Finished reading Cloud Atlas. Usual thing, once I start reading then other things I should be doing fall by the wayside. Now have to catch up with the lines I am supposed to be learning.
Anyway, finished it last weekend, and I did promise a review. This may be slightly difficult to do without giving away too much.
Six lives interwoven. Not as one story but six separate stories that hold together leading from the 1800's to a post-apocalyptic world.
Is it for everyone? I suspect not. There are times when you think you will never know the final outcome for a character. There are times when the way it is written need some real concentration. 10 times when your mind has to shift to a different place and, more importantly, a different pace. It can be hard to work out who the hero is, is it everyone or no-one. And are the links real or just a clever contraption to keep you engaged. At times it even makes you feel like you got the sucker punch.
But I enjoyed it. I wanted to know what was going to happen next, how it was going to unfold. When I twigged how it was going to loop back it made me want to continue. To follow the ride and see what it was trying to say. I don't think that the method worked completely, and I didn't feel it ended at the right place. The post-apocalypse borrow heavily from Aldous Huxley, and Timothy Cavendish was a particularly weak character, rather unlikeable. But possible being unlikeable was the point. it had me interested enough that I had to check back on other parts of the story to see why memories were triggered.
If you like depth to you books then give this a try. If you like rounded edges, no snags for your mind to get caught on, then avoid.
Anyway, finished it last weekend, and I did promise a review. This may be slightly difficult to do without giving away too much.
Six lives interwoven. Not as one story but six separate stories that hold together leading from the 1800's to a post-apocalyptic world.
Is it for everyone? I suspect not. There are times when you think you will never know the final outcome for a character. There are times when the way it is written need some real concentration. 10 times when your mind has to shift to a different place and, more importantly, a different pace. It can be hard to work out who the hero is, is it everyone or no-one. And are the links real or just a clever contraption to keep you engaged. At times it even makes you feel like you got the sucker punch.
But I enjoyed it. I wanted to know what was going to happen next, how it was going to unfold. When I twigged how it was going to loop back it made me want to continue. To follow the ride and see what it was trying to say. I don't think that the method worked completely, and I didn't feel it ended at the right place. The post-apocalypse borrow heavily from Aldous Huxley, and Timothy Cavendish was a particularly weak character, rather unlikeable. But possible being unlikeable was the point. it had me interested enough that I had to check back on other parts of the story to see why memories were triggered.
If you like depth to you books then give this a try. If you like rounded edges, no snags for your mind to get caught on, then avoid.
2 comments:
I did try it and I didn't get very far. I was a bit disappointed as when I first heard about it I wanted to read it a lot. But I'm not keen on books with lots of different characters or groups of characters all over the place.
Have you read 'The Deeds of Paksenarrion' trilogy by Anne Moon? I think you might like it.
I think the style takes a bit of getting used to. It is a risky way to run a story and certainly requires some dedication, especially at the beginning. Not many books have ever defeated me and once I got going with this it improved and started to grip. About to add Anne Moon to my wish list.
Post a Comment