Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.99 AVERAGE
3.99 AVERAGE
Barker certainly doesn’t sugar coat history and the war, in particular it’s terrible impact, is dealt with in an almost visceral intensity. Hard going but her writing is impeccable.
medium-paced
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
So this third book, the finale, is the one that won the Booker Prize, yet for me, it's the weakest one in the trilogy. Having said that, 'The Ghost Road' is still a really well-written book.
With the end of the Great War in sight, Barker now plumbs the depths of flashbacks and non-linear narrative to continue the story of our two main protagonists. It's done well and neatly, the ping-pong between the past and the present as well as between setting never feels confusing or difficult to grasp. Yet, for all that, I did wonder why?
Maybe I missed out on a vital detail in my devouring of this book but the flashbacks into the past that are set in the Solomon Islands felt incongruous in theme. Rather than focus on war and trauma, as the first two books had largely dealt with, these flashbacks dealt with colonisation, imperialism and the effects of such on indigenous cultures and traditions. Death, loss and grieving did crop up in these flashbacks but nowhere near as underlined enough for it to be the reason one of the main characters are experiencing these flashbacks in the first place.
So when the book ends, it struck a strange note.
And to be frank, I did like the ending. Or rather, the non-ending. War cuts short all endings as we tend to think of them. Rude interruptions and fullstops in the middle of a life in progress. And this Pat Barker has portrayed to perfection at the book's close.
With the end of the Great War in sight, Barker now plumbs the depths of flashbacks and non-linear narrative to continue the story of our two main protagonists. It's done well and neatly, the ping-pong between the past and the present as well as between setting never feels confusing or difficult to grasp. Yet, for all that, I did wonder why?
Maybe I missed out on a vital detail in my devouring of this book but the flashbacks into the past that are set in the Solomon Islands felt incongruous in theme. Rather than focus on war and trauma, as the first two books had largely dealt with, these flashbacks dealt with colonisation, imperialism and the effects of such on indigenous cultures and traditions. Death, loss and grieving did crop up in these flashbacks but nowhere near as underlined enough for it to be the reason one of the main characters are experiencing these flashbacks in the first place.
So when the book ends, it struck a strange note.
And to be frank, I did like the ending. Or rather, the non-ending. War cuts short all endings as we tend to think of them. Rude interruptions and fullstops in the middle of a life in progress. And this Pat Barker has portrayed to perfection at the book's close.
challenging
dark
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
challenging
dark
informative
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
dark
reflective
sad
slow-paced
This is a pretty harrowing look at the psychological burden of war. It’s the last of this trilogy and the only one that won the Booker. I suspect that prize was given for the work in its totality rather than this one alone. I don’t think this works that well as a standalone because the characters are given a much more robust introduction in book 1 and some more development in book 2. This one spends quite a lot of time going back and forth between the war and before the war with Rivers, the psychiatrist, in Melanesia. I think those parts detracted a bit from the impact of this book in my opinion. I could see some of the links she was making between the anthropologic work and war but it was a bit too disjointed for my taste.
What a triumph of a book. After reading the first two books in the trilogy, I was expecting a mediocre read but this last book made up for a lot. Half of me wants to recommend jumping in and reading this book standalone but I wonder how much of the impact it had was only possible due to the foundation laid by the first two books.
This book was distinctly different to its two predecessors. Firstly, because it alternated between Rivers and Prior's view points throughout basically the entirety of the book which allowed for deeper stories to develop. Secondly, the majority of this book does not take place at Craiglockhart War Hospital but instead is split between River's memory of his trip to Melanesia studying a tribe of headhunters and Prior having returned to the war in France to fight = more action overall. Thirdly, towards the end, Prior's story is told largely through first person diary entries. All of these changes lead to much deeper character development which allowed me to connect effortlessly and earnestly to each of these main characters.
Rivers' recollections of his time in Melanesia explore the domination and subjection of the Other which was characteristic of colonialism. It is this Othering which provides parallels to the war and has us questioning whether we have in fact evolved at all.
Barker continued to paint an unadulterated view of the harshness and futility of the war but this time through Prior, the human element came to life in a way in hadn't for me in the first two books. This book was a heart-felt and sensitive, I highly recommend it.
This book was distinctly different to its two predecessors. Firstly, because it alternated between Rivers and Prior's view points throughout basically the entirety of the book which allowed for deeper stories to develop. Secondly, the majority of this book does not take place at Craiglockhart War Hospital but instead is split between River's memory of his trip to Melanesia studying a tribe of headhunters and Prior having returned to the war in France to fight = more action overall. Thirdly, towards the end, Prior's story is told largely through first person diary entries. All of these changes lead to much deeper character development which allowed me to connect effortlessly and earnestly to each of these main characters.
Rivers' recollections of his time in Melanesia explore the domination and subjection of the Other which was characteristic of colonialism. It is this Othering which provides parallels to the war and has us questioning whether we have in fact evolved at all.
Barker continued to paint an unadulterated view of the harshness and futility of the war but this time through Prior, the human element came to life in a way in hadn't for me in the first two books. This book was a heart-felt and sensitive, I highly recommend it.
This completes my Regeneration Trilogy. I think I like Eye in the Door the most, but I still love these characters. And just can't believe Barker could create such a beautiful series of novels with rich and engaging characters based on real historical figures. I like the parallel between the World War I soldiers and the people Rivers studies in Melanesia. Beautiful novels.
Read this book straight on from book two in the trilogy, and I think that helped. I thought this was the best of the three books - I thoroughly enjoyed it. I've read a lot of Pat Barker and the Regeneration trilogy is, I think, her best work.