Katherine
5+++/5. This is beyond any rating system.
It’s always easier not to think for oneself. Find a nice safe hierarchy and settle in. Don’t make changes, don’t risk disapproval, don’t upset your syndics. It’s always easiest to let yourself be governed.
You cannot buy the Revolution. You cannot make the Revolution. You can only be the Revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.
This book is incredible. I’ve been telling everyone how much I’ve enjoyed it since I started reading. I love how Le Guin sets up the dichotomies between Urras and Anarres. She gives you so much to think about- how each system has good and bad to it, how they are different, but also how humans will always be the same no matter what system they are born into. She gives you no easy answers and holds no punches, only presents you with this rich setting and asks you to make a decision. I love Shevek’s journey and growth as he navigates through both of these societies. The writing on a prose level is astounding. I wanted to quote half the pages. So much of what happens is applicable today, over 50 years after this was published. The Dispossessed will make you think. It will force you consider what humanity actually wants and needs. What is truly valuable? What happens when needs are not met? When the idealistic system meets the reality of what humans are?
Go read this. Seriously. Take your time with it, think about what’s being said. It certainly made me consider viewpoints I had never had the context for before. An incredible, thought-provoking, and powerful reading experience.
5+++/5. This is beyond any rating system.
It’s always easier not to think for oneself. Find a nice safe hierarchy and settle in. Don’t make changes, don’t risk disapproval, don’t upset your syndics. It’s always easiest to let yourself be governed.
You cannot buy the Revolution. You cannot make the Revolution. You can only be the Revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.
This book is incredible. I’ve been telling everyone how much I’ve enjoyed it since I started reading. I love how Le Guin sets up the dichotomies between Urras and Anarres. She gives you so much to think about- how each system has good and bad to it, how they are different, but also how humans will always be the same no matter what system they are born into. She gives you no easy answers and holds no punches, only presents you with this rich setting and asks you to make a decision. I love Shevek’s journey and growth as he navigates through both of these societies. The writing on a prose level is astounding. I wanted to quote half the pages. So much of what happens is applicable today, over 50 years after this was published. The Dispossessed will make you think. It will force you consider what humanity actually wants and needs. What is truly valuable? What happens when needs are not met? When the idealistic system meets the reality of what humans are?
Go read this. Seriously. Take your time with it, think about what’s being said. It certainly made me consider viewpoints I had never had the context for before. An incredible, thought-provoking, and powerful reading experience.
I hadn’t heard of this book before, but read it as part of a challenge. I didn’t know much going in other than it evidently won a Pulitzer Prize and the setting was an asylum right after the American Civil War.
Overall, I’m left pretty confused, disappointed by the exploration of the themes that were promised, and feeling very little about the book other than “what the fuck was that”. By the way, TW for on-page SA and graphic war violence and injury. There are some positives- some nice quotable passages, an initially intriguing setup and story, and the ideas that were presented about the horrors of war and its effect on the human psyche. Unfortunately, the book took a nosedive into a confusing mess of an ending. Honest to god I have a headache after finishing the book because I was brow furrowed the ENTIRE LAST 20%!
A New York Times Review by Dwight Garner calls the book “sludgy, claustrophobic, and pretentious”, and I think I agree with that opinion. The prose can be flowery, and at times it’s very hard to follow because of it. I didn’t understand what Phillips was trying to say a lot of the time, because the metaphors and similes and imagery became so convoluted. There were many moments where I read something, was completely befuddled, and reread it several times to no avail. Some of the passages, when they’re actually decipherable, are pretty good, but few and far between after the first half.
