You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.15 AVERAGE
4.15 AVERAGE
A relativisation of Western elective democracy, at a time when it is showing it weakness. Maybe there are fairer ways of organising society?
At first this book kind of annoyed me. I thought it was following the usual clichéd narrative, seen in books like 'The Help', of poor impoverished, black folk providing the backdrop, with a family of white saviours as protagonists, saving the black folk from themselves and the cruelties of more distant white folk who the readers aren't really meant to identify with anyway.
In the end, it was more nuanced. The white protagonists wouldn't have survived longer than about a week without the help and generosity of their Congolese neighbours and friends. The travails of the Congo can be squarely placed in the court of the Western powers that first colonised the Congo, and then ensured that on independence, the nation was not so much still born, as malnourished and beaten before birth and then murdered as soon as it emerged. The Congolese aren't waiting for some magical white saviour, they are trying pretty darn hard to make it themselves, and would have been a lot better off with even indifference from the west, as opposed to the meddling, both openly malicious and supposedly helpful that they ended up with. Kingsolver definitely wants to get across how culpable she feels the West is in creating the supposed 'heart of darkness'.
She finishes by saying how when the Portuguese first landed in the Congo, they found advanced civilisations, justice systems and a nation that was originally engaged with as an equal - these are described in contemporaneous texts and letters sent by the early explorers. These tend not to be mentioned in history books today. The myth of a backward Hobbesian Africa is something invented by the colonialists to justify their own inhumanity. How else could one justify the crime against humanity that was the slave trade and subsequent colonisation and subjugation of Africa?
Returning to the book, some of the metaphors are a little heavy handed, for example, the caged parrot, freed, but having forgotten how to fly, its freedom is only the freedom to be eaten by a civet cat or mongoose. It is worth reading though, and I applaud it for not painting Africans as passive victims as we so often see, but courageous and resourceful people trying to take control of their own destiny.
In the end, it was more nuanced. The white protagonists wouldn't have survived longer than about a week without the help and generosity of their Congolese neighbours and friends. The travails of the Congo can be squarely placed in the court of the Western powers that first colonised the Congo, and then ensured that on independence, the nation was not so much still born, as malnourished and beaten before birth and then murdered as soon as it emerged. The Congolese aren't waiting for some magical white saviour, they are trying pretty darn hard to make it themselves, and would have been a lot better off with even indifference from the west, as opposed to the meddling, both openly malicious and supposedly helpful that they ended up with. Kingsolver definitely wants to get across how culpable she feels the West is in creating the supposed 'heart of darkness'.
She finishes by saying how when the Portuguese first landed in the Congo, they found advanced civilisations, justice systems and a nation that was originally engaged with as an equal - these are described in contemporaneous texts and letters sent by the early explorers. These tend not to be mentioned in history books today. The myth of a backward Hobbesian Africa is something invented by the colonialists to justify their own inhumanity. How else could one justify the crime against humanity that was the slave trade and subsequent colonisation and subjugation of Africa?
Returning to the book, some of the metaphors are a little heavy handed, for example, the caged parrot, freed, but having forgotten how to fly, its freedom is only the freedom to be eaten by a civet cat or mongoose. It is worth reading though, and I applaud it for not painting Africans as passive victims as we so often see, but courageous and resourceful people trying to take control of their own destiny.
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Another favorite. As much as I liked this book I was surprised by how difficult I found it to finish. It took me several months despite my best efforts of daily reading. This was another book that I enjoyed because it dealt with themes of family relationships, faith, self-conviction and culture. I love Barbara and have enjoyed several other books of hers. She is a master of weaving cultural anthropology into a nice little story.
This is an important book to read. Barbara Kingsolver is a great story teller and this is her best. I learned a lot about the history of the Congo and I love the way she worked the missionary family into the story with differing perspectives from the mother and daughters.
I've tried writing this review a couple of times but it never said what I wanted it to say, so here's another try:
This book was required summer reading for my English class. I'd told friends the name, and their first impressions were that it was a book having to do with, and I quote "A bible for gypsies? Or maybe witches?" And a book about those things seemed infinitely more interesting than this one. AND, a lot of the recent reviews on Goodreads gave the book one or two stars! So, let me say, I did not have high expectations.
But now I've read the book. (And I'm not ashamed to say I cried. Twice in fact.) I thought it was going to be an overly religious story about a family forced to be missionaries in the Congo by Their Father, and then their life craps out.
It was not that story. This book was the story of the Price family's survival, love, loss, undoing and remaking, intertwined with the history and politics surrounding the Congo, told through the points of view of the 5 Price women. Every single one of their voices was unique and different—from Orleanna's broken begging for forgiveness, to Rachel's selfish thoughts, to Leah's unyielding faith, to Ruth-May's innocence and Adah's quiet palindromes. My favorite character was Adah, the cynical observer. It was amazing to watch their growth (although Rachel, my least favorite character and the girl most similar to Nathan, didn't change as much, and neither did Orleanna). Even with the bible quotes, the story wasn't overly preachy and didn't force the ideas down the reader's throat. Except for Nathan Price, but you know, that was kinda his thing (I mean he forced his family to be missionaries in the Congo against their will and against their church's wishes). There were beautiful quotes and metaphors throughout and I am thoroughly glad to have read this book.
This book was required summer reading for my English class. I'd told friends the name, and their first impressions were that it was a book having to do with, and I quote "A bible for gypsies? Or maybe witches?" And a book about those things seemed infinitely more interesting than this one. AND, a lot of the recent reviews on Goodreads gave the book one or two stars! So, let me say, I did not have high expectations.
But now I've read the book. (And I'm not ashamed to say I cried. Twice in fact.) I thought it was going to be an overly religious story about a family forced to be missionaries in the Congo by Their Father, and then their life craps out.
It was not that story. This book was the story of the Price family's survival, love, loss, undoing and remaking, intertwined with the history and politics surrounding the Congo, told through the points of view of the 5 Price women. Every single one of their voices was unique and different—from Orleanna's broken begging for forgiveness, to Rachel's selfish thoughts, to Leah's unyielding faith, to Ruth-May's innocence and Adah's quiet palindromes. My favorite character was Adah, the cynical observer. It was amazing to watch their growth (although Rachel, my least favorite character and the girl most similar to Nathan, didn't change as much, and neither did Orleanna). Even with the bible quotes, the story wasn't overly preachy and didn't force the ideas down the reader's throat. Except for Nathan Price, but you know, that was kinda his thing (I mean he forced his family to be missionaries in the Congo against their will and against their church's wishes). There were beautiful quotes and metaphors throughout and I am thoroughly glad to have read this book.
Liked it, then abruptly stopped liking it. It should have finished 200 (count 'em) pages earlier!
Also the dad's death was so dramatic - why did she just mention it as reported.
The book felt like it was going somewhere when just ran out of.....
Also the dad's death was so dramatic - why did she just mention it as reported.
The book felt like it was going somewhere when just ran out of.....
Moving, sad but heartwarming, it worms its way right inside you.
Occasionally you read a book that changes the way you see the world and that you know will stay with you. This is one of those times. Extraordinary, evocative and so beautifully written. Everyone should read this book.
Wow, thank heavens I had the summer off to plow through this one. I loved the characters and their different narration styles. The details of their experiences in the Congo were vivid and heart-wrenching. I found it so interesting how Kingsolver incorporated religion with history with politics and yet still kept the characters dynamic and real. I appreciated the theme of social justice at the international level. Some parts were very long and after the sisters split up and led different lives, it became less interesting and I found myself just trying to get through it.