Sign in with FacebookErin's Reviews > Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption
Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption
by Laura Hillenbrand
by Laura Hillenbrand
I enjoyed the beginning of the book somewhat, learning about the main character's struggles to become an Olympic runner. It quickly transitioned into an account of his experiences at war. I had a very difficult time connecting to/caring about any of the characters. (Perhaps the third-person narrative was too distant for me? I felt as though I was just reading a series of facts.) Also, I don't have much interest in war, combat, or airplanes; when I picked up 'Unbroken' I was depending on my love for the characters to be enough of a gripper to keep me engaged, and that just didn't happen. Reading it became more of a chore than an escape, so ultimately I only made it through about a quarter of the book. I wonder if I just needed to hang on a bit longer to fall in love with this book the way that so many others have...
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Unbroken.
sign in »
Comments (showing 1-17 of 17) (17 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Laura
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Apr 24, 2012 05:58pm
I totally agree with you on this point. Many reviewers on here mentioned that the book became more interesting after Louis went to war, but like you, I enjoyed the beginning a lot more -- once the war started, the book became more of a superficial "this happened, then this happened..." And I grew tired of searching chapters I'd already read in an attempt to find characters that had only been cursorily introduced, then mentioned again much later in passing.
reply
|
flag
*
Thanks for backing me up! :) I was afraid I was just being impatient, but life's too short to read books I don't enjoy for more than 50 pages.
Is it really fair to rate a book clearly about WWII when you "don't have much interest in it." It would be like me rating a "romance" novel. One reader gave my novel "Where the River Splits" one star, then said she stopped reading after the first 15 pages or so because she "didn't like the style." Why rate it then? Should have stopped reading and gone on to something else, as you indicate in your comment.
This is neither here nor there other than you are probably too far removed in age to see WWII as real rather than as history. When I was born, it had only been over for about 8 years and until I was in college "the war" meant WWII, not Vietnam. What is important to understand about any period like this one is that it involves real people and real suffering and real change. I agree about not reading books that don't hold your interest. I do, however, think it is unfair to rate a book on an incomplete read. You never know what you might have found in that other 75%. Just my thoughts.
For me, it was all about the experience. I enjoyed the book and as I read I felt their pain and sorrow. When the story ended, I felt satisfied.
When you say "characters" it is an indication of an attitude in your approach to the book. These are not "characters" but very real people struggling through horrific circumstances. Historical fact/interpretation can not be read the way one reads fiction. Fiction is for entertainment; this is so much more. Entertainment, education, understanding....and an inkling that we would not be living the way we are now, were it not for these remarkable people....a bit of empathy in your approach might make all the difference.
Oh, I wish you would have held on for a little longer. I agree that the first quarter was more "information" than story, and as I'm used to novels, it was kind of hard for me to get through, but once you get to the event that is core to the book, it becomes much more detailed and the story whisks you away.
I don't have a special interest in war novels or accounts, but that isn't to say that a story that involves this topic or takes place during that era is necessarily a turnoff. Had I cared about the characters, continuing to read wouldn't have been an issue. The book just didn't progress in a way that fostered me as the reader to engage with the characters. I understand why other readers criticised me rating the book when I didn't finish it, but I also think that part of being well-rated is that I WANT to finish it. I did push beyond my initial inclination to put it down, but after 50 pages of that, I didn't see the point.Thank you all for your respectful feedback. You present interesting points about the book, hanging on to a read beyond hurdles/lulls and how we may differ on our definitions of fair ranking practices.
I agree with what Nancy Martin said - this is not fiction; these are not characters. Non-fiction is a series of facts. Stick to fluff if that's your cup of tea. This is a serious piece of history.
Perhaps my rating was harsh; I expected to connect with the people in this book and feel engaged with the main events since reviews claimed that this book was a "page-turner". True history can certainly be engaging, I just didn't feel that in what I read. We are all entitled to our opinion though, and I understand that others may have an entirely different reaction. To say that my response to 'Unbroken' means that I only like "fluff" is unfair and offensive.
You are right. "Fluff" was a poor choice of words. I am curious to know if you have read other books of serious history that did hold your interest. What I meant was that perhaps well-researched history is just not your cup of tea.
Erin, your attention span coupled with your need to be entertained is reflected by your generation's inability to digest content based information. Perhaps in ten years you should give it another try.
How could you not connect with the characters? you learn all about them in beginning of the book. then all this crazy stuff happens to him. Do you remember when he held up the bored for 36 min.
Well, it just got more disturbing as the book went on and quite frankly, made me hate the Japanese. I can't finish it.
Just wanted to chime in and say that I also had a problem relating to the people in this book. I think the listing facts about the air crafts, etc. detracted from what they were experiencing. I did enjoy the book more after he was lost at sea, but just never got as emotionally involved as I do with other books. I don't believe my opinion or the person who wrote this review should be accused of only reading "fluff" because our opinions may differ from the majority. I very much enjoy other nonfiction accounts of history that I connected much more to.
