老虎机稳赢方法

My local book group discussed this book in June 2012. Here's a summary of our discussion...

It's a masterpiece.

As is Slaves of Solitude which I have subsequently read.

I guess the lack of interest in this group is probably an indication of the extent to which Patrick Hamilton is regarded in the 21st century. It's funny how some writers lose their credibility, others retain it, and still more are rediscovered. In his day, Patrick Hamilton was a household name, and in my view his work really stands up.

His is the world of the ordinary man or woman: boarding house occupants, drinkers, con men, commuters, and (arguably) his best book, this one - Hangover Square (1941) - is an important London novel and kick started me reading many more.

What do you make of Hangover Square?

I was telling my kids about his group the other day - specifically how I am the only member and so have conversations with myself about the genius of Patrick Hamilton. They thought it was hilarious.

Nigeyb wrote: "I was telling my kids about his group the other day - specifically how I am the only member and so have conversations with myself about the genius of Patrick Hamilton. They thought it was hilarious."

But now they'll be laughing on the other sides of their faces - three members! Welcome Val and Susan.

In today's Times Saturday Review, in the Summer Books feature, "writers choose a new book for the beach and an old favourite for the bottom of the suitcase". Rachel Joyce's old favourite is Hangover Square, "Lonely George pursues the amoral, would-be actress Netta to the point where his obsession becomes destructive. Depicting a pre-war world of bedsits , teahouses, theatres and cheap hotels, this is a brilluant, dark, tender book and it's impossible to put down."

Thanks David. I think Rachel's nailed it. The only part I'd question is "tender". I'm going to reread it in the Autumn so will bear that particular interpretation in mind.

I first arrived at Patrick Hamilton, in general, and 'Hangover Square' in particular, via 'Of Love & Hunger' by Julian MacLaren-Ross. If you're a fan of Hamilton's, and have not read Maclaren-Ross, I can recommend 'Of Love & Hunger' with supreme confidence. Further, 'Fear & Loathing in Fitzrovia' -- Paul Willetts' biography on Maclaren-Ross -- is brilliant and wholly engaging.

Mark wrote: "I first arrived at Patrick Hamilton, in general, and 'Hangover Square' in particular, via 'Of Love & Hunger' by Julian MacLaren-Ross. If you're a fan of Hamilton's, and have not read Maclaren-Ross, I can recommend 'Of Love & Hunger' with supreme confidence. Further, 'Fear & Loathing in Fitzrovia' -- Paul Willetts' biography on Maclaren-Ross -- is brilliant and wholly engaging. "

Thanks Mark. I came to Julian Maclaren-Ross via Patrick Hamilton - so did your route in reverse.

I completely agree about both Of Love and Hunger and Fear and Loathing in Fitzrovia by Paul Willetts. Both are well worth reading.

You've inspired me to set up THIS THREAD dedicated to Julian Maclaren-Ross.

It's in a new folder called "Hamilton-esque books and authors" where you can recommend other books and authors who you feel share some of Patrick Hamilton's qualities, or that you just find interesting and can see parallels. It might just be a book from the same era; or books that celebrate London; Brighton & Hove; England; the 1930s or 1940s; pub culture; and so on. I'm sure you get the idea.

Nice one! I'll head over to the new thread and post some recommendations along the lines of Patrick Hamilton. Get ready to irresponsibly mis-direct a sizable chunk of rent-money...

I'll also add here that all three Paul Willetts books are fantastic. I've never been one for non-fiction, particularly as they tend to be written by people who can't write. Willetts, though, is another beast entirely -- I'll read anything by him, just on the strength of his writing and his ability to grip and hold and fascinate. As an example, I bought his latest, 'Members Only: The Life & Times of Paul Raymond' without a clue as to who Raymond was. He's just never been a household name in the states. But I bought it on the strength of Willetts' talents, and was instantly pulled in and engaged.

Mark wrote: "Nice one! I'll head over to the new thread and post some recommendations along the lines of Patrick Hamilton. Get ready to irresponsibly mis-direct a sizable chunk of rent-money..."

That's the spirit Mark. I look forward to denying my landlord rent money.

Mark wrote: "I'll also add here that all three Paul Willetts books are fantastic."

I have North Soho 999: A True Story of Gangs and Gun-Crime in 1940s London on my shelf, which I bought on the strength of Fear and Loathing in Fitzrovia. I really must read it - so many books and so little time.

Mark wrote: "I'll read anything by him, just on the strength of his writing and his ability to grip and hold and fascinate. As an example, I bought his latest, 'Members Only: The Life & Times of Paul Raymond' without a clue as to who Raymond was. He's just never been a household name in the states. But I bought it on the strength of Willetts' talents, and was instantly pulled in and engaged. "

Thanks Mark, I'll have a look at the Raymond one. I used to walk past his Raymond Review Bar every day in the late 1970s. He was very famous in Britain during that era. I've heard mixed reports about the recent film that stars Steve Coogan. I wonder if Willetts had any involvement in the film?

