Bloom Books

Young Goodman Brown is an intriguing short story about a young Puritan man existing in a self-righteous miasma who discovers the true motivations behind the hypocritical facade of the towns people surrounding him.

On All Hallow's Eve, he must leave his wife "Faith" {recognized as symbolic of his own allegorical belief}behind to venture into the vast untamed wilderness {represents the dark subconscious, akin to "The Great Abyss"} amidst wild beasts and savage Indians*. He eventually holds concert with The Devil {perhaps representative of his own guilty conscience within the Judeo-Christian myth's paradigm} in the forest, where The Devil attempts to persuade him to The Sabbath, but Brown is determined to remain in the good graces of his "God", upholding the perceived honor of his ancestors - yet to his horror, discovers and witnesses that the very same men and women he admires most in the past and present fir their piety, are themselves in league with Lucifer, and have been for centuries.

For instance, the elderly Goody Cloyse {she who had schooled him in catechism, now considering him a "silly fellow"}, an apparently staunch Puritan matriarch, appears in the forest to inform his "worship" [sic] that her broom has disappeared despite her knowledge of the ingredients to make the broom fly, including "baby fat", as is the classic claim born of hysteric legendry, as invented by various dramatic writers and Christian propagandists of the time. The Infernal Gentleman graciously lends her His own serpentine staff to usher her forth safely into the night to the ceremonial grounds.

Traveling on, Goodman Brown witnesses clergyman Deacon Gookin he admired so well, riding his horse astride with The Prince of Darkness, salaciously laughing it up about the night;s initiate, a nubile young lady. To his horror, he later realizes that she who is to be initiated is his precious wife Faith, as is made evident in one maddening sequence, in which he tears violently through the forest lamenting his apparent loss, subsequently finding falling pink ribbons {representing "purity" and innocence"; translate: ignorance}. His visage ironically resembles that of a fearsome beast {see Satanic Statement #7}, more terrible than those who inhabit the woods, as he comes closer to himself as the beast in man.

As if in a dream, he finds his way to The Sabbath, where Satan appears in a plume of sulphurous flame amidst an Altar and arc of rock, calling forth the converts**.

Before him, Brown recognizes prominent persons of all persuations of good and ill-repute celebrating the diabolic mass together. During His Sinister Sermon, Satan recognizes the true nature of man is that of 'evil', no matter how much one tries to deny it, offering historical proof of such. Brown's delusions are shattered, awakening the next morning, as if his eyes were finally opened to the undefiled truth.

Consequently, Young Goodman Brown refused to aknowledge man's true selfish nature, thus becoming paranoid and fearful, suspicious and muttering.

Conclusion

Whether or not the events occurred is not as important as the consideration of the effect it had on the protagonist, establishing that the antagonist frequently causes a change for the better, as he/she/it forces the pretentious so-called 'righteous' to face themselves in all of their repressive false sanctimony.

_________
* Indians were considered literal 'devils' by early English-American settlers because of their natural and perceived exotic customs.

** Comparable to a butterfly bursting from its cocoon of fleshly ignorance unto the raptures of The Devil's carnal delights.

Having to read and compare Young Goodman Brown to The Crucible as a school assignment first seemed like a chore at first. But after understanding the story and being able to analyze it, it really is a great story although somewhat confusing in the beginning. If you'd like a little backround, Young Goodman Brown is about a Puritan man who takes a walk into the woods and finds himself talking to the devil.

I enjoyed reading Lord of the Flies by William Golding. It was a very well written novel. Although I believe the beginning started really slow and did not grab my attention right a way, but as I kept going the book became more and more interesting. Golding sure knows how to make a huge plot flow and was able to create a huge conflict for the story. The conflict in the end teaches some very valuable life lessons for the reader and the characters.
Golding expressed each character extremely well. Each character was unique. The only characters that were very similar were the twins, but they were like one character rather than two characters. The four main characters Ralph, Piggy, Simon, and Jack all add to the story. Ralph is the elected leader and he believes very much in keeping order and government. Ralph also wishes to be rescued and builds a signal fire. (Which becomes a source of many future disputes) Jack is Ralph's opposite because he just wishes to hunt, have fun, and is tremendously power hungry. Piggy is the kid who everyone picks on, the misfit, but he very logical and applies sense to the tough situation they are in. Simon rarely does anything wrong. He is always there to help Ralph, but is sort of a loner compared to the rest of the schoolboys.
In the beginning, a group of schoolboys are stranded on an uncharted island and are forced to fend for themselves. At first they try to run a form of government. Which is considerably hard when no adults are there to enforce the rules and as result chaos breaks out. When the boys were thrust into this sort of situation it caused them to grow and mature very rapid. None of them will leave the island the same boy they came to the island as. It shows the dark side of reality and forces us to except the truth is that even the most innocent will fall to evil one day. (Simon) As the boys were taken off the island at the end they all left behind one thing, their innocence.
After reading Lord of the Flies by William Golding I say that it was a great book. I highly recommend it and if you are contemplating putting it down DO NOT it only gets better as it goes on!

