Way to lead out, Katie!!!
I also read "most" of 1632...my library didn't have it so I had to read it online. I must say, much much harder to do for me than to have a physical book to read, and I think it tainted my opinion just a bit. For the last chapters, I just wanted to get it over with, though I was thrilled that chapters don't seem so long when scrolling...anyway, I digress.
I agree with you, Katie, that the premise is very interesting--to have these parrallel universes and the "birth" of a new one, sending a slice of our present to a past...and I enjoyed the history revists (as far as I could tell, the real characters were pretty acurately portrayed), but had a hard time getting into the story (sorry Katrina!). I'm cracking up about Katie's comment re: everyone speaking English instead of German or Italian, even Latin or some combination, now that I think of it. That language barrier would have bogged character interaction down, to be sure.
There were way too many characters to keep track of (and all the romances). However, that being said, how refreshing was it that the characters were "everyday" people who had realistic jobs, but just happened to be transported to this new universe? I liked that aspect.
OH! Thanks, Katrina, for adding the bit of trivia about the sequels...I love that some of the sequels (or what-have-you) out there that are fan written. I don't think I would have written one, but I can see how people could get REALLY into it (it was an easy read!). I am finding, however, that I'm not the biggest fan of historical fantasy fiction (I'm in another bookclub and we're reading "Son of Avonar" by Carol Berg, which is interesting, but I don't know that I'm loving it just yet, either).
In any case, I was glad to have had an opportunity to read it...and read it online even. At least it was available!!!! And poor Leven Thumps, the sequel, is having to wait till the library gets it in. :)
Happy Thanksgiving everyone!!!!!
:) Laurenda
Monday, November 20
1632
Sure, I'll be first again. ;-)
I read 1632, at least most of it. The premise was fascinating, and I overlooked a lot of the language to see how the premise would play out. I was talking with a co-worker about the book, and when he found out it was sci-fi, he said "well, everything will be well thought out, not like in a silly romance novel." Meaning, things like the power plant (how to keep power for the town), ammunition, fuel for cars, etc. Which, in fact, they were.
There were a few things that the author kept doing that drove me nuts. He would describe a person, either in action, or just features, etc. and then the next sentence would say "that is to say, Mike" or "that is to say, Doug" or whatever. It was also very hard for me to follow the story/characters when the author kept changing how he referred to them - by first name, then last name, then nickname. There were too many characters for me to keep up with.
I found myself wondering whether in 1632 is was really feasible that so many people would speak English - especially an English that would be understood by present day people (or whether our English would be understood by those people).
And what happened to Mike's sister and her new husband? Everyone was attending their wedding, but I don't remember hearing about them again (at least as far as I read). We saw the groom's father, of course, but where did the groom go?
Again, I really liked the premise - but found that I got bogged down in the historical stories and didn't feel like I got to know the characters very well.
Thanks, Katrina!!
I read 1632, at least most of it. The premise was fascinating, and I overlooked a lot of the language to see how the premise would play out. I was talking with a co-worker about the book, and when he found out it was sci-fi, he said "well, everything will be well thought out, not like in a silly romance novel." Meaning, things like the power plant (how to keep power for the town), ammunition, fuel for cars, etc. Which, in fact, they were.
There were a few things that the author kept doing that drove me nuts. He would describe a person, either in action, or just features, etc. and then the next sentence would say "that is to say, Mike" or "that is to say, Doug" or whatever. It was also very hard for me to follow the story/characters when the author kept changing how he referred to them - by first name, then last name, then nickname. There were too many characters for me to keep up with.
I found myself wondering whether in 1632 is was really feasible that so many people would speak English - especially an English that would be understood by present day people (or whether our English would be understood by those people).
And what happened to Mike's sister and her new husband? Everyone was attending their wedding, but I don't remember hearing about them again (at least as far as I read). We saw the groom's father, of course, but where did the groom go?
Again, I really liked the premise - but found that I got bogged down in the historical stories and didn't feel like I got to know the characters very well.
Thanks, Katrina!!
Thursday, October 26
Leven Thumps
Ladies,
At the get-go, let me say that I found Leven Thumps to be a quick and an enjoyable read. However, as a fan of fantasy literature, my expectations were probably too high. If I were to put Tolkien and CS Lewis at the top and JK Rowling somewhere in the middle, then I would put Leven Thumps down toward the bottom of the continuum.
In fact, after reading the bio of the author, I wondered if it had been written by a committee or as a publishing house ploy to see just what it would take to get a book to sell. Maybe the book was written simply to create an interactive opportunity for readers to “Begin their own adventure in Foo at LevenThumps.com." (This is something Orson Scott Card has done with some of his books.) Maybe its target audience is young adolescents with no attempt to reach mature adults. I don’t know how or why it was written, but let me explain why I was so aggravated by the time I finished the book.
On a positive note, I thought the comments about coincidences on page 60 and discouragement on page 144 were profound. I also thought the moral to the story about Geth being powerful even though he was a toothpick (don’t judge a book by its cover) was instructive. And I thought the idea of “casting” a shadow was clever. The fact that Sabine’s shadows: sought those who minds entertained selfish or conspiring thoughts (page 114), used self doubt as their most powerful tool, and could be dismissed with the snap of a finger was pretty neat.
However, there was way too much borrowing from other literary works. I noticed that some of you mentioned the similarities, too, but I felt like it was a cop-out from the author, copying rather than creating:
from Harry Potter: being raised by a mean aunt, sleeping on the porch (or under the stairs), Clover is like Doby the House Elf, Winter swells up just the Mr. Dursley’s sister, getting to Hogwarts is done in a similar manner as getting into Foo.
from Lord of the Rings: Sabin is a lot like Saron; Morfit sounds a lot like Mordor
from Celestine Prophecy: fate will make things turn out like they should
from Paradise Lost: Sabine / Satan don’t understand that what they want to do will not get them what they want; it will actually destroy everything
from XMen/Superheroes: Winter can’t touch Leven and the Earth Monster is something right out of the movies.
Plus the Chapter 30’s “The Occidental Tourist” was a “cute” play on Anne Tyler’s book, The Accidental Tourist.
I felt like the author was almost mocking the reader: the Gateway to Foo(l), those who have special gifts are “nits,” the king is a toothpick (page 132, 133, etc.) In fact, the scenes involving Geth are almost cartoon-like.
The writing is very good in places but sloppy and clichéd in others: page 197 “They hit the ground running and took off like there was no tomorrow,” page 199 “Leven had grown to sort of like the little guy . . . he couldn’t bear to just leave him for dead.”
