Scan barcode
daja57's review against another edition
5.0
The key to unlock this labyrinthine but ultimately rewarding book is to realise that it is meta-fiction. In the very first paragraph, the narrator (a student, living with his disapproving uncle, a clerk at the Guinness Brewery in Dublin) discusses his “spare-time literary activities. One beginning and one ending for a book was a thing I did not agree with.” So he gives three beginnings (of course, there is a fourth beginning, because the book has already begun, with the narrator!):
About “Pooka MacPhellimey, a member of the devil class”.
About John Furriskey, the character in a book written, we will later learn, by Dermot Trellis, who is himself a character in stories told by the narrator.
About Finn Mac Cool, the “legendary hero of old Ireland”, a the subject of many stories, who will go on, after a lot of prevarication, to tell a story about mad King Sweeney.
The book ends with a discussion of madness, which seems appropriate, and the formula “good-bye, good-bye, good-bye”; so there are three endings to go with the three beginnings.
There are stories within stories. At one point we have a story about someone called Bartley being told by someone who is a character (Shanahan) in a story told by a character (Trellis) in a story told by a character (the student) in a story told by the author.
The characters take on a life of their own, interacting, and conspiring to drug the author so he sleeps so that they can live ‘normal’ lives without the author making them do things that they don’t want to do. And towards the end the characters decide to revenge themselves of the author so that one of them writes the story of Trellis being tortured and then put on trial by the characters; he only escapes when his maid, making up the fire in his bedroom, burns the manuscript pages that give life to the rebellious characters.
No wonder it’s confusing!
The narrative moves up and down the levels. It pokes fun of literary conventions (one character complains that although he has been provided with outer clothing he was given no underpants and therefore caught pneumonia; another character is born as a twenty-five year old man) and figures of speech (litotes, synecdoche, anadiplosis and anaphora). As a sort of homage to (or possibly satire on) James Joyce’s Ulysses, several literary styles and genres are used (including different sorts of poetry); the characters repeatedly prefer everyday styles (eg westerns are preferred to Irish myth, even though both may be about cattle rustling). There are foreshadowing and echoes; for example, Finn Mac Cool (a character written about by the student who is written about by the author), who is a figure from Irish myth, tells a story about mad King Sweeny who perches in trees and when Trellis is punished by his characters he is made to roost in a tree.
It’s very clever and there are moments of beautiful writing. I particularly enjoyed the discussion between Furriskey, Lamont and Shanahan which was a sort of conversation through free association which ranged from death by drowning to Hemlock to Homer to the persecution of the Christians to blindness to harpists to blackheads and pimples and boils. You can hear these three Irishman in the pub, arguing and discussing and getting things wrong.
Another great set piece is when Shanahan recounts a story in the western genre, with all the vernacular, about he and his mates trying to reclaim rustled cattle and holding up a train etc. In the course of this story the cattle rustler at prayer is likened to Brian Boru who was the founder of the O’Brien dynasty (from whom Flann O’Brien had taken part of his pseudonym) and a King of Munster and subsequently High King of all Ireland, a warrior who died defeating the Vikings (who founded Dublin) at the Battle of Clontarf (a seaside resort north of Dublin whose name means ‘Meadow of the Bull’, where James Joyce lived when he was young); the resemblance seems appropriate because many of the exploits of legendary Irish heroes seem to have been glorified cattle rustling.
There are so many in-jokes. Two characters who appear are called “Timothy Danaos and Dona Ferentes” (Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes = “I fear the Greeks even when bearing gifts” is a famous line from the Aeneid). There is a wonderfully bad-tempered Good Fairy.
From time to time the frame story intrudes in which the student (who lives with his somewhat censorious uncle) lies in bed, goes to college, goes to the pub and gets drunk, is violently ill, and then goes back home to lie in bed again.
There’s part of me that wants to know what it all means. Great literature, I tell myself, should have a purpose. But does it ever? Is there a purpose for Ulysses? Presumably the work of Wodehouse is intended to make people laugh, to entertain, and this, though it was hard work in places, certainly does that. It may be convoluted but it’s clever and that is the secret of it’s wit.
Swim-Two-Birds is the rough translation of an Irish placename where there is a church which mad King Sweeny reportedly visited. I'm not sure whether that explains the title of the book.
About “Pooka MacPhellimey, a member of the devil class”.
About John Furriskey, the character in a book written, we will later learn, by Dermot Trellis, who is himself a character in stories told by the narrator.
About Finn Mac Cool, the “legendary hero of old Ireland”, a the subject of many stories, who will go on, after a lot of prevarication, to tell a story about mad King Sweeney.
The book ends with a discussion of madness, which seems appropriate, and the formula “good-bye, good-bye, good-bye”; so there are three endings to go with the three beginnings.
