Search
Search results
BookInspector (124 KP) rated The Devil's Prayer in Books
Sep 24, 2020
More reviews can be found at https://bbookinspector.wordpress.com
What drew me to this book was the blurb, it sounded really intriguing to me. Once I started reading the book, I thought I will be disappointed, as it sounded really historical to me, and I had no idea what was going on, but once I carried on it absorbed me. The main character in this novel supposed to be Siobhan, but her mother Denise took all the spotlight, as most of the book was about Denise. The author told the stories through multiple perspectives, and that made the book really compelling. I really liked Denise as a character, she was really interesting and I felt really sad about what happened to her. I think that Siobhan didn’t fully open as a character in this book, and I hope that it will change in the future.
The plot of this novel was very very well researched and really gripping. I really enjoyed all the unexpected turns and twists of this story, which kept me hooked till the last page. There are some parts which sound unrealistic, but I think, it gave this book a unique charm. I really enjoyed how Luke Gracias portrayed religion in this novel, it was amusing to read. Even though historical parts were crucial in this novel to understand it better, my mind tended to wander away while reading those historical parts of it. ( Have no clue why…)
The writing style of this book was creative and pleasant to read, and I have to warn you all that there is rape, drugs, and a lot of violence in this book, so it is not for weak stomach holders. The chapters are a decent length and it did not drag to me at all, because the story sucked me in, and it was hard to put it down. The book ended with a cliffhanger and I will be waiting for the next book impatiently. (It has to continue!!!) So, to conclude, it was a stunning novel filled with amusing story and it is really sad this book is available only as an E-book. I do hope that a smart publisher will consider this book because I think it is a must read for sure...
What drew me to this book was the blurb, it sounded really intriguing to me. Once I started reading the book, I thought I will be disappointed, as it sounded really historical to me, and I had no idea what was going on, but once I carried on it absorbed me. The main character in this novel supposed to be Siobhan, but her mother Denise took all the spotlight, as most of the book was about Denise. The author told the stories through multiple perspectives, and that made the book really compelling. I really liked Denise as a character, she was really interesting and I felt really sad about what happened to her. I think that Siobhan didn’t fully open as a character in this book, and I hope that it will change in the future.
The plot of this novel was very very well researched and really gripping. I really enjoyed all the unexpected turns and twists of this story, which kept me hooked till the last page. There are some parts which sound unrealistic, but I think, it gave this book a unique charm. I really enjoyed how Luke Gracias portrayed religion in this novel, it was amusing to read. Even though historical parts were crucial in this novel to understand it better, my mind tended to wander away while reading those historical parts of it. ( Have no clue why…)
The writing style of this book was creative and pleasant to read, and I have to warn you all that there is rape, drugs, and a lot of violence in this book, so it is not for weak stomach holders. The chapters are a decent length and it did not drag to me at all, because the story sucked me in, and it was hard to put it down. The book ended with a cliffhanger and I will be waiting for the next book impatiently. (It has to continue!!!) So, to conclude, it was a stunning novel filled with amusing story and it is really sad this book is available only as an E-book. I do hope that a smart publisher will consider this book because I think it is a must read for sure...
Lee (2222 KP) rated Saint Maud (2020) in Movies
Oct 6, 2020
Saint Maud is a psychological horror about a young nurse (Morfydd Clark) who, following ‘an incident’ while working for the NHS, something horrific that is alluded to in the opening scene, now finds herself working in palliative care.
Maud is a lonely, isolated, and very religious young woman, and as she sits in her sparse little bedsit, she prays to God in the hopes that he will guide her as she begins her new role. That new role sees her taking over as carer for Amanda (Jennifer Ehle), an ex-dancer whose body is now succumbing to terminal cancer. As Maud feeds, bathes and generally does everything for Amanda, her obsession with her faith and religion begins to send her into a downward spiral, becoming increasingly convinced that her personal mission from God is to save Amanda's soul. Amanda’s lifestyle choices and love-life are often at odds with Maud’s beliefs, eventually resulting in tensions between them.
'In my head, she's very much this person who has felt really alienated her entire life and has always found it really difficult to connect with other people,' explains British director Rose Glass about the lead character of her feature-length debut. Morfydd Clark fills that role brilliantly, with her calm and innocent voice narrating much of the film through her prayers, and we experience her failed attempts at connecting with others while on a rather heavy and eventful night out on the town. An ominous score also helps to set the tone, along with a rather gloomy colour palette, and there is a general feeling of dread throughout.
Aside from that, it’s fair to say that Saint Maud really didn’t work for me at all. I was fully invested in the character of Maud, how faith was shaping her, and how her relationship with Amanda was affected. But two thirds into this slow-burn character study of a young woman essentially going through a breakdown, I was bored and desperate for something to happen. Considering the runtime is only 84 minutes long, that’s not good.
A last-minute burst of chaos and horror provided a glimmer of hope but was very short-lived. And an attempt to deliver powerfully, memorable imagery only resulted in laughs from my cinema audience the likes of which I haven’t experienced since the ending of Hereditary.
Maud is a lonely, isolated, and very religious young woman, and as she sits in her sparse little bedsit, she prays to God in the hopes that he will guide her as she begins her new role. That new role sees her taking over as carer for Amanda (Jennifer Ehle), an ex-dancer whose body is now succumbing to terminal cancer. As Maud feeds, bathes and generally does everything for Amanda, her obsession with her faith and religion begins to send her into a downward spiral, becoming increasingly convinced that her personal mission from God is to save Amanda's soul. Amanda’s lifestyle choices and love-life are often at odds with Maud’s beliefs, eventually resulting in tensions between them.
'In my head, she's very much this person who has felt really alienated her entire life and has always found it really difficult to connect with other people,' explains British director Rose Glass about the lead character of her feature-length debut. Morfydd Clark fills that role brilliantly, with her calm and innocent voice narrating much of the film through her prayers, and we experience her failed attempts at connecting with others while on a rather heavy and eventful night out on the town. An ominous score also helps to set the tone, along with a rather gloomy colour palette, and there is a general feeling of dread throughout.
Aside from that, it’s fair to say that Saint Maud really didn’t work for me at all. I was fully invested in the character of Maud, how faith was shaping her, and how her relationship with Amanda was affected. But two thirds into this slow-burn character study of a young woman essentially going through a breakdown, I was bored and desperate for something to happen. Considering the runtime is only 84 minutes long, that’s not good.
A last-minute burst of chaos and horror provided a glimmer of hope but was very short-lived. And an attempt to deliver powerfully, memorable imagery only resulted in laughs from my cinema audience the likes of which I haven’t experienced since the ending of Hereditary.
Greek Orthodox Calendar
Reference and Lifestyle
App
----------------------------------------- Original Greek Orthodox calendar for iPhone! #1 current...
Sohng: Prisoner of Fate (Tales of Arca #1)
6.0
Rate It
Book
n a world of hidden secrets, all will be revealed in this Dark, Science Fiction, Fantasy Adventure....
Cosmopolitan India
Lifestyle and Magazines & Newspapers
App
Cosmopolitan isn't just a magazine, it's a religion. Now in its 15th year in India, Cosmopolitan is...
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated Writings Of Thomas Paine Volume 4 (1794 1796); The Age Of Reason in Books
Jun 29, 2018
Thomas Paine was a political theorist who was perhaps best known for his support for the American Revolution in his pamphlet Common Sense. In what might be his second best known work, The Age of Reason, Paine argued in favor of deism and against the Christian religion and its conception of God. By deism it is meant the belief in a creator God who does not violate the laws of nature by communicating through revelation or miracles The book was very successful and widely read partly due to the fact that it was written in a style which appealed to a popular audience and often implemented a sarcastic, derisive tone to make its points.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
Whatchareadin (174 KP) rated Ruby in Books
Apr 3, 2019
Ruby Bell lives in the town of Liberty in East Texas. She was one of the most beautiful women in the town. Liberty is the town she grew up in and ran away from in search of her mother in New York City. When news of the death of her best friend reaches her, she decides to return to Liberty, but the things that await her there are very dark and menacing.
