the first story knocked the wind out of me. very absurd and well written, had me thinking a lot about the meanings etc
second story didn’t interest me at all i skipped
third story is when i realized that i didn’t have to keep myself reading this. i’m sure it’s literary great just not for me
definitely check out if you’re looking for a unique story, though! which is why i picked it up initially, unfortunately did not know what i was getting myself into
i don’t really know how to rate autobiographies because it feels like i’m rating someone’s lived experience. that being said this book was quite good especially because i audiobooked it with angelou’s narration
it was touching, reflective, and gave a window into a life i never could have known otherwise. i have no experience with angelou besides learning about her in school and probably reading a poem or two at some point. i hope to read more of her books and learn more of her activism going forward
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
i think i’m going to leave this unrated until i reread it in the future. i came in thinking it was going to be something completely different, and my autistic brain kept trying to cram my expectations into this book. i was taking all the allegories at face value and it wasn’t until 75% of the way through that i went “oh” and started comprehending what it was actually trying to say
i liked some of the quotes, especially the one about needing caterpillars to see butterflies. i know that if i ever make it to the sahara one day, i will certainly look up at the stars and hear the 500 million little bells tinkling with laughter. and i think that’s the best thing one can take away from it
i picked up this book simply because it was set down the road of where i live (thanks to goodreads 1 book from each state list), and i did no further research into it. this rating is completely my fault because i failed to check the genre before reading. i’ve never read a book with any psychological or thrilling elements, so when murderous entities sprung up it took me much by surprise—the kind of surprise you don’t want when reading a book
i gave it 3 stars cus there isn’t anything particularly wrong with it, a good exercise in suspension of disbelief if anything. it’s just not for me. i can see why someone would like, though
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
enjoyable and quaint
i had already read the second book, thinking it was a standalone, so reading this one almost 2 years later felt like reading the prologue to book two’s adventures
i love this authors writing style, it feels so whimsical and it has me pulled into the world. i like how there’s no exposition, you just have to figure out the world yourself. what i wouldn’t give for a map, though. oh and id love to see an actual parameter written out
i dont necessarily agree with some of the characters philosophy’s or my revolutionary brother, but it didn’t detract from my enjoyment
i hope the author makes another edition in this world !
was very entertaining to read and i love reading about a delusional/morally bad main character. i prefer my satire to be less heavy handed though, which is why i took off some stars, but the sheer entertainment value brought it back up. listened on my 14 hour plane ride lol
i really don’t know how to rate this book. on one hand, it was an incredibly fascinating read. seeing japan’s point of view before WWII/their view on imperialism was eye-opening. as someone who’s moved to japan it puts into perspective even modern politics
that being said, i don’t want to rate the book which justified the exploitation of asia, comfort women, unit 731, etc 5 stars
if you’re interested in history, or reading a new perspective oft not taught in western school, definitely give it a read. its short, so not much time is lost
i don’t really know how to describe my thoughts to be honest. it’s provocative and unique, that’s for sure.
that being said, tho, i did not get the point of the play until i read the author’s notes at the end. there was a lot going on and it wasn’t really connected until the end. and as a personal preference i don’t really like meta-moments in plays.
i think the merit of this play would be in the discussion that comes from it, not necessarily the actually acts themselves. and since i sit here in a tokyo library with no one to talk to, i can only base my review on how much i enjoyed reading it
in a couple years ill try rereading it with the intended message in mind