I went into Zamyatin’s ‘We’ predicting it to be a five star, it being the dystopian that inspired ‘1984’: my favourite book. I was not at all disappointed. ‘We’ depicts a future ‘utopian’ society where everybody lives in perfect happiness in entirely structured days, but in the trend of supposedly utopian worlds the reality is overwhelmingly dystopian. The governance of OneState has citizens with no agency nor identity, only known as a number, and an election system where all unanimously agree to vote in the same Benefactor publicly, resulting in punishment if he is voted against yet the level of indoctrination is so great all conform anyhow.
‘We’ seems to have done more than inspire ‘1984’. So many elements of each dystopia were strikingly similar, from character roles and arcs to the worldbuilding and some overlaps in plot line, but was just different enough to the extent I was more than satisfied with each text standing on its own two feet. I was however very taken aback by how much Orwell was influenced by, ‘We’ writing in opposition to the soviet state Zamyatin lived under and therefore even author motivations overlapping, I couldn’t help but be slightly disheartened that all these overlaps slightly negate Orwell’s individual creativity and genius, for frankly it was not particularly individual.
Maybe it was that personal bias that just stopped ‘We’ from being five stars, but it didn’t seem quite there. I loved the themes and world building, found myself in visible shock at the twists and the sense of futility throughout the book is a feeling I really enjoy and think is so great to analyse and painfully realistic. I did however find the protagonist D-503 a little flat and the plot was told through his records that he took almost alike to a diary, therefore there were parts that did feel a little distanced, limiting the effectiveness of the plot in areas. The descriptions of R-13, the only minority character, really weren’t great either. Hence’ We’ had some limitations that I feel Orwell bettered, but in almost rivalling ‘1984’ in my enjoyment of a futile dystopian is a huge credit given how highly I commend the book that ‘We’ helped to create.
(In beginning ‘The Time Machine’, opportunity arises to backlog ‘War of the Worlds’: read pre-downloading storygraph)
For a book about the martian invasion of earth, H.G Wells couldn’t make it more dull. I read this very young in my experience with classics and as a text that I studied in high school so need to give it the benefit of the doubt that a negative opinion would’ve been encouraged by the circumstance, however I do recall absolutely hating it and have revisited sections of the book more recently and such haven’t encouraged much of an opinion shift. The narrator character lacked so much personality and was such a dull protagonist and the ending was so anticlimactic it was extremely disappointing. The role of the Artilleryman was a redeeming beacon of light however. I don’t have loads to say as this was a book I read so long ago but am hoping revisiting Wells may amend my opinion a little.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.25
Hardy’s ‘Tess of the d’urberville’s’ is the story of the country girl Tess in her discovery that she is of upper class descent. It follows her love affairs and social ruin as she just tries to keep on her feet getting jobs at various dairies. Most of ‘Tess of the d’urberville’s’ played out as a typical victorian period classic, just Hardy placing a lesser emphasis on the upper class areas, but the twist in the ending genuinely subverted my ideas about the whole book and I was pleasantly surprised, bumping my rating up a little bit.
I haven’t read anything else by Hardy yet but with knowledge of the titles of his other books was impressed to find an overlap with a focus in the areas os Wessex and Casterbridge, and am intrigued to see how much, if at all, the universes of the novels intertwine. Tess as a protagonist character wasn’t written awfully, more a standard you can expect from Male Victorian writers towards women. As protagonist she had some agency but her main character conflicts were as a result of her attempts to conform to patriarchal standards of which she willingly obliged to. She was by no means a groundbreaking female lead.
Aside from the last couple of chapters, ‘Tess of the d’urberville’s’ was not bad but nothing remarkable, very much as I expected in terms of the plot, style and my engagement with the story.
‘A Cup of Sake Beneath the Cherry Trees’ is the musings of a 13th Century Japanese monk as he writes his ideas on living a fulfilled life in the short time one has on earth. Kenkō’s buddhist teachings are evident in the collections of his thoughts, a heavy condemnation of alcohol, love and marriage throughout but also exceptions raised for the joy of a cup of sake among friends. It focuses on the value of intellectual discussion but also time to oneself used in your own musings, a personal favourite snippet of mine being:
“It is a most wonderful comfort to sit alone beneath a lamp, book spread before you, and commune with someone from the past whom you have never met”
I found myself drawing many similarities between Kenkō and Gibran’s ‘The Prophet’ in the texts structures, freehand discussion of many themes and teachings, though I found Kenkō to bring a lot more peace and seem more self-confident in his musings. His ideas just felt much more applicable and calming. Whilst I will not be pursuing buddhist spiritualism, (there are elements I am in disagreement with) it is an idealistic way of life we can take a lot from.
