On my kick for reading dystopian novels, I came across Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood. I've read Atwood's novels before, well, just one, The Handmaid's Tale. I enjoyed that book very much (rated it 9/10 back in January 2009). I'm not sure if this happens to anyone else, but after reading a good book by a particular author, I find that the author's other books can't compare to the first one I read.
But not with Margaret Atwood. Oryx and Crake is deep, sinister, framed within a rather normal hedonistic society. But isn't that true of our current society? It focuses on Jimmy/Snowman, the seemingly last normal man on Earth. In the "present," he lives in a tree and some strange "perfected" people live nearby, asking him questions, wanting stories, providing one fish per week as ordered by Crake. These people are always naked, eat only plants, have green eyes, and do not understand much about the world. And so the story of Jimmy, Crake, and Oryx unfolds through a series of flashback chapters that slowly reveal how things came to be in the present. I can't say much else, because the key ingredient of this book is the slow reveal and what is revealed is well...awesome.
Atwood apparently did quite a bit of research when writing this book and it shows. There's a bit of science in the novel, but it's nothing a common reader cannot grasp. It's a beautifully written book all the way until the end. Apparently, 6 years after writing Oryx and Crake, Atwood released a sequel: The Year of the Flood. After finishing Oryx and Crake, I'm bleeding to read the next installation.
Oryx and Crake gets a 10/10. It's just that good!
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Feed....Part Deux
As it turned out, this book didn't go anywhere. By the time I realized this, I was halfway through the novel and there was no turning back. I reluctantly made it to the end and felt glad to be done with it.
The book had an interesting premise, but was too focused on the two main protagonists and their completely boring teenage ramblings (made worse by the use of teenage slang and lazy dialect). And as I read on, I began to despise both protagonists - Violet for being so damn chatty (and then ridiculously depressed when she wasn't talking) and Titus for being so lame, speaking his mind then taking it back. Violet and Titus were extremely annoying characters.
And because the book is written through Titus' eyes, it makes everything that much more annoying. What's strange is that the author adds little hints about world politics throughout the chapters, things you'd THINK would impact the main characters. But these little glimpses into world politics end up meaning nothing to the plot. That's what's so very disappointing about this book. Why bother telling the reader about "The United States annexation of the moon," and "Global Alliance is pointing weapons at the United States" if it doesn't mean anything? If it has no influence on Violet or Titus or any other characters? It was like a carrot dangling, making me read further, expecting it to have a point, and then realizing the carrot is rotten.
Feed by M.T. Anderson gets a 2/10. Horrible, would not recommend, not even to teenagers.
The book had an interesting premise, but was too focused on the two main protagonists and their completely boring teenage ramblings (made worse by the use of teenage slang and lazy dialect). And as I read on, I began to despise both protagonists - Violet for being so damn chatty (and then ridiculously depressed when she wasn't talking) and Titus for being so lame, speaking his mind then taking it back. Violet and Titus were extremely annoying characters.
And because the book is written through Titus' eyes, it makes everything that much more annoying. What's strange is that the author adds little hints about world politics throughout the chapters, things you'd THINK would impact the main characters. But these little glimpses into world politics end up meaning nothing to the plot. That's what's so very disappointing about this book. Why bother telling the reader about "The United States annexation of the moon," and "Global Alliance is pointing weapons at the United States" if it doesn't mean anything? If it has no influence on Violet or Titus or any other characters? It was like a carrot dangling, making me read further, expecting it to have a point, and then realizing the carrot is rotten.
Feed by M.T. Anderson gets a 2/10. Horrible, would not recommend, not even to teenagers.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Feed by M.T. Anderson
I've started a new book...okay, I'm halfway through this new book. It's called Feed by M.T. Anderson. You'll find it in the Young Adult section of your local bookstore/library. I can understand why it's categorized as young adult science fiction - imagine reading a book that's written exactly how teenagers talk. Every other, like, word, has the word "like" in it. You know, like, whatev.... Nonetheless, it could very well get reluctant teenage readers to read, not only due to the "likes" but also because there's so many f***ing curse words in it.
At first, I thought that maybe this book was some high school student's attempt to write a novel...and he was lucky enough to get it published, probably because of the concept of the book (which I'll explain in a second). But no, M.T. Anderson is in his 40's, which makes the writing style even more grotesque.