Nigeyb wrote: " I wonder if Willetts had any involvement in the film? "

That's a resounding yes.

And if you can't be bothered to click....

I spoke to Paul Willetts who wrote the book, Members Only: the Life and Times of Paul Raymond, on which the film is based, and was a consultant on the script, about the project. He explained that the book had an interesting genesis that started when he accessed a Scotland Yard file about a bizarre episode in Raymond鈥檚 life when he was terrorised by a purported IRA plot to extort money from him, and the perpetrator turned out to be a chancer painter and decorator. The tragi-comedy aspect of this incident, and his life in general, had Willetts hooked and he was drawn into Raymond鈥檚 world, from the seedier end of variety in the 1950s to becoming the richest man in Britain in the 1990s.

Follow the link above for plenty more.

I read Paul Willet's Paul Raymond book as a sort of consolation for not being able to get his Julian Maclaren Ross Book! I thought it was well-researched and very well written. I must have another go at getting hold of the JMR biog.

Fionaonaona wrote: "I must have another go at getting hold of the JMR biog. "

There's a copy in Hove Library - the very copy that I read. I notice you're based in Kent. According to the Brighton and Hove Library website, Kent Libraries participate in the SELMS partnership which means, if you're a member of a Kent Library, you should be able to borrow it. There is charge of 拢3 per item. I hope that helps.

Thanks, have ordered Of Love and Hunger and Fear and Loathing in Fitz.

Hurrah. I look forward to your thoughts on both.

It's about time we stimulated some more discussion about Hangover Square by Patrick Hamilton. So I have set it up as a Group Read for September 2013. If you've never read it then this a great time to read it. If you have read it then how about a reread in September 2013?

It's quite dark but, in my opinion, absolutely brilliant, and probably my favourite book of the twentieth century.



Here's some more information:

Hangover Square is a 1941 novel by English playwright and novelist Patrick Hamilton (1904鈥�1962). Subtitled A tale of Darkest Earl's Court it is set in that area of London in 1939. A black comedy, it is often cited as Hamilton's finest novel, exemplifying the author's concerns over social inequalities, the rise of Fascism and the hovering doom of World War II.

I'm due to re-read in September! I have bought this book as a gift for a few of my friends and one thinks it is one of the greatest books of all time! He visited Brighton earlier this year and retraced George's steps by walking to portslade! I've just returned from a week in brighton ready for a re-read and stocked up with some early twentieth century classics!

Jamie wrote: "'m due to re-read in September!"

Hurrah.

Jamie wrote: "'I have bought this book as a gift for a few of my friends and one thinks it is one of the greatest books of all time! He visited Brighton earlier this year and retraced George's steps by walking to portslade!"

Wow. Hats off to your friend.

Jamie wrote: "'I've just returned from a week in brighton ready for a re-read and stocked up with some early twentieth century classics! "

Excellent. What have you got?

Here's a few thoughts on Hangover Square - our September 2013 Hamilton choice.

*This posting does contain spoilers*

"Hangover Square" was written and published at the peak of Patrick Hamilton's fame which - was considerable. Like all Patrick Hamilton's novels, the story is in part inspired by incidents from Patrick Hamilton's life. Like the protagonist and narrator George Harvey Bone, Hamilton's life was becoming saturated in alcohol; and like Bone he too was obsessed by an unattainable woman, in Hamilton's case she was actress Geraldine Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald is the inspiration for Netta, and in a sense this book could be Hamilton's revenge on her given the unflattering portrait ("She was completely, indeed sinisterly devoid of all those qualities which her face and body externally proclaimed her to have - pensiveness, grace, warmth, agility, beauty ... Her thoughts resembled those of a fish..").

Where the book really succeeded for me was in its evocation of London as war looms. The book was written under the shadow of the seemingly unstoppable advance of Germany and Nazism. The novel searches for a human metaphor to express the sickness that Patrick Hamilton perceived in this period. As a Marxist he identified the petty bourgeoisie from which Netta and Peter had sprung as the enemy. Peter, and the stranger who comes down to Brighton with Netta and Peter, are both fascists. The spectre of the forthcoming war, and discussions of fascism, and nods towards contemporary cinema (e.g going to the cinema to see a Tarzan film with Johnny Weismuller and Maureen O'Sullivan on the day Germany invade Poland) all added to the book's magic, the book being full of such wonderful period detail.

