Human Traces is a a huge and ambitious novel, which aims to explore the development of psychiatry, psychoanalysis and neurology in the late 19th and early 20th century. It took Sebastian Faulks five years to write, and involved spending hundreds of hours on research and creating charts and timelines to keep track of events and characters. The novel begins in the 1876, with the introduction of the two protagonists - Jacques Rebiere and Thomas Midwinter. They are both 16 years old, and although separated by social status, language and land, they both undergo personal experiences which make them wish to become doctors. Jacques is a poor boy living in rural France, forced to abandon his education and an early age and work in the villages to support his family. Jacques is fascinated with anatomy and dissects frogs in his spare time, drawing detailed illustrations. But what he most wishes for is to understand madness: he wishes to be able to cure his brother, Olivier, who succumbed into it and is forced to live locked in the stable, shackled to the wall. Oliver was the last person to have seen their mother, as she died shortly after giving birth to Jacques. Their father refuses to talk about his late wife, and Jacques sees in Oliver the only chance to learn anything about her.In England, Thomas Midwinter dreams to study Shakespeare andbelieves that literature allows for understanding of humanity. For Thomas, literature deepens the perceivement of emotions and heightens one's awareness of being alive. He is met with scorn from his father, who is experiencing financial troubles and is forced to arrange a marriage for Thomas's sister, Sonia. It is Sonia who advises Thomas to study medicine, as itwill also allow him to study the nature of humanity...and guarantee a respectable income.These early sections show Faulks at his very best; they're compelling and evocative. full of humanity and wonder. Although the hardships which Jacques faces are overwhelming, he never gives up: his devotion to knowledge and understanding is admirable and beautifully shown, and his love for his brother and the mother he never saw compensates for all sacrifices. Thomas is forced to abandon his dreams of studying literature, like his sister is forced to enter into marriage; both will have to shape their lives this way and not the other because of the place and time they were born in. When the lives of Jacques and Thomas intersect, both discover that the other shares the same fascination: both pledge to pursue further understanding of the human condition and all that comes with it, and eventually set up their own clinic. With time, each begins to form a different hypothesis: Jacques believes that traumatic experiences at a young age can are the cause of madness and schizophrenia, while Thomas remains a strict naturalist and believes that mental and physical problems are genetic. This is fascinating material, and the novel promises to be a wonderful experience. Sally Vickers in The Times compared it to works by Balzac, Stendhal and Mann, praising its scope and ambition - the novel's canvas encompasses three continents. It spans several decades and generations, and is victorian in its lenght and drama: from sweeping love affairs to tragic death, journeys to faraway lands and even war and its tragedy, all this with exploration of scientific, religious and philosophical themes.Yet, as a novel, it is greatly flawed. The main sin it commits against the art of storytelling is the sheer amount of exposition: after the brilliant opening it lapses into a display of its impressive background research, with the characters becoming little more than speakers for the author who illustrate his points; several chapters are devoted to long and academic discussion over the nature of mental illness, and in one chapter a whole lecture is transcribed from beginning to end. These chapters could have been edited and shortened to a portion of their lenght; the pace and dramatic impact of the narrative would greatly gain from such treatment. Likewise, the portions of the novel set in Africa and California seem to be more of a recounting of the research that went into writing them than genuine parts of the storyline; the plot starts looking as if the story was so framed to fit the background research - which would explain several improbable coincidences - than the research resulting from the nature of the story and the characters which populate it, moving very linearly and mostly predictably and perfunctorily. It's as if the sheer amount of ideas was too large for its canvas, forcing Faulks to cut his characterization short in order to present psychoanalysis and psychiatry with the attention and detail he felt it deserved.The novel shines with insividual sequences - descriptions of mental asylums and the patients within them are haunting and effective, with one feeling their squalor and despair - but on the whole the plot and character interactions feel scripted, the novel's world tailored only to present its themes and not allowed to evolve and live on its own. Still, despite these factors it's not a failure: it is an intelligent work, and the author's devotion to the subject and representation of science from that period, with its many doubts but also enormous promise, is to be acknowleged and praised. The novel begins to regain the opening grandeur as it nears towards the end, with events which I found bitterly ironic and deeply saddening. The end of Human Traces is powerful and sublime, written in passages echoing with quiet beauty. It's almost cathartic in effect, purifying the artificual plot with truly human emotions; I closed the book forgiving it its flawed and weak parts, being glad that I was able to experience the strong and beautiful.
