Search

Search only in certain items:

40x40

Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Giver in Books

Dec 7, 2018  
The Giver
The Giver
Lois Lowry | 2012 | Children
10
8.5 (84 Ratings)
Book Rating
<a href="http://fuzzysparrow.tumblr.com/post/101435382283/review">October 2014 Book of the Month</a>

<i>I received this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.</i>

It has been over twenty years since Lois Lowry’s controversial children’s story <i>The Giver</i> was published and it certainly deserves its status as an essential modern classic. Jonas has grown up in the perfect world of the Community whose survival relies on strict rules and rituals. Adults are assigned spouses and children (one boy and one girl) as they take up their role within the society. At the beginning of the book Jonas is approaching then end of his eleventh year and feeling apprehensive about the Ceremony of Twelve where he will be assigned a job for him to do for the rest of his adult life. Jonas gets selected as the Receiver of Memory – a very rare position – and begins to experience memories from humans who lived a long time ago. For Jonas this is exciting until he begins to see the flaws in his perfect world.

Dystopian literature has become popular over the past few years and it would not be surprising if it were <i>The Giver</i> that inspired these contemporary works. Lowry claims that she did not intend for The Giver to have a sinister feel about it; she was writing an adventure story and exploring the concept of the importance of memory, but it turned out to be something much more thought provoking. As the children’s novelist Margaret Mahy (<i>The Haunting</i>) pointed out, up until the publication of this novel in 1993 Lowry was best known for her funny stories about Anastasia Krupnik resulting in <i>The Giver</i> being even more shocking and unexpected.

<i>The Giver</i> highlights that attempting to produce perfection can often result in the loss of good things as well as the bad. The notion of the ideal world may seem like a wonderful proposal, but in order to achieve it humans would have to do away with free choice as in ironing out the inequalities and injustices of the present world would result in everything becoming the same for each individual.

This is a difficult concept to grasp, particularly for a child. Although intended as a children’s series, <i>The Giver</i> and its following installments are more suitable for young adults and older. The only issue with this is that the writing style was target at a younger audience meaning that the overall story is short and lacks depth. If it were to have been written for older readers then there would have been the scope for it to become a much lengthier novel.

There are a lot of mixed reviews surrounding this book although they have changed greatly since the original publication. To begin with <i>The Giver</i> was banned in some areas however the dystopian theme has become accepted in today’s society. What many people comment on now is the oversimplification of such strong ideas. Then again, as already mentioned, it needs to be emphasized that this book was aimed at children, thus the language reflects the reading skills of its target audience.

<i>The Giver</i> is a gem of a book that not only is enjoyable but also can educate the reader on the dangers of attempting a utopian society and why it is important to retain human memories – even the bad – in order that wisdom can exist. Those who have become fans of contemporary dystopian novels, for example <i>Divergent</i> by Veronica Roth or <i>Delirium</i> by Lauren Oliver, will be sure to love this series.
  
Earth Abides
Earth Abides
George F. Stewart | 1949 | Dystopia, Science Fiction/Fantasy
9
9.5 (2 Ratings)
Book Rating
Truly a classic, and a must read.
Earth Abides is not an entertaining book. It is not perfect. It is a tad long-winded at some points, sometimes decidedly dated feeling, and has a serious lack of everything that generally entertains me. It is, at it’s base, a look at the post-apocalyptic world through one man’s eyes. It was first published in 1949, and according to Goodreads, currently has 55 editions. It is considered a sci-fi book, but there’s nothing science fiction about the book. A disease hits, wipes out most of the world’s population, and the few that survive are left to pick up the pieces. That’s it. But that’s not all there is to it. A lot happens, but it’s over the life of one man. There’s no grand battles, no good versus evil in the ruins of the old world, just the quiet puttering of one of the last embers of humanity as it strives to not die out completely. And yet it won’t let you alone until you finish it.

I think this book had to have made some waves when people first started reading in. Published in 1949 and it features an interracial union and espouses a life better without God in it? Yowzers.

