08/12/2013 The Review Show

this month: As the world mourns his death, the life of Mandela on film.

A movie about an unknown musician from the Coen brothers. A dramatic

detective stories. Visions of war and health from the

Chapman brothers. And music from Primal Scream. Coming up: The Great

Train Robbery from the point of view of the cops.

And some surprising selections for this year's best book from my

guess, Paul Morley, AL Kennedy and James Delingpole. When guests at the

premiere of Mandela: Long Walk To Freedom entered the cinema on

Thursday night, they had no idea that the subject of the film had in

fact died that evening. The movie, based on his 1994 autobiography,

spans being tyre life of the man whose generosity of spirit made him

the best loved leader of the world. So does this film do justice to this

titanic figure? I have cherished the ideal of a

free, democratic society, where all persons live together in harmony

with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and

achieve. But, if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to

die. The man's life in its completeness is extraordinary. What

is come from and been through in order to deliver the punch at the

end, the political and moral punch. We realised we would have to tell

the whole life. It was a 2-person story, the story of Mandela and

Winnie. It is a love story in the most incredible way. It tracks the

political path that were opened to Mandela. For the first time, his

wife felt, that is why she became such a rage machine. Usually they

wait until just before the girls come back from school to take me

away. So the girls will find an empty home. They think about these

things, you know. They think about me a lot. What Mandela and his

colleagues did was they actually changed the whole society without

warfare. A revolution without blood. I want the film to be entertaining

and educational, but most of all, I want them to realise there was a

fantastic moral power. Because that applies to anywhere in the world. If

you can do it, so can we. So, that was the screenwriter there

talking about taking a deep breath, deciding they were going to cover

the whole life of Nelson Mandela. This is ambitious. Yes, and I think

it was a mistake. I would have called it the long night of Gordon.

-- boredom. I think it would've been more interesting if they had named

it Young Mandela. One didn't really get to know him at all. I suppose

the idea was to introduce his life to a generation who might not know

the complexity of his story. If you look at an equivalent film, Gandhi

is pretty much 50 minutes longer and it kind of cuts to the chase a bit

more. You cannot afford to lose an hour, because you lose the key

thing, the Robben Island experience, why you find out how

this terrible experience would allow you to make an extraordinary

decision to not respond to hate with hate. The performance by Idris Elba

is wonderful. But his story is so fragmented that you lose Nelson as

soon as he goes into Robben Island and you get him back when it comes

out with all these lapidary sayings. I think it you want to say to

people, you can make these wonderful things happen as well, it is more of

a shame that you don't see the process, you don't see how they

turned the prison around. Using non-violent tactics, the guys in

their really did an extraordinary thing which you don't quite

understand. They took one issue the understand. They took one issue, the

battle not to wear shorts. They made that symbolic of the kind of changes

that Mandela and his fellow prisoners wanted to make. That was

the problem, everybody -- every thing became sketchy because they

were trying to hack in so much. By the very nature of wanting to put so

much in, we get very little. Between 1970 and 1990, that was symbolised

I'd just a little bit more grey hair. What you mentioned, they want

to appeal to people who don't know the story, I think that is a real

problem. That should not be the case. They have to tell a

sophisticated, complicated, brilliant story about a complicated

man rather than reducing it to those that don't really know the story. In

the end, we end up with something bland. If you look at his first

marriage, you do see Nelson Mandela hitting his first wife, we see his

womanising. It is not a hagiography. I thought it was actually not a

subtle film. It was too black-and-white, you might say, in

its portrayal. We are all aware the apartheid up -- regime was not

pleasant, but it seemed all the white characters were rather scrawny

looking, as if the casting people had gone overboard in trying to find

the most un-attractive people they could find. Of course there were

white people who supported him. I would like to know more about the

white communists who sheltered him at the farm where he was eventually

captured. But the story of him and Winnie was interesting, wasn't it

primer -- wasn't it? Her story is the only one which really survives

intact. But my understanding was the press cutting that was given to him

in prison relating to her being unfaithful in marriage, that was

odd. I don't know if there were to press clippings. I wanted to know

why they kept cutting away to this is what the American news

broadcasters... I mean, I know it is because they are making the film for

America, but if they were making a film about an American civil rights

activist, they wouldn't be cutting away to news clips from other

countries. Over time, all the bits that were edgy and complicated got

taken away so that we were left with what ultimately became almost like a

daytime movie romance. And the music, the strings that went out of

fashion in the 1970s, I could not understand that element. That

symbolised how weak the film was, to really celebrate and represent an

extraordinary figure. Such a missed opportunity. But the thing was, we

had to have this film. And it must've been complicated to make. So

all we get is a series of compromises. So would it have been

better to focus on the young Mandela? Or the prison. There is

nothing like a good prison movie. This could have been the Shawshank

redemption with knobs on. How did he cope, particularly in the early

stages when they didn't have any books to read? How did they stop

going mad? This is an interesting story. And he was a lawyer, he was

very intellectual. But it is difficult to show the life of the

mind, isn't it? I think it is hard in general to do it, because

ultimately it has to be entertainment, but that is the

problem. They had a shot of him doing press ups. For crying out

loud. It was such a shame. Idris Elba 's's performance, that wasn't

hollow. Nobody in their wasn't good. His mother was fantastic. I think it

was an impersonation, not a performance. Whatever our panel made

of the film, I'm sure there will be many who want to find out more about

his life through Mandela: Long Walk To Freedom, in cinemas on January

the 3rd. Now, to a fictional character whose

life is lived in blanket obscurity, in the new film from the Coen

brothers. Inside Llewyn Davis follows the misfortunes of a

talented but luckless folk musician. Living in a magic existence, he

relies on papers from friends and his haphazard agent to eat out a

living. Nobody knew was when we were a duo. It's not like we were a big

act. Mel? How are you doing, kid? I would say he is definitely a loner.

Not by choice, but just at this point he is having a hard time

relating to people. He's been so compressed by life that he doesn't

have the energy for empathy. This is one of those guys who has something

to say, knows what he wants to say, has the means to express it, but

people aren't interested in listening.

There is someone special in the audience tonight you might get up

and held me if you would give him a round of applause. The Coen brothers

have taken great pains to recreate the Greenwich Village folk scene of

the 1960s. Soundtrack is curated I T Bone Burnett to previously

collaborated with the brothers on O Brother, Where Art Thou? . You know

the saying, there is no failure like success. These were guys that were

just making the rounds, living like farmers. They were ploughing the

fields and putting in the seeds and harvesting, just going around doing

their work. They weren't thinking about making a new form of music

called folkrock. This is an error we think we know

very well, Greenwich Village at the start of the 60s. -- an era. How

faithful is it, do you think? Well, I'm not quite old enough to know!

Without any of the politics, why people with singing those songs and

making new songs about people doing things, ordinary people, that is not

there. It is entertaining to see Justin Timberlake doing whatever

that thing was. It is a very gentle, innocent kind of take on a very

specific little bubble within that scene. I don't know, I kind of get

the feeling that they didn't quite love the music as much as the music

in O Brother, Where Art Thou?. They hadn't quite embraced it, because of

the slight fakeness of it in the sense that they were trying to

recreate something. I didn't see any of that gentleness. I thought it was

a harsh, brutal, raw film. I've rarely seen a film which tells it so

much like it is. This is what life is like. I thought the experiences

of Llewyn Davis, where kind of hoping he might become the next Bob

Dylan. It reminds you life does not always deliver.

