My reviewer criteria. I like light, entertaining novels. I like smaller scale stories rather than epics. I like character focused novels featuring pleasant characters, with a minimum number of unpleasant ones. I greatly value clever and witty writing. I like first person, or close third person narratives. I dislike a lot of "head jumping" between POVs and flashbacks. I want a story, not a puzzle. While I am not opposed to violence, I dislike gore for the sake of gore. I find long and elaborate fight, action, and battle sequences tedious. Plot holes and things that happen for the convenience of the author annoy me. And I fear I'm a born critic in that I don't mind pointing out what I don't like in a story. However, I lay no claim to be the final arbitrator of style and taste, you need to decide for yourself what you like or dislike in a book.
Your opinions are always welcome. Comment below
Little Women by Louisa May Alcott C+
I have read that Miss Alcott did not really want to write this book. Her publisher did. She favored more livelier and exciting subjects. Nevertheless, write it she did, for the money. Even so, she felt that the first 100 pages were pretty boring, despite praise from other readers. I think she was right. However, the story did get more interesting as it went along, especially in volume two and her publisher proved to have known what readers wanted, as it is the book Alcott is remembered for.
This book turned out to be something other than what I had expected. I have never seen any adaptation of the story, and knew its premise only vaguely - a number of girls living with their mother, who might have been a widow, in the 1860's. Thus, I was surprised to find that the complete story spanned something like eight years with the young girls growing up and having families of their own, as well as traveling to Europe and New York for extended stays. I won't spoil the rest of the story for you, as a lot happens over the course of it that I couldn't begin to summarize.
Perhaps what I found most interesting was that one of the sisters, Jo, is an aspiring writer, very much, I suspect a fictional Miss Alcott. Her struggles as a writer offer insights into what writing involved in the 1860's. It seems that one of the major components of serious novels was moralizing. When Jo was selling her gaudy stories to the newspapers, she had to strip out all the moralizing, which troubled her. Miss Alcott didn't have to do that for this book, anyway. For all I know, she may have skipped moralizing for the more adult adventures and melodramas that she wrote. However, in this story she liberally laced it with a lot of wholesome wisdom and moralizing reflecting the tastes of the time in worthwhile novels. I'm not complaining, just noting the fact.
As I mentioned, the first hundred pages or so are rather dry and episodic in nature, but as the story goes on, and especially in volume two, the writing gets more lively, and the characters deeper. There is, as usual with stories of this period, a lot of "telling" by the writer. But I did finish the story, which you can take as a stamp of approval, though I must admit I did not fall in love with it, as it seems so many readers have before me. I had to choose between a B- and C+ and well, recalling all those long passages of wisdom and sentimentality, opted for the latter
My second title this week is something I came across browsing the Gutenberg Project... I forget what I was looking for, but I read a chapter and decided to give another old book a try.
In Pawn by Ellis Parker Butler C





%20style%203000.jpg)
%20style%203000.jpg)



%20style%203000.jpg)


%20style%203000.jpg)

