Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.92 AVERAGE
3.92 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
mysterious
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I will be thinking about this book for a long time. Wow.
Only thing keeping me from ranking it higher is my personal preferences in books - this was written by a philosopher and it does, at times, show. It is certainly not an easy read; at times it's not even an enjoyable one. But wow.
I believed in the characterisation of Bradley so strongly that at times I absolutely hated this book, but in the best possible way of 'i am furious that I cannot slap this man and tell him to please leave the 20-year-old alone and stop talking about art'.
The depiction of obsessive love Bradley was limerent as fuck) was difficult to read - in that, it was excellently written. This is also perhaps the perfect unreliable narrator narrative - the ending is fascinating and definitely the strongest part of the novel.
In conclusion, every single female character in this book did absolutely nothing wrong ever. And yes I definitely think Rachel probably was the one who killed Arnold and personally I think she was so right for that.
Only thing keeping me from ranking it higher is my personal preferences in books - this was written by a philosopher and it does, at times, show. It is certainly not an easy read; at times it's not even an enjoyable one. But wow.
I believed in the characterisation of Bradley so strongly that at times I absolutely hated this book, but in the best possible way of 'i am furious that I cannot slap this man and tell him to please leave the 20-year-old alone and stop talking about art'.
The depiction of obsessive love Bradley was limerent as fuck) was difficult to read - in that, it was excellently written. This is also perhaps the perfect unreliable narrator narrative - the ending is fascinating and definitely the strongest part of the novel.
In conclusion, every single female character in this book did absolutely nothing wrong ever.
Thrown across the room in frustration then grabbed back to keep reading.
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
funny
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Я ніби потрапила на імпровізовану виставу, яку грають підлітки. Суцільний балаган, а кожен герой - драма квін на максималках.
Кінцівка, правда, здивувала, але я вже так втомилась від цих персонажів, діалогів і роздумів, що розв’язка не справила на мене належного враження.
Кінцівка, правда, здивувала, але я вже так втомилась від цих персонажів, діалогів і роздумів, що розв’язка не справила на мене належного враження.
This book does not offer a continually enjoyable reading experience but gets better after you’ve finished it and given it some thought (and ideally, discussed it in a reading group).
It is a story told from the perspective of a very unreliable narrator, called Bradley. The postscripts by other character at the end give alternative versions and interpretations of the events, making this a book about the subjectivity of experience and narration. Another important theme is the question what art is.
A key passage is a scene in which Bradley explains Hamlet to the daughter of his best friend. This is an important moment in the plot, since during this session Bradley falls madly in love with the young woman, leading to desastreus events. Perhaps more importantly, however, in this scene Murdoch introduces elements that can invite different interpretations and reading techniques. First of all there is the intertextuality with Hamlet: should we read The Black Prince as a retelling of Shakespeare? Bradley’s interpretation of Hamlet also involves or suggests Freud, Lacan, homosexuality en gender fluidity, and we can wonder whether we can use the same elements to interpret The Black Prince - although Bradley’s analysts doesn’t seem very successful. The main point is, I think, again the plurality: there is not one narrative, and perhaps art can be called successful when it’s open to different layers of interpretation.
It is a story told from the perspective of a very unreliable narrator, called Bradley. The postscripts by other character at the end give alternative versions and interpretations of the events, making this a book about the subjectivity of experience and narration. Another important theme is the question what art is.
A key passage is a scene in which Bradley explains Hamlet to the daughter of his best friend. This is an important moment in the plot, since during this session Bradley falls madly in love with the young woman, leading to desastreus events. Perhaps more importantly, however, in this scene Murdoch introduces elements that can invite different interpretations and reading techniques. First of all there is the intertextuality with Hamlet: should we read The Black Prince as a retelling of Shakespeare? Bradley’s interpretation of Hamlet also involves or suggests Freud, Lacan, homosexuality en gender fluidity, and we can wonder whether we can use the same elements to interpret The Black Prince - although Bradley’s analysts doesn’t seem very successful. The main point is, I think, again the plurality: there is not one narrative, and perhaps art can be called successful when it’s open to different layers of interpretation.
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Niche opinion.
The Black Prince (Iris Murdoch, 1973) isn't as good as Zazie in the Metro (Raymond Queneau, 1959). Both use frantic, anarchic happenstance as the primary driver of narrative. Zazie just did it first, and better.
This is a book that over stayed its welcome. Where Zazie was quick and chaotic, the Black Prince just continues ricocheting characters against each other, eventually becoming tedious.
2/3 through the book and a story emerges as the characters become full rather than thin caricatures. It's as if it were a different book. It all turned on the ineffectual protagonist taking up with the young girl. How very gossipy.
In brief it's a psychological thriller tracked onto the end of a romp. Despite some great flourishes, it's just too all over the place.
The Black Prince (Iris Murdoch, 1973) isn't as good as Zazie in the Metro (Raymond Queneau, 1959). Both use frantic, anarchic happenstance as the primary driver of narrative. Zazie just did it first, and better.
This is a book that over stayed its welcome. Where Zazie was quick and chaotic, the Black Prince just continues ricocheting characters against each other, eventually becoming tedious.
2/3 through the book and a story emerges as the characters become full rather than thin caricatures. It's as if it were a different book. It all turned on the ineffectual protagonist taking up with the young girl. How very gossipy.
In brief it's a psychological thriller tracked onto the end of a romp. Despite some great flourishes, it's just too all over the place.
adventurous
challenging
dark
funny
mysterious
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes