Kingdom Come – J.G. Ballard
We were missing Ann and Pete for this meeting, but welcomed Daniel to his first book group meeting. We were all distinctly underwhelmed by this dystopian account of the dark heart of suburban southern England. I think that all of us were expecting a little more from Ballard and that this book was not a good introduction to his work.
Martin and Nicky both brought up that the concept of the book was unbelievable, with Nicky saying that she found this an obstacle to enjoying the book. Paddy said that he thought that the setting was great, but that Ballard failed to set up a dystopia. I didn’t particularly mind that the plot was unbelievable, but felt that at times, instead of building up an atmosphere of menace, the events came across as silly, which undermined any satirical or metaphorical intent.
Ciara felt that all the characters were two dimensional, which prevented her from engaging with the book. We discussed the protagonist in particular, who Paddy felt lacked an emotional drive behind his actions. Daniel felt that he was intended by Ballard to be representative of apathy, which fitted in with Paddy’s comment that he reacted too calmly when witnessing extreme violence. We discussed the role of the Metrocentre and Ballard’s comments on consumerist society. Martin described giant shopping centres as his ‘worst nightmare’ and felt that Ballard was anticipating a future where people socialise in a safe, sanitised environment, and display the apathy of some of the book’s characters. Daniel disagreed to some extent, feeling that Ballard had misunderstood the way some people find shopping a unifying force.
Of the other characters, we found Cruise, the figurehead, quite interesting but didn’t go into too much depth discussing his significance. Martin and Daniel liked the character of the mental patient, discussing his significance – the voice of reason, an anarchic figure… I was confused about the significance of the deceased father, and why the truth about him was revealed. Nicky agreed, feeling that this wasn’t adequately explained. Daniel felt that maybe he was representative of the author himself, trying to infiltrate and understand the fascist mentality.
Paddy wondered what the connection was between the the Metrocentre and the sports club. Nicky felt that there was no real connection, which fitted in with most people’s view that the plot was badly thought out.
To sum up the rest of the criticisms, Ciara felt that the book was full of inconsistencies, Martin thought that it was badly written and full of throwaway sentences and most of us felt that he should have written in more detail about less subjects. I described it as a minor book by a major writer, and felt that the book demonstrated that Ballard’s finger wasn’t on the pulse with his material. Despite this, our disappointment with the book made for an really enjoyable discussion.
Overall, we felt that his work is worth reading but would probably recommend High Rise or Crash as books to start with.
