Catch-22, Joseph Heller, 1955
Plot: Relatively non-existent. This book takes place with a squadron of bombadiers as WWII draws to a close and shares tons of little anecdotes about their time together. It is sort of in the middle, as about half of the stories are things that have already happened and half of the "plot" is moving forward. However, this book is much more about how the characters deal with their circumstances than a straightforward narrative. Because of this, it is hard to grade it down on plot when there wasn't really supposed to be one. I enjoyed the little stories though, so...um...5/10?
Style: I realize that I am far from the most well-read person ever, but I have never read a book with such an unusual style. Much of the stylistic characteristics of previous books I've read can (at least partly) be attributed to the time period. But in this instance, I think it is all Heller. This book was alternately hilarious and gruesome. The characters consistently talk in circles and have conversations with each other that go nowhere. It is funny, but hard to imagine anyone actually having that sort of conversation. Also, there were so many characters it was nearly impossible to keep them all straight, especially because he would mention them once and then not again for 5 chapters or so. Heller described people in great detail: their facial features, their mannerisms, but didn't do the same for the settings or environments. It was crazy and hard to follow at times, but it was so much fun to read. 8/10
Hotness of the main character: John "Yo-Yo" Yossarian. Physical attributes aside (partly because I don't remember them and partly because Heller seemed to describe everyone frankly and unflatteringly) he seems like a pretty normal guy. He cared about his friends, and didn't care about the other guys. All he wanted to do was go home. And also he slept around a lot. Too much of a charity case for me. :) 3/10
The character who I would most like to be: Oh wow there are so many to choose from. I think I'd pick Orr. He had infinite patience, made the best of every situation and was totally funny.
Re-readability: Occasionally. It might be nice to read again with a better understanding of the characters and where everything is going.
Fun quote: "Why did you walk around all day with rubber balls in your hands?"..."I did it to protect my good reputation in case anyone ever caught me walking around with crab apples in my cheeks. With rubber balls in my hands I could deny there were crab apples in my cheeks. Every time someone asked me why I was walking around with crab apples in my cheeks, I'd just open my hands and show them it was rubber balls I was walking around with, not crab apples, and that they were in my hands, not my cheeks. It was a good story. But I never knew if it got across or not, since it's pretty tough to make people understand you when you're talking to them with two crab apples in your cheeks."
Final Decision: Shelf it.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Great Expectations - Final Review
Great Expectations, Charles Dickens, 1860
Plot: Terrible. Okay, so by the end it came together and the last quarter of the book had some decent action to it, but up until that point, absolutely nothing of interest happened. Add to that the fact that I still don't really understand the concept of a wealthy person using their own money to make some random poor kid a "gentleman" and you end up with pretty much blah. 3/10
Style: Oh boy. I love me some Dickens. Just about as soon as I'd get bogged down in the nothingness that was going on, he'd throw in some sarcasm or a great quip and I'd be stuck reading some more. And while I was disappointed in the amount of lead up it took to get to the good stuff, the good stuff was pretty dang good. 7/10
Hotness of the main character: Well he started out as a young kid, so we'll skip to the end for this part. Pip was a hopeless romantic (points for this) but was hung up on a girl who treated him terribly and couldn't get over her (negative points for this). He had a decent amount of debt and treated his family from before he became a gentleman with contempt. So those aren't particularly good traits. Still, he had a good heart and always felt remorse for these actions; to the point of complete humility and repentance at the end. Goodness...um...5/10?
The character I would most like to be: I'd have to choose between the girl who all the boys love and the loyal best friend. The girl is a great manipulater and can make the boys do anything she wants...definitely a useful power, but sort of lonely I'd think. I'll go with Herbert I suppose.
Re-readability: Once in a blue moon. Dickens' writing is the only thing keeping me from making this never again. It was drugery to get through.
