Status
Available
Publication
Knopf (1993), Edition: First Edition, 241 pages
Description
Fantasy. Fiction. Science Fiction. Thriller. HTML: Told with P. D. James's trademark suspense, insightful characterization, and riveting storytelling, The Children of Men is a story of a world with no children and no future. The human race has become infertile, and the last generation to be born is now adult. Civilization itself is crumbling as suicide and despair become commonplace. Oxford historian Theodore Faron, apathetic toward a future without a future, spends most of his time reminiscing. Then he is approached by Julian, a bright, attractive woman who wants him to help get her an audience with his cousin, the powerful Warden of England. She and her band of unlikely revolutionaries may just awaken his desire to live . . . and they may also hold the key to survival for the human race. From the Trade Paperback edition..… (more)
Similar in this library
User reviews
LibraryThing member TheAmpersand
A disquieting and original vision of the future that raises some intriguing philosophical issues. James imagines a world in which the human race has gone sterile and has resigned itself into slowly aging into extinction. "Children of Men" is, as might be expected, a relentlessly sad and mournful
James is also very thoughtful about the various emotional reactions that might be expected of the people inhabiting her childless future. Rather than descend into an orgy of short-sighted self-gratification, the world has instead become overcome by lassitude and hopelessness. Human endeavor more or less grinds to a halt and suicide becomes commonplace. I've spent a lot of time with existentialist writers whose characters motivated themselves to live full, meaningful lives by contemplating their mortality. Still, even if they didn't spend any time speculating about an afterlife or what future generations might think of them, they shared an unspoken assumption that some human society would follow them. Robbed of this certainty, James's characters slide into torpor, and their grief perverts the social institutions that once safeguarded society's good order. It's far from a "novel of ideas," but in its way, "Children of Men" questions – and sometimes flatly contradicts – optimistic existentialist notions of the relationship between mortality and human initiative. There is, James seems to argue, a vast difference psychological difference between a single human's death and the death of an entire society. The novel also seems to shed light on the rather fragile foundations of even our most enlightened democracies. Faced with the possibility of extinction, most of the inhabitants of James's future quickly and guilelessly opt to support an autocratic regime that offers to do its best to make humanity's final days as comfortable and stable as possible. Xan Lippyat, the self-proclaimed Warden of England, is perhaps a bit too straightforward when he expounds his pragmatic, pessimistic view of human society, but sometimes, when one considers the widespread decay that characterizes this novel's setting, he's difficult to argue with. Again, James seems to posit that the imminent decline of the human race would change our assumptions about ourselves in drastic and perhaps humiliating ways. I can't remember the last time I felt so relieved to remind myself that the book I was reading was only, after all, fiction.
This isn't to say that "Children of Men" is flawless. I don't usually look for plot holes in books, assuming readers have to work with what the author gives them. Still, much of the plot of "Children of Men" revolves around the assumption that the surprise pregnancy that is the book's major plot development must be carried to term outside the purview of the dictatorial Warden of England. I wasn't convinced that this would have made much difference to the inhabitants of James's world, particularly since James doesn't seem to be advocating a back-to-nature or anti-statist agenda. Also, I found the novel's final scene, which resembles nothing so much as an overdramatic Hollywood showdown, a little too pulpy and out of tune with the quiet desperation that fills most of the novel's preceding chapters. Still, I'm glad I read this one. I have the feeling "The Children of Men" illuminates something true, if rather depressing, about the way relate to our future, and to ourselves.
Show More
book. Much of it takes place in a particularly chilly, rain-swept England, and the appearance of a pregnant female character who promises a possible rebirth for the human race a hundred or so pages into the narrative barely alleviates the gloom. There's a certain toughness here too, though: imagined both as an ongoing diary of a historian and as a third-person narrative, "The Children of Men" is free of either sentimentality or self-pity. It's a stark account of people determined to make the best of grim circumstances. and James's prose, which is often uncompromisingly direct and rather chilly, is well-suited to her narrative. Indeed, the often makes the slow decline she describes seem both poignant and perversely beautiful. The novel's depictions of the world slowly going back to nature as an increasingly geriatric population struggles to maintain a crumbling infrastructure and abandons the mouldering relics of its past stayed with me for a long, long time. James is also very thoughtful about the various emotional reactions that might be expected of the people inhabiting her childless future. Rather than descend into an orgy of short-sighted self-gratification, the world has instead become overcome by lassitude and hopelessness. Human endeavor more or less grinds to a halt and suicide becomes commonplace. I've spent a lot of time with existentialist writers whose characters motivated themselves to live full, meaningful lives by contemplating their mortality. Still, even if they didn't spend any time speculating about an afterlife or what future generations might think of them, they shared an unspoken assumption that some human society would follow them. Robbed of this certainty, James's characters slide into torpor, and their grief perverts the social institutions that once safeguarded society's good order. It's far from a "novel of ideas," but in its way, "Children of Men" questions – and sometimes flatly contradicts – optimistic existentialist notions of the relationship between mortality and human initiative. There is, James seems to argue, a vast difference psychological difference between a single human's death and the death of an entire society. The novel also seems to shed light on the rather fragile foundations of even our most enlightened democracies. Faced with the possibility of extinction, most of the inhabitants of James's future quickly and guilelessly opt to support an autocratic regime that offers to do its best to make humanity's final days as comfortable and stable as possible. Xan Lippyat, the self-proclaimed Warden of England, is perhaps a bit too straightforward when he expounds his pragmatic, pessimistic view of human society, but sometimes, when one considers the widespread decay that characterizes this novel's setting, he's difficult to argue with. Again, James seems to posit that the imminent decline of the human race would change our assumptions about ourselves in drastic and perhaps humiliating ways. I can't remember the last time I felt so relieved to remind myself that the book I was reading was only, after all, fiction.