Lord of the Flies By William Golding: Book Review
By: Conlan Mueller

The author of Lord of the Flies, William Golding, has many ways of showing the meaning of the book. The terrible human quality that man has, turning savage, doing anything for his own survival, in times of great crisis. Golding shows this point in many ways. He uses a variety of metaphors throughout the story. Golding also bluntly shows this in the book. Golding was born in Cornwall, England in 1911. Lord of the Flies was William Golding's first novel out of many, published in 1954. Peter Brooke made a movie, The Lord of the Flies in 1963. After The Lord of the Flies Golding wrote a variety of novels, essays, and plays. He also won the "Booker Prize" for one of his novels, Rites of Passage. William Golding lived eighty-two years and died in 1993. Golding does a great job of demonstrating his point of the tale, using school children representing mankind. One of the great ways he does so is with a simple conch shell that represents so much. In the beginning, the children use the conch shell to call a meeting, staying civilized. This is why when the shell shatters it is such a beautiful metaphor for all hopes of civilization being shattered and crushed at the same time. A different approach that Golding takes to simply represent this point is just stating that the children turned into a tribe of savages. Just using the word tribe throughout the story to talk about the group of children is a simple yet effective way that Golding establishes his point. The novel, Lord of the Flies has various strengths and weaknesses. One strength in this book is the use of many brilliant physical and psychological metaphors throughout the story. Though I couldn't establish many weaknesses of this book, I do think that William Golding could have elaborated a little bit more on the background and future of the children of the island. That is just my view though. Overall I believe that Lord of the Flies is beautifully written and does a wonderful job of illustrating this terrible characteristic of mankind.

Lord of the Flies is a very different book. Though the words are clear and easy to read it isn't exactly the easiest book to understand. The story line has so many different symbols, that u have to read each and every line to understand. There were times while i read this book that i had to go back and re-read what i had previously read.
Even though this book is hard to understand i still say it was a good book. I loved the vivid images that Golding described. I was able to create pictures in my mind as i read. Again i did have difficulty with some of the symbols but when I thought about it for a while it got easier. It really shows just how destructive mankind can be in situations that require calmness. I'm glad to have read this book though not by choice I still think that it was an amazing book proving that no matter how we act or how someone might think they act even the hardest of situations can tear you down to that savage instinct that everyone has.
-K.D. Mrs.Strey honors english III

I had to read this book while I was in high school and thought it was just OK. I just reread it on my own and now that I'm an adult, it touched me more deeply. The bullying and cruelty these boys exhibit, the casual schadenfreude that escalates into violence, had a greater impact on me this time around. I'm glad I reread it, appreciated the message, but did not enjoy it. Some facts of life aree too awful and I prefer not think of them.

I couldn't remember if I had read this book at an earlier age so I downloaded it and read it again. I enjoyed this book. What can I say that hasn't already been said. If you haven't read this book, I encourage you to do so. This isn't a book you want to miss.

This is absolutely my favorite novel of all time. No matter how many times I go back and re-read this book (that I was first introduced to as a sophomore in high school), it never fails to take me to a different time and place.

I love the descriptions of the lazy and decadent ways of these characters and the struggle Nick Carroway has to be a part of them. I love the scandals that are around every curve. But, most of all, I love the easy-going manner of Gatsby himself. He's quite possibly the greatest character in all of American literature and I feel that, often times, he's the least appreciated too.

I've heard many say that this novel is "too slow" or "too descriptive". But, I really feel that Fitzgerald was trying to completely overwhelm the reader with excess. It's an underlying theme in this novel and his writing style makes the reader feel the fact that money can not buy happiness. Sure this novel is wordier than some - But there's beauty in each and every carefully chosen one.

Aside from the narrator, Mr. Carroway, who chances to be Gatsby's perceptive neighbor, we are the only ones who ever come to know the man. Everyone else sees only a fragment of him... if that. And he is far from what he appears to be. We ultimately know him as delusional, obsessive, pitiable, and needy. The fact is he's quite a bit like many of us; the difference is in the contrast between his external persona and his internal one. Fitzgerald's remarkable achievement in this book is in portraying Gatsby's dimensionality so completely in 180 pages. From shadowy playboy to abandoned corpse in 180 pages. And in the process Fitzgerald treats is to his remarkable craft:

"Instead of rambling, this party had preserved a dignified homogeneity, and assumed to itself the function of representing the staid nobility of the countryside - East Egg condescending to West Egg, and carefully on guard against its spectroscopic gayety."

"...there was a jauntiness about her movements as if she had first learned to walk upon golf courses on clean, crisp mornings."

"Everyone suspects himself of at least one cardinal virtue..."

"He had waited five years and bought a mansion where he dispensed starlight to casual moths - so that he could `come over' some afternoon to a stranger's garden."

"...I think he revalued everything in his house according to the measure of response it drew from her well-loved eyes."

"There is no confusion like the confusion of a simple mind..."

"At the gray tea hour there were always rooms that throbbed incessantly with this low, sweet fever, while fresh faces drifted here and there like rose petals blown by the sad horns around the room."