The concept of the novel is one many science fiction novels have explored: everyone has a chip in their head, mainly used to advertise products and places, but also is good for watching television, movies, listening to music, and chatting. Basically, it's a computer with internet...in your head. Then, one day, the protagonist and his friends go to the moon for Spring Break and at a club, some guy comes around and hacks into their chips. See, not everyone thinks the chips are a good idea... That's as far as I've made it through the book.
I'm not sure where this novel is going, but it's an easy read so...I'm sure I'll be done by Tuesday.
At first, I thought that maybe this book was some high school student's attempt to write a novel...and he was lucky enough to get it published, probably because of the concept of the book (which I'll explain in a second). But no, M.T. Anderson is in his 40's, which makes the writing style even more grotesque.
The concept of the novel is one many science fiction novels have explored: everyone has a chip in their head, mainly used to advertise products and places, but also is good for watching television, movies, listening to music, and chatting. Basically, it's a computer with internet...in your head. Then, one day, the protagonist and his friends go to the moon for Spring Break and at a club, some guy comes around and hacks into their chips. See, not everyone thinks the chips are a good idea... That's as far as I've made it through the book.
I'm not sure where this novel is going, but it's an easy read so...I'm sure I'll be done by Tuesday.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
The Road by Cormac McCarthy
So, I finished The Road last night. I somehow devoured 110 pages yesterday and couldn't put the book down, not even at 1:30 in the morning. All that I hoped to know, the questions that were left unanswered...were never explained. Instead, Cormac McCarthy decided on the sad (but I suppose inevitable) ending and left the reader to feel, well... je ne sais quoa. It's not that I'm disappointed in the ending. I'm just left wanting more. MORE!! MOOOOORE!!!
Thankfully, there is more to have. The Road was wonderfully made into a movie. And movies take liberties with books, as we all know. So, I'm hoping (just this once) that the movie actually answers the burning questions, the unexplained mysteries surrounding the apocalypse!
The Road receives: 8/10. Interesting, engrossing setting, likable characters, and impressive imagery. -2 for grammatical confusion and leaving the "history of the world" almost completely unexplained. All in all, a good read!
Thankfully, there is more to have. The Road was wonderfully made into a movie. And movies take liberties with books, as we all know. So, I'm hoping (just this once) that the movie actually answers the burning questions, the unexplained mysteries surrounding the apocalypse!
The Road receives: 8/10. Interesting, engrossing setting, likable characters, and impressive imagery. -2 for grammatical confusion and leaving the "history of the world" almost completely unexplained. All in all, a good read!
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
The Road by Cormac McCarthy
I'm 120 pages into The Road by Cormac McCarthy. It's a book I picked up back in May, but then due to work, was unable to complete. So, with the summer, I decided to pick up where I left off.
This is an unusual novel in a number of ways. It's unconventional - no chapters, just paragraphs separated by big spaces from one another. The characters are unnamed and since both main characters are male, it can become dubious who's talking or doing something. I probably wouldn't teach this book to a group of high school students due to the horrific amount of incomplete sentences, the lack of apostrophes in conjunctions, and again, the fact that using the pronoun "he" is confusing when there are two male characters...and really only two male characters. But of course, this is a STYLE and it works rather nicely as a means to set a long, frightening tone throughout the novel.
Oh, so, a quick synopsis: A man and a boy are wandering down a road on foot to go south. The world is post-apocalyptic, but I only say this because that's how the book jacket describes the setting. As an independent reader/thinker, I find it hard to say. As of yet, why the world is this way hasn't been described, only what is: Everything is dead. Trees, grass, a large portion of the human race. Everything is covered in ash, including the sky which allows a minimal amount of sunlight through the ashy haze. Buildings have been ravaged for any supplies - food, clean water, gasoline. There are gangs of brutal people out to slaughter anyone in their path. There are slaves. You get the idea. Civilization is gone.
And really, what kind of plot do you need when you've stuck a father and his son in this setting? For the past 120 pages, they've simply wandered. Most of what I've read is simply descriptions of the wasteland they're walking through and the simple exchanges between father and son. But there's tension. Because you know they're afraid. They're starving. They'll make a wrong turn somewhere. You just don't know when things are going to go from bad to worse.
I can't wait to finish this book to find out what happens next.
This is an unusual novel in a number of ways. It's unconventional - no chapters, just paragraphs separated by big spaces from one another. The characters are unnamed and since both main characters are male, it can become dubious who's talking or doing something. I probably wouldn't teach this book to a group of high school students due to the horrific amount of incomplete sentences, the lack of apostrophes in conjunctions, and again, the fact that using the pronoun "he" is confusing when there are two male characters...and really only two male characters. But of course, this is a STYLE and it works rather nicely as a means to set a long, frightening tone throughout the novel.
Oh, so, a quick synopsis: A man and a boy are wandering down a road on foot to go south. The world is post-apocalyptic, but I only say this because that's how the book jacket describes the setting. As an independent reader/thinker, I find it hard to say. As of yet, why the world is this way hasn't been described, only what is: Everything is dead. Trees, grass, a large portion of the human race. Everything is covered in ash, including the sky which allows a minimal amount of sunlight through the ashy haze. Buildings have been ravaged for any supplies - food, clean water, gasoline. There are gangs of brutal people out to slaughter anyone in their path. There are slaves. You get the idea. Civilization is gone.
And really, what kind of plot do you need when you've stuck a father and his son in this setting? For the past 120 pages, they've simply wandered. Most of what I've read is simply descriptions of the wasteland they're walking through and the simple exchanges between father and son. But there's tension. Because you know they're afraid. They're starving. They'll make a wrong turn somewhere. You just don't know when things are going to go from bad to worse.
I can't wait to finish this book to find out what happens next.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The Great Gatsby
Don't give me that look. You've probably read The Great Gatsby at some point in your life. But let me tell you, the third read-through of such a novel is a wake-up call. I had to read this book so I could teach it to my 11th grade class, which made me really analyze the book so I could teach my students how to analyze it. But since I have almost 15 years more experience than they do, there were things I caught that they did not. And I wondered if The Great Gatsby, known to be a timeless classic, is starting to, well, age. Not of it's own avail, mind you, but the initial interpretation has gone to hell with a new generation of readers with new moral understanding.
For example, the novel is told through the eyes of Nick Carraway. He tells you information out of order and he says he's the "most honest man he knows." This manipulation of facts in sequence makes Nick an unreliable narrator. You truly can't trust him, because what else could he be holding back until a later time? But my students argued that he was honest and it didn't matter when he told you something...as long as he told you. I then posed the question, "Well, he held a number of secrets from his own friends. And he never planned to tell any of them. He knew Tom was cheating on Daisy, Daisy was cheating on Tom, and he never told them. Is that being honest?" And they still argued, "Yes, that information isn't his to tell Tom or Daisy. That's none of his business." So, to the Internet Generation, holding back crucial information still makes you an honest person...and supposedly, a good friend. I wonder if F. Scott Fitzgerald would agree.
There is something lovely about this tragic tale, though. Reading the story again made me really sympathize with Gatsby (though my students had no sympathy for him - he was a creepy stalker in their eyes) and it mirrored our current society's lack of responsibility for poor judgment and actions. There is no justice at the end of the novel. Tom and Daisy stay together, no one gets arrested for the hit and run of Myrtle Wilson, and Gatsby is murdered even though he wasn't the one driving the car. It's like all those corrupt companies that get a little tap on the fingers with a ruler and then keep on going about their business.
And so I rate The Great Gatsby a 7/10. -1 for a confusing beginning, -1 for lengthy sentences that sometimes can put a reader to sleep, and -1 for lacking a real plot until around Chapter 6, when things start to pick up.
For example, the novel is told through the eyes of Nick Carraway. He tells you information out of order and he says he's the "most honest man he knows." This manipulation of facts in sequence makes Nick an unreliable narrator. You truly can't trust him, because what else could he be holding back until a later time? But my students argued that he was honest and it didn't matter when he told you something...as long as he told you. I then posed the question, "Well, he held a number of secrets from his own friends. And he never planned to tell any of them. He knew Tom was cheating on Daisy, Daisy was cheating on Tom, and he never told them. Is that being honest?" And they still argued, "Yes, that information isn't his to tell Tom or Daisy. That's none of his business." So, to the Internet Generation, holding back crucial information still makes you an honest person...and supposedly, a good friend. I wonder if F. Scott Fitzgerald would agree.
There is something lovely about this tragic tale, though. Reading the story again made me really sympathize with Gatsby (though my students had no sympathy for him - he was a creepy stalker in their eyes) and it mirrored our current society's lack of responsibility for poor judgment and actions. There is no justice at the end of the novel. Tom and Daisy stay together, no one gets arrested for the hit and run of Myrtle Wilson, and Gatsby is murdered even though he wasn't the one driving the car. It's like all those corrupt companies that get a little tap on the fingers with a ruler and then keep on going about their business.
