I hate this book. But I guess I should say why. Some might say that I was too young to read this book since I read it when I was 15 but I'm a few yearI hate this book. But I guess I should say why. Some might say that I was too young to read this book since I read it when I was 15 but I'm a few years older now and I still hate it with seething anger. I heard that Toni Morrison was a good writer so when we had to pick a book from this long list I decided to read it. BIG MISTAKE!
I didn't like any of the character -at all-or the plot. I know the book is supposed to give you a view on the cruel treatment of slaves but after I finished I actually less sympathetic for them. How exactly am I supposed to feel sympathetic to people who screw cows -that is just disturbing on so many levels- and kill their own babies. Paul D even admitted that the male slaves usually rape the girls. Beloved (the charater) is supposed to give the book more depth but she was just confusing and quite annoying, so is the mom by the way.
The writing of the book was good and believe me its painful for me to give any praise whatsoever to this book. There are metaphors, similes, symbols, personification, and basically everything that is an English teachers dream. But that does not mean it was a good book in the least. I like a decent metaphor as much as the next person but that is not what I think makes a good book. You know how your supposed to feel all deep and intelligent after you read classic book. Nope didn't happen. ...more
Okay, I had to read this book for a class I'll admit but this book surprised me. I actually got into it. These men are old but somehow so full of promOkay, I had to read this book for a class I'll admit but this book surprised me. I actually got into it. These men are old but somehow so full of promise. They learn so much and I learned a lot about South Africa. The reason I didn't give this book a higher rating is because its just so sad almost the whole time and just when I thought it was getting hopeful the author had to put some doubt into the mix. If you like nice sugary ending like I do I would not recommend this book. However I saw the message clearly and there were moments that I got goosebumbs because I knew exactly what the author was trying to say. Its just too sad for me is all....more
Overall a good read. I don't usually like classics that were written over a 100 years ago, so I was surprised that I actually enjoyed it. Although theOverall a good read. I don't usually like classics that were written over a 100 years ago, so I was surprised that I actually enjoyed it. Although the beginning was hard to get into because the language was difficult for me, but after the first quarter of the book I got the hang of it. I still had to ask about words like 'incandescent' and 'ardently' though.
One thing that was different from regular classics I've read is that Jane Austen doesn't ramble on for 10 pages describing the scenery, this gets pretty annoying after the first 3 pages. She instead focuses on the society of her time which, in my opinion, is more interesting. I like Elizabeth because she is actually the character that makes the most sense. There are other characters that are likeable, and they are the people who you are obviously supposed to like.
The message in this book is pretty clear and I think it is the message has made this book such a classic. ...more
This book is so raw and grusome that I'm sure a story like Paul's is real. I wasn't sure what to give this book because, well, it was just so hopelessThis book is so raw and grusome that I'm sure a story like Paul's is real. I wasn't sure what to give this book because, well, it was just so hopelessly depressing. It made me so depressed that at times that I just had to put it down and breath. I don't regret reading it because I learned a lot about what war is really like but I just felt so hopeless about everything. If you are anything like me and can't handle a lot of hopelessness then have something like Winnie the Pooh on hand to cheer you up. ...more
First off I should say that London is a great writer. This is the first book I've read of his. His description of the Alaskan terrain is incredible. IFirst off I should say that London is a great writer. This is the first book I've read of his. His description of the Alaskan terrain is incredible. I have never been to Alaska but when I read this book I could picture it in my head very clearly.
However, that does not take away what I think of the story itself. It wasn't bad. It was interesting, but I could not seem to grasp exactly what London's point was. Was it animal cruelty? Was it the wild should be kept wild? Or is there some hidden social message? There are numerous other themes that I could guess at but I couldn't pinpoint the particular one London was trying to express. It did get me thinking but in more of a jumble of thougts instead of just focused on one.
There are parts where the narrator (third person) seems very detached as if he were giving a documentary on Buck. Now Buck is an amazing dog, no doubt about it. He goes against all odds and learns how to survive the wild northland leaving his legend. But nevertheless he is a dog and maybe I'm bias since I usually only read books about humans but I could only see Buck as a dog. Don't get me wrong, I was cheering him on the whole time. I wanted him to have his happily ever after but the ending didn't give me that satisfaction. Maybe it's a happily ever after for a dog but not for me....more
Definitley a romance. I'm a sucker for romance so I liked it a lot. However the romance isn't everthing in this book.
