Christine's (TineOliver) 2011 Reads

I thought I'd edit this post to show what I've read this year as I go, so I can keep a complete list all in one place.

Books read so far in 2011:

1. Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes (trans: John Ornsby) - Post 4
2. The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien - Post 5
3. The Complete Grimm's Fairytales by the Brothers Grimm - currently reading
4. Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain - Post 13
5. Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight by Anonymous (trans: Charlton Miner Lewis) - Post 14
6. Armadale by Wilkie Collins - Post 15
7. The Scarlett Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne - Post 17
8. The Vampire Lestat by Anne Rice - Currently Reading
9. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button by F. Scott Fitzgerald - Post 18
10. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon - Post 19
11. Love in the Time of Cholera by Gabriel Garcia Marquez (trans: Edith Grossman) - Post 24
12. The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera - Post 26
13. The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood - Post 27
14. The Life of Pi by Yann Martel - Post 28
15. Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov -No post yet
16. The Master and Margarita by Michail Bulgakov - No post yet
17. Carmina by Catullus (in Latin) - Currently Reading
18. 2666 by Roberto Bolano - No Post yet
19. 2894914::Fabulae Faciles by F. Ritchie (in Latin) - Currently Reading
20. Standing Ground by Kay Danes - No Post Yeat
21. Room by Emma Donoghue - No Post Yet
22. Thank You, Jeeves by P. G. Wodehouse - No Post yet
23. The Book of Flights by J. M. G. Le Clezio - No Post yet
24. Revolutionary Road by Richard Yeats - Currently Reading

Welcome! I read Don Quixote a few years ago but was never able to work out my thoughts to do a review (though I hope to this year). I'll be interested to see what you thought.

Will be interested in your Don Quixote reading experience, as I've thought about trying it this year or the next.

Sorry for my absence all - Don Quixote took much longer than I thought, for reasons set out below and I'd been distracted with far too many other activites.

Some thoughts on Don Quixote.

As I've noted elsewhere on LT most of Don Quixote was slow going. Admittedly, I'm reading a public domain version, so the translation is very old and I'm not sure to what extent my boredom with most of it is due to the translation (the language isn't winning me over at all) or the underlying story or both.

The novel does have it's moments though - Sancho's government of Baratavia and the Ill-Advised Curiosity, being a novel within a novel, are my highlights so far. In fact, I think I would have prefered if the Ill-Advised Curiosity had been worked into a longer, free standing novel.

I've seen a few commentaries on Don Quixote which talk about the novel's theme of the 'search for self' and I'm not sure I find that concept dealt with, necessarily, to any great degree. In any case, it's certainly not what I'm taking away from the novel. I think it works far better as a satire of chivalry.

I find the novel also provides an some interesting commentary about love - nearly all of the 'episodes' and adventures centre around it; whether it be Quixote's love for Dulcinea or other characters love for each other.

The concept of 'madness' and how others deal with 'mad' people also seems to get a fair deal of play and it raises some interesting questions: Are some people better of with their delusions - is it better to be happy and mad than 'sane' and sad? Does helping always help? At what point does a particular viewpoint of reality become 'insane'? (Not to mention the mistreatment of Quixote by those who find his madness entertaining).

The Hobbit

I first read the Hobbit when I was ten, so I'll keep this post on my thoughts fairly short, because they're far from my first impressions.

This time, I re-read the book aloud to my fiance - he doesn't read at all for pleasure (despite being very intelligent, he's a very slow reader stemming from a speach problem as a child - he finds reading too frustrating).

I prefer The Hobbit over The Lord of the Rings - more adventure, less war. I also find the character development much better in the prequel.

I do love The Hobbit. I think you are correct about the character development. I love The Lord of the Rings too. My least favorite book in the trilogy is The Two Towers, probably because, as you say, all the wars. I repurchased them for my kindle last year and read them all over again. So much fun!

k4k

Not sure from message 4 if you finished Don Quixote. If you haven't, I would suggest that you persevere. The second part is a bit tighter and less picaresque than the first, although it is still admittedly slow. I was ready to bin it after part 1 but I stuck with it, and am fairly pleased that I did.

>7 GlebtheDancer: That's good to know--I gave up after part 1, and have been considering going back myself.

In case your issue with Don Quixote is the translation, I highly recommend the Edith Grossman translation - I found it really readable.

7 - I've updated my summary a little; I'm hopeful it's now clearer that I did in fact finish Don Quixote. I agree with your comments and I am glad I persisted, but I still found the second half a little slow.

9 - Thank you for the tip! I was reading the John Ornsby translation. I'll keep my eye out for the Grossman one (I may revisit Quixote).

Had a hard time with Quixote, too. I 'read' it in that I turned the pages, took several quizzes and sat through a lot of discussion for a Spanish Lit course but I can barely remember a thing about it.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

I was keen to read this given the recent press re. the removal of offensive language.

I think I need to preface my thoughts on the novel by saying I'm not American and accordingly, I'm simply not as familiar with the history of the African-American people as I would like to be, and I certainly don't thoroughly understand (other than the parts that have been given a great deal of publicity) what would be viewed as offensive and what would not.

I've read a fair portion of literary criticism dealing with the book and it would seem that most fall into two camps:
1. Twain was anti-racism as illustrated by his deliberate attempt to show Jim as human;
2. Twain's novel is racist - Jim is still a caricature of an African American.

Having read other books that deal with the same period, I have to say that Jim is given far more humanity than other slave characters. He certainly comes across as an abolitionist. I think, to some extent, that those seeing Twain as racist are judging him by today's standards (by which he probably would be considered racist) rather than by comparing his views to society's standards at his time. I also think that labelling Jim is a caricature is probably not an indication of racism in this case, many of the other (white) characters seemed equally to be caricatures.

Sir Gawayne and the Green Knight

This was a wonderful story and lots of fun. The version I have, translated by Charlton Lewis, has been translated from Old English into rhyming verse.

The poem it tells about King Arthur's nephew, Sir Gawayne (I note that other translations seem to have this as Gwain) and a 'jest' with a green giant. Gawayne is permitted to land one blow on the giant with the giant's axe. In exchange, the giant is permitted to return that same blow in a years time. In a word, it is simply delightful.

Armadale

A wonderfully convoluted plot involving two gentlemen named Alan Armadale.

I am very much a Collins fan - I can't help but think how pioneering his novels would have been in his time.

Memorable quote: '"No" is the strongest word in the English language, in the mouth of any man who has the courage to repeat it often enough'

This one obviously goes on my wishlist. :-)

The Scarlet Letter - ***1/2

Why I read this now: LibraryThing recommendation, on the list of 1001 Books to Read Before You Die

Will I Like It? LibraryThing says: I probably will like it.

Short synopsis: The Scarlet Letter is the story of Hester Prynne, who commits adultery in early Puritan Massachusetts. Her affair results in the birth of a child, but she refuses to name the father and is punished by having to wear a scarlet letter 'A' on her breast.

Comments:
I think I'm actually being generous in my rating here, simply because it's such a classic. I can certainly see why generations of school children can't stand it. It provokes some interesting thoughts about redemption, sin, the role of religion in law, family and community. What it doesn't seem to have is a great deal of character development, with the exception of Dimmesdale - and I could have lived without reading Hawthorne's introduction which spanned nearly 20% of the book and was littered with dry details about the Customs Office which were largely unrelated to the story.

Hawthorne's prose also didn't win me over.

How would it have worked better? Drop the introduction for starters - either altogether, or keep it much more to the background pertinent to the actual narrative. To be honest, I think it would have been much more effective as a short story - I found for a good portion of the book nothing actually happened.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - ***1/2

Why I read this now: I love Fitzgerald's prose and I was looking for a short read.

Will I like it? LibraryThing says: I probably will like it

Short synopsis: In The Curious Case of Benjamin Button the title character lives his life in reverse, starting off as an old man and ending as a baby.

Comments:
I think I need to revise my rating for The Scarlet Letter; I enjoyed this much more, but I certainly wouldn't give it more than three & 1/2 stars. I very much love Fizgerald's turn of phrase and it was wonderful throughout this short story.

How would it have worked better? I acutally think that it would have been much more interesting developed into a full length novel - it could have served to provide an insightful commentary into the role of aging in our society, but as it stands, it does not quite get there. It also leaves many questions unanswered - what happened to his wife? How did she feel about his treatment of him in her later years? How did his father die? How did he feel about that? How did he feel about the thought of becoming a baby? Did it worry him like it worries some people to grow old?

The Curious Incident of the Night-Time Dog - ****1/2

Why I am reading this now: Recommendation by a friend, on the list of 1001 Books to Read Before You Die, Winner of the Whitebread Book of the Year.

Will I like it? LibraryThing says: I probably won't like it. (Sorry, LT, but you're wrong this time!)

Comments:
Curious Incident is the story of a young boy with 'behavioural problems' (I note that some editions indicate that he has autism/aspergers, however, I believe that the author has sought to distance himself from this characterisation). Although it purports to be the story of the 'murder' of a neighbours dog, it is clear fairly early on that it's more about how people relate to Chris; especially his family, but also strangers who are unaware of his problems.

For me, the most wonderful aspect of the novel is that it isn't (deliberately) depressing, like most other novels I've ever read about people with 'problems'. Sure, there are some sad moments, but I don't think that's the key message the author is trying to get across.

I do note that this is marketed as a 'YA' novel. While the language is fairly simplistic, I think this stems from the voice of the character, not an appeal to a YA audience. (However, I note that sometimes I find YA novels less contrived than 'adult' novels and quite often, more willing to push boundaries).

How would it have worked better? No major thoughts on this one - the missing 1/2 star is just a matter of personal taste.

I have to admit I found The Curious Case of Benjamin Button too predictable for my taste, but I think you are exactly right! If Fitzgerald had turned it into a full-length novel, a lot more could have been done with the characters. That's a very good point. I will be interested to know your final feeling about The Curious Incident of the Night-Time Dog. LT also predicts I won't like it. I am not sure why. It sounds fascinating to me. The only thing I can think of is that there is a death of a dog in there and I have a really difficult time with animal cruelty since I became a cat owner. But I don't think the LT predictor is that subtle...

20: I'm getting a bit behind on updating my thread, but The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time was fantastic. I highly recommend it - the death of the dog doesn't actually feature much within the narrative.

Nice reviews of late. I've been on the lookout for something containing The Curious Case of Benjamin Button since I saw the movie (though I imagine they are only vaguely related plot-wise). Seems like something that would make for interesting discussion.

I quite enjoyed Curious Incident as well.

20 & 21> Thanks! I will put it on the list. Not sure what to do next -- fiction or nonfiction... so many choices!

Love in the Time of Cholera - ****

Why I am reading this now: On the 1001 Books to Read Before you Die list, randomness :)

Will I like it? LibraryThing says: I probably will like it.

Comments:
LiToC is one of those books that I don't think you can review without revealing a part of yourself. I think the interpretation of the reader in this particular instance hinges on life experience (not just length but also the types of experiences) and I can see how completely different arguments could be made about various aspects of the book. So please be gentle on this, I'm being vulnerable here!

I see LiToC being about two key things: 1. Different types of love and 2. Time and ageing.

First, to deal with the love issues, I personally see the novel exploring the ways that love isn't what we think it is. The novel centres at its most basic level around a love triange: Fermina Daza's relationship with Florentino Ariza, who loves her from her youth and suffers thoughout most of his life because of it; and Daza's relationship with Dr Juvenal Urbino, whom she essentially marries for security. Though from the outside the latter relationship appears to be a happy one, on further examination, both Urbino and Daza suffer at various points as a result of their marriage.

The character of Ariza is also fascinating, in that not only does he suffer because of love, but he also causes a great deal of suffering in those that love him. However, the extent to which his suffering is the direct cause of the suffering of others is probably debateable and even in an historical context, some of his actions were probably unforgivable.

Love is not the only source of suffering in the novel, time also features as a source pain for many of the characters. In fact, the story opens on the suicide of a man who has taken his life to prevent suffering in old age.

