Description
In 1946, a young couple set off on their honeymoon. Fired by their ideals and passion for one another, they plan an idyllic holiday, only to encounter an experience of darkness so terrifying it alters their lives for ever.
Genres
Collection
Publication
Anchor (1998), 176 pages
Media reviews
An uneasy mixture of mystery, contemporary history, and novel of ideas.
User reviews
LibraryThing member sbloom42
This had to sit on my palate a while after finishing it for me to really enjoy the taste. The surface level of the story is fairly pointless. A man and woman become husband and wife and then grow apart based on a mysterious encounter with a couple of black dogs. The book explores their ideologies,
Looking deeper in the text, however, it became apparent to me how deep this story goes. The black dogs directly relate to the horror inflicted on Europe through World War II and the adherence to the belief that political ideologies can change the world for the better, even when the ideologies are responsible for horrible atrocities. There are reactions of withdrawal, both in the wife and in the Polish concentration camp which refuses to admit that Jews were killed there. There are reactions of a political nature that seem to say "if only we try again, we can get it right this time", as seen in the husband and the fall of the Berlin Wall.
A very interesting read for someone like me who grew up in America in the 70s and 80s at the end of the Cold War. Not McEwan's best work, but as an investigation of how the second half of the 20th century affected individuals and their relationships, it was a fascinating and worthy read.
Show More
how the man believes politics can save the world and the woman believes only inward transformation can save the world. Along the way their's a very interesting exploration of the impact of World War II on Europe and an account of the dismantling of the Berlin Wall.Looking deeper in the text, however, it became apparent to me how deep this story goes. The black dogs directly relate to the horror inflicted on Europe through World War II and the adherence to the belief that political ideologies can change the world for the better, even when the ideologies are responsible for horrible atrocities. There are reactions of withdrawal, both in the wife and in the Polish concentration camp which refuses to admit that Jews were killed there. There are reactions of a political nature that seem to say "if only we try again, we can get it right this time", as seen in the husband and the fall of the Berlin Wall.
A very interesting read for someone like me who grew up in America in the 70s and 80s at the end of the Cold War. Not McEwan's best work, but as an investigation of how the second half of the 20th century affected individuals and their relationships, it was a fascinating and worthy read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dczapka
Since first reading Saturday, I have been both intrigued and perplexed by Ian McEwan. What I've read of his oeuvre has convinced me that he is a talented if bizarre author, capable of incredible accomplishments (see the brilliant Amsterdam). But he is also disconcertingly inconsistent, as evidenced
After a somewhat misleading but detailed premise, the novel proper opens as the four-part narrative of a failed marriage. Though we get a detailed portrait of our narrator Jeremy, the tale is clearly about Bernard and June, deeply in love but more deeply divided by political and ideological differences. As the narrative progresses forward (and then, finally, backwards, to the novel's central event), McEwan aim is to reconstruct a failed marriage against the fall of the Soviet Union.
One of the main problems with the tale is that there is simply not enough material to sustain the story, even if the tale is only 150 pages in length. June's obsession with her meeting with the title characters is alluded to early, and McEwan clearly wants us to wonder why it is so life-shaping, but the ultimate resolution is somewhat deflating. The Maire's story is unsettling in a classically McEwan-esque manner, but it fails to carry the weight of June's fear because her final explanation feels wanting.
Also wanting is the development of character outside of June. The opening chapter, with June on her deathbed, is a fascinating insight, one that McEwan successfully builds on in the other three parts. But Bernard is a frustratingly distant character, separated from the more interpersonal affairs of the book because of his obsessive political works. It's an almost too-forced juxtaposition, awkwardly sidled into the work in the same way that the destruction of the Berlin Wall falls conveniently into the work. That moment and the moment of family violence at the end of Part III feel too much like intended set pieces, rather than as fully realized parts of an organic narrative.
In the end, what could have been an intriguing examination is rendered transparent by its constructs. It is a problem inherent in much of McEwan, but one that is occasionally outshone by the power of his descriptive abilities. Here, though, it feels as if he is trying too hard to extend a simple idea outside of the realm of a short story -- rendering the titular Black Dogs less a harbinger of doom than another dark mark on McEwan's already spotted body of work.
