Scan barcode
marryallthepeople's review against another edition
1.0
I think I'm in a literary hole where I need a bunch of trashy books before climbing out and seeing the sun. Because I really didn't "get" nor like this book. I found the characters improbable and a little bit whiny. I definitely seem to be in the minority with this opinion though so please disregard and tell me that I'm an uncultured swine!
bellatora's review against another edition
2.0
This is a hard book to grade.
On the one hand, it reads quickly.
On the other hand, my whole view of this book was colored by the fact that it is based on the author's experience of getting one of his teenage students pregnant. Will is an author avatar for Maksik and Marie is a creepy way for him to justify his actions, because the fictional version thinks he did nothing wrong while according to Jezebel the real girl was hurt by the affair and feels violated by his including personal confidences into her literary version.
The book centers on Will Silver, a Dead Poet's Society professor. You know the type: brilliant, charismatic, inspiring, daring, doesn't play by the book. The kind that Community so brilliantly spoofed in the third episode of season 1. It is from the perspective of three people: Mr. Silver, Gilad (a brilliant but lonely student with a messed up home life who worships Mr. Silver) and Marie (a student at Mr. Silver's school who has an affair with him).
I couldn’t tell if Will was supposed to be as…not as heroic as he came off as being. I'm not even talking about having an affair with his student. I'm talking about his being arrogant and pathetic and kind of a hollow character. I mean, yes, I get that the author was trying to show him not living up to his own ideals of bravery through his inaction when a hobo pushed a man into an oncoming train and when a protest turned violent. But what about the fact that he was obviously one of those teachers that while he claims he’s just getting his students to think, he already has the “right” answer in his mind? He rewards the students that agree with him and punishes those that don’t. (example: one of the students is very religious and doesn't believe the existentialist explanation of Sartre. Silver lets the other students give the existentialist argument but never adequately plays devil's advocate in giving the religious argument. He lets the religious student, who is not presented as a very good debater, take on the entire rest of the class. This comes up again when the Bitch Girl advocates a valid opinion on how suicide is not a viable option. She gets shut down. I have had a professor who used the the Socratic Method-which is what Silver is doing-brilliantly. Silver is not at his level.) And what about his hypocrisy in talking about the need for a man to take responsibility for his own choices, while during the whole affair he acts like it is something that is happening to him instead of something he has decided to do? Will is all flash and no substance.
Gilad is created to worship Mr. Silver and then ultimately become disillusioned by him – but still have the class impact his life in positive ways.
Marie is the typical poor little rich girl with a best frenemy, nasty ex and absentee parents that make her the perfect girl to pursue an affair with a teacher. I don’t feel like she actually rings true. She doesn't seem to do anything in her life besides obsess over Mr. Silver. Doesn't this girl have hobbies?
Now that I think about it, all the main characters are kind of hollow. Despite the fact we are getting events through their PoVs, we never really know them. They are moving and talking, but just going through the motions of their respective roles. Teacher that can't live up to the ideals he preaches! Student that puts teacher on pedestal, then is hurt when he falls off it, yet still finds the courage his teacher never could! Seductress/innocent who tries to find the love she isn't getting in normal relationships through a destructive affair with her teacher!
This is not a badly written book. I can’t actually give it one star just for the author being a skeezy McSkeeze. Too bad a guy with talent uses it for evil.
On the one hand, it reads quickly.
On the other hand, my whole view of this book was colored by the fact that it is based on the author's experience of getting one of his teenage students pregnant. Will is an author avatar for Maksik and Marie is a creepy way for him to justify his actions, because the fictional version thinks he did nothing wrong while according to Jezebel the real girl was hurt by the affair and feels violated by his including personal confidences into her literary version.
The book centers on Will Silver, a Dead Poet's Society professor. You know the type: brilliant, charismatic, inspiring, daring, doesn't play by the book. The kind that Community so brilliantly spoofed in the third episode of season 1. It is from the perspective of three people: Mr. Silver, Gilad (a brilliant but lonely student with a messed up home life who worships Mr. Silver) and Marie (a student at Mr. Silver's school who has an affair with him).
