I want to say it's too broad-sweeping, that there is no character development, I think those were among the writers goals. As a broad-sweeping novel imagining the world of humanity on the brink of annihilation by zombies, it's pretty damned good.
To celebrate friend Jarret's recent milestone birthday, we sailed on Priscilla, the fully restored late 19th century fishing boat on the Great South Bay. The crew that operates this boat daily recommended Matthiessen's tribute to the once thriving Long Island fishing industry and the men who for generations made their meager livelihood from the sea as surfmen and baymen of the South Fork.
I love the book. Having done some growing up on Long Island, and spent a number of my teenage days as crewman on lobster boat out of Mount Sinai, I couldn't put this one down. It speaks of very real, imperfect people who sustained their lives by cultivating the land and fishing the sea just off the coast of Long Island. It also speaks to me personally as a romantic, a man who truly longs to make a life outside. We die sooner at desks.
Matthiessen manages to write lovingly about these poor but very independent people, and yet unflinchingly explores the varying environmental impact of the commercial fishing industry over time. I also enjoyed his attack on the "sport fishing" industry, which apparently has been responsible for nearly 80% of the fish sold to the major fish markets on the eastern seaboard for a number of decades. Matthiessen wonders, page after page, why the world of politics has invested billions over decades focusing on commercial fishing when so-called sport fishing has hauled millions of pounds of fish annually for nearly a half-century. Nor have politicians had the courage to deal with the pollution of our major rivers, which have fouled the bays (fish spawning beds) for over a century. Somehow it's easier to attack the little guy and ignore the more significant causes. But the little guy has done his damage too.
A damned good book, but probably not a "page turner" for everyone.
A friend of mine is planning to teach Dracula to his 11th grade class of middle class slackers. (I'm not trying to say that all middle class 11th graders are slackers, but the majority of these folks are). This is a group in which the majority will fake their way through any difficult novel, by which I mean a novel that is long and doesn't have an intensely rewarding... something... every 4-5 pages. I hadn't read the novel and wondered if Dracula is still a rewarding read.
Dracula is an impressive attack on Victorian era sexuality and gender, fears of illness and death... and all that stuff so many other rebellious Victorian era novels are about. But who cares about that crap? It's also a good read by today's standards: sex, intense murder/mystery, "the case," etc. I really enjoyed the plot as it unfolds through an assemblage of journal entries and letters sent between the characters. And there are some very memorable characters! Of course, Dracula, the original of the sub-genre, makes all vampires that follow seem like mere fashion. And Abraham Van Helsing is not at all the character of recent Hollywood movies. It's worth reading the novel for this character alone.
Dracula is a very good novel, especially if you like the gothic horror genre. This is one of the grand-daddys of its genre and, like Led Zeppelin, still has something its predecessors don't manage to copy or surpass.
This little post-apocalypse novel was recommended by one of my 8th graders. It is the best book she ever read. And I can see why. It is a world where everyone over 13 years old dies and the kids are left to figure out how to survival by themselves. Ten-year-old Lisa Nelson, an unlikely hero, rises to the occasion and does remarkable things.
Nelson, the author, is clearly telling a kid's version of Ayn Rand's philosophy. It's a bit too obvious in the tale, and a distraction. Maybe not to unknowing readers between 10 and 15, her targeted audience.
By J.R.R. Tolkien
I finally read it and very much enjoyed it. Written nearly two decades before The Lord of the Rings, it is in the same medieval epic style, but with a much brighter and humorous tone. In fact, I was surprised by the humor and fun (which is non-existent in LotR).
Tolkien’s world is so magnificent, so rich, and full of life and character.
But I have been interested in Tolkien’s WWI experience as a soldier, and how it manifests in his novels. They are, after all, partly about “people” in a state of total war. Tolkien, who enjoyed a very comfortable, pampered, existence found himself fighting alongside regular Joes during WWI. He was most inspired by them and their special kind of heroics in the face of atrocity and absurdity of that awful war. The regular Joes fought on, despite knowing they would meet certain death (20,000,000 deaths in four years). Tolkien witnessed first hand the battle of Somme, one of the deadliest battles of WWI in which approximately 300,000 soldiers died in a matter of weeks. His heart wrenching epic battles stem from his memory.
The Hobbit, and perhaps moreso LotR, are stories of heroes as well as of the total cost of war. Great kings fall alongside farmers. In both stories, there is joy in epic victory, and the return home, but also a strong parallel sense of loss that comes to mind when thinking on them. The pastoral nature of Hobbiton is in stark contrast to the desolation and violation of the battlefield. That kind of makes going home all that much better.
But The Hobbit is really about the adventure, not the war. That is a big difference between it and the much darker and serious LotR.
Anyway, I very much enjoyed it.