Scan barcode
qstew's review against another edition
3.0
Debit cards! Surround sound speaker systems! Amazon fulfillment centers! Ubiquitous sidewalk awnings!
In earnest, I did find myself taken aback by some of Bellamy's technologically-innovative prophecies - namely those listed above - but for the most part this book presents nothing unique as pertains to a utopian novel.
Depending on your sociopolitical leanings and preconceptions, the ideas presented in this book will either tickle you pink something fierce or lead you to see red (with the blood of the proletariat). I, personally, thought the futuristic picture painted herein was one of perfection, though such is the nature of utopias.
The arrival to the structure of the respective society is one of dubious incident; the notion that an entire nation of people would shrug off the nationalizing of all industry without even mild cause for alarm is beyond preposterous.
As a treatise on socioeconomic revolution, I found it to be a fantastic work with some truly inventive approaches to many of the issues which plagued late-19th century society. As a story? Couldn't have been more trite, overwrought, or formulaic.
This "novel" is a thinly veiled attempt to convey Bellamy's political agenda in the form of an overextended borderline-science fiction allegory. Tremendously little happens as pertains to any semblance of a plot, and what does transpire is entire presumable by the reader simply based on the tone created at the outset. A solid 50-60% of the book is one character explaining the intricacies of the hypothetical 20th century to the narrator. There is an all too derivative romantic subplot, and no part of it even appealed to the romantic glutton in me for lack of depth.
I won't by any means attempt to fault Bellamy for his attempts at predicting the speech patterns or dialect of the real-world 20th century, though towards the beginning of the novel the narrator states that 2000s speech is more similar to the 1880s than that of the 1700s - a very bold assumption for someone of his position to make.
Perhaps my biggest issue with the book is how flat the ending fell. Without spoiling anything explicitly, Bellamy tries one final "gotcha" at the end that was entirely unneeded and foreseeable. On the whole I enjoyed the ideas he proposed in the story and can certainly respect his decision to utilize a constructed future world as the delivery for the ideas. In some ways, he does a good job of guessing how we nowadays might have improved life for the masses; in others - some might say for the most part - he missed the mark catastrophically.
As an avenue for ideas, it is a passable work. As a story, it just BARELY qualifies - guy goes to sleep in 1887, wakes up in a utopic 2000. He freaks out, but quickly learns how great things are now through a series of personalized lectures from a doctor.
Wicked.
In earnest, I did find myself taken aback by some of Bellamy's technologically-innovative prophecies - namely those listed above - but for the most part this book presents nothing unique as pertains to a utopian novel.
Depending on your sociopolitical leanings and preconceptions, the ideas presented in this book will either tickle you pink something fierce or lead you to see red (with the blood of the proletariat). I, personally, thought the futuristic picture painted herein was one of perfection, though such is the nature of utopias.
The arrival to the structure of the respective society is one of dubious incident; the notion that an entire nation of people would shrug off the nationalizing of all industry without even mild cause for alarm is beyond preposterous.
As a treatise on socioeconomic revolution, I found it to be a fantastic work with some truly inventive approaches to many of the issues which plagued late-19th century society. As a story? Couldn't have been more trite, overwrought, or formulaic.
This "novel" is a thinly veiled attempt to convey Bellamy's political agenda in the form of an overextended borderline-science fiction allegory. Tremendously little happens as pertains to any semblance of a plot, and what does transpire is entire presumable by the reader simply based on the tone created at the outset. A solid 50-60% of the book is one character explaining the intricacies of the hypothetical 20th century to the narrator. There is an all too derivative romantic subplot, and no part of it even appealed to the romantic glutton in me for lack of depth.
I won't by any means attempt to fault Bellamy for his attempts at predicting the speech patterns or dialect of the real-world 20th century, though towards the beginning of the novel the narrator states that 2000s speech is more similar to the 1880s than that of the 1700s - a very bold assumption for someone of his position to make.
Perhaps my biggest issue with the book is how flat the ending fell. Without spoiling anything explicitly, Bellamy tries one final "gotcha" at the end that was entirely unneeded and foreseeable. On the whole I enjoyed the ideas he proposed in the story and can certainly respect his decision to utilize a constructed future world as the delivery for the ideas. In some ways, he does a good job of guessing how we nowadays might have improved life for the masses; in others - some might say for the most part - he missed the mark catastrophically.
As an avenue for ideas, it is a passable work. As a story, it just BARELY qualifies - guy goes to sleep in 1887, wakes up in a utopic 2000. He freaks out, but quickly learns how great things are now through a series of personalized lectures from a doctor.
