It must have been 20 years since I last read this book, but it is still a good time. The premise is that earthly events are simultaneously mirrored byIt must have been 20 years since I last read this book, but it is still a good time. The premise is that earthly events are simultaneously mirrored by spiritual events. Though mirrored isn't really the right word, it's more of a sense that the same events are happening on two different levels simultaneously. The main characters are the young preacher struggling with his flock and the big city newspaperman who bought the local paper to spend more time with his family, oh and the angles who are assigned to watch over them.
The spiritual warfare aspects of this book are fairly over the top, and that's part of what makes the book so enjoyable. The Bible tells us that we are in a spiritual struggle in this world, and it's kind of fun to read about it as if it were a tactical/special forces type of conflict....more
Still a classic. I'm really impressed with the author's attention to detail. One that stood out to me on this read through was (view spoiler)[HermioneStill a classic. I'm really impressed with the author's attention to detail. One that stood out to me on this read through was (view spoiler)[Hermione looking for wood to start a fire for the Devil's Snare. It just occurred to me that an eleven year old who had been raised without magic would naturally revert to what was familiar under stress. (hide spoiler)] It's a little thing, but I think those little realistic touches are a major part of why the series is so popular....more
I had trouble deciding on a rating for this book. I read it first over 20 years ago and remembered it being a favorite. This was an audio version, andI had trouble deciding on a rating for this book. I read it first over 20 years ago and remembered it being a favorite. This was an audio version, and I wasn't as happy with it. The narrator was good, I just think there is too much to the story to work well for me as an audio book. I listen during my commute and there are too many distractions to give this the full attention it needs and deserves. There is a whole lot to the story and I just feel like I missed parts.
In any case, since that is my fault not the book's, I decided to give my memory the benefit of the doubt and give this four stars rather than three....more
OK, so I really enjoy this book, and I have for a long time. I've looked in a few discussions of it here on Goodreads, and I was a little surprised byOK, so I really enjoy this book, and I have for a long time. I've looked in a few discussions of it here on Goodreads, and I was a little surprised by the reaction to it. Many seemed to have taken the final chapters and interpreted them to mean that the third invasion was completely wrong, and humans are just destructive cavemen smashing anything worthwhile. This was not what I took from the book. I read Ender's Game and I see a reiteration of the only rule of war, it is better for the enemy to die than for you to die. Was it a tragic misunderstanding? Yes it was. Could the humans have found a way to communicate and live in peace? In retrospect, yes, but retrospect is always 20/20. What the humans knew, was there was a formidable enemy, who killed their soldiers without mercy or remorse, and that the only way they were defeated last time, wouldn't work a second time. With those facts alone, the choice of attack or parlay is a much different decision than it is with the benefit of Ender's book.
I also admit, that I haven't read the rest of the quartet. The only other Ender book I'm familiar with is Ender's Shadow, which I also liked. Maybe I'll read Speaker for the Dead now, and maybe my interpretation of this book isn't what Card intended, but it won't change my opinion of this book....more
I know that I read this book before, but since it was 25 years ago I didn't remember anything about it. As you would expect from a Douglas Adams book,I know that I read this book before, but since it was 25 years ago I didn't remember anything about it. As you would expect from a Douglas Adams book, it is strange and a little random, but enjoyable. I didn't like it as much as the hitchhiker books, but it was still pretty good....more
I enjoyed this book, but not nearly as much as I enjoyed The Count of Monte Cristo. The Inseperables are a compelling bunch, but not sympathetic. WithI enjoyed this book, but not nearly as much as I enjoyed The Count of Monte Cristo. The Inseperables are a compelling bunch, but not sympathetic. With the exception of Athos, they are shallow, self-centered and manipulative. I tried to like them, but couldn't quite manage it.
I also was a bit put-off by the dialogue. There were several instances the characters would converse in clipped sentences back and forth, giving a feeling more of a stage play than a novel. A comment in the Should Have Read Classics book discussion said that the novel was originally written as a serial, and that this was an artifac of Dumas trying to fill out the required number of lines for each installment.
Finally, I found the plot to be a bit schizophrenic. The beginning of the book is almost a farce, while the final portion is quite dark. It made for a shocking transition when everything turned dismal.
That is not to say that there wasn't anything to like in this book. The plot moves along, and there are portions of the story which are qutie memorable, particularly the scene where the four friends take a bet that they can occupy an enemy position for an hour during their breakfast. Also, while I didn't like them, the characters were well developed.
Overall this is a good book, and I will probably at some point read Dumas' The Man in the Iron Mask, but I don't forsee re-reading the Three Musketeers any time soon....more