'Jill' by Philip Larkin is a frustratingly erratic novel. It starts promisingly, then dips considerably before rallying in its final section. I came near to giving up on it during the very dull and tedious middle part of the story. I persevered with it, and I'm glad that I did. I was left with the impression, however, that it's an unremarkable novel which had it not been written by someone who went on to become a very well-known poet would probably be largely forgotten today. The principal character is John Kemp, a young working-class student from the north of England who, while at grammar school, wins a scholarship to read English at Oxford University during the early years of the Second World War. During his first term at Oxford, John meets a number of middle class students, one of whom - Christopher Warner - is his roommate. Christopher went to a minor public school and is a confident and assertive person. He is academically lazy, appears to float from one social engagement to another and neglects his studies. John is his exact opposite. He is clever and studious but socially awkward. John becomes entranced by Christopher and his friends. Desperate to get Christopher's attention, he creates a fictional younger sister - the 'Jill' of the title - despite the fact that he actually has an older sister, Edith, who is a teacher in Manchester. He does so because he thinks that the outwardly confident Christopher may harbour a slight envy of his more ordinary life and the closer family ties that go with it. John begins to compose fictional letters from Jill and a diary by her. He leaves these lying around in the hope that Christopher will surreptitiously pick them up and read them. But, of course, the self-obsessed Christopher shows no interest whatsoever in John's extra-curricular life. So, the latter's plan fails. Eventually, John bumps into a young woman called Gillian - another 'Jill'! - in an Oxford bookshop. He becomes infatuated with her, a situation that for all kinds of reasons - not least that Gillian is a relative of one of Christopher's closest friends, Elizabeth - is destined to be fraught with emotional difficulty. I enjoyed the early part of 'Jill'. Larkin vividly portrays what life must have been like in wartime Oxford for the student population. One small example is that the station porter has to walk the length of the platform shouting "Oxford, Oxford" when John's train from the north of England arrives because the station nameplates have been removed for the duration of the war. Larkin also conveys very well the clash of cultures that takes place when the life of the working-class, grammar school-educated and somewhat diffident John collides with that of the ultra-confident, middle-class, ex-public schoolboy Christopher. The middle section of the book, which features the letters and diaries of John's fictional sister Jill, is nothing like as good as the opening chapters. Indeed, it's mind-numbingly dull. Things improve in the final third of the story, which concerns the impact of John's seemingly ill-fated infatuation with Gillian. Not surprisingly, perhaps, given its author's poetic pedigree, 'Jill' is suffused with beautifully descriptive language. The characterisation is also good but the pacing of the story leaves much to be desired. Far too much time is devoted to the fictional Jill and her correspondence. In my view, the use of that particular plot device unbalances what would otherwise be a reasonably readable and coherent story. All in all, 'Jill' is a bit of a mixed bag of a novel. It's unlikely to live long in the memory and it's not a story that I feel I can wholeheartedly recommend. 6/10.
Larkin wrote Jill during Word War II, while he was still at university and set the book in the same time and place. The writing is very good, as you would expect from a poet as good as Larkin. Words are tools he obviously has no problem using. However, the story leaves something to be desired.As I began reading the book I raced through it. Larkin writes brilliantly of the displacement felt by his main character, John Kemp, a working class freshman at Oxford University. John is "as restless as a cat in new home". It is easy to wallow with him in his melancholy and disorientation. In a good way. His early interaction with roommate, Chris Warner, is a masterpiece. It immediately called to mind one of my favourite books, Brideshead Revisited, and I hoped it would continue in this vein. Larkin writes: "Whatever one might think of Christopher Warner, he could not be neglected." Unfortunately, Larkin does.The book goes downhill when the eponymous Jills, technically there are two, come onto the scene. The first is an imaginary sister created by John. He writes false letters to her and diaries by her. These provide insights into John's character; "She hated Maisie, and envied her, and hated herself for envying her" could have been written about John and Chris. On the whole though, this section is dull.The second Jill is actually called Gillian, a young girl John becomes infatuated with. The infatuation ends badly but not tragically. The plotline seems pointless and fails to engage after the well-written and promising start. As I was reading the book I was counting the pages until the end, never a good sign. I even found it a significant effort to get through the last hundred pages. I would not even call it bad, just mediocre. Mediocre is not good enough though, when there are so many books to read and many, many of them more worth reading than this one.The early qualities resurface towards the end after a bombing raid hits John's home town. Once again his disorientation and anxiety are wonderfully realised. It is not enough to redeem the whole and the book staggers to an uninteresting close.The most interesting part of the novel is Larkin's 1963 introduction, which was almost worth the £3 I paid for the book. In it he talks about writing the book and his friendships at the time, including that of Kingsley Amis.Overall though, give this one a miss.
