Ahhh, jeez. I've read enough positive reviews for this book to know that a lot of you really like it, and some of you lurve it, so I've built myself a happy little igloo and I'm not coming out until you decide that you really quite like me enough to forgive me. Because I hated it. And there were so many pages that I dog-eared, and SO many notes with swears in them that I made in my notebook, but one of my main beefs with this book was shittiness+length, so I'm going to try to keep this review down to size.I'm not even going to...ok, I am. Young girl steals books, lives in Germany during WWII, hides a Jew in her basement, Death is the narrator. There. Now you know everything you need to know, and I can get on with it.
First thing: too many damn words. This is the opposite of tight, clever prose. This is...I don't know...loose, diarrhea prose. Everything Zusak thought, he wrote down, and he did it using the most words possible. That's why the book is 550 words long, and that's why I'm so angry. Serious. You read a short, crappy book, and you're all 'Well, won't do that again.' You read a long, crappy book and MAN! That's hours of my life down the drain. I know, my own fault. Learn to put a book down unfinished. But so many words could have been edited out, and the book wouldn't have lost a thing.
Like, after you've mentioned someones customary looks or trademark expressions two or three or dozens of times, there's no reason to keep prefacing them like that. We get it. The old woman calls everyone an asshole. There's no need for this: 'Mama only handed him one of her trademark looks of disgust, followed by the most common ration of her vocabulary' (which is, incidentally, followed immediately with 'Liesel swapped a customary wink with her papa'...I wish I were joking).
And then everything has this tremendous set-up. Like, everything. Which, necessarily, leads to dozens of let-downs, since not everything (or even most things) are important enough to set them up with a whole paragraph. Like, this old man is chasing Liesel and her friend and calling them names, and Zusak goes on about how the man's abuse got worse and worse, until he hollers, 'I've never seen you before!' I know, zzzzzzzzzzzing, right?
And then he'll say things like 'As always, they were clapped' or 'He laughed - a ten-year-old, smugness laughter.' Hhhhwhat? Do you not speak-a de Eengleesh? And I kind of figured out after a while that that's just his style, but it got old quick.
As did the constant animation of inanimate things. And the constant tangiblization of intangible things. Things like breath, or colors, or WORDS! Like: 'When Liesel left that day, she said something with great uneasiness. In translation, two words were struggled with, carried on her shoulder, and dropped as a bungling pair at Ilsa Hermann's feet. They fell off sideways as the girl veered with them and could no longer sustain their weight. Together, they sat on the floor, large and loud and clumsy.' And this might be fine if this sort of thing happened once or twice, but words never do anything besides struggle or creep or limp for a few sentences which, again, too many words. And this is nearly 150 pages into the book, so you're used to the relentless build up, and you should have caught on by now that Zusak does this for every third or fourth utterance, so when the two words in question are just 'I'm sorry,' you aren't all, Dude! I knew she was going to say that, like, four paragraphs ago!!! Why the hype!!!! Because by now you're deadened to the usual methods of stressing an event. Like the whole, long-paragraph-followed-by-a-single-impactful-sentence?
You can't do it for every paragraph.
You sure can't do it without putting an intervening long paragraph in, because it loses its impact entirely.
See what I mean?
This is not interesting.
And then everything was qualified, like, a billion times, which not only served to make the writing weaker, but also resulted in such contradictory messes as this: 'I'm compelled to continue on, because although it's not true for every person on earth, it's true for the vast majority - that death waits for no man - and if he does, he doesn't usually wait for very long.' So...death waits for some people, but not most people, but no people, but not for very long for those people. Hwaaa?
Did I mention that Death is the narrator? Great idea, right? Someone said of Philip Roth that he manages to erase all space between reader and narrator. Narrator Death? Dude puts football fields between you and the events. You just go ahead and try to feel something when your narrator is the freakin' Grim Reaper. I mean, it could have worked great, but it didn't. And all I kept hearing in reviews was that Death was so funny. 'Grim, darkly consoling humor,' Time says. I found no grim humor. There was plenty of dad-humor, though. Death is funny like my dad is funny, in that he's not.
My only favorite bit was where he describes this one general, or whatever, performing 'what is called a Schreierie - a consummate exhibition of passionate shouting' and I was all, I do that all the time! Really, that's all I got for you. The plot was boring and went on and on for ages, and I just didn't care. I'm going to call this J. Picoult Syndrome (JPS), where anything written about anything serious is automatic awesomeness. YOU CANNOT HANG SHIT ON THE HOLOCAUST AND CALL IT ART!
