Scan barcode
surfmadpig's review against another edition
2.0
The more I think about this book the less I like it. It's got a mix of good and bad qualities but the more thought I give it, the more angry with it I get - that's a bad sign. It feels as if I was cheated out of a very good book, which it could have been but certainly isn't.
Without any prior knowledge of the book or the author, I picked it up excitedly as it is one of this summer's Brave New Reads and I'd just read the brilliant [b:Signs Preceding the End of the World|21535546|Signs Preceding the End of the World|Yuri Herrera|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1398195367s/21535546.jpg|15089950], from the same selection. Looking back, I should have taken the hints offered by the uninspired cover art and quote from the Daily Telegraph. No, the book is by no means "complex" as the reviewer claims.
The author is ambitious - that's admirable. But he has managed to take a good premise for a story and a great idea for the structure and make it into a predictable and uninspired novel, and that's unfortunate. The writing can be interesting at times but the author is trying too hard and takes every little opportunity to provide a quote that aims to be profound - sometimes they are, but more often they're not.
The premise is interesting and interconnected stories and a good-natured, humanistic viewpoint are certainly my cup of tea. But I'm still annoyed. Let's see if a good quote changes things:
- I'm not even sure this makes sense, but I like it.
However, this book is very gimmicky, and the trick it's trying to pull off has been performed way better by many others. It's also rather patronising and has some infuriating inconsistencies.
So a great writer? No. A smart writer, who knows a few tricks to please the masses and is either ballsy or ignorant enough to do so in a very obvious, superficial way.
These things annoyed me:
Random name-dropping of god/God. Yes. Although belief in god isn't shown to drive or help these characters on any level or make any difference in the reality of the novel. The author thought he'd add these mentions in what seems like an afterthought or a half-baked idea that was never truly realised. Why? Is he just trying to please everyone, like a brand making sure that no social media service is left unspammed by its supposedly witty PR? I think so. Ugh.
Another afterthought and major plot hole: the Holocaust. Van Booy seems to be trying to cram in everything that anyone would want to hear about WWII: But Martin was found in 1944 in a burning house in the Nazi-occupied French countryside, his mother's corpse charred outside after some planes dropped bombs on it. So how can he be Jewish? OK, perhaps he CAN be - but his immediate family wasn't in the Holocaust, as it's implied at the start of the book. So why is it implied?
Typecasting much? The character who turns out to have been a Nazi had an abusive father - as if if he didn't, he would have had a choice to not join them growing up in Germany (spoiler: no). He also keeps saying that he had been part of the "hated" although the novel shows no evidence of him receiving this hate - I'm not saying he wouldn't have known about it, but wouldn't you elaborate more if it's so important?
And finally, one more sign of sheer lack of common sense: In France, 1944, an old tree is supposed to still have uniforms and weapons from Napoleon's army in its hollow. As if, in the 100 years+ since they could have gone undiscovered. Just because we want to connect the past with the present - good intentions badly executed.
I think I'll blame the editor, these things they are supposed to pick up on.
Without any prior knowledge of the book or the author, I picked it up excitedly as it is one of this summer's Brave New Reads and I'd just read the brilliant [b:Signs Preceding the End of the World|21535546|Signs Preceding the End of the World|Yuri Herrera|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1398195367s/21535546.jpg|15089950], from the same selection. Looking back, I should have taken the hints offered by the uninspired cover art and quote from the Daily Telegraph. No, the book is by no means "complex" as the reviewer claims.
The author is ambitious - that's admirable. But he has managed to take a good premise for a story and a great idea for the structure and make it into a predictable and uninspired novel, and that's unfortunate. The writing can be interesting at times but the author is trying too hard and takes every little opportunity to provide a quote that aims to be profound - sometimes they are, but more often they're not.
The premise is interesting and interconnected stories and a good-natured, humanistic viewpoint are certainly my cup of tea. But I'm still annoyed. Let's see if a good quote changes things:
"When the moon came out, she exhaled a final breath and the most insignificant part of her slipped away with grace."