Show More
by his post-USSR work Black Dogs, which, though brief, fails at building interest and juggling the somewhat unusual machinations of its plot.After a somewhat misleading but detailed premise, the novel proper opens as the four-part narrative of a failed marriage. Though we get a detailed portrait of our narrator Jeremy, the tale is clearly about Bernard and June, deeply in love but more deeply divided by political and ideological differences. As the narrative progresses forward (and then, finally, backwards, to the novel's central event), McEwan aim is to reconstruct a failed marriage against the fall of the Soviet Union.
One of the main problems with the tale is that there is simply not enough material to sustain the story, even if the tale is only 150 pages in length. June's obsession with her meeting with the title characters is alluded to early, and McEwan clearly wants us to wonder why it is so life-shaping, but the ultimate resolution is somewhat deflating. The Maire's story is unsettling in a classically McEwan-esque manner, but it fails to carry the weight of June's fear because her final explanation feels wanting.
Also wanting is the development of character outside of June. The opening chapter, with June on her deathbed, is a fascinating insight, one that McEwan successfully builds on in the other three parts. But Bernard is a frustratingly distant character, separated from the more interpersonal affairs of the book because of his obsessive political works. It's an almost too-forced juxtaposition, awkwardly sidled into the work in the same way that the destruction of the Berlin Wall falls conveniently into the work. That moment and the moment of family violence at the end of Part III feel too much like intended set pieces, rather than as fully realized parts of an organic narrative.
In the end, what could have been an intriguing examination is rendered transparent by its constructs. It is a problem inherent in much of McEwan, but one that is occasionally outshone by the power of his descriptive abilities. Here, though, it feels as if he is trying too hard to extend a simple idea outside of the realm of a short story -- rendering the titular Black Dogs less a harbinger of doom than another dark mark on McEwan's already spotted body of work.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jmoncton
This is the 3rd Ian McEwan book I've read and I have to say I was disappointed. The others, Atonement and Saturday were both profound and so incredibly well written. I found Saturday to be initially very slow and disjoint, but it all comes together rapidly and definitely gives you an interesting
Show More
perspective on relationships, integrity and life. Well I kept on waiting for that huge epiphany with Black Dogs, but it didn't happen. The book seemed to end abruptly (maybe it should have been 6 cds long?) and I was left without that 'aha' moment that his other stories gave me. Show Less
LibraryThing member mareki
Unfortunately, the least enjoyable McEwan I have read. The plot is uninteresting, the characters pompous & annoying & the ending fizzles out without going anywhere. The tension McEwan tries to set up between faith & rationality doesn’t convince, and the two main characters come across as
31/3/08/
Show More
ventriloquists dummies for poorly thought out arguments. 31/3/08/
Show Less
LibraryThing member Helenliz
This is very interesting. The narrator is a man who looses his parents early and spends his teens being semi adopted by his friend's parents. He then finds himself with an almost closer relationship to his in-laws than his wife and her siblings. June & Bernard have a complicated relationship, and
I found it poignant that they clearly cared for each other but were unable to live together. The events that we spend a lot of the book building up to was quite shocking, both in the event and their quite disparate reactions to it. The final portion is quite thought provoking, because of the incident with the black dogs, their plans are changed and the house in France is bought. Does the family owe some of their current happiness to an incident that, to some extent, cause a rift between June & Bernard that persisted for the rest of their lives? We are, each of us, a summation of our life experiences and to change any one of them could change the route through life.
I listened to this and, for once, I think this would have been better read, to enable me to pause and reflect on some of the ideas raised.
Show More
he spends a significant proportion of the book preparing notes for a memoir of some description. It pops backwards and forwards in time until, in the final portion, we hear about the great event that June believed changed her life and that Bernard dismisses entirely. Maybe because he was otherwise engaged drawing a caterpillar. It strikes me as an essay in how different people can look at the same event, or hear the same story and take vastly different things from it.I found it poignant that they clearly cared for each other but were unable to live together. The events that we spend a lot of the book building up to was quite shocking, both in the event and their quite disparate reactions to it. The final portion is quite thought provoking, because of the incident with the black dogs, their plans are changed and the house in France is bought. Does the family owe some of their current happiness to an incident that, to some extent, cause a rift between June & Bernard that persisted for the rest of their lives? We are, each of us, a summation of our life experiences and to change any one of them could change the route through life.