And so I rate The Great Gatsby a 7/10. -1 for a confusing beginning, -1 for lengthy sentences that sometimes can put a reader to sleep, and -1 for lacking a real plot until around Chapter 6, when things start to pick up.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
It was a 2008 Bestseller and I've heard enough about it to have entered into my bookclub JUST to read this book. (Ironically, I don't think I'll be able to make the bookclub talk, because I'll still be traveling home from an out-of-state wedding).
Nonetheless, let's talk about Stieg Larsson's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. This gripping mystery is set in Sweden and follows three distinct storylines: 1) Journalist Mikael Blomkvist is convicted of libel for publishing a story against corporate giant Wennerstrom. Blomkvist knew he was on to something, that Wennerstrom was definitely up to no good, but needs more time and evidence to nail the corporate leader once and for all. 2) To get away from the shame of libel conviction, Blomkvist agrees to work for former CEO of Vanger Industries, Henrik Vanger, to write the Vanger family history and moreover, do his best to find out what happened to Vanger's niece, Harriet. Harriet went missing - no body was found and the circumstances of her disappearance are to say the least, suspicious. 3) Punk/Goth/Weirdo Lisabeth Salander (aka the girl with the dragon tattoo) works for a security firm. She's absolutely amazing at doing background checks and other investigations. But she has no social skills. In fact, she's a ward of the state due to not being "mentally or emotionally" capable of handling herself and her private affairs.
Corrupt corporations, murder, sex, secrets, lies...this book has it all. It's intricate, suspenseful, memorable, and just a pleasure to read. There were some downsides, though. The beginning of the book was a little dry, but it did set up a nice profile of just who Blomkvist and Salander were as people. The middle - totally awesome! The very, very end of the novel felt forced. There were details given that were unneeded and it just seemed like Larrson was trying to wrap up the loose ends and be done already. I would have been happy with the book ending on page 553 of the paperback. Nonetheless, WELL DONE.
My score: 9.5/10.
Nonetheless, let's talk about Stieg Larsson's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. This gripping mystery is set in Sweden and follows three distinct storylines: 1) Journalist Mikael Blomkvist is convicted of libel for publishing a story against corporate giant Wennerstrom. Blomkvist knew he was on to something, that Wennerstrom was definitely up to no good, but needs more time and evidence to nail the corporate leader once and for all. 2) To get away from the shame of libel conviction, Blomkvist agrees to work for former CEO of Vanger Industries, Henrik Vanger, to write the Vanger family history and moreover, do his best to find out what happened to Vanger's niece, Harriet. Harriet went missing - no body was found and the circumstances of her disappearance are to say the least, suspicious. 3) Punk/Goth/Weirdo Lisabeth Salander (aka the girl with the dragon tattoo) works for a security firm. She's absolutely amazing at doing background checks and other investigations. But she has no social skills. In fact, she's a ward of the state due to not being "mentally or emotionally" capable of handling herself and her private affairs.
Corrupt corporations, murder, sex, secrets, lies...this book has it all. It's intricate, suspenseful, memorable, and just a pleasure to read. There were some downsides, though. The beginning of the book was a little dry, but it did set up a nice profile of just who Blomkvist and Salander were as people. The middle - totally awesome! The very, very end of the novel felt forced. There were details given that were unneeded and it just seemed like Larrson was trying to wrap up the loose ends and be done already. I would have been happy with the book ending on page 553 of the paperback. Nonetheless, WELL DONE.
My score: 9.5/10.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Case Histories by Kate Atkinson - The Next Book You NEED To Read
Contemporary mystery has never really grabbed my attention as a reader. I took a Mystery Story course as an undergraduate and felt that contemporary mystery either was too old-fashioned (very Sherlock Holmes) or very CSI (a TV show I don't watch).
But Case Histories by Kate Atkinson is different. It may be set in England, but it's very contemporary. It doesn't have a sleuth with a magnifying glass nor medical examiners with magical insight. It doesn't make far-fetched connections and that's probably the most satisfying part of reading this book.
Oh right, what is this book ABOUT? Well, there are three "cases" which are introduced in the beginning of the book. One involves a missing little girl, another involves the shooting of an 18 year old woman working at a law firm, and the third is about a wife who splits her husband's head open with an ax. These three cases fall into the lap of Jackson Brodie, a retired investigator who opened his own practice. The novel follows Jackson through his process to investigate these cases, but that's only half the novel. The author also writes chapters to give us wonderfully detailed glipses into the lives of other characters involved in these cases, which move the story along and lets the reader begin to put pieces together. This dramatic irony makes the book exciting from cover to cover!
