The writing and character development left something to be desired, and the novel was often unbelievable, but on the whole I'm glad I read the trilogy...moreThe writing and character development left something to be desired, and the novel was often unbelievable, but on the whole I'm glad I read the trilogy to completion. It was an entertaining, easy read, and the last few pages of this novel were actually fairly good. The series provokes a little thought, but not too much, about how even if life is nasty, brutish, and short, and even if mankind doesn't learn from its mistakes, one can still make a life of some kind, and that is better than not. I think I preferred Mockingjay to the second in the series, which was in some ways a rehash of the first. There were times when her characterization made no sense to me - when Katniss or Gale did things that seemed out-of-(the-established)-character.
These are decent enough genre books, and fun enough to read, but the disappointing thing is that they had so much more potential than they realized. It's like when your kid is doing a rush job of homework just so she can be done and go play Wii. It's still pretty decent work, compared to a lot of students, but you know she's capable of much more, and what a shame that she doesn't produce it.(less)
The blurb I read about this book billed it as a "novel" and said that it was "funny." Well, it's only funny in the sense, as one of the characters say...moreThe blurb I read about this book billed it as a "novel" and said that it was "funny." Well, it's only funny in the sense, as one of the characters says, of "not funny ha-ha, but funny tired. Funny sad." The book is also more like a short story cycle than a novel. Characters and themes weave together throughout the collection, but each chapter is somewhat self-contained and there are large gaps in time. As such, there wasn't a lot of the sustained tension typically present in a novel, and so I was not compelled to keep reading, despite the fact that the writing itself was good. Whenever I finished a chapter, I thought, "that was well written and affecting," and yet I still didn't feel like I needed to read the next chapter. While I'm glad I read the book now that I'm done, I'm not entirely sure if I would have finished it had I not been reading it for a book club.
Flannery O'Connor once described the South as "Christ haunted," and there's an element of that in this book, particularly in the last chapter – that undercurrent of holy longing and those hints of redemption just beneath the surface of a darkly broken and fallen world. Rebecca Wells doesn't capture this as powerfully as the great Southern writers (O'Connor, Faulkner, etc.), but she toys with it. She gets it in bits and pieces, here and there, then loses it, then gets it again. I think in the end the whole God as "her" thing killed it a little bit for me. It's just hard to come off as literarily serious and Christ-haunted once you go there. Yes, I get that the narrator's mother was a mess and thus God-as-mother. But…eh…it just didn't work well for me. It was distracting. It took me a little bit out of the sad beauty just as I was finally going in to it. (less)
**spoiler alert** I found this to be a thought-provoking book. It highlighted just how complex are the factors that contribute to the dissolution of a...more**spoiler alert** I found this to be a thought-provoking book. It highlighted just how complex are the factors that contribute to the dissolution of a marriage, how easy it is to become caught up in the fixation on the negative, how terribly difficult it is to forgive ("[Forgivenss] was such a lovely, generous idea when it wasn't linked to something awful that needed forgiving."), and how the pain we experience forms our characters ("It wasn't just that her memories of the last ten years were back. It was that her true self, as formed by those ten years, was back. As seductive as it might have been to erase the grief and pain of the last ten years, it was also a lie."). The pain we experience forms our characters, and this books asks—what if we really could forget that pain?
But we can't forget it, except in a fantasy like this novel; that pain has left its mark, and only time can ease it, allowing a new character to form yet again—at best, we can achieve a balance, but how do we even do that? Alice is able to do it only with a sudden loss and recovery of memory, but it makes one think about achieving that difficult balance of perspective in real life. ("Now it seemed like she could twist the lens of her life and see it from two entirely different perspectives. The perspective of her younger….sillier innocent self. And the older, wiser, more cynical and sensible self.")
