Take a photo of a barcode or cover
reflective
medium-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Wow, so uh, I hate this.
I went into this with relatively high expectations. I read O Pioneers! and genuinely really loved it (except the very ending, which was misogynistic in a way that grated really hard). I expected this to be roughly as good, but it was way off.
First, the good. I did enjoy the Moonstone setting. I think Cather is at her strongest when she depicts that kind of rural community life. Watching the characters grow in this setting was probably the most interesting aspect. I didn't even mind when she first went off for singing lessons, as it kept a similar feel. It was also nice to see Thea achieve her goals, and have everything end happily (after the depressing end of O Pioneers!).
Now the bad. First off, from a narrative standpoint, a lot of Thea's life after Moonstone is just not interesting to read. I felt like it dragged on forever in a way that just felt boring and a bit frustrating. I know that Cather herself was less than fond of what she wrote following Moonstone, and a decade and a half later she actually rewrote large portions of the book and cut a tenth of the original content.
Second, the characters. My god. So there were definitely way too many adults lusting after twelve-year-old Thea. You can try to tell me it was normal for the time, but it was not. Even if we went that route, and you told me it was normal for the time and I accepted it (and I really, really don't, women usually married in their early twenties in 19th century USA), reading it from a modern standpoint is difficult when the plot RELIES on adult men being into this child. Thea would never have gotten her vocal education if it were not for the money left to her by a man who wanted to marry her (which he decided when she was 12 and he was an adult which is gross). The doctor is a lifelong friend of hers, and it is unclear for basically the entire novel whether he feels fatherly or loverly towards Thea. Outside of the uncomfortable age issues, it was also frustrating to follow along with a character who is the embodiment of "I'm not like other girls" and seems to hold a lot of misogynistic views about other women in her profession and in general.
Third, the racism. Racial slurs to describe plantlife and thieving servants. Describing people as sitting "still as an Indian." Describing how "Indians" throw their infants in the river to teach them to swim. Moonstone has a Mexican community where essentially every person there is a stereotype. Even when it seems like the author and characters are trying to "defend" Mexicans, they seem to be offering backhanded compliments and further stereotypes. As uncomfortable as it can be to read racial slurs today, the other phrases used seem to be far more insidious and hold up stereotypes that hold today.
Fourth, the ableism. A doctor (a main character) says a sick woman should be considered legally dead for the benefit of her husband. There is so much wrong with this heartless eugenics bullshit, but I think going into it makes it worse. The woman has general paresis, according to what the doctor says. First off, general paresis is caused by syphilis (so sexually active women should be considered legally dead?). It is worth noting that the woman is the wife of Thea's love interest. So does he also have syphilis that he would risk spreading to her? Then, consider what general paresis does. It causes neurological effects that result in chronic illness symptoms (chronically ill women should be considered legally dead?), but affects the brain in a way that also causes mental illness (so mentally ill women should be considered legally dead?). This is a character that the author intends the audience to dislike, so the intent is clearly for the audience to agree that she should be considered legally dead (rather than the responsibility of the husband who may have given her syphilis?). As someone with chronic illnesses, this is deeply offensive in a way I am used to (people often indicate that they would rather be dead than sick or disabled, or that they think sick and disabled people should be dead).
Honestly, this story was just aggressively not for me. Between the lacklustre and overlong story, the unsympathetic characters, the misogyny, the racism, the stereotypes, the vague pedophilic undertones... I genuinely have a hard time trying to see past this novel's flaws. It started out fine, but it became a chore to read, and it took me a while to finish.
I really only finished this because I am a completionist. I know that many people like or even love this novel, and I am sure I know people who haven't read it that would like it, but I honestly couldn't think of who. I don't think I'd be able to recommend this novel to them, because I don't think I could recommend it to anyone.
I actually still plan on reading My Antonia though. I enjoyed O Pioneer's enough, and I am aware that My Antonia is the most popular, so I'd like to give it a fair shot. It's shorter than Song of the Lark as well, which hopefully means that even if I don't love it, it at least won't take me months to get through.
I went into this with relatively high expectations. I read O Pioneers! and genuinely really loved it (except the very ending, which was misogynistic in a way that grated really hard). I expected this to be roughly as good, but it was way off.
First, the good. I did enjoy the Moonstone setting. I think Cather is at her strongest when she depicts that kind of rural community life. Watching the characters grow in this setting was probably the most interesting aspect. I didn't even mind when she first went off for singing lessons, as it kept a similar feel. It was also nice to see Thea achieve her goals, and have everything end happily (after the depressing end of O Pioneers!).
Now the bad. First off, from a narrative standpoint, a lot of Thea's life after Moonstone is just not interesting to read. I felt like it dragged on forever in a way that just felt boring and a bit frustrating. I know that Cather herself was less than fond of what she wrote following Moonstone, and a decade and a half later she actually rewrote large portions of the book and cut a tenth of the original content.
Second, the characters. My god. So there were definitely way too many adults lusting after twelve-year-old Thea. You can try to tell me it was normal for the time, but it was not. Even if we went that route, and you told me it was normal for the time and I accepted it (and I really, really don't, women usually married in their early twenties in 19th century USA), reading it from a modern standpoint is difficult when the plot RELIES on adult men being into this child. Thea would never have gotten her vocal education if it were not for the money left to her by a man who wanted to marry her (which he decided when she was 12 and he was an adult which is gross). The doctor is a lifelong friend of hers, and it is unclear for basically the entire novel whether he feels fatherly or loverly towards Thea. Outside of the uncomfortable age issues, it was also frustrating to follow along with a character who is the embodiment of "I'm not like other girls" and seems to hold a lot of misogynistic views about other women in her profession and in general.
Third, the racism. Racial slurs to describe plantlife and thieving servants. Describing people as sitting "still as an Indian." Describing how "Indians" throw their infants in the river to teach them to swim. Moonstone has a Mexican community where essentially every person there is a stereotype. Even when it seems like the author and characters are trying to "defend" Mexicans, they seem to be offering backhanded compliments and further stereotypes. As uncomfortable as it can be to read racial slurs today, the other phrases used seem to be far more insidious and hold up stereotypes that hold today.
Fourth, the ableism. A doctor (a main character) says a sick woman should be considered legally dead for the benefit of her husband. There is so much wrong with this heartless eugenics bullshit, but I think going into it makes it worse. The woman has general paresis, according to what the doctor says. First off, general paresis is caused by syphilis (so sexually active women should be considered legally dead?). It is worth noting that the woman is the wife of Thea's love interest. So does he also have syphilis that he would risk spreading to her? Then, consider what general paresis does. It causes neurological effects that result in chronic illness symptoms (chronically ill women should be considered legally dead?), but affects the brain in a way that also causes mental illness (so mentally ill women should be considered legally dead?). This is a character that the author intends the audience to dislike, so the intent is clearly for the audience to agree that she should be considered legally dead (rather than the responsibility of the husband who may have given her syphilis?). As someone with chronic illnesses, this is deeply offensive in a way I am used to (people often indicate that they would rather be dead than sick or disabled, or that they think sick and disabled people should be dead).
Honestly, this story was just aggressively not for me. Between the lacklustre and overlong story, the unsympathetic characters, the misogyny, the racism, the stereotypes, the vague pedophilic undertones... I genuinely have a hard time trying to see past this novel's flaws. It started out fine, but it became a chore to read, and it took me a while to finish.
I really only finished this because I am a completionist. I know that many people like or even love this novel, and I am sure I know people who haven't read it that would like it, but I honestly couldn't think of who. I don't think I'd be able to recommend this novel to them, because I don't think I could recommend it to anyone.
I actually still plan on reading My Antonia though. I enjoyed O Pioneer's enough, and I am aware that My Antonia is the most popular, so I'd like to give it a fair shot. It's shorter than Song of the Lark as well, which hopefully means that even if I don't love it, it at least won't take me months to get through.
reflective
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Good lord, did this book get boring in the last quarter or so. It might have gotten three stars if I didn't spend the last 60-70 pages skimming the text and wondering if anything at all was even going to happen before the end.
Additionally, while in the beginning I liked Thea, over time she grew more and more...annoying. I feel like Cather thought she was drawing a complex and interesting character, but really, she was just a bratty weirdo who everyone seemed to like a hell of a lot more than she deserved.
Also too, thanks for all the grossness of grown men talking in creepy, pseudo-pretentious, salacious ways about a prepubescent girl. I mean, I know this was written a long time ago, maybe before people knew the term "pedophile" but uuuuggggghh.
Additionally, while in the beginning I liked Thea, over time she grew more and more...annoying. I feel like Cather thought she was drawing a complex and interesting character, but really, she was just a bratty weirdo who everyone seemed to like a hell of a lot more than she deserved.
Also too, thanks for all the grossness of grown men talking in creepy, pseudo-pretentious, salacious ways about a prepubescent girl. I mean, I know this was written a long time ago, maybe before people knew the term "pedophile" but uuuuggggghh.
adventurous
reflective
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
More of an "O, Pioneer!" gal myself
I ended up reading Willa Cather's Great Plains trilogy out of order, but found that it did not actually matter. The Song of the Lark is the second novel in the series, and the final one which I got to. Cather's novel is so well written, and is filled with exquisite prose, but the story feels rather thin on the ground in places, and did not really hold my attention. Whilst I found Thea Kronborg quite intriguing at first, I became less and less interested in the protagonist as the novel went on. I love Cather's writing style, but from my experience, feel that her novellas and short stories are far more successful than her longer books.
This book has not aged well. It casual sexism and racism is hard to read now. Cather's nature writing is certainly the strongest part of the novel.
After finishing O Pioneers and loving it, I thought I'd pick this up next and read the Prairie Trilogy in order. I won't say I regret doing that, exactly, but there's definitely a reason this book isn't as well known (or as widely praised) as O Pioneers. The show-to-tell ratio in this book is, unfortunately, much lower than in its predecessor. Either through her narration or, more tediously still, through her characters, Cather gives voice to a number of philosophical declarations, especially about the nature of being an artist (not to say the nature of art, really). Some are interesting, some are not, but few are very enlivening, and whole sections of the book are mired in these discussions. Apart from that, it's not bad, and there's plenty to like as well. The characters, despite their occasional roles as vessels for Cather's philosophizing, are relatively well fleshed out and interesting. Still, I expect to enjoy the last Prairie novel (My Antonia) more, and I certainly did O Pioneers.