Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookpossum
I read this book as being about a particular place and a particular way of life. Rebanks doesn't talk much about Oxford because that's not what the book is about. That is, he is writing about life as a shepherd, not life as a student in Oxford. So yes, of course he touches on various aspects of his life, such as school, going to Oxford at a later stage, mentions UNESCO, and so on. But these parts of his life aren't what the book is about.
I don't think it is reasonable to berate him or call him blindly ignorant to other ways of life because he doesn't write about them. They aren't a part of his life as a shepherd.
As for astrangerhere's reference to the "other", I interpreted her as referring to another way of life from the way of life of the vast majority of us, living in cities, getting our food (wrapped in plastic) from the supermarket, and so on. That for me was certainly the real interest and enjoyment in this book: showing me something of a very different way of life from the one I know. While I don't like Rebanks' writing style, I did find the content interesting.
|
I had similar thoughts. It is about a way of life and not necessarily "my life as a shepherd." I read an interview where he stated that the book was "a letter to his father" and intended to show respect for his father and that he was very glad that his dad was able to read the book before he died and tell him how proud he was. I also read that his intent was to portray shepherding life as an insider. He wanted to contrast with the famous literature about shepherds written by outsiders.