I thought it was a Disney version. Or perhaps a Mumford version. Within

12 seconds I realised what the ending would be, which we cannot

give away. 12 seconds. That is like, oh, no, that is ridiculous,

that is what they are going to do. The set pieces, Justin Timberlake in

a beard. And when John Goodman turns up, it is Jeff ridges liked. On

every level I was constantly let down. I did not think it was like it

was at all. The best thing was a cat, there is a cat element, which

made it more of a Disney film. If it was a Disney film, I would think it

was a return to form. The Coen brothers, middle ranking. It is the

best performance by a cat ever. There is a moment when he

contemplates leaving the cats. The cat looks at him, as if to say, are

you going to leave me? It is perfect. I could not disagree with

you more. I loved the emptiness. That fantastically funny ditty about

please, Mr Kennedy. Llewyn Davis is part of the recording. We think it

is going to become a massive hit. And that is not the punch line. In

the hands of lesser film-makers the the hands of lesser film-makers, the

sum would have been a hit and Llewyn Davis has signed away the royalties

and does not get it. This is left to your imagination. I Inc it is

subtle, a beautiful film, a masterpiece. -- I think. Did you see

vintage Coen brothers? They are wonderful, but I do not think it is

vintage. They are trying to do a difficult thing, about the middle

ground, when you are not quite good enough. Doing their take on being a

mediocre person and sliding towards the back, you are not quite doing

good. It is delicate and bits of it for the parts. You wonder what the

point is, the person playing Llewyn Davis, is he so good it is a shame

he does not make it? It was not great T Bone Burnett. I think he is

too tidy. The hair was too tidy, the too tidy. The hair was too tidy the

sweaters were too tidy. This is an exploration of mediocrity, which is

unusual. Is he meant to be mediocre? They are not making him

out to be mediocre, they make him out to be brilliant and the failure

is to do with other circumstances, not talent. He is not good enough

and not quite nice enough to make up for... We just don't know. One of

the attractive things about the film is that he might possibly make it.

You are thinking is this the moment the agent is impressed? What about

the treatment of the music. The film does let it breathe. They like the

songs to become part of the story. There is something at the centre of

it that was missing. I think it does not have the scene that was in the

film about Johnny Cash, where you have the heartless rendition by

Johnny Cash and he says if you were hit by a van, what would using? The

guy who does not seeing the thing he would sing. -- what would you

perform? If you want to see the cat, the best performance, inside Llewyn

Davis is in cinemas from the 24th of January. Somewhere at home I have a

battered addition of Emil And The Detectives, the German classic. It

is an adventure story much loved by several generations and now it has

been adapted for the National Theatre Christmas production. Would

you help me? Help you? Me, help you? I understand, you don't know me

That would be ace. You would you could that would be so. No speeches,

Gustav, but everyone calls me Toots. Emil. He is a boy given money by his

grandmother to take it to Berlin. He meets a man on the train who robs

him and the story is about how he gets the money back. It was a

pioneering book when it was published in 1929. Erich Kastner set

the story in a contemporary city. He had children who were recognisable.

They were not in a fairy tale forest. They were on trams and

buses. It is a contemporary story. This is him, he is the victim of a

crime. We decided to set it in Berlin in 1929 when it is originally

set and it is an extraordinary period with Weimar Germany, and

amazing gift for the creative team to create onstage. # Take good care

where you go. It takes you into a world where adults steals from a

child and tries to get away with it. The moral themes of the story

are serious. Even though it is told in a joyful way. I loved the book as

a child. Do you think you would have hat to have had that experience to

fall for the charms of the production? I am 50 years too old to

review this properly. For me, it was too sweet. Therefore, I would say,

thinking about myself as an eight-year-old, I would hate it

because it was too sweet. I did ask some children after and they did

enjoy it. I do not want to know that. The fact that children were

onstage dancing annoyed me. That is because I am too old. If we are

preparing children for what is happening next in their lives I

wonder if this sweet innocence is the way to go. The source material

and the first thing in the city, the and the first thing in the city the

first thing about them being children, it is a shame it is so

sweet. For me, that let it down slightly. It was not sophisticated

enough to engage a child with anything but its weakness. I think

it prepared the way. There is a scene and much play made of the

relationship between pro and his mother. He has to be the adult -

mother. He has to be the adult -- Emil. I think it was genuinely

disturbing when it was broken. I try to think whether I would have

thought it was magical when I was children will stop you have this

amazing set. Bauhaus. I think it might be like Matilda, when you feel

that people below a certain height in the audience have different

concerns. It might tap into something that is no longer a

concern when you are an adult. What they tried to pitch to adults was

the setting of 1929. There are hints of darkness in the story. I read the

book before I went to see it. I thought it was a charming book and I

thought the charm was missing in the production. I must confess, which is

naughty of me, I was listening to be squeaky children, being annoying,

and thinking it is 1929 in Berlin and so in 1935 they will be in the

Hitler youth and after that they will be off to the Eastern front.

