The Birth of Media Power?

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

I had no idea what to expect when picking up ‘Arthur andGeorge’, by Julian Barnes.  I’d read ‘The Sense of an Ending’, and was very impressed with the sensitivity of the writing, the subtlety of thought and feeling, the integrity of the writer.  A collection of short stories also impressed me.  I just glanced through the Barnes section at Kepler’s, and picked it up.  It's a very well reviewed work (finalist for the Booker).  If acclaimed and by Julian Barnes, I couldn’t go wrong, right? I half-expected it to be a book about a gay almost-couple, but really had no idea.

Turns out to be historical fiction.  Arthur is none other than Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (creator of Sherlock Holmes).  George is George Edalji, a modest first-generation Brit wrongly convicted of heinous crimes.  Arthur takes up the case after the fact, and does manage to have the stain erased, though the full correction sought is not achieved.  Yes, this really did happen.  It’s a pleasure to be so skillfully led into the world of England around 1900.  What a fascinating time; the empire is starting to crumble, and ethnic tensions are brewing at home.  Old-fashioned concepts of honor, duty, and faith are upheld, but the stresses and strains are all too evident.  The London of Monica Ali’s 'Brick Lane' is well in sight.

George Edalji

The book is an admirable performance, but I’m not sure that historical fiction is Barnes’s optimal genre. Barnes is capable of expressing more direct and striking insight into the human condition, but that's just not the primary aim of this book. The first third of the book is structured in short chapters that alternate between the early history of Arthur and that of George.  Both depictions are compelling and fascinating in their way, and are probably my favorite parts of the book. But the constant alternation and short chapters created (for me) an annoying rhythm that I wasn’t comfortable with.  I kept wishing that Barnes would stay with one story for longer and get to a deeper level.

But then the chapters do indeed get longer, and alas I was not entirely happy then either.  The narrative drive just didn't have the strength to push the prose through longer segments.  This is a true story and Barnes is constrained by the facts; a more satisfying but fictional conclusion is not available. I felt set up for a ‘Holmes’ satisfying ending, but real life intervened.  Unfortunately that means that the novel is also similarly constrained.  Not a fatal flaw.  To bring these two historical characters to life is admirable.  I’m sitting here in California in 2013, and having read the book I have a better appreciation of the unusual transitional state of Britain around 1900.  That is a testament to the novel’s success. And the has-to-be-intentional contrast between real-life legal/criminal entanglements and the literary convenience of the Sherlock Holmes stories is striking and apt.

There really is quite a bit to be learned here.  Consider the America of 2013.: tensions over immigration,  gun policies, racial issues.  It’s not all that different.  If we could see ourselves through that lens we could save ourselves a lot of trouble.  But no, we’re human.  That’s the good news and the bad.

Bravo to Mr. Barnes, but also a caution:  The raw literary talent clearly evidenced by Mr. Barnes in other works is significantly hemmed in here.  But given the task he set for himself, Barnes has succeeded.  I’m not overwhelmed by the result, but I have great respect for both the task and the effort required.