I couldn’t tell if Will was supposed to be as…not as heroic as he came off as being. I'm not even talking about having an affair with his student. I'm talking about his being arrogant and pathetic and kind of a hollow character. I mean, yes, I get that the author was trying to show him not living up to his own ideals of bravery through his inaction when a hobo pushed a man into an oncoming train and when a protest turned violent. But what about the fact that he was obviously one of those teachers that while he claims he’s just getting his students to think, he already has the “right” answer in his mind? He rewards the students that agree with him and punishes those that don’t. (example: one of the students is very religious and doesn't believe the existentialist explanation of Sartre. Silver lets the other students give the existentialist argument but never adequately plays devil's advocate in giving the religious argument. He lets the religious student, who is not presented as a very good debater, take on the entire rest of the class. This comes up again when the Bitch Girl advocates a valid opinion on how suicide is not a viable option. She gets shut down. I have had a professor who used the the Socratic Method-which is what Silver is doing-brilliantly. Silver is not at his level.) And what about his hypocrisy in talking about the need for a man to take responsibility for his own choices, while during the whole affair he acts like it is something that is happening to him instead of something he has decided to do? Will is all flash and no substance.
Gilad is created to worship Mr. Silver and then ultimately become disillusioned by him – but still have the class impact his life in positive ways.
Marie is the typical poor little rich girl with a best frenemy, nasty ex and absentee parents that make her the perfect girl to pursue an affair with a teacher. I don’t feel like she actually rings true. She doesn't seem to do anything in her life besides obsess over Mr. Silver. Doesn't this girl have hobbies?
Now that I think about it, all the main characters are kind of hollow. Despite the fact we are getting events through their PoVs, we never really know them. They are moving and talking, but just going through the motions of their respective roles. Teacher that can't live up to the ideals he preaches! Student that puts teacher on pedestal, then is hurt when he falls off it, yet still finds the courage his teacher never could! Seductress/innocent who tries to find the love she isn't getting in normal relationships through a destructive affair with her teacher!
This is not a badly written book. I can’t actually give it one star just for the author being a skeezy McSkeeze. Too bad a guy with talent uses it for evil.
mhall's review
3.0
Only the French could take the sordid story of a high school teacher's affair with his student and make it mostly about the essential meaninglessness of life. It made me want to read some Camus; the teacher's senior seminar on existentialism was integrated well into the rest of the tale. Told from three different perspectives, this novel is engaging, exotically Parisian, and a fast read about an international high school and the relationship between a teacher and student.
avlain's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
mkach's review
4.0
Okay, so I have to say I've had my suspicions starting this book. I had somewhat of a similar experience when I was younger, and for the most part it was this that made me wary. I'd read about the controversy and though it doesn't say much as to the character of Maksik that he's used the story to get a bit of an oomph for his book (I mean as far as the whole subject matter is concerned), it was also his story to tell and well, writers often are "users" in the broader sense of the term and I think most of them take at least something from their own life and the lives of the people around them and put it into their books. That said, I don't want to justify him (AT ALL), but I also want to try not to get moralistic and dwell on the right-wrong dimension of what he's done since I feel here we should be rating the book, and the not the man.
And the book is, ultimately, very good. All the characters in it are flawed and seem real. I think he managed to do a decent job of making himself/the character of William Silver appear highly unlikeable. At least for me, because I found his description to be very realistic of the type of person who would make the decisions he makes in the book and the way he goes through life. I like that he's not black and white, and though he may have gone easier with the whole Mister Keating vibe, all in all, I think Silver was portrayed very faithfully. Marie wasn't very likeable either, though, and I couldn't connect to the character as I would've liked. This is where the -1 star comes from, because I found her two-dimensional and didn't feel invested in her as I should have. Perhaps teenage girls are really like that sometimes, but for the most part - the demanding mother and disinterested parents were there as some sort of reason/explanation for her behavior that was being pushed on me without delving into her own, inner motives and so I found her portrayal lacking. By the end of the book, though, I did warm to her somewhat.
The real star in my eyes, however, was Gilad. I loved his story, loved how he grew through the book to finally see Silver as he was and be able to take it. I also liked his friendship with the Irish boy that was Marie's ex (I forget the name, I've read this a few months ago) and for me, the two of them made the book. It showed how much of an impact teachers can have on their students (a fact that is nowadays, at least in the society I live in, overlooked by many), regardless of their own personal demons and character. I enjoyed reading about their classroom discussions (even if they were sometimes romanticized) and how the differences in culture affected their view of the subject matter.
All in all, my high rating of the book does in no way imply I like what Maksik's done, because I think he was selfish then for using the girl who obviously had issues and was ill-equipped emotionally and psychologically to deal with the aftermath of the relationship she had with him (let alone what happened afterwards), and he was selfish now for doing what he's done by publishing the book (which basically shows he's learnt nothing, just as I feel his character hadn't by the end). So, zero stars for Maksik's personality. But the book itself I've found to be very enjoyable and intriguing, well-written, and I did relate to its characters and was interested in what happened to them, and for that I give it 4 stars. There.