About the first 100 pages I struDefinitley a romance. I'm a sucker for romance so I liked it a lot. However the romance isn't everthing in this book.
About the first 100 pages I struggled to get into the book. When Jane decribed her life as being boring at one point I agreed. As she was decribing her dull life I was literally falling asleep, but when Jane starts to take her life into her own hands it gets more interesting. The text was easy enough to follow. Way easier than some other classics I've read.
I like Jane a lot. Mostly because I think she has strong character. She is told over and over again how much of a dependent she is but she strives to finally become an independent woman. She has this balance of mind and heart. She does what she feels is right and moral, but also what she feels will make her happy. And Jane gets her happy ending which I feel is very important.
Now the romance. It's mentioned over and over again how plain Jane is and how ugly Mr. Rochester is and at first I thought this would bother me but it didn't. I actually think that it would've bother me if they were both good looking. If they were both good looking I would probably roll my eyes and think "typical" because all the pretty people always seem to fall in love. I like Mr. Rochester well enough but not nearly as much as Jane.
I read this book without knowing much of anything and I thought that it made the whole story more interesting for me. Although I might read it again. I was tempted to give this book 5 stars but I didn't want this book being a classic to influence what I rated it. For a classic I would without a doubt give it 5 stars. ...more
There was nothing WOW STUPENDOUS about this book. I like it well enough. The witch trial was my favorite part, but that was the highlight of the wholeThere was nothing WOW STUPENDOUS about this book. I like it well enough. The witch trial was my favorite part, but that was the highlight of the whole book for me. The plot was slow almost the whole time.
Kit was an okay heroine. She does what she thinks is right and stands by it but she didn't have much personality. Her spontaneousness wasn't that spontaneous. Kit was rich so she felt very degraded by all of the work she was told to do. That bothered me because she felt like only servants did that sort of work and she was above it. It wasn't mentioned very often and Kit does more or less get used to it so it didn't bother me too much.
The setting was in Puritan time and it felt like a true decription of Puritan life. Not many events happened, I think that the plot was suppose to be character driven, but characters just didn't interest me enough. There were numerous romances going on at the time and none of them really caught my attention. I felt for the characters (especially Mercy) but I wasn't hooked.
Lastly I didn't feel like I learned anything new. ...more
This book without a doubt surprised me. I expected it to be all innocent and nice when I first started reading the book. But that is how she is in theThis book without a doubt surprised me. I expected it to be all innocent and nice when I first started reading the book. But that is how she is in the beginning of the book, innocent and naive. She doesn't stay that way so neither does the book. No doubt during the time it was published it was probably a scandalous book. Now less people would be offended about some of the truths presented.
Cassandra was very observant and very aware of how much she didn't know. That may not make sense but its how Cassandra is. I neither like her nor hate her, I just feel bad for her. She and her family start out dirt poor. And this isn't your glamorous "oh we can't buy new cloths" poor; this is really really poor.
What I liked about it was that it had all these things that you don't expect to happen. Like Cassandra is actually happier when they are poor. Cassandra starts to mature once they start getting money. Usually its the other way around. Kids start to become more solemn and mature when their family is struggling financially. Its something I found very new from a classic. It may sound like an oxymoron but its true. Plus, I liked that you got a sense of everything like it’s new because it mostly is to Cassandra.
All the characters are confusing, I want to say complex but I couldn't understand them sometimes so they are just confusing. Each have their motives for doing things but I don't know what they are sometimes. I could see Cassandra's motives because she tells you them and I could see what Rose's motives were because they are, for the lack of the better word, shallow. Everyone one else is just a mess of emotions.
The ending didn't turn out the way I would've liked. But the way the author made a mess of everything I'm just grateful that no one committed suicide. Cassandra is depressed for a long time, over a quarter of the book I'd say. I remember her saying that people who didn't feel depressed every once in a while were missing out on life. Not in those exact words but in general. My reaction to this was, "Your wasting your life away when you ARE depressed!" I just think she was way too self-pitying. She knows this too because -like I said- very observant. And a lot of characters are left with some hope but it’s very vague and they are currently unhappy. There is tons drama, but it was an easy read -for a classic anyway. ...more