Protagonist Gordon Comstock quits his job at an advertising agency to write poetry. He has major issues with money and despises his reliance on it. He refuses to accept assistance from his girlfriend. He becomes obsessed, punishing himself and his girlfriend in his stubborn refusal to do anything about his poverty. Gordon is an unlikeable character and I found it difficult to feel much sympathy for him. He treats his girlfriend abominably, while believing he is the one being mistreated. Orwell’s writing is the best part of the novel. I liked it but didn’t love it. ( )

'Behold the aspidistra: indifferent to what may pass. Nor shall it blossom or ever bear fruit, just like the middle class' [Wil Hudson c1970] ( )

This is a very interesting portrait of the lives of the vast majority of people under capitalism. ( )

The last of Orwell's novels for me to re-read, and I struggled.
The writing is fine, but the topic is so formidably ugly! The lead character has chosen a literary life, and foregoes a well paid job in order to succeed in writing. We then spend 30% of the book, in tattered clothes, cold because his coat is in hock, hungry, lonely and sad. So sad. It is never explained why he couldn't retain the better paid job and write at night - as he does, fitfully, in his chosen literary life.
I was pleased to read later that Orwell wasn't proud of the book, and refused permission for it to be reprinted in his lifetime. The publishers should have continued to observe his wishes! ( )

I didn’t appreciate this book, unfortunately, and I will explain why shortly.

It is the story of Gordon, a budding poet who works in a bookshop.

I must first confess that I didn’t really know what an aspidistra was, until I looked it up in the dictionary. (Being old-fashioned and bookish, I still avail myself of dictionaries, first and foremost, and not the net, though sometimes I need eventually to resort to the latter.) It turns out an aspidistra is a plant, commonly found in people’s window sills, at least at the time Orwell wrote the book, perhaps still.

What bothered me about the book was Gordon’s attitude to money, which he spends all his time thinking and talking about. He never has any, and he thinks he will never have any; and without money, he will never get a woman to sleep with him, which is also a main preoccupation of his; in fact, he will never get anything.

He has a kind, wealthy friend called Ravelston who is always willing to lend Gordon money and wouldn’t care if he never got it back. But Gordon feels it wouldn’t be right to borrow or accept money from him. He won’t even accept a meal from him.

Orwell himself must have had this negative attitude to money, since he makes so much of it in this book; so I well understand that for long periods he found himself in deep poverty, as attested by his book “Down and out in Paris and London”.

Gordon says to his girlfriend, Rosemary:

“-- the way nothing ever goes right in my life. It's always money, money, money that’s at the bottom of everything. And especially between me and you. That’s why you don’t really love me.” -- “You won’t sleep with me simply and solely because I’ve got no money.”

I wonder if Orwell ever had money or whether he died penniless.

I myself probably subconsciously have more than a touch of Gordon’s attitude, otherwise it wouldn’t bother me so much.

The aspidistra turns out to be a symbol of respectability and belonging to the common herd, and finally, but surprisingly, or even shockingly, Gordon decides he too wants to have one.

The book is exceedingly well-written and despite G’s attitude I will absolutely not advise against reading it. ( )