And the book is, ultimately, very good. All the characters in it are flawed and seem real. I think he managed to do a decent job of making himself/the character of William Silver appear highly unlikeable. At least for me, because I found his description to be very realistic of the type of person who would make the decisions he makes in the book and the way he goes through life. I like that he's not black and white, and though he may have gone easier with the whole Mister Keating vibe, all in all, I think Silver was portrayed very faithfully. Marie wasn't very likeable either, though, and I couldn't connect to the character as I would've liked. This is where the -1 star comes from, because I found her two-dimensional and didn't feel invested in her as I should have. Perhaps teenage girls are really like that sometimes, but for the most part - the demanding mother and disinterested parents were there as some sort of reason/explanation for her behavior that was being pushed on me without delving into her own, inner motives and so I found her portrayal lacking. By the end of the book, though, I did warm to her somewhat.
The real star in my eyes, however, was Gilad. I loved his story, loved how he grew through the book to finally see Silver as he was and be able to take it. I also liked his friendship with the Irish boy that was Marie's ex (I forget the name, I've read this a few months ago) and for me, the two of them made the book. It showed how much of an impact teachers can have on their students (a fact that is nowadays, at least in the society I live in, overlooked by many), regardless of their own personal demons and character. I enjoyed reading about their classroom discussions (even if they were sometimes romanticized) and how the differences in culture affected their view of the subject matter.
All in all, my high rating of the book does in no way imply I like what Maksik's done, because I think he was selfish then for using the girl who obviously had issues and was ill-equipped emotionally and psychologically to deal with the aftermath of the relationship she had with him (let alone what happened afterwards), and he was selfish now for doing what he's done by publishing the book (which basically shows he's learnt nothing, just as I feel his character hadn't by the end). So, zero stars for Maksik's personality. But the book itself I've found to be very enjoyable and intriguing, well-written, and I did relate to its characters and was interested in what happened to them, and for that I give it 4 stars. There.
noahbalazs's review
4.0
A fascinating and scandalous tale of third-culture kids and international-school-teachers in Paris. Thinly veiled memoir? Based on true events? I wonder...
marathonreader's review
dark
reflective
medium-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
5.0
Where, even, to begin. Picture the indifferent or detached Mersault in The Stranger. This is your lead narrator, though he is far from apathetic in the English Lit classroom.
Now remember Hamlet's internal battle between desire and hesitation. This struggle between action and inaction characterizes your second narrator (though it is his voice who technically opens the narrative).
Then there is an impressioned (hesitant to say impressionable) girl, whose literary counterpart I haven't yet figured out.
All three stories come together in an international school in France. But as much as the classroom is a stage, so are select urban scenes in Paris.
This is a book for those who are drawn to Dark Academia, to My Dark Vanessa, to The Plot and Kill All Your Darlings and The Secret History. But also for those who want to see Jean-Paul Sartre be applied to Hamlet and As I Lay Dying and The Stranger, for those who contemplate on the function of literature, for those who have ever admired or been admired by people from a distance.
While the student voices felt a little contrived for their age group, I will never forget the existential reflections on such quintessential texts, the mediations on what it means to be "on stage" as a teacher, the delectable but disturbing parallelism.
Would that I could reread this with virgin eyes again.
That said, trigger warnings.
Now remember Hamlet's internal battle between desire and hesitation. This struggle between action and inaction characterizes your second narrator (though it is his voice who technically opens the narrative).
Then there is an impressioned (hesitant to say impressionable) girl, whose literary counterpart I haven't yet figured out.
All three stories come together in an international school in France. But as much as the classroom is a stage, so are select urban scenes in Paris.
This is a book for those who are drawn to Dark Academia, to My Dark Vanessa, to The Plot and Kill All Your Darlings and The Secret History. But also for those who want to see Jean-Paul Sartre be applied to Hamlet and As I Lay Dying and The Stranger, for those who contemplate on the function of literature, for those who have ever admired or been admired by people from a distance.
While the student voices felt a little contrived for their age group, I will never forget the existential reflections on such quintessential texts, the mediations on what it means to be "on stage" as a teacher, the delectable but disturbing parallelism.
Would that I could reread this with virgin eyes again.
That said, trigger warnings.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Abortion, Adult/minor relationship, Physical abuse, and Domestic abuse
whats_margaret_reading's review
3.0
For as dynamically written as the three main narrators are, I'm just a little creeped out by the plot. I'm not sure if this was the goal, some sort of modern Americans abroad international school Lolita, or it's because a teacher is loved by everyone and takes advantage of an underage girl. Maybe Dead Poets Society with more legally unable to consent minors? Let's go with that as an analogy to this novel.