How could it have worked better? Again, there's probably nothing I could suggest here; Marquez has put together a beautiful examination of the above two issues. The missing 1 star is just personal taste.

Hi Christine,

I noticed that you are reading A Handmaid's Tale. I will be interested to see how you feel about it. People seem to love it or hate it. It was my first Atwood and I plan on reading more.

Best wishes,

k4k

The Unbearable Lightness of Being ****

Why did I read this? On 1001 Books to Read before you Die, librarian recommendation

Will I like it? LT says: I probably will like it.

Comments
Firstly, if you're one of those people who like linear narratives, who think the most important aspects of a book are what happens, not why, how or the implications, then Lightness is not for you (Side note: If you're like that, I'd also suggest you stay well away from Catch-22).

The first half of Lightness is beautiful, flowing prose and deep philosophical thought. The problem is that the book has no climax - the whole book is at the same 'level' and the ending was a little too neat (I mean in the sense of 'tying things up in a nice little package' not that everyone lives happily ever after).

Notwithstanding the above Lightness is a fabulous read and, if you're not distracted by trying to figure out where the narrative is going, it will certainly have you thinking about the way you look at things in life.

Memorable quote: "...vertigo is something other than the fear of falling. It is the voice of the emptiness below us which tempts us and lures us, it is the desire to fall, against which, terrified, we defend ourselves."

The Handmaid's Tale ***

Why did I read this? On 1001 Books to Read before you Die, librarian recommendation

Will I like it? LT says: I probably will like it.

Comments
Like k4k says above (#25) most people either love or hate this book. In all honesty, I was completely indifferent to it.

So, to start with what's good about it, THT is highly readable and it flows very nicely. The characterisation is very good and I had little difficulty imagining most of the settings in which Atwood placed her characters. The prose was nice but not outstanding - in other words, it was neither so good (see Unbearable Lightness above) nor so bad (see anything by Dan Brown) as to be distracting.

So now the negatives. It's hard to read THT without thinking of 1984, which may be an unfair comparison. In my view, 1984 is far superior to the former and I think, to some extent it's because of how far both authors push the envelope in terms of dystopian society and the level of explanation. I think some of Orwell's brilliance was in his subtlety and the way he explained how/why his society was as it was. In my view, Atwood leaves the reader to fill in too many gaps. Also, I think in reading 1984 you could see why people (both men and women) might have initially been drawn into that kind of political system, whereas with THT I could see little of the society's initial appeal.

The other issue, is I had difficulty identifying with the main character, Offred, simply due to personal tastes. I struggle to imagine anyone being that passive in her situation, but again, it may be because I couldn't think about Offred without contrasting her to Winston Smith.

Finally, really a side note here, as someone who knows a fair bit of Latin, her 'joke' was not even remotely funny.

Memorable quote: "There is more than one kind of freedom, said Aunt Lydia, freedom to and freedom from. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you are being given freedom from. Don't underrate it"

The Life of Pi -**

Why did I read this? On 1001 Books to Read before you Die, librarian recommendation, LT recommendation

Will I like it? LT says: I probably won't like it.

Comments
I need to state upfront here that I generally hate metafiction, you know, that story within a story stuff. Especially if you start of with an 'author' you have created to tell the story of another character. Especially in the case where this fictional 'author' only serves to espouse how fantastic he thinks the story of the main character is, it's hard to see how this adds anything to the book.

Secondly, if you're going to start making promises about what effect the main character's story is going to have on me, you'd better be darn sure that is the effect it has.

The Life of Pi begins with an author who is retelling the story of Pi, an Indian boy who ends up stranded on a life raft in the Pacific Ocean after the ship on which his family is travelling sinks. Who else is on the life raft with him depends on which of Pi's stories you believe. The author character says Pi's story will make you believe in god - which it might, but only if you believe in the first place. If you don't, Pi's (fictional) story, is certainly not going to convince you (it also helps if the main character doesn't outright insult you, or fall for an old fallacy (no atheists in foxholes)).

There are a lot of similarities between Pi's story and Robinson Crusoe (anyone else notice how both had companions who might have been tempted to eat them?), and I think both stories would have been better without the droning on about how good god apparently is.

