Scan barcode
A review by ed_moore
A Clergyman's Daughter by George Orwell
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
‘A Clergyman’s Daughter’ is the first book of Orwell’s that I have read and not been utterly captivated by. It was a story about a loss of faith and shaped to be a promising criticism of organised religion in its opening, and as it progressed did succeed in recounting the hardships of poverty and the lower classes in typical Orwellian fashion, whereas these themes were much more fractured and far less impactful than I am used to with Orwell.
The book follows Dorothy, the daughter of a rector in the small village of Knypes Hill, and her loss of memory resulting in her existing in poverty as a hop-picker, on the streets in London and in a small private girls school. This also opened some criticisms of the private education system in the early 20th century, whereas there were too many issues raised across one book to the point where no single criticism was fully explored. I would’ve much preferred a designated focus on its initial staging to attack organised religion, for we have seen plenty about destitution from Orwell. There was also a mention of a dog called Toto in the opening chapters though I don’t think the book was particularly linked to ‘The Wizard of Oz in any way’! Orwell has faced backlash for his presentation of female characters, and in most cases I can look beyond this as the individuals are never the primary focus in Orwell’s writing and messages, though in the case of ‘A Clergyman’s Daughter’ I don’t believe Orwell did an awful job. Dorothy as a character was strong willed, broke away from patriarchal systems and expressed agency, though a lot of this was ultimately futile but I shan’t spoil such with details.
I didn’t much like Orwell’s chapter spacing and the structure of this book. Each of the five chapters takes a completely different circumstance and setting, which are each only partially linked to one another, and the third one breaks style completely and is written as a script with a huge cast of characters whom very few of had been introduced prior. Also the main catalyst for Dorothy’s fall into poverty, her memory loss, is left completely unexplained which created major plot holes. It was a fine book, but only fine. With how amazing an author I know Orwell can be I expected an awful lot more from it.
The book follows Dorothy, the daughter of a rector in the small village of Knypes Hill, and her loss of memory resulting in her existing in poverty as a hop-picker, on the streets in London and in a small private girls school. This also opened some criticisms of the private education system in the early 20th century, whereas there were too many issues raised across one book to the point where no single criticism was fully explored. I would’ve much preferred a designated focus on its initial staging to attack organised religion, for we have seen plenty about destitution from Orwell. There was also a mention of a dog called Toto in the opening chapters though I don’t think the book was particularly linked to ‘The Wizard of Oz in any way’! Orwell has faced backlash for his presentation of female characters, and in most cases I can look beyond this as the individuals are never the primary focus in Orwell’s writing and messages, though in the case of ‘A Clergyman’s Daughter’ I don’t believe Orwell did an awful job. Dorothy as a character was strong willed, broke away from patriarchal systems and expressed agency, though a lot of this was ultimately futile but I shan’t spoil such with details.
I didn’t much like Orwell’s chapter spacing and the structure of this book. Each of the five chapters takes a completely different circumstance and setting, which are each only partially linked to one another, and the third one breaks style completely and is written as a script with a huge cast of characters whom very few of had been introduced prior. Also the main catalyst for Dorothy’s fall into poverty, her memory loss, is left completely unexplained which created major plot holes. It was a fine book, but only fine. With how amazing an author I know Orwell can be I expected an awful lot more from it.