lenorayoder's reviews
146 reviews

What a lovely little book! I think there's room here for more, but I still really liked it as is. Love the toad. Even with such a short space Miles manages to be such a real, tragic character. Summer itself feels like a character and really lends a certain something to the magical feel of the story. Wish I'd read this when I was a kid!

Read this online back in the day and decided to reread and help my library's stats at the same time. So nostalgic! I laughed, I kicked my feet! 

I'm perhaps one of the few who prefers the old style, so I really enjoyed rereading the first part of this book. I love all the hockey terminology interludes, and they're a big reason I understood anything that was happening when I first watched Letterkenny lol. I still got a rush of endorphins at that

first kiss between Bitty and Jack

. Ah! 

On reread the plotting is a little lacking, but I still really enjoyed this read and have Book 2 on hold. 4 stars! 

To get it out of the way, this is not the most well-written book. Gordeeva isn't a writer, and professes no interest in writing throughout this book. That must be where co-author E.M. Swift comes in... and let's just say dude should have stuck to sports writing. This is a memoir. 

But what's really interesting about this book is what peeks out at you from between the lines. Life during the Soviet Union, the dynamics of the Soviet-era sports club, Russian culture, how young athletes are treated, the isolation of being the youngest skater in a group, Gordeeva's naivete, the strange dynamic of her relationship with Sergei Grinkov... it's all fascinating and a better biographer would have expanded on these things but instead as the reader you just get little peeks at what seems like a deep underbelly. I hope someday someone takes a closer look at this story (and what comes after) and writes an amazing book. 

I know Little Women is a beloved classic so this will ruffle some feathers, but I was so disappointed in this read. I grew up on the 90's movie and loved it, I toured the house when I was a kid, and I've heard enough cool things about Alcott that her letters/journals are on my TBR. But this book was a slog. If I weren't accounting for the first part/book being essentially a children's book and the whole thing being written in the 1800's, this would have been 2 stars. 

The first part has the issue of feeling more like a collection of short stories than a book. It felt like the kind of book that you would read to your kid a chapter at a time before bed. The formula of one or more sisters doing something "wrong," experiencing consequences, and then getting a little religious/moral lecture from Marmee and promising to do better was tiring. It doesn't leave room for any subtlety or nuance, and often Alcott is just telling us stuff instead of showing us. One of the books supposed strengths is it's characters, but they behave in such formulaic ways for so much of this first part that they feel more like caricatures than people. Jo is somewhat the exception to this, I suppose because she's the character based on Alcott herself. 

Some of my favorite bits of the first part are exceptions to the above. Notably, John's story in the Camp Laurence chapter about the

knight wanting to free a captive princess

gives us insight into his character, shows us

how he feels about Meg, and feels quite romantic

without out-right telling us that

John wants to marry Meg

. I love that the

story gets wildly off-track as the "Rigmarole" game continues, but as the last story-teller Laurie brings the story back to the knight

. Alcott manages to convey his

support for John, his love for the Marches, and that he thinks John should be more active about his feelings.

Unfortunately this is somewhat ruined in a few chapters when Alcott feels the need to outright tell us these things, but I loved the subtlety while it lasted. 

The second part felt more like a cohesive novel and I started it with a lot of relief, but it soon fell back into the short-story pattern of the first part. The messages about marriage feel very outdated, and Meg feels like a shadow of herself after

the wedding chapter

. I found Beth's quiet struggle to

accept her fate compelling

, and the talk she has with Jo when she finally reveals that

struggle is very moving

. 

Throughout the book Amy's portrayal has felt off to me, and I finally came to the conclusion that Alcott just... doesn't like Amy.

Laurie's proposal to Jo

being written so beautifully and emotionally while

his marriage to Amy

happens off-screen, Amy's chapters about

falling for Laurie

alternating with the chapters about

Beth dying, Laurie writing a last letter to Jo seeing if she'll change her mind before he decides to pursue Amy, Laurie thinking of Amy as a replacement for Jo, and Amy's only child being named after Beth only to end up being sickly and unlikely to survive childhood

all just felt malicious. Jo and Amy are the most realized characters of the book, but there's just this constant undercurrent of dislike. As children (when Amy is eleven, mind you) they seem to clash equally, but by part two, it feels like

Amy has moved on and likes/admires Jo, but Jo (and Alcott) has this contempt for her that doesn't feel deserved

. I could talk about this more, but it's just kind of unpleasant to read in a book that's supposed to be about the bond these women have. 

I have more Thoughts but this is long enough. I'm glad I read this, but I wish it lived up to the hype. I'm going to go watch the adaptations and try to find fan fiction about Amy. 

I liked this and it was fairly engaging. Some very nice prose. I'm primarily interested in characters and this book is primarily interested in world-building, so it's 3 instead of 4 stars for me. My ratings are subjective and this just wasn't my cup of tea.

i still don't get 4 categories -> 5 bins

First of all: while I recommend reading this book, Orson Scott Card is a terrible person and who knows what terrible things he donates money to. If you read Ender's Game, please do it by buying it used or borrowing from someone, not anything (like buying new, borrowing ebooks and audiobooks from a library app, etc.) that could give that man royalty money.

There’s a lot to love about this book, but the author’s vibes are truly rancid and permeate the whole thing. I like what this book says about empathy, and some of the critiques of military culture and war. Despite some critiquing though, this book never manages to feel as anti-war/military as it seems like it should given the subject matter. The pervasive sexism clearly comes from the author instead of serving as another layer of the military critique. The portrayal of religion and its suppression is strange and doesn’t mesh well with the rest of the book. The way Card depicts and talks about young boys… really rubs me the wrong way.

