Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.73 AVERAGE
3.73 AVERAGE
We by Yevgeny Zamyatin
3.5 Stars
If this review had been written 2 'entries' into We I would've told you I hated everything about it, the way it was written, the countless unfinished sentences and the use of maths (ewwwwww!) and given it 1 star.
If you'd asked me halfway through the book I would've given you a solid 4 stars after getting used to the style and getting more interested in the plot and characters as well as getting over the maths and seeing and even appreciating the reason for the unfinished sentences.
However, after taking a small break from reading it and coming back and having to readapt to the book and not completely understanding what was going on during the books climax (which may have been the point) I knocked it down half a star.
This book is considered one of if not the first modern dystopian novel and inspired both 1984 and Brave New World. The plot is incredibly similar to 1984 although the world of We is more 'Sci-fiy' than 1984's post WWII feel and has an actual bonafide 1920's rocket ship and all the wacky science that makes it fly.
George Orwell admitted he lifted the plot for 1984 from We and you can tell although I do think 1984 is a better book (great artists steal) but that doesn't mean you shouldn't read this one.
Overall I'd recommend it to Dystopian and Political fiction fans who liked 1984, Brave New World and others.
3.5 Stars
If this review had been written 2 'entries' into We I would've told you I hated everything about it, the way it was written, the countless unfinished sentences and the use of maths (ewwwwww!) and given it 1 star.
If you'd asked me halfway through the book I would've given you a solid 4 stars after getting used to the style and getting more interested in the plot and characters as well as getting over the maths and seeing and even appreciating the reason for the unfinished sentences.
However, after taking a small break from reading it and coming back and having to readapt to the book and not completely understanding what was going on during the books climax (which may have been the point) I knocked it down half a star.
This book is considered one of if not the first modern dystopian novel and inspired both 1984 and Brave New World. The plot is incredibly similar to 1984 although the world of We is more 'Sci-fiy' than 1984's post WWII feel and has an actual bonafide 1920's rocket ship and all the wacky science that makes it fly.
George Orwell admitted he lifted the plot for 1984 from We and you can tell although I do think 1984 is a better book (great artists steal) but that doesn't mean you shouldn't read this one.
Overall I'd recommend it to Dystopian and Political fiction fans who liked 1984, Brave New World and others.
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
wow… the world-building is really complex. we is written as d-503’s journal and the good part is that each chapter is really short.
for me, this is a masterpiece. definitely a challenging and tough read. all the philosophy, political critique, and scientific analogies can be hard to absorb. IT’S SO MESSY I BELIEVE. zamyatin didn’t make it easy. he filled the book with imagery, metaphors, symbolism, and more.
SO THIS IS TRICKIER THAN IMAGINED!!!
for me, this is a masterpiece. definitely a challenging and tough read. all the philosophy, political critique, and scientific analogies can be hard to absorb. IT’S SO MESSY I BELIEVE. zamyatin didn’t make it easy. he filled the book with imagery, metaphors, symbolism, and more.
SO THIS IS TRICKIER THAN IMAGINED!!!
i admit that can be super frustrating sometimes.
besides the whole beautiful artistic narrative, the math discussions are even scarier. i mean, i don’t quite understand the formulas and calculations. everything is calculated, people’s lives, their work, and their relationships are governed by rational rules and strict schedules, all rooted in math, logic, and precision. soul (emotions) and freedom are dangerous (those things shouldn't exist in the perfectly logical world of the one state). INCURABLE. the state wants to eliminate anything that doesn’t fit into an equation. it’s all about maintaining absolute order.
i think we is not an easy book for someone just starting with dystopian fiction. it might feel overwhelming if you're not already familiar with the concept.
besides the whole beautiful artistic narrative, the math discussions are even scarier. i mean, i don’t quite understand the formulas and calculations. everything is calculated, people’s lives, their work, and their relationships are governed by rational rules and strict schedules, all rooted in math, logic, and precision. soul (emotions) and freedom are dangerous (those things shouldn't exist in the perfectly logical world of the one state). INCURABLE. the state wants to eliminate anything that doesn’t fit into an equation. it’s all about maintaining absolute order.
i think we is not an easy book for someone just starting with dystopian fiction. it might feel overwhelming if you're not already familiar with the concept.
and it’s kind of sad that we doesn’t get the attention it deserves, especially considering how influential it is in the dystopian genre. still, for those who do discover it, it’s a hidden gem.
Es una novela distópica narrada en primera persona que, con bellas palabras nos cuenta lo que es vivir en un mundo de cristal en el que nadie oculta nada. Intenta convencerte (al menos durante la primera mitad) de que todo es correcto así, que esa es y debe ser la única forma de vida feliz, la cual es sumamente extraña, allí tener alma es una enfermedad, la fantasía es un riesgo, la libertad un delito, la música es por completo carente de sentimientos e incluso el amor es cuestión de lógica matemática: una función de la muerte. Aquí no existen nombres propios, todos son números y letras, átomos de un solo ser. La individualidad es el mayor crimen.
El protagonista D-503 es el ingeniero a cargo de la construcción del Integral, una nave que llevará a todos los salvajes y libres de todos los continentes del universo las leyes de El Protector (el único y verdadero Dios, autoridad máxima, la perfección), y cree fervientemente que hace lo correcto hasta que conoce a I-330, una mujer de la que se enamora, volviéndolo enfermo, un delincuente, a pesar de que intenta muchas veces volver a su vida, olvidarla le es imposible.