The production notes to that. There is a character who possibly will

become a Hitler youth. They made it darker than the book. You see

children's authors referring to it often as their favourite children's

book. I can see why, it has an innocence. When it was written,

there was no knowledge of what is about to happen. Now, we have the

sense of absolute knowledge. For me, I could not get out of my mind... It

I could not get out of my mind. . It was like watching the White ribbon.

You knew in 12 years, they would be different children, different

people. Does it add another dimension? It is both very sweet,

appropriately in some cases, and then you have Nazi hints in the

character who is dying to get an extra uniform. It is frankly quite

terrifying. This new generation of talented and experienced child

performers. I was sitting in a gathering of them, being

aggressively professional as they viewed their colleagues. They were

the harshest critics. They were more on the ball than the grown-up actors

I know. They can be in Matilda, they can be in this. There might be a

permanent children's Co. There is Billy Elliot. The element of fame.

You can see it on the children's faces, especially when they invaded

the audience. You have two in baby audience. It was scary, they are so

into the idea they are onstage. You have people who are experienced and

then you have people like Amy Wilmot, her first professional

performance. They are getting carried away with the idea that it

is Berlin when it is. I found it like a cartoon. I did not get a

sense of Berlin and a great moment in time. Perhaps for a younger

audience, Emil And The Detectives is playing until March. And now another

detective story. This time, an event that shocked Britain 50 years ago

and still captures the public imagination. Two new dramas on BBC

One aim to give both sides of the story of the Great Train Robbery.

The first, A Robber's Tale, focuses on plans to rob the Glasgow to use

to mail train. The films by Chris Chibnall, who wrote the Doctor Who

and was behind Broadchurch on ITV. Luke Evans plays Bruce Reynolds the

Luke Evans plays Bruce Reynolds, the charismatic gang leader who

masterminded the raid. You were in Wandsworth? Mistaken identity. Enjoy

your night, but do not get carried away. The robbery was known as the

crime of the century. It netted more than ?2 million, over 40 million

into day's money. -- today's. A Copper's Tale is the detective

story, following Jim Broadbent as Chief Inspector Tommy Butler as he

leads the investigation. His enquiries are conducted under the

glare of the media spotlight and under the gaze of a public largely

sympathetic to the robbers. His determination and professional pride

means that he will not rest until each of the robbers is behind bars.

Early turn is officially 9am until 5pm. I expect you here until at

least ten. From the outset, it is a very strong sense of its own style.

Yes, and I was relieved. I did not want three hours from an era of

drabness. What the director decided to do in the first episode was to

restyle it is kind of the avengers meets The Italian Job Central Coast

Marshall. That Was All Exciting. Obviously, They Must've Taken

Tremendous Liberties. . I hated the fact that it had been put through

that filter. There is an eternal attempt to get some of the magic

from HBO and Scandinavia, it is extraordinary. For me, it was almost

two films. I think structurally that was a lack of nerve. One film is

from the view of the cops and one from the robbers. I would have

preferred a much more imaginative combination to make one film.

Separate, there was likely empty. You didn't get enough detail and I

would've liked to have seen a more imaginative of blending the two

stories. Although it did mean we had a focus on the story of the police,

which we hadn't had before. We didn't know about the police work. I

think if you stay with it, you might feel the glamour of the train

robbery was kind of shallow and you do know that story much better, but

if you cling on to the second one Jim Broadbent is being a force of

nature. It's lovely. You've got beautiful little details. Jack

Mills, the guy who would sit on the head, the train driver backtrack who

was hit on the head, it was pointed out that that guy never got better.

