Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.94 AVERAGE
2.94 AVERAGE
Hitler Youth kid finds out his parents are in the Resistance and are hiding a Jewish girl in their attic. Kid is young and impressionable, but decides not to turn them in, instead develops a twisted relationship with Elsa.
First 2/3, during the war are very good. I was pretty riveted. Then comes the last 1/3 after the war, and it all devolves into this strange, dysfunctional, weird story that kind of wrecks the whole thing. I didn't necessarily want them to ride off into the sunset, but holy moly, it's insane. And I get that post-war was crazy, but Johannes and Elsa are in the French zone, so not the worst. I almost abandoned it, but I hope that the author would somehow bring it together, and she really didn't.
Not recommended.
First 2/3, during the war are very good. I was pretty riveted. Then comes the last 1/3 after the war, and it all devolves into this strange, dysfunctional, weird story that kind of wrecks the whole thing. I didn't necessarily want them to ride off into the sunset, but holy moly, it's insane. And I get that post-war was crazy, but Johannes and Elsa are in the French zone, so not the worst. I almost abandoned it, but I hope that the author would somehow bring it together, and she really didn't.
Not recommended.
I love this book. I was fascinated and completely absorbed by the story of Johannes’s obsession, by his dark love of Elsa.
I hate him but I also (against my better judgement) strangely sympathise with him.
Leunens’ writing—her voice—is beautiful, and the tale she crafted is intense.
Unputdownable. I couldn’t stop reading until it was done.
I hate him but I also (against my better judgement) strangely sympathise with him.
Leunens’ writing—her voice—is beautiful, and the tale she crafted is intense.
Unputdownable. I couldn’t stop reading until it was done.
I read this over several days in which I also watched the movie - JoJo Rabbit. While the twisting humor and shadowy terror were similar in both formats, the book takes the story too far (as in too far past the point when it should have ended) and the movie takes the story too far (too far into the absurd). And yet neither of them were really too far, because what is “too far” when you’re talking extremism, fanaticism, selfish disdain for the humanity of others, etc.
A difficult read that warps simple notions of good and evil in a very dark and discouraging way. The movie left me feeling more hope in the midst of tragedy, but the book dragged me down and held me under. This portrayal of a narcissistic young man living in Austria during WWII was in many ways more disheartening than reading about the many ghettos and concentration camps. The tepid bravery of Johannes’ parents was not enough to overcome their son’s speedy embrace of Naziism, nor the icky feeling of Johannes’ doing the right thing only because it happened to serve his own ends, and more often doing the wrong thing in order to serve his own desires.
Despite the utterly depressing tone barely leavened with a sense of humor and biting criticism, it was a unique portrayal of the intersection of reality and madness.
Notes while reading:
Reading this gives me chills. It paints the lure of white supremacy, including the idea that you are unique and valuable to the race war, even if no one else values you. Shivery, indeed:
“We learned new, frightening facts. Life was a constant warfare, a struggle of each race against the others for territory, food and supremacy. Our race, the purest, didn’t have enough land—many of our race were living in exile. Other races were having more children than we were, and were mixing in with our race to weaken us. We were in great danger, but the Führer had trust in us, the children; we were his future. How surprised I was to think that the Führer I saw at Heldenplatz, cheered by masses, the giant on billboards all over Vienna, who even spoke on the wireless, needed someone little like me. Before then, I’d never felt indispensable; rather I’d felt like a child, something akin to an inferior form of an adult, a defect only time and patience could heal.”
Phew. Okay. Parts are painful, but then there’s this:
“Nothing’s as necessary to existence as diversity. You need different races, languages, ideas, not only for their own sake, but so you can know who you are! In your ideal world, who are you? Who? You don’t know! You look so much like everything around you, you disappear like a green lizard on a green tree.”
I don’t know that I ever heard before that Kristallnacht began because of a rumor that a Jew had killed a German embassy official. Smacks a little like an American lynching, in which any excuse is taken for violence against an imagined enemy.
“Feelings were mankind’s most dangerous enemy. They above all were what must be killed if we were to make ourselves a better people.” They are making cybermen: erasing all feeling... to flip that on its head, how can we as a society encourage feeling? Encourage empathy?