What most impressed me about this book is that I think it "gets" marriage in a way most fiction doesn't. Marriage isn't about the rightness of the match itself, or about the quality of the person we marry, but about the *time in*, and the willingness to *put* that time in. "It was never so much that Dominick was wrong for her and that Nick was right. She may have had a perfectly happy life with Dominick. But Nick was Nick…They could look at an old photo together and travel back in time to the same place…" Marriage cannot be simply put asunder, because of the tangled threads ("How strange [divorce] was. Wouldn't it be a lot less messy if everyone just stayed with the people they married in the first place?"). Time binds: "Each memory, good and bad, was another invisible thread that bound them together, even when they were foolishly thinking they could lead separate lives." It's not a romantic view of marriage, but nor is it a cynical one, and it seems to me a very true one. There is actually something quite beautiful in it: "Early love is exciting and exhilarating…Anyone can love like that. But love after three children, after separation and a near-divorce, after you've hurt each other and forgiven each other, bored each other and surprised each other, after you've seen the worst and the best—well, that sort of love is ineffable. It deserves its own word."
I could have done without the Frannie subplot and Mr. Mustache which seemed to be inserted solely to add spacing to the main storyline, and I found Elisabeth writing to her psychologist to be an odd an unbelievable narrative device (as were Frannie's letters to a long dead fiancé), and of course as many have pointed out, amnesia doesn't work like that. But when I put these quibbles aside, and suspend my disbelief, I found the book very well worth reading. (less)
This novel made me want more than it delivered. It was an easy read (and by that I certainly don’t mean light, but that I was able to read it quickly...moreThis novel made me want more than it delivered. It was an easy read (and by that I certainly don’t mean light, but that I was able to read it quickly and that it largely held my interest throughout). The novel moved me emotionally, which is something I like to have happen when I read. The alternate third person / first person point of view was different and to my surprise it worked well enough.
The ending of the novel felt rushed, as if something was missing or as if there should have been a twist that didn’t materialize. The author’s style of using short, choppy fragments and repeated questions wore on me after a while. I didn’t much notice it for the first 100 pages, but then I couldn’t stop noticing it for quite some time, before it finally became less distracting again. For a while, it felt like this – “I’m being dramatic. So dramatic. Endlessly dramatic. Do you feel the drama? Such drama. And such pain. Such sad, serious pain. Feel it. Do you? How about now?” If you think I’m exaggerating wildly, let me quote an actual passage at random: “Avenue de la Gare. Hordes of Jews. And one day, there was a noise. An awful noise. My parents used to live a distance from the camp. But still we heard it. A roar that went through the entire town. Went on all day. I heard my parents talking to the neighbors. They were saying that the mothers had been separated form the children, back at the camp. What for?” Now, this is someone talking in dialogue, but both narrators (the third person and the first person) do not infrequently fall into this style as well, and it just gets tedious after a time.
I didn’t get why Sarah was just referred to as “the girl” for so long until her name was revealed. One would expect her name to mean something, for it to be connected to an already known agent, if it was being kept secret in the narrative, but there was no real purpose for this initial secretiveness that I could see, and thus “the girl,” “the girl,” “the girl,” just became annoying in time.
None of the Jews in this book seem to have any real sense of their Jewishness. It’s just – oh, why do people hate the Jews? I don’t know. How awful that they hate the Jews. Who knows why? Isn’t this bad? Very, very bad. There’s no practice here, no religion, no tradition, no history even, other than the history of the roundup; there’s a surprising lack of Jewish identity for a book presumably about Jewish suffering. But that’s not really what it’s about, I suppose. It's really more of a book about gentile guilt, but I don’t think it was particularly effective that way either. The book made me feel, but it didn’t make me feel guilty. Maybe if I were French it would have, but I get the impression from this novel that French people are too busy committing adultery and drinking wine when they should be working to worry about gentile guilt.
