Perfect timing, I arrived at work having already planned my classes and had forgotten my book. I sat outside the cafe in the praca and read this cover to cover. I enjoyed it, though I agree with Mallary that I saw the ending coming. Back to the library! ( )

When Molly Lane dies, two of her friends meet outside a crematorium to express both their remorse and their view of Molly’s last days. Clive Linley and Vernon Halliday are a pair of extremely successful men who at one point or another had an affair with Molly. Molly died in what they consider a horrible way; she just started to lose it suddenly, became ill, and required her long-suffering husband to nurse her. Clive, the most famous composer of his age, and Vernon, editor of a top newspaper, make a pact after Molly’s death that rebounds against them in a way they’d never expected.

On the back cover, this is described as “a sharp contemporary morality tale, cleverly disguised as a comic novel”, and I can’t say it better than that. The comedy to me appears to come from how ridiculous these men are, how they are so wrapped up in themselves that they can’t hear and don’t care about the outside world at all. By the end of the novel, they have each truly become like Molly, lost to the world without realizing what has happened to them. They’ve been overtaken by an illness, and that illness is, according to Ian McEwan, the ills of public society and the selfishness that it takes to ignore the needs and wellbeing of fellow humans while taking care of number one. The disturbing thing is that neither of them realize it; what they’re doing is so normal to them that they don’t understand what’s wrong. They think they’re adding to society when really they’re just adding to the problem.

Anyway, in that way, this novel is so deep in so few pages that it’s hard to say whether or not I liked it. This is one of those books that I want a class on. There’s a lot here to pick at and just writing that paragraph above has helped me clarify it in my mind. I think I could write a paper on it. It’s less than two hundred pages long, so it didn’t take me very long to read, but it packs in so much thought-provoking material in with the ridiculousness of the situation. The worst part is that, when dissected, the behavior of neither of the characters is ridiculous. They’re doing what has been done countless times before and that is eerie and worrying, especially given the extreme dislike I felt for both of them by the end of the novel. Really the problem with the novel is that it isn’t a very good story. The story and the characters exist only to prove McEwan’s point, which is a strong one, but it doesn’t work very well at a surface level.

In conclusion, there is a very good reason that Amsterdam won the Booker Prize. It’s a truly haunting commentary on society that still manages to be slightly ridiculous enough to make it interesting. I haven’t even touched on all the issues here, but I can tell I’m going to continue thinking about this for some time to come. It isn’t as good as a book as Atonement is, in my humble opinion, particularly because it is shallow in everything but its overall meaning. I still think it’s worth a read. ( )

The story opens at woman's funeral where two of her past lovers are discussing her death and loss. The two men have has a long frinedship; one is a publisher and the other a famous composer. They each agree to protect the other from a lingering painful death. Subsequently they are both morally challenged, and each disapproves of the other's decision.

The conclusion is quite unbelievable, and I don't think this was worthy of the Booker ( )

McEwan is brilliant. If you've gone in expecting to read ATONEMENT again, think again. If, however, you've read IN BETWEEN THE SHEETS or THE CEMENT GARDEN, then you've come to the right place. McEwan's prose is ripe and delicious, yet gritty and, probably, tinged with a little bit of poison. ( )

This is my first McEwan book. I loved the story and pace...until the end. Too much, too quickly, too improbable...left me feeling rushed and unsatisfied. Surprising to me that it won the Booker Prize. I have a feeling I will generally enjoy his work even though my expectations were not met by this particular story (ending). ( )

Brilliantly crafted story of friendship gone awry, of losing sight of what is important. Great characters. Only drawback is that the story lacks proper warmth. However, Amsterdam is a page turner, raising important issues along the way ( )

I have to say, that I was surprised that I didn’t like this book, because I loved Atonement by McEwan, and I thought that this book would have that similar style of writing and characterization, but it didn’t. Although McEwan brings up some points of morality in the book, and what is the “right” thing to do, the story really did, just fall short for me. The passages were dull and boring; there wasn’t much there to keep the readers interest. The characters were one dimensional and bored me throughout the entire book, I didn’t care much at all for them at all and whether they lived, died, got what was coming for them or anything of the sort. Which is a shame because there could have been an interesting plot for the book, the issue was and still is a very controversial one, but it just wasn’t handled well in my opinion. The book just fell short of what I would have expected it, especially after hearing such praises about the author himself in all of his works in general, I was expecting something fantastic from him and didn’t get even to close to it, I thought there would be more exciting passages, more to the characters then what was shown, and more of an in-depth look at the morals and controversy around euthanasia. But none of that happened. Overall not a very good read for me.

Review also on my blog: http://juliebooks.blogspot.com/2009/0... ( )

I really wanted to like it. I think I'm just too sold on linear plot. ( )

A page turner. Well-developed, very believable characters (though I found it hard to actually like any of them). Thought- provoking subject matter. Can't say it was a favourite, but it kept my interest. This was the first book I've read by McEwan, and I've decided he is an intelligent author. I'm curious about some of his other work. ( )

I liked Amsterdam - sort of. But I don't think it comes close to some of McEwan's other achievements. It's odd that it won the Booker. In an interesting way, it captures the sour, almost childish disappointment in life that seems to to run through the novels of many of McEwan's British peers. ( )

A quick, easy read that just didn't go into enough depth for my liking, as a lot was left unsaid. I'm sure that was probably the intention, but i'm afraid it left me unsatisfied... ( )

very clever but i don't think i would have given it the booker ( )

Oh dear, this is a really shocking rating to be giving a novel by the venerable Mr McEwan (as if I could do any better!) and it probably wasn't helped by the advance (and unjustified) hype I heard about it, but really... To be honest, if one of my writing students had come to me with a proposal that outlined this story's plot and ideas, I would have rejected it offhand as being frankly preposterous. And then, of course, I would have gone down in history as the narrow-minded pedagogue who rejected a Booker prize-winner. Hmm.

Nevertheless, it does seem to be a vast injustice that this was the Booker winner out of an oeuvre so stellar it contains "Atonement" and "Saturday". Certainly, there's no reason to give up on McEwan for this reason - I did like the musical interludes, and he is a master at making himself at home in any number of disciplines - but there is, I think, reason to be disappointed at this effort from such a masterly writer. ( )

Meh. I usually love McEwan's novels - his writing is beautiful. In fact, I think he is one of the greatest writers I have ever read. His sentences leap off the page, his paragraphs contain pearls of well-constructed widsom, and the blandest of moments become inspiring. Amsterdam, however, is lacking this greatness. Yes, the novel is probably better written than many other books, but it does not have that spark of greatness that I have come to expect from McEwan.

The plot is interesting enough - it is a tale of morality, of politics, and of the destruction of friendship. The two main characters are well-constructed, and the narrative contains many twists and turns. But, it is no Atonement - a book with characters that I cared about, and themes that resonated in my own life. I finished Amsterdam and immediately moved on to my next book. I didn't stop to ponder passages, or to reflect on the ending - something that I almost always do.

I still love McEwan - you can't give up on an author because of one mis-step, right? ( )

My least favorite book by McEwan; I didn't like the story or the ending, which seemed contrived.

Favorite quotes:

"Instead it seemed to Vernon that he was infinitely diluted; he was simply the sum of all the people who had listened to him, and when he was alone, he was nothing at all."

"In his corner of West London, and in his self-preoccupied daily round, it was easy for Clive to think of civilization as the sum of all the arts, along with design, cuisine, good wine, and the like. But now it appeared that this was what it really was - square miles of meager modern houses whose principal purpose was the support of TV aerials and dishes; factories producing worthless junk to be advertised on the televisions and, in dismal lots, lorries queueing to distribute it; and everywhere else, roads and the tyranny of traffic. ... To watch it mile after mile, who would have guessed that kindness or the imagination, that Purcell or Britten, Shakespeare or Milton, had ever existed?"

"They should have been ridiculous, these photographs, they were ridiculous, but Clive was somewhat awed. We knew so little about each other. We lay mostly submerged, like ice floes, with our visible social selves projecting only cool and white. Here was a rare sight below the waves, of a man's privacy and turmoil...." ( )

