This month our diary comes from the North Nibley Bookgroup

Although this book was one of our more unpopular choices, we had an extremely enjoyable evening discussing it! The North Nibley Bookgroup is an offshoot of North Nibley Woman's Institute, and the six members choose a book in rotation every month, with the meeting being held in that member's house. No organisation is required, beyond choosing the next month or two's books. Pat Burns-Cox takes notes of the meetings, held together in what is now an extensive file - over the last five years we have read 75 books - and we often refer back to them. We have also experimented with various ways of marking the books. At one point we gave each book two marks, one for literary quality, the other for readability. Eventually, this was decided to be too cumbersome, and we give one, though often with the cry 'It's very well written, but I didn't enjoy it at all!' or vice versa. What has proved more interesting, though, is recording the range of marks given for a book - we gave The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver between 7 and 8 marks, while White Teeth by Zadie Smith got 2 and 8. The latter was, in fact, the least popular book that we have read, narrowly beating Beryl Bainbridge's Master Georgie. Not appearing in the list is The Information by Martin Amis, which was chosen, but boycotted by another member of the group. So that we don't begin to sound like an anti-book group, we all loved The Poisonwood Bible, Beloved, by Toni Morrison, An Equal Music by Vikram Seth, and, in fact, most of the other 75 books that we have read.

Although various organisations give lists of suggestions for groups to read, we never have any problem making our choice. What is surprising is the number of books that other groups also select. Over the last year, the other North Nibley Book Group chose three of the same books as us (Girl with a Pearl Earring, Handmaid's Tale, and Music and Silence). One of our members has also worked out that 75% of our books have been written by women. Perhaps we will see the day when male writers assume female identities to appeal to the book group market. We have also been bitten once too often by the '3 pages of favourable comments printed at the front of the book' technique, as it generally only tends to emphasise the mediocrity of the attached book.

So, back to George Orwell...as I had chosen the book, I started the discussion. I had read it several years ago, and love it. It is flawed, and it is sometimes hard to disentangle the writer's own prejudices against vegetarians, feminists, sandal wearers, etc from his argument, but the power of the book shines through this. Although the world has changed in ways that Orwell, writing so recently, could not have anticipated, many of his statements shine with an absolute truth. How else can one react to his assertion that although, by his time, pregnant women no longer hauled coal trucks through the mine, if it was necessary for them to do so in order for coal production to be maintained, it would happen; other than by immediate recognition of the truth. Later on, Orwell writes of how the British standard of living at the time depended on inhabitants of other parts of the Empire living in abject poverty, otherwise it would be relegated to an obscure island living on herrings and potatoes (excuse me if I am not exact, as I have lent my copy of the book to a friend). How true that still is today! I could go on forever, but one last example comes to mind. Orwell, commenting on how the eating habits of the poor were criticised, said how it was easy for a rich man to live on Ryveta and fruit juice (or something equally Spartan), but that poorer people needed more comforting fare. In short, a classic book, with all its flaws.

The next member, Pat Simons, had also read the book when younger, and was surprised how much she still enjoyed it. Gloria hated it, and only finished it out of a sense of duty. Pat Burns Cox enjoyed the first half, but found the second part illogical and rambling. Kay Bell disliked what she saw as inverse snobbery in the attitudes of the book. Orwell's dated exact delineations of class were disliked. Margaret Barnett, who did not enjoy the book, for many of the same reasons already outlined, had had a visitor while she was reading the book, a High Anglican Priest, who was also a socialist. His love of the book had modified her opinion, but she still found the numerous references in the book to long forgotten personalities frustrating - perhaps the editor should have provided footnotes? When marked, the book was given an average of 6 points, the range being from 4 to 9. It was, though, an extremely enjoyable and noisy meeting, partly because there was such a wide divergence in opinions. It was also refreshing to read something so completely different from the novels that we usually cover.

‘It is easy to see why the book created and still creates so sharp an impact … exceptional immediacy, freshness and vigour, opinionated and bold … Above all, it is a study of poverty and, behind that, of the strength of class-divisions’ Richard Hoggart

‘True genius … all his anger and frustration found their first proper means of expression in Wigan Pier’ Peter Ackroyd, The Times