Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by madw0manintheattik
Sophie's World: A Novel about the History of Philosophy by Jostein Gaarder
5.0
Don't judge a book by its cover we're told, but how can one not judge this book by its cover? The cover is actually one of the main reasons I bought the book. It's dreamy, artistic, and makes one curious as to what wonders it holds inside.
In addition to wonders, readers will find that this particular book also holds many questions, such as "Who are we?" and "Where does the world come from?" Once exposed to such questions there is no door to escape through. One can't help but wonder about the answers to such questions even when not reading the book. The lesson to be taken from this book is that none of these questions have definitive answers and that one shouldn't be surprised if the answers to the questions are questions themselves.
How does one even begin to tackle these loaded questions? The book presents readers with a framework or foundation in which they can use philosophy to answer the questions. The book teaches its readers that life itself can be seen and understood in many different ways depending on the framework one chooses.
As for the story itself, I have a few complaints. Firstly, sometimes it felt like too much information was packed into a tiny chapter. Perhaps it wasn't even that, but the text book feel of the philosophy lesson itself between Alberto and Sophie. It was very dry and factual which I would expect in a text book, but not in a novel. Sometimes I found myself wondering when the history would end and the story actually begin again.
In addition, I didn't really feel that the chapters transitioned very well. They were very redundant. In some parts, it felt like the author was rushing the story (the writing was poor and simple) in order to get the story itself to the next long text book like philosophy lesson.
When Alberto is actually teaching Sophie about the history of philosophy, the dialogue is sometimes problematic. For example, Sophie will occasionally interrupt Alberto with her own thoughts or statements which seem to be coming not from Sophie the character, but the writer. I know that a lot of people will argue that the writing/dialogue comes from the author, but the point I'm trying to make is that a lot of Sophie's responses and thoughts did not seem realistic coming from a 14 year old girl. Some of her responses seem too pre-made and she also catches on to the philosophy lessons rather quickly considering that we are told this is the first time she's been introduced to philosophy.
Towards the end of the book, we learn that Sophie and Alberto are merely characters in a book. The book is being written as a birthday present for a girl named Hilde. I thought this was really clever on the writer's part and I found myself smiling because even I was tricked and didn't see it coming. There are of course subtle but also very obvious hints that this is the case, and the reader knows something odd is going on, especially when we learn that the man's name who is writing the book is Albert (very similar to Alberto, Sophie's teacher.) The whole idea is very clever indeed, especially when broken down - this is a story of a girl and a man being written by a man for his daughter, which has been written by Jostein Gaarder. Story within a story that is a story itself ! :)
What if we too are merely characters in a book that is being written? Perhaps we can escape like Sophie and Alberto did when the writer wasn't thinking of them.
My last thoughts on the book concern the philosophy itself. Do we come away satisfied that we have learned something of philosophy, or do we put the book down in frustration and confusion? I think if anyone actually manages to finish the book they will either be REALLY confused or just a little more knowledgeable about philosophy. The pace of the book is so quick that most of the history gets lost and comes off as being very dry and rather confusing when jumping from one philosopher and time to another. I think the history of philosophy could have been written in a more grab your attention sort of way that makes readers feel like they are actually reading a novel and not a text book.
Did I actually enjoy the book? I enjoyed it in parts. Some parts were very interesting and I had trouble putting the book down, but then those mind boggling history lessons would sneak up and I'd grow rather bored again. It's not really a matter of my familiarity with philosophy, but more along the lines of the text book feeling I got during the lesson parts. Would I recommend it? I would, but only to individuals who enjoy philosophy or are interested in it. And yeah, I would mention that it goes back and forth between novel and text book.
On an interesting side note, I almost counted how many times "bagatelle" is used in the novel, but decided not to, lol. According to wikipedia, "a bagatelle is a short piece of music, typically for the piano, and usually of a light, mellow character. The name bagatelle literally means a "trifle", as a reference to the innocent character of the piece." In case anyone was wondering.. :)
In addition to wonders, readers will find that this particular book also holds many questions, such as "Who are we?" and "Where does the world come from?" Once exposed to such questions there is no door to escape through. One can't help but wonder about the answers to such questions even when not reading the book. The lesson to be taken from this book is that none of these questions have definitive answers and that one shouldn't be surprised if the answers to the questions are questions themselves.
How does one even begin to tackle these loaded questions? The book presents readers with a framework or foundation in which they can use philosophy to answer the questions. The book teaches its readers that life itself can be seen and understood in many different ways depending on the framework one chooses.
As for the story itself, I have a few complaints. Firstly, sometimes it felt like too much information was packed into a tiny chapter. Perhaps it wasn't even that, but the text book feel of the philosophy lesson itself between Alberto and Sophie. It was very dry and factual which I would expect in a text book, but not in a novel. Sometimes I found myself wondering when the history would end and the story actually begin again.
In addition, I didn't really feel that the chapters transitioned very well. They were very redundant. In some parts, it felt like the author was rushing the story (the writing was poor and simple) in order to get the story itself to the next long text book like philosophy lesson.
When Alberto is actually teaching Sophie about the history of philosophy, the dialogue is sometimes problematic. For example, Sophie will occasionally interrupt Alberto with her own thoughts or statements which seem to be coming not from Sophie the character, but the writer. I know that a lot of people will argue that the writing/dialogue comes from the author, but the point I'm trying to make is that a lot of Sophie's responses and thoughts did not seem realistic coming from a 14 year old girl. Some of her responses seem too pre-made and she also catches on to the philosophy lessons rather quickly considering that we are told this is the first time she's been introduced to philosophy.
Towards the end of the book, we learn that Sophie and Alberto are merely characters in a book. The book is being written as a birthday present for a girl named Hilde. I thought this was really clever on the writer's part and I found myself smiling because even I was tricked and didn't see it coming. There are of course subtle but also very obvious hints that this is the case, and the reader knows something odd is going on, especially when we learn that the man's name who is writing the book is Albert (very similar to Alberto, Sophie's teacher.) The whole idea is very clever indeed, especially when broken down - this is a story of a girl and a man being written by a man for his daughter, which has been written by Jostein Gaarder. Story within a story that is a story itself ! :)
What if we too are merely characters in a book that is being written? Perhaps we can escape like Sophie and Alberto did when the writer wasn't thinking of them.
My last thoughts on the book concern the philosophy itself. Do we come away satisfied that we have learned something of philosophy, or do we put the book down in frustration and confusion? I think if anyone actually manages to finish the book they will either be REALLY confused or just a little more knowledgeable about philosophy. The pace of the book is so quick that most of the history gets lost and comes off as being very dry and rather confusing when jumping from one philosopher and time to another. I think the history of philosophy could have been written in a more grab your attention sort of way that makes readers feel like they are actually reading a novel and not a text book.
Did I actually enjoy the book? I enjoyed it in parts. Some parts were very interesting and I had trouble putting the book down, but then those mind boggling history lessons would sneak up and I'd grow rather bored again. It's not really a matter of my familiarity with philosophy, but more along the lines of the text book feeling I got during the lesson parts. Would I recommend it? I would, but only to individuals who enjoy philosophy or are interested in it. And yeah, I would mention that it goes back and forth between novel and text book.
On an interesting side note, I almost counted how many times "bagatelle" is used in the novel, but decided not to, lol. According to wikipedia, "a bagatelle is a short piece of music, typically for the piano, and usually of a light, mellow character. The name bagatelle literally means a "trifle", as a reference to the innocent character of the piece." In case anyone was wondering.. :)