The book is fairly slow-paced. There isn’t a lot happening for most of it, but the overall plot is… confusing. Initially, I was intrigued and very concerned about ConaLee with her Mama and her “Papa” and what the heck was even going on with the whole situation. Part 2 expands on that with me gaining even MORE concern and outright horror. It sets up a lot that, while horrific, I thought could go in some fascinating directions. But in Part 3, things begin to fall apart for me, with decisions that don’t seem to make a lot of sense for any of the characters and a frankly *baffling* ending. There is a lot that happens all at once but I don’t know why and very little is given in explanation. Part IV makes it even more baffling by acting as a tiny flashback that, as far as I can tell, didn’t do anything to give the reader new information or insight. Also, why doesn’t the child character know her mother’s first name? That’s so weird and truly bizarre. It was to set up a parentification theme, but that was very present even without that last “reveal”.
I liked some of the themes and the exploration of war, identity, and trauma. It was interesting to learn about the Kirkbride method of running asylums (which was “moral” and honestly way more humane than I would’ve expected in the 1870s….). I thought the horrific scenes were written in a truly horrific and realistic way. I *can* see why some of the book was set up the way it was to establish an idea- such as a soldier coming back from war completely changed, with one husband disappearing and “Papa” coming in. I don’t necessarily think the ideas were bad to make these themes come to life, but the execution was frankly causing much more confusion than I think was necessary, especially with how the plot plays out.
In summary, good ideas, some literary devices that could really work, but overall left me flabbergasted.
I hadn’t heard of this book before, but read it as part of a challenge. I didn’t know much going in other than it evidently won a Pulitzer Prize and the setting was an asylum right after the American Civil War.
Overall, I’m left pretty confused, disappointed by the exploration of the themes that were promised, and feeling very little about the book other than “what the fuck was that”. By the way, TW for on-page SA and graphic war violence and injury. There are some positives- some nice quotable passages, an initially intriguing setup and story, and the ideas that were presented about the horrors of war and its effect on the human psyche. Unfortunately, the book took a nosedive into a confusing mess of an ending. Honest to god I have a headache after finishing the book because I was brow furrowed the ENTIRE LAST 20%!
A New York Times Review by Dwight Garner calls the book “sludgy, claustrophobic, and pretentious”, and I think I agree with that opinion. The prose can be flowery, and at times it’s very hard to follow because of it. I didn’t understand what Phillips was trying to say a lot of the time, because the metaphors and similes and imagery became so convoluted. There were many moments where I read something, was completely befuddled, and reread it several times to no avail. Some of the passages, when they’re actually decipherable, are pretty good, but few and far between after the first half.
The book is fairly slow-paced. There isn’t a lot happening for most of it, but the overall plot is… confusing. Initially, I was intrigued and very concerned about ConaLee with her Mama and her “Papa” and what the heck was even going on with the whole situation. Part 2 expands on that with me gaining even MORE concern and outright horror. It sets up a lot that, while horrific, I thought could go in some fascinating directions. But in Part 3, things begin to fall apart for me, with decisions that don’t seem to make a lot of sense for any of the characters and a frankly *baffling* ending. There is a lot that happens all at once but I don’t know why and very little is given in explanation. Part IV makes it even more baffling by acting as a tiny flashback that, as far as I can tell, didn’t do anything to give the reader new information or insight. Also, why doesn’t the child character know her mother’s first name? That’s so weird and truly bizarre. It was to set up a parentification theme, but that was very present even without that last “reveal”.
I liked some of the themes and the exploration of war, identity, and trauma. It was interesting to learn about the Kirkbride method of running asylums (which was “moral” and honestly way more humane than I would’ve expected in the 1870s….). I thought the horrific scenes were written in a truly horrific and realistic way. I *can* see why some of the book was set up the way it was to establish an idea- such as a soldier coming back from war completely changed, with one husband disappearing and “Papa” coming in. I don’t necessarily think the ideas were bad to make these themes come to life, but the execution was frankly causing much more confusion than I think was necessary, especially with how the plot plays out.
In summary, good ideas, some literary devices that could really work, but overall left me flabbergasted.
