You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.73 AVERAGE
3.73 AVERAGE
One of the best books I've read in a long time. It inspired in me a bit of an existential/quarter-life crisis with all the difficult moral questions the plot posed, but it ended happily and I was quite satisfied, as I like books that make me think. Loved it, and really felt I could connect to the characters.
This book had my 2 year old laughing hysterically. A fun rhyme scheme and engaging illustrations, it is an entertaining addition to any child's shelf.
Maybe I’m not the best audience for this book but I found it difficult to get through. I did enjoy the creature’s POV though and the message i took from it; the creature was made a monster by those around him and that his creator should have taken some responsibility for his creation instead of running around Europe complaining and describing everything he did and thought in painstaking detail.
I know, I know. I just gave four stars to a book that centres on a relationship between a man and woman. I usually steer clear of these books, but this one ended up in my hands for some reason and I thought I'd give it a try. This time, that try yielded positive results and I pretty much binged it.
Perhaps it was the timing: right book, right time. The wife is a therapist, and so a lot of her narrative (it flip-flops between her and him) is spent on either her former therapy sessions in the Adler method, or with her own patients. This sets up the lens with which to see the whole book, because now all of the couple's thoughts can be seen that way, and since we are exposed to their faulty thinking, the influences of their childhood, it makes for a good psychological...not quite thriller, but certainly tickler.
Does it matter who is actually guilty in the end? Did the victim deserve their death? Was there another option? If so, what was it? Which character earns the most dislike from the reader? This book is definitely a character-driven plot, because it's all about the characters. And boy, are they layered! They're complex and flawed and realistic for it. As reader, you don't want to like them for those flaws, but at the same time, you don't fully blame them because you might do the same or similar in their situation. That's the stroke of great writing and it's here.
Perhaps it was the timing: right book, right time. The wife is a therapist, and so a lot of her narrative (it flip-flops between her and him) is spent on either her former therapy sessions in the Adler method, or with her own patients. This sets up the lens with which to see the whole book, because now all of the couple's thoughts can be seen that way, and since we are exposed to their faulty thinking, the influences of their childhood, it makes for a good psychological...not quite thriller, but certainly tickler.
Does it matter who is actually guilty in the end? Did the victim deserve their death? Was there another option? If so, what was it? Which character earns the most dislike from the reader? This book is definitely a character-driven plot, because it's all about the characters. And boy, are they layered! They're complex and flawed and realistic for it. As reader, you don't want to like them for those flaws, but at the same time, you don't fully blame them because you might do the same or similar in their situation. That's the stroke of great writing and it's here.
The ageing Doctor Manette, has been released from the Bastille, after being eighteen years as a political prisoner in the Bastille and is reunited with his daughter in England.
]
In England the Doctor’s daughter Lucie, has the love of two very different men. One, Charles Darnay, an exiled French aristocrat, and Sydney Carton, a disreputable but brilliant English lawyer.
From the tranquil roads of London, they are drawn against their will to the vengeful, bloodstained streets of Paris at the height of the Reign of Terror, and they soon fall under the lethal shadow of La Guillotine.
I went into reading this historical novel with some trepidation, as Charles Dickens is a writer, I have tried to read before but have never completed one. The reason for this is while the stories are always interesting, I do find the writing style of Charles Dickens a bit dry for my taste.
This one was no different with this reading and even up to about 50% of the book i was thinking about not finishing. However at that point the story seemed to start to flow, i am not saying the book has made me a Charles Dickens fan, however the story did start to interest me at that point.
This was because the idea of, what we would now call a love triangle in the book along with the danger of Revolutionary France and the jeopardy that Dickens was able to bring made the story a great read.
This is how I would define Tale of Two Cities in my opinion, a great story which for me, was spoiled by the writing style of Charles Dickens.
So who would I recommend this book for, Charles Dickens is one of those writers that most people should at least try to read in their reading life, in addition if you want to read a book about revenge and going beyond the call of duty, then Tale of Two Cities is the book for you.
]
In England the Doctor’s daughter Lucie, has the love of two very different men. One, Charles Darnay, an exiled French aristocrat, and Sydney Carton, a disreputable but brilliant English lawyer.
From the tranquil roads of London, they are drawn against their will to the vengeful, bloodstained streets of Paris at the height of the Reign of Terror, and they soon fall under the lethal shadow of La Guillotine.
I went into reading this historical novel with some trepidation, as Charles Dickens is a writer, I have tried to read before but have never completed one. The reason for this is while the stories are always interesting, I do find the writing style of Charles Dickens a bit dry for my taste.
This one was no different with this reading and even up to about 50% of the book i was thinking about not finishing. However at that point the story seemed to start to flow, i am not saying the book has made me a Charles Dickens fan, however the story did start to interest me at that point.
This was because the idea of, what we would now call a love triangle in the book along with the danger of Revolutionary France and the jeopardy that Dickens was able to bring made the story a great read.
This is how I would define Tale of Two Cities in my opinion, a great story which for me, was spoiled by the writing style of Charles Dickens.
So who would I recommend this book for, Charles Dickens is one of those writers that most people should at least try to read in their reading life, in addition if you want to read a book about revenge and going beyond the call of duty, then Tale of Two Cities is the book for you.
The prequel is as good as the first one, and thankfully, no need to explain everything. We do get a few answers, but not retcon or anything. Now I'm anxious for a third book!
I only finished this book because I hated it so much and felt it unfair to rate a book 1 star if I hadn't finished. What if the book redeemed itself in the end? This did not.