Scan barcode
moeljo's review against another edition
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
graywacke's review against another edition
reflective
sad
slow-paced
4.0
hmm. A collection of lectures and essays, many of which Coetzee had actually given, made into a novel. He even included responses to his work. I didn't know that. Blind, I opened with a very interesting chapter on Realism. But the heart of the essays seem to revolve around Veganism from a moral perspective, which I tried very hard to care about, but nothing was concluded and these were odd and sometimes slow. Then it goes into other things Coetzee imagined, slowly. Nothing concludes, naturally.
I think it's important and admirable that the essays were intelligent. All the thought processes on all sides were well put, argument and criticism. And that I did appreciate. But does it make a good book, or a bore? I'm done and I haven't decided yet. And if you asked me to read it again, I imagine I could be convinced to try again. So, it works in its way. It still might be bore.
I think it's important and admirable that the essays were intelligent. All the thought processes on all sides were well put, argument and criticism. And that I did appreciate. But does it make a good book, or a bore? I'm done and I haven't decided yet. And if you asked me to read it again, I imagine I could be convinced to try again. So, it works in its way. It still might be bore.
jayden_mccomiskie's review against another edition
5.0
What appeared at first cheesy, an alter ego for Coetzee's essays and views, turned out to be a splendid read and a new favourite and I still don't know how he did it, but Coetzee is looking at me with a seducer's eye over his left shoulder that says "you'll be back for more."
makennadykstra's review against another edition
read in swiss ski town verbier. tbh, the views from my coffee shop far surpassed the book itself. essentially a series of highly didactic, exceedingly pretentious essays disguised as a story of an aging writer giving lectures around the world. enjoyed the first “lecture” (lesson 1: “realism”) and really, really enjoyed the last (lesson 8: “at the gate”) but the others were scattered & tedious. i will concede, though, lessons 3 (“the lives of animals: the philosophers and the animals”) and 4 (“the lives of animals: the poets and the animals”) almost convinced me of the futility of being vegetarian
jbrins1's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
nearnik's review against another edition
challenging
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
zsoka's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
martuchi's review against another edition
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
Elizabeth Costello is such a snob, annoying, close-minded, weird little old woman. I couldn’t empathize nowhere with her. She believes she’s better than anyone else, and she’s too radical while having an opinion on absolutely everything—even when she implies she never has an actual belief.
She’s too stubborn, while I understand she’s supposedly old and tired. She’s a book character, and has to have at least me likable characteristic. She had none, in my opinion.
Coetzee may be a Nobel prize winner, but this book should have disqualified him from the award. Elizabeth Costello is a pretentious novel about a boring old-woman’s life, who no one cares about; and even if she’s so famous and loved by every reader on earth, manages to make her pretty intriguing and amazing life, into a somewhat uncharismatic and uninteresting story.
She’s too stubborn, while I understand she’s supposedly old and tired. She’s a book character, and has to have at least me likable characteristic. She had none, in my opinion.
Coetzee may be a Nobel prize winner, but this book should have disqualified him from the award. Elizabeth Costello is a pretentious novel about a boring old-woman’s life, who no one cares about; and even if she’s so famous and loved by every reader on earth, manages to make her pretty intriguing and amazing life, into a somewhat uncharismatic and uninteresting story.
rosekk's review against another edition
2.0
I'm not really sure what to think of this. At first I was disappointed because I expected it to be a story, and it's more like a series of lectures strung together under the guise of a story. I suspect I would like other works of his more than this, because they sound better. I found a lot of this quite annoying to read because Elizabeth Costello's character is not one I find relatable, and a lot of the views she espouses at the reader I find either vague or unsubstantiated or both. It bothers me that I didn't like this more, since Coetzee's work seems to have impressed a lot of others. I feel like I'm missing the point somewhere.
*EDIT* Am re-reading this book for revision purposes. Am not enjoying it any more the second time round, but I'm doing a better job of working out what it is that aggravates me about this book (because it does aggravate me. There aren't many books that annoy me like this one does). It goes back to what I said before about it being lectures in 'the guise of a story' - that's what set me against this book from the beginning: I have a problem with any novel that sacrifices its role as entertainment in order to be Literature. I love books that are meaningful and reflective e.t.c. but to me all of that is a bonus produced by the best writers and the heart of a novel should always be as a thing to be enjoyed. That's not to say that I dislike dark novels and stories that aren't nice, but I want a novel that was written to be read, not to have further essays written about it. I can forgive a novel that is shallow if it provides entertainment, but the inverse - a book that is intentionally deep, but short on actual story telling - seems to me to be an abuse of the format. Again, it feels arrogant to be saying this about a book that some seem to have gotten a lot out of, by an author who has won a great many accolades (who am I to tell him what a novel should be?), but there you have it... I just can't find what others have found in this book.
2ND EDIT: Ok I think I've worked out where I've been going wrong with this book. I get caught up in Costello's arguments and forget that what she says isn't necessarily what the book means. I expect conclusive arguments, because the formal style of her addresses suggests there should be a logic to the proceedings, but of course as a novel it doesn't have to endorse one well-argued opinion; it can play with ideas and run in multiple directions as it pleases. I won't pretend that acknowledging this makes me enjoy the book more, but I don't dislike it as before.
*EDIT* Am re-reading this book for revision purposes. Am not enjoying it any more the second time round, but I'm doing a better job of working out what it is that aggravates me about this book (because it does aggravate me. There aren't many books that annoy me like this one does). It goes back to what I said before about it being lectures in 'the guise of a story' - that's what set me against this book from the beginning: I have a problem with any novel that sacrifices its role as entertainment in order to be Literature. I love books that are meaningful and reflective e.t.c. but to me all of that is a bonus produced by the best writers and the heart of a novel should always be as a thing to be enjoyed. That's not to say that I dislike dark novels and stories that aren't nice, but I want a novel that was written to be read, not to have further essays written about it. I can forgive a novel that is shallow if it provides entertainment, but the inverse - a book that is intentionally deep, but short on actual story telling - seems to me to be an abuse of the format. Again, it feels arrogant to be saying this about a book that some seem to have gotten a lot out of, by an author who has won a great many accolades (who am I to tell him what a novel should be?), but there you have it... I just can't find what others have found in this book.
2ND EDIT: Ok I think I've worked out where I've been going wrong with this book. I get caught up in Costello's arguments and forget that what she says isn't necessarily what the book means. I expect conclusive arguments, because the formal style of her addresses suggests there should be a logic to the proceedings, but of course as a novel it doesn't have to endorse one well-argued opinion; it can play with ideas and run in multiple directions as it pleases. I won't pretend that acknowledging this makes me enjoy the book more, but I don't dislike it as before.
vr_alyssa's review against another edition
3.75
2019 review:
I really enjoyed this book, as frustrating as it was. Though don't ask me what the overall plot was (about), I have no idea. But some of the ideas and concepts expressed within the book really spoke to me.
I really enjoyed this book, as frustrating as it was. Though don't ask me what the overall plot was (about), I have no idea. But some of the ideas and concepts expressed within the book really spoke to me.