You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lighthearted
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Divergent is fine.
Really, there's nothing particularly remarkable about it. I liked it enough to put the sequel on my TBR (despite what I've heard), mostly because I'm simply curious. I won't praise nor degrade Veronica Roth because Divergent is just fine, nothing more nor less.
Tris is a fine character, though her character arc feels kind of all over the place. She's trying to be strong and tough like the Dauntless after coming from Abnegation, but there also seems to be messaging that the recklessness of the Dauntless is worthy of critique when compared to the original values Dauntless was built on. Particularly, that interested me because I am infatuated with stories about ideologies being twisted to fit certain narratives and how that shapes the world they fit in, but Roth seems uninterested in exploring that sort of political intrigue when she could have a tournament arc and romance subplot. There are little inklings that the world outside the Dauntless compound is interesting, but Tris hardly has reason to go see that, so why is it important?
More importantly, everything in this book just seems to happen to Tris–she's hardly proactive. In a great novel, this would be a deliberate choice in order to emphasize helplessness, but Tris is just meant to be the strong female protagonist that was so popular when this was written and nothing else. If anything, her passivity in the story feels like a product of Tris's lack of character motivation than a greater commentary.
But my biggest issue with this novel has to be the subtle anti-intellectualism. I'm sure other readers have spoken about this and with far more eloquence than I have, but it really irks me how Tris's brother joining Erudite is seen as a bad decision because the Erudite have bad leadership–as if he made the choice with that in mind. It feels particularly hypocritical because the condemnation of Eric and Jeanine are both further condemning their power-hungry ideologies that seek to twist the original ideas of the faction in order to serve their own means. Yet, the narrative seems to paint Caleb leaving Erudite as the only good decision while Tris gets to stay in Dauntless. They are effectively in the same situation, but Erudite is treated as if the entire faction is complicit in their bids for power while Dauntless is excused. It just seems a bit poorly thought out to me and gives the implication, whether intended or not, that intelligence cannot be trusted for whatever reason.
Also, the idea of being Divergent is stupid. Humans are naturally varied and the very event of the Choosing Ceremony allowing children to choose a different faction from their birth faction means that "Divergence" essentially means nothing except it puts a target on one's back–which isn't even explored well! Tris just has bouts of worry about someone finding out, but other than that it's hardly important, especially thematically. Also, what makes Caleb not Divergent? He was a model Abnegation member but transfers to Erudite seamlessly, so what gives?
Other than that, this book was decent to read. The prose was okay; the romance was alright and even good at points; the plot was somewhat intriguing. I recommend this book if you want a taste of a dystopia that's easily digestible and fictionalized.
(By the way, I have no idea how people kept comparing this to The Hunger Games. I hadn't read either for a long time, but I read the entire Hunger Games trilogy recently and Divergent, which just outlined to me that they're very different stories. Divergent wishes it was Hunger Games while Hunger Games stands on its own easily.)
Really, there's nothing particularly remarkable about it. I liked it enough to put the sequel on my TBR (despite what I've heard), mostly because I'm simply curious. I won't praise nor degrade Veronica Roth because Divergent is just fine, nothing more nor less.
Tris is a fine character, though her character arc feels kind of all over the place. She's trying to be strong and tough like the Dauntless after coming from Abnegation, but there also seems to be messaging that the recklessness of the Dauntless is worthy of critique when compared to the original values Dauntless was built on. Particularly, that interested me because I am infatuated with stories about ideologies being twisted to fit certain narratives and how that shapes the world they fit in, but Roth seems uninterested in exploring that sort of political intrigue when she could have a tournament arc and romance subplot. There are little inklings that the world outside the Dauntless compound is interesting, but Tris hardly has reason to go see that, so why is it important?
More importantly, everything in this book just seems to happen to Tris–she's hardly proactive. In a great novel, this would be a deliberate choice in order to emphasize helplessness, but Tris is just meant to be the strong female protagonist that was so popular when this was written and nothing else. If anything, her passivity in the story feels like a product of Tris's lack of character motivation than a greater commentary.
But my biggest issue with this novel has to be the subtle anti-intellectualism. I'm sure other readers have spoken about this and with far more eloquence than I have, but it really irks me how Tris's brother joining Erudite is seen as a bad decision because the Erudite have bad leadership–as if he made the choice with that in mind. It feels particularly hypocritical because the condemnation of Eric and Jeanine are both further condemning their power-hungry ideologies that seek to twist the original ideas of the faction in order to serve their own means. Yet, the narrative seems to paint Caleb leaving Erudite as the only good decision while Tris gets to stay in Dauntless. They are effectively in the same situation, but Erudite is treated as if the entire faction is complicit in their bids for power while Dauntless is excused. It just seems a bit poorly thought out to me and gives the implication, whether intended or not, that intelligence cannot be trusted for whatever reason.
Also, the idea of being Divergent is stupid. Humans are naturally varied and the very event of the Choosing Ceremony allowing children to choose a different faction from their birth faction means that "Divergence" essentially means nothing except it puts a target on one's back–which isn't even explored well! Tris just has bouts of worry about someone finding out, but other than that it's hardly important, especially thematically. Also, what makes Caleb not Divergent? He was a model Abnegation member but transfers to Erudite seamlessly, so what gives?
Other than that, this book was decent to read. The prose was okay; the romance was alright and even good at points; the plot was somewhat intriguing. I recommend this book if you want a taste of a dystopia that's easily digestible and fictionalized.
(By the way, I have no idea how people kept comparing this to The Hunger Games. I hadn't read either for a long time, but I read the entire Hunger Games trilogy recently and Divergent, which just outlined to me that they're very different stories. Divergent wishes it was Hunger Games while Hunger Games stands on its own easily.)