Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I loved it but I have a great admiration for creative stories however I’m not sure the level of creative liberties taken by the author will appeal to a broader audience. I also wonder why the author didn’t just write a trilogy as I had to keep the stories separate in my head. I also need to read more historical fiction set in Hawaii involving Hawaiian royalty- any recommendations?
The author imagines a world in which same sex marriage was legal in 1893. I just had a hard time following all of the David's, Charles, Edwards... which again I appreciate the creativity, it just made it hard for me to follow as a reader. But I fully enjoyed the thought provoking ideas of this creative story.
In 1893, David is a wealthy young man of society in a world where gay marriage is legal, in love with poor and charming Edward but betrothed to rich and respectable Charles. In 1993, there are two Davids: one a young man in New York, living with his wealthy older lover Charles, and that David’s father, living in Hawaii, in an abusive relationship with impoverished Edward. In 2093, the protagonist is a young woman named Charlie who lives in a dystopian New York ravished by pandemics, in a loveless marriage with Edward, fascinated by a mysterious stranger named David.
The author imagines a world in which same sex marriage was legal in 1893. I just had a hard time following all of the David's, Charles, Edwards... which again I appreciate the creativity, it just made it hard for me to follow as a reader. But I fully enjoyed the thought provoking ideas of this creative story.
In 1893, David is a wealthy young man of society in a world where gay marriage is legal, in love with poor and charming Edward but betrothed to rich and respectable Charles. In 1993, there are two Davids: one a young man in New York, living with his wealthy older lover Charles, and that David’s father, living in Hawaii, in an abusive relationship with impoverished Edward. In 2093, the protagonist is a young woman named Charlie who lives in a dystopian New York ravished by pandemics, in a loveless marriage with Edward, fascinated by a mysterious stranger named David.
My irks with this book stem from its strengths. Each story leaves you wanting more. But goddam, I wanted more. I needed the end of each story, I needed to know what happened to my Davids and to Charlie.
Each story succeeds in its own way. By far the first is comparably the least interesting, but the alternate history adds a level of intrigue, even if its delivery is rendered incomplete by the 180 pages. The second story, split in two two, delves into firstly, the intricacies of dying in a way I had never read before, and secondly the meaning of what it means to be Hawaiian. In this way it is wholly novel and I loved it.
The final story, Yanagahara tries her hand at sci-fi and succeeds in creating a dystopian, realistic future that is gritty but fleshed out, futuristic but grounded. That story, despite some unevenness in the two sides of the story, nearly made me cry, and was by far the most cohesive.
Yanagahara used three distinctive narrative styles for each time period, tracking a family through the 90s of the 1800s, 1900s and 2000s. All are engaging, (I had some grief with the final one, finding the diary entries far less interesting than the main story, usually relegated for plot dumps).
Ultimately, with the difficult task of following up A Little Life, Yanagahara succeeds in making you care about 3 distinctly different protagonist, in three fleshed out alternate worlds, in three very different styles, while delivering a cohesive novel.
I will read everything she writes now.
Each story succeeds in its own way. By far the first is comparably the least interesting, but the alternate history adds a level of intrigue, even if its delivery is rendered incomplete by the 180 pages. The second story, split in two two, delves into firstly, the intricacies of dying in a way I had never read before, and secondly the meaning of what it means to be Hawaiian. In this way it is wholly novel and I loved it.
The final story, Yanagahara tries her hand at sci-fi and succeeds in creating a dystopian, realistic future that is gritty but fleshed out, futuristic but grounded. That story, despite some unevenness in the two sides of the story, nearly made me cry, and was by far the most cohesive.
Yanagahara used three distinctive narrative styles for each time period, tracking a family through the 90s of the 1800s, 1900s and 2000s. All are engaging, (I had some grief with the final one, finding the diary entries far less interesting than the main story, usually relegated for plot dumps).
Ultimately, with the difficult task of following up A Little Life, Yanagahara succeeds in making you care about 3 distinctly different protagonist, in three fleshed out alternate worlds, in three very different styles, while delivering a cohesive novel.
I will read everything she writes now.