- I'm not even sure this makes sense, but I like it.
However, this book is very gimmicky, and the trick it's trying to pull off has been performed way better by many others. It's also rather patronising and has some infuriating inconsistencies.
So a great writer? No. A smart writer, who knows a few tricks to please the masses and is either ballsy or ignorant enough to do so in a very obvious, superficial way.
These things annoyed me:
Spoiler
Random name-dropping of god/God. Yes. Although belief in god isn't shown to drive or help these characters on any level or make any difference in the reality of the novel. The author thought he'd add these mentions in what seems like an afterthought or a half-baked idea that was never truly realised. Why? Is he just trying to please everyone, like a brand making sure that no social media service is left unspammed by its supposedly witty PR? I think so. Ugh.
Another afterthought and major plot hole: the Holocaust. Van Booy seems to be trying to cram in everything that anyone would want to hear about WWII: But Martin was found in 1944 in a burning house in the Nazi-occupied French countryside, his mother's corpse charred outside after some planes dropped bombs on it. So how can he be Jewish? OK, perhaps he CAN be - but his immediate family wasn't in the Holocaust, as it's implied at the start of the book. So why is it implied?
Typecasting much? The character who turns out to have been a Nazi had an abusive father - as if if he didn't, he would have had a choice to not join them growing up in Germany (spoiler: no). He also keeps saying that he had been part of the "hated" although the novel shows no evidence of him receiving this hate - I'm not saying he wouldn't have known about it, but wouldn't you elaborate more if it's so important?
And finally, one more sign of sheer lack of common sense: In France, 1944, an old tree is supposed to still have uniforms and weapons from Napoleon's army in its hollow. As if, in the 100 years+ since they could have gone undiscovered. Just because we want to connect the past with the present - good intentions badly executed.
I think I'll blame the editor, these things they are supposed to pick up on.
nonoemi's review against another edition
5.0
From ARC.
Van Booy might cross into over sentimentality at times, but it's a journey I was happy to take. The lives of his characters are beautiful and painful and full of hope. Even if the final chapter wraps things in a bow of high-coincidence it fits the rest of the novel well, which reads like a letter refuting the value of jadedness.
Van Booy might cross into over sentimentality at times, but it's a journey I was happy to take. The lives of his characters are beautiful and painful and full of hope. Even if the final chapter wraps things in a bow of high-coincidence it fits the rest of the novel well, which reads like a letter refuting the value of jadedness.
wicked_sassy's review against another edition
5.0
"Rain says everything we cannot say to one another. It is an ancient sound that willed all life into being, but fell so long upon nothing." p. 62
"Love is also a violence, and cannot be undone." p. 101
"She came to Glasgow International Airport, and watched him inch along the security line. He knew that he would never come back to live in Scotland and felt the pull of another home that cold never truly be his." p. 141
"He would not have described himself as lonely, but would have admitted that something was missing. He often sat at his kitchen counter wondering what it could be, watching his dogs sleep, watching them breathe, their small hearts turning and opening like locks." p. 149
"Love is also a violence, and cannot be undone." p. 101
"She came to Glasgow International Airport, and watched him inch along the security line. He knew that he would never come back to live in Scotland and felt the pull of another home that cold never truly be his." p. 141
"He would not have described himself as lonely, but would have admitted that something was missing. He often sat at his kitchen counter wondering what it could be, watching his dogs sleep, watching them breathe, their small hearts turning and opening like locks." p. 149
urikastov's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
gracechen64's review against another edition
4.0
At one point of the story I felt that he had mapped out the story too far, that there were too many characters and that it was getting hard to pull everything back together. But he did pull it back together, and with still the amazing simplicity of the poetic prose. I was fascinated by the connections among all the characters and, like always, the writing itself.
booksadaisyes's review against another edition
5.0
Loved this story - so beautifully and eloquently written - I didn't want it to end.
anna4ce's review against another edition
4.0
This was a beautiful short story! The writing itself was incredibly poetic and captivating. It was very easy to read and I appreciated the fact that once it was finished, you have to sit and process the story in its entirety and see exactly how connected we are to one another. A very, very beautiful book!
