I got caught up in part 1, and was very engaged in the family relationships of parents and adult children. Part 2 is a jump of several Did not finish.
I got caught up in part 1, and was very engaged in the family relationships of parents and adult children. Part 2 is a jump of several decades back to focus on the mother and I realized I did not care to learn about her early life. I abruptly lost interest. No idea if the story picks up again where Part 1 ended....more
I feel bad rating as 2 stars a book I didn't really like for the reason that it's not the type of book that I like, but whatever. I found it "OK" and I feel bad rating as 2 stars a book I didn't really like for the reason that it's not the type of book that I like, but whatever. I found it "OK" and Goodreads says if I only thought it was OK then it gets 2 stars from me. If you loved this book I would never fight you over it.
Long Story Short: This is probably a wonderful book that was just not for me, at least not for me during this particular January, when I was expecting I’d have some cozy dark-early winter times and got instead 80-degree weather with trips to the jacuzzi. I didn’t finish it.
Why I Chose This Book: A biologist friend recommended this book to me, and had said he’d found it very inspiring. What with winter coming up, and me always looking for recommendations from real people, I thought it would be the perfect thing for the season. It was not.
The Book’s Strengths: This was a book with a strong voice, told with great detail about a fascinating subject. It was almost a memoir, I thought, and the author had great passion for the subject, as well as a careful and thorough approach to the various explorations of how tiny little animals (and bigger animals) survived during the harsh winters of northern climates. It was peppered with pencil drawings from the author’s own notes, and it was full of interesting observations about the world, and I liked many of the connections the author drew between seemingly disparate things. I mean, I know we use trees for fuel and animals eat other animals, but I never explicitly thought about trees as solar energy containers or rabbits harnessing the sun’s energy for the benefit of the foxes, that kind of thing. (The author said it better, but the book went back to the library weeks and weeks ago.) The author lymoved between loving the natural world and conducting actual experiments about the natural world (like measuring the temperature of bird corpses to see how long they’d hold heat with that shape and that size in frozen temperatures, or sticking his head into tree trunks to measure the amount of squirrel droppings in order to estimate the number of animals using a shelter), with highly readable and almost poetic prose.
The Book’s Weaknesses: I am going to fudge on this section, because I can’t really say that the things I didn’t like were weaknesses. I just prefer not to read books that have these things in them. I don’t as a rule read memoirs, because I don’t care that much about people’s introspections on their own lives, and although this book was not a memoir it had an awful lot of “I” in it. I just do not care that much about this guy’s feelings about the natural world. I care much more about the natural world itself, except that I don’t care enough about it, I guess, to learn about the guy while I’m learning about the world. I disliked Thoreau’s Walden for much of the same reason. I would have been happier with a different book about the exact same topic, but I realize that’s not an actual weakness, and I understand that I am dismissing a book because it’s not what I prefer and not for any objective reason. But I just got tired of him.
The marketing text for the book includes this sentence: “Biologist, illustrator, and award-winning author Bernd Heinrich explores his local woods, where he delights in the seemingly infinite feats of animal inventiveness he discovers there.”
I’m sure I would delight in these things myself if I were reading about them directly. But I didn’t delight in reading about the author’s delight. Does that make sense?
What Should Have Happened: I should have read a different book that matched my preferences, I guess. I don’t really have a recommendation here.
Short Story Shorter: I don’t like my non-fiction mixed up with memoir. Maybe you do....more
I gave up on this book at page 252 of 600. The very beginning was pretty interesting, and I found the character of a young man essentially raising hisI gave up on this book at page 252 of 600. The very beginning was pretty interesting, and I found the character of a young man essentially raising his baby alone (with his remote wife) as a successful medieval serf in pastoral Spain very compelling. I liked the stuff through the pottery workshop, too, but after that? It felt to me like the story dropped off for the sake of cramming a historical setting with stock characters to represent different aspects of life in 14th Century Barcelona. There was little narrative suspense or tension, and the book rapidly turned into an episodic adventure. For all that the novel is touted as portraying a time and a place, it does neither. And when the characters are given a few lines of dialogue, it serves only to do the author's work for him. They don't talk like anyone real.
There are many places that the story could be developed: the community of the bastaixos, the relationship of Joan and Arnau, regional warfare, restrictions on women. The author just glosses over everything. The sentences are written well enough, and the prose is readable enough, but there's no real reason to keep reading the book. It lacks substance. It's like Moll Flanders--Arnau just goes from place to place, getting more and more successful but with very few insights into what he thinks or feels. He's a puppet. They're all puppets. At least Moll Flanders makes some coy statements about her contemporary era, which are interesting to read in the modern era. Cathedral lacks even that authenticity.
