Not my favorite Irving book, the setting and premise seemed a little far fetched, but I loved the characters and all their duality. And besides, reading an okay Irving book is still way better than reading a lot of other things.

I did not finish this book. I have been reading for almost 1 full year. I have decided to give up. In this moment, I feel free. So free. The word I would use to describe this book is: tedious.

SPOILERS BELOW:

Not sure how much I can spoil this book since I didn't finish it, but anyway...

There are some shining moments, such as the narrative digression to Nancy's backstory which culminates in Dr. Daruwallah's conversion experience.

However, mostly the book is telling and retelling the same shit over and over again.

In terms of the substance of the book, I had a big problem with narrative around Rahul/Mrs. Dogar. First, let me say that I'm not a fan of critiquing old books through the lens of the current more accepting and educated political/social views on race, gender, etc. since I think that's a really boring way to read shit. That said, good fucking lord. The problem with Rahul is that Irving and his characters are so much more horrified by Rahul's transgender identity and sexuality than they are by his murder spree. The author appears to relish in extremely indulgent descriptions of how "other" Rahul is, and in fact Rahul's murder activities are almost treated as a logical, unavoidable by-product of their gender and sexual identity.

To me, this is pretty lazy character development (let's be honest, Rahul's not a real character) and it is evident in how Nancy is written too, as though Nancy's arc is like the only possible answer to the question "OK, what if there was a girl who was kinda fat but also she was poor but also she had like really nice boobs?"

Farrokh and Vinod are pretty fine characters, as is Mr. Sethna, but everyone else I could really take or leave. Good fucking god this book was so long.

This was the longest book I read this year. In time to finish if not the number of pages. At times I felt like I wouldn't make it. It was the first Irving book I read. Some sentences were great - some chapters were a slog. I kept asking my wife if this was his usual style or writing. I would say I liked it, some parts of the story were riveting, the details of India quite specific and entirely foreign. The themes of immigration interesting. The religious parts kind of annoying. Before you embark on this journey, know you have a lot to learn.

DNF auf Seite 135 oder so. Das Buch hat schon einen echt schlechten Start mit seiner nonchalanten Erzählweise über ableistische, rassistische und misogyne Themen. Aber wenn dann noch eine Frau vom Hochseil stürzt und der Hauptcharakter einzig die festen Brüste unter ihrem Trikot und die Berührung ihrer zarten Haut auf seiner beschreibt.. Mag sein, dass man das auch reflektiert als Charakterstudie im zeitlichen Kontext lesen kann. Ich nicht.

Now a Canadian citizen, Dr Farrokh Daruwalla lives and works in Canada but spends some time each year in his place of birth, Bombay, and it is in Bombay and India that we spend our time with him. He maintains his own apartment there with a staff, and pursues his interest in the dwarfs who work in the circuses; and it is in the circus that is seems we might be spending most of our time - but the action does move elsewhere, and often back in time.

As we would expect with John Irving the story is far from straight forward, and includes in addition to the dwarfs, the low life of Bombay including beggars and prostitutes, actors and film stars, gays, transsexuals and other variations, twins, a handsome Bombay film star as much hated as he is loved, and an unusually honest police officer among others. Much of the action centres around the Duckworth Club, a very respectable club with a twenty year waiting list for members. But bringing everything together is a murder that proves to be more than an isolated case.

Farrokh, a family man now in his late fifties, becomes involved with the murders, he has a connection with the first, and he is there when the latest occurs, and his penchant for writing detective stories ensures his involvement.

The Son of the Circus I consider one of Irving's best efforts. Initially I must admit I did not find it immediately involving, but once we got beyond the circus and met some of the other characters I was completely drawn in and found it captivating, with a number of very endearing characters - along with one or two villains.

Irving never disappoints. Not as good as Garp or Owen Meany but still a terrific story with Irving's classic off-center yet always fascinating and endearing characters.

La historia es 100% John Irving pero tiene la novedad de desarrollarse en India y aunque el autor avise al principio que no es una novela sobre la India sí que contiene detalles y curiosidades sobre este país. Tampoco es una novela sobre el circo (que es lo que yo esperaba) aunque esté muy presente, es una novela sobre encontrar nuestro lugar en el mundo, dónde pertenecemos.

This book was pretty strange and that's usually fine with me, but at times the weirdness seemed pointless and the narrative became disjointed. It was also hard for me to "care" about the characters, as they all seemed pretty amoral and shallow.

I also have a few issues with the way the Irving portrays India. While I like his exploration of immigrant identities, I was a little turned off by the way he described India and Indian people. His depiction seemed a little too otherizing, typically western, and negative. (ie: India is dirty and death is no biggie there.)

You would probably enjoy this book more than I did if you aren't as much of a romantic (I love deep and archetypal characters) and if can overlook the neocolonial undertones. After all, the book was pretty entertaining, and the plot got progressively more engaging.

This is one of my least favorite of what I've read of Irving, and I'm trying to figure out why. I'm certainly a little tired of this perspective on life in India and have others I vastly prefer, but it sort of works for the unrooted nature of the protagonist. I also liked the characters and the story somewhat. My biggest problem is just that I had not real reason to read. I enjoyed a little as I read, but I had no drive to keep going. It took me forever. There just was no pull, no purpose. I don't know if it was bad pacing or what, but this was really missing something for me.