And the author never convinced me of the whole premise for the book. In Lord of the Rings, I knew the ring had to be destroyed to stop Saron from taking over the world. In Leven Thumps I really didn’t buy the premise that there was a world where dreams exist and that without it the world would fall apart. I didn’t arrive at the literary state of “willing suspension of disbelief.” And the author didn’t give any real reason (except he said so) to explain why destroying the Gateway to Foo had to be done by a blood relative.
My copy of Leven Thumps was a gift from a friend who reviews children's lit. Next time I see her, I will get her opinion on the book and pass it on to you. I would love to see an interview with the author. In fact, I have a few questions I would like to ask him myself! I’m not sorry I read it and I will probably read the sequel. Actually, it was kind of fun to have an opportunity to really sink my teeth into literary analysis again. Thanks, Laurenda :)
At the get-go, let me say that I found Leven Thumps to be a quick and an enjoyable read. However, as a fan of fantasy literature, my expectations were probably too high. If I were to put Tolkien and CS Lewis at the top and JK Rowling somewhere in the middle, then I would put Leven Thumps down toward the bottom of the continuum.
In fact, after reading the bio of the author, I wondered if it had been written by a committee or as a publishing house ploy to see just what it would take to get a book to sell. Maybe the book was written simply to create an interactive opportunity for readers to “Begin their own adventure in Foo at LevenThumps.com." (This is something Orson Scott Card has done with some of his books.) Maybe its target audience is young adolescents with no attempt to reach mature adults. I don’t know how or why it was written, but let me explain why I was so aggravated by the time I finished the book.
On a positive note, I thought the comments about coincidences on page 60 and discouragement on page 144 were profound. I also thought the moral to the story about Geth being powerful even though he was a toothpick (don’t judge a book by its cover) was instructive. And I thought the idea of “casting” a shadow was clever. The fact that Sabine’s shadows: sought those who minds entertained selfish or conspiring thoughts (page 114), used self doubt as their most powerful tool, and could be dismissed with the snap of a finger was pretty neat.
However, there was way too much borrowing from other literary works. I noticed that some of you mentioned the similarities, too, but I felt like it was a cop-out from the author, copying rather than creating:
from Harry Potter: being raised by a mean aunt, sleeping on the porch (or under the stairs), Clover is like Doby the House Elf, Winter swells up just the Mr. Dursley’s sister, getting to Hogwarts is done in a similar manner as getting into Foo.
from Lord of the Rings: Sabin is a lot like Saron; Morfit sounds a lot like Mordor
from Celestine Prophecy: fate will make things turn out like they should
from Paradise Lost: Sabine / Satan don’t understand that what they want to do will not get them what they want; it will actually destroy everything
from XMen/Superheroes: Winter can’t touch Leven and the Earth Monster is something right out of the movies.
Plus the Chapter 30’s “The Occidental Tourist” was a “cute” play on Anne Tyler’s book, The Accidental Tourist.
I felt like the author was almost mocking the reader: the Gateway to Foo(l), those who have special gifts are “nits,” the king is a toothpick (page 132, 133, etc.) In fact, the scenes involving Geth are almost cartoon-like.
The writing is very good in places but sloppy and clichéd in others: page 197 “They hit the ground running and took off like there was no tomorrow,” page 199 “Leven had grown to sort of like the little guy . . . he couldn’t bear to just leave him for dead.”
And the author never convinced me of the whole premise for the book. In Lord of the Rings, I knew the ring had to be destroyed to stop Saron from taking over the world. In Leven Thumps I really didn’t buy the premise that there was a world where dreams exist and that without it the world would fall apart. I didn’t arrive at the literary state of “willing suspension of disbelief.” And the author didn’t give any real reason (except he said so) to explain why destroying the Gateway to Foo had to be done by a blood relative.
My copy of Leven Thumps was a gift from a friend who reviews children's lit. Next time I see her, I will get her opinion on the book and pass it on to you. I would love to see an interview with the author. In fact, I have a few questions I would like to ask him myself! I’m not sorry I read it and I will probably read the sequel. Actually, it was kind of fun to have an opportunity to really sink my teeth into literary analysis again. Thanks, Laurenda :)
Monday, October 16
Leven (not Levin as I've been spelling it) Thumps
Yay! I really liked this book the first time I read it and am glad everyone so far has enjoyed it. I have to say that I suggested it because I wanted to re-read it before I read the sequel (and I had checked it out from the library instead of buying a copy the first time!). You know, ironically, the reason I read the book in the first place is that I saw it advertized in a Deseret Book Catalog I got in the mail, and I was looking for something to read to take my mind off of Harry Potter mania!!! :)
There are so many aspects of the book that I liked or appreciated, so, just to name a few: I love that Geth just lived in faith, believing that Fate would make everything allright or else it wouldn't...like he'd either figure out a way through stuff or it was simply his time to die. The end. That's the way it was. I think I would be in such a better mindframe about my own problems if I could really live like that...trusting the Lord that things would work out, one way or another--and I mean really trusting that. Instead, I start to worry and fret (and the big earth monsters start to stalk me!) lol. Anyway, enjoyed that even as a toothpick, he accepted the way he was and where he was and worked with what he had. Loved it.
I loved Winter and her special abilities of freezing stuff. And I loved Clover and thought the conversations between Leven and Clover were a hoot and a half. I sometimes wish that I, too, had a Void and then I think, oh wait...I do...my purse. lol. (did anyone ever see that episode of "Mad About You" where Helen Hunt's Jamie and her sister switch purses, and by the end of the day Jamie is a disaster and her sister seems totally put together? lololol...ahem). I agree with Katrina that even the sinster characters served a purpose and I'm curious to read more about life in Foo with them there (do we really think Sabine is gone???? all aspects of him?????hmmmm), and I'm thrilled that Leven was reunited with his Grandma. (How many of you realized that it was Grandma who placed Winter in the hospital? I didn't until this reading. Interesting, no?). The one downer of reading was I didn't quite picture the climatic battle scene in my mind as clearly as I would have liked, but it might have been because I was reading it so fast, so engrossed was I in the story.
So, I also loved the dedication...it made sense the second time around...lol. "For those who saw me slip thorugh and held their tongues--your part in this is just beginning." :) (cue foreshadowing here!)
ANYWAY! Enjoyed the book the second time around (which to me is a great sign of a good book) and am going to be heading out to get the sequel sometime this week!!!!!! Yeehaw!
Have a great day, everyone (and can I just say, am loving the emailed blog entries! Wahoo, Miss Katie for "making it work"!).