That is allowed to breed in the second part. -- to breathe. I think

there is a tradition in this country. If you think of all these

great heist caper is, you always want the robbers to get away with

it. I think what this does is habit both ways. You get the criminals

glamorised in the first episode and then the second one you get the

real-life drudgery, this vengeful cop trying to get his man, which she

does. I thought it worked well. We're going to have these

anniversaries with a constant temptation of revealing something

new. I didn't really think that it did reveal anything. I thought Jim

Broadbent was a bit narrow, actually. I found it underwhelming.

What I was intrigued by was if 2 What I was intrigued by was if

million is worth 4 million, what about the 30 years that they were

put away for? What would they be put away for now? This seemed to reveal

any thing knew about it. Backtrack anything new about it. I wouldn t

anything new about it. I wouldn't have a nickname if I was in it.

Those great train robbery dramas are on BBC One on the 18th and 19th of

December. Our music tonight comes from Primal Scream, formed in

Glasgow 30 years ago and still going strong. They are currently touring

with material from that 10th studio album. This is their most recent

single, goodbye Johnny. # Johnny. # It's a soundless sound when the sun

don't show. # The nights up there like the great

escape. # To push me down How it suffocates.

# Johnny. # I'd go across the world but not

away. Goodbye Johnny.

# Can't hear anything Anybody says. # Oh, how the passion is crushed

under the sky. # Oh, how I hate everything that is mine.

# Johnny. # Everybody's drunk in the world

below, Johnny. # It's a soundless sound when the

sun don't show. # Somebody made it and I just can't

fit. # And here's the excuse I have for

it. # Goodbye, Johnny. # Goodbye, Johnny.

# Goodbye, Johnny. # Goodbye, Johnny.

And there will be more from Primal Scream a little later. Earlier, we

discussed the work of the Coen brothers and we turn now to the

brothers who've been often labelled the bad boys of Brit art. Jake and

Dinos Chapman gained notoriety alongside Tracey Emin when their

mannequins of children with genitals on their faces were shown at the

Royal Academy back in 1997. They continued to court controversy by

creating visions of health, featuring Nazi toy soldiers, and by

pacing -- painting over works by Adolf Hitler. Now, the new

Serpentine celebrates their work. We approached it thinking about the

space and what things have been seen in London, just as a kind of prison

Break -- prosaic first trawl. I think most of it is new work.

Interspersed with some other stuff. The title of the exhibition, Come

And See, was inspired by a film which detected the Nazi invasion of

Belarus during World War II. It seemed to be an analogue is what we

were doing. It descends into something which is not particular

will stop it starts off being realistic. And then it turns into a

less surrealism, it becomes kind of fantasy, violent on a different

level. At the centre is a film by the Chapmans themselves. It is a

selection of bits of films we've made. I think some of it is maybe 20

years old. Some of it is quite recent. Film-making is good, it just

depends more on collaboration. This script has been knocking around the

years. It is an idea of a history of production, starting off with our

birth. There are some scenes in their joining up with a Colin O P

video. -- colonoscopy. It cements their reputation as provocative as.

20 years on, they are as defiant as ever. There is a Venn diagram of

people who are idiots who don't get it because they have no sense of

humour, and people who understand. The more you suppress things, the

more you actually invite their transgression, anyway. This stuff is

funny. It's more funny than it is dour.

So, a time when a lot of contemporary art does take itself

very seriously, but there we have it. I've always thought of them as

comedians. It is interesting that it is in an art context, in a gallery.