I like my characters to do a little more thinking and my authors to do a lot less spoonfeeding. If you love Barcelona or the Santa Maria del Mar church, or have a particular interest in the period, you would probably like this book. I think you'd be better off reading a really good non-fiction book on the topic, though. Maybe there aren't any yet. ...more
I've heard from vaccine deniers, HIV deniers, evolution deniers, but I've never given the Shakespeare deniers a chance. I don't worry overmuch about wI've heard from vaccine deniers, HIV deniers, evolution deniers, but I've never given the Shakespeare deniers a chance. I don't worry overmuch about who wrote the plays, but I do consider myself a New Historicist when I can be bothered to analyze literature, so I am very interesting in learning about why this is important.
It doesn't bother me that Shakespeare could have been a commoner with little formal schooling, but I don't think this book takes the snobbery route. If you don't want to read the book there is a series of podcasts by the author that highlight the main point. I listened to them and found the ideas intriguing, although they were very much highlights. This book is much thicker than it looked like it would be from the website. I can take it, though--don't worry on my behalf.
UPDATE January 1, 2009 I never progressed beyond page 75 or 100. This book was a blow-by-blow retelling of De Vere's life, accompanied by references to specific scenes and lines and plots from Shakespeare plays regarding the same topics. It's interesting enough, but a blow-by-blow recap wasn't what I was looking for. There was too much De Vere Had to Have Accomplished This and not nearly enough No Way Shakespeare Accomplished This.
I will admit, though, that the conspiracy theories regarding the topic are fascinating. Look them up. I also think it's interesting that the conspiracy theories didn't start until people started regarding Shakespeare's places as having significant literary importance. My suspicion--and I plan to read up on this someday--is that the establishment didn't want a plain old kid from the suburbs in their canon. You know how the British Empire used to claim its start in those noble refugees from the Trojan War? I have this idea that this Shakespeare Is a Nobleman comes out of the same desire for grandeur.
It was fun to read this book, but the podcasts made the same overarching points faster, and my experience reading the book was an exercise in filling in details. I moved on to other things....more
I put this book down once before, but I don't remember why. We were talking about it at Book Club last week, and two people loved it. Loved the seriesI put this book down once before, but I don't remember why. We were talking about it at Book Club last week, and two people loved it. Loved the series. I know lots of people who love the series. So when I was at the library the other day, and it was just sitting there, facing me on the rotating paperback rack, I grabbed it.
I have finished Part One and I'm at the part where things probably "get interesting" at Castle Leoch. We're probably going to hear all about the local politics and alliances will form. It's kinda formulaic and kinda what I've gleaned about it already and exactly what I was expecting.
You can take that as praise or criticism as you will. I anticipate finishing it this time.
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 4 I am just not feeling this. It's not very interesting. Maybe I missed the window for loving it, but it is not on its way to becoming my newest favorite historical romance series. It's entertaining enough as I read but when I put it down I forget all about it. Still, it's the only thing between me and Light in August, which I recently decided I really ought to read to see if it's a Faulkner I overlooked or a Faulkner I forgot. There's a noose on the cover, which is vaguely familiar, so I think I've forgotten it. If Joe Christmas is in it, then I definitely forgot it.
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 6 I'm done. I don't care. I got to the part with the wedding, and skipped to the end to see if she goes back, and I don't even want to think about how many other books continue this story. I don't even have a rating for the book....more
I learned nothing from this book because it says nothing. Well, nothing else besides how many names she has and what all of her friends and coworkers I learned nothing from this book because it says nothing. Well, nothing else besides how many names she has and what all of her friends and coworkers think about stuff. I'm not sure how the chapters are organized or what the actual point of the book is. It's a ramble, pure and simple. Not only that, it's a ramble that refers only to news articles (without ever citing specific dates or titles) from 2005. She makes her points from movies like Mean Girls (2004) and Million Dollar Baby (2004) with one-line references to characters and scenes. Martha Stewart, whose name comes up a lot, went to jail in 2004. She uses Entourage (2004) to make some points. She refers to science from 2005 (without giving names, universities, or journal titles).
When, might you ask, was this book published? 2005.
