sanguine_air

Brilliant narration w/all the voices

Revisado: 10-13-22

I've listened to this well over 50 times. Each character has its own voice, the vast majority are brilliant. One of my favorites is the voice of Sir William Lucas though he has only one line in all of P&P. Some of the best are probably Mrs. Jennings, Mrs. Bennett, Mr. Woodhouse, Mrs. Norris & Lady Catherine. Mrs. Gardiner and Elizabeth Bennett are also good. Even Rebecca the trollopy servant in Portmouth is distinctive. And all the Portsmouth kids. Jane Bennett is probably one of the weakest.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Perfect

Revisado: 02-24-20

Since it's the narration that seems to be getting the criticism, I'll start there. Yes, Gus talks like he's a bit deaf and a bit too loud. But after a few chapters, that's just Gus, and after 102 chapters I could not imagine him sounding any other way or want him to sound any other way. Gus proclaims. He is not subtle. He does not make sly asides. I perhaps benefit from not having read the book previously or otherwise developed ideas about how Gus should sound. He is now one of my favorite characters in all of literature and Lee Horsley's Augustus McCray is, for me, definitive. I did not notice the breathing of which others complain.

As for the story, though portraying a life that is difficult and frequently punctuated with tragedy and death, it is not--as a whole--sad or mournful. It is a story of perseverance, endurance and humor.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Perfect

Revisado: 02-24-20

Since it's the narration that seems to be getting the criticism, I'll start there. Yes, Gus talks like he's a bit deaf and a bit too loud. But after a few chapters, that's just Gus, and after 102 chapters I could not imagine him sounding any other way or want him to sound any other way. Gus proclaims. He is not subtle. He does not make sly asides. I perhaps benefit from not having read the book previously or otherwise developed ideas about how Gus should sound. He is now one of my favorite characters in all of literature and Lee Horsley's Augustus McCray is, for me, definitive. I did not notice the breathing of which others complain.

As for the story, though portraying a life that is difficult and frequently punctuated with tragedy and death, it is not--as a whole--sad or mournful. It is a story of perseverance, endurance and humor.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Riveting . . . but . . .

Revisado: 12-18-18

The author reminds me of the childhood Jane Eyre believing that the students and teachers at Lowood School will believe Mr. Brocklehurst's stories that she an alien, a liar, whose body must be punished to save her soul, "if, indeed, such salvation be possible." In truth, no one liked Brocklehurst or cared what he said about Jane. Jane was able to learn that because of Helen and Miss Temple. But the author had no Helen or Miss Temple to note that the bullies in the household were not good and great men. Instead she had a mother who propped up bullies. The result is that the modern day Mr. Brocklehurst got bigger and more imposing than he deserved. And the author has set out to slay him with perfect dispassionate rationality. Except that he is not worthy of her efforts. The reader does not not see the same dragon that the author saw. For all her education, she still seems to lack any sense of proportionality about her father/s ability to influence others. She acknowledges writing so that she can tell her own story and not have it told for her, but she doesn't see how small her father's audience was. The author needed to have this conversation with Helen Burns:

“Helen, why do you stay with a girl whom everybody believes to be a liar?”
“Everybody, Jane? Why, there are only eighty people who have heard you called so, and the world contains hundreds of millions.”
“But what have I to do with millions? The eighty, I know, despise me.”
“Jane, you are mistaken: probably not one in the school either despises or dislikes you: many, I am sure, pity you much.”
“How can they pity me after what Mr. Brocklehurst has said?”
“Mr. Brocklehurst is not a god: nor is he even a great and admired man: he is little liked here; he never took steps to make himself liked."

But there does not seem to have been anyone to say this to the author. Indeed, the author seemed devoid of rational voices and even though she seems to have found some now, any positive influence they seem to play pales beside the destructive voices. The positive influences are flat. They admire her, they want to help, she recites their interaction, but they seem held at arms length. Only the destructive voices get to come in close.

It's hard to say that a book you find riveting--and I flew through this book like I have few others--shouldn't have been written for another decade, but imagine if Angela's Ashes had been written when Frank McCourt was 30 rather than 65. I'd be interested to see what the author would have done with the story in another decade or two or three.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 1 persona

Interesting, and yet . . .

Revisado: 05-02-18

This is not a new and improved biography, this is an argument that assumes you have read other "conventional" biographies. I hadn't. The author cares very, very much that you are persuaded by her, but is very, very sure that you will not be. She has a few good points, and some others. (E.g. while on the one hand admitting that Jane did not use a lot of symbolism, the author spends quite of bit of time unpacking alleged symbolism.) Her writing is not graceful. As someone who has written a lot of graceless prose in my life I know graceless writing when I hear it. But the worst of it is not necessarily the author's fault: much of the narration was just painful. The main text of the book is read in the reader's own voice which is serviceable. Had it been used throughout it would not have been painful. However, pretty much all of the many and extensive quoted passages from Austen books, letters, etc. are read in what seems to me--and admittedly I'm no expert-- an unfortunate faux generic British accent. Notwithstanding these drawbacks, most of the book held my interest. Which is not an insignificant achievement. My library is littered with books that are infinitely "better" but that I haven't come close to finishing. This, I nearly finished.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 5 personas

Worthwhile, but flawed.