There are two ways in which the narrative might have worked better:
1. Drop the god stuff, the rest of the story would be much better without it.
2. Even for someone who is not a 'believer' Pi's religious views are fascinating, as he somehow manages to reconcile Christianity and Islam with each other and with his native eastern belief system. The author goes in to very little detail as to how Pi manages to do this (given the obvious conflicts between those belief systems) and consequently, I am left with the view that it is not possible to do so. Had this aspect been explored in more detail, I may have been able to turn a blind eye to Pi's pontificating throughout the rest of the novel.

In summary, if you do believe in god, then The Life of Pi is probably a very good read. If you don't, then I'd steer clear as the novel makes promises it can't keep and then insults you to boot.

Hi Christine, Enjoying your reviews. I am glad I am not the only one to be unimpressed by the Handmaid's tale, Margaret Atwood I found it predictable and dare I say it a little boring. I have got both the unbearable lightness of being and The life of Pi on my to read pile.

28 - Nice review. I've got this one on my TBR and it may stay there for a while yet.

29: I kept thinking that I was missing something with The Handmaid's Tale. It's interesting to contrast that with 1984 (which in my view was brilliant) at one end of the spectrum then Anthem (which in my view was rubbish (review here: http://www.librarything.com/profile_reviews.php?view=TineOliver)) at the other. The Handmaid's Tale fits somewhere in the middle.

Is anyone familiar with Margret Atwood's political leanings? I wonder where she fits compared to Orwell and Rand ideologically.

30: Life of Pi is probably worth a read once for no other reason than its following. I can certainly see why if you were spiritual or religious, you might really enjoy it. A look at the reviews here on LT seems to suggest that this is one of those that you either love or hate.

I find your comments on Life of Pi interesting, because I was definitely in the "love" category for it. (You're right, I think, that it seems to be a love it or hate it book.) I am very much not religious, possibly even anti-religious, but whatever the stated purpose may have been, it didn't feel like an attempt to convert me, more like a fascinating look into a completely different worldview from my own. So I took it on that level and enjoyed it. Then again, I generally do like the whole metafiction thing and thought the narrative twist worked really, really well. So maybe that's the difference.

(I totally agree with you about Robinson Crusoe, though. Way too much pious dreck!)

32: thanks for your comments bragan - it's always good to hear opposing opinions on books (I'm always worried I might have missed the point!). I was trying to avoid bringing up what my exact spiritual position was (on the basis of politeness), but I think it's relevant to this discussion. I'd normally class myself as an agnostic, if not an atheist.

Necessary spoilers re. Life of Pi follow:

There was something about the fictional author in the introduction stating that 'Pi's story would make me believe in god', combined with Pi's statement that being agnostic is not a rational position that got me offside (considering Pi had reconciled three opposing ideologies without explaining how that was a rational position). There was also his advocacy of the 'no atheists in foxholes' position that irritated me. I do agree with you though, that his world view is interesting (and quite novel) - I actually would have liked if his view had been explained more (option 2 in my post at 28). Without the explanation (and combined with the 'fictional author's comments), both the story and Pi appeared to me to be pontificating rather than informing (or entertaining). Although, I can see how others might view it differently.

The problem for me is, that aside from those issues, I think Martel's story was very good (and I really liked the possible alternative story Pi gives at the end).

The metafiction was really only a side niggle - I find that unless it's done in a really clever way it just feels contrived to me, but again, I can see how this might not be an issue for others.

You know, what's funny is that the things you point out are positions that usually irritate the heck out of me, but somehow didn't in this case. Maybe I didn't feel it was aimed at me so much or maybe it's just that I found the story itself to be good enough that it overwhelmed my usual objections on that score. Very possibly it was just the novelty of it not actually being a traditional Christian perspective being preached. Unfortunately, it's been long enough since I've read it now that I can't say for sure.

Anyway, I do find your analysis interesting, and totally understandable.

