Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.73 AVERAGE
3.73 AVERAGE
Reading the novel in breaks rather than one continuous sitting did ruin the flow of the story for me mainly because I have a bad memory and I can't recall completely what I read months ago. But despite that, this book is everything I had hoped it would be. It agglomerates (almost) all things I hold dear: mathematics, dystopia, and Russian literature. I can see themes I have noticed in other Russian novels (the question of free will and happiness) and in other dystopian novels (totalitarian governments and the realisation that there is something wrong with the world around you) and finally those in mathematics (infinity, irrationality) weaving a perfect tale of caution and terror.
I'm even pleasantly surprised by the women in this novel having strong characteristics and important storylines. To be honest, I really was not expecting that. I also drew a lot of comparisons to Dostoevsky and I discovered that Zamyatin was influenced by him and of course, it's very possible that it was intended to be a criticism of "militant atheism" (whatever that is) but like Dostoevsky, Zamyatin left enough room for it to be interpreted as a criticism of organised religion.
My immediate thoughts of the novel were that it wasn't just a usual criticism of totalitarian governments but also that of organised religion because it talks a lot of infinite happiness and how freedom has to be divorced from life to achieve that. People are not aware of what constitutes as happiness and so it's a nifty solution where organised religion just spells it out for them. There is this quote in the book: Remember: in paradise, they don't know desire, they don't know pity, they don't know love. There, angels, the slaves of God, are blissful with surgically excised imaginations (which is why they are blissful.)
I've grown quite fond of this book and I will probably revisit it at some point now that I have finished it. Do check it out, I don't think anybody would regret it. it's one of the giants that somehow isn't all that well-known. I read the translation by Natasha Randall.
I'm even pleasantly surprised by the women in this novel having strong characteristics and important storylines. To be honest, I really was not expecting that. I also drew a lot of comparisons to Dostoevsky and I discovered that Zamyatin was influenced by him and of course, it's very possible that it was intended to be a criticism of "militant atheism" (whatever that is) but like Dostoevsky, Zamyatin left enough room for it to be interpreted as a criticism of organised religion.
My immediate thoughts of the novel were that it wasn't just a usual criticism of totalitarian governments but also that of organised religion because it talks a lot of infinite happiness and how freedom has to be divorced from life to achieve that. People are not aware of what constitutes as happiness and so it's a nifty solution where organised religion just spells it out for them. There is this quote in the book: Remember: in paradise, they don't know desire, they don't know pity, they don't know love. There, angels, the slaves of God, are blissful with surgically excised imaginations (which is why they are blissful.)
I've grown quite fond of this book and I will probably revisit it at some point now that I have finished it. Do check it out, I don't think anybody would regret it. it's one of the giants that somehow isn't all that well-known. I read the translation by Natasha Randall.
Not as good as 1984 but of course this one was written years ago. It might be one of the very first books of the genre
If only it wasn't written almost 100 years ago I'd probably rate it much higher. But it's OLD.
Una obra maestra y un clásico. El origen de las distopías, es básicamente 1984 pero mejor, si eso se puede.
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:
Complicated
challenging
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
3.70* untuk world building dan writing style nya yang unik meskipun terkadang cukup membingungkan karena pemikiran D-503 yang sering terhenti ditengah. Tapi itulah uniknya.
Cerita novelnya sendiri tidak terlalu bagus dari awal cerita sampai pertengahan ceritanya membosankan apalagi waktu sudah masuk kecerita asmara D-503, ceritanya tidak hanya membosankan tetapi juga cukup menyebalkan. Pada saat 10 bab terakhir, baru ceritanya mulai (agak) seru. Membosankan disini dalam arti bahwa pengarang menitik beratkan perasaan D-503 yang pertama kali merasakan emosi bernama "cinta" daripada mendobrak kungkungan negaranya. Jadi, karakter D-503 jadi terlihat agak pasif.
Pelajaran penting dari cerita ini adalah bahwa pemikir logis pun akan melakukan apapun demi cinta (kkkk).
Cerita novelnya sendiri tidak terlalu bagus dari awal cerita sampai pertengahan ceritanya membosankan apalagi waktu sudah masuk kecerita asmara D-503, ceritanya tidak hanya membosankan tetapi juga cukup menyebalkan. Pada saat 10 bab terakhir, baru ceritanya mulai (agak) seru. Membosankan disini dalam arti bahwa pengarang menitik beratkan perasaan D-503 yang pertama kali merasakan emosi bernama "cinta" daripada mendobrak kungkungan negaranya. Jadi, karakter D-503 jadi terlihat agak pasif.
Pelajaran penting dari cerita ini adalah bahwa pemikir logis pun akan melakukan apapun demi cinta (kkkk).
challenging
dark
reflective
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I read this book as part of a dystopian reading challenge. It’s the oldest book having been written in 1924 (a hundred years ago!) in Russian but published in English. That being said, there’s obvious boundaries in what was possible for the writer to imagine at the time. E.g. gender is binary, sexuality is heteronormative, and technology is not as advanced as we know it can be.
The writing was a bit hard for me to follow and the descriptions difficult to imagine. It took me a while to get into it. Also a there a lot of … in the text for the reader to fill in.
