Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.49 AVERAGE
3.49 AVERAGE
It was alright. I actually didn't finish it but it was very well written.
I loved the period language and the philosophical arguments, but I could imagine how they would annoy some. Made me think more carefully about how I teach the American Revolution.
I'd give the first half of this book two stars, the second half four.
I finally finished this after 3 tries. It's very ambitious and an interesting narrator but it took me a while to get into it. Once I was into it though the switch from prized pet to slave (really one and the same) was hard for me to read. I felt wretched watching his hard won knowledge and his mother's downfall.
I felt much more kindly towards M.T. Anderson as an author at the end of his book, when he (in an epilogue with much plainer language than the rest of the book) admitted that the interplay between race, slavery and the Revolutionary War was incredibly complex without throwing in the narrative thrust of his plot.
I found this book to be pedantic, overly aware of its own literary voice, and far too caught up in its own explication of certain 18th century philosophies to be accessible to the average reader, much less the average teenage reader. While the narrator, a black slave boy being raised by a group of philosophers interested in the limits of the African mind, is so restrained in his narration of his childhood, lacking all emotion except the natural curiousity encouraged by his group of father figures. I didn't believe, therefore, in the maturity of his emotion at a crucial moment late in the book, when he had been completely stifled up until that point. I would have expected a child devoid of any human compassion, and instead we are given a man of strong character and determination, and I'm not sure where he came from.
I guess my emotions about this book are rather hard to quantify. I enjoyed all the literary/scientific references to different theories of the day, but I don't know if a young adult book is the best venue to be presenting them. I found this book to be aloof, and I didn't really engage with the characters.
I found this book to be pedantic, overly aware of its own literary voice, and far too caught up in its own explication of certain 18th century philosophies to be accessible to the average reader, much less the average teenage reader. While the narrator, a black slave boy being raised by a group of philosophers interested in the limits of the African mind, is so restrained in his narration of his childhood, lacking all emotion except the natural curiousity encouraged by his group of father figures. I didn't believe, therefore, in the maturity of his emotion at a crucial moment late in the book, when he had been completely stifled up until that point. I would have expected a child devoid of any human compassion, and instead we are given a man of strong character and determination, and I'm not sure where he came from.
I guess my emotions about this book are rather hard to quantify. I enjoyed all the literary/scientific references to different theories of the day, but I don't know if a young adult book is the best venue to be presenting them. I found this book to be aloof, and I didn't really engage with the characters.
I think this was a case of listening to the audiobook when I would have enjoyed the book more. I will say I am intrigued to read volume 2.
It was better than I thought it would be, but I don't know that I would recommend it. The beginning is weird in ways that I would have trouble defending (see the fecal diary), and it's not one of those books that sticks with you, per se.
It's a shame because there are a lot of good things going on here. I liked the ending most of all. I thought the idea of telling Octavian's story through a mixture of testimony and secondhand accounts demonstrated the dichotomy between Octavian's fight for liberty and the American fight for liberty and the hypocrisy of the "all men are created equal" mentality of the Revolution. I wish that more of the story was told in this way. I especially wish that the fecal diary thing had been in passing and not so much a focus. It would be more powerful if Mr. Gitney was like, "And his feces were normal today." That would be disturbing and comical and the implications would make me curious rather than grossed out.
In the end, there are some very poignant moments and some extraordinary storytelling marred by the meandering plots and overall lack of developed secondary characters. I would read an autobiography of Dr. Trefusis, for example, but I only caught some glimpses of him.
It's a shame because there are a lot of good things going on here. I liked the ending most of all. I thought the idea of telling Octavian's story through a mixture of testimony and secondhand accounts demonstrated the dichotomy between Octavian's fight for liberty and the American fight for liberty and the hypocrisy of the "all men are created equal" mentality of the Revolution. I wish that more of the story was told in this way. I especially wish that the fecal diary thing had been in passing and not so much a focus. It would be more powerful if Mr. Gitney was like, "And his feces were normal today." That would be disturbing and comical and the implications would make me curious rather than grossed out.
In the end, there are some very poignant moments and some extraordinary storytelling marred by the meandering plots and overall lack of developed secondary characters. I would read an autobiography of Dr. Trefusis, for example, but I only caught some glimpses of him.
Really enjoyed this book. It had such a unique narrator, definitely a perspective I hadn't seen before that allowed the book to have one of the most interesting commentaries on privilege that I've read. It starts a bit slow and detached, but keep reading! I got sucked in so subtly that by the end of one section I was shocked to find myself holding back tears. It's a very intelligent book but it's also very relatable and very visceral.
Also LOLing at all the reviewers who are like "WHY THIS YOUNG ADULT. HOW TEEN READ BOOK TEEN DUMB HOW HAPPEN." Teenagers aren't stupid, guys. ;) Well some of them are, but a lot of adults are too. This has some definite breaks with "normal" YA--the narrator starts off young and the language is a bit archaic, but it's very YA. Which is not an insult. :)
Also LOLing at all the reviewers who are like "WHY THIS YOUNG ADULT. HOW TEEN READ BOOK TEEN DUMB HOW HAPPEN." Teenagers aren't stupid, guys. ;) Well some of them are, but a lot of adults are too. This has some definite breaks with "normal" YA--the narrator starts off young and the language is a bit archaic, but it's very YA. Which is not an insult. :)
I can see why it is recommended to schools for required reading. The main character is interesting while being relatable and it speaks to important matters of history. But man oh man did it just not feel very readable. I just wanted to put it down every time I picked it up. I think it just felt much too meandering for me. It felt like nothing was going anywhere and the topics aren't new for me, so it felt pretty unengaging overall. I cannot give it a worse or better rating. It's just very middling for me.
Once again, narrator Peter Francis James takes an already amazing book (although, not as good as Invisible Man, the last book I listened to that was narrated by James) and makes it even better, bringing it completely to life. I look forward to listening to the audio book of the sequel.