I just can't take it. So dating is stressful and men talk about shoe shopping at the office. Comments like that are in sequential paragraphs. I am dropping this book at page 111. What on earth does a designer clothing store in Paris closing before Oprah could finish shopping have to do with Condoleeza Rice? And how on earth were decisions made for breaking this book into chapters? The first chapter is 70 pages long in a 350-page book. The second chapter is 17. Willy-nilly decisions like that just add to difficulty of finding a point....more
Yeah, it was quite the random day at the library. Filly was wandering among the shelves and this was at eye level and so I grabbed it. I like black peYeah, it was quite the random day at the library. Filly was wandering among the shelves and this was at eye level and so I grabbed it. I like black people, I like white people, I like America... I'm gonna give it a whirl.
UPDATE April 27, 2008 This book went back to the library. I read the intro, I read the chapter on marriage, I read my due date. There just wasn't time. And it just wasn't making me think about things. Either race relations have changed in the past 10 years or I am perfectly enlightened. Maybe it's a generational thing or maybe I'm unable to see the world through the eyes of another group and lack the required empathy. It just seemed sort of obvious.
I think, perhaps, that the world has been flooded with content. I've read a lot of things since 1997 and people have written even more. Race relations are a huge topic that has been tackled by hundreds of people in multiple media. The book just wasn't that enlightening. I probably would have liked it a lot ten years ago. It's quite possible I didn't read the salient chapter, but even the introduction was giving off a "duh" vibe.
I don't think the topic of race relations is taboo anymore. Lots of the unspoken issues between whites and blacks in America are being spoken about now. Ten years is a really long time....more
This book makes a lot of big promises, but it suffers from several serious flaws:
1. Lack of focus. 2. Too long. 3. Preposterous claim. 4. Boring
This is aThis book makes a lot of big promises, but it suffers from several serious flaws:
1. Lack of focus. 2. Too long. 3. Preposterous claim. 4. Boring
This is a true crime novel--maybe--set against the history of the Mormon Church--but not really--trying to tie in a couple of murders committed by a couple of sickos--all too common--into an historical and political climate of post-terrorist, millennial religious revival--unsuccessfully.
For true crime, it's shockingly dull, and the crime is committed by the middle of the book, but you already know it's going to happen because it's committed in the prologue, too. The characters aren't interesting, their motivations are the ordinary motivations of religious sickos, and the detail is presented tediously.
The Mormon Church is presented as entirely to blame for the murderers' thoughts and the victims, and for Elizabeth Smart's abduction and captivity. It's crammed full of historical detail that might be interesting but it's presented in such a snide, disrespectful tone that it's just a rip on the Church. At one point the author grudgingly admits that Mormonism is no stranger or objectively odd than any other religion (once you get right down to it) but he nonetheless mocks it and its adherents. He continually harps on its sexism, as if every other religion in the Western World were a paragon of equality and political fairness. Odder still is the fact that his murderers and enablers aren't even Mormon. They invented a religion based on Mormonism, but it's taken to such an extreme that the Mormon Church has disassociated itself with them and is cited frequently by the author as denying that what these guys practice is the same religion.
I made it to page 175 where the murders happened, and then the book jumped to another overly detailed of the history of Joseph Smith and friends and I was only halfway through the book. I guess the rest of it is how the Mormons got to Utah and the court case, but considering everyone knew who committed the murder--they'd told maybe ten people they were going to do it and they confessed immediately and you knew this already from the book--there was no suspense about that. The psychological profile of a religious killer is known already. I can't imagine what you would need to keep writing about.
There are also too many footnotes, on diverse and vaguely interesting tidbits, some of them half a page long. It adds to the lack of focus. It's just a scrambled book about a tragedy.
Everything seems to be coming up polygamy of late, down to the HBO series, Big Love. So perhaps this was shocking and provocative and informative a few years ago, but the fundamentalist polygamist sects are very much in the public consciousness now and this book doesn't give any new information. What I found most interesting were the similarities to some of the characters in that television show to some of the fundamentalist profiles in the book. None of them were similar to the point of being "inspired by," I don't think, but things like the Romanian immigrant becoming a plural wife reminded me of Ana, and the daughters of prophets all over the place reminded me of Nikki, and the Mormon wives of Mormon men who adopt polygamy reminded me of Barb. Of course, this is in circumstance only. Bill Paxton's family makes me wish I had a sister wife sometimes. I'd certainly get a lot more done....more
Loading...
