Book Festival: The novel reaches a crisis point (maybe), whilst Stephen Poliakoff discusses another crisis

Has the novel eached crisis point?

“I want knob-flaunting Speedos in every paragraph!” was the cry that went up from American writer David Shields, whose manifesto Reality Hunger prompted today’s debate on the future of the novel.

For an incredibly high-minded and intellectual debate, this was funnily enough the most often used phrase. Borrowed from Alan Hollinghurst, in Shields’ opinion this description of tight-fitting swimwear displays the kind of clear, free-thinking writing that too much of modern literature lacks.

Throughout the debate there was a lack of agreement about what a novel actually was, what the crisis could be defined as, or the position of novels in relation to this crisis. Most of the panel did not have a firm view either way, and instead traded names of authors they liked and discussed their various bugbears in fiction.

Shields’ central thesis is that the novel needs to reconnect with the modern world, and to ponder deeper, more philosophical questions. He offered some withering criticism of contemporary literature, describing the content of most novels as “wind machines” disguising a lack of new ideas.  

Gabi Wood, literary editor at the Telegraph, joked about being uncomfortable with the explosions of knob-flaunting Speedos, and suggested that the novel was too broad a category to be placed in any one crisis.

Also on the panel were writer Geoff Dyer and Scotland on Sunday literary editor Stuart Kelly. Dyer pointed out that there was a constant theme of a golden period having just passed over the horizon in the arts, though criticised the influential Booker prize for homogenising modern literature. Kelly opined that too much of literature seemed beholden to the great writers of the past three decades.

The event was enlightening and intellectually stimulating, though I’m sure many left feeling more unsure about the state of the novel than when they entered.

 

Stephen Poliakoff

Celebrated director and screenwriter Stephen Poliakoff received a warm Book Festival welcome when promoting his latest film Glorious 39. Before his talk, a short video displayed some of the most memorable clips from his many films, highlighting the big-name actors he had worked with over his career.

Anecdotes from working with these stars provided some great material. As a director he has his cast rehearse a lot, allowing them to trade ideas and form a bond. “The conventional wisdom that actors aren’t very intelligent is not true... often the most formidable-sounding actors are the easiest to work with,” he said.

Glorious 39, released in cinemas last winter, portrays a pre-war plot in Britain to appease the Nazis. As a Jew, this period in history fascinates Poliakoff- if Britain had colluded with the Axis his family could quite easily have disappeared. He was fiercely critical of the British establishment of the time, saying that the royal family and most of Parliament wanted Lord Halifax, an “arch-appeaser,” as Prime Minister. He warns not to view Neville Chamberlain as a bumbling but well-intentioned leader, but instead as “the most dictatorial Prime Minister we’ve ever had” for his tendency to spy on his opponents.

His recent BBC television film, The Lost Prince, takes another dim view of the royal family. It depicts the almost-forgotten Prince John, the severely autistic child of George V, who was sequestered away from the public eye as Britain launched into the First World War. Despite the film’s critical acclaim, which has followed much of Poliakoff’s work, “there are always fights about money,” with producers arguing over production budgets.

Poliakoff also hit out at the UK’s lack of support for independent films, and despaired over the government’s axing of the UK Film Council.

The Q&A session revealed the depth of his fan’s adoration. “I love, love, love, love your work,” raved one of them, “please take care of your health and don’t die too soon!”