What do You think about Jill (2005)?
Me gustan las novelas situadas en ambientes universitarios; Jill es una de ellas. Philip Larkin la escribió a los 20 años, cuando estaba Oxford. Por eso el retrato parece tan real, y a la vez tan parecido a un ajuste de cuentas. Allí vertió su inquina, eliminando cualquier atisbo de idealización. De sentimentalismo. Le echó hiel, retrató perfectamente la mediocridad, la soledad, entre las paredes de un college; estudiantes ricos que se codean con otros (nuestro protagonista), becados por su capacidad, pero colocados al otro lado de la fractura social de una Inglaterra en plena Segunda Guerra Mundial. Es una novela sin héroes, porque estos están, invisibles, en el frente. Es, dada su localización y dada las vivencias de los personajes, una "novela de aprendizaje" en la que nadie aprende nada. Y mucho menos el lector. Queda la simpatía hacia el joven estudiante, John Kemp, pero también su lejanía, la frustración ante una forma de ser y de comportarse que, aunque en determinados momentos parece brillar, acaba muriendo en sus titubeos, su servilismo y su mediocridad. En fin: un excelente paseo por el paisaje de los pequeños desastres de un personaje que no acaba de levantar el vuelo, perdido en su propio laberinto.
—Pfanner
Larkin really slammed this so I wasn't expecting much. But really, it's more skilful than he gives it credit for. Yes, it IS a bit rough -- and I do think Larkin is a better poet than novelist -- but it is really quite enjoyable. And more skilful than expected, as I've already said. I'm afraid I didn't like Kemp so much [even as I identified with him, poor soul] but that's probably a GOOD thing, not bad, and Larkin managed to tread the balance between creating someone pathetic and yet -- quite flawed. I think his poetic abilty shows through as well, and (his own) marketing of himself as a plain style poet is undermined I think, by the surreal portions of this book (also by poems like Solar, but since poems come in little bits I think it's easier to miss?). Often, I say, it's when you read the book, and I felt very sorry -- because I identified with Kemp. On the other hand, if many of the feelings ARE Larkin's, it explains why he was such a douche sometimes. I mean, I love him, but some stuff is inexcusable (just his behaviour as a person)
—Lorraine
This book was stylishly written, with some wonderfully and sharply observed passages, highlighting the snobbery and carelessness of people in social circles 'above' the protagonist, who is a new undergraduate at Oxford University in the 1940s. Some have marked the book down due to the youth of the writer (21 when he wrote this), and there are certainly aspects of the style and the subject matter that denote a younger, less experienced author (it's notable in some of the perhaps belaboured metaphors and playfulness around subject matter). I think my dislike of the novel is more to do with a personal growing distaste for the protagonist, who starts out almost unbearably and painfully shy and unsure of himself, and grows to become a bit of an ass. He seems to pick up the worst habits of his roommate and his friends, without developing any clear sense of self or purpose, and is left in a sorry state at the end of the novel, with no sense of redemption implied in the final passages. My burgeoning dislike for the protagonist (which in itself I think reflects what the author was trying to do) spoiled my pleasure in the book, so I fear I can only give it three stars for being frequently eloquent and evocative, but not to my taste plot or character-wise (it does mean I should question why I wanted John to grow - what my personal investment in the redemptive storyline is).There are a number of lovely moments - flashes of closely observed realism and painfully honest characterisation, and certainly there is a descriptive talent in the writing, an emotional truth and clarity. I only wish I had not wanted to get off the train as it sped to its terminus.
—Ineffablyschmoo