:) Laurenda
ps. Katie, can I tell you I never made the corrolation between Leven's hair and Harry's scar??? Yegads. lol. Hooray for other book club readers sharing insights. :)
There are so many aspects of the book that I liked or appreciated, so, just to name a few: I love that Geth just lived in faith, believing that Fate would make everything allright or else it wouldn't...like he'd either figure out a way through stuff or it was simply his time to die. The end. That's the way it was. I think I would be in such a better mindframe about my own problems if I could really live like that...trusting the Lord that things would work out, one way or another--and I mean really trusting that. Instead, I start to worry and fret (and the big earth monsters start to stalk me!) lol. Anyway, enjoyed that even as a toothpick, he accepted the way he was and where he was and worked with what he had. Loved it.
I loved Winter and her special abilities of freezing stuff. And I loved Clover and thought the conversations between Leven and Clover were a hoot and a half. I sometimes wish that I, too, had a Void and then I think, oh wait...I do...my purse. lol. (did anyone ever see that episode of "Mad About You" where Helen Hunt's Jamie and her sister switch purses, and by the end of the day Jamie is a disaster and her sister seems totally put together? lololol...ahem). I agree with Katrina that even the sinster characters served a purpose and I'm curious to read more about life in Foo with them there (do we really think Sabine is gone???? all aspects of him?????hmmmm), and I'm thrilled that Leven was reunited with his Grandma. (How many of you realized that it was Grandma who placed Winter in the hospital? I didn't until this reading. Interesting, no?). The one downer of reading was I didn't quite picture the climatic battle scene in my mind as clearly as I would have liked, but it might have been because I was reading it so fast, so engrossed was I in the story.
So, I also loved the dedication...it made sense the second time around...lol. "For those who saw me slip thorugh and held their tongues--your part in this is just beginning." :) (cue foreshadowing here!)
ANYWAY! Enjoyed the book the second time around (which to me is a great sign of a good book) and am going to be heading out to get the sequel sometime this week!!!!!! Yeehaw!
Have a great day, everyone (and can I just say, am loving the emailed blog entries! Wahoo, Miss Katie for "making it work"!).
:) Laurenda
ps. Katie, can I tell you I never made the corrolation between Leven's hair and Harry's scar??? Yegads. lol. Hooray for other book club readers sharing insights. :)
Leven Thumps - Gateway to Foo
I found several similarities between Leven Thumps and Harry Potter (which may be why I liked it so much):
Young boy, parents having been killed, being raised by relatives that really don't want him.
Said relatives mistreat him.
The young boy has a "mark" of some kind that distinguishes him from others (Harry - scar, Leven - white stripe of hair).
Then, at a given age, this young boy is told he is "special," and has a special destiny different from the world he knows.
I liked the fact that Leven had a hard time coming to grips with his new reality, his "special-ness." I tried to imagine a boy his age (my 16-year-old nephew comes to mind) all of a sudden being told he has magic-ish powers. He wouldn't believe it and he would rebel against it. That brought a certain je ne sais quoi - I mean a certain reality to the book. However, to bring a little religion into it, I imagine another 14-year-old boy who helped bring about a religious revolution. There is a reason change starts with people so young - because they probably have an easier time believing in their destiny - so I'm changing my previous opinion about my nephew. I still liked that initial "who me?"
It was very imaginative - I loved the way they took the car across the Atlantic, and I can't wait for the sequel.
Young boy, parents having been killed, being raised by relatives that really don't want him.
Said relatives mistreat him.
The young boy has a "mark" of some kind that distinguishes him from others (Harry - scar, Leven - white stripe of hair).
Then, at a given age, this young boy is told he is "special," and has a special destiny different from the world he knows.
I liked the fact that Leven had a hard time coming to grips with his new reality, his "special-ness." I tried to imagine a boy his age (my 16-year-old nephew comes to mind) all of a sudden being told he has magic-ish powers. He wouldn't believe it and he would rebel against it. That brought a certain je ne sais quoi - I mean a certain reality to the book. However, to bring a little religion into it, I imagine another 14-year-old boy who helped bring about a religious revolution. There is a reason change starts with people so young - because they probably have an easier time believing in their destiny - so I'm changing my previous opinion about my nephew. I still liked that initial "who me?"
It was very imaginative - I loved the way they took the car across the Atlantic, and I can't wait for the sequel.
Wednesday, September 20
The Giver
Hello, Ladies:
I'm late on this post I know but I will be early on the post for Leven Thumps and the Gateway to Foo.
But to get back to The Giver... I found this book fascinating and not to mention a very quick read. There were so many things that I thought were very sad about the whole scenario that they lived in. I realize that not one of them really knew true love, had an opinion, was able to make a choice or really live life like we all know it. It is all so static and going about this all "churchy" and stuff, truly what things were to be like if all we had to do was to get a body and have things made for us. We wouldn't have to decide what to be when we grew up, or who or when to marry or even how many children to have. (One boy and one girl...that is it.)
How tragic that they think being a birth mother was "job without honor," the lowest form of work anyone could do and how they really discouraged Lily from thinking that she would see what this "work" would be like. And I have to say that I don't think that the pills they were all taking were just to help "control" everyone into submission and believing that what was happening was the way things should be. It seems as though they started the pills when they hit puberty...perhaps to control other sentiments and feelings as well.
Everything about nearly everyone was superficial...even the conversations among the family. They would share but it was done without emotion; emotionally sterile. Even when Jonas is chosen to be the next Giver there was surprise, but life went on. Jonas was not to talk about the training, but his parents didn't know that. It didn't seem like they cared much. Life as they knew it was going on as everything did every day. I was also surprised about the "release" process. I cried when I found out what the process was, yet to the dad, it was just a job he did every day.
Another item I found interesting was all the different ceremonies they had...Naming and Placement, Release of the Old, Ceremony of the Tens, Matching of Spouses, Ceremony of the Twelves, etc. What is with all this pomp and circumstance? To keep the people in line? To keep it organized and sterile?
I liked the Giver. He seemed like the most real person there was. Truly sad and enthusiastic to get things turned over to Jonas...he had more emotions than everyone...duh, I know. I did worry about his plan to get everyone to experience more, however. Did it work? Who knows but that this and if Jonas and Gabriel arrived elsewhere are the two pivital debates. I don't know the the Giver's plan would have worked. When his own daughter chose to be released, there was some disquiet for a time, but things went back to "normal"...as they knew it. Did Jonas die...was there something else out there...did he find it? I like this ambiguous ending. I have debated in my head back and forth the outcomes and I, like Katie, came the conclusion that people did have to start feeling and Jonas and Gabriel made it elsewhere and lived happily ever after.
