Julia

It was okay BUT... Too much sexual content.

Revisado: 08-13-22

I grew up with both of my parents loving Stephen King but I never really officially read him until this year. I read Misery before this one and it was pretty good. I have been moving recently and I wanted to tackle 'the beast' so to say and download this huge book of his to finally see it at long last while I moved into my new home.

The narrator did a superb job and I really liked his reading of it. It is the story itself which I have more qualms with.

It is a really nice story overall and I understand it was published many years ago so it was a different time, a different Stephen. I understand all of that. I watched the TV series as a kid (Though I don't remember much) but it was super nice getting to finally read the book.

My main problem about this is that there is simply TOO MUCH sex and sexual content in it. It flat out ruined the story for me. I'm not one of those 'I'm gonna clutch my pearls cause you mentioned a NAUGHTY THING' types at all and I understand sex is a cornerstone of humanity... Especially in rebuilding after a humanity destroying event like this. But I felt as if Stephen King couldn't go A SINGLE CHAPTER without mentioning it. In many, MANY instances the women only amounted to sex rather than other people or characters.

So that is my main complaint. I surmise that he was simply young, hot, and horny, and simply failed to 'get one out' before writing it more often than not. You could quite literally omit a large number of the sexual mentions or scenes WITHOUT destroying any plot whatsoever. Once I realized how overtly sexual nonstop it was it was like I couldn't stop hearing it and it was a buzzing in my ear. Girl characters that were interesting and had plot in the beginning devolved into sex things. Sex, sex, sex. If there was anything involving a woman it was sex eventually. At one point a pregnant character was 'exploring her body with her hands' and he put the line 'Instead of traveling Southward her hands went to her stomach'. He did NOT even have to include that line of '...Instead of going southward' at all. It's like adding a bunch of unecessary explosions.

Again, I'm fully aware this is a younger, different Stephen King. I just really wish he didn't put so much unnecessary sex into it. Was it REALLY pertinent to the story to have Mother Abigail talk about being with her husbands and 'smelling corn'? Was it really necessary to go into detail about Trashcan Man's sexual rendevous in prison/jail/wards or wherever he was? Frannie was literally there to cause some weird sex triangle mischief only it felt like. If you were a woman in this book you HAD sex or your story surrounded it. No female character was left untouched by this. I get that women have sex and relationships but this is ridiculous. Seriously sex-less plots surrounding the women are insanely minimim and even background mimor women were sexualized or men wanted to do it. Even as the judge left town the boys wanted him to pick up dirty magazines. Even finding another dog even though it was a puppy they were like 'They can do itttttt' and it got so annoying so fast. It felt like at the end of every scene at one point the characters were like 'You wanna go at it? ;)' And they would. It was beyond frustrating. At one point a woman woke up thinking about her sexual adventures, looked over, called to a man that she had just 'had', went another round, then talked about doing it again. I GET that she was weaseling her way into him and his info using a sexual tactic but... At this point I was so unamused by the nonstop sex I didn't care.

Sexual content in a story is like cheese. Plot is the meat. The atmosphere/setting is the bread, the characters the toppings, events the toppings, and so forth. The burger was already pretty good but for some strange reason Stephen King wouldn't STOP putting cheese slices on it. At some point the entire burger is buried and it is nothing but cheese.

I don't mind the rambling or long story but I feel like the sexual content really got out of hand in this one and my eyebrows are beyond off of my forehead at the fact that no one else seems to notice this. Don't get me wrong: I'm okay with sexual content and don't mind it! But this was TOO MUCH and unnecessary! It had no relevance to the plot 9 times outta 10! And as a woman I'm also deeply annoyed with the fact that women are just sex dolls essentially in this story or figures meant to cause sexual strife. There was one woman who was into other women and it became a big thing for no reason, overtly sexualized and put into it and strangely written about. Again, I know the 80's/90's were a different time- I get that. But this is just weird. I really wish an editor came through and edited out certain sexual sections and I woudl've enjoyed it far better.

Other than that the story was pretty alright. I really detested Frannie's character and how she became a sex thing for the majority of the story. I feel as though she was mainly there to be the object of a jealous affair triangle between two men. A lot of the females in general were sex objects but I dislike her the most. If it wasn't for all of the nonstop "This woman stood up and she had tight clothes and you can bet the men looked at that" and other sexual nonstop mentions the book would honestly be rated much more higher for me. I'm glad that most of his works are NOT This long and perhaps having them more condensed or shorter will help to drop out the nonstop sexual mentions. I do look forward to reading those and hopefully his other works, now that he is older and perhaps in his 'post nut clarity' when writing some of these other ones. I think he's a great writer aside from that and definitely someone everyone should read at least once. It's perfectly okay and acceptable to have critque of an artist of whose media you consume and it doesn't mean I hate Stephen King or his work. I just wish he would 'calm the hell down' a lot.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Like a chunk of people here; Not a book for me

Revisado: 07-01-22

This book started out interesting enough and had a interesting plot.