Today is one of those days when I long for a book such as "The Great Gatsby"
It is inseparably associated with a point in history F. Scott Fitzgerald claimed to despise. He is both the quintessential Jazz-Age writer and probably his era's harshest critic. Complex and timeless. Who could ask for more?


My favorite passage -


"Most of the big shore places were closed now and there were hardly any lights except the shadowy, moving glow of a ferryboat across the Sound. And as the moon rose higher the inessential houses began to melt away until gradually I became aware of the old island here that flowered once for Dutch sailors' eyes--a fresh, green breast of the new world. Its vanished trees, the trees that had made way for Gatsby's house, had once pandered in whispers to the last and greatest of all human dreams; for a transitory enchanted moment man must have held his breath in the presence of this continent, compelled into an aesthetic contemplation he neither understood nor desired, face to face for the last time in history with something commensurate to his capacity for wonder."

At 26, I just finished reading this for the first time and I have to say it completely captivated me. F. Scott Fitzgerald's prose style was thoroughly engaging, and I was fascinated with how he downplayed (and at the same time characterized) the narrator of the story (Nick), by focusing on his observations of Gatsby and the other characters around him.

This is a novel I heard a lot about and I was ready for a bit of a disappointment, considering that it was so "hyped." This is one those few works of art that deserves its high praise however. There is truly a freshness to the story and yet a keen criticism of the times.

My only criticism (which prevents this from getting the "A+"): the climax of the story. I won't provide any spoilers, but it became a little too preposterous for me, both in terms of coincidence and the large-scale events that occur (relative to the intimate proceedings and narrow focus of the story prior to this).

Nevertheless, F. Scott Fitzgerlad definitely got his themes across and I find it remarkable that so many of them still apply so completely today, 80+ years on.

My personal choice for The Great American Novel - with an emphasis on the American. This is, as narrator Nick Carraway notes, a story of the West after all.

Fitzgerald's masterpiece captures the American dream at a point in time, and yet in a way that resonates down to us today. It remains the most accessible of the classics. I can't recall enjoying re reading a book more. Just a delight. Every chapter, every page, is luminous and heart breaking.

I returned to the book, haunted in many ways, not so much by Gatsby as by Carraway, the narrator, who happens to be in the perfect position to observe the Gatsby/Daisy Buchanan love story, as a relative of Daisy and a neighbor of Gatsby's.

It was his sense of being an outsider looking in, or being more observer than participant in events, with which I most cloely identified. In many ways I still think of it as Nick's book, and this re reading confirmed the notion.

Ernest Hemingway's Book "The Old Man and the Sea" is the story of an old man (as you can get from the title) and his experience through the sea and trying to catch the fish of his life. This book looks like a short read but, it takes a lot of will to get through this whole book. I think this is a great piece of literature but, I read it in my 8th grade class. In this class it was hard to really get into the book because, it is a book that is suppose to take only a few days and it was stretched out to two whole months. As we all know, when reading a 120 page book over two months could make anything terrible. I can see why this book is a classic piece of literature because of the simplicity but, I would not try to make children understand to read it because there are very subtle metaphors that are pretty hard to pick up. I myself did not enjoy the book for the reason that it took to long to read and Santiago (who is the old man) was not a very relatable character being so young. I would enjoy reading this book when I am older but, for anyone wanting to read this young it is a little to slow moving for the average person.

Hemingway apes "Moby Dick," recasting Ahab as a "black sheep" shaman who constantly yearns for his overly emotional boy slave and has self-destructive tendencies he takes out on his loved ones and those who seek to possess said loved ones. Everything is emptiness, like brainpans fried away, ornaments without luster.

At least Idaho Spud keeps his aimless ramblings brief, unlike the constipated "A Moveable Feast," in which Papa Longstocking trained a spotlight on the mundanity of social hour at the writers guild.

This book is about an old man and the sea.
Actually, it is about quite more than that - I am just not sure what. I liked the book, and I love Hemingway; and that's the attraction - the great appeal of this book for me is that it is Hemingway's style and philosophy laid bare. Hemingway was famously agnostic - to the point of seeming despair. We see that theme and message over and over again in his writing: in Robert Jordan awaiting the shutting out of his lights in "For Whom The Bell Tolls," in Frederic Henry's lonely walk away from the richness meaninglessly denied him in "A Farewell to Arms," and in the nameless, solitary old man who mumbles his rosary to nothing in "A Clean, Well Lighted Place." Your theological agreements or disagreements with Hemingway aside, his literary message was consistent, unsentimental, and stark - and always presented in the blunt narrative that he mastered and is so often unsuccessfully imitated.
In "The Old Man and the Sea" the theme comes through again, this time in the situation of a little old man alone in a little old boat in the big old sea. The man, for all of his humanness, is just another contestant in nature. Most of the book is devoted to his long struggle with the great fish - and of course we see him eventually become the prey, so to spoke, as the links of the cold, unemotional, and amoral food chain pay out to take away the fruit of his hard work.
I think that as an introduction to Hemingway, this book might disappoint. EH's European novels are my favorites (like "The Sun Also Rises" and the other titles mentioned), and this plot prevents him from working through the human interactions that he did so well. EH was also a master at the short story - and this book isn't one of those either.
Recommended - but I would direct the EH beginner to one of the other titles mentioned.

