A House in the Uplands

[Liz M]

Why it is included in the 1001 list: "Erskine Caldwell is best known for Tobacco Road and God's Little Acre. Both were lauded a reviled in equal measure when first published,.... The publication of God's Little Acre led to Caldwell's arrest on obscenity charges;..."

So basically, this book is included because his other, better known works were so shocking and therefore wide selling. In other words this is a book that one does NOT need to read before they die and I highly recommend that you choose to skip it if you are not reading all 1315 books.

The only good aspect of this book is that it is short and can be read a a few hours. The characters are badly drawn, racist/sexist stereotypes (there is a character named Brad, which immediately reminded me of The Rocky Horror Picture Show -- these characters are less well-rounded than the movie characters), the plot is appalling (I love him and will stick by him even though he is abusive and doesn't love me), and the writing is mediocre at best. I couldn't even cheer at the expected downfall of Grady because even though his terrible traits are listed, I didn't even care enough to dislike him enough to be glad of his eventual ruin.

[Diane]

Rating: 1.5 stars


This is seriously not list-worthy. Thankfully, it is short and easy to knock out of the way. That is, of course, if you are lucky enough to find a copy. I had to resort to a Spanish copy since it is so woefully out of print in English. You would think it would be more popular here in Georgia, since this is Caldwell's home state and the setting of the book.

This is a book that can seriously offend most 21st century readers. This slim novel is packed with blatant mysogyny, racism, class stereotyping, etc. Add unlikeable 2-dimensional characters, cheesy scenes, cliched situations, a predictable plot, and overall sub-par writing. This book does not deserve its place on the list, but somehow managed to remain through several Boxall editions while more worthwhile books did not.

[Amanda]

I don't necessarily disagree with the above reviews, yet I gave it 4 stars...lol. I thought this was great at being what it is: a Southern melodrama with a pulp-like quality from the first half of the 20th century. It isn't literati quality, sure, but it feel it was a great time-capsule book that fits into it's own niche the way I like both Raphael for the sublime and novice velvet paintings from the 70s for the kitsch. This one is the latter.

Also confused as to why his more famous (and more readily available!) books aren't on the list instead.