I really enjoy good quality London fiction and continue to mine this rich literary seam. I think Hangover Square is right up there with the best London fiction. As the back of my edition accurately states "you can almost smell the gin". By the end of the book I felt I'd been in and out of a succession of smoky, shabby Earls Court boozers with George and his unsavoury companions. Netta, the book's femme fatale, is a wonderful fictional creation - beguiling but also totally self-serving.

The perspectives from various different characters also enriched my reading experience. Even a very minor character such as the young man Bone meets towards the end gives an illuminating and detached perspective of George and his companions.

I think it's also a very moving book. The reader quickly understands that George has to forget Netta and move on. George knows it too and yet he just can't escape her. A true lost soul. I felt almost as happy as George after his successful round of golf in Brighton that gaves him a glimpse of how life could be away from Netta and her boozy coterie.

It ends in the only way it could. All said, I think it's a masterpiece and Patrick Hamilton's finest book.

Nigeyb wrote: "All said, I think it's a masterpiece and Patrick Hamilton's finest book. "

What about my fellow TPHSers? Any other thoughts? I know a couple of you planned to read it during September. Or how about those that have also read it?

*Contains more 贬补苍驳辞惫别谤听厂辩耻补谤别 spoilers*

. Writer Simon Goulding states that 贬补苍驳辞惫别谤听厂辩耻补谤别 can be read as a requiem聽for the 1930s. The deaths of Bone, Netta and Peter are the necessary聽apocalypse to聽conclude a decade in which much was hoped for and little was achieved.

It is the last of聽笔补迟谤颈肠办听贬补尘颈濒迟辞苍鈥檚 novels聽with a wholly pessimistic ending; his remaining novels would attempt to聽find some positive summation for the lives of聽those involved in their narrative.

Whilst writing聽贬补苍驳辞惫别谤听厂辩耻补谤别, 笔补迟谤颈肠办听贬补尘颈濒迟辞苍 witnessed the fall of France, the聽Battle of Britain and the start of the聽Blitz. It is a novel written during one of the bleakest periods of聽British history.

There is a streak of dark聽humour in the novel鈥檚聽climax, when Bone at last murders Netta and Peter. John Branston, in an article for聽the聽Morning Star, noted that: 鈥渢he drunken double killer who, hell bent on revenge, is not聽too drunk to be too clever for the聽man and woman he plans to annihilate鈥� is also killing a pair of Fascists. As he puts an end to the lives聽of Netta and Peter, the聽radio is broadcasting Chamberlain鈥檚 declaration of war. The juxtaposition invites readers to聽question聽whether, in killing these two fascists, Bone is really mad? Is the murder of Peter聽and Netta justified because of their聽political inclinations, and the way that they have treated聽Bone throughout the text? Or is the act of killing in any form聽morally wrong? Do readers at聽this point lose sympathy for Bone, or are they too involved in the consciousness of this now聽tragic figure to be able to disassociate themselves from him?

Writing in 1941,聽from the perspective of two years聽of war, 笔补迟谤颈肠办听贬补尘颈濒迟辞苍 wanted readers to assess their own聽feelings, and to bring reason, as well as empathy, into their聽responses. They might聽sympathise with Bone and his individual act, but they might also see him as a selfish figure,聽killing聽to satisfy some private instinct when the community would have been well served by聽the elimination of an ideology that聽was destroying Europe.

There鈥檚 lot more interesting ideas and information in the article. What do you make of it?

Here鈥檚 a few more discussion questions inspired by the article:

To what extent do you regard Hangover Square as a thriller?

What do you make of the聽"click" in聽George Harvey聽Bone's聽head as a literary device?

To what extent did did you believe that Netta was always going to die? 聽How did you feel about this?

What is the significance of Earls Court as a location for much of the novel (given its lack of any identifying aspects)?

To what extent does the blankness of the Earls Court streets reflect the void of the聽character鈥檚 lives?

Is getting drunk a way of聽coping with Earls Court?

Or does聽Earls Court simply attract damaged characters such as聽Netta, Peter and George?

Great cover in that photo Nigel. Is that your copy?

Nina wrote: "Great cover in that photo Nigel. Is that your copy?"

Sadly not. Just one I came across online.

Nigeyb wrote: "Nina wrote: "Great cover in that photo Nigel. Is that your copy?"

Sadly not. Just one I came across online."

yes... thought it smacked of first edition! As a side point, last summer I discovered some first editions, including Ian Flemming, at my husband's parents 'holiday home' (I know!) 鈥� loads of circa mid 50s books. Not Hamilton, though, sadly.

It's rare for me to find a character such as Netta who is so disgusting and loathsome, yet so enjoyable. So, hats off to Netta for achieving that.

What do you make of the "click" in George Harvey Bone's head as a literary device?