The Old Man and the Sea may very well become one of the true classics of this generation. Certainly, the qualities of Ernest Hemingway's short novel are those which we associate with many great stories of the past: near perfection of form within the limitations of its subject matter, restraint of treatment, regard for the unities of time and place, and evocative simplicity of style. Also, like most great stories, it can be read on more than one level of meaning. On one it is an exciting but tragic adventure story. Sustained by the pride of his calling, the only pride he has left, a broken old fisherman ventures far out into the Gulf Stream and there hooks the biggest marlin ever seen in those waters. Then, alone and exhausted by his struggle to harpoon the giant fish, he is forced into a losing battle with marauding sharks; they leave him nothing but the skeleton of his catch. On another level the book is a fable of the unconquerable spirit of man, a creature capable of snatching spiritual victory from circumstances of disaster and material defeat. On still another it is a parable of religious significance, its theme supported by the writer's unobtrusive handling of Christian symbols and metaphors. Like Coleridge's Ancient Mariner, Hemingway's Cuban fisherman is a character allowing the imagination of his creator to operate simultaneously in two different worlds of meaning and value, the one real and dramatic, the other moral and devotionally symbolic
The best sentence I like in The Old Man and The Sea is a man can be destroyed but he can never be defeated. I think the old man is very super.

"The Old Man and the Sea" was Ernest Hemingway's last important work. Written in Cuba in 1951 and when published, it became one of his most recognize pieces. The work won him the Pulitzer prize in 1953 and the Nobel prize in literature in 1954.

*SPOILER*

This is the story of Santiago, a poor, humble Cuban fisherman who has been down on his luck for some time i.e. no catches lately. However on this day he ventures father out to sea than usual in his tiny skiff, and hooks the biggest Marlin he's ever seen. Thus the real story begins; a battle of epic proportions, drawn out over several days, between man and fish, man and the ocean, and man and himself.

What really impressed me about this short novel was Hemingway's ability to conjure a slowly increasing sense of foreboding and fear as his hero is dragged farther and farther off-shore by his immense 'prize'. With only himself to talk to and an ever dwindling supply of water and food there is something primordial about this situation that creeps into ones subconscious. In a great book the reader will usually identify in some way with the protagonist of a story, transferring some of the fears and anxieties of the hero into the reader, making for a more 'personal' and intense experience; this book is no exception.

Conclusion:
A short, spelling-binding tale that is beautifully written.
5 Stars.

Ray Nicholson

P.S.
I originally read this work some time ago because, of all things, a crossword puzzle...The clue was, 'What book with six words in the title and each word having 3 letters, won a Pulitzer prize.' From there it was a mere formality that I had to read this intriguing work.

Beloved / 0-452-28062-1

Beloved is not for everyone (most books aren't), but if you cherish the tradition of rich symbolism given to us by such masters as Hawthorne and Poe, you may well love Beloved.

Beloved tells the languorous story of the set-upon Sethe, an ex-slave who has endured the worst hardships life can offer. Having lost a child, she feels deeply burdened with the guilt of the death, her feelings of failure as a mother, even her regret that she could not procure a more elaborate grave marker for her dear baby. When a mysterious girl arrives, seeming to embody the ghostly spirit of the lost child, Sethe clings to the girl in an attempt to salvage some forgiveness for her past sins. As the girl grows stronger every day, she seems to leach Sethe's own spirit and Sethe withers away, to the sorrow of her friends and loved ones. The rich symbolism is so heavily redolent of Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter, only here the shame is directed (however unfairly) inwardly, rather than from outside forces. Beloved is, at the heart of it, a wonderful novel of how destructive our guilt and pain can be, when we allow it purchase.

Amazon.com great company to buy from. Prices, shipping, etc.
I was expecting a bit more in the book beings the movie was so good, did not hold my interest, but the price was good.

Get a peek of what is to come next in this novel without knowing you're seeing the future. Morrison's artistic lyrics are outstanding.

Beloved HAD to be written. The African-American tragedy is told here in a way that the slaves could not have articulated themselves - but here their souls cry out. True, Toni Morrison does not quite make this a total work of Art. The devices are too obvious as she fulfills this almost impossible task she has set herself. In this book you LIVE the destruction/denigration of life - in a way I cannot remember experiencing in any other book. The characters, especially Beloved, are symbols - and yet they are very real and quite fascinating too! These are vibrant, exciting people - and Morrison gives them a voice and makes them so real!

I read this book after reading The Known World and March so I had already had a good (better, actually) dose of reading about the inhumane conditions slaves lived under. This was a ho-hum book for me. I thought it was more work that it was worth and I wanted it over with and was glad when I finished it.