O’Farrell’s ‘Hamnet’ is a very slow paced look into the lives of Shakespeares family. It focuses on his daughter Judith’s contraction of the plague whilst he is away in London and places emphasis on those family members with their stories far lesser told by refusing to name Shakespeare at any point, instead referring to him as ‘The Father’, ‘The Husband’ etc. This is at least what it tries to be, it was a clever plot decision however the boom is structured in alternate chapters looking at the children and Agnes in the present timeline, and then how Agnes met William and their marriage, hence a lot of the story is in fact focused on Shakespeare himself and I found myself much preferring the chapters focusing on the children.
‘Hamnet’ was very readable, its plot not encompassing loads but still proving engaging. I especially enjoyed the later intermingling of the London playhouse life though it plays such a small role and is supposed to be out of focus across most of the novel. I did find Agnes to be not the greatest of protagonists, she was very predictable and unchanging, the extent of her grief also a little long perhaps, therefore with a book titled Hamnet I would’ve loved a little more of him where it was possible.
Stevenson’s ‘The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’ is a book that everyone recognises the story of without having read it. That meant that when there was nothing else in the book other than the character archetype of Jekyll and Hyde that was already familiar it failed to offer much. It is a classic gothic style, the titular characters serving as a physical representation of the moral good and moral evil in man, and serving this purpose they each are quite one-dimensional, not to mention the characters around Jekyll and Hyde such as the protagonist Utterson have no development whatsoever. As a concept ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ has a lot of merit and holds its legacy in popular culture for a reason, though beyond that the plot is mostly unengaging. I place blame on this because Utterson was very distant from the interesting elements of the story, in a traditional gothic fashion I suppose, the main events and points of interest being told in an epistolary format. Though this happens in the great gothic such as ‘Frankenstein’ and ‘Dracula’, the just feel more intimate despite the epistolary format and in this case ‘‘The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’ falls short.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.75
Stevenson’s ‘Olalla’ is quote difficult to place. It was certainly gothic, to an extent seems to be a tale of unrequited love as the nameless protagonist, a Scottish Soldier recovering in Spain, falls hopelessly in love with the fallen noble Olalla. There wasn’t much to go from but unlike ‘The Body Snatcher’ and ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ the characters were very distinct and developed. I particularly enjoyed the innocent and presented as half-witted son Felipe who seems only to mean well and be trying his best. ‘Olalla’ also left me with a lot of speculation, as the exact nature of its gothic isn’t explicitly revealed but leaves me with ideas on genre, I however shan’t expand on such to protect the main plot element. It was easily the best of Stevenson’s ‘Tales of Terror’ that I have encountered.
*This was apart of the 'Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' audiobook however I have logged separately to leave an individual rating and review.
‘The Body Snatcher’ is a short story written in the aftermath of the infamous Burke and Hare grave robberies and murders, about a medical student Fettes and his acquisition of bodies as an assistant for his school. It explores the decay of morals in favour of profit as Fettes becomes enveloped by the corrupt grave robbing circles around him and is an interesting vignette of the fears of grave robbing at the time. It was only a short story so shan’t criticise character however I feel the conclusion of the story was very abrupt and seemed unfinished, stopping right in the plot climax.
*This was apart of the 'Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' audiobook however I have logged separately to leave an individual rating and review.
Sappho’s Fragments were absolutely wonderful. The poetry was so beautifully crafted and explored the likes of love, womanhood, marriage, the gods, death and my personal favourite couple being on Troy. There was also analysis and notes accompanying each fragment which was really engaging and gave great context of each. It was really unstressful, beautifully written poems which I kind of needed in my current read as I don’t think I could’ve coped with much that was heavy. It’s just upsetting that we only have fragments but I suppose we can be thankful at least those survived.
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
Hval’s ‘Paradise Rot’ is a story of the sexual awakening of Jo, a Norwegian exchange student, after she finds a housemate in a converted brewery with little private space in it due to limited and paper thin walls.
It was quite an uncomfortable book. Hval’s use of description is extremely intimate and makes constant sexual innuendos, often making comparisons for the sake of description between things that really shouldn’t be and are quite uncomfortable, such as piss as warm milk for example. She really loved describing scenes of characters pissing for some reason…
There is connections made to Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’ both in the title and frequent links to the Genesis story, though it wasn’t much of a retelling and instead just contained many food descriptions and a microcosm of rotting fruit throughout which was an interesting element at least. The space of the novel felt very liminal and uncomfortable, which is both down to its weird nature but also was contributed to by how awful the narration on the audiobook I read was. The narrator spoke so slowly with so little expression, it sounded a lot like an AI though I don’t believe this was the case.
I didn’t particularly find any of the characters that likeable, the male love interest/ antagonist Pym was a disgusting man who made every scene with his involvement a generally unpleasant experience. I don’t know what I expected from this book but it was just unsettling, and not in a god way, in addition to being full of questionable description.