I frequently disliked the main character. Isherwood Williams is the type of man that – while I might admire his mind – I would frequently want to thump. He’s full of himself. He’s so cynical about the ‘simplicity’ of the people around him. And, of course, he’s completely human, and there’s the rub. We look for a ‘hero’ in these types of books. Ish is no hero. He’s someone who had the ‘luck’ to survive the end of the world, and now he’s got to live in it. But the world changes – doesn’t it always? And Ish isn’t a King of old. He’s just the head of his Tribe.

Earth Abides feels timeless. I have read many post-apocalyptic books, and they’ve grown tiresome. I approached this book with some caution, because I was afraid of more of the same drivel that is wonderful the first few times you read it, and then swiftly approaches “Been there done that” with disturbing ease. I didn’t want to dislike this book because I was bone-weary of the sub-genre. Thankfully, that wasn’t the case. Because, for all the post-apocalyptic books I’ve read, I don’t think that I’ve ever read a novel like Earth Abides. It also feels the most real. This is how the world goes on; earth abides while humanity fumbles along.

I won’t deny that the main reason I’m making the connection between the two is because I just recently read it, but I could not help but think of McCammon’s Boy’s Life when I finished Earth Abides. I am not someone who self-describes as liking ‘literary fiction’. I’m happy with my genre jollies, thankyouverymuch. I’ll admit to even wrinkling my nose at the idea of reading ‘literature’. However, I think both Earth Abides and Boy’s Life are perfect examples of books that show the appeal of that type of book. They’re not 600 pages long and packed with five dollar words, yet they don’t fit into any particular genre, and they make you think far more than they entertain you.

Here are a few of my favorite quotes:

“If there is a God who made us and we did wrong before His eyes—as George says—at least we did wrong only because we were as God made us, and I do not think that He should set traps. Oh, you should know better than George! Let us not bring all that back into the world again—the angry God, the mean God—the one who does not tell us the rules of the game, and then strikes us when we break them. Let us not bring Him back.”

“Man has been growing more stupid for several thousand years; I myself shall waste no tears at his demise.”

“During ten thousand years his numbers have been on the upgrade in spite of wars, pestilences, and famines. This increase in population has become more and more rapid. Biologically, man has for too long a time been rolling an uninterrupted run of sevens.”

Earth Abides really does deserve it’s spot on the “Must Read” list folks. Its hard to talk about but easy to read. You’ll need some quiet to be able to really appreciate it. Take as long as you need to take with it. I actually walked away from it for a week or so because I have an attention span the length of a gnat, but was drawn back to it, and able to pick up right where I left off.
  
The Hobbit
The Hobbit
J.R.R. Tolkien | 1937 | Children
10
8.4 (144 Ratings)
Book Rating
See the latest version of this review over on Ramble Media http://www.ramblemedia.com/?p=19585

Wow, am I glad that watching the film made me want to reread this timeless classic! I first read this as an eleven year old at school, trying to prove a point to a teacher that a child could read a book like this. I succeeded in reading it, thought the fantasy great, but remembered very little of the story or the fact there was another epic adventure waiting to be told by the much praised JRR Tolkien.

How I have missed out! The story follows a very plain, and at times fussy, Mr Baggins of Bagend, a Hobbit of Hobbiton, in the 'reasonable West', as he takes an adventure, in the company of 'dwarves' to save their long forsaken home. The company encounter many trials and tribulations along the way, from angry goblins, to giant spiders, to meddlesome elves and even Smaug the Terrible, but they triumph over them all.

Honestly, I cannot give praise enough for the book, and many have done so before in, what I am sure, will be better expressed reviews and accolades of praise, so I will aim to keep this short and sweet, picking up on key, outstanding features that bowled me over. The first thing I have to raise is the characterisation. The 'cast' of assembled characters, from the main company of the dwarves, to the helpers and and those that hinder them along their journey, are all thoroughly well explained by the creative use of authorial voice in the narration of events. Mr Baggins is, although a little fussy at times, an incredibly likable character, as I'm sure most hobbits are, who's funny outbursts and ideas make him the comedy relief at tense times. He is also, without a doubt, the brains and drive behind the adventure, once Gandalf has left, and proves that anyone, no matter how small can be a hero - a great quality to see in a major character who is less 'normal' than most as too often it's the popular, stereotypical heroes that dominate literature! Thorin and his company of bedraggled dwarves are a barrel of laughs at times (no pun intended!) and are all well developed in what is a relatively short story.