Ephram Jennings lost both his mother and father at a young age and was raised by his sister Celia. Celia takes great care of Ephram and together they attend church every Sunday and are a pillar in the community.
Ephram has known Ruby Bell since they were small children, although his interaction with her has been very limited. When she returns to Liberty Ephram would like to change that. But Ruby Bell is no longer the same woman who returned to Liberty. Frequently she can be found huggin the chinaberry tree on the edge of the woods near her home(Bell Land), she is often naked, or barely dressed and once even urinated in the middle of the street. Everyone in Liberty knows that Ruby Bell is a harlot and a Jezebel. Ephram refuses to believe that this is true and makes it his mission to prove this to the entire town.
Religion plays a big part in this book which really spoke to me. We as Christians are taught to love one another and treat each other the way Jesus treated the world, with kindness and compassion. It always gets to me how tolerance and love become an issue when trying to help those who are different. Ruby is plagued by demons in this book and the town shuns and rapes her for this. They call her crazy and when Ephram goes to her to help her be the woman HE knows she can be, he is looked down upon by the entire town and especially by his sister Celia. Ephram wants to understand the demons in Ruby and he never judges her for her "crazy" ways, but tries to comprehend what she is going through.
This story really touched my heart. We all need to do what we can for each other especially in the African American community. We tend to shun away from each other instead of embracing one another. I loved the way that Ephram went to Ruby despite what the rest of the town thought. How he stood by her side no matter what. This book could teach us all a lesson.
Ephram Jennings lost both his mother and father at a young age and was raised by his sister Celia. Celia takes great care of Ephram and together they attend church every Sunday and are a pillar in the community.
Ephram has known Ruby Bell since they were small children, although his interaction with her has been very limited. When she returns to Liberty Ephram would like to change that. But Ruby Bell is no longer the same woman who returned to Liberty. Frequently she can be found huggin the chinaberry tree on the edge of the woods near her home(Bell Land), she is often naked, or barely dressed and once even urinated in the middle of the street. Everyone in Liberty knows that Ruby Bell is a harlot and a Jezebel. Ephram refuses to believe that this is true and makes it his mission to prove this to the entire town.
Religion plays a big part in this book which really spoke to me. We as Christians are taught to love one another and treat each other the way Jesus treated the world, with kindness and compassion. It always gets to me how tolerance and love become an issue when trying to help those who are different. Ruby is plagued by demons in this book and the town shuns and rapes her for this. They call her crazy and when Ephram goes to her to help her be the woman HE knows she can be, he is looked down upon by the entire town and especially by his sister Celia. Ephram wants to understand the demons in Ruby and he never judges her for her "crazy" ways, but tries to comprehend what she is going through.
This story really touched my heart. We all need to do what we can for each other especially in the African American community. We tend to shun away from each other instead of embracing one another. I loved the way that Ephram went to Ruby despite what the rest of the town thought. How he stood by her side no matter what. This book could teach us all a lesson.
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Saints for All Occasions in Books
Jan 30, 2018
Well-written (1 more)
Striking characters
Gorgeous family saga
Nora and Theresa Flynn are only twenty-one and seventeen when they leave their native Ireland and immigrate to the U.S. For her entire life, Nora has been the quintessential older sister, raising Theresa and their younger brother after the death of their mother. Now she's headed to Boston to be married to their former Irish neighbor, Charlie, whom Nora doesn't really even love. Theresa, meanwhile, is outgoing, beautiful, and intelligent. She loves the dances and social atmosphere in Boston, but that all changes when she winds up pregnant. Both Nora and Theresa are forced to make some drastic life decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Fifty years later, in 2009, Nora and Charlie have four children: John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. But Theresa and Nora are no longer speaking, and Theresa lives as a cloistered nun in an abbey in Vermont. What happened between the two sisters? And how will a sudden tragedy affect their current, separate lives?
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know.
This was an amazing book - just beautiful, heartbreaking, and lovely. Sullivan captured the essence of each of her characters so perfectly. I could picture every one, and each was so realistic, with their own background, mannerisms, and details.