I am at the point where Johannes’ father returns from questioning, believing he has been denounced by his son. How terrifying and sickening to be so afraid of your own child. But children are so inherently inconsistent, living with such a limited understanding of the world. How could parents not be afraid?
“If I could have stopped time I would have, but time is the greatest thief of all: It steals everything in the end, truth and lie.”
A difficult read that warps simple notions of good and evil in a very dark and discouraging way. The movie left me feeling more hope in the midst of tragedy, but the book dragged me down and held me under. This portrayal of a narcissistic young man living in Austria during WWII was in many ways more disheartening than reading about the many ghettos and concentration camps. The tepid bravery of Johannes’ parents was not enough to overcome their son’s speedy embrace of Naziism, nor the icky feeling of Johannes’ doing the right thing only because it happened to serve his own ends, and more often doing the wrong thing in order to serve his own desires.
Despite the utterly depressing tone barely leavened with a sense of humor and biting criticism, it was a unique portrayal of the intersection of reality and madness.
Notes while reading:
Reading this gives me chills. It paints the lure of white supremacy, including the idea that you are unique and valuable to the race war, even if no one else values you. Shivery, indeed:
“We learned new, frightening facts. Life was a constant warfare, a struggle of each race against the others for territory, food and supremacy. Our race, the purest, didn’t have enough land—many of our race were living in exile. Other races were having more children than we were, and were mixing in with our race to weaken us. We were in great danger, but the Führer had trust in us, the children; we were his future. How surprised I was to think that the Führer I saw at Heldenplatz, cheered by masses, the giant on billboards all over Vienna, who even spoke on the wireless, needed someone little like me. Before then, I’d never felt indispensable; rather I’d felt like a child, something akin to an inferior form of an adult, a defect only time and patience could heal.”
Phew. Okay. Parts are painful, but then there’s this:
“Nothing’s as necessary to existence as diversity. You need different races, languages, ideas, not only for their own sake, but so you can know who you are! In your ideal world, who are you? Who? You don’t know! You look so much like everything around you, you disappear like a green lizard on a green tree.”
I don’t know that I ever heard before that Kristallnacht began because of a rumor that a Jew had killed a German embassy official. Smacks a little like an American lynching, in which any excuse is taken for violence against an imagined enemy.
“Feelings were mankind’s most dangerous enemy. They above all were what must be killed if we were to make ourselves a better people.” They are making cybermen: erasing all feeling... to flip that on its head, how can we as a society encourage feeling? Encourage empathy?
I am at the point where Johannes’ father returns from questioning, believing he has been denounced by his son. How terrifying and sickening to be so afraid of your own child. But children are so inherently inconsistent, living with such a limited understanding of the world. How could parents not be afraid?
“If I could have stopped time I would have, but time is the greatest thief of all: It steals everything in the end, truth and lie.”
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
medium-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
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
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Devo ammettere di trovarmi in grande difficoltà davanti a questo romanzo, perché non mi è piaciuto, ma faccio molta fatica a capire perché.
Devo però fare una premessa importante: ho ascoltato l'audiolibro in macchina, andando e tornando dal lavoro in un periodo a dir poco frenetico, spesso stanchissima, volentieri distratta, quindi buona parte della mia insoddisfazione potrebbe essere semplicemente dovuta a una scarsa attenzione che non mi ha permesso di godere al meglio di dettagli importanti.
In ogni caso, ho la sensazione di non aver capito dove il libro volesse andare a parare. Forse verso la dimostrazione di quanto l'esposizione di una giovane mente alla propaganda, alla dittatura e agli orrori della guerra generi soltanto delle mostruosità, ma in ogni caso non credo che la cosa sia perfettamente riuscita. O meglio, lo è nella prima parte, quando Johannes è ancora un ragazzo e le sue bugie si ammantano ancora di quel tormento struggente della giovinezza. Proseguendo nella lettura, mi è parso che tutto - lo stile, gli avvenimenti, i dialoghi... tutto - si avvolgesse sempre più su sé stesso, diventando contorto, ripetitivo, pesante e claustrofobico.
