Take a photo of a barcode or cover
theanitaalvarez's Reviews (1.77k)
There's something about the big Russian writers that makes them larger than life itself. And that's especially true about Tolstoy. In this book, as well as Anna Karenina, we get this sense of something bigger than life. If I'm not being clear, I'll say it outright: I LOVED THIS BOOK. I mean it. If I hadn't loved it as I did, I probably wouldn't have read it in a week. It's a lengthy and dense piece of work, but I was so engrossed in reading that I just couldn't stop. And I was depressed after finishing it. It happens when I read something that is just perfect, and spend weeks telling myself that I'll never write anything so amazing, so I'm losing my time.
In a few words, this huge novel (over a thousand pages!) is about a group of Moscovite families in the times of the Napoleonic Wars, and how the war influences everyone. There's an insane amount of characters, so I'd recommend that you read it with a list of characters(though I say the same with every 19th Century Russian novelist). It helps to see who is who and to keep track of them, because Russians have like at least three or four different names for everyone. So a character may be referred to by their name, their last name, their patronimic or their nickname.
But it goes to Mr. Tolstoy credit that all of his characters have strong personalities, and all of them were interesting and amazing. Generally, when I read choral stories, I'm always looking forward to go back to one of the many characters. It didn't happen with this one. I wanted to have them all together and read about everyone at the same time!
Of course I have a few favorite characters. I particularly adored Prince Andrey Bolkonsky(when he died, I couldn't believe it and cried a lot), Pierre Bezukhov, Princess Marya Bolkonsky, and Natasha Rostova. Andrey was so incredible! I loved him with his first wife, and with his son and when he invited Natasha to dance with him at the ball. The death of his wife was one of the most moving parts of the book, as well as him falling for Natasha. I had mixed feelings about her throughout the book. She was kind of foolish at some points, but her relationship with Andrey was so sweet I forgave her. And then she fell for Anatole. Girl, you have han amazing man at home and you fall for this other guy? Seriously? I hated Andrey a little bit for leaving her, and her for being so stupid. I reconciled with her when she took care of Andrey when he was sick.
By the way, as soon as Pierre mentioned he liked Natasha, that ship sailed. I hated his first wife and I'll admit I wasn't sorry at all when she died. I'm usually not okay with slut-shaming, but she had it coming. Pierre was a good guy and he didn't deserve what she did to him. So him and Natasha seemed perfect. Although I have to say that I disliked the epilogue, with Pierre and Natasha becoming so distant (and she getting fat). I get that Tolstoy wanted to show reality, but these two deserved a better fate, I guess.
Andrey's sister, Marya, also won a big place in my heart. I loved how she took care of her family, how strong she was in the face of danger, how she always helped everyone. She deserved a good man, like Nikolai. I also loved Sonya for her generosity. She was engaged to Nikolai for most of the book, but when she realized he was in love with Marya, she just let him go. It was a nice point for her.
Oh, I almost forgot about Petya, the youngest Rostov. I was beginning to like him and he died! It was so unfair! Seriously, Mr. Tolstoy, was it necessary? I guess it was, but poor Petya was another of my favorites.
It's hard talking about War and Peace. It's an enormous book, filled with life and power, and it's a celebration of life (because all good books are that). There's so much one can say about it, about the characters, the descriptions, the events. I believe it would take a lifetime to talk about everything in this novel. But I've tried. I'll probably edit this review a hundred times more. Everything is so perfectly described that you can almost feel as if you're there, fleeing from Moscow, or going to an elegant ball. And I believe I'll probably read it more than once. It's one of those books, you know?
In a few words, this huge novel (over a thousand pages!) is about a group of Moscovite families in the times of the Napoleonic Wars, and how the war influences everyone. There's an insane amount of characters, so I'd recommend that you read it with a list of characters(though I say the same with every 19th Century Russian novelist). It helps to see who is who and to keep track of them, because Russians have like at least three or four different names for everyone. So a character may be referred to by their name, their last name, their patronimic or their nickname.
But it goes to Mr. Tolstoy credit that all of his characters have strong personalities, and all of them were interesting and amazing. Generally, when I read choral stories, I'm always looking forward to go back to one of the many characters. It didn't happen with this one. I wanted to have them all together and read about everyone at the same time!