What can I say, I'm an hopeless romantic!
Good pick!
Michelle
I'm late on this post I know but I will be early on the post for Leven Thumps and the Gateway to Foo.
But to get back to The Giver... I found this book fascinating and not to mention a very quick read. There were so many things that I thought were very sad about the whole scenario that they lived in. I realize that not one of them really knew true love, had an opinion, was able to make a choice or really live life like we all know it. It is all so static and going about this all "churchy" and stuff, truly what things were to be like if all we had to do was to get a body and have things made for us. We wouldn't have to decide what to be when we grew up, or who or when to marry or even how many children to have. (One boy and one girl...that is it.)
How tragic that they think being a birth mother was "job without honor," the lowest form of work anyone could do and how they really discouraged Lily from thinking that she would see what this "work" would be like. And I have to say that I don't think that the pills they were all taking were just to help "control" everyone into submission and believing that what was happening was the way things should be. It seems as though they started the pills when they hit puberty...perhaps to control other sentiments and feelings as well.
Everything about nearly everyone was superficial...even the conversations among the family. They would share but it was done without emotion; emotionally sterile. Even when Jonas is chosen to be the next Giver there was surprise, but life went on. Jonas was not to talk about the training, but his parents didn't know that. It didn't seem like they cared much. Life as they knew it was going on as everything did every day. I was also surprised about the "release" process. I cried when I found out what the process was, yet to the dad, it was just a job he did every day.
Another item I found interesting was all the different ceremonies they had...Naming and Placement, Release of the Old, Ceremony of the Tens, Matching of Spouses, Ceremony of the Twelves, etc. What is with all this pomp and circumstance? To keep the people in line? To keep it organized and sterile?
I liked the Giver. He seemed like the most real person there was. Truly sad and enthusiastic to get things turned over to Jonas...he had more emotions than everyone...duh, I know. I did worry about his plan to get everyone to experience more, however. Did it work? Who knows but that this and if Jonas and Gabriel arrived elsewhere are the two pivital debates. I don't know the the Giver's plan would have worked. When his own daughter chose to be released, there was some disquiet for a time, but things went back to "normal"...as they knew it. Did Jonas die...was there something else out there...did he find it? I like this ambiguous ending. I have debated in my head back and forth the outcomes and I, like Katie, came the conclusion that people did have to start feeling and Jonas and Gabriel made it elsewhere and lived happily ever after.
What can I say, I'm an hopeless romantic!
Good pick!
Michelle
Sunday, September 17
The Giver
Ladies,
I finished this book on time. In fact, I took it to Utah over Labor Day and had Carolyn read it as well. I do apologize for not posting my blog until now, however. I have just been crazy busy with school and church! Speaking of Church . . . how does Moses 5:11 & 12 sound? "Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad . . . " that they were experiencing the good and bad in life. I, too, was certainly reminded of the need for opposition in order to experience joy.
In the book, when they talked about school and the regimentation and conformity that was part of it, it really gave me pause. In the name of classroom control, am I guilty of forcing conformity and taking away the individuality of my students? And the total lack of genuine feeling toward any other human being was chilling. There are many things in this world that can dull or "drug" our empathy and sympathy toward others. Violent media is only one, but it is certainly a powerful desensitizer.
The real enigma to me is "The Giver." Can you imagine how hard his life must have been . . . knowing what he knew, sharing what he knew with his daughter and realizing that she chose death rather than experience knowledge and pain, waiting for years for Jonas to grow up, feeling that there was nothing he could do to change things . . . and then coming up with a plan to bring "real" life back to the people in his care? An interesting thought just occurred to me while I was writing this post. How much of a "Heavenly Father figure" is he . . . giving the people in his care as much as they are capable of handling, protecting, counseling and teaching them? Just a thought.
As far as the ending is concerned, I am all for happy endings. I vote for their safe arrival "elsewhere" and a mortal life of many years filled with joys and sorrows. If not, they might just as well have been "released." In other words, I would like to think they were victorious in more ways that just choosing the way they would die.
Anyway, I loved the book and was surprised I hadn't read it years ago. I own and have read another Lois Lowry book, "Number the Stars." I told Rod that "The Giver" is one he really has to read. He has read "Leven Thumps" and is excited for me to be reading it. Evidently the sequal has just come out in paperback so I imagine it will be part of our home library soon.
Thanks for the incentive to read and the interesting shared insights upon completion! :)
--Karen S.
I finished this book on time. In fact, I took it to Utah over Labor Day and had Carolyn read it as well. I do apologize for not posting my blog until now, however. I have just been crazy busy with school and church! Speaking of Church . . . how does Moses 5:11 & 12 sound? "Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad . . . " that they were experiencing the good and bad in life. I, too, was certainly reminded of the need for opposition in order to experience joy.
In the book, when they talked about school and the regimentation and conformity that was part of it, it really gave me pause. In the name of classroom control, am I guilty of forcing conformity and taking away the individuality of my students? And the total lack of genuine feeling toward any other human being was chilling. There are many things in this world that can dull or "drug" our empathy and sympathy toward others. Violent media is only one, but it is certainly a powerful desensitizer.
The real enigma to me is "The Giver." Can you imagine how hard his life must have been . . . knowing what he knew, sharing what he knew with his daughter and realizing that she chose death rather than experience knowledge and pain, waiting for years for Jonas to grow up, feeling that there was nothing he could do to change things . . . and then coming up with a plan to bring "real" life back to the people in his care? An interesting thought just occurred to me while I was writing this post. How much of a "Heavenly Father figure" is he . . . giving the people in his care as much as they are capable of handling, protecting, counseling and teaching them? Just a thought.
As far as the ending is concerned, I am all for happy endings. I vote for their safe arrival "elsewhere" and a mortal life of many years filled with joys and sorrows. If not, they might just as well have been "released." In other words, I would like to think they were victorious in more ways that just choosing the way they would die.
Anyway, I loved the book and was surprised I hadn't read it years ago. I own and have read another Lois Lowry book, "Number the Stars." I told Rod that "The Giver" is one he really has to read. He has read "Leven Thumps" and is excited for me to be reading it. Evidently the sequal has just come out in paperback so I imagine it will be part of our home library soon.
Thanks for the incentive to read and the interesting shared insights upon completion! :)
--Karen S.
Tuesday, September 12
The Giver
I must say that it wasn't until talking with Amanda (and then reading Laurenda's post) that it even crossed my mind that Jonas and Gabe didn't make it to elsewhere, that they simply died. I just assumed they made it to a warm, loving place. Maybe that's my desire to always see the happy ending.