Ho detestato Johannes, l'ho detestato come raramente mi è capitato di detestare un personaggio letterario. E non solo per il suo comportamento (che, a mio parere, non ha alcuna giustificazione),ma l'ho detestato per il suo atteggiamento, per la sua voce, per il suo manipolare e distorcere ogni cosa per poter apparire sempre più la vittima che in realtà non è.
Ho trovato poi la narrazione abbastanza farraginosa: ci sono dei salti temporali che ho fatto fatica a collocare, come se avessi saltato un capitolo intero (ripeto, non sono stata concentratissima nella lettura, quindi potrebbe essere solo un mio problema, ma questo non è l'unico audiolibro che ho ascoltato in questo periodo, ma è l'unico con cui ho riscontrato questo problema), le situazioni inverosimili, ripetitive ed esasperanti.
Insomma, ho avuto l'impressione di fare un viaggio torbido e disturbante senza che questo viaggio avesse alcuno scopo, e la cosa mi ha molto irritata.
E comunque, che il libro sia sempre meglio del film è una sciocchezza immane, e questa storia in particolare ne è una prova lampante.
Devo però fare una premessa importante: ho ascoltato l'audiolibro in macchina, andando e tornando dal lavoro in un periodo a dir poco frenetico, spesso stanchissima, volentieri distratta, quindi buona parte della mia insoddisfazione potrebbe essere semplicemente dovuta a una scarsa attenzione che non mi ha permesso di godere al meglio di dettagli importanti.
In ogni caso, ho la sensazione di non aver capito dove il libro volesse andare a parare. Forse verso la dimostrazione di quanto l'esposizione di una giovane mente alla propaganda, alla dittatura e agli orrori della guerra generi soltanto delle mostruosità, ma in ogni caso non credo che la cosa sia perfettamente riuscita. O meglio, lo è nella prima parte, quando Johannes è ancora un ragazzo e le sue bugie si ammantano ancora di quel tormento struggente della giovinezza. Proseguendo nella lettura, mi è parso che tutto - lo stile, gli avvenimenti, i dialoghi... tutto - si avvolgesse sempre più su sé stesso, diventando contorto, ripetitivo, pesante e claustrofobico.
Ho detestato Johannes, l'ho detestato come raramente mi è capitato di detestare un personaggio letterario. E non solo per il suo comportamento (che, a mio parere, non ha alcuna giustificazione),ma l'ho detestato per il suo atteggiamento, per la sua voce, per il suo manipolare e distorcere ogni cosa per poter apparire sempre più la vittima che in realtà non è.
Ho trovato poi la narrazione abbastanza farraginosa: ci sono dei salti temporali che ho fatto fatica a collocare, come se avessi saltato un capitolo intero (ripeto, non sono stata concentratissima nella lettura, quindi potrebbe essere solo un mio problema, ma questo non è l'unico audiolibro che ho ascoltato in questo periodo, ma è l'unico con cui ho riscontrato questo problema), le situazioni inverosimili, ripetitive ed esasperanti.
Insomma, ho avuto l'impressione di fare un viaggio torbido e disturbante senza che questo viaggio avesse alcuno scopo, e la cosa mi ha molto irritata.
E comunque, che il libro sia sempre meglio del film è una sciocchezza immane, e questa storia in particolare ne è una prova lampante.
dark
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Loveable characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The first 40% is a solid 4 stars. The rest is disappointing.
First 1/3: a captivating story advances swiftly whilst giving a good insight to the characters. It shows the ease with which concepts (in this case nazism) can be established in a population and the role education plays into sustaining them. Even in a well instructed family a child can be influenced by popular opinion.
The remaining 2/3: a change of pace towards an absence of action focusing on the aftermath of the beginning of the book. This section drags on not bringing something new but recycling the same idea over the rest of the book. It seems to lose the touch of the characters which become depleted of personality.
The contrast between the two parts of the book is difficult to ignore and as the beginning is the strongest it fails to provide the satisfactory development and conclusion the book initially warranted.
The remaining 2/3: a change of pace towards an absence of action focusing on the aftermath of the beginning of the book. This section drags on not bringing something new but recycling the same idea over the rest of the book. It seems to lose the touch of the characters which become depleted of personality.
The contrast between the two parts of the book is difficult to ignore and as the beginning is the strongest it fails to provide the satisfactory development and conclusion the book initially warranted.