Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.53 AVERAGE
3.53 AVERAGE
The first half of this book really reads as a Socratic dialogue, showcasing various conversations between the main character (a blue collar labor organizer) and members of the upper and middle classes. The second half plays out a dystopian class war in the United States. Thought it was really interesting how the whole book is written as a primary document with footnotes and consistently referenced as a major piece of history from its time as well.
This book is a thinly disguised manifesto of the socialist ideals in vogue at the beginning of the 20th Century. It is only science fiction in the sense that the conceit of the book is that this is the 700-years-in-the-future annotated text of the biography of a key socialist revolutionary.
The interesting thing about the book is how its details of the strife of a hundred years ago is eerily similar to many of the current issues and debates, topics such as income inequality, the aggregation of wealth by a few, the control and corruption of government and the press by powerful business trusts (monopolies), white-collar crime, moral hypocrisy among the wealthy, relief for the unemployed, and worker safety. In other words, not much has changed in over a hundred years. For example, the book states that:
“Of the total number of persons engaged in occupations in the United States, only nine-tenths of one per cent are from the Plutocracy, yet the Plutocracy owns seventy per cent of the total wealth. The middle class owns twenty-four billions. Twenty-nine per cent of those in occupations are from the middle class, and they own twenty-five per cent of the total wealth. Remains the proletariat. It owns four billions. Of all persons in occupations, seventy per cent come from the proletariat; and the proletariat owns four per cent of the total wealth.”
The book assumes that socialism will ultimately replace capitalism:
“Not only is it inevitable that you small capitalists shall pass away, but it is inevitable that the large capitalists, and the trusts also, shall pass away. Remember, the tide of evolution never flows backward. It flows on and on, and it flows from competition to combination, and from little combination to large combination, and from large combination to colossal combination, and it flows on to socialism, which is the most colossal combination of all.”
Despite its polemics, the book is actually quite readable, with a fair amount of action and romance to carry the plot forward. The reader gets to know the revolutionists and is sympathetic towards their plights.
The interesting thing about the book is how its details of the strife of a hundred years ago is eerily similar to many of the current issues and debates, topics such as income inequality, the aggregation of wealth by a few, the control and corruption of government and the press by powerful business trusts (monopolies), white-collar crime, moral hypocrisy among the wealthy, relief for the unemployed, and worker safety. In other words, not much has changed in over a hundred years. For example, the book states that:
“Of the total number of persons engaged in occupations in the United States, only nine-tenths of one per cent are from the Plutocracy, yet the Plutocracy owns seventy per cent of the total wealth. The middle class owns twenty-four billions. Twenty-nine per cent of those in occupations are from the middle class, and they own twenty-five per cent of the total wealth. Remains the proletariat. It owns four billions. Of all persons in occupations, seventy per cent come from the proletariat; and the proletariat owns four per cent of the total wealth.”
The book assumes that socialism will ultimately replace capitalism:
“Not only is it inevitable that you small capitalists shall pass away, but it is inevitable that the large capitalists, and the trusts also, shall pass away. Remember, the tide of evolution never flows backward. It flows on and on, and it flows from competition to combination, and from little combination to large combination, and from large combination to colossal combination, and it flows on to socialism, which is the most colossal combination of all.”
Despite its polemics, the book is actually quite readable, with a fair amount of action and romance to carry the plot forward. The reader gets to know the revolutionists and is sympathetic towards their plights.
dark
inspiring
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
нудьга.
дочитала її суто з дослідницького інтересу - раптом колись знадобиться.
але справді, нудьга смертна. неймовірно надумане й нелогічне.
і нараторка, чорт, якийсь андроїд, а не жінка. закохана панянка двадцяти восьми приблизно років, яка примудряється думати про свого чоловіка тільки тоді, коли він є, а решту часу - суто про революцію. він узагалі з закоханими панянками спілкувався, перш ніж це написати?
добре, що сюжет завершується після першого повстання (але з передмови ясно, що буде ще друге - і ще багато, але то вже інша історія. цікаво, лондон був перший, хто вигадав хід із перед- чи післямовою з точки зору подоланої антиутопії?), бо такого самого штучного опису другого повстання я би вже не витримала.
дочитала її суто з дослідницького інтересу - раптом колись знадобиться.
але справді, нудьга смертна. неймовірно надумане й нелогічне.
і нараторка, чорт, якийсь андроїд, а не жінка. закохана панянка двадцяти восьми приблизно років, яка примудряється думати про свого чоловіка тільки тоді, коли він є, а решту часу - суто про революцію. він узагалі з закоханими панянками спілкувався, перш ніж це написати?
добре, що сюжет завершується після першого повстання (але з передмови ясно, що буде ще друге - і ще багато, але то вже інша історія. цікаво, лондон був перший, хто вигадав хід із перед- чи післямовою з точки зору подоланої антиутопії?), бо такого самого штучного опису другого повстання я би вже не витримала.
If you could imagine Karl Marx and Upton Sinclair sitting down to write a parody of 1984, you're pretty close to this novel.
I knew it would be political, but to even call it a novel is generous (that said, London has this really cool "found footage" thing he does with footnotes and a separate narrator that is reminiscent of the Dune series, particularly the sequels).
Rather dry, rather bland, a bit of a slog to get through in the middle half, but it was valuable to get a psychoanalytical peak into Jack London's head.
I knew it would be political, but to even call it a novel is generous (that said, London has this really cool "found footage" thing he does with footnotes and a separate narrator that is reminiscent of the Dune series, particularly the sequels).
Rather dry, rather bland, a bit of a slog to get through in the middle half, but it was valuable to get a psychoanalytical peak into Jack London's head.
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
"You [capitalists] want opportunity to plunder your fellowmen in your own small way, yet you hypnotise yourselves into thinking you want freedom. You are piggish and acquisitive, but the magic of your phrases leads you to believe that you are patriotic."
This book was pretty wild. Written in the POV of a woman who marries a revolutionary and then gets involved with a political revolution.
I'm honestly surprised that this isn't listed among some great political books because although it is certainly propaganda I would be willing to put this among the likes of 1984 or Brave New World.
As can be shown from the quotes I shared this book strongly shows workers rights and also is vehemently against the Oligrachy that exist[ed] in the US at this time it was written. Many lessons that we've long forgotten from the first labor movement can be relearning through this book.
I highly recommend it.
#SelfTaughtPolitics
I'm honestly surprised that this isn't listed among some great political books because although it is certainly propaganda I would be willing to put this among the likes of 1984 or Brave New World.
As can be shown from the quotes I shared this book strongly shows workers rights and also is vehemently against the Oligrachy that exist[ed] in the US at this time it was written. Many lessons that we've long forgotten from the first labor movement can be relearning through this book.
I highly recommend it.
#SelfTaughtPolitics
Do I feel bad for pausing yet another book? Of course. But I need to read some more for the Book Riot challenge so...
Non credo ci siano parole per descrivere un capolavoro simile. London con questo libro ha creato un mondo, il Tallone di Ferro è stato il seme che ha generato opere distopiche del calibro di Noi, il Mondo Nuovo o 1984, per citare i più famosi. Libro estremamente innovativo per l’epoca (scritto nel 1908, ma sembra anticipare avvenimenti di decenni dopo, e ancora ora è, a parer mio, più che attuale), non poteva esistere un capostipite più degno per il genere della distopia.
Gli avvenimenti sono sconcertanti, è un continuo crescendo di tensione inserito in una cornice ancora più grande e interessante che non solo rappresenta la giustificazione ed il significato del libro stesso, ma dimostra anche l’originalità dell’autore. Le tematiche che tratta, per quanto possano sembrare ostiche o difficili da comprendere, sono proposte in una maniera così dinamica ed intelligente che durante la lettura non pesano proprio, né tantomeno tolgono spazio alla narrazione, che è invece coinvolgente ed estremamente tesa, tanto da culminare in una sequenza finale tanto inaspettata quanto assurda.
Gli avvenimenti sono sconcertanti, è un continuo crescendo di tensione inserito in una cornice ancora più grande e interessante che non solo rappresenta la giustificazione ed il significato del libro stesso, ma dimostra anche l’originalità dell’autore. Le tematiche che tratta, per quanto possano sembrare ostiche o difficili da comprendere, sono proposte in una maniera così dinamica ed intelligente che durante la lettura non pesano proprio, né tantomeno tolgono spazio alla narrazione, che è invece coinvolgente ed estremamente tesa, tanto da culminare in una sequenza finale tanto inaspettata quanto assurda.