I did find the world they lived in very interesting and filled with gospel insights. For example, the fact there must be opposition in all things. At night the families talked about their feelings. But, as Jonas found out after becoming the Receiver, how real were these feelings? They didn't know anything different - how could they be happy when they didn't experience unhappiness?
The world they lived in reminded me a lot of the dark planet visited in A Wrinkle in Time where all the boys playing outside bounced the ball in the same rhythm, and the one who didn't was quickly taken back inside for more instruction. All that sameness is never portrayed as a good thing.
What I found interesting is the fact that all these people could be controlled - although it just came to my mind that that's why they had the medication that all adults were to take. Still, it's amazing that all adults would take that medication without question. Those who rebelled were released? I can't even imagine a world without color, music, love, laughter, and this type of world doesn't come without hurt, anger, hatred, etc. Although there are occasions when I wish other people didn't have their agency to choose, I'm really glad we do have that agency.
I'm looking forward to Leven Thumps...
I did find the world they lived in very interesting and filled with gospel insights. For example, the fact there must be opposition in all things. At night the families talked about their feelings. But, as Jonas found out after becoming the Receiver, how real were these feelings? They didn't know anything different - how could they be happy when they didn't experience unhappiness?
The world they lived in reminded me a lot of the dark planet visited in A Wrinkle in Time where all the boys playing outside bounced the ball in the same rhythm, and the one who didn't was quickly taken back inside for more instruction. All that sameness is never portrayed as a good thing.
What I found interesting is the fact that all these people could be controlled - although it just came to my mind that that's why they had the medication that all adults were to take. Still, it's amazing that all adults would take that medication without question. Those who rebelled were released? I can't even imagine a world without color, music, love, laughter, and this type of world doesn't come without hurt, anger, hatred, etc. Although there are occasions when I wish other people didn't have their agency to choose, I'm really glad we do have that agency.
I'm looking forward to Leven Thumps...
The Giver
Hello Ladies!!! :)
Well, I just have to say that I enjoyed the book--a very easy read that only took me a few hours to finish (I read it this past Sunday). That being said, it made me have fretful dreams that night because I couldn't decide if Jonas and Gabe had made it to "Elsewhere" or if they had moved to the great beyond. It also caused weird dreams because of how it dovetailed with all sorts of gospel related themes.
It took me a bit to get into the book, but I did enjoy the journey as Lowry describes the society in which the plot is set. I kinda liked some of the family unit traditions of talking about their feelings at night and their dreams in the morning because it really did seem like good family quality time. And, to be honest, I thought Lily's anger--for a young child--was pretty appropriate, because that's how my girls get. They get "angry" and "frustrated" with the goofiest things, and it's almost comical because they've never experienced "real" anger (at the library today, Elisabeth was getting angry because she couldn't fit a puzzle piece in just right). Perhaps this is what Lowry was trying to illustrate, that children and adults had the same "feelings." Her parents expression of feelings was pretty superficial. I thought it was interesting that Jonas' father was worried that little Gabe would be released--which would reflect a failure on him--and thus got him a years extension before the Father voted to release him because of all the trouble he caused the night crew, but wasn't worried about "releasing" the smaller twin.
I thought it was so fascinating that Lowry linked memory to feelings, both painful ones and happy ones--both being necessary, and seeing colors and hearing music, and that when you willingly choose "Sameness" over choice, you are still making a choice not to HAVE choices. How interesting was it that when a "Receiver" died, the memories had to be transferred instead of just dying with the "Receiver" (remember how Rosemary's memories came back to the people and caused all sorts of chaos?). I must say that it caused me to cry when I read about the baby being killed, Rosemary choosing to end her life, and then finding out that it was the Giver's daughter.
ANYWAY! It was a very profound and well written book and I can see why it won so many awards. However, it did give me enough fretful dreams that in the morning, I did some research and found a thread of discussion that was actually a relief. This guy was theorizing that the reason Lowry gave such an ambigiuous ending was to allow the reader to choose for themselves what happened to Jonas and Gabe. I liked that. And, you know, with that choice, I was no longer fretful about what happened to them, but ironically, could not decide which ending I preferred. Isn't that funny? :)
Great selection, Miss Katie!!!
:) Laurenda
Well, I just have to say that I enjoyed the book--a very easy read that only took me a few hours to finish (I read it this past Sunday). That being said, it made me have fretful dreams that night because I couldn't decide if Jonas and Gabe had made it to "Elsewhere" or if they had moved to the great beyond. It also caused weird dreams because of how it dovetailed with all sorts of gospel related themes.
It took me a bit to get into the book, but I did enjoy the journey as Lowry describes the society in which the plot is set. I kinda liked some of the family unit traditions of talking about their feelings at night and their dreams in the morning because it really did seem like good family quality time. And, to be honest, I thought Lily's anger--for a young child--was pretty appropriate, because that's how my girls get. They get "angry" and "frustrated" with the goofiest things, and it's almost comical because they've never experienced "real" anger (at the library today, Elisabeth was getting angry because she couldn't fit a puzzle piece in just right). Perhaps this is what Lowry was trying to illustrate, that children and adults had the same "feelings." Her parents expression of feelings was pretty superficial. I thought it was interesting that Jonas' father was worried that little Gabe would be released--which would reflect a failure on him--and thus got him a years extension before the Father voted to release him because of all the trouble he caused the night crew, but wasn't worried about "releasing" the smaller twin.
I thought it was so fascinating that Lowry linked memory to feelings, both painful ones and happy ones--both being necessary, and seeing colors and hearing music, and that when you willingly choose "Sameness" over choice, you are still making a choice not to HAVE choices. How interesting was it that when a "Receiver" died, the memories had to be transferred instead of just dying with the "Receiver" (remember how Rosemary's memories came back to the people and caused all sorts of chaos?). I must say that it caused me to cry when I read about the baby being killed, Rosemary choosing to end her life, and then finding out that it was the Giver's daughter.
ANYWAY! It was a very profound and well written book and I can see why it won so many awards. However, it did give me enough fretful dreams that in the morning, I did some research and found a thread of discussion that was actually a relief. This guy was theorizing that the reason Lowry gave such an ambigiuous ending was to allow the reader to choose for themselves what happened to Jonas and Gabe. I liked that. And, you know, with that choice, I was no longer fretful about what happened to them, but ironically, could not decide which ending I preferred. Isn't that funny? :)
Great selection, Miss Katie!!!
