Scan barcode
duanebutcher's review against another edition
5.0
This is such a beautifully written book that I don't feel like there's really anything I should say about it. Byatt can make anything interesting. Her prose is beautiful, and her characters are compelling. Everyone should read this. And everything by her.
somethingclearandtrue's review against another edition
5.0
I loved every part of this massive, detailed, entrancing Byatt masterpiece. Even the parts I glazed over, like the news reports, marching us to WWI—this book is monumental, and expertly crafted.
danelleeb's review against another edition
5.0
I'm in awe of Byatt. I just finished this and I'm seriously considering delving right back into it again.
The Children's Book is a magnificent read. An all-consuming, saga-like book that follows the children of a few families who are in the same circle of friends - a group of free-thinkers in the Victorian Age - from the end of the Victorian Period up to World War I. You learn about the characters a bit at a time - a paragraph here, a page or two there, falling in and out of their lives, and somehow not missing a beat - which lengthens the entire experience of the book.
I was mesmerized by the beginning - the boys finding Philip in the bowels of the museum (making me think of that book I loved as a second-grader, From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Franweiler) and the descriptions of the irridescent gossamer that was the magical world of the Wellwoods. Olive, the mother of the large brood, is an author of children's stories, fairy tales. She has sort of a fantasy life with all of them, writing them each their own personal fairy tale and keeping up with this magical world, but it all changes gradually; for all the lightness in fairy tales, there is also much darkness.
The book is about so many, many things: art & creating art: pottery, pastoral paintings, poetry, writing, drama; social class & welfare; social reform; coming of age. It's so much you can't help but be pulled in. But the focus is on these sets of parents who have followed the newly-formed idea of parenting children with freedom and love and encouragement so that they may discover what it is they want to do with their lives; giving them the magical youth the parents often dreamed of having; and how their children lost this youth in WWI.
The historical aspects of the novel are well researched and in abundance. There are so many parts to so many pieces and Byatt ties them all together beautifully. These people may not have existed, yet they exist right along-side those who realy did exist (Palissy, Wilde, Woolf, Kaiser Wilhelm, etc.) Byatt seems to know so much about so many things, and she can write about them impressively - and this is why I'm in awe of her.
It's an intelligent book by an intelligent writer.
The Children's Book is a magnificent read. An all-consuming, saga-like book that follows the children of a few families who are in the same circle of friends - a group of free-thinkers in the Victorian Age - from the end of the Victorian Period up to World War I. You learn about the characters a bit at a time - a paragraph here, a page or two there, falling in and out of their lives, and somehow not missing a beat - which lengthens the entire experience of the book.
I was mesmerized by the beginning - the boys finding Philip in the bowels of the museum (making me think of that book I loved as a second-grader, From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Franweiler) and the descriptions of the irridescent gossamer that was the magical world of the Wellwoods. Olive, the mother of the large brood, is an author of children's stories, fairy tales. She has sort of a fantasy life with all of them, writing them each their own personal fairy tale and keeping up with this magical world, but it all changes gradually; for all the lightness in fairy tales, there is also much darkness.
The book is about so many, many things: art & creating art: pottery, pastoral paintings, poetry, writing, drama; social class & welfare; social reform; coming of age. It's so much you can't help but be pulled in. But the focus is on these sets of parents who have followed the newly-formed idea of parenting children with freedom and love and encouragement so that they may discover what it is they want to do with their lives; giving them the magical youth the parents often dreamed of having; and how their children lost this youth in WWI.
The historical aspects of the novel are well researched and in abundance. There are so many parts to so many pieces and Byatt ties them all together beautifully. These people may not have existed, yet they exist right along-side those who realy did exist (Palissy, Wilde, Woolf, Kaiser Wilhelm, etc.) Byatt seems to know so much about so many things, and she can write about them impressively - and this is why I'm in awe of her.
p.147 There were trees that had been shaped by steady blasts of wind, stunted and reaching sideways. Philip wanted to draw them. They were a stationary form of violent movements.
p.847 Poetry, Julian thought, was something forced out of men by death, or the presence of death, or the fear of death, or the death of others.
It's an intelligent book by an intelligent writer.
teresatumminello's review against another edition
5.0
Really 4.75 stars, but that’s only because it’s by the author of Possession. Without that perfect Possession, I’m sure I would feel this is a full-on 5.