The suspenseful plot, intricate detailing for each and every character, and smooth writing make this one of the best books I've read in a long, long time. (Perhaps since The Other Boleyn Girl.) The only drawback I saw in this novel was the sheer amount of characters. At one point, I picked up the book after 3 days of an unfortunate non-reading spell, and couldn't remember who certain people were. (These people, by the way, were people that "enhance" your understanding of main characters...and there's a lot of "enhancement characters.")
My rating: 9/10. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this mystery and I think you will, too.
But Case Histories by Kate Atkinson is different. It may be set in England, but it's very contemporary. It doesn't have a sleuth with a magnifying glass nor medical examiners with magical insight. It doesn't make far-fetched connections and that's probably the most satisfying part of reading this book.
Oh right, what is this book ABOUT? Well, there are three "cases" which are introduced in the beginning of the book. One involves a missing little girl, another involves the shooting of an 18 year old woman working at a law firm, and the third is about a wife who splits her husband's head open with an ax. These three cases fall into the lap of Jackson Brodie, a retired investigator who opened his own practice. The novel follows Jackson through his process to investigate these cases, but that's only half the novel. The author also writes chapters to give us wonderfully detailed glipses into the lives of other characters involved in these cases, which move the story along and lets the reader begin to put pieces together. This dramatic irony makes the book exciting from cover to cover!
The suspenseful plot, intricate detailing for each and every character, and smooth writing make this one of the best books I've read in a long, long time. (Perhaps since The Other Boleyn Girl.) The only drawback I saw in this novel was the sheer amount of characters. At one point, I picked up the book after 3 days of an unfortunate non-reading spell, and couldn't remember who certain people were. (These people, by the way, were people that "enhance" your understanding of main characters...and there's a lot of "enhancement characters.")
My rating: 9/10. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this mystery and I think you will, too.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Finished "Excellent Women"
Yes, just as I expected, the ending to "Excellent Women" has not changed my rating for the book. It was a fitting ending to say the least. She doesn't get married (though maybe they're hinting at it?) and she gets new neighbors (but oh crap, they're not regular Catholics...they're those Roman Catholics!).
My book discussion is on Sunday and I'm not sure how much commentary I'll be able to contribute. What's there really to say about a passive main character who loves church and does everyone else's bidding? I get a feeling the older people in my book discussion group are going to praise this book. That's gonna be awkward :-)
My book discussion is on Sunday and I'm not sure how much commentary I'll be able to contribute. What's there really to say about a passive main character who loves church and does everyone else's bidding? I get a feeling the older people in my book discussion group are going to praise this book. That's gonna be awkward :-)
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Excellent Women - Not So Excellent
The second book of my Book Discussion group is "Excellent Women" by Barbara Pym. I'm starting to understand the selection of these books after going to my first discussion last Sunday. I was at least 20 years younger than everyone there. Though funny enough, many of the people in the discussion group felt exactly as I did about "Nathan Coulter" (see my review of that book below).
As for "Excellent Women," it has tinges of my gripes about "Nathan Coulter." This is a weird prim-and-proper English novel. It follows the life of a 30-something single woman named Mildred, who doesn't seem all that interested in getting married. She acts like she's 60, though, maybe even 70. If I had to make a Match.com profile for her, it would be "LIKES: Church, church jumble sales, tea, cooking books, everything boring. DISLIKES: Drama, men, science, liquor, everything interesting." This is no joke. Mildred loves church, loves solitude, and everything that infringes upon those loves is considered a bother...not that this isn't interesting, but rather an amusing undertone throughout the whole book. In fact, her commentary on her dislikes are hilarious. How she frets over every boring thing is hilarious. ("Oh no, the tea is not strong enough! How dreadful!") And whenever something comes up that contradicts her beliefs, well, please let the hilarity ensue! For example, her pastor, her married neighbor downstairs (Rocky), and Rocky's wife's business partner, Everard, are all interested in her. But #1 - She doesn't think pastors should marry. #2 - Rocky is married and apparently a playboy. He also seems to only like her because she possesses two qualities his wife lacks - Mildred can clean AND make tea. WOW!! And #3 - As perfect as Everard is for her (he even goes to church!), he's also an intellectual, which doesn't seem to thrill Mildred. My guess is that she hates science since it's interesting (and also tends to turn people atheist).