Final Decision: Sell it.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Frankenstein - Final Review
Frankenstein, Mary Shelley, 1816
Plot: Good stuff. Suspense, horror, action, foreshadowing all there. Still, fairly depressing...okay really depressing, with no redeeming happiness at the end. 6/10
Style: Mostly good. Had no difficulty following this at all, and for many sections was an easy read. Shelley though, worked very hard to make this about the human condition (which I will ignore, as I am uninterested in most big-picture metaphors and simply want a good story). And while some authors have succeeded in weaving their story with their agenda subtle-y and seamlessly, Shelley sort of randomly delves into these huge, philosophical monologues delivered by one of the main characters. It's probably halfway profound, decent stuff, but as mentioned, not the point for me. So those parts were a bit laborious. 6/10
Hotness of the main character: The main character is most definitely Victor Frankenstein, and not his monster, so let's just clarify that right out. :) He is a brilliant guy, always wants to be learning, on the forefront of science, etc. He loves Elizabeth from when they are children and wants to be with her forever, but sometimes his work comes first. As the book progresses, he becomes very depressed and frantic at what he has unleashed upon the world. His thoughts are always for the safety of others, but he gets sort of crazy. 5/10?
The character I would most like to be: Difficult, since [SPOILER ALERT] most people in this book end up dead. I'll go with Henry Clerval. He's a great friend, happy, optimistic about life, and gets to take this great trip! Yay for travel!
Re-readability: Rarely. I guess the end must have been really unsatisfactory, because I remember really enjoying this book, but right now, having just finished it, I'm okay with not reading it any more, or at least for a long long time.
Final Decision: Sell it.
Plot: Good stuff. Suspense, horror, action, foreshadowing all there. Still, fairly depressing...okay really depressing, with no redeeming happiness at the end. 6/10
Style: Mostly good. Had no difficulty following this at all, and for many sections was an easy read. Shelley though, worked very hard to make this about the human condition (which I will ignore, as I am uninterested in most big-picture metaphors and simply want a good story). And while some authors have succeeded in weaving their story with their agenda subtle-y and seamlessly, Shelley sort of randomly delves into these huge, philosophical monologues delivered by one of the main characters. It's probably halfway profound, decent stuff, but as mentioned, not the point for me. So those parts were a bit laborious. 6/10
Hotness of the main character: The main character is most definitely Victor Frankenstein, and not his monster, so let's just clarify that right out. :) He is a brilliant guy, always wants to be learning, on the forefront of science, etc. He loves Elizabeth from when they are children and wants to be with her forever, but sometimes his work comes first. As the book progresses, he becomes very depressed and frantic at what he has unleashed upon the world. His thoughts are always for the safety of others, but he gets sort of crazy. 5/10?
The character I would most like to be: Difficult, since [SPOILER ALERT] most people in this book end up dead. I'll go with Henry Clerval. He's a great friend, happy, optimistic about life, and gets to take this great trip! Yay for travel!
Re-readability: Rarely. I guess the end must have been really unsatisfactory, because I remember really enjoying this book, but right now, having just finished it, I'm okay with not reading it any more, or at least for a long long time.
Final Decision: Sell it.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
An Observation
I have now read 6 "classics" and am about halfway through Frankenstein and I have had the following thought:
First of all, I realize that 6 is not really an acceptable sample size, but that's what I have to work with so far, so I will. I have chosen to shelf 5 of them (SPOILER ALERT: soon to be 6, I am loving Frankenstein) and sell back only 1. This is an over 80% success rate. I feel like these books are classics for a reason, and for some reason, that is nice to know. This is a strong contrast to the visual arts world, where the difference between "good" art and "bad" art seems amazingly arbitrary in my opinion. Of course, this observation could change as I continue reading, but for now, I thought I'd share it.
Thoughts? (Feel free to bash on modern art...)
First of all, I realize that 6 is not really an acceptable sample size, but that's what I have to work with so far, so I will. I have chosen to shelf 5 of them (SPOILER ALERT: soon to be 6, I am loving Frankenstein) and sell back only 1. This is an over 80% success rate. I feel like these books are classics for a reason, and for some reason, that is nice to know. This is a strong contrast to the visual arts world, where the difference between "good" art and "bad" art seems amazingly arbitrary in my opinion. Of course, this observation could change as I continue reading, but for now, I thought I'd share it.
Thoughts? (Feel free to bash on modern art...)