I was really struck by Morrison taking you inside the damaged spirit of some of the characters. You learn how they only let themselves love others a little as all things important to them will likely be taken away. You learn the significance of a star or a leaf to someone who has no joy in their life whatsoever. You come to understand why a mother would rather take the life of her child than subject it to a life of continuous degradation and misery.

It was very well written, with imagery so vivid that it was at times disturbing. However, the ending ruined the entire book for me. I had never read anything by Atwood before, and I never will again. What a letdown!

I received the product within 3 business days and the product was in excellent condition.

Cambridge, England, June 25, 2195.

Professor James Darcy Pieixoto discusses the findings of a manuscript titled "The Handmaid's Tale" which in its pristine state consisted of a metal footlocker, US Army issue, circa perhaps 1955--an account of the Gilead regime, city of Bangor, somewhere in Maine.

The author's identity can't be authenticated, but her tale is compelling.

"I'm sorry there is so much pain in this story. I'm sorry it's in fragments, like a body caught in crossfire or pulled apart by force. But there is nothing I can do to change it."

The President of the US and the Congress are all assassinated. The US Constitution is revoked. A matriarchal society ensues, where polygamy is justified for the sake of fertility.

The oligarchy in control, most of which is sterile from radiation can acquire "handmaids" for purpose of procreating. The wives rule the house and submit and attend a fornication ritual so that their husbands can reproduce.

The account is by Offred, a handmaid.

She may leave the home of her lord and his wife once a day to walk to the food market. She must lie on her back once a month and pray her commander gets her pregnant, because in a republic of declining births, Offred and the other handmaids are valued only for their ovaries.

Offred recounts the years before , when she lived and made love to her husband, Luke. When she played and protected her daughter that was given away to a powerful commander. When she had a job, money of her own, and access to knowledge.

"The Fall was a fall from innocence and knowledge," she tells.

Margaret Atwood has created a masterpiece that brilliantly interconnects politics and sex--just like Orwell challenged us in 1984, so will our minds be challenged--and forewarned-- again in Atwood's "Handmaid."

Considered a modern Classic, The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood had been on my must read list for some time now. I checked it out once before from the library and never got past the first couple of pages before I had to return it. I probably should have left it at that, because I'd rather be wishing I read it, then feeling the keen sense of disappointment like I do now.

The story is narrated by Offred- not her real name; which I'll get to later- in the first person. Technically I don't mind first person. There are quite a number of books I've truly enjoyed from that POV. However, for this book, it didn't work for me. Even though it was written from the most intimate of narratives, I still felt like I was watching from afar. None of Offred's true feelings came through to me, which frustrated me completely, because this story demands that we connect with the character.

Here's the lowdown;

The story is set in the not too distant future where a totalitarian state is in control and the women are treated shamefully- right down to forcing the women to wear oppressive clothing.

Something has occurred- which is never quite clear to me- where the nation's birth rate is nil and many women are unable to have children. (The author hints at a nuclear war but she also hints at the low birth rate trend.) Of course, the men in control blame it on the women and not their own sterile likelihood and have set up a system to alleviate the problem.

Enter The Handmaids. They are women who have been ripped from their families- families from 2nd marriages after divorces and "living together" unions- neither of which are valid in the new States' laws.

These women have given birth to children in the past and are therefore considered an effective tool to alleviate the world "problem". They are reprogrammed and subjugated into becoming the "handmaid" for leaders who are unable to begat children on their wives- much like what happened in Biblical Old Testament times when women were barren.

The new names for The Handmaid's are given to them at the time of their programming and they are a connected to the Commanders they will eventually be given too- names such as Of-glen, Of-warren, and for this narrative, Of-fred.

The premise of the book fell apart for me because it was a little too obvious and preachy, and, to make things worse, I couldn't follow Atwood's style of writing. It also seemed scattered and disjointed- which I believe is why I couldn't connect with Offred.

As scary dystopian fiction, this book's as good as any- it's a frightening world Atwood conjures up. However, I'm giving this one 2 out of 5 because it fell flat and failed to hold my interest- I ended up skimming two chapters towards the end!

This book was written very well. I had the creeps while I was reading it. It reminded me of the movie "Children of Men" and the book "The Giver". The entire time I was reading this book, I kept thinking of a certain female vice presidential candidate. I am afraid that she would love the form of government that is described. This is a short read. Give it a whirl.

I absolutely HATED reading this book. I respect it as a very popular piece of literature, but in truth I spent more time sounding out all of the names in this then actually reading it!

It's rare to find a book that can be at once so severe and so touching. This is a fantastic and emotionally charged book of a view of Africa that is not always revealed to the world in such a way in suh honest color. While Achebe clearly cares for the culture, he is not afraid to hide what is true about it. The result is a deeply moving look into the way of people and how they relate themselves to the rest of world as it changes.

This is a transcendant book about the culture, mores, and primitively beautiful ways of a place and people most of us will never get a chance to experience first-hand. The prose is terse and close, but worlds of emotion -- agony, love and surprise -- shine through at every turn. Above all, perhaps, the story is wildly interesting.