It's set in post-WWII England, but it might as well be 1850. The dialogue is just so sickeningly proper that sometimes I feel like writing a curse word somewhere to liven it up. Even on important subjects like DIVORCE, CHEATING, BREAK-UPS, and DEATH, Mildred takes a tone of, "Oh, of course one must miss one's husband when he leaves." Uh-huh. Way to state the obvious.
Despite the prim-and-proper plot, dialogue, and character (no stockings?! YOU REBEL!), the book is actually quite enjoyable. I won't rate it as the best book I've ever read, but I won't rate it as the worst either. Seeing as how I'm 20 pages from the end, I know the ending won't change my mind about this book. So, I'll tell you now. I'm giving it a 6/10 for easy reading, good character development, and a rather entertaining non-plot. Oh yes, non-plot...not nothingness like "Nathan Coulter," but more along the lines of nothing happens but everything happens. It's a very internal plot.
I'll let you know how the ending goes.
As for "Excellent Women," it has tinges of my gripes about "Nathan Coulter." This is a weird prim-and-proper English novel. It follows the life of a 30-something single woman named Mildred, who doesn't seem all that interested in getting married. She acts like she's 60, though, maybe even 70. If I had to make a Match.com profile for her, it would be "LIKES: Church, church jumble sales, tea, cooking books, everything boring. DISLIKES: Drama, men, science, liquor, everything interesting." This is no joke. Mildred loves church, loves solitude, and everything that infringes upon those loves is considered a bother...not that this isn't interesting, but rather an amusing undertone throughout the whole book. In fact, her commentary on her dislikes are hilarious. How she frets over every boring thing is hilarious. ("Oh no, the tea is not strong enough! How dreadful!") And whenever something comes up that contradicts her beliefs, well, please let the hilarity ensue! For example, her pastor, her married neighbor downstairs (Rocky), and Rocky's wife's business partner, Everard, are all interested in her. But #1 - She doesn't think pastors should marry. #2 - Rocky is married and apparently a playboy. He also seems to only like her because she possesses two qualities his wife lacks - Mildred can clean AND make tea. WOW!! And #3 - As perfect as Everard is for her (he even goes to church!), he's also an intellectual, which doesn't seem to thrill Mildred. My guess is that she hates science since it's interesting (and also tends to turn people atheist).
It's set in post-WWII England, but it might as well be 1850. The dialogue is just so sickeningly proper that sometimes I feel like writing a curse word somewhere to liven it up. Even on important subjects like DIVORCE, CHEATING, BREAK-UPS, and DEATH, Mildred takes a tone of, "Oh, of course one must miss one's husband when he leaves." Uh-huh. Way to state the obvious.
Despite the prim-and-proper plot, dialogue, and character (no stockings?! YOU REBEL!), the book is actually quite enjoyable. I won't rate it as the best book I've ever read, but I won't rate it as the worst either. Seeing as how I'm 20 pages from the end, I know the ending won't change my mind about this book. So, I'll tell you now. I'm giving it a 6/10 for easy reading, good character development, and a rather entertaining non-plot. Oh yes, non-plot...not nothingness like "Nathan Coulter," but more along the lines of nothing happens but everything happens. It's a very internal plot.
I'll let you know how the ending goes.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Nathan Coulter - Reviewed
I finished Nathan Coulter last night. Grandpa finally died in the last 2 paragraphs of the book. It was anti-climatic at best. Though there wasn't really a climax to begin with.
So, let's recap - This book was a book about a farming family in Kentucky. The 118 pages of the book (there's 118 pages, not 114 as noted in my last post) describe Kentucky landscape, farm life, and hick characters that do nothing. The Kentucky landscape is nice, but author Wendell Berry feels the need to remind me of what it looks like every few pages. It's repetitive. Farm life - I'm not really sure 50+ pages need to be devoted to describing how to put in a fence post, pulling vines, harvesting tobacco, and planting seed. Berry wants the reader to feel that the relationship between farmer and land is romantic, despite all the hard work. I get that. But to describe that bond is NOT a PLOT. And then we reach the hick characters. You've got the drunk, the one-eyed guy, the bible-thumper, etc. Nathan looks up to the drunk, his uncle, as a role model. Ridiculous. Am I really supposed to feel something for these characters? If so, it's downright disgust. The "Shooo-eeey" knee-slapping hillbillies are not likable characters because they're one dimensional. And just plain annoying.