I listened to this and, for once, I think this would have been better read, to enable me to pause and reflect on some of the ideas raised.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Cariola
Probably the most boring novel I've ever read by [[Ian McEwan]], whose work I usually love. Jeremy plans to write a memoir of his mother-in-law June, and most of the novel recounts stories that she and her husband Bernard told him of their courtship, early marriage, honeymoon in France (where she
Show More
encounters two black dogs), membership in the Communist party; June's odd spiritual quest, which leads her to a life alone on the southern coast of France; etc., etc. The only thing I can imagine that might be more boring would be reading the memoir that Jeremy hoped to write. Show Less
LibraryThing member siafl
One of the earlier and shorter of McEwan's works, although I think there are other ones that speak to me more than this one. Even The Innocent, completed before Black Dogs, I have found to be a bit more interesting. Nonetheless this book has typical McEwan's poignant prose, albeit it feels like the
"A Crowd is a slow, stupid creature, far less intelligent than any one of its members." (65)
Show More
author's skills are slightly on the honing and developing side."A Crowd is a slow, stupid creature, far less intelligent than any one of its members." (65)
Show Less
LibraryThing member tori_alexander
Black Dogs is a skillfully written novel with an interesting and profound topic as its subject. McEwan does a wonderful job describing June, an eccentric old woman, the narrator's mother-in-law. He also handles what could be a very artificial story device in a reasonably natural way. The idea of
"...'Don't you think the world should be able to accommodate your way of looking at things and Bernard's? Isn't it for the best if some journey inwards while others concern themselves with improving the world? Isn't diversity what makes a civilization?'
The last rhetorical question was one too many for June. The frown of neutral attention disappeared in her hoot of laughter. She could no longer bear to be lying down. She struggled up, successfully this time, while speaking to me in gasps.
'Jeremy, you're a dear old fruit, but you do talk such twaddle. You try too hard to be decent, and have everyone like you and like each other... There!'"
I especially like the "hoot of laughter," which shows the vitality and confidence of this old woman. Part of the function of the passage is to convey the "position" of the book, but to do so in a way that it does not sound like an author at the lectern. The narrator's earnestness is apparent, but his sentimentality does not go unnoticed.
Although I have no real criticism of the book and enjoyed thoroughly my time spend with it, I will say that McEwan is not intellectually daring. He might have offered a new and interesting middle road between mysticism and rationality. But he does not. In fact, he actually avoids that conflict by redefining one as an inward journey and the other as an outward journey. Recast that way, the conflict isn't a conflict at all, but two different and unopposed ways of being. Between mysticism and rationalism, belief in purpose and rejection of purpose, there is a real irresolvable conflict that can't be made to go away by saying "diversity is best."
McEwan realizes this I guess, for the argument continues even after June dies. It goes on the narrator's head as he imagines the fighting pair continuing to talk past each other. It's perhaps too much for me to expect this very good novelist to be a very good philosopher too. He tells a story well.
Show More
the book is to explore the conflicts between mystical thinking and rationality, and the narrator is interviewing and writing a memoir on his mother-in-law and father-in-law who represent those views respectively. This passage exemplifies well McEwan's sensitivity and talent as a writer; "...'Don't you think the world should be able to accommodate your way of looking at things and Bernard's? Isn't it for the best if some journey inwards while others concern themselves with improving the world? Isn't diversity what makes a civilization?'
The last rhetorical question was one too many for June. The frown of neutral attention disappeared in her hoot of laughter. She could no longer bear to be lying down. She struggled up, successfully this time, while speaking to me in gasps.
'Jeremy, you're a dear old fruit, but you do talk such twaddle. You try too hard to be decent, and have everyone like you and like each other... There!'"
I especially like the "hoot of laughter," which shows the vitality and confidence of this old woman. Part of the function of the passage is to convey the "position" of the book, but to do so in a way that it does not sound like an author at the lectern. The narrator's earnestness is apparent, but his sentimentality does not go unnoticed.
