Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.4 AVERAGE
3.4 AVERAGE
To start, this is coming from someone who had seen the play first. The play is bloody fantastic and I highly recommend it to anyone, regardless if you've read the book.
Moving on...
I knew the book would certainly have it's differences, that's a given when works are transformed into other works. The first thing that caught me off guard was the beginning. It wasn't surprising that we would meet the parents first, that back-story was touched upon in the play, however I didn't expect it to be so long. Eh, that's a lie, I think the first thing that caught me off guard was the writing style. Very gross, in my opinion. Much of it was filler nonsense, pointless nothings that could've just as well been left out. So many details, it's ridiculous, really. The way the author wrote was just uncomfortable. It took me out of the world so often, I was rarely, if ever, immersed in the story. It was horribly distracting and a huge turn-off. It felt more like he was trying to make this book something elegant, fancy, rich and archaic, like he was somehow a special snowflake. Honestly, talking about it now, it feels more cocky than anything. Do not approve. It's not attractive, it's not interesting, it's not special, it's drab.
Anyhoo, the story itself. Again, coming from someone who had only seen the play, the character I was most looking forward to was Elphaba. My god, was it forever before we saw her, granted we saw her as a child, but I was more interested in her Shiz-age than her as a baby. When we finally reached school age, it was a relief, but at the same time, still so confusing. I'd like to blame the writing style for my lack of understanding of much of the "deeper" meanings and politics/religion, but even still, I feel like it was all worded and explained throughout the book in such a crappy way. Don't get me wrong, there were moments, granted, insanely scarce and I can honestly only think of one at the moment (the "evil" talk towards the end with Avaric, it was cute), that I did rather like and had some merit, but the rest was just...bad. It reminded me of his writing style, like he tried to be so "cool" about it and it came off so flat. I was no fan of 'The Hobbit', but at least that guy can world build. It was like this author was trying to do just that and failed miserably.
A big part that bothered me, aside from the above, was the relationship dynamics between the characters. It felt so rushed, random, and unrealistic. I liked Boq and Elphaba, I think there were times that the two of them were done right, other times awkward, but mostly good. Elphaba and Galinda, the highlight of the play, wasn't bad, but I didn't feel that 'bond' that the two shared in the play. I don't think it was nearly as well portrayed in the book. I liked the later moments with Elphaba and her father, I wish that had been in the play, but I understand time constraints. I think it really added to her character though. Worst of all, Fiyero and Elphaba.
/SPOILERS/
Elphaba leaving Shiz so suddenly did catch me off guard but I accepted it. I know it's not exactly how it was in the play, but so be it, again, I knew they were going to be different. But man, Fiyero and Elphaba? Now that was just horrifyingly bad. In the play, there is a clear struggle with Fiyero, we see him and Elphaba's relationship grow and change, to when they /do/ get together, you're nodding your head, understanding how those events lead to that point. In the book? Where did any of that happen? Elphaba was gone from Shiz for years, hiding out in Emerald City. She had rarely interacted with Fiyero, I can't recall even one line of dialogue they had with each other. Fiyero is visiting the city, sees Elphaba, understandably wants to chat with her, it's been years, they went to school together, okay. But then, BAM sexual and romantic relationship! WHAT? ...???? They were in /love/, like, how and when did that happen??
/END SPOILERS/
I feel like much of the book and story was lost on me due to how distracted I was with how badly it was written. I found myself skimming sometimes just to get it over with. The story might have otherwise been interesting if was written better!
/SPOILERS/
A big part of the book I hated was after the death of Fiyero. Events unfolded in a strange way and the whole Sarima thing was dragged out for so long, it didn't give off that 'Wicked' feel. Of course other characters will be made in a faux back-story of a character in another book, it wasn't that I had a problem with, it was just how drawn out that part was. It was at least one-third of the book where almost /nothing/ happens. (I am /not/ exaggerating here.) Elphaba stays with these people for months. We're told basically the day-by-day events. Children play and bully each other (mostly Liir, I was so glad when they killed off Manek, what a horrible person), Sarima's sisters do their chores, Sarima...did...whatever, Elphaba sulked and walked around. That was essentially it. (I am not kidding.)
