Or something more than th love triangle in an exotic location at the advent of world war which does make you think King was n't naware of the colossal commercial success of The English Patient and Out of Africa- except her writing unfortunately is n't in the same class as Ondaatje or Blixen.
In he last five chapters there could be the suspicion that anthropology is just comin to be used as an exotic backdrop for little more than another done-to-death love triangle.
King is asking questions about the veracity of anthropology as a science since it is all about communication between the observer and the observed- and tha is what every good novelist does, starts off asking crucial questions about the themes the novel is to investigate.
I ’ ve got a theory that if you ead ovel in big daily instalments you ’ ll enjoy it les than if you read say ten pages at every sitting.
I ’ ve continued to use chapter 21 to highlight how King consistently allows the tension line of th ovel to go slack.
hen there ’ s he very long winded reading of Helen ’ s novel, though not before a brief discussion about tea which allows Fen to get in another snide remark.
King restores it at the beginnin of thi chapter when she shows how energising is the intellectual collaboration between the three – but, for me, to many chapters in he novel follow this somewhat sloppy pattern.
Isn ’ t it anthropology itself that invites many of the questions people have praised King for raising?
A real answe is, did King develop these themes?
What most interested King was clearly the love triangle.
Were there deep layers of cultural meaning emerging from the Nell-Fen-Bankson triangle?
I know the key to how much enjoyment you got out of his novella was the level of emotional investment you had in the love triangle ( not the case with, for xample, the English patient, where there ’ s a lot more going on).
If you were able to appreciat the anthropology as simply exotic background colour the novel as a whole was probably a more ewarding experience.