I don't know why, but I'm rating this book a 3/10. I'm pretty sure you were expecting a 1/10, but I have to give this book some credit. The fact that it's a book about nothing and yet it still made me interested enough to read it to the end must mean there's something good about this book. It did have some really great descriptions and the the writing was easy to read. It flowed. But due to lack of interest, lack of plot, lack of complicated characters, and some grievous repetition, I have deducted 7 points from the book's score.
Nathan Coulter receives a 3/10.
So, let's recap - This book was a book about a farming family in Kentucky. The 118 pages of the book (there's 118 pages, not 114 as noted in my last post) describe Kentucky landscape, farm life, and hick characters that do nothing. The Kentucky landscape is nice, but author Wendell Berry feels the need to remind me of what it looks like every few pages. It's repetitive. Farm life - I'm not really sure 50+ pages need to be devoted to describing how to put in a fence post, pulling vines, harvesting tobacco, and planting seed. Berry wants the reader to feel that the relationship between farmer and land is romantic, despite all the hard work. I get that. But to describe that bond is NOT a PLOT. And then we reach the hick characters. You've got the drunk, the one-eyed guy, the bible-thumper, etc. Nathan looks up to the drunk, his uncle, as a role model. Ridiculous. Am I really supposed to feel something for these characters? If so, it's downright disgust. The "Shooo-eeey" knee-slapping hillbillies are not likable characters because they're one dimensional. And just plain annoying.
I don't know why, but I'm rating this book a 3/10. I'm pretty sure you were expecting a 1/10, but I have to give this book some credit. The fact that it's a book about nothing and yet it still made me interested enough to read it to the end must mean there's something good about this book. It did have some really great descriptions and the the writing was easy to read. It flowed. But due to lack of interest, lack of plot, lack of complicated characters, and some grievous repetition, I have deducted 7 points from the book's score.
Nathan Coulter receives a 3/10.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
A Story About Nothing
"Nathan Coulter" is turning out to be a story about nothing. But not in the good Seinfeld way. I'm about 30 pages from the end of the book and if you asked me what the plot of the book is, I'd say, "Nothing." There's no climax, there's no PROBLEM, there's just page after page describing the river and the farm and hick-farm people in Kentucky. If I didn't have to read this book for the book club, I would have deserted it a long time ago.
The strange thing about this book is that it's a quick read. I'm not sure WHY or HOW, but it is. I mean, the book is only 114 pages long which is perhaps one of its endearing qualities. I still find myself reading it wondering if something is FINALLY going to happen. I read the back of the book - Grandpa is supposed to die. Perhaps that's what's driving me to the end. I'm waiting for this old guy to DIE. Maybe while the authors at it, he (she?) can kill off the narrator, too. He has no mind of his own, a sort of BLANK SLATE NARRATOR who just reports, does whatever he's told, and always seems to have the word "Huh?" floating over his head at all times. Nathan Coulter must also die.
Death is a good way to end a book. I've done it in many of my novels. The tragic ending...oh so satisfying!
Well, next time, I'll report on the ending of this book and rate it. But I'm sure you can already guess my rating. Til next time!
The strange thing about this book is that it's a quick read. I'm not sure WHY or HOW, but it is. I mean, the book is only 114 pages long which is perhaps one of its endearing qualities. I still find myself reading it wondering if something is FINALLY going to happen. I read the back of the book - Grandpa is supposed to die. Perhaps that's what's driving me to the end. I'm waiting for this old guy to DIE. Maybe while the authors at it, he (she?) can kill off the narrator, too. He has no mind of his own, a sort of BLANK SLATE NARRATOR who just reports, does whatever he's told, and always seems to have the word "Huh?" floating over his head at all times. Nathan Coulter must also die.
Death is a good way to end a book. I've done it in many of my novels. The tragic ending...oh so satisfying!
Well, next time, I'll report on the ending of this book and rate it. But I'm sure you can already guess my rating. Til next time!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Book Club - Nathan Coulter
It would only make sense that a Literature Lover such as myself would join a book club. So, I did. I started the first book today, entitled "Nathan Coulter" by Wendell Berry. I'm 11 pages into the book and I'm wondering if anything is really going to happen. This is a book that suffers from over-description. Everything is overanalyzed and complicated. Berry can't tell me it's sunset in less than 300 words. So, needless to say (but I will anyway), I'm wondering if I'll actually manage to finish this book in time for the discussion. Can I drag myself to read complicated descriptions of farm landscape (do I really care where Uncle's cabin is in relation to the narrator's farm? Grandpa's house? The river?)? We'll see...