*
It’s a novel rich with rewards for Byatt fans, including all that Byatt loves and that for which we love her. Immediately upon starting the second chapter, I was plunged into her [b:The Virgin in the Garden|86888|The Virgin in the Garden|A.S. Byatt|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1399401834s/86888.jpg|245459]. It was partly the prose, but also the characterization of the children of another brilliant, eccentric family that lives in the 'country'. As does The Children’s Book, [b:The Virgin in the Garden|86888|The Virgin in the Garden|A.S. Byatt|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1399401834s/86888.jpg|245459] starts with a scene in a famous, though different, British art museum and continues with a Shakespearean play. The hints of incest that pervade The Children’s Book remind me of other of her works and that's just a scratch on the surface.
There’s also what I brought to the novel that Byatt didn’t intend. The stories Olive writes in each of her children's books are exactly the way stories of role-playing games (such as Dungeons & Dragons) spool out. As we learn more of Olive’s favorite child, Tom, I was reminded much later of the graphic novel series The Unwritten which deals with another grown child whose parent had used him as the basis of a character (think Christopher Robin, who is mentioned within these pages). During my slow-read of an E.M. Forster biography, I read of Forster's first meeting with the 70-year old Edward Carpenter just after reading of an encounter between a fictional character and Carpenter in this book. My recent read of [a:Constance Fenimore Woolson|182611|Constance Fenimore Woolson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1383608610p2/182611.jpg]'s biography was brought to mind as the struggle of women for recognition as artists (and in other spheres) is a big part of this novel. Finally, just yesterday I saw the title of a Dickens/[a:Frances Trollope|767847|Frances Trollope|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1399824913p2/767847.jpg] lecture I’ll be attending in a couple of weeks: Morbidity in Fairyland—the perfect appellation for this book.
Names are important, not just Olive changing the name of her character Lancelin (which invokes Lancelot, which invokes a painting Olive’s son muses upon), but also the children who choose to be called something different than the names they were given. In fairy tales, names are important too: Rumpelstiltskin is only one example.
The book’s era encompasses a time when children’s literature was popular among adults and I wondered if seeing that in our time was an impetus for Byatt, firing her brilliant mind into several directions. There were a lot of things I wondered about, but mentioning any more of them would be to bring in too much of the ending.
Immersed in the atmosphere, story and characters, I was captivated, happy to be back in one of Byatt's worlds. And though a few times I felt taken out of her world by the increasing amount of facts (granted those were times I was perhaps too tired to be reading at all), all the pieces are essential to providing a picture of the whole. As the down-to-earth daughter Dorothy says (and, yes, The Wizard of Oz is referred to once): “Not abstract. Concrete.”
*
It’s a novel rich with rewards for Byatt fans, including all that Byatt loves and that for which we love her. Immediately upon starting the second chapter, I was plunged into her [b:The Virgin in the Garden|86888|The Virgin in the Garden|A.S. Byatt|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1399401834s/86888.jpg|245459]. It was partly the prose, but also the characterization of the children of another brilliant, eccentric family that lives in the 'country'. As does The Children’s Book, [b:The Virgin in the Garden|86888|The Virgin in the Garden|A.S. Byatt|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1399401834s/86888.jpg|245459] starts with a scene in a famous, though different, British art museum and continues with a Shakespearean play. The hints of incest that pervade The Children’s Book remind me of other of her works and that's just a scratch on the surface.
There’s also what I brought to the novel that Byatt didn’t intend. The stories Olive writes in each of her children's books are exactly the way stories of role-playing games (such as Dungeons & Dragons) spool out. As we learn more of Olive’s favorite child, Tom, I was reminded much later of the graphic novel series The Unwritten which deals with another grown child whose parent had used him as the basis of a character (think Christopher Robin, who is mentioned within these pages). During my slow-read of an E.M. Forster biography, I read of Forster's first meeting with the 70-year old Edward Carpenter just after reading of an encounter between a fictional character and Carpenter in this book. My recent read of [a:Constance Fenimore Woolson|182611|Constance Fenimore Woolson|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1383608610p2/182611.jpg]'s biography was brought to mind as the struggle of women for recognition as artists (and in other spheres) is a big part of this novel. Finally, just yesterday I saw the title of a Dickens/[a:Frances Trollope|767847|Frances Trollope|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1399824913p2/767847.jpg] lecture I’ll be attending in a couple of weeks: Morbidity in Fairyland—the perfect appellation for this book.
