Skip to main content

End to End review

I very rarely review self-published books, but I love humorous travel books, particularly those set in the UK from the likes of Bill Bryson and Stuart Maconie. So, when I was offered the chance to read a book described by the author as 'a travelogue adventure in a similar style to Bill Bryson' featuring a bicycle trip from Lands End to John O'Groats I plunged in, and I don't regret it.

Alistair McGuinness tells the story of a three-man trip over the 800+ mile trail that would sometimes test the individuals involved to the limit, but that also brought romance to one and a nightmare experience in a youth hostel to all. (The dog mentioned on the cover, incidentally, doesn't come into the story at all - it's just a postscript that somehow got into the subtitle.) The book is solidly written, and has been well edited. I never got bored or felt I wanted to give up on reading it. If I had to sum it up in one word I would say 'Pleasant.' Two words? 'Mildly pleasant.'

Unfortunately, it didn't really live up to the promise of being similar to Bryson's style. The key to good humorous travel writing is to skip the mundane and highlight (dare we even say exaggerate in some cases?) the unusual and extraordinary, injecting a sense of the absurd and delightful. There is too much writing in End to End  along the lines of this extract: 'Breakfast was a quiet affair, broken by requests for water, juice, and more tea. Our cooked breakfast was served by a teenage waitress, who didn't hover at the table too long, except to collect orders for additional toast.' And I care about this because? It's a factual account, but it lacks any bite.

There is one well-flagged incident in the youth hostel visit, which had plenty of potential for humour, lacked pizzazz. We have a nice set-up with one of three cyclists saying he doesn't want to stay in a Youth Hostel, particularly with dormitories and organic muesli as breakfast. With a certain inevitability a hotel booking is missed, it's too late to book a family room in the hostel, and all the worst possibilities come together in a dormitory with plenty of comic opportunity in the problems of getting back into a dark dormitory when returning from a night out. But although the opportunities for hilarity are there, the telling lacks the sophistication it needs, falling a little flat. A comic narration like this needs to build relentlessly, and for whatever reason this never happens.

So, at risk of damning End to End with faint praise, it is fine as a simple description of a biking holiday that really stretched those involved. But it has no real narrative thrust, none of the comedy genius that is present even in Bill Bryson's lesser works. I am glad I read this book. I hope others will too. But think of it as a simple travel account, not travel humour.

End to End will be available on Amazon soon...
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you  


Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope