How to be Both by Ali Smith

How to be Both

by Ali Smith

How to be both is the dazzling new novel by Ali Smith.

WINNER OF THE BAILEYS WOMEN'S PRIZE FOR FICTION 2015

WINNER OF THE GOLDSMITHS PRIZE 2014

SHORTLISTED FOR THE MAN BOOKER PRIZE 2014

WINNER OF THE 2014 COSTA NOVEL AWARD

WINNER OF THE SALTIRE SOCIETY LITERARY BOOK OF THE YEAR AWARD 2014

NOMINATED FOR THE FOLIO PRIZE 2015

Passionate, compassionate, vitally inventive and scrupulously playful, Ali Smith's novels are like nothing else.

How to be both is a novel all about art's versatility. Borrowing from painting's fresco technique to make an original literary double-take, it's a fast-moving genre-bending conversation between forms, times, truths and fictions. There's a renaissance artist of the 1460s. There's the child of a child of the 1960s. Two tales of love and injustice twist into a singular yarn where time gets timeless, structural gets playful, knowing gets mysterious, fictional gets real - and all life's givens get given a second chance.


'Smith can make anything happen, which is why she is one of our most exciting writers today' Daily Telegraph

'She's a genius, genuinely modern in the heroic, glorious sense' Alain de Botton

'I take my hat off to Ali Smith. Her writing lifts the soul' Evening Standard

Reviewed by pamela on

2 of 5 stars

Share
Yes, yes. Well done Ali Smith. You're very smart.



If there is one thing Ali Smith's Bailey's Prize Victory with her novel 'How To Be both' has proven to me it is that even literary prizes can fall prey to the bells, whistles and buzz words of a good media campaign.

'How To Be Both' was marketed as a genre defining, genre bending and genre creating novel of ultimate importance in the literary world. It hailed the rebirth of true stylistic originality, and Ali Smith has been described by one of the Bailey's Prize judges Shami Chakrabarti as 'a literary genius'. The problem is, I don't know a single person who liked it.

The novel's main selling point is that it can be read in two different ways. We have a modern story about a teenager in Cambridge named George, and a story about Renaissance painter Francesco del Cossa. Depending on which copy of the book you pick up will depend on which story you are treated to first. The order in which each half is read is supposed to change the entire reading experience. From discussion with my book group a few weeks ago we deduced that yes, it did change the reading. But only those who read Francesco's story first derived any semblance of enjoyment from 'How To Be Both', and indeed seemed to understand the underlying a plot a lot better. Francesco's story is stylistically more complicated to follow, and is without a doubt less interesting than George's half. Reading George's story second seemed to feel like a reward, whereas having to read Francesco's half second felt like the ultimate punishment. Francesco's half was rather more abstract that George's, and this abstraction lent itself to understanding only if read first. Upon discussion we found that those of us who had read Geroge's story first simply did not put the connection between the two characters together, meaning we ultimately felt that we'd read two different stories rather than a cohesive whole. To me this would indicate that the central selling point of this novel's originality was ineffectual and I must admit I'm not even entirely convinced of its intrinsic originality. I feel like we are meant to see this as new and revolutionary for no other reason than Ali Smith told us to. Huge props to her publicist who deserves a raise for making us all believe it.

The pages devoted to Francesco's story in 'How To Be Both' are stylistically experimental. They flow poorly and are not written in a style believable to the settings time period. Ali Smith has also made an annoying decision to replace the word 'because' with 'Cause' in every case within Francesco story. It truly grated after a while, and did not serve to heighten the plot, or give Francesco a convincing voice. Smith also foregoes the use of regular grammatical structure, something that I don't usually take issue with when implemented to the advantage of a novel. In this case however it felt like a self conscious decision to appear to be 'literary'. It is a plot device employed in what feels like a cynical move to appeal to the pretensions of judges who sit on literary prize panels. Do they make decisions of the merit of a work, or do they make decisions based on the fact that they, like everyone, gets so caught up in the supposed newness of an idea that they see a genius that simply isn't there because they so desperately want it to be?

I know that I am not alone in seeing Ali Smith's 'How To Be Both' as far from the genius it has been claimed to be. I think what we have now is a large proportion of the reading public who are too worried about coming across as ignorant, or that they somehow just didn't get it. So they smile, nod and perpetuate the marketing jargon which makes us all think that 'How To Be Both' is the second coming of the novel, all so that their supposedly 'more learned' friends won't think them stupid. In my opinion there are a whole lot of disappointed book buyers out there who have spent good money on something that they were told was going to be brilliant and ultimately left them a little more empty than before they'd read it. It is simply a case of the literary marketing monster desperately making us want a thoroughly underwhelming product. Did I buy it? Yes I did. Did I enjoy it? I think the answer to that is obvious.

http://iblamewizards.com/opinion-how-to-be-both-wins-the-baileys-prize/

Last modified on

Reading updates

  • Started reading
  • 24 May, 2015: Finished reading
  • 24 May, 2015: Reviewed