And that, I suppose, is the best feature of this book, for me at least! The development of plot, characters, scenery and everything else you could possibly wish to know about anyone involved in a story (eg background history etc) is all given to you in abundance, but they never overpower each other, they are instead woven intricately together in a brand of storytelling that belongs in oral tradition, not in words on a page. It is clear, especially after reading the foreword, that the Hobbit originated as a story to be told, not read, and incredibly, that makes it all the more readable as it hooks you in a way few books ever will. It aims to drag you, however reluctantly or willingly, into the adventure and take you away from your own little, safe, hobbit hole across the Shire and the Wild, and everywhere else they travel, with you feeling completely immersed as the final member of the company, but one who goes as unnoticed by the others as if you were wearing Bilbo's ring. However, the extremely clever thing that Tolkien does, and of this I am supremely envious of as I wish I could do this in my own writing, is that even though you feel so well informed, you still want to know more about them, and for the creative among us, we want to fill those gaps with our own imagination! Very rarely do I come across an author who manages to inform, excite, engage, and engender creativity in such a way in under 300 pages.

Finally, I guess I have to give credit to the wonderful drawings accompanying the text. Beautifully drawn, incredibly supportive of your own imaginative process, yet strangely, not limiting in letting you continue to let your imagination wander. The are a wonderful addition to the book, and I say that as someone who doesn't think a real book should have pictures, and add a greater accessibility to all of the new experiences you encounter as you travel through the story to the Lonely Mountain at the end.

And so, I draw my ramblings to a close, however there is plenty more to be said, that will be left unsaid, partly due to my desire to go and read Lord of the Rings for the first time as a result of reading The Hobbit. I can only conclude with the highest praise for this story, and the highest level of recommendation to anyone who has not yet read it, or those like me that think because they read it as a child it counts. This is a book that should, and deserves, to be read over and over again, and one of those occasions should be reading it aloud to a child, as that, is the only way to truly experience the wonderful story weaved by a master storyteller.
  
The Haunting of Hill House
The Haunting of Hill House
Shirley Jackson | 2009 | Fiction & Poetry, Horror
8
7.5 (29 Ratings)
Book Rating
Strong writing (1 more)
Good characters
Run-on sentences (1 more)
No explanations for paranormal activity
Contains spoilers, click to show
If you're looking for a scary story, 'The Haunting of Hill House' just doesn't add up.

The story is still worth reading because Jackson's story telling is something that is missing in literature today. The reader is introduced to characters that are different enough to be interesting; their development is just right that it leaves the reader satisfied. The story moves along well enough that the pace keeps us from getting bored. And each turn of the page keeps the reader guessing what is going to happen next- a must for any ghost story.

In 'The Haunting of Hill House,' Jackson mostly focuses on the character Eleanor - a woman who recently lost the sickly mother she had taken care of for years, to receiving an invitation for a paranormal experiment at the infamous Hill House. Eleanor also seems to be the main character affected by the house, not only having her name written on a wall, but also having her named called out by spirits during an automatic writing session with them.

Our first introduction to the Hill House happens as Eleanor arrives: "No Human eye can isolate the unhappy coincidence of line and place which suggests evil in the face of a house, and yet somehow a maniac juxtaposition, a badly turned angle, some chance meeting of roof and sky, turned Hill House into a place of despair, more frightening because the face of Hill House seemed awake, with a watchfulness from the blank windows and a touch of glee in the eyebrow of a cornice. Almost any house, caught unexpectedly or at an odd angle, can turn a deeply humorous look on a watching person; even a mischievous little chimney, or a dormer like a dimple, can catch up a beholder with a sense of fellowship; but a house arrogant and hating, never off guard, can only be evil. This house, which seemed somehow to have formed itself, flying together into its own powerful pattern under the hands of its builders, fitting itself into its own construction of lines and angles, reared its great head back against the sky without concession to humanity. It was a house without kindness, never meant to be lived in , not a fit place for people or for love or for hope. Exorcism cannot alter the countenance of a house; Hill House would stay as it was until it was destroyed."

We never see Hill House through any other character's eyes, and the viewpoints mostly come from Eleanor (a missed opportunity,I think). Everyone who arrives at the house feels uneasy about it: doors and curtains close on their own, unexplained banging noises down the hallways(only at night), the chattering and laughter of children, and with an oddly placed cold spot. Yet,to the reader's dismay, nothing is fully explained by the end of the story - no apparitions show up, no one seems harmed by anything unseen (although, the character, Luke, suddenly shows up with a bruised face that is never discussed), and the reader ends up wondering if this really is a product of mass psychosis. It almost seems like Jackson ended the story abruptly just to finish it(the book is only a little under 200 pages). She set up wonderful scenarios, but without explanations, we're left with a very empty feeling.

Nearing the end of the book, the doctor, John Montague, who has ran the entire experiment, has his wife,Mrs. Montague,arrive a few days later, who seems to know more about contacting spirits than he does: "The library? I think it might do; books are frequently very good carriers, you know. Materializations are often best produced in rooms where there are books. I cannot think of any time when materialization was in any way hampered by the presence of books." And with the arrival of Dr. Montague's wife, we get one of the major experiences in the entire book. Although her character is quite annoying- even seen through the eyes of other characters- she brings some of the most ghost story elements, one of which is her automatic writing sessions: "Planchette felt very strongly about a nun, John. Perhaps something of the sort- a dark, vague figure, even- has been seen in the neighborhood? Villagers terrified when staggering home late at night?" None of the characters, besides Mrs. Montague's companion, Arthur, believe her automatic writing sessions are real, even after Eleanor's name is brought up during one. As I stated before, without any explanations, the reader is even led to believe that nothing was meant to come of these sessions whatsoever.

The ghost story elements may not have been strong in the story, but the characters make up for them. They constantly question what they are experiencing and/or seeing, they question their surroundings, and they question each other -Jackson does an amazing job weaving paranoia into the story line.

One of the more shocking and unbelievable scenes is when Eleanor is suddenly not fearful of the house anymore: "And here I am, she thought. Here I am inside. It was not cold at all, but deliciously, fondly warm. It was light enough for her to see the iron stairway curving around and around up to the tower, and the little door at the top. Under her feet the stone floor moved caressingly, rubbing itself against the soles of her feet, and all around the soft air touched her, stirring her hair, drifting against her fingers, coming in a light breath across her mouth, and she danced in circles. No stone lions for me, she thought, no oleanders; I have broken the spell of Hill House and somehow come inside. I am home, she thought, and stopped in wonder at the thought. I am home, I am home, she thought; now to climb." It was as if Eleanor was a completely different person in just a few pages.

I do have a couple of problems with 'The Haunting of Hill House,' mostly centering around the use of run-on sentences and extra long paragraphs. The run-on sentences are a waste of time because Jackson seems to merely elaborate on something that could be easily explained or experienced with fewer words. The paragraphs, however, need to be broken up for scene transitioning purposes -when she transitions from one scene to the next, she can confuse the reader with them: one paragraph will have all the characters in the dining area, but in that same paragraph, just a few sentences down, Jackson has the characters suddenly in the parlor,drinking Brandy. Maybe the intention was to make the reader feel paranoid and uneasy like the characters in the book, but it was certainly not needed with the way of Jackson's style of writing.

With all that said, it's easy to see why this book is a popular classic. The writing is strong, using enough descriptions to put the reader in Hill House with all of its paranormal beings. And no matter who you are, you are able to find at least one of the lead characters as a favorite. I feel the book is a must-read for anyone interested in the paranormal, because Jackson brings out the occult interest that was going on around 1959 - when she published 'The Haunting of Hill House;' everything from cold spots to the use of a planchette for automatic writing.

I recommend this book, but if you're looking for scares, you must look elsewhere.