This isn't to say that "Children of Men" is flawless. I don't usually look for plot holes in books, assuming readers have to work with what the author gives them. Still, much of the plot of "Children of Men" revolves around the assumption that the surprise pregnancy that is the book's major plot development must be carried to term outside the purview of the dictatorial Warden of England. I wasn't convinced that this would have made much difference to the inhabitants of James's world, particularly since James doesn't seem to be advocating a back-to-nature or anti-statist agenda. Also, I found the novel's final scene, which resembles nothing so much as an overdramatic Hollywood showdown, a little too pulpy and out of tune with the quiet desperation that fills most of the novel's preceding chapters. Still, I'm glad I read this one. I have the feeling "The Children of Men" illuminates something true, if rather depressing, about the way relate to our future, and to ourselves.
Show Less
LibraryThing member MeriJenBen
In 2021, Theodore Faron, an Oxford professor of history, specializing in the Victorian period, lives a life of quiet routine, looking to the "comforts of culture" to cushion the harsh realities of his life. No children have been born anywhere in the world since 1995. In a world obsessed with aging,
James has pulled off something unique: an engrossing novel with a group of largely unlikeable main characters. Theo is a stuffy prig, Xan is a depressingly average despot, Julian is delusional, her husband Rolf is a bully. Only the midwife Miriam gives the book any warmth or feeling. Calling it sci-fi is almost a misnomer -- yes, it takes place in a dystopic future, but the dilemmas faced by Theo are not unique to the civilization or the time. However, James adds many convincing details to flesh out her setting, and fans of softer sci-fi will find much to like here.
This book wears it's age, a bit, as there is no discussion of cloning or stem-cells or any other of the reproductive technologies that have emerged since the early 1990's. Like V for Vendetta this book is profoundly rooted in the politics of the Thatcher administration, and may loose some relevance with readers not familiar with the England of those times. Slow to start, but engrossing, this is thoughtful sci-fi for mature readers. I have not yet seen the film adaptation of this book, but can say that it is either profoundly different from the novel, or that Clive Owen is severely miscast.
Show More
the last generation of children, known as Omegas, have grown to a cruel and dissipated adulthood, and the truly aged are encouraged to commit suicide. This is a world where kittens are baptized and the state runs porn shops. On his fiftieth birthday, Theo starts a diary, for what he admits are selfish reasons. Theo ultimately winds up recording his memories of his cousin Xan, now the powerful and increasingly despotic Warden of Britain, and of his involvement with a revolutionary group, the Five Fishes. While the Fishes seem ill organized and willfully ignorant to Theo, one young woman, Julian, awakes him to the abuse of power in his ordered life. When she ultimately reveals her pregnancy to him, Theo abandons his life of comfort and reflection to help her.James has pulled off something unique: an engrossing novel with a group of largely unlikeable main characters. Theo is a stuffy prig, Xan is a depressingly average despot, Julian is delusional, her husband Rolf is a bully. Only the midwife Miriam gives the book any warmth or feeling. Calling it sci-fi is almost a misnomer -- yes, it takes place in a dystopic future, but the dilemmas faced by Theo are not unique to the civilization or the time. However, James adds many convincing details to flesh out her setting, and fans of softer sci-fi will find much to like here.
This book wears it's age, a bit, as there is no discussion of cloning or stem-cells or any other of the reproductive technologies that have emerged since the early 1990's. Like V for Vendetta this book is profoundly rooted in the politics of the Thatcher administration, and may loose some relevance with readers not familiar with the England of those times. Slow to start, but engrossing, this is thoughtful sci-fi for mature readers. I have not yet seen the film adaptation of this book, but can say that it is either profoundly different from the novel, or that Clive Owen is severely miscast.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Toast.x2
Children of Men, PD James (with Spoilers)
PD James… cant say i am a fan.. i have read one or two of her novels, and they are all very interesting, but not a style i enjoy reading. In her mystery novels, investigator Adam Dalgliesh is an excellent character, and the plot lines are excellent, but i
The Children of Men was greatly different. Throughout the initial 50 pages, I was accosted by over abundance of internal monologue and ultra descriptive scenery that i had virtually no interest in. right around page 50, characters start intermingling and talking. as soon as James starts mixing in dialogue, children of men blossoms as a novel.
I really hate comparing books to movies.. i think it is unfair to the author, the story, and the experience in general. I cant help it in this instance. Both the movie and the book moved me for starkly different reasons. the movie was only loosely based on the novel. there are stolen aspects which translate over well.
When i compare the two, here are the things i liked more about the movie than i did the 1995 book.
1. King Crimson on a soundtrack?? AWESOME!, thank you for being only the second movie to ever do that. it was a pleasant and welcome surprise.
yup, that’s right, only one item made the movie list and it was not even related to the book. The reality is that they are two completely different beasts. just because you liked the one, doesn’t mean the other falls directly in line. the core detail of the plot is the same. Man kind can no longer procreate, no one knows why. some of the characters are definitely designed after those in the book, but past that the comparison should end.
things i liked more about the book than i did the 2006 movie.
