Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.86 AVERAGE
3.86 AVERAGE
Wow. So this one isn't quite 5 stars, but it's at least 4.5. Maybe 4.75. The prose was gorgeous. And there was a lot of prose to admire in this tome of a novel. Although the plot was intense and captivating, it was the writing that really drew me into this one and kept me reading. This book is meant to be digested slowly but worth the investment of time.
MILD SPOILERS THROUGHOUT
For something as well known and steeped into the pop culture as SOPHIE'S CHOICE I guess I expected a lot more, but for the most part I was pretty disappointed. For a book seemingly titled after one character, it follows very little about her and barely fleshes out anything. Instead this is told from the perspective of Stingo, a cynical privileged Southerner finally getting time to write after losing his job, but still living off of Daddy's funds. Sophie is used more as a plot point and her titular 'choice' is so buried under pretentious bullshit and used for shock value so late in the novel, that it barely holds any power by the time it's revealed. Due to the adaptation being one of Meryl Streep's hallmark performances, I knew the 'twist' going into this story which severely devalued the 'power' of this book, but even if I didn't know I highly doubt it would've left me with the intended reaction. Instead I was left waiting and waiting for the other shoe to drop and it was incredibly frustrating.
I feel this entire novel is false advertising. I went in expecting a moving journey of a woman's survival from a concentration camp and grappling with the horrors she had to endure and consequences of her unthinkable choices. Instead Stingo's story is wholly unrelatable and his obsession with having sex is incredibly grating to the point of being painful. Any woman he meets he only values them for the chance of getting into their pants and when he's constantly turned down he immediately treats them like garbage. He acts as if any time he's nice to a woman he's owed sleeping with her and having so much of this plot revolve around this revolted me. He mostly treats Sophie as another object that he can fantasize about, but also occasionally as a tool syphoning off her story into his own work. I understand having a third party main character is to be the audience's window into the story and the attempt of his character was to juxtapose his American, sheltered naïveté with a world-worn European survivor, but concentrating so much on his petty problems felt hollow compared to Sophie's hardships. There's also so much time wasted on unrelated plots or theoretical symbolism that seemed to go nowhere. With a book named after Sophie I really wanted her plot to take center stage instead of being occasional anecdotes. So much of this was also told from an unreliable narrator POV, whether Stingo or Sophie it was apparent I wasn't getting the full story. Stingo even takes time to say Sophie's omitting the truth during some of her initial stories, and to that I ask why and what's the point? I don't know if this was an attempt to keep it interesting or to surprise with the twist later on, but all it did was further confuse me. We're told multiple versions of the same story to the point when we get to the real one all of the tension and intrigue is completely deflated. I understand it's Sophie's way of retconning her past and trying to move forward, but since she also is constantly suicidal it's clear she doesn't want to forgive herself so I don't know why telling her truth would change that.
There is so much missing from Sophie's characterization as well, mainly because she is viewed through the singularly focused eyes of horny Stingo, and it keeps me from being fully emotionally connected to her throughout the narrative. And frankly, I just despised Nathan and did not understand his purpose nor what Styron is trying to say with their ending. I know Sophie is a masochistic victim who lived through serious trauma. I know she made some choices she will never forgive herself for, so Nathan is the punishment she has inflicted on herself. But what the hell is Nathan's problem? He is an American born Jew, born into wealth and privilege, enough that he can actually help himself to get better. Some of the scenes between Sophie and Nathan were more disturbing and horrific than the ones that took place at Auschwitz. Is that really what Styron hoped to accomplish? Every time I'd hoped she'd learned something or gotten away she would be dragged back to this psycho. To end in not only her going back to him, but their double suicide, I genuinely don't understand what point is trying to be made. Is Styron saying making terrible mistakes can never be forgiven or that the only salvation is death? Is he saying physical and emotional violence is a logical punishment for overcoming tragedy? Is he saying such trauma like the atrocities of WWII can never be forgotten? It left me truly baffled.
This story is as much about lies as it is about choices, lies that we hide behind to protect ourselves. So what happens when we confess the truth? That is a question worth thinking about, but to me it all came across muddled due to Sophie's story being coated in so much abuse and unnecessary plot contrivances. In spite of the fact that the prose and overall language is relatively well written, there was just too much hype preceding the book that I believe it was set up for failure. Likewise, as stated earlier there was way too much build up regarding the nature of Sophie's actual "choice" . Then when he finally gets there, Styron glosses over it, and that was the one place I would have liked him to linger. That detracted from any emotional affect it could have on me. I really wish this book was completely reedited to center around Sophie's life. That's what I found the most interesting and that's what I cared about, I couldn't be bothered with Stingo's bullshit and libido. I'm definitely going to watch the film since its legacy has preceded this book and I'm hoping it focuses in more on Sophie, actually developing her character and giving us anyone to become emotionally attached to. I respect the attempts made in this book, but overall it completely fell flat for me. Sometimes I think I just need to listen to people who say 'just watch the movie'.
For something as well known and steeped into the pop culture as SOPHIE'S CHOICE I guess I expected a lot more, but for the most part I was pretty disappointed. For a book seemingly titled after one character, it follows very little about her and barely fleshes out anything. Instead this is told from the perspective of Stingo, a cynical privileged Southerner finally getting time to write after losing his job, but still living off of Daddy's funds. Sophie is used more as a plot point and her titular 'choice' is so buried under pretentious bullshit and used for shock value so late in the novel, that it barely holds any power by the time it's revealed. Due to the adaptation being one of Meryl Streep's hallmark performances, I knew the 'twist' going into this story which severely devalued the 'power' of this book, but even if I didn't know I highly doubt it would've left me with the intended reaction. Instead I was left waiting and waiting for the other shoe to drop and it was incredibly frustrating.
I feel this entire novel is false advertising. I went in expecting a moving journey of a woman's survival from a concentration camp and grappling with the horrors she had to endure and consequences of her unthinkable choices. Instead Stingo's story is wholly unrelatable and his obsession with having sex is incredibly grating to the point of being painful. Any woman he meets he only values them for the chance of getting into their pants and when he's constantly turned down he immediately treats them like garbage. He acts as if any time he's nice to a woman he's owed sleeping with her and having so much of this plot revolve around this revolted me. He mostly treats Sophie as another object that he can fantasize about, but also occasionally as a tool syphoning off her story into his own work. I understand having a third party main character is to be the audience's window into the story and the attempt of his character was to juxtapose his American, sheltered naïveté with a world-worn European survivor, but concentrating so much on his petty problems felt hollow compared to Sophie's hardships. There's also so much time wasted on unrelated plots or theoretical symbolism that seemed to go nowhere. With a book named after Sophie I really wanted her plot to take center stage instead of being occasional anecdotes. So much of this was also told from an unreliable narrator POV, whether Stingo or Sophie it was apparent I wasn't getting the full story. Stingo even takes time to say Sophie's omitting the truth during some of her initial stories, and to that I ask why and what's the point? I don't know if this was an attempt to keep it interesting or to surprise with the twist later on, but all it did was further confuse me. We're told multiple versions of the same story to the point when we get to the real one all of the tension and intrigue is completely deflated. I understand it's Sophie's way of retconning her past and trying to move forward, but since she also is constantly suicidal it's clear she doesn't want to forgive herself so I don't know why telling her truth would change that.
There is so much missing from Sophie's characterization as well, mainly because she is viewed through the singularly focused eyes of horny Stingo, and it keeps me from being fully emotionally connected to her throughout the narrative. And frankly, I just despised Nathan and did not understand his purpose nor what Styron is trying to say with their ending. I know Sophie is a masochistic victim who lived through serious trauma. I know she made some choices she will never forgive herself for, so Nathan is the punishment she has inflicted on herself. But what the hell is Nathan's problem? He is an American born Jew, born into wealth and privilege, enough that he can actually help himself to get better. Some of the scenes between Sophie and Nathan were more disturbing and horrific than the ones that took place at Auschwitz. Is that really what Styron hoped to accomplish? Every time I'd hoped she'd learned something or gotten away she would be dragged back to this psycho. To end in not only her going back to him, but their double suicide, I genuinely don't understand what point is trying to be made. Is Styron saying making terrible mistakes can never be forgiven or that the only salvation is death? Is he saying physical and emotional violence is a logical punishment for overcoming tragedy? Is he saying such trauma like the atrocities of WWII can never be forgotten? It left me truly baffled.
This story is as much about lies as it is about choices, lies that we hide behind to protect ourselves. So what happens when we confess the truth? That is a question worth thinking about, but to me it all came across muddled due to Sophie's story being coated in so much abuse and unnecessary plot contrivances. In spite of the fact that the prose and overall language is relatively well written, there was just too much hype preceding the book that I believe it was set up for failure. Likewise, as stated earlier there was way too much build up regarding the nature of Sophie's actual "choice" . Then when he finally gets there, Styron glosses over it, and that was the one place I would have liked him to linger. That detracted from any emotional affect it could have on me. I really wish this book was completely reedited to center around Sophie's life. That's what I found the most interesting and that's what I cared about, I couldn't be bothered with Stingo's bullshit and libido. I'm definitely going to watch the film since its legacy has preceded this book and I'm hoping it focuses in more on Sophie, actually developing her character and giving us anyone to become emotionally attached to. I respect the attempts made in this book, but overall it completely fell flat for me. Sometimes I think I just need to listen to people who say 'just watch the movie'.