Of course I have a few favorite characters. I particularly adored Prince Andrey Bolkonsky(when he died, I couldn't believe it and cried a lot), Pierre Bezukhov, Princess Marya Bolkonsky, and Natasha Rostova. Andrey was so incredible! I loved him with his first wife, and with his son and when he invited Natasha to dance with him at the ball. The death of his wife was one of the most moving parts of the book, as well as him falling for Natasha. I had mixed feelings about her throughout the book. She was kind of foolish at some points, but her relationship with Andrey was so sweet I forgave her. And then she fell for Anatole. Girl, you have han amazing man at home and you fall for this other guy? Seriously? I hated Andrey a little bit for leaving her, and her for being so stupid. I reconciled with her when she took care of Andrey when he was sick.
By the way, as soon as Pierre mentioned he liked Natasha, that ship sailed. I hated his first wife and I'll admit I wasn't sorry at all when she died. I'm usually not okay with slut-shaming, but she had it coming. Pierre was a good guy and he didn't deserve what she did to him. So him and Natasha seemed perfect. Although I have to say that I disliked the epilogue, with Pierre and Natasha becoming so distant (and she getting fat). I get that Tolstoy wanted to show reality, but these two deserved a better fate, I guess.
Andrey's sister, Marya, also won a big place in my heart. I loved how she took care of her family, how strong she was in the face of danger, how she always helped everyone. She deserved a good man, like Nikolai. I also loved Sonya for her generosity. She was engaged to Nikolai for most of the book, but when she realized he was in love with Marya, she just let him go. It was a nice point for her.
Oh, I almost forgot about Petya, the youngest Rostov. I was beginning to like him and he died! It was so unfair! Seriously, Mr. Tolstoy, was it necessary? I guess it was, but poor Petya was another of my favorites.
It's hard talking about War and Peace. It's an enormous book, filled with life and power, and it's a celebration of life (because all good books are that). There's so much one can say about it, about the characters, the descriptions, the events. I believe it would take a lifetime to talk about everything in this novel. But I've tried. I'll probably edit this review a hundred times more. Everything is so perfectly described that you can almost feel as if you're there, fleeing from Moscow, or going to an elegant ball. And I believe I'll probably read it more than once. It's one of those books, you know?
Like every other woman in the world, I’ve been subjected to “mansplaining”. That is, a man has tried to explain me in a patronizing manner, something I already knew. Rebecca Solnit, the author of this book, is the one who coined the term in the essay that gives this book its title. I love this word, because it’s so clear and sums up this experience so perfectly. I also love that the suffix –splain is being used in many different spheres now. I love words, okay?
I really enjoyed reading these essays. They are wonderful. Solnit puts in her words a lot of things I’ve felt and my thoughts. It’s always good to know you’re not alone in that fight. She manages to have humor about all these things that are part of the everyday sexism that we women experiment. But she is also very active when it comes to fighting against it. While the book is very short (you can read it in an afternoon easily), she gets to important points in the battle for women’s rights. Remember that she’s a woman in an age when women still get lots of abuse for… well, being women and being outspoken. It’s even braver for her to make her voice heard.
In the title essay, she is talked down by a man at a party. They were discussing a topic that she had written a book about, but before she could even mention, the man shut her down. Of course, he mentioned the book and asked her is she had read it. He actually gave her time to answer that she hadn’t read it. She had written it.
It may seem a little example of a one-time occurrence, yes. But it’s also perfect in order to show how women of every class and condition are often seen as less intelligent than men. We suffer this in different ways and about different topics, but it doesn’t mean it is okay. Women in academia are often treated to this kind of discourse. I, for one, usually get angry and end up fighting with the mansplainer in question. I know it’s not the healthy thing to do, but it’s one of those things that simply get me. Of course it is an issue for most women, but it is also an issue for men. After all, they are the ones doing the talking-down thing. So the message here may not be really for women, but for men. Though it is true that there are many women who are conscious of this being a problem, I think every woman knows the feeling, even if they are not able to name it. It is men who need to realize why what they’re doing is so problematic and disgusting.
And, you know, STOP DOING IT. Pretty please.