Hi Christine,

Thanks for the interesting reviews. It has been so long since I read 1984 that I can't really compare it to The Handmaid's Tale. I am pretty sure she is left-leaning, unlike Rand. Can't say how she compares with Orwell. I didn't get the feeling that her book was as overtly political as Orwell's or Rand's in the traditional capitalist vs. communist vs. fascist sense. It was more of a "what will society do to save the human race from extinction" after all the toxic chemicals have practically destroyed our reproductive ability. Women then become a commodity (again). I feel as though her message was that Society always takes the easy (and wrong) way out of the messes that they create. Fortunately, the end of the book suggests that ultimately this was corrected.

As for The Life of Pi, while I thought the prose was beautiful, I didn't quite get the point. Like you, I didn't understand why the book would make one believe in God. If people get to choose which story they want to believe, it rather defeats the purpose of trying to convince someone that God exists. You can choose the story you like the best or the one you think most likely -- the one with, or the one without, God. Very arbitrary.

Still reading And the Band Plays On -- a long book! Talk about Society always missing the point - that is a real-life example...

k4k

Interesting discussions of both The Handmaid's Tale and Life of Pi. I read The Handmaid's Tale again last year and I was surprised at how much less scary it was than I remembered. I wondered if it was because I'm now beyond the childbearing stage, but I also think it's because of how much more graphic and violent books, movies and TV are. I think I've been desensitized. Regarding Life of Pi, I'm an atheist, but really liked the book. Wish I had read it more recently, so I could remember if I had been annoyed by those parts you mentioned.

I never really got Life of Pi either. With all the rave reviews and hype surrounding the book I thought I was the one who just didn't get it. But like you said it was how dismissive of atheism and yet able to reconcile three viewpoints that aren't exactly complementary of one another that irritated me the most. I don’t consider myself that argumentative when it comes to others expressing their views of religion, but to dismiss an opposing viewpoint so out of hand to me at least is a little condescending. But then again I really didn’t care for how the book was written in the first place. I almost never made it past the 1st 50 pages.

35: I agree that The handmaid's tale wasn't anywhere near as political as either Orwell or Rand. I actually saw it, is some ways, as a warning against the power of the (religiously) conservative.

37: Perhaps Life of Pi is largely one of those 'preaching to the choir' type things - if you're already on board the faith train then it's fabulous, otherwise it's somewhat lacking. Although as bonnie says above, there are clearly some atheists that enjoyed it. Personally, I think the story without the tiger was better than the one with.

Ok, I'm dreadfully behind in keeping my thread up to date, but I'm hoping to catch up over the Easter (or, for those of us non-believers "Zombie Jesus Day") weekend. In the meantime, here's a very short summary of my thoughts on my reading over April:

Lolita - ****: Some of the best prose I've read. I'm not sure you can say you love a book about someone so hideous though.

The Master and Margarita - *****: Highlight of the year so far, simply wonderful.

2666 - ****: A greatly inspired work. I felt the ending was missing something though.

Standing Ground - **1/2: A work in desperate need of an editor. Interesting story, but couldn't help but feel there was more to it than the author shared (more to come on this in full review).

Room - ***1/2: A bold narrative, but uneven in places.

Thank You, Jeeves - *****: Who doesn't like Wodehouse?

39 - I'm about to start 2666 (probably the beginning of the month) for the Le Salon group read. The Master and Margarita is something I would like to get to this year.

Lolita - ****

Why did I read this? On 1001 Books to Read before you Die, librarian recommendation, LT recommendation

Will I like it? LT says: I probably will like it.

Comments:
What can you say about a novel like Lolita? It's one of those novels you crack nervously, hoping that as you'll read it, you'll see the brilliance so many before you have seen. But what if you don't? Surely it can't be the novel's failing, after all, so many others have read and praised its literary virtue. In other words, in some ways, I feel like Lolita is some sort of grand literary test and I have to say that I started reading it with some trepidation.

...Then after about four pages I relaxed into the beauty that is Nabokov's mastery of the english language. Say what you want about the subject matter of Lolita, there are very few native english speakers who could produce works with this level of eloquence and style.

