.jpg)
What a Carve Up! is Coe’s first ‘long’ novel, which
differs from his earlier work not only in length, but also in complexity; all
of his previous work has been less multifaceted. What a Carve Up! interweaves various characters together, who
stretch right back to the Second World War, where the centre of the history of
the Winshaws begins with the death of Godfrey Winshaw. Godfrey’s sister Tabitha
later pronounced mad, claims his death was due to the conniving plan of their
brother Lawrence. The novel then moves right up to 1990 to Michael’s present
day life, climaxing in the first section on New Year’s Day 1991; a new era
without Margret Thatcher.
Michael Owen,
a middle aged writer finds himself coincidently, or so he thinks, writing a history
of a certain family; the Winshaws. He begins to realise, after putting the
pieces and events of his past and present together, that he is not as detached
from the Winshaws as he once thought, he is not simply writing their family
history; he is in it. He was specifically chosen by Tabitha Winshaw the supposed
mad Aunt of the six siblings that ruin the British society, to write this
family history for a very specific and personal reason.
Coe’s every
thickening plot differs to his previous works which mainly consists of basic
humour as opposed to how he satirises society in his latest novel. The extent
to which he clearly criticises society in this novel is indicative of his
feelings towards the Conservative government.
His previous
novels collectively are humour based, but this latest book sees Coe use satire
to expose the money grabbing antics of the upper classes during a difficult
period in English history. His characters are selfish, cruel, uncaring and more
often than not, inhuman. Mark Winshaw’s materialism is evident when a bomb
intended for him explodes in his car; killing his newlywed wife. Yet he appears
to be more concerned by the damage the car has endured rather than murderous
death of his newlywed wife, which to add salt to the wound, he describes as
only having been “useful”!
Not only is
Coe’s plot complicated through the amount of characters and interweaving
stories, but he is also highly adventurous with his use of narrative. The use
of a shifting range of narrative form grasps the reader’s attention from the
offset. The range of narratives he uses is vast; including first person,
manuscript, tabloid newspaper article, diary entries, TV manuscripts and third
person. Shifting narrative form like this all adds to the fast paced
over-the-top fragmented image of reality that Coe is trying to create. Coe uses
these forms clearly in an uncomplicated way to work well in the novel; the plot
is so fragmented that a single narrative approach would not have worked, or
perhaps not as well as this multitude does.
The title is
perhaps the biggest signpost that the novel encompasses more than one story and
meaning and Coe uses it skilfully to mean many things. Not only does the title mirror
the fact that the novel is a re-make of the 1960s film of the same name, but it
also reflects the regimented structure of the novel itself; therefore ‘carving’
up the novel. Coe uses a prologue to introduce the Winshaw family history to
the reader and to set the scene. The main story is then told in ‘Part One:
London’ where Coe alternates the focus of the chapters between Owen and a
different Winshaw. He then employs Part
Two ‘An Organization of Deaths’ to detail the reading of the father’s will.
Lastly, he ends with the preface of Owen’s Family Chronicle of the Winshaws,
ironically where it all started.
Coe cunningly
introduces each chapter with a caricature of the Winshaw relevant to the
chapter. These Tenniel like sketches represent the whimsical nature of the
characters, much like that of Alice in Wonderland, albeit a little over the
top. It helps give the reader a physical idea of each character, even though it
is obviously Coe’s way of offering a comical image to the reader to aid his
satirical devices.
Coe carries
the ’carving up’ metaphor from the title and uses it to document the careers of
the Winshaws throughout the novel. The Winshaws personify satire with their corrupt
careers as they bridge the gap between appearance and reality as their occupation
choices reflect their gluttonous lust for money and power. There is Dorothy
producing super low cost food from battery farms, which she refuses to eat
herself, Henry the MP who dismantles the NHS, Thomas the merchant banker who
trades favours with Henry, Mark the arms dealer, Roddy the art dealer who only
sees money and not art and Hilary the tabloid columnist who writes what she
thinks people want to hear.
Each Winshaw presents themselves in society as
something they aren’t. Hilary poses as a loving woman who adores children;
except when it comes to her own. In an interview just after she has given birth
to her first child, Hilary claims she wants to spend as much time with Josephine
as possible, only to moan after the interview “Now, what’s the matter with it”
when Josephine starts crying.
This novel
is the first of Coe’s to win a literary prize, the John Llewellyn Rhys Prize,
the second oldest prize in the UK, therefore sealing his reputation as a
writer. As the novel is a satire, there is an obvious moral message behind the
humorous patchwork of the plot; greed is bad. At times, Coe does appear to be
preaching this moral message a little too often, although this can be
attributed to the (occasionally) over the top satirical style that he uses.
However, one
question that can arise in the reader’s mind after reading the novel surrounds
the character of Michael. Although he is the protagonist, at times one is left
wondering whether or not he is strong enough for this prominent role. He is,
for most of the novel very passive. He spends most of his time staring at his
television, or rewinding his VCR to ‘that’ all important moment in the film What a Carve Up!, wasting away his life.
But for Coe this seems to be a recurring theme, as in his first novel, The Accidental Woman, the protagonist
Maria is also a passive, companionless and motionless woman. Robin in A Touch of Love also shares these
characteristics. Michael appears to evolve though, as he manages to carry the
role in the end, when he realises the truth.
Although the novel is bursting with politics,
the embedded satire suppresses the political anger as opposed to building it up
and therefore the feeling released by the reader is laughter opposed to the
reader substantially engaging with the real political state of affairs, which
is ultimately what Coe is trying to do, although he subtly hides these ideas
with the essence of laughter. Coe’s politics are authentic, detailed and not
too obtrusive; his novel manages to attain the right level that is needed.
If you have
enjoyed Coe before, you will certainly like this extended work– or if you are
one to dabble in the thought of reading a politically satirical novel, then don’t
hold back on this one.