1. Men are sterile, as opposed to women in the movie. there is no need for the insertion of a virgin mary construct. i found the emasculation of the world to be quite a nice change. Why does infertility always need to be woman-centric in films?
2. Big brother was actually a fairly good guy, though a bit of a dick. sure, Xan’s plans were not always the most ethical, the methods were not always the best choices, individuals often reflected badly on the whole system. in the end though, Xan and the Council’s intent was distraction in the face of a world ending epidemic. the intent was to please the majority and keep them safe. people fell by the wayside, bad things occurred, but i cant throw blame on any one character, more on the society that drove his decisions.one man with power wanting more power, but ultimately, not a bad fellow. I was reminded of Castro, good ideas and intent, taken too far.When reading, pay special attention to the conversation about power between Rolf (leader of the dissidents) and Theo
3. Theo is a fucking dick, must be in the blood. he is a selfish and a hermit. the death of his child is caused by an accident at his hand, not a random roadside event. he has fault and has to carry it with him. the blame is part of what makes his character believable.
4. Omegas, the final generation of humans. given special rights and privileges, they are both impressive and sad. carrying out life like the bastard children of Olympic gods and lepers, both revered and feared, their world is one of hopelessness. they pretend that this is not the case, though in some places, the truth leaks out during the plot.
Things i didnt like?
1. The quietus is a repeating mass suicide that is not discussed in the film. they only lightly touch on the topic of suicide. i think it is too touchy a subject for the general populace to be able to deal with (in the film). My opinion is that James was entirely too heavy handed when she brought a known character into the quietus. it was okay to reference it against a character, but to bring one into the plot? c’mon… that aspect of the story made suspension of disbelief difficult.
in closing, a great book, and a great film.. dont try to make any comparison.. just enjoy them both for what they are. 99% different from beginning to end, and enjoyable, with the exception of a standardized 50 page ramp up time :)
--
xpost RawBlurb.com
PD James… cant say i am a fan.. i have read one or two of her novels, and they are all very interesting, but not a style i enjoy reading. In her mystery novels, investigator Adam Dalgliesh is an excellent character, and the plot lines are excellent, but i
Show More
find her writing style tiresome and very “unexcellent”. typically, getting 50 pages into one of her novels is a challenge for me. by page 50 i have enough of the plot in view that i can slog through the rest of it. as a result of these past experiences, i put off reading this a great number of times.The Children of Men was greatly different. Throughout the initial 50 pages, I was accosted by over abundance of internal monologue and ultra descriptive scenery that i had virtually no interest in. right around page 50, characters start intermingling and talking. as soon as James starts mixing in dialogue, children of men blossoms as a novel.
I really hate comparing books to movies.. i think it is unfair to the author, the story, and the experience in general. I cant help it in this instance. Both the movie and the book moved me for starkly different reasons. the movie was only loosely based on the novel. there are stolen aspects which translate over well.
When i compare the two, here are the things i liked more about the movie than i did the 1995 book.
1. King Crimson on a soundtrack?? AWESOME!, thank you for being only the second movie to ever do that. it was a pleasant and welcome surprise.
yup, that’s right, only one item made the movie list and it was not even related to the book. The reality is that they are two completely different beasts. just because you liked the one, doesn’t mean the other falls directly in line. the core detail of the plot is the same. Man kind can no longer procreate, no one knows why. some of the characters are definitely designed after those in the book, but past that the comparison should end.
things i liked more about the book than i did the 2006 movie.
1. Men are sterile, as opposed to women in the movie. there is no need for the insertion of a virgin mary construct. i found the emasculation of the world to be quite a nice change. Why does infertility always need to be woman-centric in films?
2. Big brother was actually a fairly good guy, though a bit of a dick. sure, Xan’s plans were not always the most ethical, the methods were not always the best choices, individuals often reflected badly on the whole system. in the end though, Xan and the Council’s intent was distraction in the face of a world ending epidemic. the intent was to please the majority and keep them safe. people fell by the wayside, bad things occurred, but i cant throw blame on any one character, more on the society that drove his decisions.one man with power wanting more power, but ultimately, not a bad fellow. I was reminded of Castro, good ideas and intent, taken too far.When reading, pay special attention to the conversation about power between Rolf (leader of the dissidents) and Theo
3. Theo is a fucking dick, must be in the blood. he is a selfish and a hermit. the death of his child is caused by an accident at his hand, not a random roadside event. he has fault and has to carry it with him. the blame is part of what makes his character believable.
4. Omegas, the final generation of humans. given special rights and privileges, they are both impressive and sad. carrying out life like the bastard children of Olympic gods and lepers, both revered and feared, their world is one of hopelessness. they pretend that this is not the case, though in some places, the truth leaks out during the plot.
Things i didnt like?