Names are important, not just Olive changing the name of her character Lancelin (which invokes Lancelot, which invokes a painting Olive’s son muses upon), but also the children who choose to be called something different than the names they were given. In fairy tales, names are important too: Rumpelstiltskin is only one example.
The book’s era encompasses a time when children’s literature was popular among adults and I wondered if seeing that in our time was an impetus for Byatt, firing her brilliant mind into several directions. There were a lot of things I wondered about, but mentioning any more of them would be to bring in too much of the ending.
Immersed in the atmosphere, story and characters, I was captivated, happy to be back in one of Byatt's worlds. And though a few times I felt taken out of her world by the increasing amount of facts (granted those were times I was perhaps too tired to be reading at all), all the pieces are essential to providing a picture of the whole. As the down-to-earth daughter Dorothy says (and, yes, The Wizard of Oz is referred to once): “Not abstract. Concrete.”
katiehemmer's review against another edition
3.0
You become a part of the world of the families of the Wellwoods, Cains and Warrens in late Victorian and Edwardian England. It reminds me of Virginia Woolf's writings in the fact it details the life of these people over three to four decades, but also incorporating the the history and events during the periods, such as the Arts and Craft movement. Right now I'd say it is a 3.5 stars, but I have been going back and forth between a 3 and 4. It is a good book. Perhaps too in detail of some aspects, but it is in need of these details which form the spine of the book... If that makes sense...
catalogthis's review against another edition
5.0
Checked this out from the library last year, but didn't get very far with it. (Literally. In its hardback form, it was too hefty for my commute.)
However, I just downloaded it to my not-a-Kindle, so the portability issues are now moot. Looking forward to jumping back in.
Update:
Here's how to interpret this rating: four stars for the book itself, and one star for me for finishing it even though the first 300 pages were a bit of a slog.
I'm not usually one for this kind of sprawling, epic, multi-generational historical fiction. I was drawn to the book because of the first protagonist, Olive Wellwood. I liked the idea of her... a late-19th century writer of children's books.
In the end, though, Olive wasn't nearly as interesting to me as her children and their peers. (I guess this explains the title.) And although I lost the thread of some characters occasionally (there are so many of them), the "search" function on my Nook helped to refresh my memory. By the time I reached the last 100 pages, I was fully invested in their choices and fates.
Recommendation: if you're looking for a quick read, go elsewhere. If you have some time, and you don't mind having your narrative put on hiatus by one of several "A.S. Byatt presents a primer on the cultural and political climate in which the next several chapters take place" interruptions, then dig in.
However, I just downloaded it to my not-a-Kindle, so the portability issues are now moot. Looking forward to jumping back in.
Update:
Here's how to interpret this rating: four stars for the book itself, and one star for me for finishing it even though the first 300 pages were a bit of a slog.
I'm not usually one for this kind of sprawling, epic, multi-generational historical fiction. I was drawn to the book because of the first protagonist, Olive Wellwood. I liked the idea of her... a late-19th century writer of children's books.
In the end, though, Olive wasn't nearly as interesting to me as her children and their peers. (I guess this explains the title.) And although I lost the thread of some characters occasionally (there are so many of them), the "search" function on my Nook helped to refresh my memory. By the time I reached the last 100 pages, I was fully invested in their choices and fates.
Recommendation: if you're looking for a quick read, go elsewhere. If you have some time, and you don't mind having your narrative put on hiatus by one of several "A.S. Byatt presents a primer on the cultural and political climate in which the next several chapters take place" interruptions, then dig in.
tracyreally's review against another edition
5.0
This is a gargantuan, detailed, kind of creepy novel. Lots of characters, lots of action, lots of places where you will go nonononono! and then stuff will happen anyway. I would've given it 5 stars, but at heart I am still 15 and some of the political stuff bored me.
chloeb35's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
sxnflor's review against another edition
3.0
loved the story and the depiction of the complex relationship between the families. but it was very verbose
schleviboy's review against another edition
4.0
Enjoyed her writing, which was well suited to the Arts & Crafts world. The first 1/3 or so was captivating and held great promise, but I didn't think the rest lived up to my hopes. It seemed like it wanted to be a historical epic (like War and Peace or even more like The Winds of War) but I think it would have been better with a more limited scope.