Scan barcode
natkingcole's review against another edition
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
auroraks's review against another edition
reflective
sad
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
2.5
garete62's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-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
3.5
kirstenrose22's review against another edition
5.0
This was stunning. A farm boy goes to college for the ag program but falls in love with literature, and ends up staying at the university for 40 years (through grad school and his teaching career). Much of his life ends up disappointing him, except for his books - and by extension, teaching, which is his way of transmitting that love. Read it if you fell in love with books and words and ideas. Bleak and spare and melancholy, but in a lovely way.
blairmahoney's review against another edition
5.0
This novel is made for people like me who have a deep and abiding love for literature, showing how it can come to define a person's life. There are some beautifully evocative passages that show the protagonist's mind opening as he realises what literature can offer. At times Stoner's antagonists, his wife Edith and Hollis Lomax, can seem almost cartoonish in the way they seek to undermine his modest desires but the novel remains ultimately truthful and heartbreaking. In some ways it struck me as being like a quieter version of Richard Yates' Revolutionary Road in its depiction of a failed marriage and the way a life can be stymied.
matijao's review against another edition
5.0
Made me feel things I have never felt with any other novel so far. Felt so surrral at times. Left me emotionally drained.
10/10
10/10
peggyd's review against another edition
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
One of the most satisfying--yet heartbreaking--reading experiences I've had in a long time. A classic, beloved novel that had been sitting on my shelves for ages. I finally read it and though it demolished me, I'm so glad I took it off the shelf.
The New York Times calls Stoner "a perfect novel" and I thought, no way it lives up to that. What is "the perfect novel" anyhow? Well, this must be pretty close. It follows the life of William Stoner, from his early days on a poor farm with his parents, to his choice to take up literature, complete a PhD and teach, we follow his life and choices, his disappointments, confusion, and loss. It's ultimately a simple life--nothing truly remarkable or exceptional--but it is so well-told that you can't help but root for Stoner until the end. It is easy to get submerged into Stoner's world, so much so that when I would come up for air I would be surprised that I wasn't, in fact, in early 2oth-century Missouri. The details are so well-observed I knew this world, these people instantly, and though it's a slim novel--a true "little life"--it felt complete, fully told.
But it's not happy. Yes, Stoner has his moments of happiness and fulfillment (the description of he and his young daughter in his study bursting into a fit of giggles over nothing is such a beautiful moment...it's aching what happens to that relationship) but they serve to highlight how often he has to deal with loneliness, estrangement, hostility at home and work, disappointed dreams, etc. There is dignity in his quiet acceptance, the way he doggedly forges on in a world that seems utterly hopeless. The portrait of academia, in particular, was chilling. He finally discovers his passion for teaching only to get sidelined by a chair who hates him simply for standing up for what he believes in. Just gut-wrenching stuff.
And don't get me started on his wife, Edith. At times, she's a straight-up villain, crafting ways to crush her husband's dreams (the way she carefully and strategically keeps him from working on a second book is almost awe-inspiring) and keep him estranged from their daughter. Other times, it's hard to condemn her as she's so pitiable as to be not worth the effort. She was so sheltered and protected and coddled throughout her life that she can't imagine having to give of herself at all and it turns her into something sour and broken. A character I will think about for a long, long time.
Stoner had his chances--he does find love, fleetingly--but his inability to articulate what he wants in time to fight for it, and his acceptance of life as a disappointing thing means he cannot ultimately succeed. Interestingly, in this edition's introduction, there is an excerpt from an interview with author John Williams who asserts that Stoner is a "real hero." He realizes that "a lot of people...think that Stoner had such a sad and bad life. I think he had a very good life. He had a better life than most people do, certainly." I keep coming back to this assertion because it is true to some extent. In another world, Stoner stays on at his parents' farm and works himself to the bone until he dies. He never discovers his love of literature, his passion for teaching. And yet we have a book where he sees a bigger world that can include his happiness and he can't get there. The world won't allow it. To me, that is unbelievably sad. Maybe it is heroic that he did soldier on in the face of all that.
All of this is portrayed in such a tightly woven, straightforward, unembellished way, that it's easy to see why this is a classic, why it's called luminous, riveting, and perfect.
The New York Times calls Stoner "a perfect novel" and I thought, no way it lives up to that. What is "the perfect novel" anyhow? Well, this must be pretty close. It follows the life of William Stoner, from his early days on a poor farm with his parents, to his choice to take up literature, complete a PhD and teach, we follow his life and choices, his disappointments, confusion, and loss. It's ultimately a simple life--nothing truly remarkable or exceptional--but it is so well-told that you can't help but root for Stoner until the end. It is easy to get submerged into Stoner's world, so much so that when I would come up for air I would be surprised that I wasn't, in fact, in early 2oth-century Missouri. The details are so well-observed I knew this world, these people instantly, and though it's a slim novel--a true "little life"--it felt complete, fully told.