Also, to note, I did know that Elphaba had a son, despite that not being in the play. I knew that the books following this one were about his adventures, but wow, what a way to introduce him. What a way to make me really not want to ever read those books. If those books /are/ really about Liir, NO THANK YOU! What a weak character, and I don't just mean that he's physically/mentally weak. (Though my god was he just obnoxiously annoying in general.) I mean he's weakly written. How little did the author care about this character? In fact, thinking about it now, a lot of the characters were very weakly written, even lazy at times. This includes huge characters like Elphaba.
I was so relieved when Elphaba went to go visit her sister, for probably the second time in this whole book, the first being the introduction of Shiz's section only to be sorely disappointed, I was excited. Something was finally going to happen! YES! The scenes that followed were actually not too bad, aside from the grossly distractingly poor writing. My guess is that, given how awful the Sarima section was, I was just happy to read something different, haha.
/END SPOILERS/
I did rather enjoy noticing the things both similar and different from the play, that made things a little more fun. Like Madam Morrible and her talk with Elphaba. I actually laughed remembering what scene in the play portrayed that part, it made so much more sense and was actually MORE funny having read that part in the book. I also thought it was interesting to read the differences in Nessa. To those who know the play, you'll know what I'm referring to. Makes me wonder why they changed that about her. To make things easier, I guess? Lol.
Dorothy was written rather interesting and much more entertaining than the movie. (I haven't read the original book.) I found her pretty funny and liked her interactions with Elphaba. Though Elphaba's death was both clever and...annoying, how the author went about it. I can't quite think of the word, but "sigh" is the best way I can put it. :/ ...like, really? That's how it's being done?
To the author's credit though, the ending, the very very ending, the last piece of dialogue shared, that was cute. Had that not been there, I probably would've felt much worse after finishing the book. That last little piece really helped pull it together. It was clever and very much worth the insertion.
--
TL;DR
I'm glad I read the book, just so I can say I read it and am aware of the origins of the play. Would I recommend it to someone? Never, just go see the play. (Seriously, the play freaking amazing!) It had it's rare moments of being good, but they were greatly overshadowed by extremely poor and distracting writing, gross over-detailing and confusing world-building, and weakly written characters.
Moving on...
I knew the book would certainly have it's differences, that's a given when works are transformed into other works. The first thing that caught me off guard was the beginning. It wasn't surprising that we would meet the parents first, that back-story was touched upon in the play, however I didn't expect it to be so long. Eh, that's a lie, I think the first thing that caught me off guard was the writing style. Very gross, in my opinion. Much of it was filler nonsense, pointless nothings that could've just as well been left out. So many details, it's ridiculous, really. The way the author wrote was just uncomfortable. It took me out of the world so often, I was rarely, if ever, immersed in the story. It was horribly distracting and a huge turn-off. It felt more like he was trying to make this book something elegant, fancy, rich and archaic, like he was somehow a special snowflake. Honestly, talking about it now, it feels more cocky than anything. Do not approve. It's not attractive, it's not interesting, it's not special, it's drab.
Anyhoo, the story itself. Again, coming from someone who had only seen the play, the character I was most looking forward to was Elphaba. My god, was it forever before we saw her, granted we saw her as a child, but I was more interested in her Shiz-age than her as a baby. When we finally reached school age, it was a relief, but at the same time, still so confusing. I'd like to blame the writing style for my lack of understanding of much of the "deeper" meanings and politics/religion, but even still, I feel like it was all worded and explained throughout the book in such a crappy way. Don't get me wrong, there were moments, granted, insanely scarce and I can honestly only think of one at the moment (the "evil" talk towards the end with Avaric, it was cute), that I did rather like and had some merit, but the rest was just...bad. It reminded me of his writing style, like he tried to be so "cool" about it and it came off so flat. I was no fan of 'The Hobbit', but at least that guy can world build. It was like this author was trying to do just that and failed miserably.
A big part that bothered me, aside from the above, was the relationship dynamics between the characters. It felt so rushed, random, and unrealistic. I liked Boq and Elphaba, I think there were times that the two of them were done right, other times awkward, but mostly good. Elphaba and Galinda, the highlight of the play, wasn't bad, but I didn't feel that 'bond' that the two shared in the play. I don't think it was nearly as well portrayed in the book. I liked the later moments with Elphaba and her father, I wish that had been in the play, but I understand time constraints. I think it really added to her character though. Worst of all, Fiyero and Elphaba.
