isabellarobinson7's review against another edition
3.0
**I read this book for a 2020/21 library challenge, so it is not necessarily be my taste and I may be harsh because it's not my personal preference. Or it could be a total surprise and I ended up really enjoying it.
Rating: 3 stars
Do not, and I mean do not, go into Bridge of Clay expecting and/or looking for another The Book Thief. Markus Zusak is an author that never seems to be confined by a singular genre, and therefore recommending one of his books to someone who liked another would be, honestly, a mistake.
That being said, I did enjoy Bridge of Clay, but I am not entirely sure what happened...? There was a bridge that the dude was building (it wasn't made of clay much to my disappointment) and it would bring his family back together or something like that (pro tip: have a dysfunctional family? Build a bridge. Not just the saying. Build an actual bridge and all your problems with be solved) and then there were a whole bunch of animals and a dead guy (or was it just a murderer) and lots of talking without much happening. I got it in the end, but I was a bit lost for a while.
Rating: 3 stars
Do not, and I mean do not, go into Bridge of Clay expecting and/or looking for another The Book Thief. Markus Zusak is an author that never seems to be confined by a singular genre, and therefore recommending one of his books to someone who liked another would be, honestly, a mistake.
That being said, I did enjoy Bridge of Clay, but I am not entirely sure what happened...? There was a bridge that the dude was building (it wasn't made of clay much to my disappointment) and it would bring his family back together or something like that (pro tip: have a dysfunctional family? Build a bridge. Not just the saying. Build an actual bridge and all your problems with be solved) and then there were a whole bunch of animals and a dead guy (or was it just a murderer) and lots of talking without much happening. I got it in the end, but I was a bit lost for a while.
ed_moore's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
hopeful
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
In the tide of Dunbar past there is the story of five brothers, with a dynamic much alike to the boys in Golding's 'Lord of the Flies'. Their mother dead and father abandoned them in grief they are left to fend for themselves. It was a story of many elements and many timelines, recounting the history of their parents Penelope and Michael, the history of the brothers fending alone and the numerous pets they acquire named after the heroes of Homer's epics, and the present timeline where Clay leaves to find his father and build a bridge as way of proving himself to all those he loved who had died. It's a story of grief, love, family, horse racing and running, rooftops and identity. Zusak packed so much into the story and crafts his characters so well, whereas comparing it to The Book Thief, his language is much less poetic and it did not come close to equalling the emotional hold that that book had on me. If his other work wasn't one of the best books I had ever read, then maybe Bridge of Clay would've impacted me a bit more, but safe to say I had very high expectations.
mothmans_library's review against another edition
5.0
The way Markus Zusak writes will never cease to amaze and astound me. He’s one of few writers that I’ve encountered that can make me feel such a build up and crescendo of emotion for these characters that most times we’ve only just met.
His writing makes me want to hide behind something and at the same time to stand unbidden and watch these stories unfold just because of how powerful his words are.
What a gem to be able to be alive at the same time as this writer and to be given the gift of being able to read such prose.
His writing makes me want to hide behind something and at the same time to stand unbidden and watch these stories unfold just because of how powerful his words are.
What a gem to be able to be alive at the same time as this writer and to be given the gift of being able to read such prose.
leasummer's review against another edition
3.0
The language in this is beautiful. The story was only okay for me. It took me a long time to follow what was happening, with the multiple storylines all told by the same person. I never figured out the story was set in Australia, I don’t know if I missed something or it’s not mentioned. I found parts of the story interesting, but overall I wasn’t invested. If it wasn’t for my book club I would have DNF’d it.
moon_spilling's review against another edition
3.0
I read this since reading the Book theif was quite the unique experience and this was that too but it was also a bit underwhelming?
I loved Matthew’s voice and him being the oldest with that much responsibility stuck with me. Alternating between past and present was confusing at first but made more sense afterwards. It was weird how all the female characters were killed for the plot… like aren’t we past that kind of storytelling?
The ending was really heartwarming though and some parts in the book surprised me because it goes from 0 to 100 quite quickly.
