6 Comments
User's avatar
Nicholas Holt's avatar

Thanks Mark - great review. McFarlane has done so much for nature writing - a genre that was once forgotten and now seems urgent. The flip side is McFarlane can seem to 'own' this genre in the UK, and I can see why his 'Lone Enraptured Male'style (Kathleen Jamie's article) gets criticised. McFarlane is indeed a treasure and is perhaps more accessible to a wider audience. Is a River Alive? looks wonderful, and is my list to read.

For me, Lopez is the most thrilling writer in this genre - but thats another conversation!

Expand full comment
Steven Day's avatar

Macfarlane is good, very good.

This is lovely, deserving review, Mark - even though you clearly felt obliged to chuck in a dab of criticism and one old, fun-poking wit. ;)

And isn't hiss so much better than crunch?

Expand full comment
Igor's avatar

Nice nice, I am curious, will check, but will skip lump of sugar (:

Thanks for introduction.

Expand full comment
Yasmin Chopin's avatar

Sometimes Macfarlane gets criticised, unfairly in my opinion, a) for being a man, b) for being privileged, and c) for being a man who works the english language fully and hard. I think he would make an excellent Nobel prizewinner. He has brought the beauty, and the problems, of the natural world into the spotlight. I very much enjoy reading his words and I look forward to this book. Thanks for your review, Mark.

Expand full comment
Mark Jones's avatar

Thanks, Yasmin – are you referring to that exceptionally silly piece in The Guardian saying Macfarlane was a kind of white privileged colonialist? I can't find the said piece – maybe they took it down out of embarrassment.

Expand full comment
Yasmin Chopin's avatar

I hope they did!

Expand full comment