
In McEwan’s latest novel it’s 2119 and the world has achieved a tenuous stability after the long-predicted climate catastrophe. Combined with a nuclear accident, climate change led to what’s known as “The Inundation,” a tsunami which devasted continents, leaving the UK an archipelago of former mountaintops, Nigeria the wealthiest nation and storehouse of knowledge, and the U.S. in fragments run by heavily armed warlords.
The digital world has been preserved, though, and scholars of the 22nd century have access to everything previously stored in the cloud including our emails, DMs, and social media posts. Nostalgic for the lost pre-Inundation world, Thomas Metcalfe, a scholar of literature from 1990 to 2030, is fascinated by a poem called “A Corona for Vivien,” written in 2014.
Thomas has the facts: Francis Blundy, a famous poet, composed it for his wife Vivien and read it aloud at her birthday dinner in October 2014. It has since been lost. Francis is determined to find it and thus make his name in the world of academia. He’s read everything he can find on Francis, Vivien and their friends and, as a result, believes he understands their feelings and motives, so much so that he feels entitled to fill in gaps with what he imagines they must have felt and thought.
However, as we learn, Thomas doesn’t understand at all. He visits the Bodleian Library, now on a peak in Snowdonia. Then he and his sometime-girlfriend Rose, another academic who mocks Thomas’s obsessions, take off on a quest to find the poem itself, leading to an entirely different second half of the book.
The novel is an interesting intellectual exercise about the limits of our knowledge of the past and, indeed, of ourselves and the people around us. However, as I’ve mentioned before, his characters seem cold and impersonal to me. I often have difficulty believing in them as anything more than convenient pawns to move the plot forward. I couldn’t accept Thomas’s complete cluelessness, Rose’s patience with her man-child, Vivian’s mix of passivity and sexual hunger, or Francis’s nacissism.
I’ve reviewed many of McEwan’s books, mostly because my book club likes to include them in our schedule. This time we encountered a curious split. Some people liked the first, dystopian part and thought the second part contrived, while others thought the second part realistic and the first part boring.
We all agreed, though, about the quality of McEwan’s prose. Sentence by sentence, there is much to be learned by studying his work. We also agreed that his description of the heartbreaking difficulty of caring for someone with dementia truly captured that reality.
As often with his novels, the adjacent discussions were the most interesting. We talked about history and the way details are selected and presented by historians, who (like all of us) have their own ideas and preconceptions. We also talked about the inevitably performative aspect of our interaction with others. The manner we adopt when we stand up to teach a class is different from the one we use when sitting around a table with wine and cheese to discuss a book with friends. There’s nothing dishonest in this. We contain multitudes, as Walt Whitman famously declared of himself.
So McEwan’s novel, for all its flaws (to my mind, anyway), is a potent reminder of our limits. We fumble about with our partial knowledge of ourselves, others, and the world, forming opinions and making decisions that have consequences. We do the best we can with what we know.
However, when I think of Thomas filling in the gaps in the records, I’m reminded of an issue that I often confront as writer of memoir and other forms of creative nonfiction: How do I respectfully write about the real people who are present in my piece? I can change names or obscure details. I can try to write the emotional truth of a scene even if I don’t remember exact words or details. I can depict them as the complex people they are instead of one-sided caricatures.
Yet I still feel I’m in danger of invading their privacy. This book warns me against the arrogance of believing I know anyone sufficiently to believe I can depict them in their fullness. And it reminds me of the hurt caused by appropriating someone else’s story. At the same time, I believe in the power of stories and hope they will continue to be told many years into the future.
What do you think our world will be like in a hundred years?