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Wuthering Heights - Final Review
Wuthering Heights, Emily Bronte, 1847
Plot: Interesting. I think simply because of the time period and the culture, I had Jane Austen in mind when this book began, but the plot is so different from anything I have experienced of Austen. It was refreshing, in that way, though Austen is dear to my heart for her light heartedness and optimism and Bronte (at least this sister) didn't find that necessary. Still, the unpredictableness made it very interesting as I was never sure where it was going to end up. 8/10
Style: It is funny now to remember that I had a really hard time following this when I first started, because I got so used to it by the end that it wasn't difficult. Some of the challenge is cultural; Bronte's contemporaries would have understood when she said "the master" or Mr. So-and-So, (among a whole family of So-and-Sos) who exactly she was referring to. Also, one particular character has an accent written so thickly that I often found myself whispering the dialogue in order to understand it. This method rarely worked. Luckily, he was not primary to the story. What I'm getting at, I suppose, is that the difficulties I had with style were no fault of the authors, and there was one moment in particular that I was struck by the emotion and passion in her writing. I was all of a sudden absolutely captivated. Major points for that. 8/10
Hotness of the main character: I suppose the main character would be Mr. Heathcliff, although the narrative switches around throughout. He is sort of a terrible creature who is bent on revenge, etc. He seems to have no capacity for forgiveness or any sort of compassion. Even the narrator, who attempts to give him the benefit of the doubt for as long as possible, ends up hating his behaviour, if not himself. His one redeeming quality, and it is redeeming enough to make up for at least a few of his other shortcomings, is the strength of his love for Catherine and the lengths he goes through for her (though I suppose in retrospect, much of it was selfish as well). 3/10
The character I would most like to be: I've got nothing here. The masters of the houses all suffer pain and heartbreak and the others in their families are abused nonstop. Not to mention the incredible boredom of living in this society that I believe I have mentioned before.
Re-readability: I would like to read this again, since it is written a little bit backwards. Knowing how all the people grow up, it would be nice to see the beginning of the book again since I finally have all the characters straight.
Final Decision: Shelf it.
Plot: Interesting. I think simply because of the time period and the culture, I had Jane Austen in mind when this book began, but the plot is so different from anything I have experienced of Austen. It was refreshing, in that way, though Austen is dear to my heart for her light heartedness and optimism and Bronte (at least this sister) didn't find that necessary. Still, the unpredictableness made it very interesting as I was never sure where it was going to end up. 8/10
Style: It is funny now to remember that I had a really hard time following this when I first started, because I got so used to it by the end that it wasn't difficult. Some of the challenge is cultural; Bronte's contemporaries would have understood when she said "the master" or Mr. So-and-So, (among a whole family of So-and-Sos) who exactly she was referring to. Also, one particular character has an accent written so thickly that I often found myself whispering the dialogue in order to understand it. This method rarely worked. Luckily, he was not primary to the story. What I'm getting at, I suppose, is that the difficulties I had with style were no fault of the authors, and there was one moment in particular that I was struck by the emotion and passion in her writing. I was all of a sudden absolutely captivated. Major points for that. 8/10
Hotness of the main character: I suppose the main character would be Mr. Heathcliff, although the narrative switches around throughout. He is sort of a terrible creature who is bent on revenge, etc. He seems to have no capacity for forgiveness or any sort of compassion. Even the narrator, who attempts to give him the benefit of the doubt for as long as possible, ends up hating his behaviour, if not himself. His one redeeming quality, and it is redeeming enough to make up for at least a few of his other shortcomings, is the strength of his love for Catherine and the lengths he goes through for her (though I suppose in retrospect, much of it was selfish as well). 3/10
The character I would most like to be: I've got nothing here. The masters of the houses all suffer pain and heartbreak and the others in their families are abused nonstop. Not to mention the incredible boredom of living in this society that I believe I have mentioned before.
Re-readability: I would like to read this again, since it is written a little bit backwards. Knowing how all the people grow up, it would be nice to see the beginning of the book again since I finally have all the characters straight.