You can watch my full spoiler free review here:
https://youtu.be/NV7NCnaXbQk
https://youtu.be/NV7NCnaXbQk
That was a journey! Definitely one of the largest, longest books I've ever read, and one that I really enjoyed actually. So often with long books I find myself losing interest, but this stirred within me so many feelings; very very similar ones to Yanagihara's previous novel, A Little Life. I haven't read any reviews (hate doing this before reading a book because so often it affects my opinion) so it'll be interesting to see what others favourite books were (there are 3 texts in this novel) but mine were definitely the first and third.
The second book was the most similar to A Little Life; witnessing Edmunds decline as Charles neglects him for another tore at my heart. I felt the desperation of the one you love being distant, of that love being unrequited. I felt heart sick. And immense sadness at the parallels of how loving someone who does not love you can make you terribly, inordinately ill. A quote that hit me:
'That a person marked their existence in part by their association with you'
Book 3, and the most anticipated because of its associations with the very familiar pandemic situation. Remnants of 1984 and Salt Lick. The pandemic as a racist issue, the blame on Asian countries, using it as a way to enforce racist prejudice, e.g. 'turning the boats away.' I was awakened to the theme of the pandemic blame - who actually is it? Is it the person in society who doesn't make an effort to inform people they're sick and therefore the state HAS to intervene? Is it the hospitals? Is it the government? Was it all, really, created in a lab? These are all questions we asked ourselves during Covid, the reason so many started to turn on one another (think for example of when the government asked neighbours to spy on neighbours): the spread of misinformation was a virus in itself.
Some quotes I liked, however unsettling they were:
'The answer, implicit in the man's question, was that a dystopia doesn't look like anything; indeed it can look like anywhere else.'
'Romance is ephemeral'
Throughout were themes of a non - belonging, that urge to feel like you are rooted somewhere, anywhere. I felt these deeply. As a child of Danish and English parents, I often felt lost when I was younger - which culture do I belong to? So many conversations have left me feeling not Danish enough, being berated for not knowing certain things, being berated for leaving when your life calls to a different place. Though not the same, I knew the feeling, and I think this idea was cemented here:
doing anything because your ancestors wanted to do it - fulfilling someone else's ambition - is a poor motivation
A thought provoking one, highly recommend.
The second book was the most similar to A Little Life; witnessing Edmunds decline as Charles neglects him for another tore at my heart. I felt the desperation of the one you love being distant, of that love being unrequited. I felt heart sick. And immense sadness at the parallels of how loving someone who does not love you can make you terribly, inordinately ill. A quote that hit me:
'That a person marked their existence in part by their association with you'
Book 3, and the most anticipated because of its associations with the very familiar pandemic situation. Remnants of 1984 and Salt Lick. The pandemic as a racist issue, the blame on Asian countries, using it as a way to enforce racist prejudice, e.g. 'turning the boats away.' I was awakened to the theme of the pandemic blame - who actually is it? Is it the person in society who doesn't make an effort to inform people they're sick and therefore the state HAS to intervene? Is it the hospitals? Is it the government? Was it all, really, created in a lab? These are all questions we asked ourselves during Covid, the reason so many started to turn on one another (think for example of when the government asked neighbours to spy on neighbours): the spread of misinformation was a virus in itself.
Some quotes I liked, however unsettling they were:
'The answer, implicit in the man's question, was that a dystopia doesn't look like anything; indeed it can look like anywhere else.'
'Romance is ephemeral'
Throughout were themes of a non - belonging, that urge to feel like you are rooted somewhere, anywhere. I felt these deeply. As a child of Danish and English parents, I often felt lost when I was younger - which culture do I belong to? So many conversations have left me feeling not Danish enough, being berated for not knowing certain things, being berated for leaving when your life calls to a different place. Though not the same, I knew the feeling, and I think this idea was cemented here:
doing anything because your ancestors wanted to do it - fulfilling someone else's ambition - is a poor motivation
A thought provoking one, highly recommend.
I found this to be a complex, uneven novel but well-worth persisting with till the end. Part of the complexity comes from the three different time-periods: 1893, 1993 and 2093 and the struggle to work out the not so obvious, but evident, connections between them. For example, Charles Griffith in the first period is the nouveau riche suitor of David Bingham; in the second, the wealthy lover of the Hawaian David Bingham; and in the final period, the father of another, insurgent, David, and grandfather of Charlie as well as the main narrator of her story.
I was entranced by the first section and somewhat disappointed not to find out how David had fared in “his first step to a new life; his first step – to paradise.” The relationship in the first section between David and Edward Bishop seems to be paralleled in the second one by that between David’s (Kawika’s) father and another Edward, who is also exploitative of the wealthier, weaker David (Wika). The Hawaian connection was bewildering to me, it was not clear how the Binghams were Hawaian royalty as the explanation of a missionary imposed name felt inadequate. I would also like to have understood how the David Bingham who was moving to California ended up providing a name to Hawaian royalty. The coincidence in that second section of the lover of David (Kawika) Bingham, Charles Griffith, owning the Washington Square house appeared forced.
The house appears again in the third section. Originally belonging to Aubrey and Norris, whose Hawaian art collection infuriates and antagonizes Charles Griffith, it becomes the home of Charles’ husband Nathaniel and Charles’ son David, before eventually being taken over by the State after Aubrey’s death and transformed into apartments.
Leaving aside the recurrences and coincidences, the time periods are vivid and acutely observed. The strange environment of an alternative American state, where homosexual couples are the norm, still manages to have an 1800s feel about it. The Aids epidemic in the 1990s is clearly evoked with the last dinner of Peter, former lover of Charles. I know very little about Hawaii but 1893 was a seminal date when the Hawaian kingdom was overthrown and the resentment, even a century later, percolates through the second section. The heat and epidemics of the period in the future present a frighteningly realistic evocation of a possible situation.
Yanagihara triumphs in her rendering of troubled characters, often weak and infuriatingly inadequate. They are disturbingly real to the reader, even someone as clearly unstable as David (Kawika) Bingham’s father in the second section. While there are fewer female characters, cameo appearances of Eden, both as the friend of David in section two and the mother of Charlie in section three, ring true. Charlie herself, a person afflicted by the serious illness from which she has recovered and obviously impaired by the after-effects of the drugs administered, remains convincing.
While I found section two somewhat heavy going, the vivacity of sections one and three more than made up for it and I thoroughly appreciated the novel.
I was entranced by the first section and somewhat disappointed not to find out how David had fared in “his first step to a new life; his first step – to paradise.” The relationship in the first section between David and Edward Bishop seems to be paralleled in the second one by that between David’s (Kawika’s) father and another Edward, who is also exploitative of the wealthier, weaker David (Wika). The Hawaian connection was bewildering to me, it was not clear how the Binghams were Hawaian royalty as the explanation of a missionary imposed name felt inadequate. I would also like to have understood how the David Bingham who was moving to California ended up providing a name to Hawaian royalty. The coincidence in that second section of the lover of David (Kawika) Bingham, Charles Griffith, owning the Washington Square house appeared forced.
The house appears again in the third section. Originally belonging to Aubrey and Norris, whose Hawaian art collection infuriates and antagonizes Charles Griffith, it becomes the home of Charles’ husband Nathaniel and Charles’ son David, before eventually being taken over by the State after Aubrey’s death and transformed into apartments.
Leaving aside the recurrences and coincidences, the time periods are vivid and acutely observed. The strange environment of an alternative American state, where homosexual couples are the norm, still manages to have an 1800s feel about it. The Aids epidemic in the 1990s is clearly evoked with the last dinner of Peter, former lover of Charles. I know very little about Hawaii but 1893 was a seminal date when the Hawaian kingdom was overthrown and the resentment, even a century later, percolates through the second section. The heat and epidemics of the period in the future present a frighteningly realistic evocation of a possible situation.
Yanagihara triumphs in her rendering of troubled characters, often weak and infuriatingly inadequate. They are disturbingly real to the reader, even someone as clearly unstable as David (Kawika) Bingham’s father in the second section. While there are fewer female characters, cameo appearances of Eden, both as the friend of David in section two and the mother of Charlie in section three, ring true. Charlie herself, a person afflicted by the serious illness from which she has recovered and obviously impaired by the after-effects of the drugs administered, remains convincing.
While I found section two somewhat heavy going, the vivacity of sections one and three more than made up for it and I thoroughly appreciated the novel.
Ok but seriously……..what happens to her??? I finally began to enjoy the book and like the characters and then the ending?? WTH Hanya