Although I consider Mahfouz to be one of the very finest writers of the 20th century, I found this novel very dissapointing.It is no secret that many of Mahfouz's (early) works were written as a sort of political commentary, as explorations and critiques of Egyptian society and the prevailing power structures. In my opinion this is a severe impediment to a modern reader, especially one unfamiliar with Egyptian history, as we are unable to fully appreciate the political subtexts and place the narrative in a proper historical setting. The introduction to the book is of little help, as it does not properly describe political figures like Ismail Sidki or Taha Hussein, nor does it describe the objectives of the Wafdist party.
This isn't the only Mahfouz novel that can be read as an allegory, as a social and political commentary, but it is one of his most heavyhanded treatments (excepting his early historical novels, which must almost neccessarily be read as political criticism). I believe that in later works he was able to channel his concerns and beliefs into a more believable and realistic narrative structure, and it may well be the case that this ability was the product of an increasingly liberal and permissive government (i.e., by allowing Mahfouz' characters to discuss their political concerns in a more direct and open way, instead of forcing Mahfouz to address his concerns through more highly structured allegories). Be that as it may, in this novel the characters are chosen to reflect the different elements and views of Egyptian society, but it doesn't come across as being a completely honest portrayal. I don't know that I've articulated my concerns about this very well, but it does seem somehow false. As I've said earlier, our ignorance and separation from 1940's Egypt compounds the problem, as the author's political concerns are of diminished relevance and interest to us.
The translation was done by Ramses Awad, who also wrote the introduction, and I must say he did a very poor job. One of the most striking problems with the translation is the incessant misuse or mistranslation of the word 'confusion.' The word pops up again and again, on almost every page, and in almost none of the circumstances is it an appropriate choice. It is sometimes used to suggest a sense of embarassment, sometimes to indicate a feeling of discomfort, and sometimes when the character is at a loss for words, or is unsure of what to do. Given the poetic and flowing nature that usually typifies Mahfouz's work, even in translation, Ramses Awad's work on this book is a grave disservice to the author.
I read this book because I will read any Mahfouz I can get my hands on. If you are looking for an introduction to Mahfouz, or if you just want to read more of him, there are certainly better choices available... The Cairo Trilogy is unsurpassed, and The Journey of Ibn Fattouma, Midaq Alley, The Harafish, and many others are all preferable to this.