Composer Clive Linley and his journalist friend Vernon Halliday meet at the funeral of Molly Lane, a woman who had been the lover of both men. Also at the funeral is foreign secretary Julian Garmony, a man whom both Clive and Vernon detest, and, not surprisingly, a man who also was friendly with Molly. As the story unfolds, both of the main characters show their ruthless ambition, boundless egos, and moral bankruptcy. It gets a little tiring to read their endless speculations about their own personal greatness. When some compromising photos of Garmony surface, Halliday is faced with the decision whether to publish them in hopes of saving his journalism career and the flagging circulation of his newspaper or pass on them. Not surprisingly, his ambition wins the day, but the outcome is not as Halliday had hoped as a consequence of the political acuity of Garmony’s wife. Linley vehemently disagrees with Halliday’s decision to publish the photos and sees himself as taking the moral high ground. However, when he takes a hiking trip in the country to clear his mind and finish the millenial composition he has been commissioned to write, he witnesses a suspicious encounter between a man and woman but cannot be distracted from his work to go to the police and report it. McEwan’s writing, as usual, is excellent and his cynical approach to the main characters will keep you smiling. For me, however, it is hard to enjoy a novel thoroughly if I cannot find some redeeming value in at least one character, and none here qualify. Thus, ultimately I found the novel disappointing. The ending is macabre and ironic (given the nature of a pact made between the two friends earlier in the story) and it takes place in the city for which the book is named – which is quite logical for legal purposes. I don’t mean to be obtuse, but I don’t want to spoil the story for you should you choose to read it. As I said, this one is not my favorite McEwan. I much prefer “Saturday.” ( )

I was expecting the odd ending since I had read the reviews. The writing was good but I too found it contrived and just not realistic. I listened to the audio version and the reader was terrific though. Perfect for that chiseled prose. ( )

When the electrifying Molly Lane dies of a swift and terrible illness, two of her former lovers, Clive Linley and Vernon Halliday, meet at her funeral. Both men fear for the uncertainty of the future and their mortality, which leads them to make a pact with each other that will have vast and far-reaching consequences. Meanwhile, Clive, a modern genius of a composer, is charged with writing the score of the millennial concert, while Vernon is the editor-in-chief of a floundering newspaper that would do anything to increase its circulation. When Vernon receives stunning information about another of Molly's lovers, the foreign secretary Juilian Garmony, he believes that his newspaper can be saved from its torpor with news of this sensational story, but Clive strongly disagrees. In his opinion, Vernon is being traitorous to Molly's memory and more than a little unkind to Garmony. This argument seriously undermines the friends' relationship and pits each against the other. As Vernon rushes to get his story to print and Clive puts the finishing touches on his symphony, both men find that life has other plans for them. Both Clive and Vernon, driven by their desire for success and renown, will make a terrible choice that will lead them towards the paths of their destruction, and toward the agreement that binds them together.

Frankly, I would read a telephone book if it was penned my McEwan. His perfect eye for prose and the significant weight of his dialogue has impressed me on many occasions. He has a way of capturing the visceral traits in human behavior that people so desperately try to hide. I believe very few authors can compare to McEwan's brilliance. That said, this book was disappointing. I felt that the characters had too much egotism and callousness to make them sympathetic. Vernon and Clive, although cut from different cloths, were much like two sides of the same coin. Clive was entirely too self-absorbed and shallow. He always seemed to be only half-aware of his social actions and their repercussions and he held firm to outdated beliefs and mindsets. Vernon was unlikeable as well. He was also self-absorbed, and there was a cruelty in him that made him slightly repugnant. I found myself growing very tired of his fits of righteous indignation and his issues of entitlement. I was ill at ease with both of these men and their behavior, and it made it very hard to connect and sympathize with their plights. I didn't feel sorry for either of them when things began to turn sour; in fact it seemed as though they were getting what they deserved. I felt rather impersonally towards these characters because neither of the men seemed to have any redeeming or humanizing qualities, nothing to give them the spark of life I was looking for. They seemed almost too stereotypical. I also didn't like the way in which their supposedly great friendship devolved into petty and inconsequential cat fighting. They carried their grudges like heavy weights across their backs, obsessing constantly over perceived slights. This got tiresome very quickly and made the story seem uninteresting and flat.

The conclusion of the story had an ironic twist, but it was so absurdly concocted that it almost became comical. It was at once both overblown and operatic, and although I saw it coming, I couldn't believe it would actually play out in the way that it did. It seemed something so oddly out of character for this writer to conceive of a finale like this, and it ultimately strained the credulity of the book to the breaking point for me. Yes, this book was intended to be satirical, but I think it overreached and instead became ludicrous.

After all the issues I had with this book, there were some very redeeming qualities about it. McEwan's writing was both clever and beautiful, elegant and cultured in a way that entrances. In certain parts of the book he writes so fluidly about the composition of music, I had to wonder if he ever studied classical music. The pages describing Clive at work on his symphony were lush, inviting and thrilling. In my opinion, they were the best scenes in the book. In addition, McEwan has a style of writing that is both acerbic and astute. He has great wit on the page and seems to have a way of unlocking a multi-layered strata of meaning in his narratives. My final impression was that though the language was both satisfying and rich, I felt that this book was reaching and could not find purchase, as there was too little to savor and far too much discordance in the story.

