I keep thinking about this book, so I felt compelled to write a review (by the way, continuing to think about a book after you've read it is not necessarily the sign of a good book). I think it's already pretty evident that I did not enjoy this book. As I'm at work, here are a few bullet points why.1) The characters were completely unlikeable. They were not humourous, and I could only sympathise with one of them. I think his name was Horace - I actually can't remember. So while I could sort of sympathise with him, he did not leave much of an impression. (I'm generally pretty good at remembering names). Oh I did also like that gardener bloke, mainly I think because he seemed to have a brain that worked. But not enough to leave the house of mental crazy.2) The plot was utterly and completely ridiculous. I am quite happy to suspend my disbelief, but there are limits. I understand that it was supposed to be a farce and satirical, but there are farces and there are farces. This was the latter.3) It was supposed to be funny and satirical. It was not funny and satirical. I did not laugh once. I had high hopes, we have quite a few Tom Sharpe books at home, and while I sort of expected it to be of its time (i.e. slightly 80s - though a lot of 80s humour is brilliant. And yes, I know the book was published in 2009) I thought I would still be able to laugh. I wasn't. 4) The kidnapped male in the story was 17. SEVENTEEN! Yes, he's legal to do a lot of things, but in many others way (like marrying without requiring parents permission) he's not. Yes, I know the marriage is null and void anyway as she was already married, but that is beside the point. He was abducted and then brainwashed into believing that this was ok. That's a little too Stockholm Syndrome for my liking.5) Is it not a little outdated to portray all the police as incompetent, with no emotional intelligence? The police make mistakes, they're not perfect, I would never say that they are, but the police are overworked, overstretched, poorly funded organisations, who are not the police of the 1970s and 1980s. They have progressed. 6) I like the idea that this was a book about women. (I'm sorry, I'm about to go English Literature at you, and very uncharacteristically so). Strong women in books is a good thing. I like the idea that women can control their own destiny, that they can decide who to marry, if indeed they want to marry. These women of this family, yes they were strong - but were they really? Every man that they married was one or more of the following:a) had no brain and too weak to stand up for his own rights and opinionsb) was essentially raped to produce the children requiredc) was discarded like rubbish when he didn't help produce the 'correct' childNow, none of these things sound like a progression of womens rights to me. a) If you have to marry a weak man who has no self respect, or brain, or ability to express his opinions that does not make you a strong woman. That makes you someone who is callous enough to only take advantage of those weaker than you. Yes, you can argue that men have been doing that to women throughout history, but it is not a sign of progression to reverse the roles like that. It's a sign of an inability to move on and become equal.b) Sexual assault is not acceptable at any time against any one, regardless of gender. Your desperate need to have a daughter is no excuse to justify sleeping with a man who has been drugged. That is date rape.c) Some men do discard their wives when a younger model comes along. Some men are misogynistic. Some men are complete bastards who have no respect for their wives/girlfriends/partners. Some men (Henry VIII I'm looking at you) did discard their wives if they couldn't produce the 'correctly' gendered child. However, just because history predominantly shows us that men did this (and I imagine there were a fair few women too), this does not mean that it is funny when reversed, or indeed something that should be celebrated in any way. See point a) for views on progression and how this is not it.I'm sure that Tom Sharpe meant the reversal of historical gender roles as a satirical look - an alternative to the themes running throughout history. Then again, he may not have, and just thought it was entertaining. I think if the characters and the plot hadn't been so preposterous it might have worked better. I understand the satire, I hope the satire was the point of the book otherwise this is terrible, I just didn't find it funny, and I think a little outdated.The feeling I felt after finishing? That was one of the most pointless books I've ever read. Yes, it's not really my type of book - they include death and policemen and possibly a kidnapping too. Yes, this book had all those things, but not in the way that I like them.The more I think about this book the more and more I dislike it. If I could bring myself to I would give it 2 stars for the understanding what it's trying to do. But I thought it was pants, and there are too many negatives to do that, so I'm afraid it only gets one.
Oh dear, what a shame. After the sizzling satirical and comedic brilliance of Riotous Assembly, Porterhouse Blue, The Great Pursuit and (to a lesser extent) the Wilt series, this is an awfully damp squib. Characters are hastily and hazily drawn, the plot ambles along inconsequentially and unlike almost everything else I've read by Tom Sharpe there's just no 'point' to this book. Sharpe isn't sending anything up here, he's just going through the motions. Indeed, The Gropes doesn't even have an ending. It just comes to an abrupt halt.It should perhaps have been telling that the only jacket endorsement for this book came from the Daily Express, because this is very obviously a book written by a very old man. It's perhaps unfair to criticise Sharpe on this point (after all, we all age) but this novel reminded me of the last two or three toothless Rumpole books John Mortimer published before his death: the dialogue is so out of time as to be painful, and Sharpe relies entirely on the familiar tropes of his work - large hysterical women; agitated police officers; frustrated, weak mean - to try and inject some humour into proceedings, but to no effect whatsoever. I have cried tears of laughter at Tom Sharpe's books in the past. His writing has caused my sides to ache and made me short of breath. But I managed, at best, maybe a solitary titter at The Gropes. Sharpe only published one more novel after this one before his death in 2013, The Wilt Inheritance, and if The Gropes is anything to go by, that's one novel of his I shall steer well clear of reading.
What do You think about The Gropes (2009)?
I have read many of Sharpe's novels in the past and have thoroughly enjoyed them all. This one, however, I have to admit, left me cold to say the least. Starts off in the typical Sharpe manner but after chapter two it begins a steady demise through mediocrity before coming to rest on a rushed ending. It's only saving grace for me was that it was so short. But perhaps that was its biggest flaw also, with many plot points coming in almost single sentence form. One feels like one is reading a drawn out pub joke. Unfortunately, the punch line cannot even be described as un-funny since it doesn't exist.My advice to readers; If this is your first Sharpe novel, read Wilt instead. If it is your most recent Sharpe novel........ Skip it.
—Monti
La trama è interessante, almeno all'inizio. La narrazione storica del truculento matriarcato delle Gropes è simpatica e priuttosto divertente. L'inizio quindi era decisamente promettente.Poi man mano che compaiono i veri protagonisti va tutto a rotoli e diventa una storia senza senso e senza divertimento, con continui cambi di scena e di indentità che si trascinano stancamento fino a un finale scialbo.Poi, ma perlamordiddio, il protagonista ha 17 anni, e si sposa la zia trentacinquenne, pure bigama, e nessuno, ma proprio nessuno fa una piega? E questa sarebbe una commedia divertente?Devo avere frainteso qualcosa...
—Cristina
It's been a while since I read a Tom Sharpe and I thoroughly enjoyed his latest offering. The book is both witty and humourous. A must read for those who liked the Wilt series.SynopsisIt is one of the more surprising facts about old England that one can still find families living in the same houses their ancestors built centuries before and on land that has belonged to them since before the Norman Conquest. The Gropes of Grope Hall are one such family.A brilliantly funny novel about what happens when the women take charge. The Gropes are an old English family based in Northumberland, separated from the rest of society and as eccentric as they come. It is a line dominated by strong-willed and oversexed women, determined to produce more female heirs regardless of whether their desired partners are willing or not.At the dawn of the new millennium, tired and gormless teenager Esmond is abducted and lured to Grope Hall by a descendant of the Gropes. Young Esmond is powerless to escape, and his kidnap sets in motion a stream of farcical events that will have readers laughing out loud.
—Kelly