Card was clearly enamored with the Battle Room and lingered on it a lot, and I think that’s to the detriment of what this story could have been, its themes, and the ideas I found a lot more interesting and nuanced. I would have liked to see a deeper exploration of the computers’ AI (that’s never called AI), and how it manifests in the game Ender plays on his desk. I also think the narrative doesn’t capture enough of Ender’s complexity and inner life. A lot of the characters just don’t feel as complex as it seems like they easily could be. The whole book feels more like a prequel than a standalone, and that’s a shame because there’s so much good material to work with.

Again, a lot to love and I loved this book when I was a kid. As an adult who can read between the lines though... oof.

I liked a lot of the themes and there were some really good lines that will stick with me. Even though I saw it coming the last chunk of the book still made me cry. Felt intensely 2012 and teenagery at times, which I'd consider a good thing given that's who this book is written about and for. 

Unfortunately, a lot of the characters didn't feel like real people to me. The narrative always felt like it was keeping too much distance for the characters to become fully realized. As a consequence I never really bought into the love story as much as I wanted to. That distance also made the timeline feel unclear unless explicitly stated, and as a result the pacing also felt off. 

I see why this was a sensation and I'm glad I read it, but I'm just a little too old (and too into character-focused stories) for it to hit me the way it might have ten years ago.

First of all, regardless of its pitfalls I would absolutely recommend this novella. It's a quick read that's completely worth it. 

The good: The premise and plotting of this book is so compelling. For the entire book you're only told who one of the

Thing impersonators

is, and everyone else is up in the air. When the book sticks to the psychological thriller aspect of this scenario - that

anyone could be a Thing and there's no way of knowing who or how many

- the book is amazing. I love that the book sometimes lingers on the horror of

the Thing

, but mostly cuts away from

heavy action or dramatic

moments that other books would linger on. This often helps keep the tension up and the attention focused on how the men are reacting to these circumstances, which is I think what the book does best. The 30's sci-fi is really fun, I liked Campbell's ideas of how technology might advance to allow a group of people to live for months on end at the south pole, and what they might be doing there. Campbell also clearly did his research, and I appreciate that each character's motivations remain consistent and make sense, even

the Thing's

to the extent of what we know. 

The bad: At times the book is confusing to keep tension and momentum going and build atmosphere, but at time it feels unintentionally confusing. Despite frequently describing minute parts of the setting in language that felt out of place from the rest of the book, I was often confused about where people were. At some point I remember snow being mentioned when I hadn't even realized the characters were outside. I was also frequently confused about who was who since a lot of characters are introduced with little detail very quickly. I think the story loses something when you don't know how many people are crowded into how small of a room, who those people are, and if a scene is happening outside where it's extremely cold and easy to get lost. In some instances the confusing timeline added to the feel of the book, but in others I think it took away from emphasizing either how quickly a situation can devolve or how long the men have been living in a really tense situation. Lastly, while I appreciated Campbell's research in some respects, that man had trouble killing his darlings. There are several instances where characters explain or discuss something scientific or world-buildy. In a lot of these instances, dialogue would have felt more natural and tension/momentum higher if these things had remained unsaid, alluded to, or summarized.
 

Because I love the good so much and I think a lot of the bad can be chalked up to this being written in the 1930's, this gets 4 stars from me. I really liked it! If this had received a modern editing treatment, it would probably be 5 stars. 100% recommend, and it was fun to read during a snow storm as part of my winter challenge. Also, the screen treatment in this edition gets 1 star. Thank god studios went with Carpenter's vision instead.

This book mostly feels like wasted potential. There was a lot to love in the first half - Mary's relationship with her father is heart-wrenching, alternative perspectives of Lizzy, Jane, Charlotte, and Mr. Collins during the events of Pride & Prejudice add some interesting complexity to that story, and seeing Mrs. Bennet framed through a dramatic lens rather than a comedic one makes obvious what Austen only implied in her story. This book's strength lies in exploring these platonic and familial relationships - the hope Mary desperately places in her father (and to a smaller extent, Lizzy) is so compelling to read. 

Unfortunately, this book has a LOT of pitfalls. First, the characters. At some point those alternate perspectives of Charlotte and Mr. Collins start to feel very two-dimensional. Miss Bingley's character is absolutely assassinated, and becomes a weird amalgamation of her role and Lady Catherine's in P&P. Kitty is almost completely wiped from the book, it's kind of astonishing. Mary has two romantic interests, but one barely feels like a real person and the other feels more multi-faceted but

isn't endgame

so we don't get to see more. Mary herself starts to feel less like a real person and more like a pale imitation of other Austen heroines. 

And now, the plot... it barely exists. Very little happens with Mary in the first half of the book. Then, Mary

takes a whole ass trip to London, gets a new wardrobe, improves her conversation skills and

meets... two new people. The romantic plot feels lazy and it's the only thing the book has going on for the latter half. Every plot point feels like a pale imitation of something we've seen executed much better by Austen, sprinkled with less impactful paraphrases of Austen's iconic lines! It's rough. 

The more I think about this book the more holes I poke in it, but at the end of the day it still gets 3 stars from me because I really enjoyed that first half before I started thinking about it too hard.