In my opinion, Sebastian Faulks is right up there with the best of our writers. He studied English at Cambridge. He worked as a features writer for The Telegraph papers before becoming Deputy Editor of The Independant on Sunday. This is the third novel of his I have read. Birdsong was excellent and Charlotte Gray very good, but for me Human Traces is superior.Is the writing any better in this novel? Mr Faulks writes beautifully throughout all three of these books.Is it the subject matter? There may possibly a link, you may recall I found Abraham Verghese's Cutting for Stone excellent which also has a strong medical theme. Medicine interests me but not to go into the profession, I'm far too squeamish but I enjoy the science. I like psychology and again have an interest in mental health, having read Edward de Bono, R D Laing and others in my teens and later Oliver Sachs - The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat for book group. It is interesting how the mind works and what can go wrong, the delicate line we tread. Is it the storyline? Most definitely! Right from the start where we are in France with the sixteen year old Jacques whose Mother died in childbirth, brought up mainly by his aunt and grandmother. His father busy working and his sick, mistreated, older brother for whom Jacques channels his ambitions. In England the young Thomas, at the same age, not taken particularly seriously by his father as the youngest of three children. It is his dear sister Sonia who sees how bright Thomas is and takes an interest in him, guiding him to follow his instincts and interests. When these two young men meet they form a strong bond which maintains their lasting friendship through life. This novel is not just about medicine and mental health, it is about life, dreams, hope, love, lust, ambition, death, disappointment, sickness and sorrow. Mr Faulks writing flows and is very descriptive, it is easy to 'see' and 'feel' the story. His own personal knowledge of Cambridge, England and France show and his research is thorough. In the notes and acknowledgement Mr Faulks gives thanks to those who helped and assisted him with the novel to ensure the historical facts are as accurate as possible. This story consists of 609 pages, it is quite a tome and took me two weeks to read. This is not the fault of the book which I actually found difficult to put down, my lack of reading pace was due to time restraints.Does a book have to be so big to be so good? In this case, yes! Every page was worth it and relevant to the story. An excellent read and if you have the stamina, I recommend you to give it a go.
What do You think about Human Traces (2006)?
This book was surprisingly a faster read than I expected considering the subject matter and the size. Faulks is now one of my favourite writers and I intend to go back and read all of his novels that I've missed. It is staggering to think of the amount of research needed to write this book. The history of the study of madness, as Faulks so brilliant depicts, is a long convoluted one with some doctors lost in the mire of false diagnosises and others completely "off base" and of course it takes its toll on the two main characters in Human Traces. I found the ending particularly poignant but was a little disappointed with the "voices" of the two very different main characters. Despite one being French, the other English and both having quite different world views - when you're inside their head it seemed to be the one person. I'm aware that this wouldn't bother a lot of readers but it's something I'm particularly fascinated with and this is my only criticism. For those who are interested in the subject matter - a very worthwhile read.
—Debbie Robson
This could have been a fantastic book. A brilliant beginning to what promised to be an interesting story but it never happened. The two main characters were interesting enough to have carried a story and, when Faulks allowed them to do so, it was as good as anything he's written.However, huge chunks read like an outdated psychology text book and added nothing to the narrative. The love affair between one of the characters and his wife was odd in that he saw her in the corridor one day and was violently in love with her the next with no idea how they arrived there. Faulks is capable of better emotional/love scenes but seemed too focussed on the medical side to give this any thought.Although I'd read and enjoyed several of his before this, I wouldn't rush to read another.
—Laura
I was tentative beginning this book because I so loved Engleby, the first book by Faulks I read, and was afraid I would be disappointed. I wasn't. In Human Traces Faulks traces the early history of psychiatry from the alienists of the late 1900s through to the end of the first world war, but does so through the lives of two extraordinary men, Englishman Thomas and Breton Jacques driven by personal history and their own youthful intelligence and fire to understand how the mind works and to solve and cure mental illness. Towards the end I got a little confused with characters but this was more than made up for by Faulks bringing to life a time in history when the fields of psychology, psychiatry and neurology were in their infancy. His research into different areas of study must have been intense: the sanotoriums in the Alps, fossilised human footprints in the Great Rift in Africa, fin de siecle Paris and London, fighting in the Italian Alps in World War One, Faulks brought all of these alive for me with heartbreaking force.
—Jo Bennie