This book is must-read for every contemporary feminist. Or, even better, for EVERYONE, especially for men. I’m a little sorry, guys, but you kind of need a wake-up call to realize how idiotic you can be at times.
I really enjoyed reading these essays. They are wonderful. Solnit puts in her words a lot of things I’ve felt and my thoughts. It’s always good to know you’re not alone in that fight. She manages to have humor about all these things that are part of the everyday sexism that we women experiment. But she is also very active when it comes to fighting against it. While the book is very short (you can read it in an afternoon easily), she gets to important points in the battle for women’s rights. Remember that she’s a woman in an age when women still get lots of abuse for… well, being women and being outspoken. It’s even braver for her to make her voice heard.
In the title essay, she is talked down by a man at a party. They were discussing a topic that she had written a book about, but before she could even mention, the man shut her down. Of course, he mentioned the book and asked her is she had read it. He actually gave her time to answer that she hadn’t read it. She had written it.
It may seem a little example of a one-time occurrence, yes. But it’s also perfect in order to show how women of every class and condition are often seen as less intelligent than men. We suffer this in different ways and about different topics, but it doesn’t mean it is okay. Women in academia are often treated to this kind of discourse. I, for one, usually get angry and end up fighting with the mansplainer in question. I know it’s not the healthy thing to do, but it’s one of those things that simply get me. Of course it is an issue for most women, but it is also an issue for men. After all, they are the ones doing the talking-down thing. So the message here may not be really for women, but for men. Though it is true that there are many women who are conscious of this being a problem, I think every woman knows the feeling, even if they are not able to name it. It is men who need to realize why what they’re doing is so problematic and disgusting.
And, you know, STOP DOING IT. Pretty please.
This book is must-read for every contemporary feminist. Or, even better, for EVERYONE, especially for men. I’m a little sorry, guys, but you kind of need a wake-up call to realize how idiotic you can be at times.
I had wanted to read this book for ages. One of my instructors in my university loves him very much, and she recommended me this one (we discussed it over email when I finished it). I had a lot of expectations regarding Tess, and I think it fulfilled them.
Tess is a girl from a very impoverished family, the Durbeyfields. Apparently, the Durbeyfields used to be D’Ubervilles before, but time and poverty had corrupted the last name. When he hears that from a priest, Mr. Durbeyfield, his supposed past goes to his head. And when he learns about a rich D’Uberville family in another town, he decides that the next logical step is to send his eldest daughter to him. Yes, that’s Tess. And yes, shit happens. Her “cousin”(He’s not really related to her, his family bought the name) Alec is very attracted to her, and ends up raping her. And getting her pregnant. As the novel is set in Victorian England, more shit is bound to happen.
The baby (called Sorrow, for subtlety’s sake) dies and Tess manages to get him interred in the cemetery of the church, despite the fact that the priest didn’t want to bury him there, because he was illegitimate. Then, she goes to work as a milkmaid, to help sustain her family (given that the plan of marrying her to a rich cousin miserably failed). There, she meets the famous Angel (well, actually they meet early in the book, but they don’t really talk much). He falls for her (she’s pretty and nice) and asks her to marry him. Though she at first is insecure about the whole affair, Tess accepts him.
It would seem that her life could be solved. But no. This is a HARDY NOVEL. And yes, this means that shit keeps happening.
The problem comes when he discovers that she’s not a virgin (see: raped by creepy cousin). He isn’t a virgin either, but he has the freaking gull to call her out on it. Seriously. He’s also very conflicted about her lack of virginity (his doesn’t seem to be a problem at all). Because women having sexual desire are automatically whores, despite the fact that their first experience was, you know, RAPE). Men can do anything apparently, and nobody really cares. Women are whores.
So, Angel leaves and goes to Brazil, leaving Tess on her own. Though he does give her some money, it’s not enough to keep her and help her family, so she needs to look for it somewhere else.
You probably guess what happens now. More shit.
Alec (the creepy cousin) appears again. Tess’ parents are dead and she’s in charge of all her little siblings.
He says he’s been converted, but after a short while he shows that he’s still the little shit he was at the beginning. He offers Tess to be his mistress, so she can sustain her siblings. Being a woman in Victorian English, she doesn’t really have a lot of choices (which makes her really interesting if you’ve read Far from the Madding Crowd and were amazed by Bathsheba Everdene).
