Harriet is going to jump start things here by sharing with us some of her summer reading.
I did not catch the rhythm of this book at once, and maybe not at all. The language is partly difficult, and how the author tells the story is complex–meandering, passing people interconnecting and mentioning everything small, and “must be noticed” parts to be followed up sometime later in the thick book. Phew!
I chose the book because it is thick. I wanted a book that lasted. Well, it did last. But not in a very memorable way. I do not need to read this book again.
The story is educational in how it presents the political and moral conditions of society in the time the story takes place. And it is educational in ways I do not think I need details about, really. I do not like forensic reports in crime either, which requires a similar level of paying attention to detail. The book highlights something that is unimportant in some areas and in some countries.
However, I like the great theme and the huge aspect of love and friendship across gender, age, and personal differences that shine through in this book.
If you ask me if I want to join a fan club of this author, I will postpone my answer until further notice…
Oh, and the very depressed Norwegian character is not very common. We leave that mood to the Finnish people mostly.
Jen’s Two Cents
I know the feeling of wanting books to linger, and I suppose I sometimes choose to tackle lengthy books at times when I have ample opportunity to read, but I can’t say I’ve ever chosen a book just because it’s thick. The long ones I undertake have something other than length to recommend them.
What if I selected a thick book and didn’t like it? I tend to slog my way through books I don’t like simply because it feels like a failure to not finish.
Does anyone else deliberately choose a book because it’s long?
This I liked very much when I read it earlier this spring. I like pioneering and stories of how people adapt to new situations forced upon them or due to their own incompetence, with severe consequences at times…if that make sense. Sometimes people are easy and simple and do things that have vast impact on their life. In this book it is like this in several ways.
It was a thick and good book.
Jen’s Two Cents
Oh, I like pioneering stories, too. And I like John Irving (The World According to Garp, A Prayer for Owen Meany). I will look for these two Irving books when I next go to town.
I liked the language at once–how the author caught my interest and curiosity with the first and the rest of her sentences.
I really wanted to know how these people and this feisty, brave woman worked hard, how she adjusted her life situation to improve her skills. Only in her teaching in the last year at work did she improve her skills and adapt. This weakness reflects only how it is to be human and is not a character fault by the author as such.
The book is set in the early times in the USA, and I find it very interesting.
The woman in the book is based on the grandmother of the author. I really like that the book is a story and not a biography/documentary. I like that the facts and the documentary parts are part of our old tradition of storytelling, you make sure that something is true, and you embellish it while telling.
In my opinion, the author writes descriptions that makes me smell the dry sand, the earth lacking water and the rain when it comes, and the trousers (unwashed jeans to make them more sustaining) were almost in my nose, but this was harder to imagine, really. She writes so well, I can see the people the character meets and how they react towards this strong and strange woman.
I wished this book was longer.
This woman can survive anything. I wish we had such role models today. Really!
Jen’s Two Cents
Description. As a writer, I consider description a personal weakness. It’s something I have to think about, and it’s often something that I add in revisions because it’s lacking in the rough draft. It doesn’t pour out of me as it does from some people.
In reading description, I find a little goes a long way. I remember early in my recreational-reading days (that would be my early twenties) being presented with a page-and-a-half of margin-to-margin description. I thought it was awful. My mind bolted around line three or four. It was from a book by an author of some prestige, and I wondered if I was alone in thinking it dreadful. It was the opening of the book, for goodness’s sake!
It was a sort of defining moment: A moment when I decided what kind of a reader I was. If I had been a kid presented with that as an early reading experience, I might have concluded that all books were like that and not at all for me.
I’m intrigued by the praise for the language. That, the time period, and the based-on-a-real-experience are all reasons I’ll add this to my To Be Read list, too.
First of all, this title seams wrong because the title in Norwegian, “Mørketid,” = polar night, or as we all use it when wintertime is long and daylight short: “The Dark time”. The English title seems a bit about something else. The cover is also better on the Norwegian book, seen from both the meaning of the title and as an artist.
I like this book because it is about going out on an expedition and to Svalbard in the Arctic area. Every Norwegian goes on expeditions. It is odd if you do not have some heavy nature achievements on your CV (Curriculum Vitae)!
The book is quiet and written as if the author knows this experience in her own frozen fingers and bones. The theme about one little man in darkness is recognizable, but not so easily understood. We can look for monsters under our beds when we are children and know that the grownups will fix things if there really would have been monsters there… But how to be alone in this very cold and totally dark environment and not be affected by it somehow?
Would I go with my head in a bucket? Would I go crazy? Would I see visions and hallucinate? Would I survive as a person not affected at all by the vastness of being on my own and still not significant in the big picture? Would I survive by routines?
I know I will not go on such an expedition! I would rather walk in the mountains or forest and camp.
But the book is teasing me about what we, a great many of us, see as typically Norwegian. As an ordinary human, who will cope with such conditions?
Is it like climbing high mountains a bit lower than Mt. Everest: You really do not know in advance who would get mountain sickness and who will not be affected.
It is a small and quick read, but this book lasted longer than “In One Person.”
Jen’s Two Cents
I think Norwegians and Alaskans have similar views of and regard for outdoor adventures. And this sounds a bit like caretaking. ‘Nuff said. I’m sold.
It is about people written in a French quirky manner that I like very much. It is both ordinary and not so at the same time. It is feeble and weak personalities and strong, mean ones.
The main character is a woman struggling with her life, with believing in herself, her inner self. And a lot of people around her make it hard to be her, and a few give her blooming possibilities.
I like the way the characters in the book are normal by way of being a bit odd and have secrets that are important to keep or not. I like the language. I also like that I get provoked by how some of the people interact or solve or don’t solve their problems. It is an advanced feel-good book, even though that is not giving the book really good credit. It is not a “kiosk book” as we tend to call easily-written literature, with lots of love and happiness and some conflicts. Not at all.
I hope she writes another book about this woman’s life and the confetti of people that surround her.
Jen’s Two Cents
WHAT???! You read in French, too?! Harriet, you are a language over-achiever. I think that’s way cool!
If there isn’t currently an English version–my quick search did not find one–I read that one is forthcoming.
So what did you read this summer that you really enjoyed? Harriet and I both want to know.