There are stories within stories. At one point we have a story about someone called Bartley being told by someone who is a character (Shanahan) in a story told by a character (Trellis) in a story told by a character (the student) in a story told by the author.
The characters take on a life of their own, interacting, and conspiring to drug the author so he sleeps so that they can live ‘normal’ lives without the author making them do things that they don’t want to do. And towards the end the characters decide to revenge themselves of the author so that one of them writes the story of Trellis being tortured and then put on trial by the characters; he only escapes when his maid, making up the fire in his bedroom, burns the manuscript pages that give life to the rebellious characters.
No wonder it’s confusing!
The narrative moves up and down the levels. It pokes fun of literary conventions (one character complains that although he has been provided with outer clothing he was given no underpants and therefore caught pneumonia; another character is born as a twenty-five year old man) and figures of speech (litotes, synecdoche, anadiplosis and anaphora). As a sort of homage to (or possibly satire on) James Joyce’s Ulysses, several literary styles and genres are used (including different sorts of poetry); the characters repeatedly prefer everyday styles (eg westerns are preferred to Irish myth, even though both may be about cattle rustling). There are foreshadowing and echoes; for example, Finn Mac Cool (a character written about by the student who is written about by the author), who is a figure from Irish myth, tells a story about mad King Sweeny who perches in trees and when Trellis is punished by his characters he is made to roost in a tree.
It’s very clever and there are moments of beautiful writing. I particularly enjoyed the discussion between Furriskey, Lamont and Shanahan which was a sort of conversation through free association which ranged from death by drowning to Hemlock to Homer to the persecution of the Christians to blindness to harpists to blackheads and pimples and boils. You can hear these three Irishman in the pub, arguing and discussing and getting things wrong.
Another great set piece is when Shanahan recounts a story in the western genre, with all the vernacular, about he and his mates trying to reclaim rustled cattle and holding up a train etc. In the course of this story the cattle rustler at prayer is likened to Brian Boru who was the founder of the O’Brien dynasty (from whom Flann O’Brien had taken part of his pseudonym) and a King of Munster and subsequently High King of all Ireland, a warrior who died defeating the Vikings (who founded Dublin) at the Battle of Clontarf (a seaside resort north of Dublin whose name means ‘Meadow of the Bull’, where James Joyce lived when he was young); the resemblance seems appropriate because many of the exploits of legendary Irish heroes seem to have been glorified cattle rustling.
There are so many in-jokes. Two characters who appear are called “Timothy Danaos and Dona Ferentes” (Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes = “I fear the Greeks even when bearing gifts” is a famous line from the Aeneid). There is a wonderfully bad-tempered Good Fairy.
From time to time the frame story intrudes in which the student (who lives with his somewhat censorious uncle) lies in bed, goes to college, goes to the pub and gets drunk, is violently ill, and then goes back home to lie in bed again.
There’s part of me that wants to know what it all means. Great literature, I tell myself, should have a purpose. But does it ever? Is there a purpose for Ulysses? Presumably the work of Wodehouse is intended to make people laugh, to entertain, and this, though it was hard work in places, certainly does that. It may be convoluted but it’s clever and that is the secret of it’s wit.
Swim-Two-Birds is the rough translation of an Irish placename where there is a church which mad King Sweeny reportedly visited. I'm not sure whether that explains the title of the book.
nealagrace's review against another edition
3.0
I read the whole thing. Could not tell you one thing that happened.
outcolder's review against another edition
5.0
read this in the middle of a post-st.pat's day irish fetish and i loved it. then i saw the movie, made in austria, in german, by this communist dude. wow.
couuboy's review against another edition
5.0
The kind of book with a number of passages I'd happily tattoo onto my grey-matter.
soapythebum's review against another edition
challenging
funny
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
wertwow's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
lighthearted
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
disreputabledog's review
challenging
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
leiaslizzy's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
This was an intriguing read. The characters were all brilliant, I loved the framed narrative, and the court case towards the end was fun to read.
eagerfrank13's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
In the reviews for this book I've seen that most people don't have an idea about this book. Probably due to a lack of understanding of Irish mythology and culture of old. Many elements of the book are pastiches of the form of Irish mythos, such as the use of extended, dramatic simile to describe something or the weird behaviour of nature, magic and Catholicism. O' Brien had such a deep knowledge of Irish myths and their nonsense mechanics that it would be like gibberish to anyone unfamiliar. Not to spoil chunks of the book too much but the entire retelling of the story of King Sweeny is totally accurate and the backwards, tumbling over itself that Irish stories have inherent in their structure is not too dissimilar to the output of Orlick and the boys at the end of the book, revising, going back over, forgetting bits. It's an expression in 20th century literature of the idiosyncrasies of oral story telling done to great comic effect. None of what I've said has really made much sense but honestly, I love this book too much to not exalt it's virtues.