But it's not happy. Yes, Stoner has his moments of happiness and fulfillment (the description of he and his young daughter in his study bursting into a fit of giggles over nothing is such a beautiful moment...it's aching what happens to that relationship) but they serve to highlight how often he has to deal with loneliness, estrangement, hostility at home and work, disappointed dreams, etc. There is dignity in his quiet acceptance, the way he doggedly forges on in a world that seems utterly hopeless. The portrait of academia, in particular, was chilling. He finally discovers his passion for teaching only to get sidelined by a chair who hates him simply for standing up for what he believes in. Just gut-wrenching stuff.
And don't get me started on his wife, Edith. At times, she's a straight-up villain, crafting ways to crush her husband's dreams (the way she carefully and strategically keeps him from working on a second book is almost awe-inspiring) and keep him estranged from their daughter. Other times, it's hard to condemn her as she's so pitiable as to be not worth the effort. She was so sheltered and protected and coddled throughout her life that she can't imagine having to give of herself at all and it turns her into something sour and broken. A character I will think about for a long, long time.
Stoner had his chances--he does find love, fleetingly--but his inability to articulate what he wants in time to fight for it, and his acceptance of life as a disappointing thing means he cannot ultimately succeed. Interestingly, in this edition's introduction, there is an excerpt from an interview with author John Williams who asserts that Stoner is a "real hero." He realizes that "a lot of people...think that Stoner had such a sad and bad life. I think he had a very good life. He had a better life than most people do, certainly." I keep coming back to this assertion because it is true to some extent. In another world, Stoner stays on at his parents' farm and works himself to the bone until he dies. He never discovers his love of literature, his passion for teaching. And yet we have a book where he sees a bigger world that can include his happiness and he can't get there. The world won't allow it. To me, that is unbelievably sad. Maybe it is heroic that he did soldier on in the face of all that.
All of this is portrayed in such a tightly woven, straightforward, unembellished way, that it's easy to see why this is a classic, why it's called luminous, riveting, and perfect.
dalhausen's review against another edition
5.0
I was not impressed or very interested in Stoner for the first 60 or so pages, and left this book barely read for two years before returning to it this week. It might have made a weak impression at first, but I cried off and on for 45 minutes after finishing the book. Stoner and the characters around him are, for the most part, people who do not know themselves intimately, whether by ignorance or blunt refusal, and who cannot communicate themselves clearly to others. His only intimates are parents who were stilted in their self-expression, a wife who is seemingly incapable of expressing her feelings for propriety's sake (while showing overt distress, unhappiness, and resentment), a child who eventually refuses to communicate herself to either of them, and a single friend who politely refuses to acknowledge the eccentricities of his marriage.
It is not surprising that Stoner is often confused and unable to claim emotional space, nor that he finds such a solace in literature, or that he proceeds stubbornly but safely through each of his life's disappointments without grand gestures. I was nearly halfway through the book before I realized that I actually cared for Stoner and that I was desperately hoping anything in his life would improve. As he continued to try to do what he thought was best in each situation and withdrew further into an inevitable solitude, that from which he was born and could not escape, I felt aggrieved for this person and the pure hope that he retained for connection.
This is probably what people mean when they call something a "sleeper hit." It's the uncomic equivalent of the Cohen brothers' A Serious Man. It was a complete surprise to me when I ended by feeling so much for this unexpectedly profound, sad, and simplistic novel.
"He had wanted friendship and the closeness of friendship that might hold him in the race of mankind... He had wanted the singleness and the still connective passion of marriage; he had had that, too, and did not know what to do with it, and it had died. He had wanted love; and he had had love, and had relinquished it, had let it go into the chaos of potentiality."
It is not surprising that Stoner is often confused and unable to claim emotional space, nor that he finds such a solace in literature, or that he proceeds stubbornly but safely through each of his life's disappointments without grand gestures. I was nearly halfway through the book before I realized that I actually cared for Stoner and that I was desperately hoping anything in his life would improve. As he continued to try to do what he thought was best in each situation and withdrew further into an inevitable solitude, that from which he was born and could not escape, I felt aggrieved for this person and the pure hope that he retained for connection.
This is probably what people mean when they call something a "sleeper hit." It's the uncomic equivalent of the Cohen brothers' A Serious Man. It was a complete surprise to me when I ended by feeling so much for this unexpectedly profound, sad, and simplistic novel.
"He had wanted friendship and the closeness of friendship that might hold him in the race of mankind... He had wanted the singleness and the still connective passion of marriage; he had had that, too, and did not know what to do with it, and it had died. He had wanted love; and he had had love, and had relinquished it, had let it go into the chaos of potentiality."