Then, Angel returns. He’s very much willing to make up for his shitty treatment of Tess, but now it is she who doesn’t want him back (for obvious reasons). The thing is that it isn’t really so, she does love him still (WHY?). So she kills Alec (good for you, girl) and runs away with Angel (WHY?).
Of course, given her really crappy luck, she is caught and hanged for the murder. The ending is pretty bleak, because we all kind of wished she got free. But not. She dies. This is not fair. Supposedly, part of Hardy’s signature style is how depressive he is. This shows it perfectly.
Other than that, the book is good. It’s very clear that Hardy isn’t condemning Tess. He actually seems to be condemning society as a whole, for failing her. She is a “pure woman” (come on, it’s the novel’s subtitle) and shown as a decent human being in a crappy world.
Tess is a girl from a very impoverished family, the Durbeyfields. Apparently, the Durbeyfields used to be D’Ubervilles before, but time and poverty had corrupted the last name. When he hears that from a priest, Mr. Durbeyfield, his supposed past goes to his head. And when he learns about a rich D’Uberville family in another town, he decides that the next logical step is to send his eldest daughter to him. Yes, that’s Tess. And yes, shit happens. Her “cousin”
The baby (called Sorrow, for subtlety’s sake) dies and Tess manages to get him interred in the cemetery of the church, despite the fact that the priest didn’t want to bury him there, because he was illegitimate. Then, she goes to work as a milkmaid, to help sustain her family (given that the plan of marrying her to a rich cousin miserably failed). There, she meets the famous Angel (well, actually they meet early in the book, but they don’t really talk much). He falls for her (she’s pretty and nice) and asks her to marry him. Though she at first is insecure about the whole affair, Tess accepts him.
It would seem that her life could be solved. But no. This is a HARDY NOVEL. And yes, this means that shit keeps happening.
The problem comes when he discovers that she’s not a virgin (see: raped by creepy cousin). He isn’t a virgin either, but he has the freaking gull to call her out on it. Seriously. He’s also very conflicted about her lack of virginity (his doesn’t seem to be a problem at all). Because women having sexual desire are automatically whores, despite the fact that their first experience was, you know, RAPE). Men can do anything apparently, and nobody really cares. Women are whores.
So, Angel leaves and goes to Brazil, leaving Tess on her own. Though he does give her some money, it’s not enough to keep her and help her family, so she needs to look for it somewhere else.
You probably guess what happens now. More shit.
Alec (the creepy cousin) appears again. Tess’ parents are dead and she’s in charge of all her little siblings.
He says he’s been converted, but after a short while he shows that he’s still the little shit he was at the beginning. He offers Tess to be his mistress, so she can sustain her siblings. Being a woman in Victorian English, she doesn’t really have a lot of choices (which makes her really interesting if you’ve read Far from the Madding Crowd and were amazed by Bathsheba Everdene).
Then, Angel returns. He’s very much willing to make up for his shitty treatment of Tess, but now it is she who doesn’t want him back (for obvious reasons). The thing is that it isn’t really so, she does love him still (WHY?). So she kills Alec (good for you, girl) and runs away with Angel (WHY?).
Of course, given her really crappy luck, she is caught and hanged for the murder. The ending is pretty bleak, because we all kind of wished she got free. But not. She dies. This is not fair. Supposedly, part of Hardy’s signature style is how depressive he is. This shows it perfectly.
Other than that, the book is good. It’s very clear that Hardy isn’t condemning Tess. He actually seems to be condemning society as a whole, for failing her. She is a “pure woman” (come on, it’s the novel’s subtitle) and shown as a decent human being in a crappy world.
My first Hardy! I’ll admit I only read it this because the movie was coming out (though not in my country, sadly). And one of my instructors at university loves Hardy, and told me to read him (she may have suggested Tess of the D’Ubervilles, but I picked this one instead). My first encounter with him was a beautiful poem called “The Voice”, which is also a very nice read.
The novel is about Bathsheba, a young girl who inherits a farm and a huge fortune from a distant family member. She’s confronted by three main suitors: the sexy Gabriel Oak (he actually meets her before her fortune change and wanted to marry her then), rich William Boldwood (a total bore) and Sgt. Frank Troy (kind of a hot mess, like Wickham in Pride and Prejudice).