So onto the narrative. Let me get something out of the way first. Humbert Humbert is a hideous person, I don't think anyone would dispute that (or maybe they would, but I doubt they'd do it out loud). For me, part of the brilliance of Lolita is the fact that Nabokov has made HH so human. I think as a society (and as individuals) we're far too ready to classify people as 'monsters' or 'animals'. We seem to have this idea that bad people stand out is some way, that you can tell by just looking at them or speaking to them that they're evil. Maybe for some criminals you can - but I think Lolita serves as a timely reminder that sometimes the most dangerous people in society are the ones that are the most charming.

The Master and Margarita - *****

Why did I read this? I'd heard good reviews and wanted to read it for myself.

Will I like it? LT says: I probably will like it.

Short synopsis: The devil comes to Stanlinist Russia in the company of a demon, a shape-shifting cat and a vampire witch causing all hell to break loose.

Comments:
I've actually seen some fairly negative reviews of M&M since I've read it and I wonder how much of that is due to translation. There's a lot of word play throughout the work and I can imagine that a poor translation could ruin that. Interestingly, wikipedia says this in respect of translation:

The early translation by Glenny runs more smoothly than that of the modern translations; some Russian-speaking readers consider it to be the only one creating the desired effect, though it may be somewhat at liberty with the text. The modern translators pay for their attempted closeness by losing idiomatic flow.

However, according to Kevin Moss, who has at least two published papers on the book in literary journals, the early translations by Ginsburg and Glenny are quite hurried and lack much critical depth. As an example, he claims that the more idiomatic translations miss Bulgakov's "crucial" reference to the devil in Berlioz's thought:

"I ought to drop everything and run down to Kislovodsk." (Glenny)
"It's time to throw everything to the devil and go to Kislovodsk." (Burgin, Tiernan O'Connor)
"It's time to send it all to the devil and go to Kislovodsk." (Pevear, Volokhonsky)
"To hell with everything, it's time to take that Kislovodsk vacation." (Karpelson)
"It’s time to let everything go to the devil and be off to Kislovodsk.” (Aplin)

I read the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation and whilst I admit that their translation can be less idiomatic in some places, I think it strikes the right balance between a flowing English translation and still retaining the cheeky word play that was so entertaining throughout.

The beautiful thing about M&M is that it works on so many levels: scathing criticism of stalinist Russia, linguistic mischievousness (somewhat reminisant of Lolita), a philosophical discussion.

The other fascinating element of the book is the sub-plot which arises within the Master's novel which deals with the guilt and subsequent redemption (of sorts) of Pontius Pilot having commited Jesus to death.

If you don't have a good memory, I'd recommend taking notes of the characters as you go - some of the names of the Russian characters are quite similar and at times it can be confusing as to whom is being referred at various points in time.

The Master and Margarita is definitely my highlight of the year.

Some great reading you've done lately. Enjoyed your reviews ("comments" ) on Lolita and The Master and Margarita - two books I would really like to read, but haven't been brave enough to pick up. Your reviews encourage me. Also, you can add me to the list of atheists who enjoyed Life of Pi. I didn't think it was a great and masterful work of fiction, but it was playful with belief and storyteling in what I thought was a clever way.

42 - Nice review.

Hi Christine, I'm glad to have found your thread. You're reading some great books and I like the way your reviews are structured.

Christine,
Excellent review of The Master and Margarita. This keeps being added and then taken off my "to buy" list according to the latest reviews I have read. It is now firmly back on.

You make an interesting point about the translations and the example you provide really shows up the differences. It is always useful when reading a review of a foreign language novel to have a comment on the translation.

2666 - ****

Why did I read this now? Literary challenge! (and also a discussion over in the Literary Snobs group)

Will I like it? LT says I will like it

Short synopsis Ok, this synopsis cannot possibly be what I'd call short. 2666 is made up of distinct but interrelated parts:

Part 1: The Part about the Critics centres on four academics searching for a mysterious German author who writes under the pseudonym Archimboldi, leading them to the Mexican city Santa Teresa. While there, the critics hear of a number of murders of women that are occuring in the city.

Part 2: The Part about Amalfitano takes a closer look at the life of one of the characters with whom the critics came in contact during their stay in Santa Teresa and his concerns for the safety of his daughter (and to a lesser extent, his wife).

