You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.05 AVERAGE
3.05 AVERAGE
I should have known better than to read this when I saw the comparison to "Cloud Atlas" on the cover. There's a reason I stick to hard sci-fi & hard fantasy--because they follow the rules. You always get a proper beginning, middle, and end to the story, even if the end is ambiguous. Well, for me this entire book was ambiguous. It's part Ocean's 11, part, Catcher in the Rye, and part Da Vinci Code. And yet, the stories don't gel together and it never really goes anywhere. I started and ended the book not caring about any of the characters. Aside from some minor superficial threads, the three stories didn't seem to be connected in any way that furthered the plot. Usually I can get something even out of books I don't like but this felt like a complete waste of time.
Beautifully written, more atmosphere than plot. The story is difficult to follow and connect but the three visions of three different versions of Venice were very effective.
This is an ambitious book, and one I quite enjoyed. Three stories featuring Venice (the hotel in Las Vegas, the beach in SoCal, and the actual city circa the late 1500's), each with a mysterious anti-hero that all reflect in on one another. The historical detail about the 16th century city is particularly amazing.
Ultimately, I'd say the the book doesn't quite pay off all its early promises. The alchemical magic that Stanley appears to possess is never explained, nor is any of his life between teen-age delinquent and dying older man. However, this is one of those pieces where the journey is the reward, rather than then end, which relies a bit heavily on chase scenes and battles. There's some lovely language though, especially in the argot of the beatnik-era Venice Beach and the descriptions of the Italian city.
I get the comparisons to Eco, especially in the first half of the novel, but he's not quite as assured as that writer, nor does he have the pure storytelling genius of Salman Rushdie. Still, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the book to anyone who's not afraid of obscure vocabulary words and amazingly descriptive prose.
Ultimately, I'd say the the book doesn't quite pay off all its early promises. The alchemical magic that Stanley appears to possess is never explained, nor is any of his life between teen-age delinquent and dying older man. However, this is one of those pieces where the journey is the reward, rather than then end, which relies a bit heavily on chase scenes and battles. There's some lovely language though, especially in the argot of the beatnik-era Venice Beach and the descriptions of the Italian city.
I get the comparisons to Eco, especially in the first half of the novel, but he's not quite as assured as that writer, nor does he have the pure storytelling genius of Salman Rushdie. Still, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the book to anyone who's not afraid of obscure vocabulary words and amazingly descriptive prose.
When all and said is done, this is a good book. But you have to struggle through some really poor book to get the good one.
The book is composed of three strands, in three different eras - the early 2000's, the mid 20th century (both in the US), and renaissance Italy. I'll admit that I didn't actually understand the ending, or how the three strands inform one another beyond the very obvious parts, so I may have missed some key points. But mostly, the three are perfectly independent, and I'm not sure you'd lose anything if you read only the sections of one strand without the intervening sections from the others. In the early 2000's, a former soldier is sent on a mission to locate an old family friend in Las Vegas, to help his friend. That family friend is a professional gambler, and Curtis, the former soldier, becomes immersed in the world of professional gambling to try and find him. In the 1950's, Stanley Green (the family friend) is in California, trying to find the author of a book of poems called The Mirror Thief, which he picked up from some burglar's stuff in New-York. Stanley became obsessed with the book, the only one he ever read, believing it has a key to some... something. The book tells of a doctor Crivano in 16th century Italy, the eponymous mirror thief.
The third strand of the book follows the true events in the life of dottore Vettor Crivano as he engages in a conspiracy to transport people with the protected knowledge of mirror making to the Turkish sultan.
Here's my main beef with the book: the author clearly did HEAPS of research. Each era is vividly described. But each strand also opens in an incredibly long segment where the author merely regurgitates all the research in pages upon pages of descriptions full of words neither I not my Kindle's dictionary could decipher. An author should definitely do his research when writing a book, especially about a historical period, but the reader can't be expected to do that research themselves as well. I can't look up every architectural reference, every obsolete clothing article, every arcane acronym. Maybe he was hoping to just set a mood, rather than give a useful description. That could be valid. But in that case, the "mood setting" words have to be sprinkled individually among other words that can be comprehensible, not condensed in a blob of meaninglessness at the beginning of every strand.
The fact that the book also starts off with a bewildering segment that was probably intended to be mysterious but ends up just being frustrating, leads me to think that this 600 page book could have been significantly shorter, and better for it.
Once you get through that annoying bit, though, each strand is beautifully and vividly told, and I believe worth the struggle with the problematic part. Even though, like I said, I didn't quite understand how the three strands converge in the ending. Without revealing too much, the ending is somewhat of a deus ex machina. Or a machina ex deux, maybe...
Still, worth the read. Don't feel bad about skipping pages that seem pointless.
The book is composed of three strands, in three different eras - the early 2000's, the mid 20th century (both in the US), and renaissance Italy. I'll admit that I didn't actually understand the ending, or how the three strands inform one another beyond the very obvious parts, so I may have missed some key points. But mostly, the three are perfectly independent, and I'm not sure you'd lose anything if you read only the sections of one strand without the intervening sections from the others. In the early 2000's, a former soldier is sent on a mission to locate an old family friend in Las Vegas, to help his friend. That family friend is a professional gambler, and Curtis, the former soldier, becomes immersed in the world of professional gambling to try and find him. In the 1950's, Stanley Green (the family friend) is in California, trying to find the author of a book of poems called The Mirror Thief, which he picked up from some burglar's stuff in New-York. Stanley became obsessed with the book, the only one he ever read, believing it has a key to some... something. The book tells of a doctor Crivano in 16th century Italy, the eponymous mirror thief.
The third strand of the book follows the true events in the life of dottore Vettor Crivano as he engages in a conspiracy to transport people with the protected knowledge of mirror making to the Turkish sultan.
Here's my main beef with the book: the author clearly did HEAPS of research. Each era is vividly described. But each strand also opens in an incredibly long segment where the author merely regurgitates all the research in pages upon pages of descriptions full of words neither I not my Kindle's dictionary could decipher. An author should definitely do his research when writing a book, especially about a historical period, but the reader can't be expected to do that research themselves as well. I can't look up every architectural reference, every obsolete clothing article, every arcane acronym. Maybe he was hoping to just set a mood, rather than give a useful description. That could be valid. But in that case, the "mood setting" words have to be sprinkled individually among other words that can be comprehensible, not condensed in a blob of meaninglessness at the beginning of every strand.
The fact that the book also starts off with a bewildering segment that was probably intended to be mysterious but ends up just being frustrating, leads me to think that this 600 page book could have been significantly shorter, and better for it.
Once you get through that annoying bit, though, each strand is beautifully and vividly told, and I believe worth the struggle with the problematic part. Even though, like I said, I didn't quite understand how the three strands converge in the ending. Without revealing too much, the ending is somewhat of a deus ex machina. Or a machina ex deux, maybe...
Still, worth the read. Don't feel bad about skipping pages that seem pointless.
Three loosely connected stories of seekers.
Sections (but not all) of each are captivating, but there never is a cohesive whole.
Sections (but not all) of each are captivating, but there never is a cohesive whole.
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
This was 3 books that only barely link up but the writing was great and each focus was engrossing. I’m still not fully sure I understand how it was all connected.
Maybe I'm just not smart enough to understand this book, but I really just didn't get it. I kept waiting for the three stories to come together and to understand what the hell was going on and make sense of it but I finished the book without ever having that aha moment.
The story follows three characters in three time periods. They supposedly eventually connect somehow. However, I lost interest in their plights before that happened. I made it more than halfway through the book and realized I didn't care about anything that was happening to anyone. In more than 300 pages, frustratingly little happens. I would be okay with that if I liked the characters but I didn't. Of the three main characters, I felt "meh" about one, disliked one, and hated the third.
The writing was full of detail to its detriment. The author does this thing where he doesn't use quotation marks to mark something that is spoken, which just annoyed me since it made the book harder to read.
The writing was full of detail to its detriment. The author does this thing where he doesn't use quotation marks to mark something that is spoken, which just annoyed me since it made the book harder to read.
This weaves together three stories, all very absorbing, so much so that it was a bit jarring moving from one to the next. I also found this a little hard to get into, and hard to stay into. Possibly something to re-read, as the overall plot was hard to follow - one member of my book club indicated that the Curtis story hits the high point sod what's going on overall.
Review slightly edited and expanded after book club.
Review slightly edited and expanded after book club.