The narrator is retelling us what’s happening through his journal entries. Which makes him unreliable as much as he claims to be reasonable and logical. His role in One State is a mathematician, yet he still writes poetically.
throughout the story we see D going back and forth on his loyalty to OneState. It’s deeply ingrained in him and he believes it. Through his relationship with I-330, he slowly learns to love and feel. Even though it seems by the end that she chose him for strategic reasons, their relationship was the key to his awakening. I was very sad to read the ending and that he was forced into the operation. I wish that the end of had been an open ended revolution, but maybe the takeaway is simply that our humanity is our greatest gift.
It was cool to read this book and try to contextualiza it when it was written in 1920s Russia. The themes of state repression, government surveillance, people’s conformity, and that our relationships are the key to our humanity are all still relevant. Reading WE is similar to reading Pride and Prejudice. Both were groundbreaking in their time and set the foundation for their respective genres for the centuries to come. I’m excited to continue my reading challenge and see how themes of WE come up in future dystopian novels.
The writing was a bit hard for me to follow and the descriptions difficult to imagine. It took me a while to get into it. Also a there a lot of … in the text for the reader to fill in.
The narrator is retelling us what’s happening through his journal entries. Which makes him unreliable as much as he claims to be reasonable and logical. His role in One State is a mathematician, yet he still writes poetically.
It was cool to read this book and try to contextualiza it when it was written in 1920s Russia. The themes of state repression, government surveillance, people’s conformity, and that our relationships are the key to our humanity are all still relevant. Reading WE is similar to reading Pride and Prejudice. Both were groundbreaking in their time and set the foundation for their respective genres for the centuries to come. I’m excited to continue my reading challenge and see how themes of WE come up in future dystopian novels.
Having just read A Brave New World, I can do a true comparison of these classics…
We was MUCH better. It made sense and I could follow the story!
LIKES:
1. it’s the original. It’s the book that 1984 and A Handmaid’s Tale was based on
2. It’s so creepy how something written in 1924 can still be applicable today. I don’t think this is really a compliment but I do think that this is the clear reason why books shouldn’t be banned. Banning them doesn’t mean that they aren’t real or prophetic. Stop being scared of learning
3. The imagination and free thought is the enemy of the state… very interesting
DISLIKES:
1. Nothing really, just I think I’m not a huge fan of dystopian and I need a break from this world, lol.
We was MUCH better. It made sense and I could follow the story!
LIKES:
1. it’s the original. It’s the book that 1984 and A Handmaid’s Tale was based on
2. It’s so creepy how something written in 1924 can still be applicable today. I don’t think this is really a compliment but I do think that this is the clear reason why books shouldn’t be banned. Banning them doesn’t mean that they aren’t real or prophetic. Stop being scared of learning
3. The imagination and free thought is the enemy of the state… very interesting
DISLIKES:
1. Nothing really, just I think I’m not a huge fan of dystopian and I need a break from this world, lol.
http://zimlicious.blogspot.com/
This was the second book we read as a book club, Ex Libris. First I must start with --excuse my French-- bitching about the publisher's introduction: It was way too long and way too detailed. I personally like to read the introductions in the end, after I make up my own mind about the book first. On Kindle, it's a pain in the butt to scroll back so many pages (or I haven't found the better way to do it yet), so I read it first and quickly regretted it.
The book itself, however, I enjoyed a great deal. It's quite crazy how they'll shove Orwell's 1984 down your throat in high school, but nobody even bothers to mention WE. Now that I think about it again, I'm not even sure if they knew about this at all. I do love 1984, and it was very exciting to read the one book that gave birth to it and many others alike.
Since I was so pissed off at the introduction, I'm not going to get into too much detail here. It's a book about "the collectives’ rights to individuals’ souls in the name of revolutions and progress." It's a tiny book that makes you ask big questions that probably were already wandering in the back of your head, and you find yourself questioning the world over and over again. Revolutions give birth to too much sorrow, yet great things come out of them as well. And I honestly believe this book is one of them.
My research showed that the English translation I've read is the most perfected one out there. I found this hard to believe most of the time, though. I of course have no idea how fluent the original writing is, but the translation is cringe-worthy and hard to understand at times. Nevertheless, I believe everyone should give this one a shot.
This was the second book we read as a book club, Ex Libris. First I must start with --excuse my French-- bitching about the publisher's introduction: It was way too long and way too detailed. I personally like to read the introductions in the end, after I make up my own mind about the book first. On Kindle, it's a pain in the butt to scroll back so many pages (or I haven't found the better way to do it yet), so I read it first and quickly regretted it.
The book itself, however, I enjoyed a great deal. It's quite crazy how they'll shove Orwell's 1984 down your throat in high school, but nobody even bothers to mention WE. Now that I think about it again, I'm not even sure if they knew about this at all. I do love 1984, and it was very exciting to read the one book that gave birth to it and many others alike.
Since I was so pissed off at the introduction, I'm not going to get into too much detail here. It's a book about "the collectives’ rights to individuals’ souls in the name of revolutions and progress." It's a tiny book that makes you ask big questions that probably were already wandering in the back of your head, and you find yourself questioning the world over and over again. Revolutions give birth to too much sorrow, yet great things come out of them as well. And I honestly believe this book is one of them.
My research showed that the English translation I've read is the most perfected one out there. I found this hard to believe most of the time, though. I of course have no idea how fluent the original writing is, but the translation is cringe-worthy and hard to understand at times. Nevertheless, I believe everyone should give this one a shot.