Revisado: 06-05-17

That the "radical right" has been propelled by some source of money is mostly significant if other political factions do not have similar resources and/or have not engaged in similar conduct. But this is not a book about money in politics generally. As such, it mostly lacks context that would either highlight the impressiveness of the money, or limit its relevance. Yes, the name Soros appears a time or two, but the book mostly sticks to its announced subject. The book is not remotely dispassionate. It expects the reader to be outraged on nearly every page. I did not care for the narrator whose voice was smug and mildly sneering. There is a brief pause leading into nearly every quote that seems to say "get this". It was as though the narrator did not believe that a straight reading could have carried the material and she needed to give audible clues as to when it was appropriate to be outraged. Which was, more or less, constantly. It is not a book that aims to persuade persons across a spectrum. It is a book by a political liberal for political liberals. All that said, it was interesting to learn about the history of the groups that seem to have transformed politics in the past few years. And about their methods, including deliberately invading academia. I listened over the course of a four day trip and more or less maintained interest throughout.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

It's not the destination, it's the journey.

Revisado: 01-18-17

I did not get around to reading/listening to Middlemarch until I was 50. I've read and reread all of the various Brontes and Austin, several Dickens, some Trollope. At least atmospherically, Middlemarch shares more with Trollope than with the others, but the similarities mostly end with atmosphere. Having finally discovered it, I listened to it perhaps a dozen times through in fairly rapid succession. Middlemarch is less plot driven than Trollope, or than almost any other 19th century novel that I've read. There is plot, and it does move forward, but every word, every sentence, every observation is worth a listen, independent of its relation to the greater story arc. Take this little gem, as a minor character finally comes up with a name that he had forgotten: "he suddenly slapped his knee, and exclaimed, "Ladislaw!" That action of memory which he had tried to set going, and had abandoned in despair, had suddenly completed itself without conscious effort--a common experience, agreeable as a completed sneeze, even if the name remembered is of no value." The pages are filled with this sort of elevation of the commonplace, and with an astonishing number of characters. And while you don't get to know each character equally well, none are flat. I think when I was younger I would have been far too distracted by the main characters. My favorites are not those on center stage, but include: Mrs. Cadwallader, the sharp witted rector's wife who is perhaps the funniest character in all of 19th century literature; Mr. Brooke, her watery foil; Celia, the pragmatist, except when it comes to her infant Buddha; Mr. Farebrother, who lives the gospel more than he preaches it. Juliet Stevenson inhabits all to perfection. If Middlemarch isn't your cup of tea at the moment, come back in a decade. Perhaps you will have grown into it.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Justly forgotten

Revisado: 01-16-17

So I selected this after the generally positive reviews from people who had just finished Middlemarch and were looking for another Juliet Stevenson narration. I loved Stevenson's Middlemarch, I probably listened to it a dozen times in fairly rapid succession, like one long prose poem. So if others mourning its completion got something out of North and South, it was worth a go. Except that it wasn't. In retrospect, this was eminently foreseeable. Middlemarch is frequently agreed to be the best British novel of all time; North and South is substantially forgotten. Neither is an accident.

Main character Margaret Hale is admirable and interesting. We know this because we are told this. Again. And again. And again. Except, she never does anything admirable. She never says anything interesting. When any man shows interest in her she is indignant. (The reader is merely confused as to the basis for his interest.) In fairness, she is haughty, proud and indignant for other reasons as well, but male interest is a favorite. The main plot device in the book is that people die. At regular, and ever shorter, intervals. Primarily to give Margaret an excuse to be strong, or, at times, to emote. If we could escape Margaret, the book might have some interest. Nowhere is this more true than with the character Higgins, a working class union supporter, who is better drawn than Margaret and was probably cutting edge for the time. If only he had greater purpose than to provide Margaret with a worthy character to whom she could kindly condescend. The characters are, to a person, earnest, humorless, or--most frequently--both. Where is Mrs. Cadwallader when you need her?

In the final two pages or so, Margaret finally goes from indignant and rejecting to mildly responsive. Don't blink, you'll miss it.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Starts strong

Revisado: 09-02-16

Would you recommend this audiobook to a friend? If so, why?

I loved the book and do recommend it with caveats. The simple straightforward story telling of the child hood years is thoroughly engaging and reminded me vaguely of Angela's Ashes (with a more functional family). Gradually as the author ages the storytelling suffers. Characters flatten as he begins writing about people who are likely to read what he has written. I wonder if he shouldn't have stopped this telling when he was 19 or 20 and left the rest of the story to ripen. But its not hard to get through. You are driven to see it through to the end, to see what happens.

What about Paul English’s performance did you like?

Accents were amazing. Will be looking to see what else he has narrated.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña