Dissecting The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society
By John J Kelley | November 18, 2018 |
The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, though far from being a mystery novel, still managed to perplex the WU Breakthrough Novel Dissection Group more than nearly any of our prior reads. While the concept of the story, which explores England’s emergence from the harsh shadow of WWII, holds a natural appeal, we were confused at how a novel so highly regarded, both within our group and with readers around the globe, could break so many rules we’ve come to expect of our reads. Given its epistolary format, the unfolding tale is relegated to letters, notes and telegrams, lending a reflective air to the action. Moreover, the story unfolds so naturally that it often lacks tension and telegraphs key plots points well in advance. And the characters, even while recounting tragic events, remain decidedly upbeat, scarcely displaying angst or fear.
Yet members of our group, by and large, found much to praise in the writing. Christopher Blake enjoyed the ensemble cast of “odd, diverse characters who might not have bonded, except for the dire circumstances in which they found themselves.” Leslie Budewitz felt the novel succeeded at “showing the universal through the particular” in its depiction of resilience to wartime occupation through the small acts of residents of a tiny island. And as Alisha Rohde noted succinctly, “The story had a lot of warmth to it.”
So, with that in mind, the overriding question that drives all of our dissections – “How did the author achieve breakthrough appeal?” – moved along a different tack. Indeed, our discussions repeatedly returned to considering how the authors, the late Mary Ann Shaffer and her niece Annie Barrows, connected with readers despite the challenges of their chosen narrative format and the largely predictable plot elements. Through our exploration, we hit upon these fundamental strengths, which not only sustained the novel but elevated it to both critical acclaim and commercial success:
- Shaffer and Barrows captured an appealing real-life setting, shedding light on a dark moment in its history.
- They crafted a delightful ensemble of characters that readers could embrace and celebrate.
- They anchored the story with heart, offering a reassuring tale of resilience in the face of tragedy.
Fair warning that *spoilers* lurk in the following recap of our exploration of these attributes.
Transporting Readers to a Moment in Time
As with one of our prior reads, A Gentleman in Moscow, The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society draws the reader back in time by offering a glimpse into a smaller world against the backdrop of a looming evil. In this case, the grand hotel standing stalwart against the rising tide of Stalinist Russia in A Gentleman in Moscow is replaced with a small, windswept channel island facing an onslaught of occupying German forces. Shaffer and Barrows contrast loving images of the isle with details of true wartime horrors faced by its inhabitants – family separations, rising hunger, citizen arrests. As Natalie Hart explained,
The authors excelled in giving us a snapshot of that time period and that island–educating many readers about a place and time we may have known little about. The tone and voice were strengths, as well. Although the story centered around some difficult topics, the book was easy and enjoyable to read.”
Al Budde noted too that the epistolary format, despite creating distance from the story action, was effective at evoking nostalgia for the period. Alisha felt the letters also “allowed for lots of telling (in a good way), and … made it possible to fill in lots of historical information and jump over bits that weren’t as important.”
A Diverse Ensemble of Compelling Characters
A prominent theme of the novel is the connections forged in times of distress. Friendships bloom. Communities form. The book title itself, which the group regarded as both charming and (mildly) off-putting, alludes to a “society” created as a spontaneous lie to shield a handful of islanders from harm after breaking the curfew imposed by occupying enemy forces. It is this central cast of secondary characters, the group concluded, which transformed the novel. To that end, there was lengthy discussion of how Elizabeth, founder of the title society, served as a nearly mythical story hero, in contrast with Juliet as the story protagonist. Even beyond Elizabeth, the group of distinctive secondary characters formed, as Natalie described, “a soul-sustaining tribe,” both to their fictional island community and to readers of the novel. From brooding Dawsey to eccentric Isola to kind-hearted Amelia, they and other society members offered readers a cast of characters for which to cheer when they rose and with which to commiserate when they faltered.
There was universal agreement the story soared as members of the society came into sharper focus over the course of the tale.
