Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.72 AVERAGE
3.72 AVERAGE
I really enjoy books in the WWII genre, and the premise of this one sounded interesting. Unfortunately, it really fell a bit flat for me. The story jumped around too much, and the author left out too many pieces that should've been there for character building or backstory. I found that I just didn't connect with the characters very much, and the story really just wasn't that profound in the end.
Overall, I'll say this was good, but not great. Won't be recommending it to my fellow WWII-genre loving friends.
Overall, I'll say this was good, but not great. Won't be recommending it to my fellow WWII-genre loving friends.
Shatuck writes not just an excellent historical fiction book with well drawn characters with strengths and flaws that feel real, she does some of the most skillful time-hopping with her flashbacks that I've ever seen in writing. While most of the time is spent in post WWII Germany, you see just enough of the time in between the wars to give you an excellent sense of how Germany in the 40's became, well, Germany in the 40's. It's fascinating and comforting to know that not every German was on board with Hitler, but how that affected the lives of the resistance and the family members of the resistance is what will really keep you turning the pages. This book is fascinating, but accolades should be given - Shatuck could have gotten much darker than she did, but she chose the high road, not showing everything but letting the reader know things happened. Very well done.
This was a good book but I just didn’t love it. The premise is strong and the WWII setting is one I enjoy. It was just a bit boring at times. There are better options in this genre.
emotional
reflective
relaxing
sad
tense
slow-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
Three widows, their children, a castle, and World War II era Germany are the bare bones comprising The Women in the Castle by Jessica Shattuck, where these women's lives unfold in new ways after the end of the war.
To read this, and other book reviews, visit my website: http://makinggoodstories.wordpress.com/.
Toward the end of World War II, there is a resistance effort to assassinate Hilter in order to prevent further atrocities, but it ultimately fails, leaving the men of the resistance dead and their widows forced to endure their demise. Marianne von Lingenfels, the wife of one of the resistors and best friend to another, had promised to protect the wives and children of the resistance. In keeping her word, Marianne returns to the castle of her ancestors and tries to bring as many broken families back together as possible, starting with that of her best friend by locating his son, Martin, and wife, Benita. As Marianne's new makeshift family develops, she and they are faced with coming to accept how the decisions they've made define them.
As a story of three women brought together by the tragedy of Hitler and war in Germany and their struggles to come to terms with their decisions during this time, the narrative dealt with heavily emotional topics without straying too far into the graphic brutality that occurred during this period. Jumping around in time to unfold the women's stories worked well to divulge information at times when it would make the most impact to the narrative and reveal the most about a particular character (and the character development throughout was fairly well done). It was interesting to read about the perspective of the women who were linked to a resistance effort in Germany during this incredibly tumultuous time, as this is not a perspective of World War II that is often read about.
To read this, and other book reviews, visit my website: http://makinggoodstories.wordpress.com/.
Toward the end of World War II, there is a resistance effort to assassinate Hilter in order to prevent further atrocities, but it ultimately fails, leaving the men of the resistance dead and their widows forced to endure their demise. Marianne von Lingenfels, the wife of one of the resistors and best friend to another, had promised to protect the wives and children of the resistance. In keeping her word, Marianne returns to the castle of her ancestors and tries to bring as many broken families back together as possible, starting with that of her best friend by locating his son, Martin, and wife, Benita. As Marianne's new makeshift family develops, she and they are faced with coming to accept how the decisions they've made define them.
As a story of three women brought together by the tragedy of Hitler and war in Germany and their struggles to come to terms with their decisions during this time, the narrative dealt with heavily emotional topics without straying too far into the graphic brutality that occurred during this period. Jumping around in time to unfold the women's stories worked well to divulge information at times when it would make the most impact to the narrative and reveal the most about a particular character (and the character development throughout was fairly well done). It was interesting to read about the perspective of the women who were linked to a resistance effort in Germany during this incredibly tumultuous time, as this is not a perspective of World War II that is often read about.
Got halfway through. Seemed kinda slow; no distinctive plot. After reading review on Good reads, decided to call it quits. One of the main characters commits suicide.
This was a WWII story that centered around three women. I always like these stories and this was interesting, but for some reason I felt like there was a lot more depth to some characters than others. I would give it 3.5 stars, but I'm rounding up.
The story quickly drew me in and I wanted to know more about these women and where the story was going to take me. From Germany in the late 30s to the US in the early 90s, these women lead flawed but fascinating lives. Marianne is by far the one that takes things head on, yet Ania's quiet reflection on how her life developed (errors in judgement, lack of action, lies she told to herself and others) lead her to gain strength. Benita was the only one that never truly changed and continued to look for shortcuts her entire life.
