Shades of Grey - Jasper Fforde

First thing's first; if you initially read the post title as Fifty Shades of Grey, then I want you to go sit on the naughty step, and think about what you've done.

I admit, I timed my reading of this book badly; I asked my parents to buy it for my birthday, which led to the horror of my dad Googling it, awkwardly knocking on my bedroom door and asking, "...do you mean the porn one?" So thank you, Fifty Shades of Grey, for that moment.

Anyway, to business. I have linked you up to the goodreads page of JASPER FFORDE'S (fifty-less) Shades of Grey, because it probably provides the most comprehensive summary of the story, and the TV Tropes page, for the lulz. (I promise to never use that phrase again. Even cyberly, I can't pull it off.)

Fforde immediately broke what I had believed to be one of the Cardinal Rules of writing - never, ever start a novel with a long, nonsensical explanation. I didn't have a bloody clue what was going on for the first two chapters, which just threw in phrase after phrase of Stuff I Did Not Understand. This was really annoying, until I realised that the cleverness lies in the fact that - after only a few chapters - you realise that you actually get it now. Nevertheless, it's a risk I don't think unestablished authors should take - if I hadn't known Jasper Fforde by reputation, and had picked Shades of Grey off Waterstone's shelf, I would've read the first paragraph and probably lobbed it straight back.

Fforde's one of those writers who's imagination is so ridiculously abundant, you can spend paragraphs at a time thinking 'that's just showing off'. He goes into minute detail to describe things we don't really care about (i.e. a breakdown of the features in a fictional magazine) for little purpose other than to demonstrate that he has Thought It Through. Having noticed it, I will be heavily predisposed to Think It Through from now on - Shades of Grey was a masterclass in creating a new (or different) world.

I also loved the female protagonist, Jane. Even though at the beginning you should probably hate her, you don't, partly because you're seeing through the eyes of Eddie Russett (who feels anything but hatred for her), but also partly because she's just awesome. Jane is what Katniss Everdeen would have been if she hadn't spent so much time whining.

Finally, for plus points; the sheer wittiness. Granted, I think the ability to make funnies that often is probably God-given as much as it is rehearsed, but dammit I can try.

Buuuut, one of the things that repeatedly pissed me off was every single characters' repeated failure to React Appropriately to the possibility of death. I mean, I've never been in a near-death situation, but I would imagine that my reaction would be stronger than mild annoyance, and my parents' reaction would definitely not be amusement. The tone Fforde takes in these bits is more appropriate to a comedy, but less appropriate to....like, life.

There was a character, Tommo, who I really wasn't sure whether I was supposed to like or not. Now, don't get me wrong, I love characters who aren't really on anyone's side - they're usually funny, interesting, unpredictable, and the most three-dimensional. However, I think this only really works well when you like the character, and I never really decided whether I liked Tommo or not.

 ****

Also, the ending. From a reader's perspective, it seriously pissed me off, but from a writer's perspective I thought it was brilliant. Funny that, isn't it? But generally, it was like Fforde managed to find a balance between George Orwell and Douglas Adams, which - let's be honest - is kind of genius in itself.