In short – I don’t regret reading this novel at all, but I feel somewhat ambivalent about it. I think it will leave an emotional impression for a while, and then it will be utterly gone from my mind in a year. (less)
**spoiler alert** I needed something to listen to on my commute, and I saw this on the library shelf, read the vague blurb, and knew nothing more abou...more**spoiler alert** I needed something to listen to on my commute, and I saw this on the library shelf, read the vague blurb, and knew nothing more about it until I began listening. I’m not sure why I listened as long as I did (between 1/3 to ½ of the book), but I gave up. There were multiple reasons.
It had that first person present narration that seems to be so popular these days. It always takes me several pages to get used to that, but it took me much longer than usual this time. Then there’s the switching of POV per section between the three main characters. I don’t mind multiple POVs in a third-person novel, but I don’t like them in first person novels for some reason. If I’m in the first person, then I want to stick with one person.
Then there was fact that I found the voices the reader did on the CD to be very annoying. The CD also has songs periodically which are just, frankly speaking, awful. I started skipping those, despite the admonition that I should listen because they reflect what Zoe is thinking and feeling. Actually, that made them worse, because Zoe annoyed me. I found her unrelatable, self-absorbed, and unsympathetic, at least in so far as I read. She also ends up acting in a way that is entirely unbelievable to me given her personal history up to that point. (i.e. "Sure, I’ve lived as heterosexual woman all my life and never before questioned my sexuality, but this girl likes the same mixed tape as me!") Which leads me to the preachiness of the novel – the author is obviously more concerned with message that with believability.
The first section that was narrated by Max was actually the most interesting to me. The author does manage to make Max’s initial conversion just a wee bit believable, but her portrayal of evangelicals in general lacks depth and nuance. There’s lots of scissors being taken to cardboard for the Christians in this novel.
I think I can guess, without having gotten past the point where Vanessa and Zoe first get together, that Zoe is going to want implant one of her and Max's embryos in Vanessa and Max will oppose it - so if I'm right, I can also call the novel predictable as well. I'm slightly curious as to how things will turn out, but I just can't listen on because I don't think I can wade through all of the moralism. It's just too much. I like philosophy-rich stories, but when the story and characters become nothing more than a vehicle for the message, I struggle to plow on. Thus…it has made its way to my abandoned shelf. (less)
This is the first novel I have read in a long time that grabbed my attention immediately and held it almost the entire way through. It’s the first nov...moreThis is the first novel I have read in a long time that grabbed my attention immediately and held it almost the entire way through. It’s the first novel in an even longer time I have read straight through in less than a 24-hour period. (Of course, some of that was owing to the opportunity of a long unoccupied stint in a jury room.) I think this is a book that would be difficult to enjoy if you are not fairly well read and moderately versed in the English classics, and there were moments I thought it a little too esoteric or academic in tone, but just when it would get that way, it would let up in the nick of time. In the end, I didn’t find it pretentious though I kept expecting that, any minute, I would. The story truly engrossed me; the plot is extremely compact; a lot actually happens, but not a great deal of time is spent narrating what happens; it’s the ideas and the thoughts and the emotions and the philosophy that come through.
I’ve never been much of a fan of “chick lit” and was therefore surprised to find myself so swept up by this book, which from a mere plot summary would appear to be a catalog of chick lit's every worst cliche. It’s hardly light reading, and yet somehow it was very quick reading. It moved me and tugged on my emotions and made me think and offered me a few of those special moments that have ultimately made reading so worthwhile, those moments of feeling understood. (What was it C.S. Lewis said? “We read to know that we are not alone.” ) It’s one a very few books I would say I felt ended too soon (I usually think books need some shaving). Her writing stunned me.
The only major criticism I have is that I didn’t personally care for the original poetry interspersed throughout the book, though I do like poetry in general. (less)
This book struck me as being something like V.C. Andrews for grown-ups: just longer, slower paced, and more literary. And I was mortified to discover...moreThis book struck me as being something like V.C. Andrews for grown-ups: just longer, slower paced, and more literary. And I was mortified to discover that I did not find it as interesting as I once found V.C. Andrews (a shameful secret to admit that I once enjoyed those awful books).
It’s a gothic tale, but also another one of those books about reading, books about love of books (from a woman’s perspective). Now, I love books and have long loved books, but the book sycophancy did get a little heavy handed for me at times. That said, I think she often did a good job of describing the profound experience of readng.
I appreciated the sheer complexity of the plot, story woven through story, with the overarching story steadily unraveling. I found that the multiple narrators, while shaking things up a bit and allowing pieces of the puzzle to drop and join gradually, also prevented me from coming to care much about any one particular character and made the plot overly slow and repetitive at times. A good portion of the governess's narration, in particular, came as a somewhat tedious repeat of a story we had already heard. After all of this leisurely unraveling, I found the ending anticlimactic and somewhat unsatisfying. There was more than one occasion when I thought, "Is this going to be over soon?"
I hesitate to give this book two stars because I did, after all, listen to it to the very end. It must have intrigued me enough not to give up. And I think I would have enjoyed it much more had I read it rather than listened to it read; while circumstances dictate that I get some of my “reading” done via books on CD, I don’t do as well with them as with a real book because there is no skimming, no turning back pages to double-check this or that, no going at your own pace...so I settle on three stars, though that feels generous. (less)
I attempted this a year or so ago, and I could not get past page 20. It just dragged for me. I don't know what it was. I loved Little Women. I'm not o...moreI attempted this a year or so ago, and I could not get past page 20. It just dragged for me. I don't know what it was. I loved Little Women. I'm not opposed to spin-offs of classic literature. But this just...was...so...slow.(less)
This is the second edition of the paperback, republished with some minor changes. The title story is something of a novelette, and it tells of Anne de...moreThis is the second edition of the paperback, republished with some minor changes. The title story is something of a novelette, and it tells of Anne de Bourgh's strange fate, as well as her cousin's attempts to rescue her from it. Will Mr. Darcy succeed? The next story, "A Battle of Wits," consists of an exchange of letters between Mr. and Mrs. Darcy, and "Mr. Darcy's Homecoming" relates the gentleman's return to Pemberley after a long absence. (less)
This is a powerful novelette that exposes the spiritual degradation of collectivism, a fascinating dystopian tale that left me appreciating liberty an...moreThis is a powerful novelette that exposes the spiritual degradation of collectivism, a fascinating dystopian tale that left me appreciating liberty and the Western spirit of individualism and feeling even more wary than usual about the reach of the state into so many areas of human life. Although Rand’s writing can at times seem melodramatic, here it suits the fable fairly well; it is sparse and pointed and the use of only the second and third person pronouns throughout the work communicates the author’s criticism of collectivism forcefully. While the events and outcome of the book are predictable, this was not a deterrent to my pleasure in reading it because I expect this of a philosophical novel. I give it four stars instead of five because, while I think Ayn Rand does an excellent job of exposing the spiritual dangers of collectivism, she does so by falling into an opposite error: she does not offer a mere defense of the value of the individual and of his rights, but instead replaces worship of the collective with worship of the self and refuses to acknowledge any spiritual danger in this other idolatry.
Despite all the problems I, as a Christian, have with Ayn Rand’s atheistic strong-man-worshiping philosophy, I still believe she depicts the spiritual wrongs of collectivism more pointedly and powerfully than any other writer I have encountered. Anthem reminds me in some ways of Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm and even more so of Kurt Vonnegut Jr.’s Harrison Bergeron, but none of these, despite being written by writers with a greater command of the craft of storytelling than Ayn Rand, were as raw and powerful to me as either Anthem or The Fountainhead. I think there is a great deal of truth mixed with the falsehoods in Ayn Rand’s philosophy; though her views are extreme, perhaps this hyperbole is necessary to make hauntingly clear the dangers of allowing one’s self to be sublimated to the collective, of conforming too easily, with too little thought and too little struggle. (less)
2.5 stars, really. I'm being generous. This was an easy (though hardly light) read. It was generally interesting, but I never grew to care deeply abou...more2.5 stars, really. I'm being generous. This was an easy (though hardly light) read. It was generally interesting, but I never grew to care deeply about the characters. The horror of the Cultural Revolution was not made especially real to me. The Little Seamstress herself was utterly underdeveloped. The dialogue was unrealistic: no one speaks in such a manner. There is an abrupt but brief shift in narration toward the end of the book, for no apparent reason; the fact that a particular event is told from three different points of view would lead the reader to believe it has some central significance to the story, and yet it does not appear to connect to anything. The three narrator’s voices did not even seem to be particularly distinct from one another. As a final complaint, I have to ask, how many times can the narrator possibly say something to the effect of, "We didn't know our lives were about to change forever."
And yet, nevertheless, despite these criticisms, there are things I respect about the book. The writing is sparse and yet poetic. I didn't have any trouble flying through it in two days. There were bizzare moments that I didn't comprehend the point of, and the ending was unsatisfying. My takeaway? As Alexander Pope wrote, “A little learning is a dangerous thing. Drink deep, or taste not, the Pierian spring.” (less)
This book was very easy to read, generally entertaining, and occasionally funny (in the dark comedy sense). The narration was a bit off (it’s supposed...moreThis book was very easy to read, generally entertaining, and occasionally funny (in the dark comedy sense). The narration was a bit off (it’s supposed to be first person, but the narrator sometimes seems randomly omniscient, claiming to know the feelings and thoughts of third parties). The plot and characters were thoroughly unbelievable; none of the characters were sympathetic, and the author kept interrupting the dialogue with parentheses to show how individual words were pronounced (look how they said it in their funny Ukrainian accent!).
Aside from offering an intriguing title, I didn’t understand the point of the short history of tractors in Ukrainian, which was being written by the father and was inserted throughout the story in italics. I kept expecting some profound connection to the human condition to come from the history. Instead, it felt as tedious as the shipbuilding textbook portions of Moby Dick, so I eventually started skimming anything in italics.
One thing that bothered me was the sudden insertion of the author’s political views into dialogue. At least, I think it was the author’s views. At times, it was hard for me to tell whether the author was satirizing socialism or promoting it. There was one scene when I thought: “Ah, what a clever commentary on the difference between socialists and conservatives: the daughter whose memory focuses on receiving money from a stranger grows up to be a socialist, while the daughter whose memory focuses on the stranger herself, a fur-coat-cloaked woman who actually made enough of herself to be able to afford to have money to spare, grows up to be a conservative. How subtle, showing how conservatism really leads to helping the poor more than socialism does…” But then later the author is inserting a treatise on how horrible capitalism has been for the Ukraine and how beautiful Swedish-style socialism is into the mouth of one of the characters. To make this insertion even more cumbersome, the speech is put into the mouth of a character who speaks only Ukrainian, and so it must be translated into English by the narrator, whose Ukrainian has apparently improved since earlier in the book when her Ukrainian supposedly wasn’t good enough for her to understand the same man.
So I guess I misread the author’s intention in that passage about the fur-coated, money-giving lady, and I also guess the narrator (Nadia) is not supposed to be perceived as an absolute stereotype of a naïve liberal (which is the flimsy way her character appeared to me; I could not imagine she was meant to be taken seriously). Perhaps Nadia was meant to be viewed as an optimistic and impassioned woman whose hope can change the world. Or something like that. Either the author is masterfully and intentionally ambiguous, or she’s just not very good at conveying her ideology. I’m guessing it’s the latter. Or is it? Surely we can’t be meant to take seriously a narrator who says things like: “Father is in love with both of them:” (i.e. the crazy, big-chested, a-third- his-age Ukrainian woman he marries and her first husband) “he is in love with the life-beat of love itself. I can understand the fascination, because I share it, too.” (Where’s my spoon when I really need to gag myself?) Vera wasn’t likeable, but she was the only character who made sense to me, that is, the only one who was moderately believable.
The book was a good enough read with which to pass the time, and I don’t regret entertaining myself with it. And I WAS entertained, all of these criticisms notwithstanding. Yet I can’t imagine why it should be thought worthy of any literary prize. I suppose it’s meant to be a reflection on grand themes, such as growing old, or how history haunts us, or reconciliation, or redemption, or the evils of capitalism, or some such…but it’s really more like watching that Michael Douglas / Kathleen Turner 80’s movie The War of the Roses. It would have been better, I think, if the author had aimed for a straight up dark comedy and had not attempted to insert any pretentions of depth. Still, any book I can read in three days without getting bored is well worth three stars. There must have been SOMETHING about it that grabbed and held my attention. I regret I can’t pinpoint what that something was…but there was something. (less)
Outside of children’s literature (where it works perfectly well), I can’t really wrap my head around the concept of a dog narrating a novel. Consequen...moreOutside of children’s literature (where it works perfectly well), I can’t really wrap my head around the concept of a dog narrating a novel. Consequently, it took me quite awhile to adjust to this book, for the story to feel natural. And there is some over-the-top writing. I think it may have the worst sex scene of any I have yet read, but, on the other hand, the scene is partly excused for having been observed and recounted from the point of view of a dog, so it can’t really rival the awfulness of the scene in Very Valentine. Despite these failings, I had to give the book three stars after all; I have to admit “I like it,” because, once I got into it, I really got into it. It held my attention; I read it quickly; I cared about the main characters (the dog and his man), and I was even, at times, quite moved. I admit to skimming quite a bit about race car driving…yes, I know it was all a grand, extended metaphor for life, but I got that idea even with skimming. The novel was, after all, rather lacking in subtlety. And it wasn’t particularly realistic either (and I don’t just mean because it was narrated by a dog). Nevertheless, I do find myself concluding, “I liked it.” (less)
I don’t think I’ve read a coming of age story since…well, since I came of age. On the other hand, I think there is a sort of second “coming of age” (i...moreI don’t think I’ve read a coming of age story since…well, since I came of age. On the other hand, I think there is a sort of second “coming of age” (is that a synonym for disillusionment?) that occurs in adulthood for many people, so I probably related to this book better in my 30’s than I would have if I had read it in my late teens. Surprisingly, I don’t have much to say about the book except that I liked it and often found it amusing, though occasionally predictable and a bit unrealistic. All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable book with larger than life yet complex characters, an occasional profundity, and a perfect touch of humour. (less)
I’m not sure why I read this entire, relentlessly depressing book, but I did. At about page 250, I thought, “Isn’t this over by now? I’m ready for thi...moreI’m not sure why I read this entire, relentlessly depressing book, but I did. At about page 250, I thought, “Isn’t this over by now? I’m ready for this to be over.” And yet I kept reading, gaining and losing interest intermittently, until I reached the predictable, overtly sentimental close that didn’t compensate for the hundreds of pages of intricately detailed (and often contrived) human pain. Though the book was emotionally real in parts, its events and characters were largely unbelievable. It was simply over the top. I suppose, however, it was well written, or I wouldn’t have read it all.