I can’t decide if I don’t like Styron or maybe I just don’t like Stingo.
Stingo is a pretentious writer with such a high opinion of himself that he spends most of the book mocking other writers (they are awful compared to his incredible skills), complaining about women (he is such a catch, why aren’t any of these women interested in him, doesn’t he DESERVE them?), and dismissing his own family (going back to the south is beneath him). Now, I try not to dislike a book just because I don’t agree with the main character. However, self-absorbed Stingo permeated every page and every plotline (even plotlines of other characters) so much that my distaste for him completely took over.
This book had incredible potential. In the hands of a talented storyteller, this would have been the heartbreaking, tearjerker that it should have been. When I think about Sophie’s story and her impossible choice, it devastates me. But when I was in real-time, flipping the pages, no emotions came to me other than annoyance. And this is coming from someone who cries at EVERYTHING. Immediately after the big reveal of ‘Sophie’s Choice’, Stingo launches into his own rationalization which treads very near to exoneration. Styron needed to let the reveal hang in the air, soak in. But no. Enter Stingo. Again.
Sophie has two main traits: hot and self-loathing. Of course, who wouldn’t be self-loathing in her situation. But Stingo makes sure that we fully understand how hot (and simultaneously emaciated?) she is. Sophie could be great written by a more conscientious writer.
Positives: Nathan is a well-written narcissistic abuser. His highs are high, filled to the brim with charm and charisma. His lows are low with verbal and physical abuse and manipulation. I’ve known people like this. It was terrifying and realistic.
Had the character of Sophie and her storyline not been filtered through the lens of the unbearable Stingo, I think I would have loved this book. Cut out Stingo entirely, flesh out Sophie and the holocaust storyline and THEN, I would agree that we have a literary masterpiece on our hands. As it stands today, not so much.
2/5
#bookbowlchallenge
Stingo is a pretentious writer with such a high opinion of himself that he spends most of the book mocking other writers (they are awful compared to his incredible skills), complaining about women (he is such a catch, why aren’t any of these women interested in him, doesn’t he DESERVE them?), and dismissing his own family (going back to the south is beneath him). Now, I try not to dislike a book just because I don’t agree with the main character. However, self-absorbed Stingo permeated every page and every plotline (even plotlines of other characters) so much that my distaste for him completely took over.
This book had incredible potential. In the hands of a talented storyteller, this would have been the heartbreaking, tearjerker that it should have been. When I think about Sophie’s story and her impossible choice, it devastates me. But when I was in real-time, flipping the pages, no emotions came to me other than annoyance. And this is coming from someone who cries at EVERYTHING. Immediately after the big reveal of ‘Sophie’s Choice’, Stingo launches into his own rationalization which treads very near to exoneration. Styron needed to let the reveal hang in the air, soak in. But no. Enter Stingo. Again.
Sophie has two main traits: hot and self-loathing. Of course, who wouldn’t be self-loathing in her situation. But Stingo makes sure that we fully understand how hot (and simultaneously emaciated?) she is. Sophie could be great written by a more conscientious writer.
Positives: Nathan is a well-written narcissistic abuser. His highs are high, filled to the brim with charm and charisma. His lows are low with verbal and physical abuse and manipulation. I’ve known people like this. It was terrifying and realistic.
Had the character of Sophie and her storyline not been filtered through the lens of the unbearable Stingo, I think I would have loved this book. Cut out Stingo entirely, flesh out Sophie and the holocaust storyline and THEN, I would agree that we have a literary masterpiece on our hands. As it stands today, not so much.
2/5
#bookbowlchallenge
I guess I don't understand the premise of this book. It was depressing. I've read a lot of books about Holocaust victims and this one is the first that showed someone with such loose (desperate and forgotten) morals. I couldn't finish the book.
This is one of my all time favourite books. This book is written in two times. Sophie's life in Poland and how she survived concentration camp and then her life in America - her turbulant relationship and life of a survivor...
This is a fantastic book and one of those everyone should read. I have a hardback copy in my native language (czech)and it will always be a keeper.
This is a fantastic book and one of those everyone should read. I have a hardback copy in my native language (czech)and it will always be a keeper.
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
For a young reader, it was difficult to get through, dull and repetitive for great lengths throughout.
Unfortunately the memory of the storyline as a whole is fantastic, and so I have no choice but to recommend it.
The type of book you fondly look back on, and can only fully appreciate when you have finished it.
Unfortunately the memory of the storyline as a whole is fantastic, and so I have no choice but to recommend it.
The type of book you fondly look back on, and can only fully appreciate when you have finished it.
What would have been a poignant perspective on the treatment of the Nazis’ political opponents was ruined by the author’s obsession with nuzzling breasts. I found it very distasteful to have Sophie opening her legs three seconds after recounting the horrors of Auschwitz.
challenging
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No