Read this one on the night train to Paris, excited by the cover art and the fact that it’s representing the NW Territories and the Prairies in Canada Reads 2013. Unfortunately it one of those books I opened, read two pages of and knew it was going to be a tedious read.
The Age of Hope is written by David Bergen who was born in Port Edward, British Columbia, and now lives in Winnipeg. He has worked as a high school teacher of English in addition to writing. His novel The Time in Between won the Giller Prize in 2005. He has won numerous more accolades as well.
The Age of Hope is about a woman named Hope living in a rural Mennonite community in Manitoba during the mid twentieth century (already you should be thinking– not another Canadian book like that!) She is pretty and is guaranteed for a conventional life as someone’s wife. She does get married, she does have children and is faced with numerous difficulties throughout her life.
That’s a pretty bland description, but I think it suits the book. I was really unimpressed with this book. First off, immediately Bergen breaks the writerly-rule and tells everything to the reader instead of shows it. What’s the difference? Well showing involves making a scene, it’s like taking the events of the novel and filming it as if it were on screen. People talk, the set is described, but nothing is given to you directly. Telling is when the author just tells you about what’s going on. Here’s a quick example of the two:
Showing: A single tear slid down the woman’s weathered face as she gave her son a hug.
Telling: She was sad that her son was leaving home.
Now the trick with writing is to use a combination of showing and telling. Without using telling the reader has to do a lot of work figuring out what’s going on – telling is necessary for them to be encouraged to keep reading. Without showing the reader has no work to do – it’s all just droned on like a lecture and consequently the work becomes rather un-lifelike and uninteresting.
David Bergen uses only telling in this story. It made me wonder right away who the narrator was. It might be one of Hope’s daughters who near the end of the novel claims to be writing a book only ‘slightly based’ on her mother’s life. But again I can’t be sure.
Also Hope as a character is completely uninteresting. At one point she worries she’s too passive in life (after being told this by a friend) and I think that’s exactly what she is. Bergen might be making the point that women of that era were raised that way (to abide, not question etc), but I think grouping a whole generation of women into that tiny box is not just unrealistic, but insulting. As a member of a family with several strong women of that generation I disagree entirely. This bland character coupled with the telling style Bergen chose to dictate the novel made it seem that things just happened to Hope, instead of the other way around. I like characters who are flawed and make choices. Not seemingly perfect ones who allow things to happen to them and then moan on about it.
The scale of events that happen in this one woman’s life made it seem very melodramatic as well – it was just as if Bergen was throwing all these things into a pot, hoping that he could reach more readers this way. It did not work on me.
As a portrayal of life in the prairies, I think this novel does poorly. I felt I wasn’t given anything really tangible about life in the prairies (probably because of the telling.) If you want to read about life in the prairies do yourself a favour and pick up As for Me and My House or Wild Geese or The Stone Angel instead.
Anything good to say? I guess it’s always nice to see Canada in text. This book read like one giant obituary and I like obituaries so for an obituary it wasn’t too bad. As for a Canada Reads nomination, I’m appalled this even made the cut.
I gave this book a 1 out of 5, but I’ll admit it could go to a 2. Based on reviews on Goodreads, the average rating for The Age of Hope was 4…
a love for words 