To some extent what they do is at the extreme extent of British

humour, like Monty Python. That is one way of taking it. It isn't

really provocative or offensive unless you decide it is. It gets

called troublesome, but it isn't, it is quite quaint in an odd way. And

within that, you ask, what is it really doing apart from being an

extreme sense of humour? And at this point in their career, they are

reaching a certain age, you wonder whether the gag itself is starting

to get repetitive will stop --. And repetition is part of what they do

as well. You say they have reached a certain age, but anyway, they

haven't. Their work is celebrating childishness. I think their epitaph

will read, we got away with it. It is not given to many others, the

chance to do that. I love their stuff. It is so puerile and

tasteless. I could have sat there all stood there for hours looking at

the dioramas of Nazi soldiers and skeletons in German helmets. What a

fantastic sick idea. And dinosaurs. People living in the guts of

dinosaurs. I could've stayed there day. I love it. What did you make of

it's there is a darkness at the centre of what he was describing. I

don't know if I'm more disturbed by him being so happy about

disembowelled dinosaurs. It is very funny, it is weirdly cute to be

together, they are companionable, constantly leaving little messages.

Part of their aim is to make you stare a lot next to the strange clan

members. If you stare at them for a long time and think about something

making them, they are literally visions of health. It hasn't gone

well for the Nazis. If you actually read the text that accompanies the

works, they do take you just write a strange place. -- took quite a

strange place. If we get lulled into the idea that they are slapstick

comedians, then we get drawn back to the idea that what they are doing is

actually quite serious and dark. the idea that what they are doing is

actually quite serious and dark For me, coming away from it, this

building in the middle of Hyde Park, it is isolated. It was

vaudeville in a gallery setting But vaudeville in a gallery setting. But

what is their position in the world? They have very nice lives, they are

settled and successful. They are superstars in the world. Nothing

wrong with that, is there? No, but is that right? It used to be

required that there was this double act that did what they do.

Ultimately, it has drained the meaning out of it. Or is that

falling into the trap, and actually they say, you've fallen for it. It

is completely restrict -- repeat with meaning.

I maintain a lot of interest in what they do. There is something

old-fashioned. You are going to die, you are going to rot and bear that

in mind. Sex is a peculiar thing to do, so do not get hung up on it And

the opposite of art is probably fascism. I am OK with that.

Old-fashioned in the sense that if you take comedy to the extreme, this

is where you end up. That is inside most comedians' head. There is

craft. They make a big deal of it being thrown away, but the effort

has gone into the painting and the detail. In its way, the triumphant

death, the picture, you can stare at it and you notice new things every

time. Although they make a virtue of it being trashed, it is good trash.