This trilogy gives me some whiplash, honestly. I liked the first book, the second I was less sure on, but this one made me cry even though one of my complaints is that I don’t absolutely love the characters in it. It’s a very strong end for what GGK was trying to do with the trilogy. I’m just not sure I loved every part of it.
For book 1, I liked it, but I felt that I wasn’t sure where the story was going to go, at all. There were some hints of what was to come, but I’m not sure it set up how important certain myths and legends would be. I would’ve also liked to have seen more of the central theme of fate being explored- it comes up so heavily in books 2 and 3, but it’s not well introduced in the first book. Things just sorta… happen… to ignite the full events of the series.
Book 2. This is definitely my least favorite of the trilogy. I didn’t like what GGK was doing with the fate theme; I didn’t always understand why the characters were making the decisions they did besides the nebulous idea of destiny; and I didn’t love the introduction of such a major plotline involving world myth and legend that seemed to come out of nowhere. What eventually happens with the setup this book does is great, but the setup itself isn’t.
Book 3, though, ends it masterfully. I just wish that things had been done this way before. I felt impacted by the emotional beats, despite the characters being somewhat shallow. GGK finally brings out the idea that destiny and fate don’t have to be absolute- but why this wasn’t explored at all before (except in one plotline), I don’t know.
I found the world and ideas interesting. The ideas of the Tapestry, fate, and reincarnation all work well for me. The characters could be a bit bland, and I wish I knew more about them personally, especially understanding why they make the decisions they do at times. The execution of the story was a bit all over the place, with some parts hitting all the right emotional beats and others causing confusion and frustration.
Overall, the series is solid, but it’s one I’d hesitate to recommend for everyone.
This trilogy gives me some whiplash, honestly. I liked the first book, the second I was less sure on, but this one made me cry even though one of my complaints is that I don’t absolutely love the characters in it. It’s a very strong end for what GGK was trying to do with the trilogy. I’m just not sure I loved every part of it.
For book 1, I liked it, but I felt that I wasn’t sure where the story was going to go, at all. There were some hints of what was to come, but I’m not sure it set up how important certain myths and legends would be. I would’ve also liked to have seen more of the central theme of fate being explored- it comes up so heavily in books 2 and 3, but it’s not well introduced in the first book. Things just sorta… happen… to ignite the full events of the series.
Book 2. This is definitely my least favorite of the trilogy. I didn’t like what GGK was doing with the fate theme; I didn’t always understand why the characters were making the decisions they did besides the nebulous idea of destiny; and I didn’t love the introduction of such a major plotline involving world myth and legend that seemed to come out of nowhere. What eventually happens with the setup this book does is great, but the setup itself isn’t.
Book 3, though, ends it masterfully. I just wish that things had been done this way before. I felt impacted by the emotional beats, despite the characters being somewhat shallow. GGK finally brings out the idea that destiny and fate don’t have to be absolute- but why this wasn’t explored at all before (except in one plotline), I don’t know.
I found the world and ideas interesting. The ideas of the Tapestry, fate, and reincarnation all work well for me. The characters could be a bit bland, and I wish I knew more about them personally, especially understanding why they make the decisions they do at times. The execution of the story was a bit all over the place, with some parts hitting all the right emotional beats and others causing confusion and frustration.
Overall, the series is solid, but it’s one I’d hesitate to recommend for everyone.
Even more hijinks and shenanigans abound in another Miles Vorkosigan book. This one has a lot of interesting ideas about being an Example for a particular “project”, the weight of a father on his son, identity, and making a moral decision even when everyone around you doesn’t agree. I really liked how the story set up its foils, parallels, and characterization overall- I felt this book in particular did a lot to develop some of the side characters and give more insight into Miles. I did feel it ended a bit abruptly, but it wasn’t so much so that it decreased my enjoyment of the book overall. Another fun, interesting, emotional, and insane adventure!
Even more hijinks and shenanigans abound in another Miles Vorkosigan book. This one has a lot of interesting ideas about being an Example for a particular “project”, the weight of a father on his son, identity, and making a moral decision even when everyone around you doesn’t agree. I really liked how the story set up its foils, parallels, and characterization overall- I felt this book in particular did a lot to develop some of the side characters and give more insight into Miles. I did feel it ended a bit abruptly, but it wasn’t so much so that it decreased my enjoyment of the book overall. Another fun, interesting, emotional, and insane adventure!
This peek into the past of the Vorkosigan universe (Vorkosiverse?) was really interesting! I loved the ideas of “what happens when biological engineering becomes technologically obsolete” and “what could one man accomplish” combining to make such a crazy story. There were some moments that I went “okay now that’s too much” and thought that it felt like an early writer’s tendency to make everything go wrong that could possibly go wrong. I really liked the characters, and found myself absolutely LOVING some great malicious compliance with corporate rules towards the end of the book. There were some heavy topics that I wish could have been touched on a bit more, mostly around psychological manipulation (grooming) and censorship, but the book had a LOT going for it even without that. Overall, a super cool read with some surprising twists and solutions that were a lot of fun to see.
This peek into the past of the Vorkosigan universe (Vorkosiverse?) was really interesting! I loved the ideas of “what happens when biological engineering becomes technologically obsolete” and “what could one man accomplish” combining to make such a crazy story. There were some moments that I went “okay now that’s too much” and thought that it felt like an early writer’s tendency to make everything go wrong that could possibly go wrong. I really liked the characters, and found myself absolutely LOVING some great malicious compliance with corporate rules towards the end of the book. There were some heavy topics that I wish could have been touched on a bit more, mostly around psychological manipulation (grooming) and censorship, but the book had a LOT going for it even without that. Overall, a super cool read with some surprising twists and solutions that were a lot of fun to see.
Honestly? I chose to read this for a book challenge as a bit (published in year ending in ‘26).
It really wasn’t what I expected! I knew it was sold as a children’s book and that the protagonist got shipwrecked a million times and found giants and tiny people and that was about it. Turns out Gulliver’s Travels is actually a long-winded political satire based on the (popular at the time) travel memoir, and especially based on throwing shade at Robinson Crusoe, since it wasn’t revealed that book was fictional! So Swift decided to make fun of everyone by writing a “true” travel memoir that is absolutely ridiculous and has many, MANY conversations about the absurdity of government and how awful ~~humans~~ Yahoos are.
From the tiny Lilliputans where Gulliver learns about the corruption of ministers and princes, to the giants of Brobdingnag that criticize European politics, to the Laputans who quite literally have their head in the clouds, and lastly the Houyhnhnms, civilized talking horses, and Yahoos, wild men, that highlights once again how corrupt and awful humanity is. There some really funny moments, like when Swift essentially tells philosophers that they should enjoy pondering about Gulliver’s description of what he had to do “when nature called” in each of these odd lands. Other passages with humor come from Gulliver ranting about lawyers, the stupidity of war, lying, and greed, and describing English history in the last century as “only a heap of conspiracies, rebellions, murders, massacres, revolutions, banishments, the very worst effects that avarice, faction, hypocrisy, perfidiousness, cruelty, rage, madness, hatred, envy, lust, malice, and ambition, could produce.”
Now, there are some things that haven’t aged particularly well (not surprising, given it’s been THREE HUNDRED YEARS). For one, the writing style is extremely verbose, with an excessive use of commas and semicolons accompanying long lists of nouns pertaining to the current topic (see the above quote- many, many passages follow a similar pattern). It’s not impossible to read, but it takes some adjustment to understand it. At times it gets very tedious to read, especially because there is some repetition of ideas in each new society.
There are some odd passages where Swift *seems* to be comparing certain aspects of whatever society Gulliver is in to slavery or race relations, but it doesn’t explore this topic like it does… pretty much everything else. It does somewhat address colonialism and driving natives away from their homeland out of greed, so there is that. The amount of misogyny is astounding. I honestly cannot tell how much of it is exaggerated (some of it HAS to be… right? It’s so over the top) and how much is reflective of the time.
Overall, I liked it more than I thought I would! It’s pretty good as a political satire, if you are able to look past the aged views on some aspects of society. And it did make me laugh a few times with its absurdity and how cleverly Swift came up with insults. So, maybe give it a try? It is an interesting read for purely historical reasons, and it’s more entertaining than some of the classics I had to read for school.
Honestly? I chose to read this for a book challenge as a bit (published in year ending in ‘26).
It really wasn’t what I expected! I knew it was sold as a children’s book and that the protagonist got shipwrecked a million times and found giants and tiny people and that was about it. Turns out Gulliver’s Travels is actually a long-winded political satire based on the (popular at the time) travel memoir, and especially based on throwing shade at Robinson Crusoe, since it wasn’t revealed that book was fictional! So Swift decided to make fun of everyone by writing a “true” travel memoir that is absolutely ridiculous and has many, MANY conversations about the absurdity of government and how awful ~~humans~~ Yahoos are.
From the tiny Lilliputans where Gulliver learns about the corruption of ministers and princes, to the giants of Brobdingnag that criticize European politics, to the Laputans who quite literally have their head in the clouds, and lastly the Houyhnhnms, civilized talking horses, and Yahoos, wild men, that highlights once again how corrupt and awful humanity is. There some really funny moments, like when Swift essentially tells philosophers that they should enjoy pondering about Gulliver’s description of what he had to do “when nature called” in each of these odd lands. Other passages with humor come from Gulliver ranting about lawyers, the stupidity of war, lying, and greed, and describing English history in the last century as “only a heap of conspiracies, rebellions, murders, massacres, revolutions, banishments, the very worst effects that avarice, faction, hypocrisy, perfidiousness, cruelty, rage, madness, hatred, envy, lust, malice, and ambition, could produce.”
Now, there are some things that haven’t aged particularly well (not surprising, given it’s been THREE HUNDRED YEARS). For one, the writing style is extremely verbose, with an excessive use of commas and semicolons accompanying long lists of nouns pertaining to the current topic (see the above quote- many, many passages follow a similar pattern). It’s not impossible to read, but it takes some adjustment to understand it. At times it gets very tedious to read, especially because there is some repetition of ideas in each new society.
There are some odd passages where Swift *seems* to be comparing certain aspects of whatever society Gulliver is in to slavery or race relations, but it doesn’t explore this topic like it does… pretty much everything else. It does somewhat address colonialism and driving natives away from their homeland out of greed, so there is that. The amount of misogyny is astounding. I honestly cannot tell how much of it is exaggerated (some of it HAS to be… right? It’s so over the top) and how much is reflective of the time.
Overall, I liked it more than I thought I would! It’s pretty good as a political satire, if you are able to look past the aged views on some aspects of society. And it did make me laugh a few times with its absurdity and how cleverly Swift came up with insults. So, maybe give it a try? It is an interesting read for purely historical reasons, and it’s more entertaining than some of the classics I had to read for school.
Well written, researched, and very respectful to the families of the 29 crewmen who went down with the ship. I learned a lot about the history of shipping on the Great Lakes and how a culmination of factors led to an inevitable disaster. Even if it wasn’t the Fitzgerald, a ship was going to sink eventually from relaxing safety standards and the corporations’ greed for just a little more iron, just a bit more speed. My heart goes out to those who were lost on the ship and to their remaining families and friends.
Well written, researched, and very respectful to the families of the 29 crewmen who went down with the ship. I learned a lot about the history of shipping on the Great Lakes and how a culmination of factors led to an inevitable disaster. Even if it wasn’t the Fitzgerald, a ship was going to sink eventually from relaxing safety standards and the corporations’ greed for just a little more iron, just a bit more speed. My heart goes out to those who were lost on the ship and to their remaining families and friends.
