buttock'

'He had virtually no sexual presence, didn't look as if he could be bothered even to masturbate.'

After having a wee he: 'flicked it; slapped it; I garrotted it with both hands; a final searing Chinese burn.'

'whose golden thighs and teeming breasts I found about as approachable as leprosy.'

To finish. I think I disagree with a lot of Amis' viewpoints in life, but this quote, well, he won me over a bit with this one.

'This seemed a safe choice, since to be against the Beatles (late-middle period) is to be against life.'

Amis, I agree.
20th-century lit-british read-201912 s Faye441 46

Read: April 2017

I decided to read The Rachel Papers after reading the amazing Time's Arrow last year and I cannot believe these two books were written by the same author. I wrote a review of Time's Arrow at the time which showed how much I loved it and I guess I expected this book to be of a similar calibre but it was nowhere near as good.

The protagonist here is Charles, who is trying too hard to be a 'lovable rogue' sort of character, but really he comes across as pretentious and arrogant. For reasons not made clear to me he is obsessed with sleeping with a girl named Rachel and the plot follows his attempts to get to know her and seduce her.

By three-quarters of the way through this book I really didn't care what happened to Charles or Rachel. Neither were able or particularly interesting characters. I have since realised that this was Amis's first book which helps explain the difference in quality between this and Time's Arrow and so I will continue to look out for more Amis books in the future.

Rating: 1/5 starsclassics-literary-fiction kindle-ebook reviewed10 s Marcello S560 241

La domanda qui è: io cosa facevo a 24 anni?
(…)
Di sicuro non mettevo parole una dietro l’altra con lo stile navigato di Amis.
Che, ve lo devo dire, scrive da dio.

Questa è la storia di Charles, uno di quei ventenni che la sanno lunga. Un po’ sbruffone e un po’ problematico.
Che ti fa sorridere e allo stesso tempo lo odi. Che gli daresti una testata sui denti ma alla fine gli vuoi bene.

Ci sono le ragazze (Gloria e, soprattutto, Rachel), qualche amico la maggior parte del tempo strafatto, una famiglia non del tutto normale, l’università e Londra.

La storia forse non è originalissima.
E’ pur sempre un romanzo di formazione sulla scia di Salinger e P. Roth, a grandi linee.
Però c’è tanto di quel mestiere che a dire che è un’opera prima di un poco più che ragazzino non ci crederesti.

E invece.
Ci si rivede in giro, Martin. [74/100]10 s Tim227 106

This is Amis’ first novel, written when he was in his early twenties. I greatly enjoyed his middle period but gave up on him after reading a couple of his more recent novels – Yellow Dog and House of Meetings. Then I came across this in the garden shed and realised I’d never read it…

Martin Amis has a talent for creating obnoxious characters and the narrator of The Rachel Papers, Charles Highway, certainly fits this bill. Except, un in his middle period when he somehow managed, almost a conjuring trick, to cajole you into sympathising with his villains, the obnoxious character in The Rachel Papers remains obnoxious.

Charles Highway is about to turn twenty. He’s also about to go up to Oxford. Rachel is his first attempt at an adult relationship. His pursuit of her is conducted with a scholarly attention to detail. In fact it soon becomes clear she is little more than a projection of his colossal vanity. Charles describes himself thus: “Thinking back, actually, 'self-infatuation' strikes me as a rather ill-chosen word. It isn't so much that I or love myself. Rather, I'm sentimental about myself.”
Amis has lots of fun sending up the writer because this is also a novel about the writing process. He shows us, cleverly from three steps removed – the writer watching the writer turn life into writing - how the author transposes experience into material, shows us the cynic and the self-serving scavenger in the writer.

The humour is often rather puerile and rather smug, lots of “hawking” and other jokes about body effluents but there’s no denying a well-controlled mastery of his theme and a fair bit of entertainment along the journey.
london20 s Johan WilburAuthor 1 book30

El amor juvenil que siente Charles Highway por Rachel es una que todos podríamos haber vivido a su edad y, a priori, es una historia que ya podríamos haber leído un millón de veces si nos va el rollo. Una de amor idealizado de adolescente, de buscar y conquistar, de envalentonarte… Y que se termina tras haber echado un par de polvos porque, en fin, pues eres joven y es lo que toca, supongo.

Sin embargo, es que Charles, el protagonista, un chaval de clase alta, pomposo, arrogante, leído y cuasi obsesivo con las apariencias y con planear de antemano cada movimiento y cada gesto a dar, en pos de conseguir sus objetivos, que es muy fácil no empatizar, sin embargo, a mí me ha sido difícil no sentirme identificado con él en ciertos momentos.

Luego los personajes son carismáticos, la sociedad de los años 70, la hipocresía de la clase alta de entonces… Todo me parece verosímil y representativo. Siempre asociamos esos años al rock & roll, las drogas, los hippies y todo eso, pero como esto no tiene nada que ver es un soplo de aire fresco.