/SPOILERS/
Elphaba leaving Shiz so suddenly did catch me off guard but I accepted it. I know it's not exactly how it was in the play, but so be it, again, I knew they were going to be different. But man, Fiyero and Elphaba? Now that was just horrifyingly bad. In the play, there is a clear struggle with Fiyero, we see him and Elphaba's relationship grow and change, to when they /do/ get together, you're nodding your head, understanding how those events lead to that point. In the book? Where did any of that happen? Elphaba was gone from Shiz for years, hiding out in Emerald City. She had rarely interacted with Fiyero, I can't recall even one line of dialogue they had with each other. Fiyero is visiting the city, sees Elphaba, understandably wants to chat with her, it's been years, they went to school together, okay. But then, BAM sexual and romantic relationship! WHAT? ...???? They were in /love/, like, how and when did that happen??
/END SPOILERS/
I feel like much of the book and story was lost on me due to how distracted I was with how badly it was written. I found myself skimming sometimes just to get it over with. The story might have otherwise been interesting if was written better!
/SPOILERS/
A big part of the book I hated was after the death of Fiyero. Events unfolded in a strange way and the whole Sarima thing was dragged out for so long, it didn't give off that 'Wicked' feel. Of course other characters will be made in a faux back-story of a character in another book, it wasn't that I had a problem with, it was just how drawn out that part was. It was at least one-third of the book where almost /nothing/ happens. (I am /not/ exaggerating here.) Elphaba stays with these people for months. We're told basically the day-by-day events. Children play and bully each other (mostly Liir, I was so glad when they killed off Manek, what a horrible person), Sarima's sisters do their chores, Sarima...did...whatever, Elphaba sulked and walked around. That was essentially it. (I am not kidding.)
Also, to note, I did know that Elphaba had a son, despite that not being in the play. I knew that the books following this one were about his adventures, but wow, what a way to introduce him. What a way to make me really not want to ever read those books. If those books /are/ really about Liir, NO THANK YOU! What a weak character, and I don't just mean that he's physically/mentally weak. (Though my god was he just obnoxiously annoying in general.) I mean he's weakly written. How little did the author care about this character? In fact, thinking about it now, a lot of the characters were very weakly written, even lazy at times. This includes huge characters like Elphaba.
I was so relieved when Elphaba went to go visit her sister, for probably the second time in this whole book, the first being the introduction of Shiz's section only to be sorely disappointed, I was excited. Something was finally going to happen! YES! The scenes that followed were actually not too bad, aside from the grossly distractingly poor writing. My guess is that, given how awful the Sarima section was, I was just happy to read something different, haha.
/END SPOILERS/
I did rather enjoy noticing the things both similar and different from the play, that made things a little more fun. Like Madam Morrible and her talk with Elphaba. I actually laughed remembering what scene in the play portrayed that part, it made so much more sense and was actually MORE funny having read that part in the book. I also thought it was interesting to read the differences in Nessa. To those who know the play, you'll know what I'm referring to. Makes me wonder why they changed that about her. To make things easier, I guess? Lol.
Dorothy was written rather interesting and much more entertaining than the movie. (I haven't read the original book.) I found her pretty funny and liked her interactions with Elphaba. Though Elphaba's death was both clever and...annoying, how the author went about it. I can't quite think of the word, but "sigh" is the best way I can put it. :/ ...like, really? That's how it's being done?
To the author's credit though, the ending, the very very ending, the last piece of dialogue shared, that was cute. Had that not been there, I probably would've felt much worse after finishing the book. That last little piece really helped pull it together. It was clever and very much worth the insertion.
--
TL;DR
I'm glad I read the book, just so I can say I read it and am aware of the origins of the play. Would I recommend it to someone? Never, just go see the play. (Seriously, the play freaking amazing!) It had it's rare moments of being good, but they were greatly overshadowed by extremely poor and distracting writing, gross over-detailing and confusing world-building, and weakly written characters.
I pushed myself through this book. I thought the concept of delving into the life of the "Wicked" witch was a great idea but I was bored with the language and style. Really great character development done by the author.
adventurous
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
slow-paced
adventurous
dark
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Wordy and slow paced. Feels like you start in the middle of the story hard to keep track of details/understand. Had to force myself to finish this book
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I wanted to read this after seeing Wicked the movie part 1. And boy was this a ride! It is very very different from the broadway play/movie. Be aware - it is very dark, twisted, and includes many sexual innuendoes. It is very verbose at times and the language used is a bit archaic for 1995. That being said, I did enjoy the story and it was fun to compare to the screenplay. It was an interesting read considering the entire story is politically motivated. I would give this a 2.5
challenging
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes