Scan barcode
hneite's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
stephenmeansme's review against another edition
dark
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
heliopteryx's review against another edition
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
What a book! 5 out of 5 stars. An overlooked classic. It has the most incredible prose.
Katherine Mortenhoe, at 44, receives a diagnosis of a condition incurable even though medicine has advanced enough that pretty much every disease has been cured. Alternate sections are from Katherine's point of view or from the point of view of Roddie, a reporter/cameraman who's supposed to make a reality TV show about her. This story is about so many things. Freedom and how to be free from the expectations of society and others, how to tell a good story, and the complicated ties between people as friends, spouses, and coworkers. Some of the science and tech aspects show their age, but the parts about privacy and public opinion have aged amazingly well.
Seeing the characters' own interior struggles is so uncomfortable and definitely expects the reader to be paying attention. For example, the characters think unkind things about others as a reflection of themselves, not the others. This is clearest when Katherine is judging people living in a homeless commune, but it's not because they actually embody any of the traits she applies to them, it is because she is jealous of how carefree they live.
This story is set against a vague backdrop of authoritarianism, with ever-present bureaucracy, mention of rationing, and how you need so many forms of ID and licenses. There is civil unrest, portrayed in an ambiguous way. Being written in the early 1970s, I don't have detailed enough knowledge of history to know what the author would have been inspired by here, but you'd probably understand it better if you did.
Regarding diversity, we don't get detailed descriptions of anyone's appearance so technically you can imagine them however you please, but I'm sure this is a setting of only white British people. There is a likable gay character, and historically accurate homosexuality in this setting (it's not legal, though none of the characters are homophobes, so these relationships need to be hidden either literally or with euphemisms but the characters/reader know what's up).
Katherine Mortenhoe, at 44, receives a diagnosis of a condition incurable even though medicine has advanced enough that pretty much every disease has been cured. Alternate sections are from Katherine's point of view or from the point of view of Roddie, a reporter/cameraman who's supposed to make a reality TV show about her. This story is about so many things. Freedom and how to be free from the expectations of society and others, how to tell a good story, and the complicated ties between people as friends, spouses, and coworkers. Some of the science and tech aspects show their age, but the parts about privacy and public opinion have aged amazingly well.
Seeing the characters' own interior struggles is so uncomfortable and definitely expects the reader to be paying attention. For example, the characters think unkind things about others as a reflection of themselves, not the others. This is clearest when Katherine is judging people living in a homeless commune, but it's not because they actually embody any of the traits she applies to them, it is because she is jealous of how carefree they live.
This story is set against a vague backdrop of authoritarianism, with ever-present bureaucracy, mention of rationing, and how you need so many forms of ID and licenses. There is civil unrest, portrayed in an ambiguous way. Being written in the early 1970s, I don't have detailed enough knowledge of history to know what the author would have been inspired by here, but you'd probably understand it better if you did.
Regarding diversity, we don't get detailed descriptions of anyone's appearance so technically you can imagine them however you please, but I'm sure this is a setting of only white British people. There is a likable gay character, and historically accurate homosexuality in this setting (it's not legal, though none of the characters are homophobes, so these relationships need to be hidden either literally or with euphemisms but the characters/reader know what's up).
Content Warnings
Moderate: Police brutality and Chronic illness
mxmlln's review against another edition
2.0
Story: 5 / 10
Characters: 5
Setting: 5
Prose: 3
A strong concept, but with a poorly balanced plot. Half the book was spent setting up the story, leaving little space for a proper pace. In the end, the concept is the only thing to take away from this one...
Memory triggers: TV eyes, eternal public protests, reality TV
Characters: 5
Setting: 5
Prose: 3
A strong concept, but with a poorly balanced plot. Half the book was spent setting up the story, leaving little space for a proper pace. In the end, the concept is the only thing to take away from this one...
Memory triggers: TV eyes, eternal public protests, reality TV
lindy_b's review against another edition
3.0
In the same way Ling Ma's [b:Severance|36348525|Severance|Ling Ma|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1507060524l/36348525._SY75_.jpg|58029884] is a novel about post-recession American millennial ennui and the loss of the American Dream through the trappings of genre fiction, The Continuous Katherine Mortenhoe is a novel about the English post-war generation's ennui and loss of an utopian future through the trappings of genre fiction. It's well-written enough, although despite Jeff VanderMeer's claim of its prescience in the introduction, extremely of its time.
It truly has very little to do with reality television or the surveillance state. In this version of 1973, medical science has advanced to the point that, aside from some very rare exceptions, the only cause of death is old age*. Katherine Mortenhoe is diagnosed with a terminal illness at the age of 44, is given weeks to live, and becomes a celebrity overnight. Roddie, a television professional assigned to produce a show starring Katherine in her last days, has undergone experimental surgery to have video cameras implanted into his eyes. This establishes a dialectic through which Katherine and Roddie struggle to suss out a true (or 'continuous') representation of the self and the other. And of course dialectic breaks down, because the woman who's supposed to have a future doesn't have one and the television eyes that are said to never lie of course do.
*
It truly has very little to do with reality television or the surveillance state. In this version of 1973, medical science has advanced to the point that, aside from some very rare exceptions, the only cause of death is old age*. Katherine Mortenhoe is diagnosed with a terminal illness at the age of 44, is given weeks to live, and becomes a celebrity overnight. Roddie, a television professional assigned to produce a show starring Katherine in her last days, has undergone experimental surgery to have video cameras implanted into his eyes. This establishes a dialectic through which Katherine and Roddie struggle to suss out a true (or 'continuous') representation of the self and the other. And of course dialectic breaks down, because the woman who's supposed to have a future doesn't have one and the television eyes that are said to never lie of course do.
*
Spoiler
Or at least that's the ideology of the society; as one reads along one finds out that death by suicide, traffic accidents, and vehicular manslaughter by men angry about protesters are all common enough yet unremarked upon occurrences, which goes to show that what people really want is the marketing of a death story.sea_empty's review against another edition
3.0
Premise was interesting, but plot didn't deliver. The last hundred or so pages were especially a slog because they end the book exactly how you think it will end, and add nothing except the redemption of Roddie, I guess . I keep thinking about the concept of the "TV eyes," and how that was actually a fairly accurate prediction of how advances in technology lead individuals to transform their daily lives into "entertainment" at the cost of privacy. Odd that a guy who apparently didn't see cell phones or electronic communication coming would be dead on about that....
dvdpcp's review against another edition
3.0
Did not finish. Liked the world and premise but hard to get into and keep reading. A little dense and takes a lot of work. On page 179 of 341. Maybe another time
ambar's review against another edition
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
3.5