Perhaps there was all sorts of meaning behind the duality of the various characters – the brothers Sawyer, discovering doppelgangers of Churchill and Hess, etc – but I put down this book pretty disappointed. Priest constructs a somewhat bland frame story for this novel, and then uses all manner of historical documents to flesh it out: journals (funny how all the characters write so well and descriptively in their journals, almost like … a novel), telegraphs, excerpts from newspapers and speeches, letters, military transcripts … a lot of it done to set up some kind of internal consistency, a historicity of this world where WW2 ended differently. I followed the book through several turns, keeping the storylines of the two JD Sawyers distinct in my head, even though the author was intentionally muddying the waters. Some effort was put into characterizing Hess as a powerful, menacing villain, but for all we hear of it, it’s all talk, with little more a few strong-armed conversations. Also some care was taken to flesh out an alternate history for the war. There even seems to be two competing narratives at one point, one that lives in this alternate timeline and another that lives in "our" timeline. Again, the lines are deliberately blurred, but it doesn't matter, because in the end he does nothing with them.At least the twin brothers were characterized strongly, if not particularly well done. JD felt like the lead in a Heinlein novel about the RAF, while Joe was a morose man who seems full of courage and moral vigor at his conscientious objector hearing, but he’s slowly gnawed by doubt into a rather pathetic character. Birdgit is as flat and one dimensional a female character I have seen. There was never anything there for me to care about, for JD to long for or for Joe to love. But Priest does do a good job of conveying the daily terror, scarcity, fatigue, and difficulties of wartime. Especially seeing London after a night of bomb, from both JD’s perspective and Joe’s, was captivating. Here a strong and accurate sense of geography and history help pain the picture, and it's vivid and often the best parts of the novel.(view spoiler)[I didn’t come away from the book with any clear idea of what was the “true” narrative. Did both men die in their respective methods of wartime service, and they’re both getting one of those “how life might’ve been” moments before death, a la Jacob’s Ladder? Is the incongruity of the stories a comment on the chaos of war? If Joe never really did help Britain achieve a separate peace, then what future was the frame story set in, where the US is some hyper-isolationist police state? And if Joe’s waking dreams are ultimately false, then why are there so many red herrings that pointlessly try to legitimize it all as a real part of this alternate history? (hide spoiler)]
A good deal of alternate history focuses on wars ending differently. In The Separation, Christopher Priest also looks at a war, but in a most unusual way. Here Priest examines a pacifist alternate history and also questions history itself. Depending on your read of the book, you could argue that it is not an alternate history at all.The book starts with at a slow book signing by a British author of popular military histories. He mostly writes about the "German War," which ended in 1941 with an armistice between Britain and Germany (the unfortunate Russians thereby bear the full Nazi effort). At this point, most alternate histories would have Britain falling directly under a Nazi heel or living under a quisling class of anti-Semitic Tories. Instead, Britain is prosperous and free. Priest constructs a reasonable reason for this that reminded me quite a bit of some Niall Ferguson's ideas from the Pity of War.As the historian gets up to leave, a woman leaves a memoir that the historian is seeking . He is trying learn more about someone who appears to have been both a bomber pilot and a conscientious objector. As it turns out, the one person is two, twins, and each has a diary. Unfortunately for our historian, the stories tell very different stories of the war. In one, the war ends as it does in our world, in another it ends in 1941.(Spoilers ahead)At one point, one of the characters calls Churchill a master of the manipulation of history. The creation of history, both as actor and as interpreter, is a major theme of the book. The framing device is the use of history, the pacifist and conventional interpretations of World War 2 are set apart as separate realities. And the major characters are concerned about how they are impacting history. One interpretation of the story is that the time lines are creations that reflect the desires of the characters to validate their choices. Priest ends the book quite ambiguously, so other interpretations, including the intersection of universes are also possible. I think that Priest is also arguing that the quest to fully understand history is not possible and that interpretation and mystery will always play a part.
What do You think about The Separation (2005)?
Giving this a four stars instead of a five because it obviously deserves a re-read. As usual, Priest revels in playing with your expectations, but he does not rest simply with a trick ending for the sake of a trick ending. The book is enormously well researched (it took him four years to write, apparently), and is not a smooth, entertaining read. It forces the reader to slow down and immerse himself in the various layers of history, and its representation. And in doing so, the reader is also left vulnerable to the several cracks that emerge over the length of the novel, some of them so subtle as to avoid detection.
—Arnab
*Sigh* I had high expectations for this book, all the way through until the end. And I don't know why I didn't really care for it that much. Maybe because it was way more history than I expected. I expected a story with a history setting and strong sci fi elements, and what I got was a WWII history with some extremely mild sci fi bits. Probably not actually even any sci fi bits from how I'm interpreting what I read.It's a story of twins. Their closeness is highlighted at the beginning of the book, but as the title suggests, the two have something of a falling out. I probably wouldn't recommend this to anyone who isn't a WWII buff. Not that it was bad, but it was just boring and didn't do it for me. Maybe because I was looking for something strongly sci fi. Too bad.Rating: PG, maybe PG-13 for some violence, intense moments, and discussions of infidelity.***SPOILERS (AND VENTING) AHEAD***(view spoiler)[So the whole last half of the book was a hallucination?? And did Joe die while he was in the ambulance like we are lead to believe through the first half of the book?Why couldn't Gratton find the lady who gave him the manuscripts? It's like she didn't actually exist or something. Maybe I'm just frustrated because I'm confused. Dunno. (hide spoiler)]
—Brad
This is the first book I've read by Christopher Priest but I'll be tracking down the rest now to see if they are as good as good. There are several interwoven alternate histories spread across the Twentieth Century and (I think) it is left to the reader to decide which is "real". The story is structured around win brothers growing up immediately before the outbreak of WWII. The author has done a pretty good job at injecting a convincing air of authenticity to the events (real and imagined). The book also deals with the moral predicament of pacifism in the face of a genocidally inclined aggressor.I found the detailed accounts of the bomber crews flights and feelings particularly good. The book also raises the issue of how history is created and presented and remains a living thing always subject to the conditions under which it is created or reinterpreted. A rewarding read and one it pays to be in an alert state of mind for.
—Kriegslok