I'll confess to finding it a bit lame. But it served its clumsy purpose.

I found myself wondering about Earls Court - what is it like today? Is it completely gentrified, so that as a setting it seems a little anachronistic?

How I came to the book: it was recommended by B.R. Myers in A Reader's Manifesto: An Attack on the Growing Pretentiousness in American Literary Prose. (I highly recommend that book as well, which began life as a long magazine article.)

Somewhere there ought to be a list of total sadsack losers who fall head over heels for the unattainable, manipulative bitch - sometimes far above them in social class or status, sometimes gold-diggers. I just finished reading An American Tragedy and its protagonist Clyde Griffiths is a loser with no backbone who can't resist these types of women.

A wonderful set of observations and info Lobstergirl. I'm on my phone now, so will post a more fulsome response tomorrow.

One point though, the last time I was in Earls Court it was resolutely ungentrified and still very transient, anonymous and indistinct. Pretty much as it was in 1939.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Somewhere there ought to be a list of total sadsack losers who fall head over heels for the unattainable, manipulative bitch - sometimes far above them in social class or status, sometimes gold-diggers. I just finished reading An American Tragedy and its protagonist Clyde Griffiths is a loser with no backbone who can't resist these types of women."

"...total sadsack losers" - what a wonderful phrase.

The scenario you describe - falling head over heels for the unattainable, manipulative bitch is - of course, an archetype of literature and art, and at the heart of so much film noir: the manipulative and mysterious femme fatale whose charms ensnare men often leading them into compromising, dangerous, or deadly situations.

Unusually Netta does not possess the standard femme fatale qualities. All she has are looks...

"She was completely, indeed sinisterly devoid of all those qualities which her face and body externally proclaimed her to have - pensiveness, grace, warmth, agility, beauty ... Her thoughts resembled those of a fish."

Eddie Carstairs sees right through Netta in an instant

Like Bone, Patrick Hamilton was obsessed by an unattainable woman, in Hamilton's case she was actress Geraldine Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald is the inspiration for Netta and in a sense could be Hamilton's revenge on her given the unflattering portrait.

Apropos of nothing discussed so far, I went through Maidenhead the other day. Maidenhead which of course represents traditional Englishness (and in stark contrast to Earls Court) for George, and the promise of a new beginning. Even in 2013, it is actually very non-descript and boring, and just the sort of place that might inspire suicide.

What do you make of the "click" in George Harvey Bone's head as a literary device?

Lobstergirl wrote: "I'll confess to finding it a bit lame. But it served its clumsy purpose."

Yes, I suppose so, although part of me thinks it was quite innovative too. I recently read Impromptu In Moribundia, which is Patrick Hamilton's most experimental novel, and I wonder if a bit of that experimentation carried on to this book.

"It was a noise inside his head, and yet it was not a noise. It was the sound which a noise makes when it abruptly ceases: it had a temporary deafening effect. It was as though one had blown one鈥檚 nose too hard and the outer world had suddenly become dim and dead. And yet he was not physically deaf: it was merely that in this physical way alone could he think of what had happened in his head."

This disorientation and dislocation might also be said to set up the framework for the rest of the book. Even when George is not in one of his "dead moods" he is still unconsciously drifting through his life being played by Netta and the gang. By being so closely aligned to George's thoughts, including the "dead moods", the reader becomes complicit in his murderous desires, perhaps even wanting it to happen? In a sense Hangover Square subverts our notions of the thriller genre and good and evil characters. George is doomed either way - whether he stays peaceful and submissive, or yields to violence - as in so many noir stories.

To what extent did did you believe that Netta was always going to die? How did you feel about this?

I suppose I felt she was going to from the very beginning, because we know that George is on a mission to kill her. But one of the strengths of the novel is that this in no way really dissipates the tension - it remains unputdownable, to use a word I hate.

To what extent did you believe that Netta was always going to die? How did you feel about this?

Lobstergirl wrote: "I suppose I felt she was going to from the very beginning, because we know that George is on a mission to kill her. But one of the strengths of the novel is that this in no way really dissipates the tension - it remains unputdownable, to use a word I hate."

Thanks Lobstergirl (I always enjoy typing Lobstergirl - genius name by the way). Having posed the question, I can now no longer remember whether, like you, I saw her death as inevitable. I think I must have done. It's made very clear during his "dead moods" that he must murder Netta. And, as you say, this knowledge does not dissipate the tension. With that in mind, here's one of the other questions from the list, and my answer:

To what extent do you regard Hangover Square as a thriller?