A Story Anchored in Heart
Perhaps the strongest attribute of The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society is its unapologetic heart. Members of the dissection group were intrigued at the backstory of how author Annie Barrows had become involved with the novel after the health of her aunt, author Mary Ann Shaffer, began to falter. From that act, which seems itself a labor of love, to the deft handling of real-life incidents interspersed throughout the fictional tale, many of them heartbreaking, the novel never shies away from the tragedies of life. As Natalie pointed out early in the discussion, for a novel with a light tone overall, it carried passages which resonated on a much deeper level, such as this lamentation on death and mourning,
When my son, Ian, died at El Alamein visitors offering their condolences, thinking to comfort me, said “Life goes on.” What nonsense, I thought, of course it doesn’t. It’s death that goes on; Ian is dead now and will be dead tomorrow and next year and forever. There’s no end to that. But perhaps there will be an end to the sorrow of it.”
That passage reveals another aspect of the heart of the novel, an enduring optimism that many in the group found refreshing in these uncertain times. It was an unexpected charm that surprised many of us, perhaps best expressed by Alisha, who summed up her feelings as follows:
The thing is, I was really in the mood for a comfort food-type of book, and this was good timing. It was really enjoyable, and I found myself inclined to just go with the flow of the book, overall. I honestly suspect that comforting quality has been part of its appeal for other readers.”
These are just a few of our take-aways in a book brimming with heart, but not entirely flawless. What are your thoughts? If you read The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, what aspects did you find inspiring, helpful, or frustrating? What elements did you consider to be strengths, or weaknesses? If you haven’t read it, can you relate to these observations in your own works in progress? Please share your thoughts below, so that we can learn together.
And if you’d like to join the group for our next dissection in January 2019, when we will dissect the mystery thriller In the Woods by author Tana French, please join us on Facebook. We would love to welcome you!
John J Kelley crafts tales of individuals at a crossroads, exploring themes of growth, reconciliation and community. His debut novel, The Fallen Snow, about a young soldier’s homecoming at the close of WWI, received a Publishers Weekly starred review and earned an Honorable Mention nod at the 2012 Foreword Reviews Book-of-the-Year Awards.
Born and raised in the Florida panhandle, John graduated from Virginia Tech and for a time served as a military officer. Today he lives with his partner in Washington, DC.
Ah, literary comfort-food. What a perfect description Alisha landed on. I tend to find these reads when I need them, too. And thinking about it now, they’re often books that seem to break all of the rules. Which in and of itself makes them worthy of our study.
Thanks John and WU Breakout Novel Dissection Group! Wishing you all a week of comfort-food – of both the literary and regular types.
Thanks, Vaughn! It was a comforting read, which is a feat in itself when writing about a matter so fraught with sadness.
It occurs to me now that no one in the group actually used the word “healing” in our discussion (to my recollection), but it’s a fitting description. The protagonist, Juliet, was on a journey of healing, as were the tribe of townsfolk she met on Guernsey Island.
Hope you are experiencing comfort – and warmth – now that the season has – finally – reached us. :)
I read the book after having seen the movie (twice, I confess. Ah, Dawsey…) and I was apprehensive/curious about the epistolary format. But my apprehension vanished quickly. I agree with all that was said above about the book, and I would add that for me, the fact that books brought the characters together and offered them hope as well as diversion, was a big piece of the novel’s appeal. The transcendent wisdom and universal truths found in the stories they read shone brightly though the darkness. And for me, the resilience of these people in the face of such horrors offered a contrast to the whiney anger of our own present-day culture (present company excluded, of course!!). I’ve become a student of the two World Wars and the times between, as I feel there are lessons for us to learn there. Thank you all for such a brilliant overview of this novel!
Yes! We did discuss the reads of the characters’ makeshift book group (of which I liked the concept, with members reading their own finds and exhorting their virtues to the others). Natalie, in particular, talked about how the read selections of the individuals offered a glimpse into their hopes and dreams, and a laser to what held their focus.
I agree, too, on the lessons to be learned of the past. My own writing, and the research for it, have taught me that so often. I like to imagine – or hope – that most today are coping too, even succeeding, though it may not appear that way at times.
John–thanks for effectively capsulizing the group’s reaction to the novel. I’ve had that assignment in a different context, and I know it’s hard to do. Well done.
Here’s what I’d like to know more about: “The book title itself, which the group regarded as both charming and (mildly) off-putting….” This caught my attention for two reasons. Titles really are important, so what was mildly off-putting about this one for the group?
My second reason is a growing personal bias against titles that describe something like The Ladies’ Small Appliance Repair and Cinnamon Bun Baking Society, or The Duluth Women’s Pet Rescue and Snow Removal Auxiliary. Such titles all too obviously take their cue from bestsellers with similar labels.
