Booktalk & Week 6 Prompt

 
2-Minute Booktalk

I, Claudius by Robert Graves

I have a confession to make.  Most of what I know about ancient Rome was learned from watching movies like “Spartacus” and “Gladiator.”  I haven’t encountered names like Tiberius and Agrippa since World History classes in high school.  Yikes!  But I, Claudius by Robert Graves brings those names alive in a very engaging way.

Written in the style of a tell-all autobiography, the ageing emperor looks back on his life as part of the imperial family of Rome.  Born with a speech impediment and a limp, Claudius is dismissed by his powerful family, who consider him nothing but an embarrassment.  We soon see that it’s their scorn that provides him with a degree of safety.  Known as “Claudius the Idiot,” he remains in the background of power and manages to outlive most of his family members, who fall prey to accidents and poison at an alarming rate! 

Through the observant eyes of Claudius, we meet historical figures like: Augustus, who sees himself as a benevolent god; Tiberius, the frustrated general with serious anger-management issues; and Caligula, whose madness reaches shocking extremes – even by Roman standards!  The family ranks continue to thin, and to his extreme distress, Claudius is eventually declared Emperor in 41 A.D.

You might expect a classic like I, Claudius to read like a stuffy history book, but it’s actually an eyebrow-raising family soap opera played out in decadent style.

In 1976 the book was adapted as an unforgettable 12-part television drama by the BBC, starring Derek Jacobi and featuring future stars like John Hurt and Patrick Stewart -- with hair!  The series was shown on PBS in the U.S. and makes a great companion piece to the original book.  There is also an outstanding unabridged audiobook version read by Derek Jacobi.

It’s become traditional to include a word of warning when recommending I, Claudius to new readers or viewers,
so I offer these parting words of advice: 

Don’t eat the figs!

 

 

Week 6 Response

In her RUSA article, “Booktalking for Adult Audiences,” Jennifer Baker tells us that it is important, when preparing a booktalk, to "choose only books you have loved and actually read."

Theoretically, I disagree with both elements of Baker’s statement.  Yes, a librarian who is endorsing a book he/she has read and loved might convey more genuine enthusiasm.  But I believe that many librarians are capable of doing a great job promoting books beyond their comfort zone.  In fact, it’s probably not unusual for a librarian to be put in the position of needing to give a booktalk outside his/her genre of preference.  A professional who has prepped appropriately and can point out appeal factors that will click with the audience at hand can certainly market a book they did not particularly love or may not have read at all.

Having said that, I also think that the validity of Baker’s advice might depend on the librarian and the circumstances.  Some librarians may have a difficult job plugging a book they strongly disliked with any degree of authenticity.  Professionalism aside, some people just aren't good at feigning enthusiasm. (Is there an elective Acting 101 class in the SLIS catalog?)  And, of course, it would be awkward to be in a Q&A situation and be “caught” implying that you’ve read a book that you haven’t.  It’s important that we NEVER mislead people.  Personally, I might quote a phrase or two from reviews to let listeners know that I’m conveying information from an outside source, or even mention that the book is on my future reading list.