rivka's comments (member since Mar 04, 2008)

rivka's comments from the GoodReviews: The Official Book Review Contest group.

Too bad. I really liked the idea. But yeah, the participation was pretty low.

I look forward to seeing what y'all come up with next! :D

Has GR abandoned the review contest? Or is it just on hiatus over the summer?

Lucy's review is really good.

For the last two months I have been putting off reading this book. For starters, I bought the book at an airport in Taiwan, which meant it didn't have a due date which meant it took a backseat to many books that I didn't have the luxury of reading whenever.

Additionally, because I've heard so much about this book already, I almost didn't want to read it at all. I've heard that it's depressing, that it's not as good as The Kite Runner, and that it's basically a novel about the brutal treatment of women in Afghanistan.

You know when you read a book or see a film that has had great reviews and you finish feeling disappointed because it didn't live up to the hype? My experience reading this book was the complete opposite. I loved it. I didn't feel the message of the book was one of brutality or depression, but of hope and the toughness of the human spirit.

There are plenty of awful scenes to lend credence to its reputation. While the story's time frame spans thirty years, the main focus of the novel are two woman, a generation apart, whose lives cross as they become the wives of the same man, Rasheed. The elder, Mariam, was born to a servant woman out of wedlock and is raised in banishment, ignorance and eventual rejection during the years the Afghani government was controlled by the communists. She finds herself forced to marry a much older man after her mother commits suicide. Laila, fifteen years younger and raised by intellectual parents, enters the marriage under much different circumstances. Alone after a bomb destroys her home and kills her parents, and pregnant by her childhood love who has fled the country, she marries Rasheed in a desperate attempt to save her unborn child.

The writing engrossed me. Much like the Kite Runner, Hosseini magically puts the reader in the city, neighborhood and house of his characters. Much to his credit, I found myself torn between wanting to yell at Laila to hush up, so that she'd avoid another beating, and kicking Rasheed myself, because he is a despicable brute.

Mariam, one of the most tragic characters in literature, makes this book what it is; a story of love and strenghth. She, who didn't have an easy day in her life, allows herself to be touched by the love of Laila and her children. In return, she performs the ultimate act of love and saves a family.

I appreciate Hosseini's portrayal of a part of the world that is under so much scrutiny lately. Afghanistan, and the city of Kabul where the story takes place, have a long history of wars and occupations which result in a great chasm between different ethnic tribes, Islam, economic classes and gender. Hosseini uses this novel to tell the story of Afghani women and the hardships that face them with each regime change.

As a woman, I feel blessed to have been given confidence and opportunities. I truly cannot imagine what it would be like to live under the conditions the women in this book live under. I am grateful to be born to the family I was born to and in a country which allows me to live the kind of life I choose.

Miram and Laila didn't have the opportunities or support that I have. And yet they survived. They endured and they reached out to others, despite their circumstances. In this, Hosseini redeems all of Afghanistan by showing these two women's humanity. He shows that in a place whose beauty was written about in a 17th century poem, where "One could not count the moons that shimmer on her roofs and the thousand splendid suns that hide behind her walls" is a city that can become illuminated once again.

Icarus' review of Moreta

(I actually disagree with him and really like the book. But it's an excellent review nonetheless!)


When I was a kid, I remember learning in English class about the parts of a narrative: Rising Action, Climax, and Denouement. The teacher illustrated this by drawing an equilateral triangle on the board, with the rising action on the left side and the falling action on the right, and the climax as the peak of the triangle.

Did we all get taught this concept the same way?

It didn't take me long to learn that this was absurdly wrong. The climax occurs very close to the end of the narrative, not in the middle.

Well, apparently McCaffrey was taught the same way as I was, and apparently she took it to heart when it came to Moreta. The climax--such as it is--occurs midway through the book. The entire second half is a mopping up action, with little bogus crises thrown in to keep the plot lurching along. Once the plague is pretty much under control, the story is over, and the rest is just so much anticlimax. (And I'm sorry, but a novel centered around a disease, where the climactic moment is someone finding a cure in a book, is not much of a story under the best of circumstances.)

(The following paragraph contains tiny, deliberately obscure spoilers, and details that will seem nonsensical if you haven't read the book.) While the Aftermath is powerfully written, the Great Ride alluded to in other Pern novels hardly seems necessary--if they can Time things, why not wait until tomorrow or the day after to do things? Why not take her time? [*rimshot*] And, for that matter, why keep the plan secret from the Weyrleaders? Well, because it necessitates Heroic Action on the part of the Dragonladies, of course, but it doesn't really make sense within the framework of Pern. If this is what the Masterhealer demands, then this is simply what must be done. Secrecy and going around behind the backs of the Weyrleaders seems unnecessary and contrived.

Another aspect of MacCaffrey's writing that took me out of the plot was the incessant name-dropping in the first and final chapters. The first chapter names twenty-one different characters--oh yeah, I counted. In addition, eleven localities are mentioned by name, and four dragons. But this is nothing compared to the final chapter, in which SIXTY-TWO different characters are named, along with ten locales and TWENTY-FIVE different dragons. Most of these names, by the way, do not appear anywhere in the novel besides these two chapters.

Here is an example from the last chapter, from page 302 of my edition:

"'It's not something anyone admits to but T'grel must have to use it to cope with M'tani. Don't bother with L'bol at Igen. He's useless. Go directly to Dalova, Allaneth's rider. She lost a lot of bloodkin at Igen Sea Hold. She'd know who among her riders time it. And Igen has all those little cotholds stashed in the desert and on the riverbanks. Surely you've got a few good friends left at Ista. You were there ten Turns. Have you heard that F'gal's bad with kidney chill?'"

Now it could be argued that the point here is to emphasize the scope--all the different people that Moreta must work with, and so forth. But this comes back to another bit of bad teaching. Every beginning writer has heard "Show, don't tell." Well this is not always true. When showing involved levels of detail that will break the narrative for the reader, good authors simply summarize the action. They tell us what happened instead of showing it to us. Readers fill in the gaps of time, and assume that the details we are not given are all in their proper place. Don't believe me? When was the last time you read about a character using the toilet? Do no characters use the toilet because all literary characters are constipated and dehydrated? Or do we merely assume that goes on without needing to be shown all the gory details?

I'm sorry, but this is not merely bad writing, it's laughably bad writing.

Gary, it looks like all your links are search links. I'm guessing that means you used the format [ book: title ] and/or [ author: name ] for all of them? Or maybe you used the standard HTML formatting but linked to the search results pages? Either way, it won't get readers to your review to vote. You want this link:

Gary's review

(extra spaces have been added so you can see the coding; make sure you use the full link, not just the part that's visible in my post)

When I view a book, my review (if any) shows up first. When you view it, yours does, and mine may or may not be on the first page -- let alone near the top. So finding my review, if I've just linked to the book's page, can be difficult for others.

To link directly to your review, click on "add a comment." That will take you to a page that just has your review (and any comments on it). Link to that page, rather than the book page. That way people can vote for it! :)

Meghan's review
Pam's review

(Note: When I view a book, my review (if any) shows up first. When you view it, yours does, and mine may or may not be on the first page -- let alone near the top. To link to your review, click on "add a comment." That will take you to a page that just has your review (and any comments on it). Link to that page, rather than the book page. That way people can vote for it! :) )

The links above are all to the book, not directly to the reviews. Try these links for a more direct route:
Edan's review
Andy's review
Amy's review