Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.68 AVERAGE
3.68 AVERAGE
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
dark
emotional
informative
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Graphic: Child death, Death, Racism, Slavery, Violence, War
Moderate: Gun violence, Sexual violence
Minor: Incest
Revised my rating to one star. This book bored me to tears. There's a reason why Mr. March is just a minor, only mentioned/never seen, character! He's quite insufferable here.
I lent it to my grandmother thinking she might have a different take, and she threw it away.
I will not give up on Geraldine Brooks, however! March is just a dud in the pile.
I lent it to my grandmother thinking she might have a different take, and she threw it away.
I will not give up on Geraldine Brooks, however! March is just a dud in the pile.
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
3.5 stars.
TW/CW (for the book): graphic descriptions of: injuries, war, dead and dying bodies, slavery; racism, usage of ableist/racist/antiziganist slurs and language, opium use (in the context of questionable Civil War-era medicine), slight marital infidelity (this may not be everything but definitely be aware of the above!)
The prose in this was stunning and it brought a new dimension to Little Women. It was a relatively quick and easy read and I can see why this won a Pulitzer. It also brought to light the realities of racism within the union, which is a critical complication of the traditional narrative, and done very well. There were a few "fix-it fic" plot elements that added compelling explanations to events of little women. The structure of the book was also really interesting and well done. That said, I have a few major issues.
1. The use of the n and g slurs. I know ideas about usage of these slurs has changed in the past 15 years, but it still made me very uncomfortable to see n****r written from the pen of a white author. (Yes, I understand that this was likely to demonstrate the horrors of slavery, but it was unnecessary considering the myriad of other ways this is portrayed in this book.) There was also frequent, unnecessary, unchallenged use of antiziganist slurs.
2. Mr. March is so annoying.
You know those vegans who like to compare animal farming to genocide and will yell at you for eating anything other than raw bananas?? Mr. March is characterized like that. He's idealistic to the point of self-sabotage, and honestly, if he wanted to sabotage himself? Fine. But he's so callous towards everyone in his life and actively harms his wife and children for the sake of his causes. He purposely drives himself to financial ruin to fund abolitionist causes then feeds his young children 2 meals a day to teach them about thrift. He is so convinced of his moral superiority that he trashes *everyone* else in his life and it's really unclear in the text if this is supposed to be good or not.
3. Historical Context is weird
Little Women is loosely based on Louisa May Alcott's family, which would mean Mr. March is her father-- a, erm, character. So Brooks's challenge here is to either base her Mr. March off of the actual A. Bronson Alcott or craft a more original character. She kind of did both- keeping many elements of the actual man intact (vegetarianism, fierce abolitionist, etc), while toning down the more colorful parts of his life story and adjusting the timeline. Thus, the character just reads kind of muddled- caught between the worlds of historical and literary figure. This confusion is compounded by the fact that some of Brooks's choices are inconsistent with the canon of Little Women; for example, the family in Little Women is not vegetarian, but in March their vegetarianism is made a big deal. Little Women is also set in a sort of alternate history to our own-- the war is far away and few (if any) actual historical figures are present. In March, many of the primary characters are famous figures of the 1860s- John Brown, Thoreau, and Emerson all play a significant part in the plot. This again conflicts between the historical reality of A. Bronson Alcott and the world of Little Women.
If you're not a little women die-hard or stickler for accuracy, I think you'd enjoy this, because the prose is gorgeous, but I was too irritated by the characterization of Mr. March to love this.
TW/CW (for the book): graphic descriptions of: injuries, war, dead and dying bodies, slavery; racism, usage of ableist/racist/antiziganist slurs and language, opium use (in the context of questionable Civil War-era medicine), slight marital infidelity (this may not be everything but definitely be aware of the above!)
The prose in this was stunning and it brought a new dimension to Little Women. It was a relatively quick and easy read and I can see why this won a Pulitzer. It also brought to light the realities of racism within the union, which is a critical complication of the traditional narrative, and done very well. There were a few "fix-it fic" plot elements that added compelling explanations to events of little women. The structure of the book was also really interesting and well done. That said, I have a few major issues.
1. The use of the n and g slurs. I know ideas about usage of these slurs has changed in the past 15 years, but it still made me very uncomfortable to see n****r written from the pen of a white author. (Yes, I understand that this was likely to demonstrate the horrors of slavery, but it was unnecessary considering the myriad of other ways this is portrayed in this book.) There was also frequent, unnecessary, unchallenged use of antiziganist slurs.
2. Mr. March is so annoying.
You know those vegans who like to compare animal farming to genocide and will yell at you for eating anything other than raw bananas?? Mr. March is characterized like that. He's idealistic to the point of self-sabotage, and honestly, if he wanted to sabotage himself? Fine. But he's so callous towards everyone in his life and actively harms his wife and children for the sake of his causes. He purposely drives himself to financial ruin to fund abolitionist causes then feeds his young children 2 meals a day to teach them about thrift. He is so convinced of his moral superiority that he trashes *everyone* else in his life and it's really unclear in the text if this is supposed to be good or not.
3. Historical Context is weird
Little Women is loosely based on Louisa May Alcott's family, which would mean Mr. March is her father-- a, erm, character. So Brooks's challenge here is to either base her Mr. March off of the actual A. Bronson Alcott or craft a more original character. She kind of did both- keeping many elements of the actual man intact (vegetarianism, fierce abolitionist, etc), while toning down the more colorful parts of his life story and adjusting the timeline. Thus, the character just reads kind of muddled- caught between the worlds of historical and literary figure. This confusion is compounded by the fact that some of Brooks's choices are inconsistent with the canon of Little Women; for example, the family in Little Women is not vegetarian, but in March their vegetarianism is made a big deal. Little Women is also set in a sort of alternate history to our own-- the war is far away and few (if any) actual historical figures are present. In March, many of the primary characters are famous figures of the 1860s- John Brown, Thoreau, and Emerson all play a significant part in the plot. This again conflicts between the historical reality of A. Bronson Alcott and the world of Little Women.
If you're not a little women die-hard or stickler for accuracy, I think you'd enjoy this, because the prose is gorgeous, but I was too irritated by the characterization of Mr. March to love this.
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Brooks perfectly captured the mood/tone of the era. It was a solid 4-star rating until about the last 75 pages, when it jumped to a 4.5 for me.
Knowing the story of Little Women really makes it come together. Brooks' research and attention to detail is evident from the get-go.
Can't wait to read more of her books!
Knowing the story of Little Women really makes it come together. Brooks' research and attention to detail is evident from the get-go.
Can't wait to read more of her books!