Issues with Conversations in Bloomsbury

I felt this way as I read the first excerpt of Anand's Conversations in Bloomsbury several weeks ago, and after reading the three excerpts for tonight I have only confirmed my feeling: reading this book is an odd and distracting experience. While it's interesting to be able to read about conversations that Anand had with such famous literary figures, his style at times completely detracts from the flow of the "story." I realize Anand is a subjective narrator by necessity, and I acknowledge that at times his subjectivity grants us an intimate look into the lives of these people we only know through secondary sources. However, what is the import of statements like, "Morrison offered shortbread biscuits" (126)? Some may read this narrative recollection as a quaint and enlightening look through one person's eyes into the community of Bloomsbury, but I find the form Anand has chosen to be irritating and cumbersome. I really don't care to read all of the insignificant details as to who ate and drank what, or what T. S. Eliot's handshake was like. These constant, jarring asides take away from the meat of the story and distract the reader from the heavier issues at hand. I'm interested to see if others felt the same way as they read, or if most of you saw these additions as adding something substantial to the text.

Another thing that grated on my nerves as I read was the obsequious tone Anand adopts, particularly in his conversation with Eliot. It makes sense that he would feel nervous and edgy around the talented poet, but it still made me hate him a little, much as his constant name-dropping did. I realize name-dropping is the whole point of the book, but...I want to say to Anand, "Yeah, we know, you met some really famous people and some of them even liked your book. Good for you. Fabulous. Yay. Now shut up." And now, since I appear to have completely lost any semblance of a professional tone here, I'm going to stop writing.