As Lobstergirl states, Hangover Square is a tense read. It is also a crime novel in so far as there's the impending prospect of a crime at the novel's heart. That's what makes the novel tense, that and the way Hamilton made me empathise with George Harvey Bone. Despite being an unemployed drunkard who lives off his savings, and the money of his Aunt, he has known misfortune having lost his sister in an accident, and most of the people who cared about him have disappeared from his life. He's slipping through the cracks, to use a modern phrase.

Hamilton had me feeling very sorry for George and his desperate situation. I suspect most readers root for George. We want him to walk away. We want him to forget about Netta and leave her and Peter to their own fate - which is likely to be pretty hellish anyway. To help promote the idea of salvation in the reader's mind, Hamilton uses Johnnie Littlejohn - George's childhood friend.

Johnnie Littlejohn is a kind man who, like the reader, wants to help George. I'd say Johnnie is also the conscience of the book and the antithesis of Netta. Unlike the fascistic Netta and Peter, Johnnie embodies kindness, hope and decency - and offers an escape route for George. But will George take that escape route? The very real possibility of salvation makes this book even more of a thriller. The possibility of salvation accompanying the sense of impending doom. Which road will George take?

The reader is given glimpses of how life could be for George, for example the simple pleasure of a round of golf in Brighton when George is outside, and away from pubs and alcohol, and his unsavoury companions. Or the party after the theatre visit in Brighton when George mingles with the theatrical great and good, Netta having been cast aside by Eddie who sees straight through her. Another moment when George glimpses an alternative life, one where people accept him for who he is and not what he can provide.

Despite these glimpses of an alternative happy and fulfilled life, George's "dead moods" get progressively more intense (and presumably the "dead moods" are a form schizophrenia). George's plot to murder Netta feel justified given her conduct and treatment of George. This is another way the book is so clever and powerful, Hamilton implicates the reader in George's murderous desires. Netta and Peter deserve what's coming to them. This subverts the thriller genre which normally requires the reader to side with the victim.

So, yes it's a thriller, but a very unusual, nuanced and clever thriller.

What do you think?

I'm not one of those readers who disparages genre novels (usually, anyway), so it doesn't bother me if it's a thriller or if people want to consider it one. But it's also a literary novel, clearly.

Because An American Tragedy is so fresh in my mind, unavoidable comparisons keep popping up. Obviously a very different kind of novel, but. And AAT is in no way a thriller.

But it's interesting how, in the middle of this very realistic, naturalistic novel (AAT), Dreiser suddenly (at the scene of the crime) inserts something supernatural, an "efrit" - a sort of devilish imp who is communicating with the protagonist, Clyde Griffiths. Some critics have said Dreiser was heavily influenced by Poe in the writing of that particular section. This could be compared to George's "dead moods"/the clicks in his head.

I have been trying to stay away from this thread until I finished reading the book (and failing, since I have a couple of Parts left to read).

To what extent do you regard Hangover Square as a thriller?
I think Hamilton uses some of the structure of a thriller: a potential murderer as protagonist, dramatic tension wondering when, how and if he will do it, whether he will get away with it, etc. The main focus of the story is on what is going on in George's head, rather than the thriller storyline itself.

What do you make of the "click" in George Harvey Bone's head as a literary device?
It works in the context of the book, although it probably is not an accurate representation of schizophrenia. George thinks and feels differently in his 'dead' periods, although he is in fact more logical, lucid and capable of planning than in his 'normal' periods. He uses 'dead' to describe them, but in some ways he is more alive and more confident, although is emotions are deadened perhaps. It is then he thinks of murder, of others being dead.

To what extent did did you believe that Netta was always going to die? How did you feel about this?
I thought that George might actually kill her quite early, but only thought it inevitable once he failed to break away from her when he had the chance. I felt rather more sorry for George than I did for Netta, she is a most unattractive woman, apart from her looks.

What is the significance of Earls Court as a location for much of the novel (given its lack of any identifying aspects)?
Even in the late '70s, when I lived in London, it was a dreary area, with transient residents, boarded-up, run-down buildings or cheap bedsits, rats, feral cats, dodgy landlords and the like. I could recognise Hamilton's Earls Court.

To what extent does the blankness of the Earls Court streets reflect the void of the character鈥檚 lives?
Their lives are dreary and transient, so the location fits. Hamilton is very good at both location and characters, and at matching the two, so I think it would have worked wherever in London he decided to set the book.

Is getting drunk a way of coping with Earls Court?
It is a way of surviving a dreary life, I suppose, but the characters don't really enjoy drinking, the social camaraderie of the pub culture present in Twenty Thousand Streets Under The Sky is missing in Hangover Square.

Or does Earls Court simply attract damaged characters such as Netta, Peter and George?
None of them have much money and what they do have is to buy drink and 'smokes', so it the cheapness of Earls Court which attracts them. They would prefer to live somewhere else, but get stuck in dreary Earls Court, dreary lives and dreary pubs.

