Scan barcode
A review by kirshach
The Counterfeiters by André Gide
hopeful
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.75
This book was a beautiful read.
I was fascinated by the writing style of the author, really enjoyed the characters, which were very well defined (well... at least all of the male ones), and followed their evolution with great curiosity.
Well, then why just 3.75 stars, you may ask?
The reason is - there wasn't too much of a plot. There were events happening, and the characters changed with them, but there was not a single story line you could say this book revolved around. There were so many of them, that the one which was particularly gripping to me (of someone who should probably be considered one of the two main characters of the novel), got lost in all of the others. In the middle of the book, when that particular story line stalled, I felt somewhat bored.
In the words of the author:
"And ... the subject of this novel?"
"It hasn't got one," answered Edouard brusquely, "and perhaps that's the most astonishing thing about it. My novel hasn't got a subject. Yes, I know, it sounds stupid. Let's say, if you prefer it, it hasn't got one subject ... 'a slice of life,' the naturalist school said. The great defect of that school is that it always cuts its slice in the same direction; in time, lengthwise. Why not in breadth? Or in depth? As for me I should like not to cut at all. Please understand; I should like to put everything into my novel. I don't want any cut of the scissors to limit its substance at one point rather than at another. For more than a year now that I have been working at it, nothing happens to me that I don't put into it — everything I see, everything I know, everything that other people's lives and my own teach me. . . ."
So, I guess, what I didn't like about the novel is not to be considered its bug, but a feature. However, I still think that I would've enjoyed it more, was a little more focused. Maybe I'm just too simple-minded to enjoy it the way its author intended it to be.
Do I recommend reading it though? I do.
I was fascinated by the writing style of the author, really enjoyed the characters, which were very well defined (well... at least all of the male ones), and followed their evolution with great curiosity.
Well, then why just 3.75 stars, you may ask?
The reason is - there wasn't too much of a plot. There were events happening, and the characters changed with them, but there was not a single story line you could say this book revolved around. There were so many of them, that the one which was particularly gripping to me (of someone who should probably be considered one of the two main characters of the novel), got lost in all of the others. In the middle of the book, when that particular story line stalled, I felt somewhat bored.
In the words of the author:
"And ... the subject of this novel?"
"It hasn't got one," answered Edouard brusquely, "and perhaps that's the most astonishing thing about it. My novel hasn't got a subject. Yes, I know, it sounds stupid. Let's say, if you prefer it, it hasn't got one subject ... 'a slice of life,' the naturalist school said. The great defect of that school is that it always cuts its slice in the same direction; in time, lengthwise. Why not in breadth? Or in depth? As for me I should like not to cut at all. Please understand; I should like to put everything into my novel. I don't want any cut of the scissors to limit its substance at one point rather than at another. For more than a year now that I have been working at it, nothing happens to me that I don't put into it — everything I see, everything I know, everything that other people's lives and my own teach me. . . ."
So, I guess, what I didn't like about the novel is not to be considered its bug, but a feature. However, I still think that I would've enjoyed it more, was a little more focused. Maybe I'm just too simple-minded to enjoy it the way its author intended it to be.
Do I recommend reading it though? I do.