Based on your discussion summary, I assume potato-peel pie is related to real hardship suffered in the channel islands during the war. But if I saw such a title and had nothing else to go on, I doubt I’d want to know more. If your care to, please comment.
Thanks, Barry. You captured the essence of the discussion regarding the title well. Several of us noted the title felt “cute,” and that if making a reading decision solely on it we might have been opted for something else. Of course, millions of readers might just as eagerly flock toward it for just the same reason because, as you note, titles are important ;).
I recall one member mentioning that, without having any reference, “potato peel pie” made her think the tale might be set in the Deep South, from which I hail. You know … sweet potato pie, fried green tomatoes. When in reality, it was indeed a reference to the hardships and hunger on the island during the wartime occupation.
In general, all the people who didn’t like the title thought it sounded too “twee,” like the story would be overly sappy or cute. In fact, it kept me from wanting to read this book every since it came out, despite many people having recommended it to me.
Thanks for the recap of the groups discussion, John. This idea that a breakout novel could break rules is so interesting. I’d love to hear from the authors who have done this and ask some questions. Did they know the rules? Did they intentionally break them? I’d love to hear the thought process.
Yes, sometimes we come across interviews and such that explain some of the author’s decisions. One that comes to mind is from our earlier read of A Gentleman in Moscow (also mentioned in the post). Amor Towles, the author, had explained that he purposely gave his protagonist and the book’s omniscient narrator a buoyant voice because he knew the story was a long one that would hit upon many dark matters. He essentially said he wanted to keep readers entertained while the rather complex plot developed.
While they may exist, no one came upon any similar explanations from the author on this particular read. Even the author notes at the end didn’t provide much detail on the handling of the novel between the two authors, which was of interest to many.
I’m not sure why it took me so long to read this book, since I’ve heard for years that it was wonderful. I actually saw the movie first and, I confess, fell madly in love with Dawsey. I picked up the novel the next day and didn’t put it down until I was done. Yes, it did break a whole lot of rules, but “comfort-food” really is the best way to describe it. In these uncertain times, it was the perfect escape. It was hopeful throughout, even in the dark points.
Yes, it remained resoundingly upbeat even when venturing into those dark places.
I’ve yet to see the movie, but a few members noted there were some plot adjustments. I am curious to see what was changed.
The big thing is that the novel was all letters, and that doesn’t work so well in film format, so you watch events happening. They had to condense things, certainly. The filmmakers did a fantastic job of capturing the essence and the tone of the story. Casting was fantastic.
Yes–Dawsey was fantastic in the movie! And I did like how the movie format made some of the storytelling a little fuller than we could get in the letter-format.
Based on both your recommendations, it has just moved to the top of my Netflix watchlist. I may even try to convince Jim to give it a go tonight. I’ll explain that Dawsey is quite the hunk, and that should do the trick ;).
I still haven’t seen the movie yet. But all this positive response to Dawsey confirms a bit of what we wondered about/discussed in the book discussion. I’m betting that freed from the burden of having to say things on paper, Dawsey (via the scriptwriter and the actor) could shine a bit more on screen.
I did watch the movie last night, and loved it.
As to your point, Alisha, I felt so much more engaged with the budding romance between Juliet and Dawsey due to the interactions written for them for the screenplay. For that matter, the relationship and ultimate chafing between Mark and Juliet felt more immediate as well.
I do think those relationships in particular translated better to the screen, just due to the immediacy of having the characters engaged directly rather than recounting the encounters from one perspective via the letters.
As you know, John, I read the book but never got to participate in the actual dissection because of my deadline. I’m grateful to you for such a succinct and well-written summary. Feel like I didn’t miss as much.
The whole book, for me, was about the theme of resiliency via things that are available to most all of us–food, the natural world, companionship, and societal bonds. In that sense, the title worked better for me after I read it the book; it sounded too twee to appeal to me on its own.
Juliet’s publisher-suitor was trying to pull her into the flash-bang of temporary, big pleasures. I’m glad she showed him the door.
And now I have to go see the movie to compare!
Though the discussion was good, your sage analysis was missed. I hope all is going well.
Yes, that is a good way of putting it – resiliency from the bonds we form, and the strength we gain from connecting – to ourselves, to nature, to others vs the chasing of rainbows and immediate solutions. I did love the book, but this is one case where I felt the writers for the movie version did an excellent job of drawing from the key themes and highlighting them to great effect for the screen.