There’s been a great deal of gushing over the fact that, despite being a man, Wally Lamb has managed to write a book from the point of view of a woman. I don’t really feel qualified to remark on his success (or lack thereof) in this regard, because, although a woman myself, I have been told on more than one occasion that I “think like a man,” whatever that means, but, as far as I can tell, it means I prefer discussions of politics and theology to discussions of shopping and home décor, which perhaps tells you something about the prima facie assumptions that lead people to pat men on the back for being able to penetrate the psyches of women. I don’t know if Wally Lamb accurately captures “the woman’s psyche,” because, you see, he’s not writing about “women,” but about a particular woman who suffers continuous abuse at the hands of person after person, year after year; who time and time again encounters an array of idiosyncratic people who hardly exist outside of Oprah Book Club selections; who manages to accomplish--or find herself the fortuitous recipient of--the highly unlikely on more than one occasion; and who finds life-affirming meaning in whales. Maybe I could have at least related to that last part…that is, when I was a 3rd grade girl. (less)
I read this book for one of the two book clubs I’m in, and I confess I didn’t expect to like it. It’s full of graphic - - though not always gratuitous...moreI read this book for one of the two book clubs I’m in, and I confess I didn’t expect to like it. It’s full of graphic - - though not always gratuitous (and certainly never titillating) - - sex, plenty of foul language, and a large dose of irreverence. It’s far from a literary masterpiece as far as style is concerned.
And yet, it somehow hit a raw human nerve in me. In addition to that, it sucked me in, and I blew through it in less than two days, which I honestly haven’t done with a novel in a long time. For those two reasons alone, I had to give it four stars, although the literary snob in me wanted to click only three.
Someone (I forget who) once said that all literature is about one of two things: (1) God or (2) the absence of God. “This is Where I Leave You” definitely falls into the second category. Jonathan Tropper pokes a finger into the wound of human brokenness. You don’t have to come from a highly eccentric or dysfunctional family like that of the Foxmans to relate to this book; you just have to have experienced, on some level (whether through loneliness, personal betrayal, or loss), the imperfection of this world we all live in. It’s a book in which the characters are forced to acknowledge their fallen humanity and struggle to come to grips with a broken world. It’s a heartbreaking, and yet entertaining and often funny, look at the loss of innocence that comes with age. C.S. Lewis said, “We read to know that we are not alone” (this time I remember the source!), and I sometimes think of that quote when I read a book that particularly moves me, that leads me to think – there – there – the author just glimpsed into my heart or my mind! I thought of that quote several times as I read “This is Where I Leave You.” (less)
The protagonist of this short story cycle is hardly loveable; she’s a difficult character to like, but Olive Kitteridge provides a realistic glimpse i...moreThe protagonist of this short story cycle is hardly loveable; she’s a difficult character to like, but Olive Kitteridge provides a realistic glimpse into the psyche of a woman who lives with untreated depression. The other characters who join the collection provide portraits of intense loneliness that may prove either cathartic (or painfully real) for anyone who has had even an inkling of such an experience. Betrayal (from both the perspective of the betrayer and the betrayed), mental illness, the common pain of being disappointed by the distance of one’s grown children, mid-life crises…Elizabeth Strout seems to have her finger on the pulse of ordinary human suffering. The effect of the book is heavy, and despite a note of hope, it is ultimately unsettling. The stories and characters, however, are well crafted, and I often found myself underlining a particularly impressionable turn of phrase. There were no stories that bored me, none I felt the need to skip or skim through. This “novel in stories” held my attention and moved my emotions from beginning to end. (less)
Amusing and entertaining, but also contrived, predictable, and occasionally pretentious. I fluctuated between two and three stars, but I finally settl...moreAmusing and entertaining, but also contrived, predictable, and occasionally pretentious. I fluctuated between two and three stars, but I finally settled on three because it was an easy read, and these days completing a novel in a few days is an accomplishment for me. (I think graduate school slaughtered my love of reading fiction.) I also have to excuse some of the book’s contrivances because it really is very difficult to write an epislatory novel without sounding contrived. It’s a light read; though it touches on subjects of great horror and substance, it does so shallowly without much moving the depths of human emotion.
I also received a kind of snobbish, insider’s joy out of recognizing all the literary references. Aren’t I clever! Most of the characters amused and/or delighted me (excepting, most notably, the narrator, who was too clever for her britches; and the perfect Elizabeth, who never in her life did anything common; and that child, who was clearly not born with even the slightest taint of original sin; and that Mark guy, who is the perfect stereotype of the arrogant American...okay...I liked Dawsey and Sidney). When reading this book, I at times felt as if I were sitting at a cocktail party, nodding and smiling and pretending to find every little comment of the group exceedingly clever, when really, honestly, I was fantasizing about being at home alone with a good book. But, at other times, I felt as if I actually was at home alone with a good book.
I laughed out loud at the game of Dead Bride. I could imagine my own daughter inventing and enjoying such a game...but I couldn't imagine myself delighting in playing it over and over again, as does Juliet, who is obviously not remotely like a real human being if she never grows tired of repetitive child's play. (less)
As a heads up to Kindle owners, the publisher has recently lowered the price of this book to $2.99 (previously $9.99). If it's the softcover you're af...moreAs a heads up to Kindle owners, the publisher has recently lowered the price of this book to $2.99 (previously $9.99). If it's the softcover you're after, you can buy it directly from the publisher's website for 45% off. (less)
As a heads up to Kindle owners, the publisher has recently lowered the price of this book to $2.99 (previously $9.99). If it's the softcover you're af...moreAs a heads up to Kindle owners, the publisher has recently lowered the price of this book to $2.99 (previously $9.99). If it's the softcover you're after, you can buy it directly from the publisher's website for 45% off. (less)
This is a book lover's book. It's a series of vignettes about the owners and guests of a Canadian Bed and Breakfast, and the one theme that seems to r...moreThis is a book lover's book. It's a series of vignettes about the owners and guests of a Canadian Bed and Breakfast, and the one theme that seems to run through all of the individual little pieces is a love of reading. The stories are replete with literary references and reflections on the value and pleasures of reading, and they are even occasionally interspersed by book lists of recommended reading for various moods and locations. It's a diverting little book that can be enjoyed in small chunks, with some quite amusing stories as well as some bitter sweet ones. Mixed in, however, are also more than a few rather boring vignettes, and so my three-star rating is generous. If had the means, I would mark it 2.5. (less)
I stopped reading this about half way through. Although it is somewhat well written, with a unique narrative style in the form of a monologue delivere...moreI stopped reading this about half way through. Although it is somewhat well written, with a unique narrative style in the form of a monologue delivered to a mysterious stranger, I just couldn't stomach it. It seems aimed at trying to make the reader understand and sympathize with someone who can live in the U.S. for years, benefit from its educational and professional opportunities, but still delight when the nation is violently attacked and deeply wounded. Americans are portrayed in stereotype after stereotype, some of which find their basis in reality and some of which I found to be quite far off. One recurring objection seems to be rooted in distaste for what amounts to the fact that America is, relatively speaking, the closest thing to a classless society the world has to offer (of course, it is not this to which the speaker directly objects, but it is this fact that underlies many of the things to which he does object). A book like this may also tend to reinforce the beliefs of some Americans that many immigrants from Muslim countries are just "faking it" with regard to tolerance and assimilation while secretly delighting in America's wounds and hoping for the country's eventual destruction. Is the educated, well-dressed, Pakistani immigrant business man (as in this book) really, secretly smiling when he thinks of the World Trade Towers coming down? I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this book is, but either reinforcing the stereotypes and grudges of self-loathing Americans, or reinforcing the fears of jingoistic ones, may be the effect. (less)
The first half of this collection was good; I like her writing style, and I find her characters and stories to be very emotionally raw. She writes abo...moreThe first half of this collection was good; I like her writing style, and I find her characters and stories to be very emotionally raw. She writes about real human experience and often subtly captures the pain and loss and achings that are common to most people. This is sometimes cathartic, but the focus on those rawer emotions can grow heavy at times as well, because it is so rarely balanced by attention to the positive.
Part II was a more difficult read than Part I. I’m not sure if it was the first person narrative style (for two of the stories) or if I had just lost steam, or if they just weren’t nearly as good, but I skimmed the second half of the book. (less)
Loading...