This was the absolute WORST book I've ever read in my life. My English teacher made me read it over the summer and I hated it. It's this boring hard to understand book about this guy in Nigeria just livin' his life. Then he accedentally kills this kid and is sent into excile for seven years. These people come from Europe trying to make the people more civilized and become Christians. So this guy gets mad when he comes back from exile. While they were at a meeting trying to figure out what to do, a messenger comes and the guy gets mad and shoots him. Then he goes home and hangs himself. All of that happens in the three hundred pages. It was an awful book and I would not suggest it to anyone. I wish I could give it no stars. Yeah, it was that bad.

I know this is the classic debate of all time when it comes to literature: Is it about beautifully written prose (THE STORY OF EDGAR SAWTELLE, incidentally, is a good example of this problem) or does it tell a compelling story? (yet the prose itself is not its strong point).

It seems that many works of fiction these days are of the former and unfortunately, not enough of the latter. I recently re-read this book along with another classic, JOHNNY GOT HIS GUN, after a discussion I had with a friend about this very subject. As a middle-aged person, I often look back at the books that made a difference in my life and much of the time, it's not about the author's writing style. Achebe's is a plain, straightforward style, but it's what he is conveying that is so striking about this story. (I am a bit miffed at the "English" teachers and the like who are downing this book!) Bottom line: I was left with a lasting impression that stayed with me. I can't say that many books do this today.

All I can say is pick up this read and decide for yourselves. Bottom line, this story is just as relevant today as it was so many years ago when it first appeared. These issues are universal and the world today is replete with similar conflicts. It's unfortunate to have to go back in time to find classic works of fiction, but sometimes there are exceptions. Check out--SIM0N LAZARUS, a word of mouth wonder more should know about.

I've recently had to read this book for AP Lit, like many of the other reviewers, and I don't see how this is a classic in any regard. Sure it is written in a lovely matter, but there are 15000 people with various English majors who can write beautifully as well. It's hailed as a love story, but at the core of it there isn't any love at all. Just an assortment of angry childish people all who are developed as a still birthed child.

Heathcliff and (old) Catherine love each other. But WHY, they love each other is never granted in any regard. They are in love simply for the sake of having a story a write about. That's it. Then the characters themselves aren't just underdeveloped, but they're TERRIBLE people to add on top of that. I am not one of those people who feels the need to love each and every single character, or any of them actually, but this must at least backed up with something to frame the character.

Heathcliff is a horrible person simply because, based on what was given of his character in the book, he was abused. Now this aspect of course warrants some sympathy for him. And even though he is vengeful while he is a child, this is completely understandable given how he is treated. However, as a man he does not grow at all. He degenerates to a sadist simply because he didn't get what he wants, why he wants Catherine is anybody's guest.

I'll just stop here because I honestly can't go on. The book is far too terrible for me to even go through breaking down each miserable character paragraph by paragraph. To put this book simply; it's basically like an emo's version of a Tyler Perry story. The conflicts exist simply because the characters will it to.

I honestly didn't think that I would enjoy this book as much as I did. :] It is a love and hate story. I wasn't fond of Catherine or Heathcliff, but i enjoyed the book. It took me a little while to really get into but after that i couldn't put it down! :] But if your looking for a happy story with a good fairytale ending this book is not for you. For me I really did like this book but I don't think it's for everyone.

<3

Although Wuthering Heights is distinguished as a Victorian romance novel, love is a stranger to these characters. They are manipulative, self deprecating, and pathological to the point of the readers amusement and wonderment. At times, I found myself shaking my head. How could Bronte create such uncivilized characters?

Very few readers will enjoy this novel, but many cannot help being in awe of Bronte's literary skill. It is intriguing that Bronte, in her 20's, was able to articulate the depth of human depravity and psychopathology with such profound perception. Through her writing, we learn something about her; she is passionate, intense, imaginative, intriguing and mysterious.

This is one of my favorite parts of the narrative.... it beams with imagination, brilliance and eloquence.

"Heaven did not seem to be my home; and I broke my heart with weeping to come back to earth; and the angels were so angry that they flung me out into the middle of the heath on the top of Wuthering Heights; where I woke sobbing for joy" (Chapter 9).

A mysterious work of doomed romance, depressing landscapes, and Gothic moods. How can this possibly NOT work?

The story immediately draws you in with a nameless traveler who finds himself needing a place to stay. Here he enters a house of definite spookiness and becomes wrapped up in the incredible story of its history.

This is not a happy book, but it's intriguing, exciting, and darkly romantic. It's about people who want to be together despite all-powerful fate. It's about a romance that transcends generations, destiny, and individuals looking for their own way with a breath-taking Beauty and the Beast theme.

Very few of the characters are likeable. In fact, I can't think of a single person I really liked. But they are powerful and you just can't help but root for them. Evil here is vague, and it seems all the characters have a touch of villainy.

So here is pain, heartache, and drama galore. Totally wonderful.