Y luego está el estilo de Amis, que es que me ha parecido genial a lo largo de toda la novela. Y no sé si se pondría muchas veces en plan autoficción (que bien me encajaría, porque a fin de cuentas es su primera novela y apostaría que él era tal cual el protagonista, pijetis que acaba en Oxford y demás) pero vamos, es lo de menos, la novela, siendo un reflejo de sus años de adolescencia o no me ha encantado.
8 s Minh345 56

Ngông cu?ng, nghênh ngang mà cu?n hút; cu?n ti?u thuy?t thô v?ng ??u tay c?a Amis th?t s? báo hi?u m?t s? nghi?p s?ng s?. Hi?m có ai ngang tàn, b?o ng??c, hoang dã, b?t kham ???c nh? chàng Charles Highway, và Amis vi?t nên ti?u thuy?t v? gi?ng lo?i b?t kham, v? kho?ng biên gi?i m? h? gi?a 19 20 tu?i khi con ng??i ta b?t ??u ch?u trách nhi?m. N?u Kerouac gò mình d?u hoang dã nh?ng v?n ??p ??, thì Amis là ông b?n t?t xua tay ?? r?i b?o r?ng c? bung xõa ?i. T?c t?u, hài h??c mà thi v? ??n vô t??ng t?n. Th?t hay ho.7 s Mircalla649 91

the spocchia papers

Charles è un insopportabile egocentrico stronzetto inglese, manca poco ai suoi vent'anni e, data l'immaturità che contraddistingue l'età in questione, eccolo lanciarsi nel racconto dei suoi pensieri ossessivo/compulsivi e delle sue manie di controllo:
è un ragazzetto come tanti, ma si crede speciale il caro Charles, che serba con grandiosa spocchia ogni suo pensiero per tramandarlo ai posteri, o semplicemente per darsi all'onanismo circa la sua capacità di manipolare parole copiate da altri e pensieri rimasticati senza ricordarsi di citarne le fonti...non è difficile ravvisare l'onestà dell'autore nel suo personaggio così ben riuscito, uno dei migliori di Amis, capace di una schiettezza molto ben sbandierata e altrettanto vacua, fine a se stessa e spesso non priva di una certa compiaciuta crudeltà circa il proprio potere sui sentimenti delle persone con cui sfortunatamente entra in relazione, Charles potrebbe esser stato lo stesso Amis, genitori in conflitto, padre ingombrante e problemi ai denti sono tutte cose di cui lui ci ha messo a parte negli anni...
postmoderni6 s Callie45 7

So I had a really difficult time finishing this book. Several times I wanted to quit reading it, but I honestly hate stopping a book when I'm half way through. I think my big mistake with this one was seeing the terribly made 80's film adaptation prior to reading the book. Man, was that one terrible film.
Second mistake, was that I couldn't stand the main character, Charles Highway, rather I LOATHED him. What a horribly self-centered, obnoxious, womanizing, vile protagonist.
And, yeah, I get that that's sort of the point. I suppose. But I think it's pretty hard to get into anything you're reading if you despise the narrator- am I correct? His descriptions of his sexual encounters with Rachel were horrendous (I.E. "It was too dark there (thank God) for me to be able to see what was right in front of my nose, just some kind of glistening pouch, redolent of oysters"). Yuck.
Definitely not my cup of tea, thank you.6 s Adrian Buck280 52

Somewhere in the middle of Lolita, I had the urgent insight that there was something quintessentially similar about the narratives of Charles Highway and John Self, and that of Humbert Humbert. In the first case I was wrong.

Yes, this is a story of a manipulative seduction, but there is no narrative of deception, or self deception. Charles Highway is unflinchingly honest with the reader and himself, and flinchingly funny. Re-reading this thirty plus years later, the flinch of self-recognition has long gone. This time it felt I was reading the Secret Diary of an upper-middle class Adrian Mole.

The question arose, how did Martin Amis come to be seen as literary rather than a comic novelist? His family and educational background? His ability to turn a phrase? Or his deliberate and not so successful struggle to write about the social and historical rather than the personal?fiction re-read7 s Punk1,524 287

Fiction. Self-indulgent, myopic, teenage fiction. I Amis, but not his narrator. Charles Highway is a spoiled 19-year-old who considers himself an intellectual and tends towards something he identifies as "self-infatuation" but makes no move to resist. I couldn't handle him and nearly threw this book down twice for every page I read.6 s Tony535 43

A good little tale but I couldn’t shake the idea that he was trying to borrow his father’s shoes here.

