Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.29 AVERAGE
3.29 AVERAGE
adventurous
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
adventurous
lighthearted
slow-paced
I really tried...and failed
to like this book. This book is so difficult to read it is like chewing a tough piece of meat with no flavor. The concept is whimsical, but the execution of Gulliver's Travels is pedantic. Because the author wanted everyone to believe his expedition was real, he assumed the voice of a great explorer journaling every small, unamusing detail. Ever the scientist, his notes are dry and detailed, with very little being said for how he felt or what he experienced emotionally.
to like this book. This book is so difficult to read it is like chewing a tough piece of meat with no flavor. The concept is whimsical, but the execution of Gulliver's Travels is pedantic. Because the author wanted everyone to believe his expedition was real, he assumed the voice of a great explorer journaling every small, unamusing detail. Ever the scientist, his notes are dry and detailed, with very little being said for how he felt or what he experienced emotionally.
It's not me, it's you, Gulliver's Travels.
It smells like a Fantasy genre, but in reality, it's a mocking Swift narrative on the stupidity of humanity as displayed through religion, politics, social structure etc etc etc. Characters war over which end of an egg to crack at breakfast, despite the holy book citing "the end which is convenient". Political parties are differentiated only by the size of shoe heels (high or low - with a McCain dude who wears one of each : ) Intellectuals are so caught up in their thinking that they're forced to use pebble-filled balloon talking sticks to be present in actual conversation.
I could list all of the inane human actions in the book, but why would I do that when you can easily read the daily news and get it over within 15 minutes? I tried to read GT and then, in desperation, looked to David Hyde Pierce (Niles on Frazier) to read it to me, in which he succeeded, but now I want a time refund. The clever parts were strikingly clever, but there were so so so so many words in between the clever parts. So. Many. Words. Let me make this easy for you. Humans were jackasses in 1726. They are still jackasses 300 years later. That's Gulliver's Travels. The end.
It smells like a Fantasy genre, but in reality, it's a mocking Swift narrative on the stupidity of humanity as displayed through religion, politics, social structure etc etc etc. Characters war over which end of an egg to crack at breakfast, despite the holy book citing "the end which is convenient". Political parties are differentiated only by the size of shoe heels (high or low - with a McCain dude who wears one of each : ) Intellectuals are so caught up in their thinking that they're forced to use pebble-filled balloon talking sticks to be present in actual conversation.
I could list all of the inane human actions in the book, but why would I do that when you can easily read the daily news and get it over within 15 minutes? I tried to read GT and then, in desperation, looked to David Hyde Pierce (Niles on Frazier) to read it to me, in which he succeeded, but now I want a time refund. The clever parts were strikingly clever, but there were so so so so many words in between the clever parts. So. Many. Words. Let me make this easy for you. Humans were jackasses in 1726. They are still jackasses 300 years later. That's Gulliver's Travels. The end.
The saddest part about me giving this book only 2 stars, is that I think it could have been soooo much more. I do understand that it is a satire written about the times in which Swift lived, and I also recognise that he wanted it to be satirical. However, and I don't presume to judge, I am just saying, if he stuck more to telling a story, and eased up on his satirical ranting, I think this book could have been FANTASTIC. There is so much potential there for some really good story telling. But in the end Swift decided to make it a rant about the times He lived in. It is a bit frustrating when you see what something could have been, but have to deal with what it became.
Sure, this book has a lot of quirky and fun scenarios which puts our character in various and sometimes pretty interesting scenarios, but a lot of the time you simply read about a critique of 1700-century British politics. It's a very old satire and therefore it's very hard to understand the critique which sadly makes for a pretty boring read at times.
adventurous
challenging
funny
reflective
sad
medium-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