Scan barcode
blueyorkie's review against another edition
4.0
A Novel in which the writer analyses the adverse effects of mercantilist zeal on the man of science.
We can thus reveal, in the discursive fabric of the text, an apology for the values of the spirit, practically dying in a society in which everything becomes a tradable good. Nevertheless, the novel structure shows the protagonist's moral integrity and dignity, giving the story an aura of idealism not achieved in the author's previous works.
We can thus reveal, in the discursive fabric of the text, an apology for the values of the spirit, practically dying in a society in which everything becomes a tradable good. Nevertheless, the novel structure shows the protagonist's moral integrity and dignity, giving the story an aura of idealism not achieved in the author's previous works.
glasses's review against another edition
5.0
Sinclair Lewis is a master of descriptions. He boils all manner of people down to the essentials, then boils them some more. Out of the viscous sludge of stereotype he drags out fully formed pictures, so vivid that within seconds you feel like you have known these people and places forever. And perhaps you have. This is a tale of very ordinary people, the ones we are and meet. In anyone else's hands such a story would almost certainly have been drab and uninteresting (aside from Mark Twain, perhaps). But Sinclair revels in the mundane and mediocre. While his gaze is sardonic and cynical, it has a heartfelt understanding of the trappings of human society and science.
A beautiful piece of writing.
A beautiful piece of writing.
grace_theliteraryfiend's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
the_dave_harmon's review against another edition
2.0
Did not finish. half way. long slow and boring.
merrinish's review against another edition
3.0
So I picked this up (or was given it, I can't remember the origins) a couple of years ago because it won a Pulitzer in 1926, and I'm still determined to make it through that list.
Most of the Pulitzers have either been a giant miss or a giant hit with me, but this one became a little of both. I absolutely loved large parts of the beginning. In particular, the way that Lewis describes the college that Arrowsmith attends: "It is a Ford Motor Factory, and if its products rattle a little, they are beautifully standardized, with perfectly interchangeable parts."
I think my main problem with the book was the titular character, Martin Arrowsmith. He was an inherently selfish and self-centered individual, whose main lesson in the book wasn't nearly as satisfying as I wanted it to be. Giving particulars would ruin the book, but I definitely found myself wanting to kick his shins toward the end, even though I can completely follow the line of how he got from an idealistic medical student to where he is at the end.
Sinclair Lewis is a superb writer, even though Arrowsmith is not a superb human being.
Most of the Pulitzers have either been a giant miss or a giant hit with me, but this one became a little of both. I absolutely loved large parts of the beginning. In particular, the way that Lewis describes the college that Arrowsmith attends: "It is a Ford Motor Factory, and if its products rattle a little, they are beautifully standardized, with perfectly interchangeable parts."
I think my main problem with the book was the titular character, Martin Arrowsmith. He was an inherently selfish and self-centered individual, whose main lesson in the book wasn't nearly as satisfying as I wanted it to be. Giving particulars would ruin the book, but I definitely found myself wanting to kick his shins toward the end, even though I can completely follow the line of how he got from an idealistic medical student to where he is at the end.
Sinclair Lewis is a superb writer, even though Arrowsmith is not a superb human being.
wathohuc's review against another edition
3.0
Took me longer than I thought to get through this one; but it's a worthy read. I'd probably rank it higher than a regular three star book, but not quite as high as a four star book. It's solid, well-written, and clever. Recommendable and worthy of a Pulitzer.
What makes it a bit special is the fact that it uses strong science and scientific research as the lens through which this story is told. Arrowsmith is a medical doctor more engrossed by medical research than in the practice of medicine. I don't think I've ever read a seriously science-grounded novel published any earlier than this book. Yeah, sure, there's Mary Shelly and Dr. Frankenstein, but I said serious science.
Anyway, the story itself is just about the life of scientist and researcher Martin Arrowsmith who spends his entire life vacillating between the purity of research at the expense of empathetic humanitarianism, and the drive to ease pain and suffering at the expense of cold, hard research. In the end, Arrowsmith goes for the research purity route. And the reader feels a certain affirmation of this choice; but the book is nuanced enough to plant the seed of doubt that the other path is meritorious, too. I think the basic conflict between these poles is still relevant today, which makes the book a good read. It's a bit didactic, with some caricatures for principle characters; but not overly so. Anyone interested in the early history of medical science, medical research, and the early history of comprehensive public health movements should definitely read this novel.
What makes it a bit special is the fact that it uses strong science and scientific research as the lens through which this story is told. Arrowsmith is a medical doctor more engrossed by medical research than in the practice of medicine. I don't think I've ever read a seriously science-grounded novel published any earlier than this book. Yeah, sure, there's Mary Shelly and Dr. Frankenstein, but I said serious science.
Anyway, the story itself is just about the life of scientist and researcher Martin Arrowsmith who spends his entire life vacillating between the purity of research at the expense of empathetic humanitarianism, and the drive to ease pain and suffering at the expense of cold, hard research. In the end, Arrowsmith goes for the research purity route. And the reader feels a certain affirmation of this choice; but the book is nuanced enough to plant the seed of doubt that the other path is meritorious, too. I think the basic conflict between these poles is still relevant today, which makes the book a good read. It's a bit didactic, with some caricatures for principle characters; but not overly so. Anyone interested in the early history of medical science, medical research, and the early history of comprehensive public health movements should definitely read this novel.
jbragg6625's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
mjacton's review against another edition
challenging
funny
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25
This is the eighth and by far most difficult novel to read in my chronological reading of Pulitzer Prize-winning novels/fiction.
None of the characters, or character types, goes unscathed by the satirical knife. This is primarily a medical satire that is quite relevant today, with references to both the 1918 flu epidemic and a fictional plague combining to almost completely mirror the way the public and health officials responded (and continue) to the COVID-19 pandemic.
It’s hard to know which side of that equation gets the worst criticism, but science always wins. However, the reader who knows more about early 20th Century America and the state of medicine/public health would understand better.
This is satire-driven, with semi-rich characters and very purposely disjointed plot.
I think I need to read this again someday to notice all the details and maybe understand it’s nuances better, but I’m glad I read it.
Content Warnings: Early 20th Century racial language and satirical references to Eugenics.
None of the characters, or character types, goes unscathed by the satirical knife. This is primarily a medical satire that is quite relevant today, with references to both the 1918 flu epidemic and a fictional plague combining to almost completely mirror the way the public and health officials responded (and continue) to the COVID-19 pandemic.
It’s hard to know which side of that equation gets the worst criticism, but science always wins. However, the reader who knows more about early 20th Century America and the state of medicine/public health would understand better.
This is satire-driven, with semi-rich characters and very purposely disjointed plot.
I think I need to read this again someday to notice all the details and maybe understand it’s nuances better, but I’m glad I read it.
Content Warnings: Early 20th Century racial language and satirical references to Eugenics.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racial slurs and Racism
jeffs's review against another edition
4.0
Highlights many points of contention that still exist in the science community today – the tension between pure and applied, the ethics of experimentation, and the consequences of commercialization. A fun read that gave me insight into the scientific world as it was in the early 20th century.
carson2031's review against another edition
5.0
I read this book in high school for AD and I really loved it. Not so much the classes. I really like Lewis. Sook!