Final Decision: Shelf it.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Dracula - Final Review
Dracula, Bram Stoker, 1897
Plot: Absolutely excellent. Begins with seemingly unrelated people and events and brings them together very well. There is a great deal of suspense, which is increased all the more by the well-rounded (if a bit caricature-ish) characters. As the reader, I felt almost a part of their group of friends who are willing to do anything to help each other, a theme that is repeated frequently. 9/10
Style: This book is written, not as a novel, but as a series of journal entries, newspaper clippings, telegrams, etc. Some of the journal entries are fairly long and read very much like a novel. It was a bit difficult to follow at times, because three of the main characters have a great deal of "journaling" included, and it switches back and forth many times. I had to keep checking back to see whose I was reading so that it would all make sense. I loved this format and thought it was very clever. It was a way to put the story into first person without the assumption that the narrator survives - an important point for the suspense. 9/10
Hotness of the main character: This is really made up of an ensemble "cast" and believe it or not, Dracula is not the main character, so I don't have to go there. There are, in essence, 5 men to speak of here. Dr. Van Helsing is old, but totally smart, loyal and awesome. Dr. Seward gets points (as do all of these men) for being willing to do anything to help his friends as they hunt the vampire. However, he runs an insane asylum and spends a great deal of time there. Jonathan Harker is brave, but is scarred emotionally from all that he experiences at the beginning of the book. Damaged goods. Plus, he's married. Arthur Holmwood is also awesomely brave and loyal. His drawback? [SPOILER ALERT] He was about to be married to Dracula's first victim, so he's got broken heart issues. Then we have Quincy Morris, my pick for best of the book. He's from Texas and he's kinda shy in all the right ways. He seems to be the most fiercely loyal one of the whole bunch. No numerical ratings for this group.
The character I would most like to be: [SPOILER ALERT] Well all of the girls get killed or almost killed by Dracula and deal with pretty nasty horrors. So I'm not going to really go there. I'll go with Dr. Van Helsing. He's an awesome dude. Totally cool under pressure, always knows the right steps to take, listens well to others' ideas and concedes when they are better than his own. (By the way, if you're imagining Hugh Jackman, you're doing it all wrong.)
Re-readability: Occasionally. I almost gave this a "frequently" rating, but then you take all the good suspense out of it. You have to let it sit for a while first.
Final Decision: SHELF IT!
Plot: Absolutely excellent. Begins with seemingly unrelated people and events and brings them together very well. There is a great deal of suspense, which is increased all the more by the well-rounded (if a bit caricature-ish) characters. As the reader, I felt almost a part of their group of friends who are willing to do anything to help each other, a theme that is repeated frequently. 9/10
Style: This book is written, not as a novel, but as a series of journal entries, newspaper clippings, telegrams, etc. Some of the journal entries are fairly long and read very much like a novel. It was a bit difficult to follow at times, because three of the main characters have a great deal of "journaling" included, and it switches back and forth many times. I had to keep checking back to see whose I was reading so that it would all make sense. I loved this format and thought it was very clever. It was a way to put the story into first person without the assumption that the narrator survives - an important point for the suspense. 9/10
Hotness of the main character: This is really made up of an ensemble "cast" and believe it or not, Dracula is not the main character, so I don't have to go there. There are, in essence, 5 men to speak of here. Dr. Van Helsing is old, but totally smart, loyal and awesome. Dr. Seward gets points (as do all of these men) for being willing to do anything to help his friends as they hunt the vampire. However, he runs an insane asylum and spends a great deal of time there. Jonathan Harker is brave, but is scarred emotionally from all that he experiences at the beginning of the book. Damaged goods. Plus, he's married. Arthur Holmwood is also awesomely brave and loyal. His drawback? [SPOILER ALERT] He was about to be married to Dracula's first victim, so he's got broken heart issues. Then we have Quincy Morris, my pick for best of the book. He's from Texas and he's kinda shy in all the right ways. He seems to be the most fiercely loyal one of the whole bunch. No numerical ratings for this group.
The character I would most like to be: [SPOILER ALERT] Well all of the girls get killed or almost killed by Dracula and deal with pretty nasty horrors. So I'm not going to really go there. I'll go with Dr. Van Helsing. He's an awesome dude. Totally cool under pressure, always knows the right steps to take, listens well to others' ideas and concedes when they are better than his own. (By the way, if you're imagining Hugh Jackman, you're doing it all wrong.)