Wicked.
blankster3's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
hopeful
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.0
He really thought he ate with this. Loved using dreams as a rhetorical strategy, as political thought its oddly facist and as a story the pacing is very odd.
wrightbookk's review against another edition
3.0
I really enjoyed the vision and hope of the future presented in this small book, but I feel like it was like 20% too long. There were a lot of extraneous descriptions and events that could’ve been cut out without harming the core vision and story of the book. Enjoyable read overall regardless!
gahvriela's review against another edition
1.0
I hate this book so much. The only reason I even read it was because it was for class. It was so boring, there must have been a better way to convey your ideals than through dry prose. It felt like I was reading off of an encyclopedia page. Also, this utopian society isn’t really utopian unless you’re a white male. I’m not gonna the gender roles as it seems others have picked up on that. But did anyone else think that a particular, for lack of a better word, scene was racist? Maybe not overtly so white people wouldn’t have picked up on it but to those that aren’t white. Y’all got that vibe right? I get that this book was written in 1888 but why are some countries not following this economic system in this utopian future?
alannathellama's review against another edition
2.0
I wasn’t sure if I was going to review books for classes, especially if I sped through them, but this book PISSED ME OFF.
I know it’s not meant to be much of a novel, but it could at least try a bit harder to seem like one. It’s just so boring. It reminds me of Walden Two because it's such a pathetic, repetitive attempt at persuasion towards a certain ideology hidden under the guise of being a (poorly written) novel. The characters are so flat and boring, just serving as mouthpieces. The way they spoke could have at least been a little bit more engaging (even for the time period and corresponding style) to make the paragraphs of lecturing a bit less stale.
The portrayal of women is also just so icky in every way. I know that complex female characters were neither the goal nor the style, especially for a work with such Christian values, but I still don’t have to like it. The female characters are traditional, but they could have stayed that way but been less one dimensional and plain boring. There’s also so much emphasis on the love interest being young and beautiful, I really thought I was going to throw up. The rights of women in the utopia are the bare minimum (or less), as to be expected from this type of piece, but what really got me was when it mentioned that the men permit women to work because it makes them more healthy, beautiful and charming??????
The love story is also weird as fuck. It's boring, surface level, artificial, and stupid – and only a little bit funny in how outrageous and strange it is – it makes the main character seem so special and good when he’s just a normal guy that accidentally time traveled.
The addressing of racial equality/inequality is also terrible. It’s barely mentioned, if at all, and the way it addresses it shows the prejudices of the time. Also, the way marriage and parenting works in his utopia is reminiscent of eugenics? Talking about how only the “superior” people will breed since all marriages are based on love and people getting to pick their partners?????? Like it assumes that people will only breed with a certain type of person… Idk it was just strange to me.
The purpose of introducing people to Bellamy’s idea of socialism was achieved, but the book is still bad, even for the time period.
I know it’s not meant to be much of a novel, but it could at least try a bit harder to seem like one. It’s just so boring. It reminds me of Walden Two because it's such a pathetic, repetitive attempt at persuasion towards a certain ideology hidden under the guise of being a (poorly written) novel. The characters are so flat and boring, just serving as mouthpieces. The way they spoke could have at least been a little bit more engaging (even for the time period and corresponding style) to make the paragraphs of lecturing a bit less stale.
The portrayal of women is also just so icky in every way. I know that complex female characters were neither the goal nor the style, especially for a work with such Christian values, but I still don’t have to like it. The female characters are traditional, but they could have stayed that way but been less one dimensional and plain boring. There’s also so much emphasis on the love interest being young and beautiful, I really thought I was going to throw up. The rights of women in the utopia are the bare minimum (or less), as to be expected from this type of piece, but what really got me was when it mentioned that the men permit women to work because it makes them more healthy, beautiful and charming??????
The love story is also weird as fuck. It's boring, surface level, artificial, and stupid – and only a little bit funny in how outrageous and strange it is – it makes the main character seem so special and good when he’s just a normal guy that accidentally time traveled.
The addressing of racial equality/inequality is also terrible. It’s barely mentioned, if at all, and the way it addresses it shows the prejudices of the time. Also, the way marriage and parenting works in his utopia is reminiscent of eugenics? Talking about how only the “superior” people will breed since all marriages are based on love and people getting to pick their partners?????? Like it assumes that people will only breed with a certain type of person… Idk it was just strange to me.
The purpose of introducing people to Bellamy’s idea of socialism was achieved, but the book is still bad, even for the time period.
drskaninchen's review against another edition
hopeful
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
drewsbookreviews's review against another edition
dark
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
I read this as part of my cantenbury classics of science fiction and fantasy.
This book/story is essentially a type of time travel story where a man gets hypnotized in 1887 and falls asleep for 113yrs to wake up in the future in the year 2000
Aside from that, there is really nothing really scifi about this at all. The entire story is really nothing more than a conversation between 2 people about socialist utopia of 2000 and how great it is vs capitilist society of 1887 with little to no arguments or points in favor of capitalism to any great extent and as such is much more of a manifesto on socialism than a inherent and true scifi story of any interest.
marajadie's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
juicywizard's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
hopeful
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
i don’t understand how anyone could come out of this book and focus not on its intensely hopeful and noble view of humanity but rather its flaws and shortcomings! though it is very much of its era and subject to its constraints of imagination, this book was so compelling and inspiring i felt like my heart would burst from its love of humankind