Scan barcode
ashbash_'s review against another edition
1.75
The moral stuff is cool to consider but its just a bit boring
aydmcm's review against another edition
5.0
ICONIC RELIGIOUS ALLEGORIES AND HOMOEROTICISM. what more could y’all want!!
bupdaddy's review against another edition
2.0
If I ever get my hands on a time machine, I'm going back to destroy this book before Melville's widow decides to make it public knowledge. I hate this book. Why two stars? Because the last 30 pages were good.
But look. This book hurts Melville's legacy. Moby Dick is wonderful, but most people never read it because they read Billy Budd under duress. Because this book exists, and is short, every American high school assigns it. Everyone learns to hate Melville because this book sucks wet rope. I learned to hate Melville when I was assigned this book in high school, and I never even finished it. If this book didn't exist, high school students would be assigned Bartleby the Scrivener, or passages from Moby Dick, or, like Faulkner, or Dostoevsky, you'd simply hear about this author but come to believe he's only for college students. And you know what? That'd be fine. Better than what we've got today.
Man, you know, if I get my hands on a time machine, I might instead go back to Melville and say, "remember, Herm, it's show, not tell. And the point of writing is not to be intentionally inscrutable - this isn't a word puzzle. I don't want you hanging out with Nathaniel Hawthorne anymore. He's a bad influence." But then I'd probably destroy this book anyway - it may well be hopeless. After he died, of course. No need to be confrontational; that'd just be rude.
But look. This book hurts Melville's legacy. Moby Dick is wonderful, but most people never read it because they read Billy Budd under duress. Because this book exists, and is short, every American high school assigns it. Everyone learns to hate Melville because this book sucks wet rope. I learned to hate Melville when I was assigned this book in high school, and I never even finished it. If this book didn't exist, high school students would be assigned Bartleby the Scrivener, or passages from Moby Dick, or, like Faulkner, or Dostoevsky, you'd simply hear about this author but come to believe he's only for college students. And you know what? That'd be fine. Better than what we've got today.
Man, you know, if I get my hands on a time machine, I might instead go back to Melville and say, "remember, Herm, it's show, not tell. And the point of writing is not to be intentionally inscrutable - this isn't a word puzzle. I don't want you hanging out with Nathaniel Hawthorne anymore. He's a bad influence." But then I'd probably destroy this book anyway - it may well be hopeless. After he died, of course. No need to be confrontational; that'd just be rude.
pato_myers's review against another edition
2.0
It's an alright read I guess, this story could have easily been told in much fewer words without losing the story or symbolism. The background and thought processes really seemed like rambling instead of adding to the story. Just not my taste of story telling.
abbeleas's review against another edition
3.0
Eu só queria que a escrita do Melville fosse mais fácil
jeremybost's review against another edition
1.0
The first half of the book was very very slow. *Everything* had to be explained with a long allegory, it seemed. And then, sometimes the allegory needed explaining.
But after the half-way point, things got a bit better. Their was some more action.
But after the half-way point, things got a bit better. Their was some more action.
urlordlorin's review against another edition
This man should’ve quit writing a LONG time ago. The most boring thing I’ve ever read. The most dense and hard to read writing style I’ve ever seen.
nathanlovejoy's review against another edition
5.0
The three portraits—of Billy Budd the good-natured peacemaker, of Starry Vere the discerning captain, and of Claggart the dastardly master-at-arms—are vivid and (impressive in so brief a book) sufficiently detailed as to elevate the characters beyond mere types. Much as in a longer maritime work of his, Melville is generous with his erudition, and patient readers of Billy Budd will walk away better informed about Horatio Nelson, the layout of a man-of-war ship from the late 18th century, not to mention topics ranging from Calvinistic predestination to phrenology.
I appreciated the narrator’s drawing our attention to something like the military-industrial complex; lantern oil aboard the Bellipotent is supplied by “the war contractors (whose gains, honest or otherwise, are in every land an anticipated portion of the harvest of death).” I likewise enjoyed his Pavlovian description of the crew’s obedience: “True martial discipline long continued superinduces in average man a sort of impulse whose operation at the official word of command much resembles in its promptitude the effect of an instinct.”
I was occasionally bogged down in the effort to parse Melville’s double and even triple negatives. What, for example, are we talking about when a sentence begins, “Unlike no few of England’s renowned sailors…”? I took “no few” together, reading it to mean the same thing as “Unlike quite a few…” but it’s hard to say, and there are more negatives waiting in the following clause. By and large, though, I cannot not not not love the baroque extremes of his language, as at the moment Claggart’s eyes, “those lights of human intelligence, losing human expression, were gelidly protruding like the alien eyes of certain uncatalogued creatures of the deep.”
And on the grander scale, Billy Budd is excellent tragedy. The “natural depravity” of Claggart is Iago-like. Starry Vere and the lieutenants are constrained by law, duty, and the political climate to make decisions that offend their own senses of justice and compassion. Billy Budd, for his part, is the Handsome Sailor who does right by all yet is not loved by all, since these haters, you know, they can't stand to see a good man winning.
I appreciated the narrator’s drawing our attention to something like the military-industrial complex; lantern oil aboard the Bellipotent is supplied by “the war contractors (whose gains, honest or otherwise, are in every land an anticipated portion of the harvest of death).” I likewise enjoyed his Pavlovian description of the crew’s obedience: “True martial discipline long continued superinduces in average man a sort of impulse whose operation at the official word of command much resembles in its promptitude the effect of an instinct.”
I was occasionally bogged down in the effort to parse Melville’s double and even triple negatives. What, for example, are we talking about when a sentence begins, “Unlike no few of England’s renowned sailors…”? I took “no few” together, reading it to mean the same thing as “Unlike quite a few…” but it’s hard to say, and there are more negatives waiting in the following clause. By and large, though, I cannot not not not love the baroque extremes of his language, as at the moment Claggart’s eyes, “those lights of human intelligence, losing human expression, were gelidly protruding like the alien eyes of certain uncatalogued creatures of the deep.”
And on the grander scale, Billy Budd is excellent tragedy. The “natural depravity” of Claggart is Iago-like. Starry Vere and the lieutenants are constrained by law, duty, and the political climate to make decisions that offend their own senses of justice and compassion. Billy Budd, for his part, is the Handsome Sailor who does right by all yet is not loved by all, since these haters, you know, they can't stand to see a good man winning.
rhysquez's review against another edition
3.0
3.5. The digressions are reminiscent of TRISTRAM SHANDY in their assumed (yet unironic) profundity and of THE CRUCIBLE in their attempt to understand a historic episode. It does have its tedious passages, but there is no doubt that Melville's tale is poignant and excellently written.