Re-readability: Occasionally. I almost gave this a "frequently" rating, but then you take all the good suspense out of it. You have to let it sit for a while first.
Final Decision: SHELF IT!
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Miss me yet?
Just in case all (1) of you are missing me, here is the reason why I haven't posted in a while.
First, I read the autobiography of Randy Couture, a MMA fighter. It was interesting in content, but not a very good read, if you know what I mean. Not that you could expect anything different from a man who got punched in the face for a living.
Then, I began to read Dracula, but got sidetracked almost immediately by the book I'm reading now: "Three Cups of Tea". It is the non-fiction story of a mountain climber who set out to build a school for children in a Pakistani village that he accidentally found. It is a GREAT book. Once I'm done with that, I'll get back to Dracula and the classics, which is what I know you are all (1) waiting for. :)
See you soon!
First, I read the autobiography of Randy Couture, a MMA fighter. It was interesting in content, but not a very good read, if you know what I mean. Not that you could expect anything different from a man who got punched in the face for a living.
Then, I began to read Dracula, but got sidetracked almost immediately by the book I'm reading now: "Three Cups of Tea". It is the non-fiction story of a mountain climber who set out to build a school for children in a Pakistani village that he accidentally found. It is a GREAT book. Once I'm done with that, I'll get back to Dracula and the classics, which is what I know you are all (1) waiting for. :)
See you soon!
Thursday, February 5, 2009
War of the Worlds - Final Review
War of the Worlds, Herbert George Wells, 1898
Plot: Decent. There was a vague sense of "what will happen next," but I am inclined to believe that a story about a martian attack on the earth could have been much more suspenseful than it actually was. It was a well-thought out story with plenty of descriptive details about everything from the physiology of the martians to the features of a particular house. 6/10
Style: It was written in first person, from the distant point of view of a man who lived through this experience years ago and is now committing it to paper. I liked the style and the way in which he addresses his reader, saying what probably would or would not interest me. It provided a neat connection to the character. Overall though, I ended up being mostly bored. It was a good story, but I spent most of the time trying to finish it so I can move on to the next book. 5/10
Hotness of the main character: n/a I think the reason why I can't rate this is because often the way to tell is by the character's interactions with the other people he comes across in the course of the story. During the martian invasion, the main character spends a great deal of time alone. When he is in the company of a fellow survivor, the actions are tempered so much by the strangeness of the situation that it is impossible to tell what kind of person he really is.
The character I would most like to be: How about not anyone in the greater London area during the time this book takes place?!? Tons of them are killed by the martians and many others surely end up with PTSD after the stuff they witness. No Thank You.
Re-readablility: Probably never again. It wasn't that it was awful, it just wasn't that great.
Final decision: Sell it.
(Note: I will be taking a break from the classics to read the biography of Randy Couture. Jealous, much?) :)
Plot: Decent. There was a vague sense of "what will happen next," but I am inclined to believe that a story about a martian attack on the earth could have been much more suspenseful than it actually was. It was a well-thought out story with plenty of descriptive details about everything from the physiology of the martians to the features of a particular house. 6/10
Style: It was written in first person, from the distant point of view of a man who lived through this experience years ago and is now committing it to paper. I liked the style and the way in which he addresses his reader, saying what probably would or would not interest me. It provided a neat connection to the character. Overall though, I ended up being mostly bored. It was a good story, but I spent most of the time trying to finish it so I can move on to the next book. 5/10
Hotness of the main character: n/a I think the reason why I can't rate this is because often the way to tell is by the character's interactions with the other people he comes across in the course of the story. During the martian invasion, the main character spends a great deal of time alone. When he is in the company of a fellow survivor, the actions are tempered so much by the strangeness of the situation that it is impossible to tell what kind of person he really is.
The character I would most like to be: How about not anyone in the greater London area during the time this book takes place?!? Tons of them are killed by the martians and many others surely end up with PTSD after the stuff they witness. No Thank You.
