Trauma and True men...
Kamalika_Reads 49
How I came to know about this book:
What the book is about :
Flesh traces a life across borders, economies, and eras, but it does so in a voice that feels deliberately stripped down, almost austere. The novel follows István, a man from Hungary who migrates to London, spends two decades building a life there, and eventually returns to his hometown. It is basically almost a cradle to grave story of István. On the surface, it reads like a modern parable of movement and ambition, a rags-to-riches-and-back-again arc shaped by work, money, power, and the quiet hunger to belong.
What I have loved about the book :
The story itself is easy to move through. Szalay’s prose is clean and unadorned, and the narrative threads in elements of world politics and shifting economies without becoming overtly academic. Beneath the social and geopolitical backdrop runs a more intimate current: the exploration of masculinity. István’s relationships, his sense of worth, his hunger for validation, and his attempts to assert himself in unfamiliar spaces all point to a man negotiating what it means to be “successful,” “strong,” and “seen” in a world that keeps changing its rules.
What I felt could have been better :
Given its status as the Booker Prize winner of 2025, I approached the novel with high expectations. Perhaps that made the reading experience sharper, but I couldn’t help feeling that the execution didn’t quite meet the promise of the premise. The narration often leans heavily on repetition. Dialogues echo themselves so persistently that at times it feels less like realism and more like ritual, as though the same lines are being chanted back and forth. At times it felt like a tactic to increase word count. The effect can be stylistic, but for me, it dulled the emotional edge rather than sharpening it.
That emotional distance is where the book struggled most for me. Despite following István through his rise, his fall, his losses, and his quiet reckonings, I found it difficult to truly feel for him. His trauma never quite pierced the surface. His successes felt muted, his failures oddly hollow. The journey, though carefully mapped, rarely stirred anything deeper than mild curiosity.
Why one should read or not read this book:
There is no denying that Flesh is thoughtful and intentionally restrained. Its themes are relevant, its structure deliberate, and its ambitions clear. But intention does not always translate into connection. I often felt as though I was observing István through glass. I am able to see the shape of his life, but unable to touch its emotional core.
In the end, I suspect that the Booker label carried me further than the story itself. Had it not arrived with such a prestigious crown, I might not have felt compelled to stay with it until the last page. Flesh is a novel that invites reflection, certainly, but for me, it did so with a voice too quiet, too distant, to leave a lasting echo.
The book is available on Amazon : https://amzn.in/d/4GGZrLZ
Reading the recent booker winners have somehow confused me with the thought that the literature is moving fast (where ever it is) and somewhere I am not being able to match up the pace and the taste. What are your thoughts? Drop in your opinions.
Comments
Post a Comment