For those who are McEwan fans, this book certainly deserves a perusal but I wouldn't recommend it to for a first time read of this author. If you are the type of person who is in love with language and appreciates the turn of a phrase above all, then this book will not disappoint, but if you are looking for something with a satirical bent there are better books out there. The fact that this book won the Booker Award is somewhat surprising to me. I think McEwan is a fabulous writer but this is not his finest work, and at times it felt like he was not giving it his all. If you really want to get a taste of McEwan's brilliance, I recommend Atonement. ( )

His usual standard, a gripping narrative that kept me reading, but I wasn't able to accept the story as credible. ( )

I love Ian McEwan, but I hated this book. It starts with an intriguing premise: Clive and Vernon, two old friends, attend the funeral of a former lover. Over the course of the following days, both men will make "disasterous" moral decisions and a pact with unpredictable consequences. Reading this on the jacket copy set up considerable expectations, most of which were disappointed. Like most of Ian McEwan's characters, Vernon and Clive are deeply flawed, so I was prepared not to fully like them. I was not prepared to find them utterly unengaging. Each chapter finished with a cliffhanger, but the suspense was never enough to carry me forward. Reading about boring people is simply not rewarding. As the book crept toward its conclusion, it shed its final virtue: realism. Ian McEwan often writes about people controlled by their flaws, but in his previous characters, those flaws have always seemed honest and human. The ending of Amsterdam, however, requires us to believe the characters are almost sociopathic and I just didn't find that plausible. I heaved a great sigh of frustrated relief when the book reached its final chapter. Thank goodness it was less than 200 pages. ( )

Very good, despite telegraphed ending. Surprised it won the Booker though, it's a light read. ( )

Amsterdam is a well crafted book. It avoids the bloat of some of McEwan's later work, maintaining a subtle momentum and a terse narrative. It is undoubtedly well written.

Yet it seems oddly joyless, almost clinical. It is populated by character studies, rather than people, and those characters are bourgeois and self-important, sometimes brushing close to caricature.

Finishing a good book can feel like a momentous act, its fictional events disturbing, its characters mourned for. Finishing this was satisfying, was interesting, but emotionally it felt like finishing the manual for a DVD player. ( )

I was able to coordinate my reading with my travels. I read this book in between airport stops in Amsterdam. I love it when that happens.

As it turns out though, Amsterdam primarily takes place in England. It starts out with two men, friends, at a funeral of their former lover. Clive is a famous modern composer who is currently working on a commissioned symphony to celebrate the new millennium. Vernon is the editor of newspaper who is currently working on a major breaking news story. Their friendship is tested as they each make choices about their lives, their work, and their deaths.

The structure, writing, and execution of this book is flawless. Though apparently simple and short, McEwan manages to weave a complicated story with profound implications. I can see why this book won the Booker prize. Ian McEwan is quickly becoming one of my favorite living authors. ( )

Atonement is a really good work by McEwan. But before that he actually won Booker for Amsterdam, a much shorter novel, in 1998.

The plot deals with an absent character called Molly who is dead and two former lovers of Molly meet at her funeral. One of them, Vernon, is a newspaper editor and the other is Clive, a successful composer commissioned to compose a Millennium Score. A third character called Julian is the foreign secretary and also a former lover of Molly, who can't get along with Vernon because of the scissor-paper relationship politicians and newspaper editors naturally share.

I will not divulge the plot. However, I might say that two moral mistakes are committed by both the lead characters and each of them becomes the other's enemy fighting on moral grounds until they both reach Amsterdam to fulfill a promise they made to each other during their days of friendship.

Let me tell that I did not like the closure. The closure has a strange and cunning hint at euthanasia - only the ailment here is not physical but mental and moral. The thing one must know is that Netherlands is the only country to legalise euthanasia and probably that's why the author chose such a place. However, the other part is that non-Dutch are not legally allowed euthanasia. Whatever may be the case, the strange ending will linger in your head and will surely vex you until you find a reasonable argument for the actions, like I have tried to relate it to a form of euthanasia, or will leave a bitter taste.

I own a trade paperback edition of this novel and I would not recommend buying it for appx. 350 INR. ( )