Re-readablility: Probably never again. It wasn't that it was awful, it just wasn't that great.
Final decision: Sell it.
(Note: I will be taking a break from the classics to read the biography of Randy Couture. Jealous, much?) :)
Monday, January 19, 2009
Oliver Twist - Final Review
Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens, 1837
Plot: Good. Fairly complex, but only because of the number of characters involved. Overall it was very satisfying with all of the loose ends tied up into a neat little bundle by the end. Just like I like it. 9/10
Style: This is hard to judge. On the one hand, I was pleasantly surprised by the humor and sarcasm that Dickens uses which makes it a really fun read. One of my favorite quotes, which I marked to be sure to share with you:
"The doctor seemed especially troubled by the fact of the robbery having been unexpected, and attempted in the night-time; as if it were the established custom of gentlemen in the housebreaking way to transact business at noon, and to make an appointment, by post, a day or two previous."
On the other hand, well, let's just say that I'm glad I never had to diagram a Dickens sentence. He is famous for his convoluted phrasing for a good reason. For the most part, I enjoyed deciphering his paragraph-long sentences and found myself smiling at the unique way he put the words together. But when it came time to explain the conclusion to the convoluted plot, I was at a loss to understand what was going on. I eventually figured it out by context later, but I'm convinced that I lost a good 5-10 pages. My final complaint would be the number of characters. Characters that seemed minor would make a reappearance in later pages and serve to completely confuse me as I wouldn't remember their significance from before. I feel like I needed to make a flow chart or a web graph to get it all sorted out. Anyway, I loved this book overall and am excited to read more Dickens. 8/10
Hotness of the main character(s): Well Oliver Twist is a little boy, so how bout we don't even go there. There are too many characters to list here, all young, old or completely unsavory. There was, however, a side plot that involved one Mr. Harry Maylie who was very reminiscent of an end-of-the-book Mr. Darcy. So that gets 10/10 automatically. :)
The character I would most like to be: I suppose Rose. She is sweet and kind and well...basically...Harry loves her. That's all I need to say about that!
Re-readability: When I'm in the mood to really READ, like, take time to understand each sentence, I would love to read this again. That doesn't happen super often though, so let's go with occasionally.
Final decision: Shelf it
Plot: Good. Fairly complex, but only because of the number of characters involved. Overall it was very satisfying with all of the loose ends tied up into a neat little bundle by the end. Just like I like it. 9/10
Style: This is hard to judge. On the one hand, I was pleasantly surprised by the humor and sarcasm that Dickens uses which makes it a really fun read. One of my favorite quotes, which I marked to be sure to share with you:
"The doctor seemed especially troubled by the fact of the robbery having been unexpected, and attempted in the night-time; as if it were the established custom of gentlemen in the housebreaking way to transact business at noon, and to make an appointment, by post, a day or two previous."
On the other hand, well, let's just say that I'm glad I never had to diagram a Dickens sentence. He is famous for his convoluted phrasing for a good reason. For the most part, I enjoyed deciphering his paragraph-long sentences and found myself smiling at the unique way he put the words together. But when it came time to explain the conclusion to the convoluted plot, I was at a loss to understand what was going on. I eventually figured it out by context later, but I'm convinced that I lost a good 5-10 pages. My final complaint would be the number of characters. Characters that seemed minor would make a reappearance in later pages and serve to completely confuse me as I wouldn't remember their significance from before. I feel like I needed to make a flow chart or a web graph to get it all sorted out. Anyway, I loved this book overall and am excited to read more Dickens. 8/10
Hotness of the main character(s): Well Oliver Twist is a little boy, so how bout we don't even go there. There are too many characters to list here, all young, old or completely unsavory. There was, however, a side plot that involved one Mr. Harry Maylie who was very reminiscent of an end-of-the-book Mr. Darcy. So that gets 10/10 automatically. :)
The character I would most like to be: I suppose Rose. She is sweet and kind and well...basically...Harry loves her. That's all I need to say about that!
Re-readability: When I'm in the mood to really READ, like, take time to understand each sentence, I would love to read this again. That doesn't happen super often though, so let's go with occasionally.
Final decision: Shelf it
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
