Meeting with Alexander Masters

Alexander came along to a special session of the Bookclub on 27th March at the Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival. He seemed a nice enough chap and took our various comments in good part - saying later that some of his harshest critics were now homeless people - and mentioning specifically the session he had just with us during which various points were made - for and against the book:



Such as:
'The book goes on a bit - too wordy'

'Is it all true or has the author made some of it up?'
To which Alexander assured us it was all true,
and that he had resisted attempts to jazz it up.

Others thought:
'The book is more than fair to Stuart - perhaps too fair?

'It does challenge people's views about homelessness - but some of the bad language is a bit much and is going to confirm a lot of prejudice - not all homeless are so crude or impolite.'




Even so:
Many have recommended the book to friends and wished they could have met Stuart to see what he was really like.


Many thought it was a story that really needed to be told and were happy that Alexander had managed to tell it like it is - and wanted to know whether that was a common reaction to the book?

Others thought that no book can really tell the whole story - you have to have done it (been homeless and all the other things) to really get it - so the book is a pale reflection of the reality ? Some thought the author had failed to show enough of the positive side to homelessness. It isn't all tough - some even thought Stuart seemed partially to blame for his predicament - he had some good chances but then blew them - one rough sleeper thought they would have done better had they had Stuart's chances - several thought that there was an element of 'bad luck' in being homeless - all this tends to strengthen people's view about the homeless - ie that they are to blame for their own troubles although others thought it was -
whats your opinion - was there anything in stuart's life that was of value??

Again - the issue of bad luck or not enough good luck was what many see as the crucial factor in homelessness. The book is supposed to be about the homeless but Stuart isn't really homeless - he has a nice flat, etc - which many of oxford's real rough sleepers would really die for?

Many people liked what they read about Stuart but weren't so sure about the author. Some felt the author's 'voice' got in the way of Stuart's Others thought Alexander was a bit of a mystery although in the time we spent grilling him, we got to know him and what made him tick a lot better. I guess we's all want to thank Alexander for writing such a thought provoking book and for agreeing to spend so much time responding to our comments whilst defending his own corner so eloquently