Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.03 AVERAGE
4.03 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Not the same as the movie, but beautiful in its own right
Well. I picked this up earlier to move into the 'reading-next' pile and, on the way to the pile, thought to myself, let's read the first page and see what it's like. And now I've finished reading it the same day.
As I make my way through the top 100 list I am looking for the books I call 'masterpieces', which is my favourite word when referring to literature, as it holds so much weight, honour and power. Books are masterpieces for different reasons and this, I would have to say, is a masterpiece.
Thoughtful, sensitive and moving.
As I make my way through the top 100 list I am looking for the books I call 'masterpieces', which is my favourite word when referring to literature, as it holds so much weight, honour and power. Books are masterpieces for different reasons and this, I would have to say, is a masterpiece.
Thoughtful, sensitive and moving.
Some parts of this worked really well for me - there are beautiful passages and well-crafted characters; certain scenes play out like a movie. But a lot of it fell flat - the narrator’s tone didn’t always work for me, and the ending was a big swing and a big miss.
Short and sweet. So good. Very beautiful and felt very real. Loved it.
I read this book in two days, devoured it really. On the surface, it is the story of a single day in a single gay man's life, but like every day, there is an eternity written into each experience. Longing and loss are so palpable in every sentence, every moment. As a writer, I search for ways of making simple experiences convey the depth of meaning that led up to that moment, Isherwood was the master of this. All good books sail between the story on top and the one bubbling beneath. In this story, George is just getting through another day, teaching classes, attempting to ignore social obligations, and then accepting them, because he can't stand the idea of being alone. Beneath this is the story of George attempting to find meaning in life and what is left of his. Every good book does not end until the two stories collide, and in this one it collides in a beautiful wave of emotion and understanding. I'll be reading this one again, in order to figure out how to recreate the magic.
I was assigned A Single Man in conjunction with the film for a class. Before getting to the book review part, may I say that Colin Firth is the only man I can think of who can look sexy on a toilet? Then we have Colin Firth in a Mad Men suit with Ira Glasses? Director Tom Ford created visual porn for liberals who like men.
Even so, I preferred the book. I choose Isherwood's sassy, uncensored George Falconer over Firth's broody portrayal. The book is built around the interior monologue of Falconer, who dissects 1962 Santa Monica middle class culture through his unflinching and often hilarious observations. He is a gay man, a single man and therefore suspect, isolated from the nuclear world. (Nuclear in the sense of family and in the apocalyptic, since the early 60s was an era when people built bomb shelters in their back yards).
The present tense propels the narrative, which covers a single day. Admittedly, the book is short on plot, and yet A Single Man is a fast read, carried by pitch-perfect language and excruciatingly intimate moments. The reader might want more to "happen," but the modernist story doesn't overstay it's welcome. (Paging Joyce).
I had never heard of this book or this author before my film class. But those who enjoy snark balanced by pathos, should help keep this book in the "classic" status.
Even so, I preferred the book. I choose Isherwood's sassy, uncensored George Falconer over Firth's broody portrayal. The book is built around the interior monologue of Falconer, who dissects 1962 Santa Monica middle class culture through his unflinching and often hilarious observations. He is a gay man, a single man and therefore suspect, isolated from the nuclear world. (Nuclear in the sense of family and in the apocalyptic, since the early 60s was an era when people built bomb shelters in their back yards).
The present tense propels the narrative, which covers a single day. Admittedly, the book is short on plot, and yet A Single Man is a fast read, carried by pitch-perfect language and excruciatingly intimate moments. The reader might want more to "happen," but the modernist story doesn't overstay it's welcome. (Paging Joyce).
I had never heard of this book or this author before my film class. But those who enjoy snark balanced by pathos, should help keep this book in the "classic" status.
Half inner life of mild-mannered gay professor George and half relationship stories. One particular night, first dinner with an old friend and later with a Grecian god-like student, both of whom can't seem to make up their minds. George does, however. He comes out of his grieving self and into a new realization. Well written and a quick read. The last chapter, however, I refuse to accept.
I wanted to read this because I had enjoyed the film. So, first I will say, the two mediums could not be more different. The book was almost fanciful and funny--a lightness, rather than the dark and brooding drama film.
The book was a nice read, but it got a bit intimate. There are details of a man's life that I don't need the gory details of. But I also felt the writing was a bit pretentious. Like, Isherwood was trying to write a classic rather than just a story about a man. So, it felt clunky and slow.
But it was a nice story (with its faults) with hidden meaning and "easter eggs" of symbolism.
The book was a nice read, but it got a bit intimate. There are details of a man's life that I don't need the gory details of. But I also felt the writing was a bit pretentious. Like, Isherwood was trying to write a classic rather than just a story about a man. So, it felt clunky and slow.
But it was a nice story (with its faults) with hidden meaning and "easter eggs" of symbolism.
emotional
funny
inspiring
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Non è un brutto libro, ma trovo la scrittura di Isherwood noiosa. Probabilmente nel 1964 questo era forse un libro scandaloso, la storia di una coppia gay etc.etc. Attualmente però, potrebbe essere uno di quei rari casi in cui il film è meglio della novella da cui è tratto. Magari un'altra chance all'autore provo a dargliela con i racconti Berlinesi, ma sono molto indecisa...