John Irving has written some of my favorite books of all time, and I'm not sure if that had a positive or a negative influence on my review of A son of the Circus. It doesn't really matter. This book is just bad.

This is my favorite John Irving. And on a recent plane trip, as I discussed Irving's books with the person seated beside me, she sad it was her least favorite. For me, "Circus" has Irving's most original characters, and his oddest settings. This one sits on the top shelf of my home library right next to Dickens' "Nicholas Nickleby." And sometimes when I walk by all my favorites, I just like to open them up at random and revisit a few "old friends," or simply just start reading it again, cover to cover.

Somewhere in a vacuous universe of this tube, Joey bumped into GR.

Joey: Hi, you look familiar with me. Have we met before? You must be … one of my friends on Good Reads!

GR: Oh, yeah! You are …Joey! ( overwhelmed )

Joey: And you are ...GR! Oh, it’s nice to see ya here! ( shaking hands with GR)

GR: Oh, yeah! As though we haven’t seen each other for ages! ( laughs)
( then she saw a book Joey holding) Oh, you must be reading something. ( trying to look through it) Wait ! wait! Wait! You have been reading John Irving’s ?

Joey: ( hiding the book behind his back ) Ah,huh…er… I have. ( smiling )

GR: What’s the title?

Joey: Ah…er..A Son of the Circus.

GR: Oh, really? Wait! ( thinking ) Is not that on the list of 1001 Best Novels of All Time? ( giggling)

Joey: Oh, yeah! You are right!

GR: I said it. So,what do you think of it?( excited )

Joey: Ah.. er..Well, H-how bout you? What have you been reading?

GR : Oh, I have just finished a chicklit by Rainbow Rowell. OMG! It’ terrific. I recommend you read it. It’s heart-breaking!In fact, it won …..

Joey: Oh, really?

GR: So , Is John Irving’s interesting?

Joey: Er..I think I have heard a lot of good things about Rowell. I would love to read hers too.

GR: Oh, yeah ! Come on! Get on with it! Then, let me know what you think of it. I am so excited !What was it again? Oh, yeah! It is John…

Joey : Ah,( looking at his watch ) er.. I am sorry! I’ve got to go! Nice to meet you again, GR. Chat you on Good reads. ( walking past him in a hurry)

GR: Er..H-how about …? Wait! ( waving his hand ) Ok. ( watching him fading away ) …Is there something the matter with the book? ( muttering under his breath, despaired)

When GR was home, he logged into his Good reads account. The first message popped was from Joey’s.

____________________________
To: GR
From: Joey

Hi, GR. I’ve checked that you haven’t read A Son of the Circus by John Irving’s yet.Well, I don’’t wanna be a spoiler. If you wanna read it, have LONG PATIENCE.
Otherwise, you might end up laying it to rest.
Good luck!

__________________________________


At last, I finished this 708 –page novel since I had let it on my study table collect mote of dust as well as get stuck and musty in my currently-reading list on Goodreads for a year. Gee, at that time I still found it very humorous, replete with amusing themes I could not find from other novels, as well as I was impressed by its firs immortal THE WORLD ACCORDING TO GARP ( 4 stars ). In fact, I was tempted to read first thereupon buying his A WIDOW FOR ONE YEAR because I was fascinated by its softbound cover. Unfortunately, I was very disappointed. So, automatically, I gave it 1 star. And for the second time around, A SON OF THE CIRCUS is somewhat less disappointing than the former . What’s the matter? In effect, doubtless , John Irving is a gifted writer. I liked the fact that he is able to write such ambitious novels as though he does not have to deal with a writer’s block, as if he never runs out of any ideas. Besides, it is amazing of him to jumble up his different themes together in the same concept. On the other hand, since it is now my third novel, I am now getting more familiar with his writing style than that I found out why I gave both A WIDOW FOR ONE YEAR and this one 1 star. First, Irving loves dilly-dallying with his stories as I thought of before. He tends to beat around the bush. He does not stick to the main story. Rather, he tells more details about a superficial situation I am not very much familiar with. . Who cares? Thus, the narrator sounds to be blabbering.

Blah! Blah! Blah! Blah! Blah!

Furthermore, I have noticed that John Irving loves repeating the same stories in the other chapters in a sense that they are all connected- a writing style that is doubtless very rare among other writers. However, such style is persistent in a sense that it ends up a pain in the ass. Imagine a plot goes like this :

Chapter 1 : You read a story …………………..blah! blah! blah!
Chapter 2: You read another story…….then here it goes again, the same with Chapter 1…blah! blah! blah!

I am telling you. You need a considerable amount of long patience to finish it.

Granted that this is less disappointing, I believe that this is still a masterpiece. For me , any piece of literary work is a labor of writing skills. Alas, it’s beyond my taste. But as the cliché goes,” There must be the method to Irving’s madness.”, and this is on what I want to be shed light someday.

I still have his two novels more on my shelf: A PRAYER FOR OWEN MEANY and UNTIL I FIND YOU. I wonder if he wrote them with the same style. Dear me!