Thanks so much for your responses.

I really enjoyed reading your thoughts - which chime with my own. I'll write a more fulsome response next week but for now I just wanted to say "Thanks Val".

I'm also very curious to know how you rate it once you've finished it - and, if you can be bothered, how you would compare and contrast it with The Slaves of Solitude?

Nigeyb wrote: "Thanks so much for your responses.

I'm also very curious to know how you rate it once you've finished it - and, if you can be bothered, how you would compare and contrast it with The Slaves of Solitude?"

It will be another five stars.
I think Hangover Square is the more accomplished book, but I actually enjoyed The Slaves of Solitude more, because of the dark humour. I will get around to reviewing it some time.

Lobstergirl wrote: "I'm not one of those readers who disparages genre novels (usually, anyway), so it doesn't bother me if it's a thriller or if people want to consider it one. But it's also a literary novel, clearly."

Absolutely.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Because An American Tragedy is so fresh in my mind, unavoidable comparisons keep popping up. Obviously a very different kind of novel, but. And AAT is in no way a thriller."

I don't know An American Tragedy. Should I read it?

Lobstergirl wrote: "But it's interesting how, in the middle of this very realistic, naturalistic novel (An American Tragedy), Dreiser suddenly (at the scene of the crime) inserts something supernatural, an "efrit" - a sort of devilish imp who is communicating with the protagonist, Clyde Griffiths. Some critics have said Dreiser was heavily influenced by Poe in the writing of that particular section. This could be compared to George's "dead moods"/the clicks in his head. "

Yes. I see that.

To what extent do you regard Hangover Square as a thriller?

Val wrote: "I think Hamilton uses some of the structure of a thriller: a potential murderer as protagonist, dramatic tension wondering when, how and if he will do it, whether he will get away with it, etc. The main focus of the story is on what is going on in George's head, rather than the thriller storyline itself."

I think that's a good summary. Do thrillers always have to have evil or bad characters? I'm no expert on the genre. If so, then I think we have to recognise the monstrous characters Patrick Hamilton created in Hangover Square. Even a completely sane person might struggle to suppress their murderous impulses in the company of the dreadful Netta and her Blackshirt consort, particularly after the Brighton debacle George thinks he is going to enjoy a romantic visit however Netta shows up drunk with Peter and the other man they've picked up, "a nasty-looking piece of work short". The get progressively more drunk, Peter affirming his admiration for Chamberlain and Hitler, before Netta sleeps with the unnamed thug within earshot of George's bedroom. The next morning all three have been ejected from the hotel leaving him with the bill.

More thoughts to follow. Thanks again Val. A wonderful set of responses.

Val wrote: "Hangover Square will be another five stars."

Hurrah.

Val wrote: "I think Hangover Square is the more accomplished book, but I actually enjoyed Hangover Square more, because of the dark humour. I will get around to reviewing it some time. "

I agree that The Slaves of Solitude is the more enjoyable book. Both are wonderful. I have a slight preference for Hangover Square

What is the significance of Earls Court as a location for much of the novel (given its lack of any identifying aspects)?

Val wrote: "Even in the late '70s, when I lived in London, it was a dreary area, with transient residents, boarded-up, run-down buildings or cheap bedsits, rats, feral cats, dodgy landlords and the like. I could recognise Hamilton's Earls Court."

That's even worse than my own more hazy recollections. I've only been there a few times and not for some time. There really is no reason to visit unless you're going to, say, The Ideal Home Exhibition, or similar. I did once see David Bowie play there - in 1979 or 1980.

Hangover Square is also, of course, subtitled "A Tale of Darkest Earls Court". After mulling over this question, I've concluded that the choice of Earls Court is highly significant - especially given Val's description above.

Why would anyone choose to live there or visit? It's a place to avoid. It's a place to escape from.

That George, Netta and Peter continue to live there signals to the reader the extent to which they have given up on life. They are drained of all ambition, save that of the distraction of the next opening time.

On the few occasions that George escapes from Earls Court, and all its unsavoury ingredients (to the peace of Brighton, or to the West End) he is incapable of staying away. It's as if Earls Court and Netta are a magnet that pulls him back, and then, once back, it's straight back to the familiar drunken haze. That said, Netta seems to dislike her relative poverty and seeks an easy escape route via Eddie Carstairs.

I have also realised that Earls Court has a dreadful association for Patrick Hamilton. It was in Logan Place, off Earls Court Road, in early 1932, that Patrick Hamilton was struck by a car driven by a drunk driver. The accident left Patrick Hamilton severely disfigured, and precipitated his descent into the alcoholism which he would so memorably depict in Hangover Square.