1. The quietus is a repeating mass suicide that is not discussed in the film. they only lightly touch on the topic of suicide. i think it is too touchy a subject for the general populace to be able to deal with (in the film). My opinion is that James was entirely too heavy handed when she brought a known character into the quietus. it was okay to reference it against a character, but to bring one into the plot? c’mon… that aspect of the story made suspension of disbelief difficult.
in closing, a great book, and a great film.. dont try to make any comparison.. just enjoy them both for what they are. 99% different from beginning to end, and enjoyable, with the exception of a standardized 50 page ramp up time :)
--
xpost RawBlurb.com
Show Less
LibraryThing member HollyinNNV
I think that this would be a great book for a book club. There are many interesting themes and ethical/moral considerations to discuss. I also think that this book is a great one to read if you are an aspiring author. James' use of 1st person and 3rd person points of view are done in a very
I have not viewed the movie so I don't know how close the movie follows the book. For those of you who are interested here is a synopsis (no spoilers). Set in an alternate future, we are introduced to a world where there are no children. It is not entirely clear whether men, women (or both) have become infertile, but the result remains the same-no babies. James explores a world where there is no future. She hypothesizes how this would affect the human psyche and government. Enter our main character, Theo. The book is partially told from Theo's point of view, in entries in his diary. He is a college professor and historian. His past and personality affect how he views the times.
P.D. James begins the book in a literary fashion. The book doesn't have a heck of a lot of rising action or tension. There is a lot of reflection and description of the times. The second half of the book attempts to be more of a thriller. The action is central to the plot and the pace picks up. Personally, I felt as if James pulled this book in two directions and I'm not sure if it was as successful because of this duality.
One of the things that I really liked about James' writing is that she left the moral judgements to the reader. The decisions the characters make are uniquely human-no cardboard characters in the lot. And there is no good guy/bad guy-just good and bad decisions.
All in all, I recommend the book.
Show More
different manner and lend a quirkiness to the story.I have not viewed the movie so I don't know how close the movie follows the book. For those of you who are interested here is a synopsis (no spoilers). Set in an alternate future, we are introduced to a world where there are no children. It is not entirely clear whether men, women (or both) have become infertile, but the result remains the same-no babies. James explores a world where there is no future. She hypothesizes how this would affect the human psyche and government. Enter our main character, Theo. The book is partially told from Theo's point of view, in entries in his diary. He is a college professor and historian. His past and personality affect how he views the times.
P.D. James begins the book in a literary fashion. The book doesn't have a heck of a lot of rising action or tension. There is a lot of reflection and description of the times. The second half of the book attempts to be more of a thriller. The action is central to the plot and the pace picks up. Personally, I felt as if James pulled this book in two directions and I'm not sure if it was as successful because of this duality.
One of the things that I really liked about James' writing is that she left the moral judgements to the reader. The decisions the characters make are uniquely human-no cardboard characters in the lot. And there is no good guy/bad guy-just good and bad decisions.
All in all, I recommend the book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member William345
I never was much of a genre reader but at some time in my middle years I was assailed by a love of dystopias. There's nothing like a vivid tale of the world ending to truly set me at my ease. It did not occur to me until I read Norman Cohn's The Pursuit of the Millennium why dystopic narratives
Fortunately, unlike my forebears, I have not had to run riot over the Bavarian countryside acting out my delusions by stringing up debauched clerics and those belonging to the so-called hostile faiths, but have been able to sublimate the evolutionary inanities through art. I am happy to report that The Children of Men does at times rise to that exalted level.
Here is a world in which men have gone sterile. You just can't find fertile semen anymore. Some women, denied their customary reproductive roles, have gone bonkers. They end up baptizing cats and dolls and such. (Other women, one imagines, are dancing a jig so tickled are they to never again have to risk another perineum tear.) One thing I liked was the image of the world preparing to go on without mankind. For in the vacuum left by the end of human fertility all the other flora and fauna seem to redouble their efforts.
Our hero is Theodore Faron. A sardonic at times bitter retired professor of history at Oxford--there are no more children to teach--who ran his daughter over in a tragic accident many years ago. His wife never forgave him, then she started banging this rugby player half her age. Theo happens to be cousin to the Warden of England, Xan Lyppiatt, a childhood friend, who is running a thuggish police state. During the first half of the story the state is in the process of redistributing its thinning population to central locations for purposes of making delivery of services easier. At least that's the excuse. The first half is all clandestine meetings of the dissidents and background into Theo's boyhood relationship to Xan.
Then it turns into a road story not without parallels, though fleeting, to Cormac McCarthy's The Road. Though, it should be emphasized, this is not a post-apocalyptic world going-out-with-a-bang novel, like The Road, but rather a civilization fizzling-out-with-a-whimper story. Nevertheless there is sufficient violence and craziness and survivalist mentalities employed to keep everyone happy. There is an intimation of the second coming, personal betrayal of the basest sort, and headlong hysterical flight. There is an elegant density of diction that is consistent throughout, and I found that the descriptive sections, especially in the action-packed second half of the book, touch on the beautiful. Highly recommended for thriller lovers. Mandatory for lovers of dystopic fictions.
Show More
were so satisfying on an almost physiological level. I realized it was a hardwired need, evolved by centuries of my whack-job millenarian forebears, for apocalyptic solace. These eschatological needs are still within me and going strong. They include a desire for angels as messengers of the apocalypse, an irrational longing for the rewards of paradise, and an overwhelming desire to witness those less pure of heart than myself receive their fiery comeuppance.Fortunately, unlike my forebears, I have not had to run riot over the Bavarian countryside acting out my delusions by stringing up debauched clerics and those belonging to the so-called hostile faiths, but have been able to sublimate the evolutionary inanities through art. I am happy to report that The Children of Men does at times rise to that exalted level.
Here is a world in which men have gone sterile. You just can't find fertile semen anymore. Some women, denied their customary reproductive roles, have gone bonkers. They end up baptizing cats and dolls and such. (Other women, one imagines, are dancing a jig so tickled are they to never again have to risk another perineum tear.) One thing I liked was the image of the world preparing to go on without mankind. For in the vacuum left by the end of human fertility all the other flora and fauna seem to redouble their efforts.