The novel switches between the past, starting with Nora and Theresa's journey to Boston, and 2009, with a shocking event that rocks the entire family. We hear from each character--Nora, Theresa, John, Bridget, Brian, and Patrick. As I said, they are each an individual and embellished with Sullivan's wonderful writing and details. For instance, I loved the tidbit that Nora and her daughter-in-law communicated for years mainly through Nora's daughter's dog at family gatherings. It said so much with just one story. (And I've so been there.)
I became attached to each character in their own way thanks to the strong writing and characterization. I don't always enjoy books with shifts between time periods, but all flowed seamlessly here. There's an underlying thread that ties everything together, just adding to the brilliance of the novel. While it's really a story of a family, there's still a bit of suspense, as you try to fit some pieces together. Everything works so well.
Overall, I just loved this beautiful story of parenthood, immigration, siblings, religion, and so much more. It's achingly well-written, and while it ended just right, I was still sad to see the characters go. I'll certainly be recommending it to everyone I know.
Bookapotamus (289 KP) rated No Less Days in Books
May 29, 2018
I won a copy of this book and I didn't know it was Christian Fiction. Definitely not something I would grab for myself to read. I was not turned off by the religious aspects of it though, as most are subtle and not in your face. I tended to glaze over them, which makes me believe this book would have been just as good without them. I won't say they didn't add anything as that's not my place to judge, but I won't judge the book either on parts that I wasn't particularly interested in. I wouldn't judge a mystery on it being mysterious, or a romance for being romantic. So now that we're past that...
The premise of this story is really cool. I admit, it reminded me of that Blake Lively move, Age of Adeline, but WAY better. There was thought here, and it drew me in the second I started reading.
The main focus of the story is that David Galloway cannot die. It should have happened, many times. But nope. Still here... 100 some odd years later and still looking every bit a healthy 35 year old man. We learn a lot of David's history, as well as his present situation, and we wonder: How did he become this way? Are there others like him? Will he ever die? How does he live live without ever aging?
I read this book really fast as I honestly wanted to find out what would happen. Page after page, it kept me riveted. I would give it 5 Stars, but I had some issues with parts of the story. Particularly all the themes going on - some felt really unnecessary. There was a lot of mystery, racial stuff, domestic abuse, love stories, historical references, religion, murders, celebrity, books.... I'm probably missing more. I felt like too much was happening and a lot could be toned down or eliminated. And it's very obviously set up for a sequel, but the way this "strange character" just showed up and then left... felt really disjointed and out of place.
I'm also not a big Speculative Fiction reader as well as the Christian Fiction genre. I would have never bought this book and read it on my own. But that is how you lose certain generalizations about things, and find some of the best stories. I took a chance, and I won :)
I'm happy to have read this book. And I'm pretty sure this is a sequel in the works, and I'll most likely seek that one out to read!
The premise of this story is really cool. I admit, it reminded me of that Blake Lively move, Age of Adeline, but WAY better. There was thought here, and it drew me in the second I started reading.
The main focus of the story is that David Galloway cannot die. It should have happened, many times. But nope. Still here... 100 some odd years later and still looking every bit a healthy 35 year old man. We learn a lot of David's history, as well as his present situation, and we wonder: How did he become this way? Are there others like him? Will he ever die? How does he live live without ever aging?
I read this book really fast as I honestly wanted to find out what would happen. Page after page, it kept me riveted. I would give it 5 Stars, but I had some issues with parts of the story. Particularly all the themes going on - some felt really unnecessary. There was a lot of mystery, racial stuff, domestic abuse, love stories, historical references, religion, murders, celebrity, books.... I'm probably missing more. I felt like too much was happening and a lot could be toned down or eliminated. And it's very obviously set up for a sequel, but the way this "strange character" just showed up and then left... felt really disjointed and out of place.
I'm also not a big Speculative Fiction reader as well as the Christian Fiction genre. I would have never bought this book and read it on my own. But that is how you lose certain generalizations about things, and find some of the best stories. I took a chance, and I won :)
I'm happy to have read this book. And I'm pretty sure this is a sequel in the works, and I'll most likely seek that one out to read!