Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.66 AVERAGE
3.66 AVERAGE
What a polarizing novel for myself. I just loved how L'amour describe the landscapes of Arizona.
They are almost poetic, truly showing real love and knowledge about the places written.
On the other hand, characters feel one-dimensioned, a bit corny, and cliché (I kinda expected this from a 1950's Western). For example, Angie, the love interest of Hondo, despite living her all life in the frontier and having been a couple months without her husband, seems to become utterly useless from the very moment she met Hondo.
I also didn't like the overuse of the word "squaw" (English is not my native language, but I
understand that the word has some derogative tone to it, if I'm wrong, by all means, please let me know.)
All in all, Hondo is a pretty enjoyable light novel. I'm looking forward reading something else from L'amour.
They are almost poetic, truly showing real love and knowledge about the places written.
On the other hand, characters feel one-dimensioned, a bit corny, and cliché (I kinda expected this from a 1950's Western). For example, Angie, the love interest of Hondo, despite living her all life in the frontier and having been a couple months without her husband, seems to become utterly useless from the very moment she met Hondo.
I also didn't like the overuse of the word "squaw" (English is not my native language, but I
understand that the word has some derogative tone to it, if I'm wrong, by all means, please let me know.)
All in all, Hondo is a pretty enjoyable light novel. I'm looking forward reading something else from L'amour.
Originally published in 1953, Hondo is very much a product of its time. Its plot is unchallenging, its characters archetypal, its politics conservative, its prose burdened by romanticized nostalgia for the West.
It's unsurprising that the sexual politics of the novel are so normative and its characters so archetypal. Hondo is a man of rugged country, learned in the ways of the Native Americans much like the archetypal Natty Bumppo of James Fenimore Cooper, in need of a good woman to settle his roaming heart. His woman, Angie Lowe, is a hearty country woman, romantic, strong, but clearly unequipped for life without a man. Her husband, Ed, isn't a strong masculine figure, but instead is a lazy, underdeveloped (in a physical sense, though in characterization, too) wimp who can't live up to the expectations of him. Angie's son is a promising young lad, with a heart full of wonder and in desperate need of a strong, masculine role model to grow up right. Vittoro, the noble Apache chief, is strong and cunning, though spiteful at the white men in his land, and his right hand man is conniving, brutal, and ugly.
Needless to say, the cultural lesson is wholly unambiguous; no matter how strong and cunning Vittoro is, he's doomed to death, and L'Amour in at least one passage spins a tale of the white man's rightful destiny to overtake the land of the Indians, whose role, then, is to die fighting bitterly until their roles have been played. Vittoro's gang slaughters indiscriminately, scalping white settlers and playing the boogie men to the peaceful white settlers, who only wish to establish their ranches and go about their lives. L'Amour makes certain to portray Vittoro as the noble warrior, even if he also gives us the white Hondo who is all the more noble and more skillful, his senses nearly superhuman, his prowess uncanny.
L'Amour seems to balance his romanticism for the West with an interesting description of its roughness, and he admittedly manages to write some passages that actually are quite beautiful, even if his cultural message is problematic. I don't appreciate the way in which the relentless romanticism steeps itself in normative sexual and racial politics, but I do appreciate that L'Amour can at least be engaging throughout the novel. I'm certainly interested in reading more of his work, but I also think that I can't engage in the literature as anything more than quaintly diverting. I won't defend its politics, but I think there's still room to appreciate the story.
It's unsurprising that the sexual politics of the novel are so normative and its characters so archetypal. Hondo is a man of rugged country, learned in the ways of the Native Americans much like the archetypal Natty Bumppo of James Fenimore Cooper, in need of a good woman to settle his roaming heart. His woman, Angie Lowe, is a hearty country woman, romantic, strong, but clearly unequipped for life without a man. Her husband, Ed, isn't a strong masculine figure, but instead is a lazy, underdeveloped (in a physical sense, though in characterization, too) wimp who can't live up to the expectations of him. Angie's son is a promising young lad, with a heart full of wonder and in desperate need of a strong, masculine role model to grow up right. Vittoro, the noble Apache chief, is strong and cunning, though spiteful at the white men in his land, and his right hand man is conniving, brutal, and ugly.
Needless to say, the cultural lesson is wholly unambiguous; no matter how strong and cunning Vittoro is, he's doomed to death, and L'Amour in at least one passage spins a tale of the white man's rightful destiny to overtake the land of the Indians, whose role, then, is to die fighting bitterly until their roles have been played. Vittoro's gang slaughters indiscriminately, scalping white settlers and playing the boogie men to the peaceful white settlers, who only wish to establish their ranches and go about their lives. L'Amour makes certain to portray Vittoro as the noble warrior, even if he also gives us the white Hondo who is all the more noble and more skillful, his senses nearly superhuman, his prowess uncanny.
L'Amour seems to balance his romanticism for the West with an interesting description of its roughness, and he admittedly manages to write some passages that actually are quite beautiful, even if his cultural message is problematic. I don't appreciate the way in which the relentless romanticism steeps itself in normative sexual and racial politics, but I do appreciate that L'Amour can at least be engaging throughout the novel. I'm certainly interested in reading more of his work, but I also think that I can't engage in the literature as anything more than quaintly diverting. I won't defend its politics, but I think there's still room to appreciate the story.
This book was made into a movie staring John Wayne. I am a huge John Wayne fan and so is my son. He picked this book for me to read and it was just as good as the movie. This was also my first Louis L'Amour book and I will be reading more of his. My dad also loved to read L'Amour books so I am reading them for him.
Well, this actually wasn’t as racist as I was expecting, but a lot more sexist, sooo I’ll just chalk it up to the 1950s and try to not roll my eyes out of my head at some of the commentary. That being said, I don’t read classic Westerns. The shoot em up attitude and overly manly manliness just doesn’t work for me, and I hate reading about long treks in the desert. So, you would rightly ask, why in the world would I read this book? Long story short, I needed an audiobook my husband wouldn’t hate while we were driving (without cell service or radio...imagine the horror in this modern world) in the middle of nowhere Texas (hence the western agreement for theme) and all my feminist western picks (Upright Women Wanted and Outlawed to name a few) weren’t readily available at short notice. So Hondo it was.
I mean, aside from my horror at the still pretty racist and extremely sexist dialogue, it was fine. It killed 5 hours of silence and it was fast paced and entertaining. I highly doubt I’ll read more classic Westerns but I’m glad I gave the master of the genre a try!
I mean, aside from my horror at the still pretty racist and extremely sexist dialogue, it was fine. It killed 5 hours of silence and it was fast paced and entertaining. I highly doubt I’ll read more classic Westerns but I’m glad I gave the master of the genre a try!
adventurous
challenging
dark
informative
1.5 big bad emotionally repressed cowboy, what’s new
adventurous
hopeful
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
adventurous
hopeful
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
Absolute trash. I literally threw it in the trash. There’s probably people at DI who would’ve loved it, and I believe in conserving, but it was a visceral reaction. In an interview before his death, L’Amour said this of his books: “I never rework a book. I'd rather use what I've learned on the next one, and make it a little bit better.” This is clearly the work of an author who does not labor over his writing. Truly great writers understand the hurdle they must overcome: they have to get you to buy in. L’Amour, however, doesn’t bother to sell the plot, the characters, or anything. I was first introduced to the western genre with Leif Enger’s masterful Peace Like a River, which sets a high bar. Still, Hondo is the definition of vulgar: “lacking in cultivation, perception, or taste.”
adventurous
dark
emotional
tense
fast-paced