Our hero is Theodore Faron. A sardonic at times bitter retired professor of history at Oxford--there are no more children to teach--who ran his daughter over in a tragic accident many years ago. His wife never forgave him, then she started banging this rugby player half her age. Theo happens to be cousin to the Warden of England, Xan Lyppiatt, a childhood friend, who is running a thuggish police state. During the first half of the story the state is in the process of redistributing its thinning population to central locations for purposes of making delivery of services easier. At least that's the excuse. The first half is all clandestine meetings of the dissidents and background into Theo's boyhood relationship to Xan.
Then it turns into a road story not without parallels, though fleeting, to Cormac McCarthy's The Road. Though, it should be emphasized, this is not a post-apocalyptic world going-out-with-a-bang novel, like The Road, but rather a civilization fizzling-out-with-a-whimper story. Nevertheless there is sufficient violence and craziness and survivalist mentalities employed to keep everyone happy. There is an intimation of the second coming, personal betrayal of the basest sort, and headlong hysterical flight. There is an elegant density of diction that is consistent throughout, and I found that the descriptive sections, especially in the action-packed second half of the book, touch on the beautiful. Highly recommended for thriller lovers. Mandatory for lovers of dystopic fictions.
Show Less
LibraryThing member macktan894
This is a favorite film of mine. The director Cuaron created a deeply layered narrative about a crucial time in the future. What's terrific about the film (and the book, too) is that the future is not stereotypically futuristic. People are the same as they are now, their lifestyles are similar as
Theo as protagonist evolves both in the movie and the book. The movie is much more hopeful in its portrayal of Theo who starts out as an apathetic drunk but saves the day as a hero in the end. In the book, Theo starts out as unfeeling, cynical and snobbish with his intellect. His attraction to Julian does seem a little contrived but okay, let's accept that. Who Theo is and how Theo's actions will affect things is left ambiguous.
I was surprised at the differences between the book and movie but could see how things had been refashioned for a cinematic medium. PD James' book is so totally intellectual and detailed, a lot of inner space, reflection. Movies require action, visuals, movement from here to there. Curaron did a brilliant job converting book to movie, and I can see why James is pleased with the cinematic version. It really stays faithful to the book's themes, even hammers them down more emphatically by switching things around. But all the basic elements of book are in the movie. I loved both!
Show More
well. The big differences between now and then are the mass infertility (which gets you to thinking, how would your life change if you knew the human race was expiring) and the politics. People in this future are largely apathetic and they've divorced themselves from govt completely allowing a mild form of tyranny as government. Most, including Theo, seem very self centered. Theo as protagonist evolves both in the movie and the book. The movie is much more hopeful in its portrayal of Theo who starts out as an apathetic drunk but saves the day as a hero in the end. In the book, Theo starts out as unfeeling, cynical and snobbish with his intellect. His attraction to Julian does seem a little contrived but okay, let's accept that. Who Theo is and how Theo's actions will affect things is left ambiguous.
I was surprised at the differences between the book and movie but could see how things had been refashioned for a cinematic medium. PD James' book is so totally intellectual and detailed, a lot of inner space, reflection. Movies require action, visuals, movement from here to there. Curaron did a brilliant job converting book to movie, and I can see why James is pleased with the cinematic version. It really stays faithful to the book's themes, even hammers them down more emphatically by switching things around. But all the basic elements of book are in the movie. I loved both!
Show Less
LibraryThing member MarthaHuntley
This is one of those cases of reading a book because it was the selection for a reading group I'm in -- I had never heard of the book, and wouldn't have read it otherwise. Unfortunately, I really disliked The Children of Men. I've read several others of P.D. James and have thought of her as an
Show More
unusually fine author, but this book seemed a clunker to me. The characters were not only not three-dimensional, they weren't even two dimensional. I had remembered James' writing as fairly ponderous and slow, but filled with graceful insights and often Christian-oriented themes and hope. But this book wallows in hopelessness and despair...very depressing reading. I couldn't find a character in it that was likeable, or believable. The dialogue was painful. The "hero" was pitiful and full of self-pity, self-everything. The only positive thing I can say about the book is that its premise -- no child born in 25 years, and what that would mean to (British) society and the world is a jolting thought. It's certainly a new and powerful way to look at the sanctity of life. Otherwise I think this book is a bust. Show Less
LibraryThing member Clara53
A shockingly sad dystopia, the chilling premise of which is not totally unthinkable. The first page of the book gave me a start as it opened up with January 2021 - so close at hand in present time! The book was written in 1992, so 2021 was "the future" at that time).
Then another, quite pertinent
"What he does want (the dictator) is the pretense of the internal threat to good public order. It helps buttress his authority. All tyrants have needed that from time to time. All he has to do is to tell people that there's a secret society whose published manifesto may be beguilingly liberal but whose real aim is..." - here James goes into the problems of this particular dystopia, but one can certainly fill in the lines for any dictatorship.
Then another, quite pertinent
Show More
insight was this quote:"What he does want (the dictator) is the pretense of the internal threat to good public order. It helps buttress his authority. All tyrants have needed that from time to time. All he has to do is to tell people that there's a secret society whose published manifesto may be beguilingly liberal but whose real aim is..." - here James goes into the problems of this particular dystopia, but one can certainly fill in the lines for any dictatorship.