The details in the telling of this dark part of history and how these women (and others) dealt with and equal mix of fear and rebellion was captivating. Definitely read the post notes as it adds to the overall story.
The details in the telling of this dark part of history and how these women (and others) dealt with and equal mix of fear and rebellion was captivating. Definitely read the post notes as it adds to the overall story.
This novel was not what I thought it was going to be. Me and my 21st century values went into it thinking that it would be an uplifting tale of a rare display of heroic feminism in one of the darkest periods in world history, and while this was partly the case, it was more of a depressing than that. Not that I expected a work of historical fiction set in WWII to be cheery and sugar-coated, but I figured it would be more a story of how these women picked up the pieces of their lives and helped the others do the same--not how they all one by one fell apart until the novel reaches its resolution, ending with a description of a character that was as irrelevant as she was a uniting principle.
It wasn't until Ania's story started to take shape that I became more engaged with the book. She was a complicated figure but an important one, probably because her story is quite similar to many others who actually lived during that time. The way she followed Hitler's rhetoric because such a vibrant and promising orator seemed like a beacon of light after the devastation of Germany post-WWI; the way it became clear to her much later on that something infinitely more sinister and deceptive was happening, despite what she was being told to believe; and the way she kept most of this hidden and acknowledges the past without actually full on facing it, except to be regretful and self-deprecating towards the end of her life. While Marianne's and Benita's stories were interesting, I felt that Ania's character was a bit of a dark horse in that she didn't seem that interesting until, all at once, she was one of the most important figures in the novel.
Marianne and Benita were obviously intended to be foils to one another, but I felt that the dynamic of this specific relationship could have been better explored. And while Benita's suicide is a fitting resolution to the estranged friendship of Benita and Marianne, I felt it uncharacteristic to Benita herself. Her defining virtue was her love for her son, Martin, and if this love had really been as unwavering as the reader was led to believe, there should have been at the very least a better explanation of this component of Benita's life before she killed herself. More accurate to her character is that this love should have been the thing that saved her and kept her from killing herself.
There is more to the novel than what I have written here, but these were the main things on my mind as a finish this story.
side note: the story was assembled in a way similar to other historical novels, where it is set in one period of time (WWII) and then jumps very far ahead into the future when life has come and nearly gone (early 1990s). I am not so much a fan of this kind of timeline. I think that works of historical fiction are more credible and better received if placed only at one point in time. While I understand that jumping the action forward and trying to relate it to contemporary society is a way for readers to relate themselves to the story, the human condition will be the same regardless of when the novel is set. We don't have to see the action unfold in the 1990s to realize that the love, loss, regret, grief, longing, morals, and values experienced by these characters during WWII will most definitely feel the same to us today as they did then. Maybe that is a short-sighted critique, but sometimes a story told in a snapshot of one period of time is most impactful.
It wasn't until Ania's story started to take shape that I became more engaged with the book. She was a complicated figure but an important one, probably because her story is quite similar to many others who actually lived during that time. The way she followed Hitler's rhetoric because such a vibrant and promising orator seemed like a beacon of light after the devastation of Germany post-WWI; the way it became clear to her much later on that something infinitely more sinister and deceptive was happening, despite what she was being told to believe; and the way she kept most of this hidden and acknowledges the past without actually full on facing it, except to be regretful and self-deprecating towards the end of her life. While Marianne's and Benita's stories were interesting, I felt that Ania's character was a bit of a dark horse in that she didn't seem that interesting until, all at once, she was one of the most important figures in the novel.
Marianne and Benita were obviously intended to be foils to one another, but I felt that the dynamic of this specific relationship could have been better explored. And while Benita's suicide is a fitting resolution to the estranged friendship of Benita and Marianne, I felt it uncharacteristic to Benita herself. Her defining virtue was her love for her son, Martin, and if this love had really been as unwavering as the reader was led to believe, there should have been at the very least a better explanation of this component of Benita's life before she killed herself. More accurate to her character is that this love should have been the thing that saved her and kept her from killing herself.
There is more to the novel than what I have written here, but these were the main things on my mind as a finish this story.
side note: the story was assembled in a way similar to other historical novels, where it is set in one period of time (WWII) and then jumps very far ahead into the future when life has come and nearly gone (early 1990s). I am not so much a fan of this kind of timeline. I think that works of historical fiction are more credible and better received if placed only at one point in time. While I understand that jumping the action forward and trying to relate it to contemporary society is a way for readers to relate themselves to the story, the human condition will be the same regardless of when the novel is set. We don't have to see the action unfold in the 1990s to realize that the love, loss, regret, grief, longing, morals, and values experienced by these characters during WWII will most definitely feel the same to us today as they did then. Maybe that is a short-sighted critique, but sometimes a story told in a snapshot of one period of time is most impactful.
slow-paced