I just read this one, too! I'm not sure I should say too much, though, since technically, I didn't loathe it...
...but since you brought it up, I shall. Did your edition have all the reviews at the front like mine did? Here's what I wrote in my review of "Little Children":
****** Perhaps because of the abundant glowing reviews included at the beginning of the book, I expected something more than what I got. The New York Times called him an "American Chekhov", for heaven's sake!
I liked the book, don't get me wrong. It was an easy read; effortless, even. But "bitingly hysterical"? A "quietly remarkable" writer "more comparable to Flaubert than Hornby"?
Who'd this guy blow?
(I'm sorry, that was in poor taste; but seriously, Perrotta's writing, at least in "Little Children", doesn't merit the level of giddiness that so inspired the critics...) ******************
"Quietly remarkable" my ass.
Loathesome characters aside, did YOU think it was well-written?
...but since you brought it up, I shall. Did your edition have all the reviews at the front like mine did? Here's what I wrote in my review of "Little Children":
******
Perhaps because of the abundant glowing reviews included at the beginning of the book, I expected something more than what I got. The New York Times called him an "American Chekhov", for heaven's sake!
I liked the book, don't get me wrong. It was an easy read; effortless, even. But "bitingly hysterical"? A "quietly remarkable" writer "more comparable to Flaubert than Hornby"?
Who'd this guy blow?
(I'm sorry, that was in poor taste; but seriously, Perrotta's writing, at least in "Little Children", doesn't merit the level of giddiness that so inspired the critics...)
******************
"Quietly remarkable" my ass.
Loathesome characters aside, did YOU think it was well-written?