Kuru Gürültü-William Shakespeare kitap serbest oDF biçim

Miller Mi euall — "... atalarıydı, ölü ve tozlu, burnu yıldıza doğrultan ve yüzyıllar boyunca ve onun içinden uluyan. Ve kadansları onların kadansları, acılarını dile getiren kadanslar ve onlara dinginliğin anlamı neydi ve soğuk ve karanlık. " Bu, yukarıdaki gibi akıl almaz derecede iyi yazılmış birçok pasajla iyice zevk aldığım zekice anlatılmış bir hikayeydi.

Israel Rthvb israel1990 — Oh, MT Anderson. I should really read more of your work, but some times your satire just doesn’t work for me. I’ve tried reading Burger Wuss three times, and can’t make it past the first handful of pages; I don’t know why it doesn’t work for me. But like the earlier Feed, The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing is a book that’s more bitingly observant of what’s going on now rather than when it was originally published (2006) or even the era in which its set. I wouldn’t go so far to call it a cautionary tale, but I think Anderson does a far better job of discussing the realities of the Enlightenment thinkers and the original supporters of the Revolutionary War. And despite some anvil-dropping on the ideas of personal liberty and freedom, this is very much one young man’s coming of age and seeing the world as it is. (I mention that mainly because I had to read this originally for an American Lit I class, and there was a lot of whining about “We have to read a contemporary teen book?”* Uh yeah, got a problem with that?) The thing I’ve always really loved about this is the style it’s written in. It’s a mix of traditional first person POV from Octavian, as he’s trying to unravel the truths behind his childhood and his mother’s past, and then slowly moves into an epistolary style throughout. It’s a really fascinating way to approach the plot, as Anderson acknowledges what the reader has probably guessed about Octavian and his mother very early on. I love Octavian’s accounts of his childhood (for as quietly horrifying as it later becomes); there’s a very lucid, dreamlike quality to his early days at the College of Lucidity. And yet, you can see what’s lurking underneath all of Octavian’s tutors and the tests and lessons that they give—you know even before the College’s sponsor changes hands that Octavian’s going to have all of this ripped away from him in the most humiliating and cruel way possible. I also love how his relationship with his mother is portrayed in these early scenes. You can see how Octavian is similarly charmed by his mother’s beauty and wit at an early age, but as time goes on, he does come to understand just how fragile she was when she was first bought. (Whenever he confesses to Goring later on, “I never even knew her name,” that line was so heart-breaking. There didn’t even need to be clarification on Octavian’s part; you know exactly who he’s talking about.) And the way this novel is structured makes it work extremely well. (It does help a lot more if you’re familiar with 18th century novel/book style, but Anderson does a good job of making it accessible.) You get so much characterization in these small bits. I admit, I want to read the redacted pages that are scattered throughout the book—we get tiny glimpses of what might be written, but never much more than a word or two. I really love the random letters and notes from the minor characters—people that never even show up in Octavian’s proper narrative, but Anderson infuses them with so much personality in one or two sentences. For example, about three-fourths of the way in, there’s a note between two slave catchers, and one is gloating about having caught Octavian. That’s really all the note serves for the story; however, reading it, there feels like there’s a whole other story between these two extremely minor characters. It’s very rare when a writer can pull that off, and I wholeheartedly love it. But for as great as Octavian’s personal story is, you really can’t ignore what Anderson does with the College of Lucidity and their support of the Revolutionary War. (I will try my best not to rant on current events; I will say that I was inwardly cringing at points because I have heard these arguments a lot. I kinda wanna take this book and throw it at a lot of the conservatives I have to put up with, especially when I don’t ask to hear their opinions. /done.) And I will say this about Anderson—he’s a great writer, but you can hear the anvils clanging a mile away. It’s not that he doesn’t have salient points, and I will actually say that this book works better than Feed whenever he does go off on the philosophy. (Again, see 18th century writing.) He sits down and illustrates the ideals that Mr. Gitney and his peers have, and does make them feel completely justified in their treatment of Octavian and the other slaves as they’re supporting the split from England. It’s one thing to say “Oh, these men who wanted freedom and independence for all never really considered the slaves,” but rarely does that sort of statement get the context and clarification of “No, actually, that’s how people really thought back then and yes, a lot of what they say about Octavian would have been seen as completely rational.” And then you get John Adams’s infamous “We shall have trouble in a hundred years’ hence; posterity will never forgive us” quote. (YAY HISTORY NERD.) It’s scary how rational Mr. Gitney sounds when he’s explaining the way of the world to Octavian, but mainly because that’s how people thought. (If I have to complain about the slavery aspect, I really only have an issue with it once Private Goring gets involved. I don’t think it’s ever confirmed that Goring’s an abolitionist, because once he takes over the narrative, it really feels like Anderson’s really railing against the aforementioned hypocrisy to the point of making the Revolutionary War about slavery. It’s one of the small details that I think actually hurts the book, particularly when you’ve done a great job illustrating the hypocrisy of the Revolutionaries and not everyone is free and equal and then…the clanging of the anvils.) But as it is, this is a very compelling read. I would actually recommend this to a lot of people who turn their nose up at young adult literature and dismiss it as immature and meebling. Anderson doesn’t talk down to his audience, nor does he assume that they’re going to know every tiny detail about the history involved. And even for people who love YA, I’d even say read it. This is historical fiction done extremely well, but it also doesn’t ignore the age of its intended audience. (And I really need to get my hands on the sequel. One day…) *Don’t get me wrong, I loved my college track, I had awesome professors, but some of my classmates were really pretentious. When we did Harry Potter for one of my Intro to Lit classes, the bitching was even worse.

程 昱嘉 denniseb45 — I reread this book recently. As with all Michner books, it is a sweeping historical novel. This one centers on a tel in Israel. The story is framed by an archealogical dig at tel Makor with each of the layers of the tel revealing a bit of the story of Makor. It encompasses pre-history through the 1960s. It is really fascinating and comprises most of my knowledge of the history of the Middle East - I know I shouldn't let a novel do that, but hey, better that than a movie! At times it is hard to wade through simply because of the sheer volume of it, but Michner is a superb storyteller and that paired with the fascinating subject matter makes it well worth the effort.