Sacred Tears by Rod Grigson

Sacred Tears by Rod Grigson

(Authorhouse, 2013)

Having the opportunity of reading a draft of a book that has not yet been published means you are conscious of reading in two different ways – firstly, as a draft, weighing it up and seeing what is good and what could be improved; and secondly, as a book, in terms of plot, characters, style, etc. You realize what hard work it is to write a whole book! Just to do all that writing, and keep all the different elements of the plot in one’s head at the same time!

Descriptions

The descriptions are really striking and in many ways better than the action. Especially the food – the tea, the roti, etc. The author would certainly also make a good restaurant critic!

Characters

All the characters spoke in exactly the same way. Nadim, Samir, David…, all have the same voice. The women in particular, Priyani, Danika, and the others, are all exactly the same, there is nothing to tell them apart. Yet they are supposed to be from different backgrounds and cultures. Also, when they meet, they just make friends, carry on as if they’ve known and trusted each other all their lives, and that’s the end of the story. Very unrealistic indeed. Plus David and Priyani falling in love, Samir and Danika… both couples made for each other, all settled in no time, no kind of development.

Publishing

Most of us came to the conclusion that the book is so long, and gives such vivid pictures of some episodes, that it would actually make a good film – in fact a better film than book, in many ways.

Plot

Good story. Completely convincing (unlike The Olive Grove or The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society) – this is someone who really does seem to have experienced what he is writing about first hand, both David’s life in Sri Lanka and Sami’s guerrilla fighting in Beirut and Sri Lanka. From the problems and the way they tackle them, right down to Asilin’s coconut-scraper (which almost all of us picked on for special note!).

Style

A lot of the book reads very well, but many other parts of it are very badly written. It needs a thorough re-write (sorry!) for punctuation and grammar, which is often poor (particularly the absence of commas), and, even more importantly, for the very amateur-sounding explanatory sentences and clauses right the way through. Not the fact that sentences are almost always short and simple, or the frequency of one-sentence paragraphs, in the actual narrative: those are the way this kind of book should be written, because they convey the protagonists’ level of thought effectively. The parts that need re-writing are the sort of sentence that occurs on virtually every page, that suddenly bring the movement of the narrative to a grinding halt – to take one example completely at random:

David looked across at the Colonel waiting for permission to speak. The Colonel nodded his head signalling David to begin. (p. 349)

This revising should be done not by the author, but by someone who has professional experience in writing, editing and proof-reading. It would be really worth it – though it would cost a fair amount of money.

Detail

The wealth of detail is brilliant, but this too slows up the whole story. It seems to move so slowly that most if not all readers soon started speed-reading or skimming through the book, rather than reading every page properly.

Title

None of us could explain the title of the book. The only part it seemed to be relevant to was the massacre at the Temple.

Episodes

David and Charmaine (Chapter 4). This episode showed a relationship that was totally typical of the difference in attitudes between men and women. “What they had suited David perfectly.” But as soon as Charmaine realised that that was all he wanted, that he was not interested in any kind of commitment, let alone in marrying her, she broke off the relationship and went to Australia. Unlike David, she had seen their relationship as implying, and leading to, genuine commitment. I’m not suggesting any change is needed here, though it could be interesting to bring out the difference between the way David saw Charmaine, and the way he saw Priyani, even if he didn’t reflect on that difference himself.

Father Daniel (or Daniels) and chastity (Chapter 8): “chastity is a choice, there is nothing in God’s law that forbids us to have wives.” But Catholic priests in general, and Jesuits in particular as members of a religious order, take a solemn vow of celibacy. Is Father Daniel/s supposed to have somehow forgotten it, or convinced himself that it doesn’t matter? Has he been set a bad example by other priests and has he not had anyone to put him straight? Is he not in contact with any of his superiors? Something more needs adding here.