They are a double act. In this sense, there is a craftsperson, good

at putting together leases, and the ideas, it is the equivalent of a

double act. Do we see the same craft in the film they made of their

lives? There is an extraordinary moment, giving birth to the adult

Delos Chapman. The exhibition is very male -- Delos Chapman. You

could not mistake that from anybody else. It is a funny film. It is

about what art is supposed to do. It looks at them in a serious way and

in a non-serious way. Some of it is throw away. The etchings are very

beautiful. I hope there is a bloody good punch line to the whole of

this. Even if it takes 20 years I hope it is spectacular. You can make

up your own mind. Come And See Is at the Sackler Gallery. Finally, we

could not ignore the fact that it is the season of giving. We asked

guests to nominate their book of the year. And to recommend their fellow

panellist reads it for the first time. I picked the author biography

of the man who invented the word genocide. An extraordinary idea,

genocide. An extraordinary idea inventing that word. You could

imagine it had always existed. He was at a high-level operation in 11

different languages. He made his life's study, what he came to define

as this thing, genocide. It is only in the 1940s that he began to hone

the concept. He basically killed himself working to get legally

binding statutes internationally, to establish the principle that

countries could intervene when other countries were destroying groups

within their country, which will not be popular with any government

anywhere. It is a beautifully written book. It looks at the power

of art to sustain you and to stave off the destruction of groups by

other groups because in a healthy culture that is difficult. We gave

the book to James. If Alison's plan was to bludgeon me with a serious

work, she failed. I thought it was fascinating. The first half is an

interesting account of a refined, educated, middle-aged Jewish

person's escape from Europe as it collapses and before that, his life

on the farm in Lithuania. These were not just faceless people being shot

by Germans, these were real people, it brings that into focus. The

second part, almost as interesting, his battle to get the term genocide

recognised by the United Nations and the horse trading that goes on. The

British delegation do not like the term genocide, because half of the

word is Greek and the other half is Latin. Tell us what you picked for

your choice. I picked a book by Guy Walters telling the true story of

the great escape. This is the film we see all the time Christmas and we

know that Steve McQueen jumps over the wire on his motorbike. In real

life, this did not happen. Never! Guy Walters is like a Dick test

Guy Walters is like a detective historian. The man in prison wrote

the bestselling book that became the basis for the movie, representing

the great escape is a jolly Jake. In real life, it was an enterprise

where people were shocked by the Gestapo. They were warned they were

going to be shocked and went ahead anyway. We gave that choice to Paul

Morley. This is when I started to think of nicknames for James. It is

people who have gone from public school into a prisoner of war camp.

Didn't go. That comes to mind. The book seems to want to rectify the

idea that the great escape was not correct, but it also goes into that

derring-do area and seems to reduce Nazi Germany to the equivalent of

headmasters and housemasters of a public school. I was disconcerted.

It starts out with lazy language. It is filled with things such as, as we

shall see, and it is a measure of. I came away feeling it was not

necessarily an underestimation of what happened, but the death edited

version and this needed to be wrecked divide. Are you distressed

he did not like it - this one needed to be rectified. One of the most

interesting points for me was the fact that you mock the idea he

suggests the commander of the camp ran its like a benign headmaster.

But the evidence bears that out. They were like naughty public school

boys. The Germans actually liked the idea of the prisoners digging

tunnels. They wanted to keep them occupied. They encourage them to

escape in small numbers. They said please do not escape in numbers of

more than five because the Gestapo will be on your case and kill you.

And what did you pick? Thomas Pinch on, in a way, you think he does not

exist as some people suggest and he is made up of committees. He seems

to be made up of so many people and this book is amazing, it is

post-September the 11th and the Internet, but it is still written by

Pynchon. A wonderful book as the world is split into different levels

of reality. There were many tasteful books this year 's, but they buried

themselves in a past, whereas the present seems more interesting.

Working out what is going on. And of all people he comes along and

explains where we are at the moment. We gave this book to you. It has all

the good things. He is in his early 70s and it reads like a book by a

man in his early 30s. He has such energy. He is connected to a variety

of things going on. It is slightly hard-boiled detect TIFF, there is a

thread running through it. -- detective will

-- detective. He has thought about politics and what is going on

culturally in America. He distils it into a few sentences, beautiful

descriptions of New York City. Cabs driving through water and throwing

up wings of the all the writing -- up wings of the all the writing. --

filthy water. I have recommended a nonfiction book. A sting in the tail

by Dave Wilson. It is about bumblebees. The books are out now.

Thanks to my panellists. We will be back in January with a look at some

of the cultural highlights of the New Year. To play us out, another

track by Primal Scream. It's all right, It's OK. # There's a time to

remember. # A time to forget. # A girl I wanna

see. # She's leaving in her big black car. # Leaving without me.

see. # She's leaving in her big black car. # Leaving without me #

black car. # Leaving without me. # It's all right, it's OK.

# If you're supposed to. # I don't care about tomorrow. # When I feel

like this today. # Make a start to another's path. # That's never been

my way. # Don't believe what to tell ya. #

That you will be a guy. # There s # Don't believe what to tell ya. #

That you will be a guy. # There's no part and pretender. # When you know

that is that? # It's all right, it's OK. You can fix it, wash it if it's

broken. Take your time. Walk away. You can close it once it's been

open. Many times all alone and and you cry. Walk it down, down the

streets. No-one to speak. And you cry. Oh-la-la. If you really think

about it. You've got everything you need. No-one can stop ya. If you

truly believe. It just fixate to cut you. There's no place for the weak.

People sad collect dodges. Wait for someone to freak. It's all right,

it's OK. You can be, anytime you want to. Take your time. Walk away.

You can come back. If you're supposed to. Oh-la-la. Oh-la-la.

It's OK. It's all right.