But I wouldn't waste your credit on this; Seriously. What a waste of time. If you enjoy nonstop snarky remarks every goddamn sentence then feel free to buy this book. It is as if he looked up every possible snarky remark in the English language and made a plotline AROUND it. Trust me when I say it's through the whole damn book. "What's in the Briefcase?" "Briefs" "Haha, very funny" is what you're signing up for in every sentence.

The next issue I took with it was that it stopped being about the character you were following and started being about this random damn police officer that I honestly could care less about. He was working on the case but most of the time he'd just talk about some past experiences, make a snarky remark, and you'd wonder why you even cared.

The book started being all about him towards the end and I'm not going to spoil it (Though I don't recommend bothering with it) but yes; The cop becomes the main focus. When it hits a certain point (You'll know it when you hear it) then don't even bother with the last remaining chapters unless you wanna hear about some boomer-esque cop cry about how the 'Grankids have bones in their noses', 'No one says ma'am or sir and it'll be the end of the world', about the worthless knowledge of him in the Vietnam War, and so on while he eats dinner and has a dream.

I don't recommend it and I wish I had those last few chapters of my life back from listening to that and into the cop's ridiculous side-escapades. So, yeah, if you wanna hear some old boomers complaining and being all whiny then go ahead and read it. I HONESTLY do not know why this book would be considered a 'classic' other then a bunch of boomers being all 'REMEMBER THEM GOOD OL' DAYS WOOOOOOO' If I rolled my eyes back any further I'd sever them at this point.

The person who read it wasn't half bad but if you start noticing his lip smacking and swallowing you can't stop hearing it and I am sorry to all of those I have now cursed with this LMAO but I'm just letting you know what you're getting into. I would've rated his performance of it higher if it weren't for that. I know people gotta swallow and stuff but it was very noticable hearing his mouth like that.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Eh.

Revisado: 06-10-21

I got 5 chapters in and had to call it quits because I physically want to fight the author of this book. I'm really disappointed too because he seemed as if he had a lot of details and insight onto epidemics though time but rather than telling the documents as they are he wanted to put his own interpretation and 'clever' spin on it. Aka being INSISTANT that there was absolutely NO MORAL discrimination at all in the anicent world surrounding plague, hard times, and etc. I'll believe that when pigs fly, chief. He comes across as hypcritical and trying to push a narrative that ALL of humanity is good and that no one has ever done bad is the vibe I get from this. Not that I want bad things to happen but that simply isn't the human condition and especially surrounding outsiders, religious standings, etc. His leanings towards the 'All humanity is good' is very stilted and biased, I feel, rather than looking on it from a neutral standpoint. He even painted the Romans in a good light and with how rampant slavery, wars, political/religious/foreigner aggressions, and etc were and still are in different ways I just couldn't finish it. I wanted a good reading of the history and not his narrative and viewpoint just to be condencending to people/scholars/researchers/etc who disagreee and think that some persecutions happened. Of course persecuting anyone on yhe basis of religion, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, or etc is stupid and obviously not the cause but that doesn't mean that they absolutely didn't do such awful things.

TLDR; I got really mad at the author's forced narrative that No PeRsEcUtIoN eVeR hApPeNeD eVeR. He is condencending to other scholars/researchers/etc who disagree. The narration is okay enough even if it is boring it is very clear and understood. There is a lot of potential and information here that he buries with his opinion because of documents he has selected and singled out out of the MANY lost documents to history that will never let us know the full story.

Not worth the buy unless you wanna sit there and be lectured about the GOODNESS OF HUMANITY rather than the events and responses.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 3 personas

Great!

Revisado: 06-10-21

This, like many great courses, was a wonderful read. It felt a little strange with the lack of sound of an audience but it made her all the more clear to hear. There was plenty I didn't know about and this book, going into detail about this major event in human history, was fascinating. Most other books about this period skirt over it when I really wanted an in-depth look. A bit of it was repetitive but that was because it was different lectures. Sitting through it all in one go or big sessions would seem repetitive when you're like 'Oh but we just talked about how Iceland avoided it' but it makes sense.