I loved Matthew’s voice and him being the oldest with that much responsibility stuck with me. Alternating between past and present was confusing at first but made more sense afterwards. It was weird how all the female characters were killed for the plot…
Spoiler
i thought Claudia would be next too nglThe ending was really heartwarming though and some parts in the book surprised me because it goes from 0 to 100 quite quickly.
juliterario's review against another edition
5.0
Sólo he leído un libro de este autor que para mí es uno de los mejores escritores del momento, y es La Ladrona de Libros. Creo que no les he mencionado lo suficiente (o en absoluto) de mi enorme amor por Markus Zusak y, si las palabras tuvieran el poder de enredarnos y forzarnos a enamorarnos de alguien, esas serían las de Zusak. ESTOY ENAMORADA DE TODO LO QUE ESCRIBE ESTE HOMBRE Y SIN DUDA ES DE MIS AUTORES FAVORITOS. Me la paso hablando de escritorAs, pero nunca de Zusak. Desde que leí uno de sus libros tengo planeado leerme más de sus novelas, pero ahora sí que lo tengo bien definido. ¡ESTE HOMBRE ES UN GENIO Y EN EL DÍA DE HOY QUIERO DECLARAR QUE ME VOY A LEER ABSOLUTAMENTE TODO LO QUE HA ESCRITO! Así es, queda claro lo que vengo a decir de esta lectura en particular.
“It was a Sunday, an arsonist sunrise.”
Empecemos con el hecho de que leí El Puente de Clay sin saber de qué se trataba en lo más mínimo. Lo único que sabía era que había un título asombroso, una portada muy tierna y, más importante aún, QUE EL AUTOR ERA MARKUS ZUSAK. Pero eso era todo xD. Ahora sé que esta es la historia de cinco hermanos y un puente. Lloré más de una vez al leer esto, un libro de corazones rotos y una familia. Es una historia impulsada puramente por personajes y no por una trama, lo cual le proporciona un ritmo sumamente lento. HAY TANTAS COSAS TAN SIGNIFICATIVAS E IMPORTANTES EN ESTA NOVELA, y empiezo a temblar con sólo describirlo. Es una novela profunda, preciosa, y muy al estilo Zusak, lo cual es sinónimo de la perfección pura xD. ESTE SE UNE A LOS MEJORES LIBROS QUE HE LEÍDO ESTE AÑO y se me ocurren varias personas a las que voy a molestar para que lo lean. Hay mucho más a lágrimas, héroes, hermanos, corazones e historias en la novela de este autor. El Puente de Clay es algo profundo y tan hermoso que hace feliz a mi corazón y me saca una sonrisa con sólo pensar en ello, y hay mucho más a este libro de lo que parece. ¡QUÉ PEDAZO DE OBRA MAESTRA, POR DIOS! ¡QUÉ TRABAJO TAN PERFECTO, ZUSAK! Les recomiendo muchísimo El Puente de Clay y no van a arrepentirse de leerlo. Es hermoso. Es grandioso. Es un libro que nos hablará a cada uno de nosotros y que no voy a dejar de amar jamás, porque esto es lo más lindo de esas pequeñas gemas de la literatura. ESTE ES EL SENTIMIENTO DE ESTAR LEYENDO UN GRAN LIBRO.
“She didn’t overreact. It may have crossed her mind to march down to the woman responsible for sending this charity shitbox, but she didn’t. She swallowed the glint of anger. She packed it into her prim-and-proper voice, and like her son, moved on.”
zoe_library_reads's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
One of the most confusing books I have ever read
_bookgremlin_'s review against another edition
The pace felt really slow and I got bored. 110 pages in and I still didn't know what was going on. I didn't really care about the characters
megansgc's review against another edition
2.0
I desperately wanted to like this book. The Book Thief was so wonderful. Unfortunately this book isn’t as wonderful. I found it disjointed, confusing and hard to follow. Part of it may be that I don’t recall all the details already given very well. But I didn’t find it readable. Got better towards the end and certainly had some moving moments. I enjoyed the characters (once I almost had them figured out) and saw potential in them. But just didn’t get enough of what I hoped for out of this.
hannchilada's review against another edition
3.5
I'm definitely not blind to either the faults or the beauty of this book, so maybe if you're looking for a review that's in between, this is the review for you, since most people seem to hate the book or worship the ground that it walks on.
First, things I really liked:
The tone was gorgeous. Zusak's word choice is consistently breathtaking and there's nothing changing in that here. He really does write his books like works of art, and this one is no different.
I also thought the characters were very vivid. Obviously, he used every opportunity to smash in some characterization, but they were very raw and likeable and realistic and ALLLLL the good stuff, yeah. SpoilerI thought that Clay's leaving at the end was unlike him and also didn't seem to serve a realistic purpose. It just sounded pretty. Ahh, he went to look at bridges. How poetic. I don't know.
In addition to tone, I thought Zusak used recurring symbols very well; I enjoyed the Odyssey as a motif and I always appreciate when we're consistent.
I was a good fan of the suspense with the father as well, I thought that the nickname "The Murderer" was...fun. Gosh, now I sound crazy. Murder isn't fun, kids, don't try this at home! Anyway, it was one specific instance where I thought that Zusak's pacing of revelations was well-placed to hold reader attention.
I also thought the narrator was super fun, as it's something you understand as you go on, but also it feels fresh in that you understand why you're being narrated to by that specific narrator.
Now, things I wasn't in love with:
Honestly, I think that you're being pretentious if you think that the beginning needs to be that confusing. I don't think it served any real purpose except to let stuffy die-hards tell people they're not dedicated enough if they don't finish it.
When it comes to the switching back and forth, I'm not sure how I feel about it as a whole. I mean, it definitely become more smooth and I think it was effective at specific points in balancing both the past and the present as well as holding some suspense. On the other hand, there were stories I felt were too-drawn out and I just wished weren't blocking what was clearly the relevant story, i.e. the Novac past?
This is kind of more of a critique of the actual book than the writing, but I thought that the glorification of Clay didn't make sense and wasn't incredibly necessary. Maybe I'll be thinking about this book more deeply later, but I just feel like it's a step further from any realistic family dynamic, and I wish it hadn't sullied what was such a beautiful and realistic sibling dynamic.
Finally, I'm not sure what this book was written to make me feel or think. I could draw up a couple motifs that I might be able to connect into some themes, but not as a whole. The book comes across as more of a painting than a narrative, so do with that information what you wish. It was definitely intentional and some people would argue it's beneficial. My jury is mostly still out.
I would recommend the read, if you're someone used to finishing books of larger size and slower pace. It reads more quickly than you think!
First, things I really liked:
The tone was gorgeous. Zusak's word choice is consistently breathtaking and there's nothing changing in that here. He really does write his books like works of art, and this one is no different.
I also thought the characters were very vivid. Obviously, he used every opportunity to smash in some characterization, but they were very raw and likeable and realistic and ALLLLL the good stuff, yeah. SpoilerI thought that Clay's leaving at the end was unlike him and also didn't seem to serve a realistic purpose. It just sounded pretty. Ahh, he went to look at bridges. How poetic. I don't know.
In addition to tone, I thought Zusak used recurring symbols very well; I enjoyed the Odyssey as a motif and I always appreciate when we're consistent.
I was a good fan of the suspense with the father as well, I thought that the nickname "The Murderer" was...fun. Gosh, now I sound crazy. Murder isn't fun, kids, don't try this at home! Anyway, it was one specific instance where I thought that Zusak's pacing of revelations was well-placed to hold reader attention.
I also thought the narrator was super fun, as it's something you understand as you go on, but also it feels fresh in that you understand why you're being narrated to by that specific narrator.
Now, things I wasn't in love with:
Honestly, I think that you're being pretentious if you think that the beginning needs to be that confusing. I don't think it served any real purpose except to let stuffy die-hards tell people they're not dedicated enough if they don't finish it.
When it comes to the switching back and forth, I'm not sure how I feel about it as a whole. I mean, it definitely become more smooth and I think it was effective at specific points in balancing both the past and the present as well as holding some suspense. On the other hand, there were stories I felt were too-drawn out and I just wished weren't blocking what was clearly the relevant story, i.e. the Novac past?
This is kind of more of a critique of the actual book than the writing, but I thought that the glorification of Clay didn't make sense and wasn't incredibly necessary. Maybe I'll be thinking about this book more deeply later, but I just feel like it's a step further from any realistic family dynamic, and I wish it hadn't sullied what was such a beautiful and realistic sibling dynamic.
Finally, I'm not sure what this book was written to make me feel or think. I could draw up a couple motifs that I might be able to connect into some themes, but not as a whole. The book comes across as more of a painting than a narrative, so do with that information what you wish. It was definitely intentional and some people would argue it's beneficial. My jury is mostly still out.
I would recommend the read, if you're someone used to finishing books of larger size and slower pace. It reads more quickly than you think!