The most bizarre thing is I'm not totally creeped out by the whole thing, though that this is loosely based on the author's experiences makes me a little nervous. Maybe the writing was that good I could overlook some of the generally unsettling vibes? It's worth a read, just to figure out how exactly you stand on this whole novel.
The most bizarre thing is I'm not totally creeped out by the whole thing, though that this is loosely based on the author's experiences makes me a little nervous. Maybe the writing was that good I could overlook some of the generally unsettling vibes? It's worth a read, just to figure out how exactly you stand on this whole novel.
analyticali's review
2.0
Warning 1: this review contains some vague spoilers
Warning 2: you may not want to read this book
I taught at an international school, and it’s clear from the opening pages that Maksik has too. You can’t make this stuff up if you haven’t done something like this. The writing is authentic and compelling, most especially when this novel with three narrators is being told through the eyes of Will the English teacher and Gilad the student.
I would have praised this novel about a compelling and charismatic teacher with some moral failings who is also getting his students to engage with ethical questions through literature, if I had not then thought it was autobiographical AND the literary trope that I am ready to end—young girl sleeps with grown man with power who should totally have known better. There are a lot of moral failings one can have, this is where I draw my line (and also say, you cannot do this and still consider yourself a feminist).
I do not think in generaknthat male authors get to write from the vantage point of young women sleeping with older men. Lolita is already problematic enough, but what if Nabokov had tried to write it from her perspective instead of Humbert Humbert’s and then written about how much she loved it? What if you learned that Nabokov himself had had a sexual relationship with a twelve year old girl and then gone on to write a novel from her perspective?
This might have good writing, but I wouldn’t give him an award!
I wish I had read this article before this book: https://www.timesofisrael.com/literary-author-tests-rules-of-fact-and-fiction/.
Warning 2: you may not want to read this book
I taught at an international school, and it’s clear from the opening pages that Maksik has too. You can’t make this stuff up if you haven’t done something like this. The writing is authentic and compelling, most especially when this novel with three narrators is being told through the eyes of Will the English teacher and Gilad the student.
I would have praised this novel about a compelling and charismatic teacher with some moral failings who is also getting his students to engage with ethical questions through literature, if I had not then thought it was autobiographical AND the literary trope that I am ready to end—young girl sleeps with grown man with power who should totally have known better. There are a lot of moral failings one can have, this is where I draw my line (and also say, you cannot do this and still consider yourself a feminist).
I do not think in generaknthat male authors get to write from the vantage point of young women sleeping with older men. Lolita is already problematic enough, but what if Nabokov had tried to write it from her perspective instead of Humbert Humbert’s and then written about how much she loved it? What if you learned that Nabokov himself had had a sexual relationship with a twelve year old girl and then gone on to write a novel from her perspective?
This might have good writing, but I wouldn’t give him an award!
I wish I had read this article before this book: https://www.timesofisrael.com/literary-author-tests-rules-of-fact-and-fiction/.
karenmusic's review
2.0
The most moving parts of this novel were when the author was quoting other people's words, and teaching other people's concepts. Maksik's prose is plain in a way that isn't dramatic in its starkness, it's just a bare recounting that tries to be poignant but ends up feeling emotionless. It's a good story, but ultimately, a forgettable book.
After reading this, and then the Jezebel article, I'm thoroughly creeped out at the way the author wrote in the girl's voice. Yes, teachers are humans who make mistakes and yes, an artist can and should use their personal experience to create art, but I keep feeling there is something crazy sketchy about how he tried to come off as a blameless wounded nice guy who didn't know why he did anything and had nothing messy to say in his personal life, while everyone else is always reaching and wanting and pouring out their weaknesses around him.
Will felt like a character that the author wanted us to feel had ragged edges, but was polished too smoothly for anyone to actually relate to. He was too distanced from everything in the story, despite being the center of it. Every other character has messy imperfect lives and supposedly worships this guy and the most you can say about Will is he eats bread and sits alone and thinks about other people's thoughts a lot.
After reading this, and then the Jezebel article, I'm thoroughly creeped out at the way the author wrote in the girl's voice. Yes, teachers are humans who make mistakes and yes, an artist can and should use their personal experience to create art, but I keep feeling there is something crazy sketchy about how he tried to come off as a blameless wounded nice guy who didn't know why he did anything and had nothing messy to say in his personal life, while everyone else is always reaching and wanting and pouring out their weaknesses around him.
Will felt like a character that the author wanted us to feel had ragged edges, but was polished too smoothly for anyone to actually relate to. He was too distanced from everything in the story, despite being the center of it. Every other character has messy imperfect lives and supposedly worships this guy and the most you can say about Will is he eats bread and sits alone and thinks about other people's thoughts a lot.