Definire un libro come strano a volte può essere anche positivo, vuol dire che l’autore è riuscito a raccontare una storia senza violentarla all’interno di rigidi canoni comuni. Il più delle volte però definire un libro strano significa solo una cosa, ovvero che quando si sente un rumore di zoccoli non si deve perdere tempo a pensare a una zebra, bensì a un più comune cavallo: la soluzione più semplice è spesso quella giusta, quindi quando un libro è strano non lo è perché rappresenta un piccolo capolavoro rinchiuso in un numero ben preciso di pagine, è strano perché magari punta in più direzioni senza mai muoversi verso le stesse.È il caso di questo Il regno diviso, storia arroccata su di un presupposto di una divisione del Regno Unito (grande gioco di parole nel titolo [sarcasmo: on]) venga appunto diviso in quattro paesi diversi (e non si tratta di Inghilterra, Galles, Irlanda e Scozia), nei quali vengono inviate le varie persone in base all’inclinazione caratteriale, senza tenere presente gradi di parentela e possibili amori. È in questo scenario che la voce narrante, nonché protagonista del libro, inizia la propria avventura venendo strappato dalle braccia dei propri genitori e spedito in una specie di riformatorio che lascerà per accasarsi nel Quartiere Rosso (si, i vari paesi prendono il nome da un colore che rappresenta l’indole delle persone che vi risiedono).Sorvolando sulle inutili cartine dei vari quartieri che aprono il volume, il libro si risolve in un mosaico di pezzi abbastanza eterogenei che a tratti risultano essere assai difficile da tenere insieme, almeno per un lettore come me. Si parte da un inizio che pare essere la riproduzione romanzata della deportazione degli ebrei, per arrivare subito in un collegio che sa tanto di un annacquato Non lasciarmi, per approdare poi, dopo vari salti, a uno stile che sembra essere la brutta brutta brutta copia di Jonathan Carroll. Il romanzo prende spesso direzioni inconsuete, abbandonando senza molte spiegazioni l’ambientazione nel quale si trova per approdare ad un’altra che si discosta da quella appena lasciata in modo netto e brutale. Il risultato è abbastanza squinternato, confusionario, nel quale si incontrano personaggio che tutto a un tratto spariscono all’improvviso per non fare più ritorno. Un libro che segue l’odissea del protagonista nel suo vagabondare e nei suoi più impensabili cambiamenti camaleontici di carattere, ma che lascia troppo spesso il lettore in prenda a una confusione che l’autore non è riuscito a mettere in ordine neppure dentro la sua testa: sembra che tutto il libro sia stato scritto partendo a braccio, senza avere la ben che minima idea di dove sarebbe andato a parare e seguendo gli umori del momento. Un libro che attraverso vari stati (non solo geografici, non solo fantastici o inventati) ma che alla fine ti lascia esattamente dove sei e come sei.
Sometimes I just can't turn my brain off. I mean, just shut up and enjoy the story already!The concept here is a good one, the United Kingdom, Great Britain though it's never referred to as that, is drastically reorganized and divided into four separate states based on psychological profiles, which are in turn based on the ancient theory of the four body humors: blood, phlegm, black bile and yellow bile. There are further names and meanings and symbols, but they're unimportant for my purposes.My problem is that my mind started to wonder how they divided the UK into four parts, especially after Thomas, our protagonist, mentions London, not so named of course, having been quartered. How?HOW!?How would that be possible and not have some of those divided sections be 'islands' in the middle of another territory? It's madness! Every city and town and region has been renamed as well and, given how young Thomas was when the Reorganization occurred, he naturally doesn't remember or refer to the original names.A Utopian/Dystopian novel shouldn't be read that literally though. That's not the point. I know, but I can't help myself. When I saw Disney's Cars I was struck by a thought and whispered it to her half-way through the movie, thoroughly ruining the entire experience I'm told. That thought was: What kind of car was Jesus? I mean, their whole biology and geology is based around automobiles and yet the town's oldest resident is a Tin Lizzy....were they a symbiotic species with horses? If so, where are they now? Was Jesus a donkey cart?But we're talking about Divided Kingdom. Thompsen plays around with a lot of theories about human nature and our collective untapped potential. Despite my most basic HOW? objections to how any of this functions, international relations for one thing are completely ignored, I found myself curious as to how Thompson imagined a society divided into such four extremes, and the fifth that inevitably would fall between the cracks.But as soon as things fall into a good pace, that last third is a page-turner, and I begin to accept and encourage the outlandish, it all wraps itself up nicely and ends.Not that there aren't unanswered questions, because, oh yeah, I've got a barrel, but it's all from the satisfied musings of the main character. And though I feel he hasn't come around enough for me to trust his satisfaction, there are no other sign-posts, we're supposed to take it as it is.What we have is a light psychological experiment novel, and one that doesn't get much deeper than the surface. I have questions, but I'll forget all about them before tomorrow.
Do You like book Divided Kingdom (2006)?
Il regno diviso riprende un tema caro alla letteratura inglese da Ben Johnson in poi (la divisione delle tipologie umane sulla base della teroia medioevale dei quattro umori (bile gialla, bile nera,flemma e sangue) per proporci una favola fantascientifica ma non troppo sul concetto di liberta' ,razzismo e impoosizioni sociali.la storia e' carina, ma non all'altezza dell'idea di fondo. Alcuni passaggi sono un filo lenti, specie all'inizio, ma poi la trama di riprende.Si mescolano molti temi, non tutti ne escono riuscitissimi.C'e' un'immensa ridda di personaggi difficili da ricordare, ma certi sono indimenticabili.Al di la' del contenuto, un'edizione,quella cartacea, molto curata. Dalla grafica ineccepibile, al divertissment di associare le persone che ci hanno lavorato a una delle 4 categorie umane, di certo la cosa piu' lontana da un lavoro grossolano che vi possa venire in mente.
—Alessandra
I read this book for it’s cover, and it was fantastic.Essentially, it’s about the UK, but after the country is divided into 4 different nations based on the personality types of the people who live inside those nations. People were forcibly removed from their homes, and their families and brought to the other nation if a shadowy board of figures decided they were more like the people that lived in the other nation.It’s a pretty subversive concept, and the writing makes it seem very real; he captures so much of what would actually be going on if this sort of event were to take place.So, all in all, great book that I would highly recommend.
—Dave Emmett
Dystopian literature has always appealed to me, for whatever reason, and the concept behind Divided Kingdom had me intrigued from the moment I read about it. The title refers to the "reassignment" of the United Kingdom into a new "Divided Kingdom": Based on individual temperaments of choleric, melancholic, sanguine and phlegmatic (these in turn based on the ancient medical concept of humorism), the population is broken into 4 quarters. The borders that separate the new quarters are heavily guarded and crossing without government permission highly illegal. I found this book disappointing because in many ways it seemed unfinished. There were several plot-lines or characters that were set up to be really important only to disappear from the story entirely. It's written in first person narrative and I found the character difficult to identify with. This is not helped by the massive amount of years the book covers, starting in childhood, leaving the reader wondering whose voice we are hearing, i.e., is he looking back at his unbelievable past from an old age? Are we getting it as it happens? Thomas Parry spends much of the book without a goal or purpose. When he does have a goal it's quite exciting. The rest of the time it's just a bunch of stuff happening, with half-baked, poorly explained twists that detract from the story, and I was left wondering why I should care.It's quite slow at times, mainly for this reason, even though some parts are quite well-written and the concept is interesting and reasonably well-defined. It's worth a read if you like dystopian fiction, although it could have told the same story in half the pages (if it weren't for the endless descriptive similes) and perhaps earned another star from me. Once a character with magic powers had been, shall we say, suggested, I realised that I was not likely to get any further sense from this book. Nevertheless, I blundered on and forced myself to read to the end, hoping to find some stroke of genius in the book's final chapters. As a word of warning (without spoilers), I found the ending disappointing and couldn't tell if the author was trying to be ambiguous or if he just felt like he'd written enough words.
—Cassady Maddox