I have also read that he wrote Hangover Square in Earls Court, indeed in the exact spot George Harvey Bone stands and stares at the windows of Netta's rooms.

And Peter, the loathsome fascist, and Netta's beau, also connects both the potential evils of motorcars, and yet another reference to Earls Court.

Peter has a jail record, from Hangover Square:

"I have been in jail twice, to be precise," said Peter, lighting another cigarette, and suddenly employing a large, pompous professorial tone. "On one occasion for socking a certain left-winger a precise and well deserved sock in the middle of his solar plexus, and on the other for a minor spot of homicide with a motor-car鈥�"

So we know Peter is, or was, a member of the British Union of Fascists (aka the BUF - the fascist organisation founded by Sir Oswald Mosley in 1932). The BUF held two major political rallies: one in 1934 at Olympia and the other, in July 1939, at the Earls Court Arena. At the Earls Court event the BUF used spotlights to identify anti-fascists who would be beaten up in the arena, or taken outside and beaten. Peter perfectly fits the model of the British fascist with his acceptance of violence. He is also used by Patrick Hamilton to, in passing, reiterate his concerns about the dangers of motorcars (and perhaps specifically his own accident in Earls Court).

Returning to Earls Court more generally, it is about a ten minute walk from George's Earls Court hotel to Netta's flat. Perhaps the area's relative intimacy is also a factor in Patrick Hamilton choosing to locate the novel in this part of London. The blankness of the Earls Court streets is also reflected in the blankness of the novel's characters. Getting drunk seems to be a way of coping with Earls Court but it may also be that damaged characters are attracted to the area too.

What do you think?

Nigeyb wrote: "I don't know An American Tragedy. Should I read it?"

Well....it's very long. (800-850 pp?) Maybe read the first 100-150 pages and see if it grabs you.

I wanted to get it under my belt because I hadn't read any Dreiser, he was a significant American novelist of the 20th century, and I figured it would hold my interest because it's rooted in a true crime story.

Of course, my opinion is that everyone should read everything. Feel free to disregard that though.

It's always interesting what you remember from novels and what you forget. I had already forgotten about the Fascist stuff.

Lobstergirl wrote: "It's always interesting what you remember from novels and what you forget."

I agree. I'm also curious about how people can react so differently to the same work. We perceive things through so many filters.

Lobstergirl wrote: "I had already forgotten about the Fascist stuff."

The book was written, with war looming, and under the shadow of the seemingly unstoppable advance of Germany and Nazism. For me, this is part of what makes the book so successful (in much the same way as The Slaves of Solitude evokes the World War II years - the war at the Rosamund Tea Rooms mirroring the broader global conflict).

As I mention elsewhere, Patrick Hamilton searches for a human metaphor to express the sickness he perceived during this period. As a Marxist he identified the petty bourgeoisie from which Netta and Peter had sprung as the enemy. It's easy for modern readers not to fully understand, at least up until Germany invaded Poland, that some people were openly supportive of the Nazis, and more broadly plenty of people who supported appeasement. Expressing it as "a sickness" is quite apt. It's not necessarily obvious from the early symptoms how serious the sickness will become.

Lobstergirl wrote: "An American Tragedy? Well....it's very long. (800-850 pp?) "

That's a biggie. I'm currently wrestling with the 750 page
Decca: The Letters of Jessica Mitford. It's daunting but illuminating. What a family! Jessica was a member of the American Communist Party during the 40s and 50s. Brave and courageous woman.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Of course, my opinion is that everyone should read everything. Feel free to disregard that though. "

I can get behind that. I wish I could read everything.

Returning to some more of Val's excellent responses.....

Is getting drunk a way of coping with Earls Court?

Val wrote: "It is a way of surviving a dreary life, I suppose"

I agree. Indeed I think it's probably a step beyond survival. George Harvey Bone's drinking is a sign of the extent to which he has given up on life. As Val states...

Val wrote: "...the characters don't really enjoy drinking, the social camaraderie of the pub culture present in Twenty Thousand Streets Under The Sky is missing in Hangover Square."

Yes, it is just what they do. It's better than, in George's case, spending all day in his hotel, or for Netta it's an escape from her bedsit.

By the by, here are a couple of photos that I took in May 2012, that show a recreation of Netta's bedsit, after the climactic crime scene by artist, as imagined by Anna Deamer, and to mark the 50th anniversary of Patrick Hamilton's death....




Or does Earls Court simply attract damaged characters such as Netta, Peter and George?

Val wrote: "None of them have much money and what they do have is to buy drink and 'smokes', so it the cheapness of Earls Court which attracts them. They would prefer to live somewhere else, but get stuck in dreary Earls Court, dreary lives and dreary pubs."