Bathsheba Everdene is an awesome female character. She’s strong and very capable to hold her own before the men in her life. Yes, she falls for the hot mess, but she’s not defined by him (or any of her suitors, for that matter). And she has one of the best answers I’ve ever read: “It is difficult for a woman to define her feelings in a language that is chiefly made by men to express theirs.” There you have it, feminist icon in one sentence. And even if she didn’t s say that, she also refuse to get married without love (remember: Victorian England), lead her business very well and so on. Bathsheba became one of my favorite female characters in classic literature. It’s hard not to like her, though. She is just really cool and brave.
I know that one is supposed to take classics “very seriously”, because they are “Great Works of Art”. But I happen to hate reverence and I really enjoy fangirling. So yes, I fangirled HARD while I read this book. Blame fantastic Gabriel Oak and almost everything he said. I’m a bit of a sucker for that kind of romantic hero (take that, Heathcliff). He falls in love with her at the beginning and doesn’t become a bore when Bathsheba tells him not, though he is still present in her life. He doesn’t pressure her in the way Boldwood does, he waits for her to make a decision. So he’s also a very awesome character. How could that girl resist such a gorgeous man, I’ll never understand. Though if all that didn’t happen, I wouldn’t care for him in the least.
Boldwood and Troy are fairly boring. I couldn’t really care for them at all. I just wanted them to get away so I could enjoy Gabriel’s sexiness and cuteness. Boldwood was the typical man who can’t have a no for an answer (shitty move), while Troy wasn’t really in love with Bathsheba. Gabriel was the best, I insist.
Do yourself a favour and read this book. It’s a must if you love classics, awesome female characters and romance. Oh, and sexy farm-men. I’ll go and watch the film (the DVD comes out this week!), and complain about all the changes they made.
The novel is about Bathsheba, a young girl who inherits a farm and a huge fortune from a distant family member. She’s confronted by three main suitors: the sexy Gabriel Oak (he actually meets her before her fortune change and wanted to marry her then), rich William Boldwood (a total bore) and Sgt. Frank Troy (kind of a hot mess, like Wickham in Pride and Prejudice).
Bathsheba Everdene is an awesome female character. She’s strong and very capable to hold her own before the men in her life. Yes, she falls for the hot mess, but she’s not defined by him (or any of her suitors, for that matter). And she has one of the best answers I’ve ever read: “It is difficult for a woman to define her feelings in a language that is chiefly made by men to express theirs.” There you have it, feminist icon in one sentence. And even if she didn’t s say that, she also refuse to get married without love (remember: Victorian England), lead her business very well and so on. Bathsheba became one of my favorite female characters in classic literature. It’s hard not to like her, though. She is just really cool and brave.
I know that one is supposed to take classics “very seriously”, because they are “Great Works of Art”. But I happen to hate reverence and I really enjoy fangirling. So yes, I fangirled HARD while I read this book. Blame fantastic Gabriel Oak and almost everything he said. I’m a bit of a sucker for that kind of romantic hero (take that, Heathcliff). He falls in love with her at the beginning and doesn’t become a bore when Bathsheba tells him not, though he is still present in her life. He doesn’t pressure her in the way Boldwood does, he waits for her to make a decision. So he’s also a very awesome character. How could that girl resist such a gorgeous man, I’ll never understand. Though if all that didn’t happen, I wouldn’t care for him in the least.
Boldwood and Troy are fairly boring. I couldn’t really care for them at all. I just wanted them to get away so I could enjoy Gabriel’s sexiness and cuteness. Boldwood was the typical man who can’t have a no for an answer (shitty move), while Troy wasn’t really in love with Bathsheba. Gabriel was the best, I insist.
Do yourself a favour and read this book. It’s a must if you love classics, awesome female characters and romance. Oh, and sexy farm-men. I’ll go and watch the film (the DVD comes out this week!), and complain about all the changes they made.
This is one of those books that have stayed in my to-read list for AGES. I think I added it when I watched The Dead Poets Society and heard the line: “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately”. I wanted to hear more from the man who could write such a perfect and lovely little phrase. I just didn’t have the time then. But then along came Classic Alice and their Walden-themed episodes. It was the excuse I needed to pick it up.