Part 3: The Part about Fate follows journalist Oscar Fate who is sent to Santa Teresa to cover a boxing match but feels morally compelled to investigate the murders.

In Part 4: The Part about the Murders, the crescendo that has been building hits its peak and Bolano addresses the countless murders directly in this part.

In Part 5: The Part about Archimboldi, the narrative comes full circle and the identity of the mysterious Archimboldi is revealed.

Comments:
So let me get the question everyone who has read this is asked out of the way first, I don't think 2666 would have worked anywhere near as well as a five separate parts. While the first part is engaging and has a nice flow to it, I could not see myself going back for the remaining parts. In addition, the flow and interrelationaship between the parts would most likely be diminished if read separately (i.e. one per year in line with Bolano's instructions).

Part 1
This part is strangely reminiscent of Possession by A. S. Byatt, but in my view, is much better than the latter. Really, this part serves to set up the remainder of the book, both in terms of Archimboldi and introducing the reader to the ubiquitous murders.

Part 2
This part is simultaneously both the most philosophical part of the novel and the part which deals most with every day life. There are some fantastic passages within this part, dealing with paranoia, fear and madness.

Part 3
The novel really picks up steam here and if read alone, is almost like your typical crime novel. I really enjoyed the pace of this part.

Part 4
Up to this point, the issue of the murders seems like an approaching storm - you can see the clouds getting darker, hear the ominous thunder, but it is here that Bolano lets it rip. Nearly 200 pages of the graphic details of the crimes. At first, I was shocked by the brutality and the horror, but as the pages went on, I found myself being desensitised. In some ways, I felt my feelings to the murders mirrored those of the people in Santa Teresa: Initially, I was horrified and wanted the purpetrator(s) to be brought to justice. By the end, I was no longer horrified but (disappointingly) had grown somewhat indifferent to the graphic details and simply wanted the murders to end - I didn't much care how.

Part 5
Some people rave about this part and there is certainly some merit to that acclaim, particularly in respect of the narrative of Archimboldi's life. As a final chapter in the massive work that is 2666, I have to say I was left somewhat disappointed. Surprisingly, I can't even tell you why.

All in all, I believe the investment of time in 2666 is well worth the return, however, for me, the ending lacks something and for that reason, I can't possibly rate the novel five stars.

Hi. De-lurking to say that up until now I have resisted this novel, but your comments have made me decide to add it to my list after all. Thanks!

Christine, 2666 - I agree with you that its well worth reading, although it is a bit of a commitment, especially the slog through part 4. I believe that Bolano was right to say that the parts should be published and therefore read separately. I think its worth bearing in mind that it was unfinished at the time of Bolano's death and possibly some of the parts could have been expanded.

I think the parts stand on their own because of the difference in the writing style that Bolano use, nowhere is this more apparent than the difference between part 3 and part 4. Part 3 reads like a noir thriller and part 4 like journalism. He finally gets around to a narrative story in part 5 and I would have preferred to read this part first and "filled in" with the other parts at a later time.

Hi Christine, this is my first visit to your thread. I have enjoyed reading through your reviews. I'm sorry I wasn't able to answer your question on my thread in time for your review about why I thought the ending of 2666 was clever, but I did try to clarify, if you want to take a look. Thanks for the question. It helped me organize my thoughts further.

49: I've actually seen your review on the work page (and given it a thumb already)! It's really well written.

I think the fact that it was unfinished is probably the cause of my feeling of the book's lacking something. I've mentioned this over in Poquette's thread, and perhaps I should clarify this in my review above, it's not that I think the parts couldn't stand alone (i.e. that they wouldn't work at all as separate novels), rather that in my view, they work better as a whole (or at least all the parts read in relatively close succession). That way, you get the benefit of the juxtaposition of the various writing styles you describe and I think those threads that run throughout different parts are easier to spot when the other parts are fresh in your mind.

50: I've answered your comments over on your thread :)

It's wonderful that so many people have read this recently - I've had a brief read through the comments over in the Le Salon thread. It's really given me an opportunity to think about 2666 in a way I wouldn't have done otherwise.