Anyone who is a frequent reader of this blog knows of my aversion to classics. I don't typically enjoy them, I always have to force myself to finish them, and I usually just end up giving up before I finish altogether. This book started out similar - it took me a really long time to get invested in the story and characters, I read it very slowly, and I was pretty sure I was going to hate it by page 50. Fortunately for me, though, I ended up enjoying the story when I (sadly) forced myself to continue on. (Thanks, Classics Challenge, for that little push!) I am SO proud of myself for getting through this and actually feeling like I somewhat enjoyed the book. Someone described this book to me as almost like a soap opera (can't remember who...), and that individual is completely right. There is so much drama in here... it's crazy. I definitely felt attached to the characters, even with all their unpredictable drama, and I'm glad that I finished the book and got to appreciate it. I can't really say that this is one of my favorites, but it is a pretty decent book, and I can see why it is dubbed a "classic".

This book has to be considered in the time it was written to appreciate it. Some books are timeless--theme, characters, etc.--and others are best viewed in the year they were published. I think this is one of those books. For 1926, this would have been quite daring as a response to WWI, especially considering it was a new kind of war.

The novel doesn't really make explicit assertions or come to any definitive conclusions; it's more like holding a mirror up to society: this is what is going on. I liked the dialogue and found some of the banter funny, and I did not find all of the characters completely hopeless. These stories work best as a series of short stories (Fitzgerald, Yates are good examples), which are more like a set of snapshots. This book does read like a short story in parts, especially Part I, and it is a quick read.

I often see it on the Top 100 Novels lists, which is why I read it. I think many times the distinction is not made between most influential books, on which this title would definitely fall and best written books, on which I wouldn't place this title.

The Margin
The Sun Also Rises by Hemingway the second time around was a disappointment. The first reading, many years ago, was a disappointment too but I chalked that opinion up to immaturity on my part. What do I chalk it up to now? I don't know. Anyway, I have to say I'm not the least bit impressed. I'm going to press on though, hoping to grasp why the New York Times said, "...a truly gripping story, told in lean, hard athletic prose...magnificent." I went to the local library today and checked out The Old Man and the Sea.

Marvin Wiebener, author of The Margin, a mystery novel of lost treasure with interesting characters and an unlikely outcome. You won't be disappointed.

This book was chosen for our Book Club selection for this fall. While it's an "easy read", sometimes the dialogue in the text is difficult to follow. All in all, most members of our club are enjoying this classic.

As a young man I took the opportunity of a lifetime to spend a year living and traveling abroad in Spain. Upon making this life altering choice, I began researching what novels I could read that could give me a glimpse into spanish culture--enter "The Sun Also Rises" by Ernest Hemingway. At that point in my young life, I had never read any of Hemingway's works; since reading this, I've read the majority of his other works which, while mostly they were well written and enjoyable, no other book I've read, Hemingway or other, has had the same impact on me as "The Sun Also Rises."

Many reviews will break down the story line and interpretations of the relationships in the book, what I can say to you is that I am a mid-twenties male, married with a daughter, I love travel and sport, enjoy good wines, used to enjoy partying a bit too much, and am a bit of a guy's guy, and this is hands down the best book I've ever read. My home library is not as extensive as I'd like to say, but I have began collecting this fantastic novel in as many editions as possible, simply because each year when I open the front cover, I know that I'm going to be gripped just as tightly by the story as I was that first time.

It's a simple read, and a quick one. But be warned, you will want to read it again and again...and again.

I'm Jake. Jacob Barnes. American journalist. Living in Paris. I send off my cables. I work hard for a couple of hours. I put the stories in big manila envelopes. And send them out. That brings in the money.

French? I speak French.
Spanish? I speak Spanish.

Don't think I've got it made. I don't. The War did bad things to me. The War wounded me. Physically. Okay, I survived. Some say the wound was worse than dying.

I have a girlfriend. Brett. Brett Ashley. Lady Ashley. She got "Lady" from a past marriage. Everyone loves Brett. She is a remarkably attractive woman. And she loves that everyone -- all the men -- love her.

I love her, and she loves me. Deeply. That's the end of it. We know that I can't consummate anything. Physically I cannot get it on. That's the War wound. We can kiss, and she shivers. But that's it.

"We kissed standing at the door. She pushed me away. We kissed again. 'Oh, don't!' Brett said."

The wound hurts me and the wound hurts her. So, she sleeps around. With all the guys in our group that she is attracted to. And others not in our group. Like the daring young, very young bullfighter later on. And with others she is not attracted to. Like the ex-champion boxer from Princeton, who is a Jew, sometime author, and magazine publisher. The Jew keeps hanging on. She would like to be rid of him. But he keeps hanging on.

Brett does not have independent income. The boys, the men, who love her take care of her. Drinks. Food. Hotel rooms. Sometimes they go on short trips.

All of us do a lot of drinking. A lot of drinking. We drink in the morning. We drink at lunch. We drink in the afternoon. We drink at dinner. We drink in the evening. We drink during the night. All night. We drink. Good stuff.

We all love hanging out. Going out. To the bars. Inside the bars. Outside the bars. At tables. And drinking. We get drunk. Hung over. Feel bad.

And arguing. Fighting even. Sure, and sometimes we hike. We walk through Paris. The Tuileries. By the Seine. Or out in the towns. In the woods. We play some tennis.

In Paris you can see anyone you want. South Americans. Americans. The English.

A bunch of us decide to hire a car and driver to go to Spain for some fishing in the mountains and for the fiesta at Pamplona. Others go by train.

My friend Bill and I ride a crowded bus to the mountains. We sit with many on top of the bus. The riders pass around leather wine-bottles. Lifted high, the wine streams down to your mouth. Good fun. Laughing. Good camaraderie.

We reach the river. We have worms and fishing flies and catch a lot of trout. We hide wine bottles in the cold river. The bottles get very cold.

Back to Pamplona. The others arrive in time for the fiesta. The fiesta explodes. The street is solid with dancers. The fiesta goes on for seven days and nights.

I go to sleep in my room. I wake to a rocket exploding, announcing the release of the bulls from the edge of town. From my balcony the street is empty. Suddenly the street is filled with people running. And the bulls running on the way to the ring. The bulls toss several runners.

In the ring the bullfights begin. The purest and most exciting fighter is Pedro Romero. Everyone sees the bulls goring the picadors' horses and goring the steers brought into the ring. Romero is nineteen. Brett is in her thirties. She has eyes only for him.

In a restaurant in the evening, our group strikes up a conversation with Romero's table. Introductions all around.

Brett confesses she is a goner for Romero.

Later, more about Brett and Romero. And about Brett and myself. About Paris. And Madrid. But . . . not right now.

Like Poe, strong roots in its Gothic horror era make this story too wordy to be read as a contemporary classic (contradiction in terms, I suppose), but the basic storyline does stand up over time.

A basic story, by the way, which no movie version has yet successfully captured, not even Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. That overwrought hyper-surrealistic version by Kenneth Brannagh captures the framework of the book in neat prologue/epilogue bookends, and Robert De Niro captures the menace and humanity of the creature, but Brannagh makes some boneheaded plot changes (particularly the handling of Henry and Elizabeth) that clank off the rim.

That said, though, it would be hard for any movie maker to capture this story which is told strictly in first person narrative, even when told through another's eyes or voice or pen. At one point, the narrative is retold with four layers between the reader and the actor. Good luck turning that into a movie.

And the basic conflict of the story still rings true, and is really what the book is about; unlike Brannagh, who dwells lovingly on the process, Shelley barely describes the creation of the creature, and wisely so. The focus is on the creature and its creator, not on the creative process. And as De Niro the creature says in the movie at a very dramatic turn, "I keep my promises". Frankenstein, the man and the creator, does not.

i read this book right after dracula and well, it's definitely a good read and an edge of your seat thriller. it has stood the test of time in terms of it's theme and lesson.

for the people who hated this book and gave it poor reviews. Really missed out on what may be the greatest novel of all time. For me it's hard to put down. And the themes are deep and everlasting ones that humans will forever struggle with. Life and death, God vs science, good and evil, spiritual themes, and social ones also, all wrapped up in a GREAT story. Oh well, you can't expect everyone to get it and resonate with it.

One thing about this Rieger version: it says it "reproduces for the first time in more than a century the text of the first edition published in 1818". Not true. Donohue produced at least three editions (I have them) around 1895 that are all the 1818 text.
Just an FYI.

Believe the hype! This book is hard to surpass. I virtually never give 5 stars to ANYTHING. This deserves it.

Once you read Shelley's classic you're going to scratch your head and wonder: Is this really the book that gave us the Karloff movie? Not to mention Herman Munster and Frankenberry. For over a century and half people have been cannibalizing this book for ideas, movies, other books, and products of every size, shape and type that our modern concept of Frankenstein holds little to no resemblence to the master work. While occasionally these bastardizations have had enjoyable results, like Young Frankenstein, it's criminal that so few people are unfamiliar with the source. Do yourself a favor and find out where it all came from. It's not nearly as creepy as you may think, but it's infinitely more thought provoking and it certainly doesn't hurt that this version is beautifully published at a very reasonable price.

Most editions of Mary Shelley's landmark book available today follow the heavily revised 1831 version. The impulse behind this trend is an honorable one (to present what is seemingly an author's "final revision"),but the 1818 version is preferable for many reasons. Looking back on her creation in later life, Shelley felt obliged to alter the book's focus in significant ways, adding what critic Marilyn Butler accurately describes as "long passages in which her main narrator, [Victor] Frankenstein, expresses religious remorse for making a creature..." The author sought to make the 1831 edition less controversial and thereby more palatable to the tastes of the reading public. The 1818 version is closer to Mary Shelley's original intentions, though it too, unfortunately, was filtered through the sensibilities of her husband, the poet Percy Shelley, who took many of his wife's rather straightforward passages and rendered them into his own more ornate and Ciceronian style. Still, the 1818 version remains more vital, more original, and less constrained by what the author believed would be acceptable to readers in 1830s England.