As I state above, I am not sure that they would prefer to live somewhere else. That George, Netta and Peter continue to live there signals to the reader the extent to which they have given up on life. They are drained of all ambition, save that of the distraction of the next opening time.

That said, Netta seems to dislike her relative poverty and seeks an easy escape route via Eddie Carstairs, using George as a way of trying to further this ambition.

Changing tack, here's some more photos. This time of George Harvey Bone's Brighton hotel room, as imagined by Anna Deamer, and where George so memorably heard Netta and her companion through the walls...

a recreation of Netta's bedsit
George Harvey Bone's Brighton hotel room

Very well done. (Brown wallpaper? Who thought that would look good? It could work if everything else in the room were white, but everything else in the room is also brown.)

If you read Murder in Mind you will also enjoy when the protagonist visits the woman he thinks of as his girlfriend, or at least someone he dated, in her flat, and how messy it is.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Very well done."

Agreed. It's a great evocation.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Brown wallpaper? Who thought that would look good? It could work if everything else in the room were white, but everything else in the room is also brown."

Absolutely. Things weren't that different when I was growing up in the seventies. Loads of brown. Progress and fashion dictated that purple and orange also got thrown in the mix.

By the way, in this photo..

...the woman on the front of Film Weekly magazine is actress Geraldine Fitzgerald. Hamilton became obsessed by her - stalked her basically - telephoning and hanging around outside her flat. Her unattainably was mirrored in Bone's relationship with Netta. Geraldine Fitzgerald was the basis for Netta, and in a sense this book could be Hamilton's revenge on her given the unflattering portrait.

Lobstergirl wrote: "If you read Murder in Mind you will also enjoy when the protagonist visits the woman he thinks of as his girlfriend, or at least someone he dated, in her flat, and how messy it is. "

I look forward to it.

I just want to hire someone to refinish that floor. It's so....barnlike.

When I read Hangover Square by Patrick Hamilton with my real world book group in June 2012, I created a musical mix to accompany the book. The mix contained music that is either from the era, or sounds as though it could be, and also includes other contemporaneous sounds and samples (the abdication speech, declaration of war etc.).

You can listen to it

I lived and worked in Earl's Court in the early nineties and worked in a number of pubs in London. This book brought back vivid memories of the streets, flats and atmosphere of Earl's Court Since I am very familiar with the streets and abodes, it was relatively easy for me to imagine the characters sojourns through the pubs and streets. It did not have a seedy atmosphere when I was there, if anything its ambience seemed rather colourless and plain.

Hangover Square has a very naturalised feel and the dialogue seems totally authentic. The characters remind me so much of some of the lonely patrons I met that frequented the pubs I worked in. Wonderful book

Thanks for your thoughts Martin.

Martin wrote: "I lived and worked in Earl's Court in the early nineties and worked in a number of pubs in London. This book brought back vivid memories of the streets, flats and atmosphere of Earl's Court Since I am very familiar with the streets and abodes, it was relatively easy for me to imagine the characters sojourns through the pubs and streets."

I don't really know Earls Court (should there be an apostrophe? Seems to be two schools of thought on that one) very well. However I do know Euston, Fitzrovia and Soho very well having worked in those places, and I am getting a similar feeling of recognition from Twenty Thousand Streets Under The Sky.

Martin wrote: "It did not have a seedy atmosphere when I was there, if anything its ambience seemed rather colourless and plain."

That's interesting. I think most thriving cities are becoming blander as property prices drive out the artists, mavericks, small independent businesses and bohemians. I was stunned by the change in New York from my first visit in the mid 1980s and my second in the late 1990s. The same certainly applies to Fitzrovia and Soho, although both retain clear traces of their history and heritage. It's what makes writers like Patrick Hamilton so special, as it is all so clearly accurate and, is in a sense, as much social document as it is literature.

Martin wrote: "Hangover Square has a very naturalised feel and the dialogue seems totally authentic. The characters remind me so much of some of the lonely patrons I met that frequented the pubs I worked in."

I couldn't agree more. For me, this is what makes Patrick Hamilton such an enduring writer: his ability to nail the dialogue, mood and idiosyncrasies of pubs, boarding houses etc. which is clearly borne out of his talent for observation and his skill as a writer. Absolutely wonderful. Every time I go back to his work this still surprises and delights me. At the moment I am reading The Plains of Cement, the third part of the Twenty Thousand Streets Under The Sky trilogy and not only does he, yet again, nail the pub atmosphere, he also wonderfully evokes the thought processes and anxieties of the barmaid Ella who is highly perceptive but also concerned about the agenda of Mr Thwaites. It's an absolute delight - if quite painful and sad at times.

Martin wrote: "Wonderful book."

One of the best.