La lectura de Nosotros es fluida y poética, pero no oculta la severidad de lo que cuenta. El final me ha dejado pensando mucho.
¡No tenemos salvación!
Este libro lo leí durante el 2018 por recomendación de Miriam García (A. K. A. Doña Miau) y subió inmediatamente a mi primer puesto de novelas de ese género, me fascinó de una forma en la que ninguna novela lo ha hecho. La considero muchísimo mejor que "Un mundo feliz" y "1984" juntas (la cosa es que Huxley y Orwel tomaron ideas de esta novela para las suyas).
El protagonista D-503 es el ingeniero a cargo de la construcción del Integral, una nave que llevará a todos los salvajes y libres de todos los continentes del universo las leyes de El Protector (el único y verdadero Dios, autoridad máxima, la perfección), y cree fervientemente que hace lo correcto hasta que conoce a I-330, una mujer de la que se enamora, volviéndolo enfermo, un delincuente, a pesar de que intenta muchas veces volver a su vida, olvidarla le es imposible.
La lectura de Nosotros es fluida y poética, pero no oculta la severidad de lo que cuenta. El final me ha dejado pensando mucho.
¡No tenemos salvación!
Este libro lo leí durante el 2018 por recomendación de Miriam García (A. K. A. Doña Miau) y subió inmediatamente a mi primer puesto de novelas de ese género, me fascinó de una forma en la que ninguna novela lo ha hecho. La considero muchísimo mejor que "Un mundo feliz" y "1984" juntas (la cosa es que Huxley y Orwel tomaron ideas de esta novela para las suyas).
This book was basically the foundational dystopian work. Considering it was written in the 1920s and directly inspired Brave New World and 1984, it's remarkable. 100 years later it reads a bit dated, but still very worth reading. I can't believe it took me so long to read it!
Pt 2 of my Soviet pariahs read. I wish I felt as passionate about this book as Ursala Leguin did in her excellent afterwords but for some reason the deeply impersonal nature of the characters didn't give me much to latch on to and connect with. Learning about Zamyatin's life definitely adds depth and bittersweet context to the story and it's hard to believe that neither orwell or huxely copied their ideas straight from We. The ending was probably the strongest part for me narratively.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
If I could rate higher than a 5, I would.
Through the One State, we see how being stripped of individuality and submitting to hyper surveillance is (I believe obviously) less than fucking ideal. The thought of “we” without “I” is antithetical to the human experience (we need psychology to understand sociology and vice versa, right?). But as it goes, the pendulum swings hard in the opposite direction for our protagonist and good god does Zamyatin do all of this so poetically. There are moments of D-503 discovering himself and the feelings he’s been deprived of and the language used to describe a new experience of a sunrise, for instance, is unbelievably beautiful, albeit simple. “In the morning, the sun is rosy, transparent, warm gold. And the air itself is a little rosy, all steeped in the sun’s gentle blood.” His use of language is childlike in its innocence of using blood to represent saturation rather than violence (or maybe it is violent to him—saturation—when all he’s known is grey). And throughout following logs, our mathematician spirals into anger and softness and self-righteousness and regret and the whole gamut of how wonderful and painful it is to feel.
Zamyatin writes self discovery and the search for liberation in a dystopia so romantically. And he beautifully bleeds that romance into a first experience of love turned obsession because of the inability to emotionally regulate after having no allowance for feeling in this world of logic for generations. And if I could say more without spoiling this beautiful heartache of a book, I would.
Unfortunately, there are (as expected in 1921 from a white man) a couple of moments of racism and misogyny. And while it doesn’t make them more appealing, I’m *shocked* there weren’t more.
Through the One State, we see how being stripped of individuality and submitting to hyper surveillance is (I believe obviously) less than fucking ideal. The thought of “we” without “I” is antithetical to the human experience (we need psychology to understand sociology and vice versa, right?). But as it goes, the pendulum swings hard in the opposite direction for our protagonist and good god does Zamyatin do all of this so poetically. There are moments of D-503 discovering himself and the feelings he’s been deprived of and the language used to describe a new experience of a sunrise, for instance, is unbelievably beautiful, albeit simple. “In the morning, the sun is rosy, transparent, warm gold. And the air itself is a little rosy, all steeped in the sun’s gentle blood.” His use of language is childlike in its innocence of using blood to represent saturation rather than violence (or maybe it is violent to him—saturation—when all he’s known is grey). And throughout following logs, our mathematician spirals into anger and softness and self-righteousness and regret and the whole gamut of how wonderful and painful it is to feel.
Zamyatin writes self discovery and the search for liberation in a dystopia so romantically. And he beautifully bleeds that romance into a first experience of love turned obsession because of the inability to emotionally regulate after having no allowance for feeling in this world of logic for generations. And if I could say more without spoiling this beautiful heartache of a book, I would.
Unfortunately, there are (as expected in 1921 from a white man) a couple of moments of racism and misogyny. And while it doesn’t make them more appealing, I’m *shocked* there weren’t more.
challenging
dark
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes