Scan barcode
antereb's review against another edition
3.0
This book would have been so good if it was not for the blatant misogyny.
Lots of readers seem to dislike this book because of the self-piteous and unlikable main character but to be perfectly honest, I think Gordon makes some great points and I don't think that he just stands for an artist's struggle. Gordon is a symbol for a human enslaved by capitalism and the class critique is insanely great. Orwell's message transcends pre-war England, it still applies today and that is, for me at least, a sign of a well written story. The ending fits the whole premise - a corrupt society will corrupt you, unless you choose complete alienation or death.
What bugged me (and was no surprise) was the misogyny that made me want to give this book no stars. Women are depicted as brainless, greedy, intellectually inferior beings. Rosemary is "too dumb" to understand Gordon's reasonings, women merely care about whether or not a man has money and are demonised for doing so. Given that women could not work respectively, could no longer work once they were married it is not unreasonable to select husbands that way. Furthermore, Gordon tries to coerce Rosemary into having sex with him and gets mad when she refuses. He kisses her against her will and sexually assaults her which is just disgusting. And there is no defending for Orwell, other books exist (among them WE, the story that 1984 is a shitty retelling of) with women who are not just dumb sex objects and/or obstacles for men. I don't know if I'll ever pick up another story of Orwell because his female characters are all the same and if he loathed us so much, he should have written more homoerotic stories.
Lots of readers seem to dislike this book because of the self-piteous and unlikable main character but to be perfectly honest, I think Gordon makes some great points and I don't think that he just stands for an artist's struggle. Gordon is a symbol for a human enslaved by capitalism and the class critique is insanely great. Orwell's message transcends pre-war England, it still applies today and that is, for me at least, a sign of a well written story. The ending fits the whole premise - a corrupt society will corrupt you, unless you choose complete alienation or death.
What bugged me (and was no surprise) was the misogyny that made me want to give this book no stars. Women are depicted as brainless, greedy, intellectually inferior beings. Rosemary is "too dumb" to understand Gordon's reasonings, women merely care about whether or not a man has money and are demonised for doing so. Given that women could not work respectively, could no longer work once they were married it is not unreasonable to select husbands that way. Furthermore, Gordon tries to coerce Rosemary into having sex with him and gets mad when she refuses. He kisses her against her will and sexually assaults her which is just disgusting. And there is no defending for Orwell, other books exist (among them WE, the story that 1984 is a shitty retelling of) with women who are not just dumb sex objects and/or obstacles for men. I don't know if I'll ever pick up another story of Orwell because his female characters are all the same and if he loathed us so much, he should have written more homoerotic stories.
gishiroma's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
fast-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
4.5
the old myth of the starving artist as a glorified way to live, even when it makes you miserable
violetisreading's review against another edition
5.0
Orwell at his best (in my opinon!) I loved this book and its ongoing societal critique which is still so relevant today. When will Orwell cease to be irrelevant? Never!
pbandb's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
it was slooooooooow and boooooooring. I usually love orwell, but this wasn't it for me.
varvara's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Loveable characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
A surprisingly gripping read, despite the fact that the main character is an incel idiot - what Rosemary was thinking I’ll never know XD
anna26's review against another edition
dark
inspiring
reflective
fast-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
4.0
very insightful and interesting to read,
pizzaboy's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
livvvvh777's review against another edition
dark
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
blueyorkie's review against another edition
4.0
The novel is like "1984", a thesis novel. The author sets out to portray to us in great detail the monotony and smallness of Gordon's life and shows us page after page to what extent money governs every moment of the life of his "hero," despite his desperate attempt to extricate himself from the system. Suppose a form of boredom sometimes accompanies reading. In that case, insidious anguish seizes the reader when he realizes how poverty eats away at Gordon from within, at the risk of robbing him of his soul.
The reader quickly grasps the irony of the situation. By choosing to fight against money, Gordon paradoxically gets into a slump where lack of funds dictates his choices and defines him as a social, penniless friend with Ravelston and a chaste lover with Rosemary. At first glance, the novel's title, to say the least opaque, takes on its whole meaning: the aspidistra is a perennial plant, an integral part of every London household. It symbolizes a form of normality, of belonging to society. Gordon's hatred of the aspidistra, which in his eyes represents the system he refuses to be a part of, perfectly illustrates the author's chilling irony.
The reader quickly grasps the irony of the situation. By choosing to fight against money, Gordon paradoxically gets into a slump where lack of funds dictates his choices and defines him as a social, penniless friend with Ravelston and a chaste lover with Rosemary. At first glance, the novel's title, to say the least opaque, takes on its whole meaning: the aspidistra is a perennial plant, an integral part of every London household. It symbolizes a form of normality, of belonging to society. Gordon's hatred of the aspidistra, which in his eyes represents the system he refuses to be a part of, perfectly illustrates the author's chilling irony.