Hugo's sympathy with the oppressed; the grand scope of the novel; Hugo's gift for fine metaphors and aphorisms; some of the dramatic scenes; the sensitive narration.
Absurdly long, detailed tedious digressive essays on things like the battle of Waterloo, the history of convents, the history and geography of the Parisian sewers; hard-to-believe characters who act in unbelievable ways; corny melodrama and sentimentality; excessively long and repetitious accounts of almost everything due, it seems, to Hugo's sheer delight in showing off his poetic inventiveness.
I have great tolerance for long 19th century novels. But so often I found myself thinking: come on Victor, you've said everything you've got to say abou this event, character, situation, action, motivation, relationship, dilemma. All you're doing now is just repeating yourself using alternative metaphors. Let's get moving! I also found the plot pretty silly in places; a lot depends on coincidence and people acting in unbelievable ways.
Hugo's philosophical reflections, which abound throughout, are sometimes interesting; but he's too much in love with paradox and coupling unexpected antitheses--a tendency which has bedeviled French writing ever since.
The narration is good. I liked the translation: it employs up-to-date language which makes the novel less stodgy than it might otherwsie be.
It's amazing that this is Eliot's first novel. The story telling, the dialogue, and the reflections are all so assured. The narration is truly wonderful. I'm originally from the part of England where Eliot grew up and where I imagine it to be set, and she gets the accents dead on.
I wouldn't call this Great Literature: I doubt if I'd consider reading it again, for instance. But it is still first rate literary entertainment. I especially like Irving's wry humour. The narration is very good.
A well-written and interesting dystopian novel. Given how famous it is, I was a bit disappointed. But I tend to be a little impatient with the method of narration that keeps many things mysterious and leaks out what's going on bit by bit. Still, it's an impressive feat of imagination. The narration was decent, but somewhat lacking in variety of voice or tone.
I love Dickens and have read all his main works. I'd rank Chuzzlewit about in the middle. Some memorable characters and great dialogue--I especially like Mrs. Gamp. But also the usual flaws-- e.g. authorial coyness that gets tiresome; sentimentality; uninteresting good guys. Sean Barrrett's narration is absolutely excellent: the voices he gives the characters sound perfect.
Uncle Tom's Cabin was a better novel than I expected; some of the characters--like Augustine and Opehlia, are quite interesting, and the prose is decent. Eventually, though, the unabashed moral intent of the book starts to make it repetitious and predictable. In general, the first half is better than the second half. Surprisingly, there are no especially graphic depictions of physical brutality; but there are painful scenes of separation and helplessness. The narration is excellent, especially regarding the different voices.
A wonderful novel, with memorable characters and an engaging story. The character of MacMurphy is the central axis of the novel, and he is a wonderful creation. The narrator does a fine job of voicing the different characters, including the one telling the story.
I enjoyed the story well enough, but If found the endless detailed descriptions of the tactics employed in the game room a bit tedious. The subplot involving Ender's brother and sister is also pretty weak. Overall, it was OK, but I don't really understand the fusss that's been made over the book.
This has everything you want from a classic realist novel: superb descriptive writing, omplex characters, engrossing storyline, and some philosophical depth. The narration is very good.
Very worthwhile. The book is all these things: funny, satirical, poignant, tragic, philosophical, profound, repetitious, and sometimes a bit tedious. The narrator is good, especially the way he does Sancho Panza, although there's not too much variation in the other voices. The obsession with women keeping their virginity, and the way moors (who are muslim) are sometimes discussed, can be tedious. But the whole book is rich in observations and reflections.
Classic Wharton: portrays the high society of 19th c. New York--basically a bunch of idle privileged snobs some of whom are at least intelligent enough to realize that their lives are empty. Lots of subtle description and reflection. The satire is more subdued than in The House of Mirth. Excellent narration.
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.