:) Laurenda
Sunday, September 3
Belated "To Kill a Mockingbird"
Sorry this is so late, but once I really got into the book, I could not NOT finish it. Olivia and I finally have figured out how to nurse so I can read. She's a good baby.
Okay, I just have to say, What a great book. I had never read it, though I have seen and loved the movie. Of course, after I finished it, I had to go and read up on its author! I am amazed that this was her only published book and that she's a recluse, and that she studied law (which was evident in the court scenes)...I could go on. I was just really impressed. No wonder this was awarded prizes and acclaim and has been "forced" reading in high school (though, clearly, not mine! lol).
ANYWAY, I told Katie that I was going to compare the book and the movie: all things considered, the movie was remarkably true to the book! And I have to confess that during my reading, Atticus Finch looked just like Gregory Peck! :) Indeed, my mental characterization of the book was colored by the film version (I even think I read it like a black and white film!), but I felt that they got it spot on. I was amazed at the poetry of the book and was moved by...so much! I was flipping through, trying to find passages that held me and made me stop and think, but I couldn't narrow them down, there were too many. Gosh, I just really liked this book. It was so wise and it was published at such a pivotal time.
I am glad to have read the book, though, because now I know why Jem is called Jem (I don' t think that was ever covered in the movie. lol). This was a great choice for the book club. Thank you!
I'm excited to see what everyone else thought, but I just wanted you to know that I finally got it done and am now forging on to "The Giver" and will hopefully get that one done on time!!!
Okay, I just have to say, What a great book. I had never read it, though I have seen and loved the movie. Of course, after I finished it, I had to go and read up on its author! I am amazed that this was her only published book and that she's a recluse, and that she studied law (which was evident in the court scenes)...I could go on. I was just really impressed. No wonder this was awarded prizes and acclaim and has been "forced" reading in high school (though, clearly, not mine! lol).
ANYWAY, I told Katie that I was going to compare the book and the movie: all things considered, the movie was remarkably true to the book! And I have to confess that during my reading, Atticus Finch looked just like Gregory Peck! :) Indeed, my mental characterization of the book was colored by the film version (I even think I read it like a black and white film!), but I felt that they got it spot on. I was amazed at the poetry of the book and was moved by...so much! I was flipping through, trying to find passages that held me and made me stop and think, but I couldn't narrow them down, there were too many. Gosh, I just really liked this book. It was so wise and it was published at such a pivotal time.
I am glad to have read the book, though, because now I know why Jem is called Jem (I don' t think that was ever covered in the movie. lol). This was a great choice for the book club. Thank you!
I'm excited to see what everyone else thought, but I just wanted you to know that I finally got it done and am now forging on to "The Giver" and will hopefully get that one done on time!!!
Monday, August 14
To Kill a Mockingbird
Ladies,
Sorry I'm late with my post. I read this book while traveling to Phoenix last week. I read it in high school and saw the movie then as well. It is amazing how much it taught me (and others in the 60s--hence its Pulitzer prize) about racial discrimination, as well as what it was like to live in the South during this time period. It increased my understanding and shaped my attitudes even to the present day. Having grown up in a town where there was only one African American family (and they moved out after a few weeks), my multi-cultural experience was limited. In preparation for my student teaching experience in inner-city Salt Lake, I read Black Like Me and took Black History at BYU (I actually got to meet Alex Haley, author of Roots, and shake his hand). Again, there was one black student in my class and he was transferred out before I did anything more than observe. I really wanted to not be prejudiced.
Now that I live in the mid-west, have lots of African American students in my classes and teach an African history/slave trade/prejudice reduction unit it was really interesting to see what has and hasn't changed. Scout's and Jem's innocence and subsequent initiation into the realities of injustice and cruelty were poignant. It is a process that children everywhere go through, however. I teach middle school. Elementary students are somewhat colorblind and they don't see socio-economic differences either. But by sixth grade, they begin to be very aware of differences and they can be incredibly cruel.
Adults can only do so much to overcome this. Who children become is part of a process shaped by the way they deal with the injustices around them. I loved the way Atticus raised his children. At the end of Chapter 9 he has a discussion with Uncle Jack that Scout "overhears" and later realizes that her father wanted her to hear every word. " . . . I hope and pray I can get Jem and Scout through it without bitterness, and most of all, without catching Maycomb's usual disease." His calm, patient, principled example was awesome!
Then there is the incredible writing style of Harper Lee. (You should see my markings throughout the book.) As I was finishing it, I had an opportunity to walk through the bookstore next to my hotel. I stumbled across a book about Harper Lee entitled Mockingbird, by Charles J. Shields. It is fabulous, but was written without her help. (She doesn't give interviews.) I am only part-way through it, but I can tell you that Scout is Harper Lee and Dill, is based on her best friend, Truman Capote! Her father was an attorney. She lived, and still lives, in a small town in Alabama. The autobiographical stuff in To Kill a Mockingbird is really interesting.
I think I have some idea of why she only wrote one book. First, she won a Pulitzer Prize for her first book. How do you follow that? Second, I think she shared her life and thoughts with millions of people. That is a very vulnerable place to be. It may be she just didn't want to do it again. Third, my son, Jeff, suggested that she said what she wanted to say, what she was passionate about, and then she was done. Anyway, I am so glad to have had the opportunity to re-read this book. As soon as Rod reads it, we are going to rent the movie. (I won't let him see it before he reads the book!) Thanks, Amanda, for suggesting this book!
--Karen Smith
Sorry I'm late with my post. I read this book while traveling to Phoenix last week. I read it in high school and saw the movie then as well. It is amazing how much it taught me (and others in the 60s--hence its Pulitzer prize) about racial discrimination, as well as what it was like to live in the South during this time period. It increased my understanding and shaped my attitudes even to the present day. Having grown up in a town where there was only one African American family (and they moved out after a few weeks), my multi-cultural experience was limited. In preparation for my student teaching experience in inner-city Salt Lake, I read Black Like Me and took Black History at BYU (I actually got to meet Alex Haley, author of Roots, and shake his hand). Again, there was one black student in my class and he was transferred out before I did anything more than observe. I really wanted to not be prejudiced.
Now that I live in the mid-west, have lots of African American students in my classes and teach an African history/slave trade/prejudice reduction unit it was really interesting to see what has and hasn't changed. Scout's and Jem's innocence and subsequent initiation into the realities of injustice and cruelty were poignant. It is a process that children everywhere go through, however. I teach middle school. Elementary students are somewhat colorblind and they don't see socio-economic differences either. But by sixth grade, they begin to be very aware of differences and they can be incredibly cruel.
Adults can only do so much to overcome this. Who children become is part of a process shaped by the way they deal with the injustices around them. I loved the way Atticus raised his children. At the end of Chapter 9 he has a discussion with Uncle Jack that Scout "overhears" and later realizes that her father wanted her to hear every word. " . . . I hope and pray I can get Jem and Scout through it without bitterness, and most of all, without catching Maycomb's usual disease." His calm, patient, principled example was awesome!
Then there is the incredible writing style of Harper Lee. (You should see my markings throughout the book.) As I was finishing it, I had an opportunity to walk through the bookstore next to my hotel. I stumbled across a book about Harper Lee entitled Mockingbird, by Charles J. Shields. It is fabulous, but was written without her help. (She doesn't give interviews.) I am only part-way through it, but I can tell you that Scout is Harper Lee and Dill, is based on her best friend, Truman Capote! Her father was an attorney. She lived, and still lives, in a small town in Alabama. The autobiographical stuff in To Kill a Mockingbird is really interesting.
I think I have some idea of why she only wrote one book. First, she won a Pulitzer Prize for her first book. How do you follow that? Second, I think she shared her life and thoughts with millions of people. That is a very vulnerable place to be. It may be she just didn't want to do it again. Third, my son, Jeff, suggested that she said what she wanted to say, what she was passionate about, and then she was done. Anyway, I am so glad to have had the opportunity to re-read this book. As soon as Rod reads it, we are going to rent the movie. (I won't let him see it before he reads the book!) Thanks, Amanda, for suggesting this book!
--Karen Smith
Wednesday, August 9
To Kill a Mockingbird
How I love this book. I can't believe I have never read it before. Of course, I've seen the movie (Gregory Peck IS Atticus Finch), but the book was truly a delight.
I agree with Katrina, "Pictures were drawn by the words the author provided." I could actually see the town, the courthouse, the school, etc. I kept thinking to myself that I wanted to go back in time and LIVE in this town. However, each time I thought that, I would remember the bigotry and prejudices of the time and change my mind.
Harper Lee is amazing, and how unfortunate that she never wrote another book. She's very talented in the way she can, this is hard to describe... she can tell a story without writing the story. How to explain, there were many places in the book where Scout narrated one thing, but the reader knew something else was going on. I loved that - a very effective storytelling method.
This ranks right up there with my favorite books of all time - A Wrinkle in Time, The Chronicles of Narnia, etc. Thanks, Amanda!!
I agree with Katrina, "Pictures were drawn by the words the author provided." I could actually see the town, the courthouse, the school, etc. I kept thinking to myself that I wanted to go back in time and LIVE in this town. However, each time I thought that, I would remember the bigotry and prejudices of the time and change my mind.
Harper Lee is amazing, and how unfortunate that she never wrote another book. She's very talented in the way she can, this is hard to describe... she can tell a story without writing the story. How to explain, there were many places in the book where Scout narrated one thing, but the reader knew something else was going on. I loved that - a very effective storytelling method.
This ranks right up there with my favorite books of all time - A Wrinkle in Time, The Chronicles of Narnia, etc. Thanks, Amanda!!
Monday, July 3
My Sister's Keeper
Ladies,
I was thoroughly engrossed in My Sister's Keeper from the first page to the last. However, I was totally furious after I got to page 413 and Brian got the emergency call to go to the scene of the accident. When I realized what was going down, I threw a fit and stopped reading for awhile. I was angry beyond belief. I found it interesting that in the interview with Jodi Picoult at the end of my copy, she says that her son reacted the same way. He refused to talk to her for days after he finished the book. She then explains why she felt it had to end the way it did.
I guess I am an incurable romantic, but I was a little calmer when I realized that Campbell didn't die, too. I felt that Julia deserved some happiness and frankly, I didn't want any more suffering! I just felt so defeated that Anna was fighting so hard to prove her value as an individual, and then she dies and becomes an organ donor, losing her individual identity again. I know it is noble of her to save the lives of others, but I wanted her to live a full life herself!!
I realize that Picoult was exploring medical ethics and it was a nice "bookend" approach to have Anna's life begin and end providing life for Kate, but . . . what about Anna? I wondered if an understanding of the eternal nature of life and family would have made a difference in Sara's unrelenting effort to prolong Kate's life. Is the kind of impact described in the book (especially on Jesse and Anna) typical of LDS families with terminally ill children?
Anyway, this is a book that I will remember for a long, long time and will recommend it to others. (In fact, my daughter-in-law is reading it right now.)
--Karen
I was thoroughly engrossed in My Sister's Keeper from the first page to the last. However, I was totally furious after I got to page 413 and Brian got the emergency call to go to the scene of the accident. When I realized what was going down, I threw a fit and stopped reading for awhile. I was angry beyond belief. I found it interesting that in the interview with Jodi Picoult at the end of my copy, she says that her son reacted the same way. He refused to talk to her for days after he finished the book. She then explains why she felt it had to end the way it did.
I guess I am an incurable romantic, but I was a little calmer when I realized that Campbell didn't die, too. I felt that Julia deserved some happiness and frankly, I didn't want any more suffering! I just felt so defeated that Anna was fighting so hard to prove her value as an individual, and then she dies and becomes an organ donor, losing her individual identity again. I know it is noble of her to save the lives of others, but I wanted her to live a full life herself!!
I realize that Picoult was exploring medical ethics and it was a nice "bookend" approach to have Anna's life begin and end providing life for Kate, but . . . what about Anna? I wondered if an understanding of the eternal nature of life and family would have made a difference in Sara's unrelenting effort to prolong Kate's life. Is the kind of impact described in the book (especially on Jesse and Anna) typical of LDS families with terminally ill children?
Anyway, this is a book that I will remember for a long, long time and will recommend it to others. (In fact, my daughter-in-law is reading it right now.)
--Karen
Sunday, July 2
My Sister's Keeper
Thanks to Laurenda for being first this time. ;-)
I didn't read the end of the book first. And I didn't see the end coming, which is very unusual for me.
For me, the book evoked many different STRONG emotions:
I had some time to kill in Orem before another appointment, and didn't want to drive all the way home and back again, so I stopped into Barnes & Noble to finish the book. So, I'm in the reading area of B&N crying my guts out at the end of the book. I found the ending very interesting... Anna WON her case, and yet still saved her sister's life. It seemed a little coincidental, maybe even forced, but interesting.
I did not like Sara (the mom). I can't even imaging bringing a child into the world simply to benefit another child - I'm sure the feelings are more complex than that, and granted, I don't have a dying child, but it seems very preferential. There's a line on page 100, "I have thought of this daughter only in terms of what she will be able to do for the daughter I already have." Sara hadn't even picked out names for Anna, yet.
I did like the side story of Campbell (lawyer) and Julia, even though I hate story lines where a person leaves or breaks up with another because "oh, I'm sick and I don't want to burden you with my illness" without giving the other person a say in the matter. I've always hated that.
The relationship between Sara (mom) and Brian (dad) seemed fairly true to life. I've often heard that parents of sick or handicapped children often find that, later in life, they have nothing more in common than the illness of the child. And, unfortunately, these relationships end in divorce.
I liked the writing style. Jodi Picoult had some interesting imagery ("silence has a sound"), and I liked the story from the different perspectives.
Of all the children, I think I felt most sorry for Jesse. I found his story heartbreaking. He resorted to drastic actions to get noticed. As Kate said, "...imagine [if] you were a squirrel living in the elephant cage at the zoo. Does anyone ever go there and say, 'Hey, check out that squirrel?' No, because there's something much bigger you notice first."
Were the conclusions a little pat? Yes. But I enjoyed the read, and enjoyed meeting the different characters. Thanks, Michelle!!
I didn't read the end of the book first. And I didn't see the end coming, which is very unusual for me.
For me, the book evoked many different STRONG emotions:
I had some time to kill in Orem before another appointment, and didn't want to drive all the way home and back again, so I stopped into Barnes & Noble to finish the book. So, I'm in the reading area of B&N crying my guts out at the end of the book. I found the ending very interesting... Anna WON her case, and yet still saved her sister's life. It seemed a little coincidental, maybe even forced, but interesting.
I did not like Sara (the mom). I can't even imaging bringing a child into the world simply to benefit another child - I'm sure the feelings are more complex than that, and granted, I don't have a dying child, but it seems very preferential. There's a line on page 100, "I have thought of this daughter only in terms of what she will be able to do for the daughter I already have." Sara hadn't even picked out names for Anna, yet.
I did like the side story of Campbell (lawyer) and Julia, even though I hate story lines where a person leaves or breaks up with another because "oh, I'm sick and I don't want to burden you with my illness" without giving the other person a say in the matter. I've always hated that.
The relationship between Sara (mom) and Brian (dad) seemed fairly true to life. I've often heard that parents of sick or handicapped children often find that, later in life, they have nothing more in common than the illness of the child. And, unfortunately, these relationships end in divorce.
I liked the writing style. Jodi Picoult had some interesting imagery ("silence has a sound"), and I liked the story from the different perspectives.
Of all the children, I think I felt most sorry for Jesse. I found his story heartbreaking. He resorted to drastic actions to get noticed. As Kate said, "...imagine [if] you were a squirrel living in the elephant cage at the zoo. Does anyone ever go there and say, 'Hey, check out that squirrel?' No, because there's something much bigger you notice first."
Were the conclusions a little pat? Yes. But I enjoyed the read, and enjoyed meeting the different characters. Thanks, Michelle!!
Monday, June 19
My Sisters Keeper
Hello Ladies! Better get this posted while I still can!!!!!
Well, can I just say that I had to check out the Large Print edition of this book from the second library that I visited because the other 5 editions were already checked out! lol. I have to admit, it wasn't necessarily unpleasant to have slightly larger print, but it cracked me up.
ANYWAY, that little tidbit aside, I have to say this is such an unfair book for a 9 month pregnant woman to read! lol. True confession: The suspense was so crazy for me that I read the ending of the book fairly early on and then re-read it again after I'd finished the book and BOTH times, sobbed sobbed sobbed. Ugh. As Oprah said, I'm sure I was in the "ugly" cry. Ohhhhhhh, the hormones on top of the subject matter!!!!
I thought it was a remarkably easy read, and initially I was way into the different perspectives of the characters via each new chapter. I must admit, that by about 2/3rds of the way through, I was done with all the jumping perspectives and just wanted to find out what was going on. Did find it terribly intereting about the seizures of Anna's lawyer and the necessity of Judge. Fascinating. After his big reveal, I actually remember seeing something on the news about a dog and its owner and how he kept an eye on her because she was epileptic.
Interestingly, I read some reviews on Amazon, after finishing the book, and found out that many people were incensed about the ending. I thought it was definitely a twist, but an irony that had a bit of justice...the parents still mourned a daughter, just a different one. Some of the other character's endings were a little too...happy pat, meaning it seemed that everything got tied up a little too neatly, but still, I enjoyed the book and it was a great diversion!!!!! :)
I'm going to try to get To Kill a Mockingbird in this month, but my baby is due anytime and we'll have to see how accomodating she is going to be to letting mom have some time to read (and sleep and bathe and etc etc.).
OH!!! Happy Fourth of July, everyone!!!!! May all your fireworks be safe but lovely.
:) Laurenda
Well, can I just say that I had to check out the Large Print edition of this book from the second library that I visited because the other 5 editions were already checked out! lol. I have to admit, it wasn't necessarily unpleasant to have slightly larger print, but it cracked me up.
ANYWAY, that little tidbit aside, I have to say this is such an unfair book for a 9 month pregnant woman to read! lol. True confession: The suspense was so crazy for me that I read the ending of the book fairly early on and then re-read it again after I'd finished the book and BOTH times, sobbed sobbed sobbed. Ugh. As Oprah said, I'm sure I was in the "ugly" cry. Ohhhhhhh, the hormones on top of the subject matter!!!!
I thought it was a remarkably easy read, and initially I was way into the different perspectives of the characters via each new chapter. I must admit, that by about 2/3rds of the way through, I was done with all the jumping perspectives and just wanted to find out what was going on. Did find it terribly intereting about the seizures of Anna's lawyer and the necessity of Judge. Fascinating. After his big reveal, I actually remember seeing something on the news about a dog and its owner and how he kept an eye on her because she was epileptic.
Interestingly, I read some reviews on Amazon, after finishing the book, and found out that many people were incensed about the ending. I thought it was definitely a twist, but an irony that had a bit of justice...the parents still mourned a daughter, just a different one. Some of the other character's endings were a little too...happy pat, meaning it seemed that everything got tied up a little too neatly, but still, I enjoyed the book and it was a great diversion!!!!! :)
I'm going to try to get To Kill a Mockingbird in this month, but my baby is due anytime and we'll have to see how accomodating she is going to be to letting mom have some time to read (and sleep and bathe and etc etc.).
OH!!! Happy Fourth of July, everyone!!!!! May all your fireworks be safe but lovely.
:) Laurenda
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