Show Less
LibraryThing member sturlington
P.D. James is well known as a mystery writer, but she took a departure from her usual genre with this apocalyptic story. The Children of Men takes place in a near future 25 years after people have stopped giving birth and are, as a result, facing the end of the species. No explanation is given for
The story is set in England, which has fallen under dictatorial rule in the name of providing the public with what they most want: security, comfort and pleasure. Criminals are shipped off to the Isle of Man, where they live in violent anarchy, and young, desperate immigrants are brought in to do the scut work as second-class citizens, only to be deported when they become too old or too useless. The British elderly are taken out to sea and drowned in group “suicides,” called the Quietus, much like unwanted kittens. The tone is bleak, hopeless, and filled with ennui and a sense that God has abandoned mankind.
The book is divided into two parts: Omega and Alpha. Once the reader learns that Omega is the name of the last year in which there was a birth, as well as of the last, spoiled, soul-less generation, it is simple to guess what Alpha represents: the first pregnancy in a quarter-century, a secret that propels forward the action in the second half of the novel.
The story is told from the point of view of Theo Faron, a professor of history at Oxford. Theo is so far removed emotionally from his life and the people in it that he is not even greatly affected when he accidentally kills his own baby daughter. This makes him very hard to like. He begins to change when he meets Julian, a young woman who is a member of a hapless, amateurish revolutionary group called the Five Fishes, formed to protest England’s dictatorial policies. Julian asks Theo to intercede with his cousin Xan, who happens to be the dictator, or Warden, of England. After meeting with her group and then witnessing a Quietus firsthand, Theo realizes that he can no longer be an observer, but must step on stage and become an actor in what’s happening to the human race.
The first half of the book alternates randomly between Theo’s diary entries and third-person narrative. I’m not sure why James felt that the diary sections were necessary, as the third-person chapters are also limited tightly to Theo’s perspective, and the diary itself proves not to be very important to the story. After one last entry, the diary literally disappears soon into the second half of the book.
The action ramps up as Theo joins Julian’s group on the run from Xan’s Grenadiers and discovers that Julian is nine months pregnant. Theo’s growing love for Julian and his awe at her maternal state transform him from a passive, apathetic observer into a passionate actor willing to lay down his own life for the cause. The scene when Julian reveals her pregnancy in an abandoned church and Theo gets down on his knees before her to hear the baby’s heartbeat is the most affecting moment in the novel.
Theo, Julian and the rest of the group go on the run to find a safe place for Julian to give birth. Everything is stacked against them, of course, and one by one they lose their companions until Theo and Julian are alone, literally, in the wilderness, with Xan and his soldiers bearing down on them. The ending (which I won’t reveal) may seem to be a happy one on the surface, but I think it is much more ambiguous than that, and there remains a real question as to whether this new baby will actually restore hope to the world.
The Children of Men was made into a movie in 2006, but if you have only seen the adaptation, know that it differs greatly from the novel in many respects. While the basic premise and characters remain the same, the future depicted in the novel is not as brutal or chaotic as in the movie, but it is perhaps more quietly bleak and hopeless, a tone that rang truer to me. The ending of the novel is quite different from the movie and would not be spoiled by seeing the film first.
Show More
the sudden loss of fertility — it is presented as having baffled scientists and doctors — but James seems more interested in its effects on the characters living out the last days.The story is set in England, which has fallen under dictatorial rule in the name of providing the public with what they most want: security, comfort and pleasure. Criminals are shipped off to the Isle of Man, where they live in violent anarchy, and young, desperate immigrants are brought in to do the scut work as second-class citizens, only to be deported when they become too old or too useless. The British elderly are taken out to sea and drowned in group “suicides,” called the Quietus, much like unwanted kittens. The tone is bleak, hopeless, and filled with ennui and a sense that God has abandoned mankind.
The book is divided into two parts: Omega and Alpha. Once the reader learns that Omega is the name of the last year in which there was a birth, as well as of the last, spoiled, soul-less generation, it is simple to guess what Alpha represents: the first pregnancy in a quarter-century, a secret that propels forward the action in the second half of the novel.
The story is told from the point of view of Theo Faron, a professor of history at Oxford. Theo is so far removed emotionally from his life and the people in it that he is not even greatly affected when he accidentally kills his own baby daughter. This makes him very hard to like. He begins to change when he meets Julian, a young woman who is a member of a hapless, amateurish revolutionary group called the Five Fishes, formed to protest England’s dictatorial policies. Julian asks Theo to intercede with his cousin Xan, who happens to be the dictator, or Warden, of England. After meeting with her group and then witnessing a Quietus firsthand, Theo realizes that he can no longer be an observer, but must step on stage and become an actor in what’s happening to the human race.
The first half of the book alternates randomly between Theo’s diary entries and third-person narrative. I’m not sure why James felt that the diary sections were necessary, as the third-person chapters are also limited tightly to Theo’s perspective, and the diary itself proves not to be very important to the story. After one last entry, the diary literally disappears soon into the second half of the book.
The action ramps up as Theo joins Julian’s group on the run from Xan’s Grenadiers and discovers that Julian is nine months pregnant. Theo’s growing love for Julian and his awe at her maternal state transform him from a passive, apathetic observer into a passionate actor willing to lay down his own life for the cause. The scene when Julian reveals her pregnancy in an abandoned church and Theo gets down on his knees before her to hear the baby’s heartbeat is the most affecting moment in the novel.
Theo, Julian and the rest of the group go on the run to find a safe place for Julian to give birth. Everything is stacked against them, of course, and one by one they lose their companions until Theo and Julian are alone, literally, in the wilderness, with Xan and his soldiers bearing down on them. The ending (which I won’t reveal) may seem to be a happy one on the surface, but I think it is much more ambiguous than that, and there remains a real question as to whether this new baby will actually restore hope to the world.
The Children of Men was made into a movie in 2006, but if you have only seen the adaptation, know that it differs greatly from the novel in many respects. While the basic premise and characters remain the same, the future depicted in the novel is not as brutal or chaotic as in the movie, but it is perhaps more quietly bleak and hopeless, a tone that rang truer to me. The ending of the novel is quite different from the movie and would not be spoiled by seeing the film first.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dazzyj
Wonderfully provocative dystopian fiction with the essence of what it is to be human at its heart.
LibraryThing member AliceAnna
James should stick to mystery. The concept of the book was brilliant, but she just didn't do it justice. I kept expecting much more.
LibraryThing member fdholt
I have read several mysteries of P. D. James and liked them. The children of men is completely different, a dystopian novel of a 21st century world in which no babies have been born for twenty five years. Theo Faron is a professor at Oxford University in a time when the only students left are
James is at her best here, setting the stage for a climactic ending. She writes in the third person but has chapters of Theo’s diary which add to the understanding of his character. A must read for fans of James and for those who enjoy good science fiction writing.
Show More
adults. His cousin is the Warden of the country and there is dissent. Theo meets several of the plotters and the story moves from there.James is at her best here, setting the stage for a climactic ending. She writes in the third person but has chapters of Theo’s diary which add to the understanding of his character. A must read for fans of James and for those who enjoy good science fiction writing.
Show Less
LibraryThing member M.Campanella
That someone was able to read this book and make a movie from it is somewhat incredible. The plot was not that fascinating, nor that original. James does have a talent for description, but she wastes it on things that, considering the circumstances of the story, are next to useless - as when the
Awfull.
Show More
protagonist recieves a mysterious knock on the door, and then a salad he never eats is described in livid detail. The way the book changes stylisticly, it begins with an ultimatly useless journal entry, seems to suggest that the author didnt really know what she was doing from begining to end.Awfull.
Show Less
LibraryThing member crimson-tide
Very different from the usual James book, but just as well written. Very well written in fact; with her usual brilliant characterisation, and images that bounce out from the words and lodge in your head. It is a thoughtful, compelling and powerful read.
Theo is a complex but not particularly
Apparently there is a film (released in 2006) based very loosely on the story. I'm glad I didn't see it before reading the book.
Theo is a complex but not particularly
Show More
likeable anti-hero, who becomes transformed by the process of loving someone. There are plenty of themes to reflect on . . . the need for hope, the despair and futility that eats away at people like a cancer when there appears to be no future for the race, the nature of religion and the nature of power, among others. However one thing that didn't ring true at all in the dystopian times and I just cannot accept, is that interest in (and enjoyment of) sex would drop off across the whole population purely because procreation was no longer a possible outcome.Apparently there is a film (released in 2006) based very loosely on the story. I'm glad I didn't see it before reading the book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member akreese
You know when you start reading a book thinking it’s about one thing and then are disappointed to find it’s something else? That happened to me with The Children of Men and it was entirely my fault for not paying enough attention when the book was described to me. I heard “dystopian” and
In reality this story was about society facing a childless future, and the speculation about what everyone would do in that situation. Would there be any incentive to build for the future if no one is going to be here? As an aging population starts to die, how do you decide what needs to be kept in good condition (buildings, cities, roads)? Why do any research to better the future if there is no new generation to take over?
In amongst a society facing these questions you have a government secretly acting unethically and a group of dissenters who don’t think that human rights should go by the wayside, even if humanity itself is disappearing. At the heart of it all though is the issue of power and how it corrupts, raising the question of whether anyone is incorruptible when given unlimited power.
The ending of this book could leave one hopeful or despairing depending on how you view the potential of power to corrupt. It is a quick and easy read but it is a story that provokes deep thinking and raises many ethical questions. The Children of Men would make for a great book club discussion.
Show More
“women can’t have children” and stopped listening. My brain somehow put those two things together along with the title to draw the conclusion that “therefore the men must have the children.” After all, it does say “The Children of Men.” So, it was with great disappointment that I realized it doesn’t happen that way. (But wouldn’t that have been a fun book?)In reality this story was about society facing a childless future, and the speculation about what everyone would do in that situation. Would there be any incentive to build for the future if no one is going to be here? As an aging population starts to die, how do you decide what needs to be kept in good condition (buildings, cities, roads)? Why do any research to better the future if there is no new generation to take over?
In amongst a society facing these questions you have a government secretly acting unethically and a group of dissenters who don’t think that human rights should go by the wayside, even if humanity itself is disappearing. At the heart of it all though is the issue of power and how it corrupts, raising the question of whether anyone is incorruptible when given unlimited power.
The ending of this book could leave one hopeful or despairing depending on how you view the potential of power to corrupt. It is a quick and easy read but it is a story that provokes deep thinking and raises many ethical questions. The Children of Men would make for a great book club discussion.
