Philosopher and Confession: The Philosophical Vacancy

[Okay, evidently I conveniently FORGOT to tell you that, like Confession, I had to take a hiatus. Oops. I was going to write a post consisting of a giant, size 99pt "DITTO" but then Confession posted again... so that wouldn't have made any sense... and now we're here two months later. I applaud you for sticking around this long. Anyhoo. Onwards!]

As most of you lovely internet ladies and gents will know, the glorious J.K Rowling has released a brand new book. It's called "The Casual Vacancy", and it's effectively Harry Potter without wizards, magic, Hogwarts, evil armies of Death Eaters, and with a big ol' booster shot of REAL LIFE.

Basically, nothing like Harry Potter at all. "The Casual Vacancy" is a book for adults, and J.K. has said that right from the start. She said herself that she wouldn't let anyone 8 or under read it. Does it sound like the wonderful wizarding world of Sir Potter? Not to me.

I've dived into "The Casual Vacancy" with a healthy pinch of salt. I'm not trying to compare it to Harry Potter; because, personally, I think that's unfair to Miss Rowling. And personally, I like it. It's well written, and even if she wasn't such an amazing part of my childhood, I'd still have bought the book.

Use hefty pinches of this when reading 'The Casual Vacancy'

And it seems that a lot of critics have also taken my detached attitude to reading- but others, frankly, should not be writing reviews. Feast your eyes upon a selection of the critics, choicely chosen from Wikipedia.

Lev Grossman, for Time: "It's a big, ambitious, brilliant, profane, funny, deeply upsetting and magnificently elegant novel of contemporary England, rich with literary intelligence, and entirely bereft of bulls**t." [say NO to naughty words. Say YES to happy asterisks!]

David Robinson of the Scotsman said:

"It is far grittier, bleaker (and, occasionally, funnier) than I had expected, and- the acid test- I suspect it would do well, even if the author's was not J.K. Rowling"

The Wall Street Journal, the Guardian, the Daily Mirror, The Economist- all of them had various degrees of positive reviews.

But it seems some reviewers approached The Casual Vacancy without the oh-so-important pinch o' salt. Some reviewers pulled out the forbidden words; HARRY POTTER

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES wrote: "it fails to conjure Harry Potter's magic" while Jan Moir for the Daily Mail said it was "500 pages of relentless socialist manifesto masquerading as literature"

"magic" "magic" "magic"

WHERE IS THE MAGIC? All of these deluded critics cry!

I respect their opinions, and think it's important to give a balanced view on the novel. But what people HAVE to remember is that "the Casual Vacancy" is not magical. It's not a book about good overcoming evil. It's not a fairytale, or a bedtime story. It's a book about real life, and real life is not magical. It's gritty, and bitter and sad sometimes. There are a lot of things that we don't do right.

But you know what? It's books like these that inspire change. It's books that SHOW us all the things we're doing wrong- all our mistakes and errors and the lack of magic in our lives. "The Casual Vacancy" isn't there to sugarcoat real life. It's there to present it in the most stripped-back way possible- and to inspire us all to start doing things RIGHT.

So, if you dare, pop down to the local bookstore and buy a copy. Read it, study it, make a judgement on it. Put it on a bookshelf if you like it. Put it in a golden display case if you REALLY like it. Rip it up and use it as toilet paper if you're not so keen.