There are rarely books I am unable to finish but Michel's Atomised is one. I have enjoyed many French authors in the past, and have noted (not only relating to French authors) that when authors attempt to preamble genealogical references or annotations for the benefit of establishing the characters, I am more likely to find myself confused by the names, places and periods of time I am required to connect in order to grasp the premise behind certain character's motivations. Atomised indeed had this and I struggled to map my way through the beginning of the book. Meanwhile, the Latin naming convention, a convention more, I feel delighted by the author's intrigue on the typographical effect then any benefit or pleasure for the reader - from my perspective, of course. I did enjoy the moments of reflective analysis inserted along the linear narrative, something I do particularly enjoy in writing.

Finally, being that I have an intrigue and love of more explicit material (Having delved into many a bawdy and smutty work), Michel tends to "gag" the explicit moments always with a "punchline" of sorts, these punchlines lost the effect of the initial explicitness by disturbing the moment with an unnecessary afterthought, once again appearing more like a conscious effort of the author to please himself rather then please the reader. In contrast Kosinski mixes the same explicit anomaly but leaves the outcome for the reader to surmise.

These are my thoughts at the juncture upon which I halted my following of the narrative. Others will have obviously enjoyed the read because they chose to read the book for various reasons, I however was given this novel by my best friend and put in the difficult situation of wanting to finish reading it and feeling that I should put it down and continue my regular reading 'train of thought'. It is a very difficult thing, giving and receiving a book, or a film, or an album. We can be quite selective with our choices of reading materials.