Although I have no real criticism of the book and enjoyed thoroughly my time spend with it, I will say that McEwan is not intellectually daring. He might have offered a new and interesting middle road between mysticism and rationality. But he does not. In fact, he actually avoids that conflict by redefining one as an inward journey and the other as an outward journey. Recast that way, the conflict isn't a conflict at all, but two different and unopposed ways of being. Between mysticism and rationalism, belief in purpose and rejection of purpose, there is a real irresolvable conflict that can't be made to go away by saying "diversity is best."
McEwan realizes this I guess, for the argument continues even after June dies. It goes on the narrator's head as he imagines the fighting pair continuing to talk past each other. It's perhaps too much for me to expect this very good novelist to be a very good philosopher too. He tells a story well.
Show Less
LibraryThing member lukespapa
An earlier Ian McEwan work, this is a short but dense novel. Essentially, the story contrasts spirituality and faith with science and reasoning played out through an estranged marriage. Historically, the novel spans the life of a British couple during WW II through the fall of the Berlin Wall. It
Show More
was during their honeymoon in rural France where a transformative event, the wife’s encounter with two large feral dogs, profoundly changes her world view and ultimately, her relationship with her husband. This episode is the crux of this novel as the assertion is that each of us will be able to trace back to when we were permanently altered by a singular experience. As with all of McEwan’s novels that I’ve read, the psychological component dominates the narrative, leaving the reader more enlightened, if not slightly exhausted. Show Less
LibraryThing member jayne_charles
An immensely well thought out book whose plot appears to occupy only the last chapter, but whose early sections – which skip about in place and time – help the reader interpret those final events.
Teeming with metaphor, its purpose seems to be to provoke thought rather than to have the reader
Teeming with metaphor, its purpose seems to be to provoke thought rather than to have the reader
Show More
on the edge of his/her seat. It’s an exploration of communism, religion and the effects of war, and as is the case with all McEwan’s novels, it is brilliantly written. Show Less
LibraryThing member wendyrey
A story told backwards that works. A young couple have a strange experience that changes their lives, relationship and marriage, as told by their son-in-law.
LibraryThing member emanate28
Reads like a short story that I would imagine someone making into a full-length film. It's subtle, told in a very calm voice that is, I suppose, intended to mask the magnitude of the events. If that works for you, then the book is powerful. Sadly, I can imagine the intent on an intellectual level,
Show More
but it didn't quite have full emotional impact on me. Show Less
LibraryThing member cinesnail88
I'll always be a fan of McEwan, so it goes without saying that I enjoyed this book as much as any other. I found the plot line with the actual black dogs to be an interesting idea, though this wasn't my favorite book I've ever read of his. That said, a solid novella.
LibraryThing member rmckeown
The normally reliable Ian McEwan has disappointed me in this peculiar and oddly constructed fifth novel published in 1992. I found the prose nearly as powerful as his later work, such as Atonement, Saturday, and Amsterdam, for which he won the Booker Prize, but Dogs left me unsatisfied at the end.
Jeremy lost his parents when he was a child, and began to have an inordinate amount of interest in the parents of friends, adopting them for his own. When he married, he continued this practice and became close to his in-laws. He takes on the task of writing a memoir of June, his dying mother-in-law. She recounts a pivotal event in her life involving three large, black dogs that threatened her when she was on her honeymoon in France shortly after World War II. Jeremy compares her account with that of his father-in-law, Bernard, and resolves the differences in a philosophical manner. He uses the incident to explain the world view of both, and the memoir becomes a meditation on the conflict between good and evil, rationalism and spirituality, thinking and action.
The novel is short – only 149 pages -- and that may be its principle flaw. McEwan tumbles over the waterfall in the barrel of his version and explanation of the event. I wish there was more meat on these bones to give me a better understanding of how he arrived at his conclusions.
I am glad I read this after his later work, so it has little effect on my opinion of this excellent writer, and I will work my way through his first four novels. 4 stars for the prose.