For those of you who weren’t attending in Literature 101 (or like, in life): Henry David Thoreau decided to live for two years (though in the book he says he was there for only one, for narrative purposes) in a cabin in the woods (Fun Fact: It was Ralph Waldo Emerson’s land, actually). He built it himself, and intended to cultivate his own food and so on. The idea was to spend his time reflecting away from the busy life of the cities and so on (that’s why he was a Transcendentalist). I may be talking only for me, but the idea doesn’t really sound that bad. And it’s fun to see that the idea of “alienation” that we supposedly feel in this day and age is not anything really new. It has always been there, even when they were not screens and that kind of stuff. So, there goes the argument of crazy apocalyptic people: we are not doomed. We can still last for a hundred years or so.
On the other hand, I’m not sure I could do this. I mean, I’d love to, theoretically. I like being alone, having lots of time for myself and being alone rings heavenly to me. But then, it’s an awful lot of work: cultivate vegetables, clean, build, fix stuff and all that. Life’s hard in the country. And no internet? Let’s just face it. I wouldn’t last a day there. That’s not going to happen any day soon. Nevertheless, I enjoyed Walden a lot. Thoreau is a brilliant author and he writes very vividly. It’s fun, because there isn’t too much action here. The novel is quiet and tranquil, like a stroll in the woods in a nice day. He does describe the hardships of the life there, but nature seems to take the bigger role here, and he describes beautifully.
“On Civil Disobedience” is an essay that Thoreau wrote because of his stance on the Mexican War (1846-1848) and slavery (before the Civil War). In it, he calls for citizens to have a critical outlook on society. He argues that it is one’s duty to fight the government if it is doing something wrong. Basically, he says that disobeying the law if it’s unfair, it’s a duty of a good citizen. He’s calling for revolution, in other words. It was really cool to read, because his ideas are very interesting. I actually agreed with several of them, because they made sense. Unfairness is unfairness and it doesn’t matter from whom does it come.
If you like long meditative books, you can give it a try. If you want loads of action, maybe you should read something else, though.
For those of you who weren’t attending in Literature 101 (or like, in life): Henry David Thoreau decided to live for two years (though in the book he says he was there for only one, for narrative purposes) in a cabin in the woods (Fun Fact: It was Ralph Waldo Emerson’s land, actually). He built it himself, and intended to cultivate his own food and so on. The idea was to spend his time reflecting away from the busy life of the cities and so on (that’s why he was a Transcendentalist). I may be talking only for me, but the idea doesn’t really sound that bad. And it’s fun to see that the idea of “alienation” that we supposedly feel in this day and age is not anything really new. It has always been there, even when they were not screens and that kind of stuff. So, there goes the argument of crazy apocalyptic people: we are not doomed. We can still last for a hundred years or so.
On the other hand, I’m not sure I could do this. I mean, I’d love to, theoretically. I like being alone, having lots of time for myself and being alone rings heavenly to me. But then, it’s an awful lot of work: cultivate vegetables, clean, build, fix stuff and all that. Life’s hard in the country. And no internet? Let’s just face it. I wouldn’t last a day there. That’s not going to happen any day soon. Nevertheless, I enjoyed Walden a lot. Thoreau is a brilliant author and he writes very vividly. It’s fun, because there isn’t too much action here. The novel is quiet and tranquil, like a stroll in the woods in a nice day. He does describe the hardships of the life there, but nature seems to take the bigger role here, and he describes beautifully.
“On Civil Disobedience” is an essay that Thoreau wrote because of his stance on the Mexican War (1846-1848) and slavery (before the Civil War). In it, he calls for citizens to have a critical outlook on society. He argues that it is one’s duty to fight the government if it is doing something wrong. Basically, he says that disobeying the law if it’s unfair, it’s a duty of a good citizen. He’s calling for revolution, in other words. It was really cool to read, because his ideas are very interesting. I actually agreed with several of them, because they made sense. Unfairness is unfairness and it doesn’t matter from whom does it come.
If you like long meditative books, you can give it a try. If you want loads of action, maybe you should read something else, though.
