hauban's review against another edition
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
Content Warnings
Moderate: Confinement
Minor: Antisemitism, War, and Murder
steve_t's review
3.0
The Keeper of Antiquities was an interesting, yet flawed book. I really enjoyed the main character and the atmosphere of bureaucratic paranoia. Moreover, it was occasionally funny. The very idea of a museum keeper who does his best to avoid collecting artifacts was hilarious for me.
However, the book could have used another edit. Sometimes personality traits are directly contradictory. For example, one character is described as being uniformed and always asking the wrong questions. Later he is described as intelligent and continually learning through asking good questions.
The ending also felt rushed, as if it petered out rather than concluded. Given the way the main character acted, I was confident that a different ending was supposed to have be written.
There was also a complete misunderstanding of Nietzsche. Perhaps it was a demonstration of ignorance by the main character, but I can also see it as the fault of the writer. This especially pissed me off since Nietzsche promoted the exact opposite of what was proposed in this book. Its stuff like this that makes me wish it was edited more carefully.
And although not a criticism of the writer, I found the back of the book description to be both interesting and misleading. Although there was a control over truth, the fight was over the dissemination of knowledge, rather than “over the meaning of the past.” The enemy was not any one person, but entity of the Soviet government overall. The Chief Librarian was a small enemy, and more of a representation of the Soviet entity, rather than anything in their own right, in my opinion.
Although I cannot recommend, the peak into Soviet era secret police was worth it.
However, the book could have used another edit. Sometimes personality traits are directly contradictory. For example, one character is described as being uniformed and always asking the wrong questions. Later he is described as intelligent and continually learning through asking good questions.
The ending also felt rushed, as if it petered out rather than concluded. Given the way the main character acted, I was confident that a different ending was supposed to have be written.
There was also a complete misunderstanding of Nietzsche. Perhaps it was a demonstration of ignorance by the main character, but I can also see it as the fault of the writer. This especially pissed me off since Nietzsche promoted the exact opposite of what was proposed in this book. Its stuff like this that makes me wish it was edited more carefully.
And although not a criticism of the writer, I found the back of the book description to be both interesting and misleading. Although there was a control over truth, the fight was over the dissemination of knowledge, rather than “over the meaning of the past.” The enemy was not any one person, but entity of the Soviet government overall. The Chief Librarian was a small enemy, and more of a representation of the Soviet entity, rather than anything in their own right, in my opinion.
Although I cannot recommend, the peak into Soviet era secret police was worth it.
More...