Scan barcode
A review by forever_amber
Parade's End by Ford Madox Ford
3.0
I loved F M Ford in "The good soldier" for his modernist and unconventional views and ways, and I am pretty sure we have a literary masterpiece in "Parade's End" as well, however I could barely stand this novel until the end, and I admit I skipped enormous amount of pages. Please note that all written below does not mean I stop being a great fan of F M Ford! He is amazing at entering into the depths of man's/woman's psyche!
I am pretty sure this book is made for people who are studying literature in university, or are any other professionals in this area.
The story was good, it had a big potential, yet there were so many things left unsaid, despite of the huge amount of words which inhabited these 700 pages. What was the logic in the main characters' actions? Even modernism and post-modernism have some explicable foundation; in real life it is the same. I really loved Christopher Tietjens and his features, but this is not enough for a work of such a scope. I am not concerned with its form (whether it is a novel, a diary, a chronicle, etc.), it is the vast geography (timespan, interpersonal/class relationships, etc.) it tries to cover. I didn't like Valentine at all, I could not understand Sylvia's motives. The only solid character was Cristopher (even though even he bored me in the end).
As to the strict Englishness of the novel, I admit it also posed a problem for me finding any harmony with this novel/diary/chronicle, whatsoever, since I am not a native. And I got bored by the wartime episodes described inside, I found them too formal and again, too many words that practically said nothing.
I think that for many people the better strategy would be to watch the movie/TV adaptations, because the story itself is nice and innovative, even though I think it is totally incomplete, chaotic and deprived of solid foundations.
I am pretty sure this book is made for people who are studying literature in university, or are any other professionals in this area.
The story was good, it had a big potential, yet there were so many things left unsaid, despite of the huge amount of words which inhabited these 700 pages. What was the logic in the main characters' actions? Even modernism and post-modernism have some explicable foundation; in real life it is the same. I really loved Christopher Tietjens and his features, but this is not enough for a work of such a scope. I am not concerned with its form (whether it is a novel, a diary, a chronicle, etc.), it is the vast geography (timespan, interpersonal/class relationships, etc.) it tries to cover. I didn't like Valentine at all, I could not understand Sylvia's motives. The only solid character was Cristopher (even though even he bored me in the end).
As to the strict Englishness of the novel, I admit it also posed a problem for me finding any harmony with this novel/diary/chronicle, whatsoever, since I am not a native. And I got bored by the wartime episodes described inside, I found them too formal and again, too many words that practically said nothing.
I think that for many people the better strategy would be to watch the movie/TV adaptations, because the story itself is nice and innovative, even though I think it is totally incomplete, chaotic and deprived of solid foundations.