Show Less
LibraryThing member MrsLee
The premise of this book is a fascinating one to explore, just not in this book. It was a slow plod that I thought would lead somewhere, but it never did. A big build up with a fizzle at the end. Anyway, nice descriptions and scene setting, leaden characters, slow plot, meh ending. That's why I
Show More
gave it two and a half stars. YMMV Show Less
LibraryThing member dougcornelius
An OB nurse notices that there are no appointments booked. The human race is faced with extinction when the ability to have babies has disappeared. This is a dark view of the future as human civilization is facing extinction.
LibraryThing member pdill8
It is rare for me to read a book because I saw the movie, and even more rare that I prefer a movie to its original book, but this is one of those rare occasions. THat story concept and the imagined world are really fascinating, but the story moves avery slowly for my tastes and the internal
I thought the alterations made in the film adaptation were brilliant, purposful, but true to its original vision, with a more effective tone.
Show More
dialogue of the main character isblah and unaffected, disinterested- until the meat of the story when he becomes engaged and thus the reader does as well- but this is 2/3 of the way into the book.I thought the alterations made in the film adaptation were brilliant, purposful, but true to its original vision, with a more effective tone.
Show Less
LibraryThing member trinityofone
I loved the recent film version of this (which should have gotten WAY more Oscar nominations, dammit!), so of course I had to read the book, which I’d been told was very different. Is it ever! While the basic premise remains the same, many of the events—and pretty much the entire meaning of the
Is one better than the other? I felt the film more strongly, possibly because it is so timely. But the book is incredible in its own right, chilling in different but no less effective ways. I’ll be thinking about both for a long, long time.
Show More
novel—were altered for the film. While the movie is LOUD and VIOLENT, the book is quiet and desolate and lonely. The book explores themes of guilt and how men (er, mostly I mean *humans* here rather than males, although all the examples given in the text are male) abuse power; the film is about *governmental* abuse of power far more than individual abuse, and about post-apocalyptic violent desperation rather than quiet despair. I've recently been involved in some debate over the question, Can an adaptation contain meanings not present in the original text? Watching "Children of Men" and then reading the James novel provides *loads* of evidence that the answer is *yes*. The novel was written in 1992 and expresses, along with universal concerns, others which are specific to its time. (After the superficial ‘greed is good’ ‘80s, have men and women stopped knowing how to love each other?) The film, made in 2006, is about things James couldn’t have dreamed of in 1992; it’s definitely an allegory for our time (as the truly frightening visual allusions to Abu Ghraib towards the end of the film make all-too-clear).Is one better than the other? I felt the film more strongly, possibly because it is so timely. But the book is incredible in its own right, chilling in different but no less effective ways. I’ll be thinking about both for a long, long time.
Show Less
LibraryThing member eyrehead247
I thought that the first half of this read was exciting. However, as it got closer to the end, it seemed like the author was stretching to make an ending.
LibraryThing member kaelirenee
If she used one more poorly placed simile, I was going to throw the book out the window. Excellent plot, great premise, and decent character development. I wish I could stand the author's writing style.
LibraryThing member liamfoley
The movie was so shallow and one dimensional compared with the book. James spends a lot more time on the why. The movie is very political, it turns the situation into a political statement. The book on the other hand is more spiritual, it forces the reader to look at our modern society its
Show More
spiritual malaise, and the decline in the respect for human life and dignity. Show Less
LibraryThing member misslilpaw
Can you imagine a world without children? A world where the last human being to be born has perished? A world where our great works of literature are left to gather dust on untouched shelves and our great buildings are forever closed and left to time’s weary hand? What remains of humanity (now
Show More
the ultimate endangered species) braces to in inherit this bleak no-future making what preparations is can for a time when there will be no one left to put out the lights. This is the world that Theodore Faron, Professor of Victorian Studies, of England’s prestigious Oxford University, inhabits. Passing through the university campus, strangely devoid of traffic, laughter and youth (it is, after all, a university), Theo is already something of a ghost in the living world. Dispassionate and detached from everything around him, Theo’s orderly routine comes to an abrupt halt when a woman named Julian approaches him on behalf of The Five Fishes, a small clandestine group concerned by the disturbing means used to ensure the dwindling population’s relative safety and comfort. This is the story of a man who must reawaken to his own inner humanity, to his own long silenced conscience and to the truth of his own heart. In P D James’ ruthlessly elegant novel, love is not just a force to be reckoned with, it is the only force to be reckoned with that matters in the end. Show Less
LibraryThing member ben_a
I picked this book up to re-read in the run-up to the Cuaron film version. The copy is an edition I believe I stole/borrowed from my cousin, and contains what seem like her college notes. I don't know what professor was clever enough to assign this book, but Children of Men would not be out of
Show More
place in a political science or philosophy syllabus. It's a polemical novel that transcends polemic, and would serve as an excellent introduction to anyone seeking to understand the motivations for seeking a "seamless garment of life." Show Less
LibraryThing member jopearson56
I really enjoyed the premise, that humanity is dying out because all men are sterile. I liked the details James provided about how people live their lives in this new world where no child has been born for about 25 years, what things change, how people act and react as humanity ages, how priorities
Show More
change. However, the story itself wasn't that interesting to me, and I particularly did not like the ending. I would have liked more focus on this New World: a fascinating idea! Humanity gradually dying off, what do we live for? Show Less
Subjects
Awards
Prometheus Award (Nominee — Novel — 1994)
The Guardian 1000 Novels Everyone Must Read (Science Fiction and Fantasy)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1992
Physical description
9.5 inches
ISBN
0679418733 / 9780679418733