karenks's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
inspiring
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
5.0
kberry_co's review against another edition
2.0
This book read much more like a series of short stories. It seemed as though I was only given a slice of each story, with so much missing information and lack of detail it felt very incomplete. I really enjoyed the premise of the story line, different individuals across the world and across time and how their lives are interconnected, but the execution was poor.
book_concierge's review against another edition
4.0
3.5*** (rounded up)
From the book jacket This gripping novel – inspired by true events – tells the interwoven stories of a German infantryman; a British film director; a young, blind museum curator; two Jewish American newlyweds separated by war; and a caretaker at a retirement home for actors in Santa Monica. They move through the same world but fail to perceive their connections until, through seemingly random acts of selflessness, a veil is lifted to reveal the vital parts they have played in one another’s lives, and the illusion of their separateness.
My reactions
Van Booy tells this interwoven story from different perspectives and in different time periods. We meet Martin, the caretaker at the retirement home in 2010 Los Angeles first; next we watch Mr Hugo in Manchester England teaching a little boy, Danny, to read in 1981; in 1968 a young boy plays in and around the remains of a downed plane he finds in the forest in France; John snaps a picture of his girlfriend at Coney Island in 1942; Amelia learns to live with her blindness in New York in 2005. And the chapters continue in a seemingly random fashion, introducing new characters, returning to revisit them, skipping back and forth in time, and occasionally giving the reader a glimpse of a connection between their stories. The final paragraph ties it all together for us in one stunningly simple phrase.
The writing is poetic and fluid. I felt immersed in the story, and was never disoriented by the changing perspectives or time lines. Some scenes are horrific, especially during the war. But the author does not leave the reader in these horrible circumstances for long; there are also scenes of great tenderness and kindness. Throughout we see how a small act of kindness – or cruelty – can reverberate through time and across continents.
That being said, I was left somewhat dissatisfied. I cannot quite put my finger on why I felt this way, but there were times when I felt that Van Booy was trying too hard, that the coincidences / connections were too clever.
Having finished it, I was so looking forward to my F2F book club meeting, but the discussion leader failed to show up and the conversation fizzled out too quickly for me. I want to read it again, and I would definitely read another book by this author.
From the book jacket This gripping novel – inspired by true events – tells the interwoven stories of a German infantryman; a British film director; a young, blind museum curator; two Jewish American newlyweds separated by war; and a caretaker at a retirement home for actors in Santa Monica. They move through the same world but fail to perceive their connections until, through seemingly random acts of selflessness, a veil is lifted to reveal the vital parts they have played in one another’s lives, and the illusion of their separateness.
My reactions
Van Booy tells this interwoven story from different perspectives and in different time periods. We meet Martin, the caretaker at the retirement home in 2010 Los Angeles first; next we watch Mr Hugo in Manchester England teaching a little boy, Danny, to read in 1981; in 1968 a young boy plays in and around the remains of a downed plane he finds in the forest in France; John snaps a picture of his girlfriend at Coney Island in 1942; Amelia learns to live with her blindness in New York in 2005. And the chapters continue in a seemingly random fashion, introducing new characters, returning to revisit them, skipping back and forth in time, and occasionally giving the reader a glimpse of a connection between their stories. The final paragraph ties it all together for us in one stunningly simple phrase.
The writing is poetic and fluid. I felt immersed in the story, and was never disoriented by the changing perspectives or time lines. Some scenes are horrific, especially during the war. But the author does not leave the reader in these horrible circumstances for long; there are also scenes of great tenderness and kindness. Throughout we see how a small act of kindness – or cruelty – can reverberate through time and across continents.
That being said, I was left somewhat dissatisfied. I cannot quite put my finger on why I felt this way, but there were times when I felt that Van Booy was trying too hard, that the coincidences / connections were too clever.
Having finished it, I was so looking forward to my F2F book club meeting, but the discussion leader failed to show up and the conversation fizzled out too quickly for me. I want to read it again, and I would definitely read another book by this author.