--Jim, 12/24/09
Show More
Jeremy lost his parents when he was a child, and began to have an inordinate amount of interest in the parents of friends, adopting them for his own. When he married, he continued this practice and became close to his in-laws. He takes on the task of writing a memoir of June, his dying mother-in-law. She recounts a pivotal event in her life involving three large, black dogs that threatened her when she was on her honeymoon in France shortly after World War II. Jeremy compares her account with that of his father-in-law, Bernard, and resolves the differences in a philosophical manner. He uses the incident to explain the world view of both, and the memoir becomes a meditation on the conflict between good and evil, rationalism and spirituality, thinking and action.
The novel is short – only 149 pages -- and that may be its principle flaw. McEwan tumbles over the waterfall in the barrel of his version and explanation of the event. I wish there was more meat on these bones to give me a better understanding of how he arrived at his conclusions.
I am glad I read this after his later work, so it has little effect on my opinion of this excellent writer, and I will work my way through his first four novels. 4 stars for the prose.
--Jim, 12/24/09
Show Less
LibraryThing member lindawwilson
Not that good; I kept waiting for the "black dogs" part and finally when discussed in the very last chapter it was a disappointment. Worse than a A CHILD IN TIME and much worse than ATONEMENT & THE INNOCENT. Read in Maui 2/20/08
LibraryThing member Dreesie
A classic McEwan in that this novel is not so much a story as a study.
Jeremy, orphaned as a child and raised half-heartedly by his single mom sister, became very close to his inlaws. This novel is his trying to piece together and understand the reasons for their extended (decades long) separation.
OK--the second half was more interesting.
Jeremy, orphaned as a child and raised half-heartedly by his single mom sister, became very close to his inlaws. This novel is his trying to piece together and understand the reasons for their extended (decades long) separation.
Show More
Basically it sounds like a bit of misunderstanding and a lot of stubbornness and unwillingness to understand the other.OK--the second half was more interesting.
Show Less
LibraryThing member JolleyG
I generally enjoy reading Ian McEwan's books, and I normally I find him a very engaging writer. However, this book left me flat, It was disjointed and went nowhere very interesting. There were no special revelations about character, plot, or ideas. Fortunately it was short, so I went ahead and read
Show More
the whole thing. Show Less
LibraryThing member JediJane
I really liked this book. It reminded me a bit of On Chesil Beach in some ways, in terms of its intensity. However, it was the nature of the age-old philosophical discussion regarding the existence of God which most greatly affected me. The polar extremes of religious belief (an atheist absolutism
Show More
set against a life dedicated to spiritual enlightenment) are represented within the confines of a loving marriage which is doomed because of these very ideological differences. I'm not sure that McEwan ultimately reconciles these differences but its great brain fodder nonetheless. Show Less
LibraryThing member SirRoger
This is not my favorite McEwan, and I initially gave it three stars when I read it in 2006. But after a rereading, I've decided that I do like it a bit more. It's a nice little family story, with ruminations on Good and Evil, Communism and Materialism, Memory and Meaning.
Jeremy, the narrator, is
The action happens during the time of the collapse of the Berlin wall, and a connection is drawn between the forces that affect change in Europe, and the forces that affect the course of private lives and family histories.
Jeremy, the narrator, is
Show More
preparing to write the memoirs of June, his mother-in-law. She had an experience while on a walk in the French countryside during her honeymoon that affected her beliefs and changed the course of her life and her marriage. The action happens during the time of the collapse of the Berlin wall, and a connection is drawn between the forces that affect change in Europe, and the forces that affect the course of private lives and family histories.
Show Less
LibraryThing member PilgrimJess
“So June´s idea was that if one dog was a personal depression, two dogs were a kind of cultural depression, civilisation´s worst moods.”
June and Bernard were both fervent Communists when they went on their honeymoon in France in 1946.June’s view of the world changed when she was attacked
The dogs are supposedly a metaphor for the potential for corruption and violence in modern Europe. Underscored when Jeremy, the narrator, and Jenny, June and Bernard's daughter,visit a Polish concentration camp,and when on a trip Berlin Wall Jeremy and Bernard just as the Berlin wall comes crumbling down they are caught up in a mob scene.
However, if I'm brutally honest I find this connection tenuous at best. For me it was just a tale of two people who,despite professing to love each other deeply, find when June becomes disaffected with Communism or at least the Communist party that they have very little in common so decide to live separate lives. June as something of a recluse whereas Bernard becomes a politician and minor celebrity.
Now this is the third of McEwan's books that I've read because they are on the 1001 list and the third that has left me underwhelmed. Perhaps he's just not for me.
June and Bernard were both fervent Communists when they went on their honeymoon in France in 1946.June’s view of the world changed when she was attacked
Show More
by two enormous black dogs, which she fought off with a knife after becoming separated from Bernard while out walking. They later learned that the dogs may been left behind by the Gestapo, who used the animals to terrorize the villagers. The encounter taught June about the nature of evil and finds God. In contrast Bernard has never respected her faith so despite being married for 40 years they spend large parts of their marriage apart.The dogs are supposedly a metaphor for the potential for corruption and violence in modern Europe. Underscored when Jeremy, the narrator, and Jenny, June and Bernard's daughter,visit a Polish concentration camp,and when on a trip Berlin Wall Jeremy and Bernard just as the Berlin wall comes crumbling down they are caught up in a mob scene.
However, if I'm brutally honest I find this connection tenuous at best. For me it was just a tale of two people who,despite professing to love each other deeply, find when June becomes disaffected with Communism or at least the Communist party that they have very little in common so decide to live separate lives. June as something of a recluse whereas Bernard becomes a politician and minor celebrity.
Now this is the third of McEwan's books that I've read because they are on the 1001 list and the third that has left me underwhelmed. Perhaps he's just not for me.
Show Less
LibraryThing member AlisonY
I found this an odd sort of McEwan. Not odd in the usual off-the-wall odd McEwan style, but odd in that I'm not quite sure what I made of it.
Set in the 1980s, the protagonist dips in and out of the past as he tries to piece together the reason for the broken relationship of his in-laws as he toys
At its core is the tale of how the two young lovers were both wedded in their devotion to communism, until the aftermath of WWII unravelled their beliefs. The husband found his answers in science, and when his wife has a frightening encounter with two large black dogs believed to be offspring of those used by the Gestapo, his scientific mind cannot grasp her beliefs in superstition and mysticism.
It's delicate in its handling of the complexities of marriage and of the many significant points which underpin a relationship, but somehow it just didn't do it for me. I wasn't altogether in step with exactly what McEwan was trying to do with the novel.
3 stars - definitely not my favourite McEwan.
Set in the 1980s, the protagonist dips in and out of the past as he tries to piece together the reason for the broken relationship of his in-laws as he toys
Show More
with writing the memoir of his deceased mother-in-law. Although the two had been estranged for many years before her death, both clearly still loved the other.At its core is the tale of how the two young lovers were both wedded in their devotion to communism, until the aftermath of WWII unravelled their beliefs. The husband found his answers in science, and when his wife has a frightening encounter with two large black dogs believed to be offspring of those used by the Gestapo, his scientific mind cannot grasp her beliefs in superstition and mysticism.
It's delicate in its handling of the complexities of marriage and of the many significant points which underpin a relationship, but somehow it just didn't do it for me. I wasn't altogether in step with exactly what McEwan was trying to do with the novel.
3 stars - definitely not my favourite McEwan.
Show Less
LibraryThing member sprainedbrain
This books deals with complex issues (ideologies and how they affect our lives and relationships, war and politics, marriage and families), but it's written in such a careful, beautiful way that it's very accessible. I loved it.
LibraryThing member roblong
A missed opportunity. The setup here is very good - a singular experience convinces a young woman of the existence of the occult, and drives her and her communist husband apart. McEwan begins to discuss the implications of this and touches on some of the sadness of it: that this difference parted a
Show More
newly married young couple who might have lived differently and more happily if they had shared one or other view. But it is no more than a beginning and a touch. Another hundred pages might have made for a sterling book, but here a big subject feels skimmed over. Show Less
LibraryThing member brakketh
written in a careful, poetic way that's still very accessible - a real pleasure.
Subjects
Awards
Booker Prize (Longlist — 1992)
Original language
English
Original publication date
1992