One caterpillar for the schreierie, and one because I really liked the way this book felt in my hands, paper-wise.
PS. I'm really very sorry about all of this. I know some of you love this book, and I still love you very much and don't actually think worse of you for it, because I LOVE THE SHOPAHOLIC BOOKS! There, now you know. I read chick lit when no one is watching. Also, I eat, like, four bags of Kettle Corn a day. Even stevens?
Also, Charley, I will try I Am the Messenger and I will try to forget about this book both so that I can read IATM untainted, and so that my brains don't boil with rage.
Second Opinions (nice ones)
Maw Books
Bottle of Shine
Trish's Reading Nook
Valentina's Room
Bending Bookshelf
An Adventure in Reading
Stephanie's Written Word
A Striped Armchair
Things Mean a Lot
Posts
13 comments:
That's cool, I'm totally not offended when people don't like the same things I do. Then we'd all be boring and the same, right? I thought this book was pretty good - not like "the best book ever" as some people claim, but I didn't hate reading it. But also, and maybe I shouldn't do this, but I tend to give more slack when it comes to YA books. Since they're written for younger people, I don't tend to criticize them as much. I guess this is a double standard, but oh well.
Ha! I'm actually kind of glad you didn't like it because then you wouldn't write this HILARIOUS review! Come on, diarrhea prose? Where else am I going to get that?!
On a side note, I liked it. But I didn't cry like everybody else though.
I've picked this book up half a dozen times because I've seen so many book bloggers rave about it and put it on their Top Ten lists, but something always makes me put it back. I guess I'll trust my gut and WALK AWAY next time too. Thanks for the review!
So if the book had been half the size that it was, with the same style of language, would it have been better? I'm curious! For comparison, I loved this book specifically because of the language (and the setting, because I am pretty keen on good WWII stories!). I also loved "I Am The Messenger" because it had the same language but was much more accessible emotionally and length-wise--so we know Zusak can tell a story without breaking all these "rules" of writing, for instance (scare quotes included because I know just how well rules of writing apply to writing beyond grammar and sometimes not even then).
And yet, I wonder if that wasn't half of the point; if the language and the narrator were meant to keep readers at a distance or show us something. I actually had this discussion with another friend who couldn't get emotionally invested and wondered that if Zusak did that on purpose and was just taking a gamble that people would grow fond of Death, who as, well, death, is probably pretty emotionally crippled. So instead of it being a failing with the writing in particular it's a failing in a character who doesn't necessarily understand human emotions?
I am very interested in this point, because words and flow push my buttons pretty hard and this book had great rhythm beyond what the words were actually saying (like a beat, I could hear it as I read). So I get nosy when it doesn't work for someone.
Uh, like right now. >.>
I'm glad to read your negative review of this book because I've read so many positive ones lately I was itching to know what could be awful about it. You've made me a bit more wary of picking it up; and I loved reading what you said about it!
The actual English word is "logorrhea" (http://www.bartleby.com/61/25/L0232500.html).
Don't apologize...you're great.
Don't apologise. I have toyed with the idea of reading this book but I've been suspicious, and now I am let off reading it. So thank you for saving me from wasting a few hours!
Hah! Well, 10 points for honesty, and 10 points for sticking with a book you hate until the end. I am a little afraid that you will rip my beloved I Am the Messenger to pieces, but... maybe you will love it with the same fiery passion that I do.
I totally agree that you can't just use a serious subject and have that be enough to carry the book. As a trend, I am not a fan of the Holocaust books; I actually picked up The Book Thief without knowing that's what it was (I know, right? I live under a rock). I read it because I loved the cover.
As someone who steers clear of Holocaust books because they distress her way too much, I loved this book a tremendous lot. It was kind of despite the Holocaust thing, rather than because of it. For what that's worth.
But try I Am the Messenger. It's a really different kind of book.
Ooops! It is difficult to hate a book that everyone else loved. I liked it, but wasn't as enthralled as some. And by the way, I hated Immortal, just to warn you. :)
It must have taken some guts to hit the publish on this post when so many book bloggers love it. I tried a few months ago, but couldn't get into it.
I love your review! I totally agree about the prose being forced, wordy, and unnecessarily much. I hated some of his analogies. I listened to it and it was very very long but I stuck with it too.
At the same time, I liked the cheesy message of hope and so I can say I liked this book.
Here's my review.
Post a Comment