I studied The Giver in school. I really liked it, and have since read the sequels, Gathering Blue, Messenger, and now, Son. I was not as impressed with the sequels as I was with The Giver. I still think that is one of the best Young Adult books from the late twentieth century. I fondly remember the moment when Jonas the learns about the colour red.

I’d forgotten a lot of the previous two books when I started Son, and I liked that this last instalment of the series goes back to the original community. I liked the protagonist Claire, and the moments of maternal love were very moving. Lois Lowry lost her own son, and this yearning for him comes through Claire. I like Lowry’s style which is simple, but still expressive. She is a story teller.

I am not completely in love with this Quartet though, and it’s become increasingly supernatural with most of the characters displaying powers. This is fine except it it’s hard to balance with the focus on dystopian culture. I understand why there is an element of Good vs. Evil, but at the same time, I wish the books were more analytical about the nature of human authority. In any case, this is a rather minor quibble since I was satisfied with the ending.

This is a good end to the Quartet overall, but I do think that it is not necessary to read the sequels as The Giver is in itself, a great stand alone novel.

Read July 1, 2013.

Nick Hornby wrote that this was one of the best novels he had read in the last few years. Originally published in 1965 and reissued in 2006, this novel is the story of a man who becomes a Professor of English at the University of Missouri. It recounts his whole life.

I understand why Hornby loves this book. For readers who liked Marilynne Robinson’s Gilead, this is very similar. Both are about undistinguishable men from the midwest with simple lives and backgrounds. Both novels are quiet and filled with instropection. They are both very well written.

The prose is strangely dense. It’s a small novel, but it does not seem anything is wasted. It’s a simple story of an ordinary man told well. It’s not a particularly happy story either, but it’s not a roller coaster of events. I found it engrossing in its way.

Most of the book is actually a bit sad from today’s modern perspective. Professor William Stoner is not close to his family, marries a woman who does not love him, and has a career which is stunted by personal politics. When the novel reaches its most passionate and sensual point, it is lovely:

“That the person one loves first is not the person one loves at last, and that love is not an end but a process through which one person attempts to know another.” (p. 194)

Still, this not an exciting or particularly vibrant novel in the conventional sense. There is definitely a dignity about the protagonist. I really liked the prose.

I would not say I love this book as much as Gilead though. While realistic, the conflict in the English Department felt a bit contrived. It seemed by that point in the novel, not a lot was going well for the Professor.

All in all, a lovely novel that should be more widely read especially by those of us who like literary fiction.

Read June 15-16, 2013.

Sophie Kinsella is one of my favourite chick lit authors. That’s not a large niche because I don’t read that much chick lit. Still, I’ve enjoyed most of her novels even though her characters embarass themselves a lot mostly through lying.

This novel had more characters than the typical Kinsella book, and the two women narrate the story. It’s interesting because it gives perspectives on some intimate relationships. It is the theme for all the characters that they have to be reminded by others about taking things too far. It’s a story about seeing yourself objectively.

I realized during this book that here is a lack of women of colour in Kinsella’s novels. I am not sure why it took almost ten of her books for me to realize, but perhaps those other ones distracted me long enough to realize it.

This book did drag for me a bit. I thought the slapstick antics were too much even if I did laugh during the couples quiz. While I found the female characters the same as her other books, foolish but still relatable, it got a bit too much for me. I just thought it could have been cut down by about fifty pages.

I like the fact there was more than one ending because of the larger cast of characters. I hope Kinsella does that again, but I also felt the men were short-changed as a result. Kinsella can write some amusing leading men, but not enough of them here though.

I’ll read Kinsella again, but I do not think this was one of her better novels.

Read June 15 2013.