Scan barcode
liljalunden's review
funny
lighthearted
reflective
relaxing
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
2.0
andrea12345's review
adventurous
emotional
funny
hopeful
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.75
giopep's review against another edition
4.0
Ho letto con mia figlia la prima storia, quella della tartaruga, ma il resto da solo, perché obiettivamente questo è uno dei libri di Dahl non adatti ai bambini (a parte appunto la prima storia) e lei per prima non ne era molto attratta. E, beh, è una bella raccolta, magari altalenante come è normale per le raccolte, specie poi quando come in questo caso vanno a pescare da diversi periodi nella carriera dello scrittore, ma piena di idee interessanti e sempre piena della personalità che Dahl infilava nella sua scrittura. Sono curioso di vedere cosa Wes Anderson tirerà fuori dalla storia di Henry Sugar.
bangalee57's review against another edition
3.0
I enjoyed the stories and even found myself wishing that Henry Sugar was a real person. I probably won't go back and read them again, but I am better for reading them once.
charlote_1347's review against another edition
4.0
SOME SPOILERS AHEAD.
I was impressed with the suave writing style Dahl demonstrated and the quirky originality of his plots.
‘The Boy Who Talked with Animals’ was short and grim with an evocative setting. It teetered on the brink of being unbelievable but it managed to keep its balance, largely because of its realistic humour. I didn’t like the ending – the thought of what that child’s parents went through as a consequence of his impulsive decision made me feel sick.
‘The Hitcher-hiker’ was unremarkable. The only emotions it managed to induce in me were: annoyance at the narrator for his callous speeding, smug satisfaction when he was pulled over and hopeless fury when the hitch-hiker revealed his pickpocketing tendencies and pinched the copper’s notebook.
‘The Mildenhall Treasure’ was my least favourite of the two non-fiction stories. There was no fault to find with the writing and the story was interesting enough but it failed to catch and keep my interest. There was something dry about the prose, as if it came from a cut-and-paste chapter in a textbook.
‘The Swan’ was my favourite story in the anthology. It was dark, gritty and steadfast. Peter was an intriguing character, who kept the peace at the expense of his dignity and his safety and the battle between his survival instinct and his conscience was fascinating to behold. Ernie and Raymond fell into the hooligan mould, a well-used stereotype, so it would have been nice to see original characterisation for them.
‘The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar’ was much longer than it needed to be. I enjoyed it, make no mistake, but the story-within-a-story framework could have been executed in a more concise way. Henry Sugar as a character was believably flawed so it was all the more gratifying to see him mature, to see him develop an awareness of his own privilege and to see him choose to donate his earnings to a noble cause.
‘Lucky Break’ was thought-provoking. It was startling to read about the way boarding schools, and schools in general, were run less than seventy years ago. I’d heard stories about the cane, the slipper and the ruler from my parents but reading about the punishments first-hand made them seem like more of a reality.
‘A Piece of Cake’ was disorienting. The delirium sequence, while an impressive example of Dahl’s recall abilities, made little sense and I am used to such scenes having a deliberate, symbolic meaning. The rest of the story, on the other hand, was blunt, cutting and absolutely fabulous.
I picked this up minutes after finishing ‘King Lear’. I was not expecting miracles and I did not get any; what I did get, was a pleasant surprise.
I was impressed with the suave writing style Dahl demonstrated and the quirky originality of his plots.
‘The Boy Who Talked with Animals’ was short and grim with an evocative setting. It teetered on the brink of being unbelievable but it managed to keep its balance, largely because of its realistic humour. I didn’t like the ending – the thought of what that child’s parents went through as a consequence of his impulsive decision made me feel sick.
‘The Hitcher-hiker’ was unremarkable. The only emotions it managed to induce in me were: annoyance at the narrator for his callous speeding, smug satisfaction when he was pulled over and hopeless fury when the hitch-hiker revealed his pickpocketing tendencies and pinched the copper’s notebook.
‘The Mildenhall Treasure’ was my least favourite of the two non-fiction stories. There was no fault to find with the writing and the story was interesting enough but it failed to catch and keep my interest. There was something dry about the prose, as if it came from a cut-and-paste chapter in a textbook.
‘The Swan’ was my favourite story in the anthology. It was dark, gritty and steadfast. Peter was an intriguing character, who kept the peace at the expense of his dignity and his safety and the battle between his survival instinct and his conscience was fascinating to behold. Ernie and Raymond fell into the hooligan mould, a well-used stereotype, so it would have been nice to see original characterisation for them.
‘The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar’ was much longer than it needed to be. I enjoyed it, make no mistake, but the story-within-a-story framework could have been executed in a more concise way. Henry Sugar as a character was believably flawed so it was all the more gratifying to see him mature, to see him develop an awareness of his own privilege and to see him choose to donate his earnings to a noble cause.
‘Lucky Break’ was thought-provoking. It was startling to read about the way boarding schools, and schools in general, were run less than seventy years ago. I’d heard stories about the cane, the slipper and the ruler from my parents but reading about the punishments first-hand made them seem like more of a reality.
‘A Piece of Cake’ was disorienting. The delirium sequence, while an impressive example of Dahl’s recall abilities, made little sense and I am used to such scenes having a deliberate, symbolic meaning. The rest of the story, on the other hand, was blunt, cutting and absolutely fabulous.
I picked this up minutes after finishing ‘King Lear’. I was not expecting miracles and I did not get any; what I did get, was a pleasant surprise.
nguyen_vy's review against another edition
funny
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
relaxing
medium-paced
3.0