Utterly delightful. Faye captures the spirit of Jane Eyre and the Victorian cadence without sounding derivative or dull. I chuckled out loud many timeUtterly delightful. Faye captures the spirit of Jane Eyre and the Victorian cadence without sounding derivative or dull. I chuckled out loud many times and rooted for Jane Steele the entire way. She certainly captures what life is like for a variety of 19th century women all in Jane's experience - poor relation, boarding school inmate, working class woman trying to avoid prostitution, governess, marriage material, heiress. I also enjoyed the inclusion of various minorities, especially Sikhs. I don't want to say more for fear of ruining a wonderful, wonderful book, but this is a must read for fans of historical fiction, Jane Eyre, and awesome female-drive narratives. Fabulous historical description, engaging characters, fun plot, and a charming mix of suspense and humor. Why only 4 stars? I wanted more (mostly to fill the gaps in time)!
The fine print: received ARC from NetGalley....more
This has been on my to-read list for over a decade. I always thought I'd love it, but on the inside I must have known better, which is why I subconsciThis has been on my to-read list for over a decade. I always thought I'd love it, but on the inside I must have known better, which is why I subconsciously put it off. With the Book Riot 2015 Read Harder Challenge asking me to read a book published before 1850, I knew I couldn't put it off any longer.
Well. I found the language old fashioned and clunky, which I guess is to be expected, but I never found books like Frankenstein and Jane Eyre suffered in my modern mind's reading. Then I had trouble keeping up with who was married to who and who their parents were, which is funny because there were basically fewer than a dozen characters in the book. I think they all ran together because they were all equally selfish, annoying, and strangle-able. Really. It almost got two stars just for keeping my incredulity so high.
Why is this a classic? I'm sorry Emily, but I'm sticking to Charlotte. And I guess one day I'll give Anne a chance too - perhaps for next year's Book Riot challenge....more
You know how I love Peter Pan, and it's always risky reading any kind of retelling, but... Wow. This book was incredible. It takes the theme of deathYou know how I love Peter Pan, and it's always risky reading any kind of retelling, but... Wow. This book was incredible. It takes the theme of death from Barrie's original, which has largely been lost in subsequent retellings, and takes it to a whole new level. The mythology all makes sense, the story is multifaceted, and it really makes you think. I liked how she tied together Barrie (including the stories of his dead brother David and his relationship with the Llewellyn Davies family), the fictional Darlings, Peter, and the fictional Preston and his family. It all meshed so well. The multiple points of view (the deceased Preston, his grieving mother, Wendy, and Peter) really lent itself to a complex picture of what death (and life) means on either side of the divide. There were lots of layers and subtle overlapping of characters between Here (Neverland) and Before (real life) that you can either read right past as you enjoy the story or pay close attention and get even more out of it. I can't really do it justice.
The only reason it didn't get 5 stars (and it came awfully close) is because I was irritated by a handful of editing errors (I know, I know) and because I wasn't really satisfied with the motivation behind the murderer's crime and the convenience with which the person was able to get away with it so unrealistically. Basically, the death of Preston was a majorly important plot point, and logic seemed to flee with the necessity of making it happen. It seemed like a weak point in an otherwise very strong story.
I would recommend this book to just about anyone, including Peter Pan fans and anyone interested in thinking about what happens when we die and why we live. So good....more
This book was just kind of ridiculous and overly-derivative and filled with editing errors. I was not really impressed at all. I almost gave it 2 starThis book was just kind of ridiculous and overly-derivative and filled with editing errors. I was not really impressed at all. I almost gave it 2 stars, but since I can't even imagine reading the rest of the series, I'm giving it 1....more
This book just left me with an incomplete, speechless feeling. It was a stunning work, made even more so by the fact that Némirovsky was essentially wThis book just left me with an incomplete, speechless feeling. It was a stunning work, made even more so by the fact that Némirovsky was essentially writing this as the events were happening (which technically makes it not historical fiction, but I'm still calling it that). Her notes for the next three parts of the book were full of ideas based on what she thought might happen, and it's just extraordinary how perceptive she was. Her writing is also beautiful (and I think the translator must have done a very good job) and almost mesmerizing. The way her characters brush past each other, their lives sometimes touching and sometimes just missing each other, is choreographed with the utmost artistry. This fraction of Némirovsky's magnum opus is a masterpiece, and I can only imagine how magnificent it would have been if it was finished. This woman obviously had immense talent as a writer. I'm really glad I read this book, and I look forward to reading more of her work....more
It took me three weeks to get through this one, which is pretty darn long for me. I thought I was going to like it, especially because it often comesIt took me three weeks to get through this one, which is pretty darn long for me. I thought I was going to like it, especially because it often comes up as a read-alike for Gone with the Wind.
Basically, I think it would be a lot more enjoyable if I was an educated late-19th century Russian. He spends a LOT of time mocking various Russian institutions, contemplating the meaning of life, art, and the like, and generally rambling with social commentary that is mostly irrelevant to a modern reader. (I know, I'm appalled that I'm even thinking, much less saying, such a thing.) In the midst of all this verbalizing, he frequently included phrases like "and then they discussed subjects that interested him greatly" or "she responded with words it hurt him to recall," without elaborating on what these subjects or words may be. It was very frustrating.
Also, I gather that Anna Karenina and Konstantin Levin were meant to illustrate polar opposites, reason versus passion, logical thinking versus impulsive behavior, work versus leisure, love versus faith, etc. etc. etc. But really, the titular character of this novel should have been Levin, not Karenina, because he seemed to be the main focus of the work as well as Tolstoy's fictional alter ego.
So I'm glad I struggled through it, but I wish I was smart enough to get more out of it. I guess I'll just stick to the 1948 Vivien Leigh film....more