Book Review: 22 Days In May by David Laws

I've wanted to read this one for some time but thought it might be a little heavy for the 'fun' reading I tend to do away from my PhD. I was right. However, I still enjoyed the in-depth look at the first general election I really paid attention to and the ramifications of a hung parliament and coalition negotiations. I came out of this book with my positive thoughts towards Laws himself intact (yes, I know I'm in a minority along with David Cameron here) but generally disliking the Liberal Democrats more than I had before.

What comes across in this book is the sheer importance that the Lib Dems put on voting reform as a condition for joining any coalition, either with Labour or the Conservatives. As someone who was opposed to AV in the 2011 referendum on the subject, I find this immensely amusing considering the scale of the defeat. Of course, the negotiating Lib Dem team did have admirable goals - and they did seem to be focused on the deficit as much as their own interests - but reading this two years on from the general election means it's easy to see how assumptions have been smashed and solid relationships have broken down. The Lib Dems were perfectly aware of the impact going into coalition would have on their poll rating but I think they were confident they could win an AV referendum and so maintain some representation in the House of Commons in coming years. I think the scale of discontent both within the party and the public was vastly underestimated. Looking at everything agreed within those negotiations with hindsight is remarkable and I'm certainly glad I waited to read this.

However, the book tended to cement my opinion of one of the government's major problems: communication. David Laws was an effective communicator during his brief time in ministerial office. I can't help but wonder how the government image might have fared if he'd been involved in relaying decisions to the public.

This one's definitely a book to read if you're interested in British politics but I wouldn't read it as relaxation!

Fifty Books A Year, Mr Gove?

This week our darling Education Secretary, Michael Gove, was reported to have suggested that children just hitting secondary school age should read fifty books a year, and not just the one or two novels that make it onto the curriculum. Unsuprisingly, people were quick to jump on the comments. How are poorer children supposed to obtain these books when their local libraries are closing by the dozen? Children's Laureate, Anthony Browne, also pointed out that children should be reading for enjoyment, not to reach some arbitrary target. Personally, I thought this Coalition was all about removing unnecessary targets from life but I may have been wrong.

Anyway, the statement got me thinking about reading in our society. Was I the exception to the rule fifteen years ago or were attitudes just different back then? Some of my most idyllic memories involve me perched precariously on a wall above twelve foot sheer drop onto concrete reading until I literally couldn't focus any more. Those were the books of childhood; the Enid Blyton stories and Roald Dahl's adventures. I wasn't tied to conventional authors either. For a painfully short space of time Wakefield had a discount book shop that half-specialised in stocking unheard-of children's novels. I practically ate those. I wasn't adverse to reading books half a dozen times either. I was told off in class for reading ahead in the books we were reading as a group.

But now I come to think of it, people at my school didn't seem as interested in books as I was. Could that be because I came from a relatively deprived area? Maybe. I'm willing to accept that some working class families just don't care enough about reading to pass it on to the next generation. My elder sister freely admits she barely reads now and I'm not sure she ever really did. My brother was a little more interested in books then, but I don't know if he still reads now.

Is that the problem then? Children grow up in households where their parents don't read so they don't see the significance? We live in a society where laziness prevails. Why bother reading a good book when it's coming to ITV1 as a drama in a few months? Or why bother watching any literary translations at all? There's enough on with Coronation Street, Holby City and CSI. Not that I mean to insult anybody who watches those. I'm an avid Corrie fan these days and it makes up an important part of my relaxation for the week. But, then again, so does reading. The last thing I do every day is read for anything between twenty minutes and an hour. It just depends how gripping the book is.

Do I get through fifty books in a year as an adult? Quite possibly, though at the moment my PhD reading figures will be skewing the data (I'm unsure in which direction). Do I love reading? Yes. Am I disappointed that my six-year-old niece seems indifferent to ever picking up a book and avoids her reading homework whenever she can? Yes, of course I am.

But I honestly don't think that Michael Gove proclaiming something will automatically make it so. If he proclaims it won't that just reinforce the idea that books are the privilege of the upper-classes? If I was a family being hit hard by community closures thanks to our lovely Coalition, the last thing I'd do is listen to a condescending, pompous twit like Michael Gove.

Con-Dem: A Lesson For Fiction Writers

Whatever your political affiliations, if you live in the UK you're probably in something of a state of shock. Before the election last week I don't know many people who foresaw the conclusion: a cross-party coalition that draws Right and Left together? Barmy! But there's a lesson in this for fiction writers.

Sometimes, just sometimes, it's alright to team up with the bad guy.

I like most of my characters. I think they share a lot of my potentially OTT values and self-righteous ideas which can mean I fence myself into implausible plot scenarios. Alright, in general my characters are moral but if faced with big choices would they really make the right one?

My personal opinions on the new political coalition aside, no one can doubt the difficult decision Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg had to make. Sell himself (as it was seen by many critics) to the Conservative party for a few hollow promises or try to align himself with the failing Labour party? Either way he was going to lose some popularity.

As it is with your fictional creations.

My latest project involves a bomb threat and a woman trying to do the right thing in a difficult situation. The thing is, as much as I want her to be moral and stand up for her beliefs (and as much as she does), there has to be a point where she wants to side with the bad guy, so to speak. If someone offers you life over death even the most moral amongst us will consider it.

Will readers respect her for making the perceived 'wrong' choice? No. But she may have to, if only to appease that problematic thing called being true to your character.

It remains to be seen what a Conservative/Liberal coalition means for British politics. But I'm taking heart in the fact I've managed to pull one lesson for myself out of this mess.