Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.98 AVERAGE
3.98 AVERAGE
Somehow many consider All the King’s Men the finest book ever written on American politics. Willie Stark, a quiet country-bumpkin, steals the spotlight on his trailblazing political journey. But the narrator Jack Burden is the real focus of Warren’s masterpiece. He is the only character we understand. We perceive all the others through Jack. In the end, we remain perplexed by Stark and must accept we will never understand him. Conversely, we ride along with Jack on his path to self-discovery and eventual acceptance.
Through Jack, Warren explores the burden of the past on the present and future. Without the past, we cannot understand why we are here. What led to this moment? Why not another moment? Some prefer to ignore the past and live in the present, hoping to re-live highs without understanding lows. Jack lives in the present to escape understanding his past, and so avoids planning for the future. He floats through life and accomplishes nothing of substance. He waits for the impersonal tides of time to bury him into the sands of history. Then along comes Willie Stark, a man with no history. Willie manipulates the present to achieve a future only he can see. And he asks Jack to join him as a fixer of sorts.
In Willie’s service, Jack confronts the past and uses it to fulfill Willie’s aspirations. He strains his relationships in the aristocratic Burden’s Landen in service of the truth. But he discovers that the truth is complicated. Can one bad deed offset a life of public service? If two moral codes collide, which wins? The code of the strong, the just, or the powerful? These questions haunt Jack as they’ve haunted philosophers immemorial. He responds by retreating into nihilism, or the “Great Twitch.” But that does not work either. Nihilism is an unsustainable belief. You must build walls of meaning to defend yourself from the indifferent outside of meaninglessness. And Jack finds his meaning with his love discovered in the flower of youth. And in the process accepts his past and finds the means to plan for a future.
Jack’s story resonated with me. But his story is one of many in Warren’s book. Pick it up and see what you enjoy. Warren won one of his three Pulitzer Prize for All the King’s Men. The story, the language, the characters, and the setting all flash in my mind’s eye as I look at my copy. That’s literary fiction at its finest.
Through Jack, Warren explores the burden of the past on the present and future. Without the past, we cannot understand why we are here. What led to this moment? Why not another moment? Some prefer to ignore the past and live in the present, hoping to re-live highs without understanding lows. Jack lives in the present to escape understanding his past, and so avoids planning for the future. He floats through life and accomplishes nothing of substance. He waits for the impersonal tides of time to bury him into the sands of history. Then along comes Willie Stark, a man with no history. Willie manipulates the present to achieve a future only he can see. And he asks Jack to join him as a fixer of sorts.
In Willie’s service, Jack confronts the past and uses it to fulfill Willie’s aspirations. He strains his relationships in the aristocratic Burden’s Landen in service of the truth. But he discovers that the truth is complicated. Can one bad deed offset a life of public service? If two moral codes collide, which wins? The code of the strong, the just, or the powerful? These questions haunt Jack as they’ve haunted philosophers immemorial. He responds by retreating into nihilism, or the “Great Twitch.” But that does not work either. Nihilism is an unsustainable belief. You must build walls of meaning to defend yourself from the indifferent outside of meaninglessness. And Jack finds his meaning with his love discovered in the flower of youth. And in the process accepts his past and finds the means to plan for a future.
Jack’s story resonated with me. But his story is one of many in Warren’s book. Pick it up and see what you enjoy. Warren won one of his three Pulitzer Prize for All the King’s Men. The story, the language, the characters, and the setting all flash in my mind’s eye as I look at my copy. That’s literary fiction at its finest.
DNF at 30%.
I *know* this is a classic, and I *know* Warren won the Pulitzer and all that. But my gosh, I could not do it. I gave it two stars because the writing was great. I just could not get over how slow and dull the book was. I even tried it on audiobook to listen to while I worked out but that didn't help. I found myself skimming over pages to try and find something exciting, interesting, to draw me in.
Sorry, literary world.
I *know* this is a classic, and I *know* Warren won the Pulitzer and all that. But my gosh, I could not do it. I gave it two stars because the writing was great. I just could not get over how slow and dull the book was. I even tried it on audiobook to listen to while I worked out but that didn't help. I found myself skimming over pages to try and find something exciting, interesting, to draw me in.
Sorry, literary world.
challenging
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Moderate: Racism, Sexism, Alcohol
Really amazing. What a diverse book that is about so much more than politics. A beautiful writing style (that frankly kind of wore out its welcome towards the end). I hadn't any expectations really but I was blown away.
adventurous
challenging
inspiring
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Превосходная книга!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Не ожидал такого от классического романа о политике (хотя политик тут главный герой лишь номинально). Думал будет обычная тягомотина о борьбе за "благо" народа, но это... Еще раз убедился, что никогда не знаешь, где найдешь, где потеряешь!!!!!!!!!!!
Книга настолько насыщена НАСТОЯЩИМИ мыслями (не со всеми я был согласен, однако мог понять, как автор пришел к подобным заключениям) и чувствами, что быстро читать ее не получалось (но в том, что я читал ее практически месяц виноват также и мой напряженный рабочий график в августе). И, наверное, именно благодаря медленному чтению, получилось прожить и прочувствовать эту книгу до конца!!!!!
Тут все потрясающее, но финальные повороты настолько невероятны (но правдоподобны), что просто диву даешься!!!!!!
Из минусов могу отметить, что книга чуть-чуть (очень чуть-чуть) тяжеловата, особенно вначале! А также трансформация Вилли Старка показалась мне очень неправдоподобной (хотя у этого персонажа был реальный прототип). Да и вообще губернатор мне совершенно не понравился: цель НИКОГДА не оправдывает средства, невозможно на лжи, шантаже и запугиваниях построить что-то хорошее!!!!!!!!!!!
Не ожидал такого от классического романа о политике (хотя политик тут главный герой лишь номинально). Думал будет обычная тягомотина о борьбе за "благо" народа, но это... Еще раз убедился, что никогда не знаешь, где найдешь, где потеряешь!!!!!!!!!!!
Книга настолько насыщена НАСТОЯЩИМИ мыслями (не со всеми я был согласен, однако мог понять, как автор пришел к подобным заключениям) и чувствами, что быстро читать ее не получалось (но в том, что я читал ее практически месяц виноват также и мой напряженный рабочий график в августе). И, наверное, именно благодаря медленному чтению, получилось прожить и прочувствовать эту книгу до конца!!!!!
Тут все потрясающее, но финальные повороты настолько невероятны (но правдоподобны), что просто диву даешься!!!!!!
Из минусов могу отметить, что книга чуть-чуть (очень чуть-чуть) тяжеловата, особенно вначале! А также трансформация Вилли Старка показалась мне очень неправдоподобной (хотя у этого персонажа был реальный прототип). Да и вообще губернатор мне совершенно не понравился: цель НИКОГДА не оправдывает средства, невозможно на лжи, шантаже и запугиваниях построить что-то хорошее!!!!!!!!!!!
I started up on this very reluctantly, mostly because All The King's Men is advertised as a novel about shady politics. I was glad to find that I was mistaken. Every character in this book is undoubtedly wrapped up in shady politics, but that is hardly the point. The whole thing is very character driven and the narrator (Jack Burden) is the main focus. Jack's ever-changing ethics is the central theme and anyone interested in philosophy (moral philosophy specifically) will like this read. The book takes place in the deep south in the 20s and 30s, and the tone is very cynical so I would even go so far as to put Warren in the company of southern gothic greats like Faulkner and O'Connor. The thing really is well-written cover to cover, with beautiful, elegant pacing. It is a tad longer than it probably should be, but all the little backstories and asides add a lot of depth to the characters. Luckily there are enough crazy plot twists to keep most readers interested. Overall worth a read if you have nothing to do on a Sunday afternoon.
challenging
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
For those that have given their reviews (at least the first two pages), I am not sure I read the same book you all read (or is it "y'all read"? ... and yes, RPW does say "you all" at least once in the book). The goodreads description, and most of the reviews say this is a political novel. Hunh? Yes, there is a politician, and it follows that politician and his sidekicks around, but I didn't really think that was the focus; it was only with that backdrop to which RPW presents the meat of the novel. I would certainly consider it a historical-fiction novel, but would also suggest it is a philosophical, and even a romance novel, before I would call it political. Even so, the first thing that strikes me is its unique and vivid literary prose dripping with a distinctly Southern quality. Two (of many) examples,
"The ground must have been swampy down there, for the grass and the weeds at the edge of the trees were lush and tropical green. Against the bare ground beyond it looked too green to be natural. I could see a couple of hogs lounging down there on their sides, like big gray blisters popped up put of the ground."
