Predictable Atonement Book Review (Don’t Read)

Today I am going to embark where no man has gone before. Because Atonement is one of Mr. Wasowski’s top five novels, I am going to simplify his opinion into being wrong or right based on a 50 point system that takes into account five major functions of a good book: syntax, plot, characters, themes, and personal enjoyment. Because of the obvious objectivity on display, especially in regards to the “personal enjoyment” category, there will be no room for debate—this “opinion” is purely objective. Let’s begin. 

Syntax—10/10

It’s the most boring category so let’s get it out of the way. Ian McEwan’s writing style is truly gripping. I honestly don’t care enough about syntax, being that it’s syntax, to give any examples of it, however, I will say that even reading the somewhat boring descriptions of the Tallis household was interesting simply because of how well it flowed. Compound that with the style of narration McEwan employs and the reader is now in for random jabs or foreshadowing that intertwine so well with the main blocks of text that a reader could easily gloss over them. So was McEwan’s writing style perfect? Is it worthy of the highest literary mark, a 10/10 from an AP English student (with a 90.0 A- in the class)? Yes. 

Plot—9/10

The plot of Atonement is pretty solid after page…100? I’m not sure. The inklings of actual conflict are present pretty early on with scenes like the fountain scene between Robbie and Cecilia or the weird/rapey Lola chocolate feeding session with Paul Marshall. What I’m trying to say is, although beautifully written, the exposition lasted a little longer than I was hoping for. I mean basically 25% of the novel was descriptions of various characters and easing the reader into understanding the inner workings of the Tallis’s, which I felt was a bit much. After the dragging exposition, Briony reads the dreaded cunt letter and we have ourselves a story. From here, Atonement pulls the reader in like a Heroin addiction—full throttle. Every waking moment will have readers who are invested in the novel thinking about the next time they get to shoot up, I mean read. Well, because it’s required reading, the psychological aspect of addiction probably can’t be applied but you get the point. It’s gripping. I’m feeling a light to decent 9. 

Characters—10/10

While others probably disagree, this is the main pull for me in Atonement—Ian McEwan made some really believable characters. Every character is flawed. Every character has some sort of passion or motivation. Everyone serves a purpose—the bag boy who never speaks? Used as a scapegoat to the reader for the rape of Lola. The bag boy’s dad who never speaks? Used as a point of conflict when he dies. The random friend of Leon? A rapist. It’s like McEwan knowingly took the challenge of having ‘too many’ characters and ran with it. It’s a giant middle finger to conventional storytelling and yet it works. If you know me you know I love giant middle fingers and hate conventional storytelling. 10/10.

Themes—8/10

Atonement brings interesting questions to the table, and as a Thanksgiving-table philosopher, I do enjoy a good theme or two. Not only does Atonement raise questions about guilt and forgiveness, but also about the human experience—can we truly grasp another’s perception? Well yeah dumbass, but the fun is in the followup—how? McEwan introduces the idea of sharing ideas through storytelling, an idea ironically echoed in another coming of age story, Life of Pi. There were some early lines thrown into the exposition that had me questioning the fabric of my existence but besides those, the thematic ideas were pretty standard. Not too existential yet somehow profound, Atonement does a good job of keeping it simple, stupid. The lack of complexity does detract from the score, however, so for ‘Themes’ Atonement will receive an 8/10. Nobody really cares though. 

Personal Enjoyment—8/10

I don’t really like reading, but reading Atonement was alright. There isn’t much too my score here—normally I give reading a 2/10 but here it was bearable. When taking into account my perspective and thoughts on reading previously, I realize that the average reader would find reading average—a 5/10. Well if reading’s “average” for me is 3 points lower than it is for the average reader, I need to balance my average feelings towards reading Atonement with a +3, thus netting us an 8/10. Math.

With a final score of 45/50, simplified to a 9/10, or 90.0%, or an A-, Atonement is, for someone who doesn’t like books, a good book. This is objective because I used numbers to represent my feelings and therefore from now on Atonement will be recognized as a 45/50, simplified to a 9/10, or 90.0%, or an A- in the AP English hall of fame. Objectively.