The good thing is that this club put The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo on their reading list. I can't WAIT to read that book!
The good thing is that this club put The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo on their reading list. I can't WAIT to read that book!
Friday, January 22, 2010
Lies Across America
Remember the book "Lies My Teacher Told Me" by James Loewen? Well, I read another of his books entitled "Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong." I've read 250 pages so far. It's set up by region of the United States and then critiques monuments, museums, plaques, etc. found across the country. The truth is that many of the historic sites he writes about are insignificant statues and plaques that very few people would even give a second glance at. There's lots of these things across our country and I'd hardly call them "historic sites." (In some ways, James Loewen would agree as he argues that many of them contain made-up history and are therefore made-up historic sites.)
After reading the first 100 pages, you'll get the idea of the book and once you read the heading for each passage, you'll know exactly what Loewen is going to say. He's obsessed with a) mistreatment of American Indians b) Reconstruction and Segregation and c) The lack of women in the historical landscape of the US. Basically, each entry of this entire book can fit neatly into one of those categories. After a while, you go "yeah yeah, no women in this museum..." and flip to the next entry only to say..."yeah yeah, it was the Mormons who massacred the Illinois pioneers, not the Indians...."
Now, it seems like this is a bad review of the book. But it's not. This is an interesting, insightful book, which explains rather well how America wishes to remember its history. The South rewards segregationists, racists, and continues to perpetuate racism with statues depicting black people as "mammies" and "uncles." The West rewards pioneers who enslaved American Indians, pushed them into poverty, discriminated against Chinese workers, etc. The Middle States (Montana, Kansas, Illinois, etc.) remembers things they weren't involved in or are just plain ridiculous - Abraham Lincoln's log cabin is long gone and no, he never built it. Montana had nothing to do with the Civil War and should not have a Conferate statue. The North - Well, they don't tell history like it is for fear of controversy. (Why talk about the debate about the Constitution and Bill of Rights at Independence Hall in Philadelphia when we could talk about how they all grabbed a beer afterwards...) Or, they make stuff up so that we appreciate a historical site better. George Washington wasn't really all that religious, yet we'll make a church depicting him praying at Valley Forge in stained glass. OOOH, shiny!
For what it's worth, I'll rate this book a 7/10. I'll deduct points for repetition, a lack of really noteworthy historic sites, and for sometimes long-winded entries. Other than that, Loewen provides sound historical truths and really nice explanations as to why these historical markers are detrimental to our national historical consciousness.
After reading the first 100 pages, you'll get the idea of the book and once you read the heading for each passage, you'll know exactly what Loewen is going to say. He's obsessed with a) mistreatment of American Indians b) Reconstruction and Segregation and c) The lack of women in the historical landscape of the US. Basically, each entry of this entire book can fit neatly into one of those categories. After a while, you go "yeah yeah, no women in this museum..." and flip to the next entry only to say..."yeah yeah, it was the Mormons who massacred the Illinois pioneers, not the Indians...."
Now, it seems like this is a bad review of the book. But it's not. This is an interesting, insightful book, which explains rather well how America wishes to remember its history. The South rewards segregationists, racists, and continues to perpetuate racism with statues depicting black people as "mammies" and "uncles." The West rewards pioneers who enslaved American Indians, pushed them into poverty, discriminated against Chinese workers, etc. The Middle States (Montana, Kansas, Illinois, etc.) remembers things they weren't involved in or are just plain ridiculous - Abraham Lincoln's log cabin is long gone and no, he never built it. Montana had nothing to do with the Civil War and should not have a Conferate statue. The North - Well, they don't tell history like it is for fear of controversy. (Why talk about the debate about the Constitution and Bill of Rights at Independence Hall in Philadelphia when we could talk about how they all grabbed a beer afterwards...) Or, they make stuff up so that we appreciate a historical site better. George Washington wasn't really all that religious, yet we'll make a church depicting him praying at Valley Forge in stained glass. OOOH, shiny!
For what it's worth, I'll rate this book a 7/10. I'll deduct points for repetition, a lack of really noteworthy historic sites, and for sometimes long-winded entries. Other than that, Loewen provides sound historical truths and really nice explanations as to why these historical markers are detrimental to our national historical consciousness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)