“The season was like a fine big-breasted daughter of some poor spavined share-cropper, a girl popping her calico but still having a waist, with pink cheeks and bright eyes and just a little perspiration at the edge of her tow hair (which would be platinum blond in some circles), but you see her and know before long she will be a bag of bone and gristle with a hag face like a rusted brush hook.”
I think these colloquial descriptions lend a true Southern flavor. The text wavers between paragraphs of this descriptive prose, plot advances, and philosophic ponderings; sometimes all three at once. The prose dances lyrical throughout, not just in the beginning chapter or two.
The philosophic questions are often political in nature, but don't have to be construed as such. The alluded-to moral dilemmas could pertain to, for example, personal career advances in a large corporation (often called 'office politics') or cutting-edge research, eg. genetic-engineered humans or stem-celled research... do you do the ends justify the means? Do you want the corporate advancement to be able to affect larger product decisions impacting the benefit of humanity? Do you tinkle with aborted humans fetuses to solve cancer? Do you sacrifice personal beliefs for the gain of humanity? It all comes at a cost... or as the novel says, a price of decision. The frame of reference in the novel is political, sure, but I think that is just one narrative.
I think some may criticize and rate the book low because of racial and gender issues. One must always consider two ideas before doing so: 1) when was it written? and 2) what time frame does it try to represent? Well, it is Jim Crow south (you will see words that most folks no longer use). And from everything I've read or heard about, this is how people talked, and how people were treated. The book doesn't espouse this as an ideology, but more as a matter-of-fact as to how it was in this time period. You should not fault the author for attempting to document the social norms (however abnormal as judged by the current societal norms) and language of a region in history. Imagine a literary review in 80 years from now judging current books: in a world in the year 2100, the Harry Potter's series is banned because Weasley family had more than one or two children and contributed to the overpopulation and competition for food, fresh water and jobs. Or banning the any book because it depicts gasoline-powered automobiles, which polluted the atmosphere.
Well, anyways, I liked the book. 4.5/5 stars bumped to 5 because I am sure I will be thinking about this for days.
"The ground must have been swampy down there, for the grass and the weeds at the edge of the trees were lush and tropical green. Against the bare ground beyond it looked too green to be natural. I could see a couple of hogs lounging down there on their sides, like big gray blisters popped up put of the ground."
“The season was like a fine big-breasted daughter of some poor spavined share-cropper, a girl popping her calico but still having a waist, with pink cheeks and bright eyes and just a little perspiration at the edge of her tow hair (which would be platinum blond in some circles), but you see her and know before long she will be a bag of bone and gristle with a hag face like a rusted brush hook.”
I think these colloquial descriptions lend a true Southern flavor. The text wavers between paragraphs of this descriptive prose, plot advances, and philosophic ponderings; sometimes all three at once. The prose dances lyrical throughout, not just in the beginning chapter or two.
The philosophic questions are often political in nature, but don't have to be construed as such. The alluded-to moral dilemmas could pertain to, for example, personal career advances in a large corporation (often called 'office politics') or cutting-edge research, eg. genetic-engineered humans or stem-celled research... do you do the ends justify the means? Do you want the corporate advancement to be able to affect larger product decisions impacting the benefit of humanity? Do you tinkle with aborted humans fetuses to solve cancer? Do you sacrifice personal beliefs for the gain of humanity? It all comes at a cost... or as the novel says, a price of decision. The frame of reference in the novel is political, sure, but I think that is just one narrative.
I think some may criticize and rate the book low because of racial and gender issues. One must always consider two ideas before doing so: 1) when was it written? and 2) what time frame does it try to represent? Well, it is Jim Crow south (you will see words that most folks no longer use). And from everything I've read or heard about, this is how people talked, and how people were treated. The book doesn't espouse this as an ideology, but more as a matter-of-fact as to how it was in this time period. You should not fault the author for attempting to document the social norms (however abnormal as judged by the current societal norms) and language of a region in history. Imagine a literary review in 80 years from now judging current books: in a world in the year 2100, the Harry Potter's series is banned because Weasley family had more than one or two children and contributed to the overpopulation and competition for food, fresh water and jobs. Or banning the any book because it depicts gasoline-powered automobiles, which polluted the atmosphere.
Well, anyways, I liked the book. 4.5/5 stars bumped to 5 because I am sure I will be thinking about this for days.