Worth a read though!6 s Berra43

uhhh the narrator is so annoying- good thing the writing is superb. 5 s Hugo Emanuel349 23

Martin Amis é um escritor sobre quem tenho opiniões contraditórias. Acho a sua prosa enérgica e hilariante; seduzem-me os temas que ele aborda e tramas dos seus romances. No entanto, nunca li um único dos seus romances que não achasse estar carregado de defeitos, não obstante as suas óbvias virtudes – muitas das quais são constantemente salientadas em entrevistas e declarações emitidas pelo próprio. Sim, os seus livros são perversamente hilariantes mas a dissecação do "absurdo da condição pós-moderna" que Amis e outros afirmam ser característica dos seus romances parece-me quase sempre ora pobremente ou exageradamente abordada – raramente na medida certa – e de uma forma um tanto e quanto imatura. Mas o que sei eu? Sou apenas um leitor anónimo, os especialistas em Literatura lá o irão de saber melhor do que eu, suponho. Não obstante o facto de achar que o que há de mais literato em Amis anda demasiado de mãos dadas com o que este tem de mais imaturo, não consigo evitar lê-lo compulsivamente. O facto é que esta dicotomia de algum modo me seduz.
Este "Os Papeis De Rachel" é particularmente problemático pois tem mais defeitos do que os outros romances que li de Amis, o que é compreensível pois foi publicado quando este tinha ainda 24 anos.
A personagem principal de "Os Papeis de Rachel" é Charles Highway, um jovem de 19 anos inteligente e grande apreciador de literatura mas acima de tudo egocêntrico, presunçoso e obcecado por sexo. Os seus objectivos imediatos consistem em passar nos exames de admissão de Oxford (acredita ser inteligente o suficiente para passá-los sem o mínimo esforço e surpreender todo o corpo docente da Universidade de Oxford com seu brilhantismo) e ter o maior número de sexo possível. Frequenta distraída e despreocupadamente uma escola de preparação para exames universitários de modo a que os seus pais lhe forneçam dinheiro e liberdade necessárias para que se possa dedicar ao que realmente ocupa os seus dias: esboçar em forma escrita as suas impressões e opiniões sobre a vida em geral (que considera ser mordazes e espirituosas) e formular estratégias pouco honestas (por vezes também por escrito) para conquistar raparigas. No entanto, acontece o inesperado quando conhece Rachel, por quem, muito contrariadamente, se vem a apaixonar “á seria”.
Na parte inicial do romance Amis parece demasiado satisfeito com as suas “chalaças” e referências literárias para se preocupar em delinear as personagens secundárias e procurar dar á sua obra uma estrutura narrativa minimamente disciplinada. No entanto, o romance melhora significativamente depois do encontro de Charles com Rachel. A partir desta altura a obra é de facto hilariante, espirituosa e até por vezes (surpresa das surpresas) terna.
Gostei de ler o romance – achei-o divertido e viciante, apesar dos seus defeitos. E sei que hei de voltar a lê-lo, especialmente por este ser curto. Por estes motivos sinto-me um pouco culpado por lhe atribuir apenas três estrelas mas também não posso, em boa consciência dar-lhe quatro. Digamos que é um 3.5 em 5 e um 6.8 em 10.
No entanto, se não conhecem o trabalho do autor recomendo que leiam “A Informação” e “Money” primeiro pois embora estes romances sejam bem menos acessíveis do que “Os Papeis de Rachel” são obras muito mais bem conseguidas e emblemáticas do autor.
owned5 s christa745 337

Charles Highway is a Rick Ocasek-looking, luggie horking, father-hating-for-unspecified-reasons, asthmatic on the cusp of his 20th birthday, which he is taking, most things, very seriously. He spends the hour leading up to midnight of the big day, which he refers to as the end of his youth, revisiting his relationship with Rachel. This is easy, as Charles Highway has kept detailed notes on their time together, all while simultaneously creating a personal guidebook called "Conquests and Techniques: A Synthesis."

Martin Amis does this so well, creating a character so unlikable that if you met Charles Highway in real life you'd induce a brain spasm from over-using your eye rolling muscles. Amis takes that loathsome protagonist in his first novel, "The Rachel Papers," and turns it all into a very witty story.

Charles is staying with his sister and her abusive husband while he prepares to apply for admission to Oxford. He's got a girl Gloria who stops by for all sorts of floor routine antics, which are given play-by-play treatment. "What did I feel for her?" He wonders one morning. "Ambiguous lust, genial condescension, and gratitude. It didn't seem enough."

He meets Rachel by offending her at a party, taking her on a date, not calling her, then giving it another go a week or so later. She's a tough sell, with an American boyfriend always orbiting her. Charles plots ways to make headway: He visits a museum they play to go to, plots profound statements he can say while standing near a window that delivers a specific light. He does the same with movies. He manufactures all sorts of tortured emotions, and soon enough he's got her in his bed.

Things with Rachel don't last long.

Not much happens in this short novel covering an equally short amount of time. It's a lot of listening to the pretentious ramblings of a teenager who is trying to mold his life to look and sound certain ways. Certain books left open to certain pages, and the album on the front of the pile is deliberate. But every minute in Charles Highway's head is funny and ridiculous, although treated so seriously. a caricature who believes he is an illustration.

5 s MyfanwyAuthor 11 books254

Should this be renamed? I'm thinking Portrait of the Artist as a Young Horny Man? Charles Highway is an absolute little shit and yet he is endearing and I enjoyed my time with him (even when it was gross). Everything he does, he does for experience and for an opportunity to write about it. At least this is what he tells himself. I would guess, too, that everything he does, he does in hopes of feeling real emotion, thereby breaks the boundaries of his class and family. 5 s George2,498

Autor del comentario:
=================================