Overall, a really good read and thank you for not being afraid to go into these darker topics because it is very important to know history, the good and the bad.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

I cannot stand the voice actor

Revisado: 05-12-21

I couldn't rip my headphones out fast enough. Her voice literally makes me want to go on a baby punching spree. That airhead and ditzy voice is fun for VERY small characters in the background of COMEDIES but NOT HERE. Good god. Whoever casted her as a main character in this needs to be put down. Awful. I couldn't finish. I couldn't imagine spending 9+ hours like that I might end up in jail.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

I really wish this book was renamed.

Revisado: 03-25-21

A better name for this book would've been "Medieval Europe: The Politics" because that was what the majority of it was. Don't get me wrong... I love politics and I have sat through both the Watergate Report by the Select Committee and the Nuremburg Trials. However. I only really enjoyed about 4 hours out of the total 15 hours of this book because of all the messy and instructured politics. I had picked this book up intending on hearing the daily lives of people, various professions, the medical knowledge of the times, and etc and most of it was a let down.

If you get this book and would like to know where the actual interesting bits are please fast foward to the 11 to 12 hour mark. I figured the politics would be a small chunk of the book... Not the majority. Just tell us you want to write about only the politics then, sheesh.

Okay so I think a good reason this book falls apart is that the author spread himself TOO thin and tried to bring up all the politics and powers-that-be at the times in a really weird fashion. I think had he segmented it down into blocks of time and then further by each region he would be more coherent. He verbally makes me feel cross-eyed because of how scattered all this imformation is. Or maybe it could've been structured by region? "But instead of Europe as a whole let us focus on what the Medieval Middle East was doing during these times." Just a bit better structure and it would've been LEAGUES better. If you were to organize a movie in this fashion that he talked most of the audience would be baffled as to what is going on because he is trying to talk about every square inch of the world all at once.

A major thing that bothered me was the constant noting to other chapters. I felt that was too heavy. Almost every chapter had him rattling off a "Please see chapter xx" and sometimes it felt like every other sentence. I understand he is trying to reference it to others who are interested but having it constantly rattled off was annoying when I was reading that chapter at hand.

The womens' section was disappointing. After all the hype and the constant "We will explain the womens' roles in xx chapter" hint drops all the time... Well I kept waiting for it. I was interested because at first he said "All you hear about are the prominent queens and figureheads. The rich." And that he MIGHT tell me some bit of daily lives for women or more minor roles. And the daily lives... Was extremely small. He claimed to want to describe women other than the famous or rich ones which I suppose he did but the women he described still seemed well off, rich, etc. I understand a lot of surviving texts was from more prominent families and hard to get more details on but... Well, he did a great job on the peasant revolts vs the rich side's take on it and demonstrating how skewed it was. I enjoyed that. The womens' bit was a let down because he didn't really do the same.

And he absolutely played down the Black Death. I don't think it was as ever small as he was attempting to make it out to be. His view on it was interesting but I feel he underplayed it, didn't talk that much about it, and proceeded right back into his own personal love letters to the genre of 'politics'. That's great, my guy, but rename the book or label ituch more clearly if you wish to rattle on and on about politics rather than anything else.

Overall I did waste a great deal of my time on this. Had he structured it better, renamed or better described it, didn't spread himself so thin so suddenly, and stopped with the constant other chapter mentions it would be a lot better. Yeah- My biggest complaint absolutely is that he spread himself too thin and wanted to talk about multiple happenings at once. Which I understand- They did. But we'd be talking about Spain and then suddenly it was England. Then suddenly China. Structure it better. Do sections or adhere to timelines better. I nearly put it down rather quick because of that but I trudged through. Those last 4 hours were very interesting and what I wanted more of!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

I'm sad I couldn't finish this.

Revisado: 02-13-21

I really looked forward to reading about this scandal and while it is sensationalized and almost crudely funny humor did interest me the way it was read was not. I really am into both history and scandals and I am not new to long or almost seemingly 'boring' retellings. I tell you I am a girl who sat through the Select Committee's report on the Watergate scandal and I just recently finished a 25 hour length telling of the Nuremburg Trials. I really like court, politics, law, scandals, etc.

This was bad enough that I could not finish it. I got an hour in and dropped it. The narrator speaks too quickly for me to absorb anything as if he himself is telling it through the mouth of a 1920's man. I enjoy how he sounds as it adds atmosphere but it is much too distracting and I cannot focus on what is being said. There are WAY too many characters being absolutely lobbed at you and the pacing is absurd. I feel like I am on a runaway train. Between the fast paces there are sudden stops that cause a reader to lurch forward mentally. I simply cannot listen to this reading of it and I am disappointed because I really looked forward to the 10 hour seemingly in-depth look here as that is the longest version on this service and that this topic is very scarce. Oh well.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña