Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lizdarkhorse 's review for:
Winter's Tale
by Mark Helprin
Warning Very Long Review
This is the first book of 2014 I have read that I've been sorely disappointed by.
Synopsis:
New York City is subsumed in arctic winds, dark nights, and white lights, its life unfolds, for it is an extraordinary hive of the imagination, the greatest house ever built, and nothing exists that can check its vitality. One night in winter, Peter Lake, orphan and master-mechanic, attempts to rob a fortress-like mansion on the Upper West Side.
Though he thinks the house is empty, the daughter of the house is home. Thus begins the love between Peter Lake, a middle-aged Irish burglar, and Beverly Penn, a young girl, who is dying.
Peter Lake, a simple, uneducated man, because of a love that, at first he does not fully understand, is driven to stop time and bring back the dead. His great struggle, in a city ever alight with its own energy and besieged by unprecedented winters, is one of the most beautiful and extraordinary stories of American literature.
WHAT A LIE OF A SYNOPSIS!
What is this story really about you may ask?
It's about overcoming the old and looking into the new and a mythical New York City where anything magical can happen. Where there are no rules, nothing makes sense, winters seem to be the only season that occurs, where horses can fly, people can time travel, people can see lights that nobody else can see, see the future, bring back the dead, and where true love conquers all.
This isn't magical realism, this is pure fantasy. There's no denying it. Magical realism you don't suspend your disbelief even when there are fantastical elements. It's integrated in a way that it doesn't even make you think that what's happening isn't possible. This is past magical realism into total fantasy.
A fantasy that makes no sense.
I tend to have a high tolerance for suspension of disbelief, but believe me even die hard fantasy lovers will be scratching their heads if they read this novel.
I don't normally care about rules, and sometimes there doesn't need to be. However, how can characters who did not have a magical horse time travel and live longer than they should? How can characters who are a hundred years old drive a sled and go up and down the stairs like they are in their thirties or forties? This isn't a suspension of disbelief, this requires the reader to think that anything is possible and that there are no limits. There has to be limits in fantasy, otherwise it becomes a parody.
What love story?
The synopsis says there is a love story in this novel. I say what love story? You mean the insta-love story that doesn't feel earned?
There is no real love story in this book. I don't know why the movie is centering on the part of this book that only takes up less than thirty five percent of the whole novel (thirty at the beginning and five percent at the TAIL END of the book).
Peter Lake is a burglar and a mechanic. A super genius mechanic who falls "in love" with Beverly Penn, an eighteen year old heiress of the Penn newspaper legacy and young woman diagnosed with Tuberculosis.
The "love" is so fast, so much insta-love that it makes me sick. I understand Beverly has TB and we know she has not much time. However, the first thing she wants is to have sex with Peter Lake. They do, and Peter hatches a plan to marry her for her money. A gold digger? I'm sorry this isn't what I would like to see. Then we find out that there love is true, and honest. Blah, blah, blah. It's much too quick! There's no development. We are supposed to believe this? Love comes with time. This is lust and teenage hormones. This is not the fairy tale love story the movie trailers are depicting.
Beverly is not an admirable heroine. She is whiny, and when she isn't whiny she can see lights that no one understands. She can confused physicists by the equations she writes in notebooks about how she can hear and see the stars and the light. How she can hear its music. Beverly is a seer of sorts, but Helprin doesn't come out and say this at all. Then she can protect Peter Lake with her love after?
Plot
This novel at seven hundred and seventy eight pages should have a plot, right?
Nope. It does not.
It might consider itself having a plot if the events made any sense, and if the events had a reason for existing.
Why was there a battle at the Lake of the Coheerees at the near end of the novel? If there was shouldn't there been points that lead up to this eventual battle between the citizens of the lake and the Short Tails?
How in the world did three characters, a priest, a friend of Peter Lake's, and a third associate not die either? They had a job? A job to build a bridge? The bridge that brought the light, but ended up failing?
All I can gather is that this novel wants to play with in tribute to the early 1900's era of New York City. A mythical New York City that does not exist, and to plunge onwards to the year 2000. The time frame of 100 years. That things will change, new eras will rise and the closing of old eras will always be hard to recover from.
I think the author was admirable in what he wants to cover, but sadly from a plot perspective he fails to keep a coherent story together. He jumps around way too much without keeping his audience in the know.
When you jump timelines you need to be clear to the readers as to when events are occurring. In the beginning, this is not an issue but after the halfway point it becomes an issue. There are times I read when I wasn't sure if it was the early 1900's, the mid 1980's, and only when the author mentioned that it was two weeks before 2000 did I know what time period I was in.
The plot did not help the characters either, or their stories. The novel wanted to tackle so many things that it left out characters who are fully developed. There are so many characters in this novel that once you start to even care about a certain character, or two, then there are other characters that are introduced. Some come back into the story and earn their keep, others I'm still not understanding their whole part in this novel.
The author thinks he is clever in writing this story, and the ending by far is the most infuriating. It's a cop-out classic:
Themes and symbols
When I first was interested in reading this book it's when I found out after I saw the movie trailer it was a book. There was a picture I found of Peter Lake and Pearly Soames on horses.
(Sorry for the monochrome, but I couldn't find the colored one).
This was an awesome image. Pearly Soames on the black horse and Peter Lake on the white horse, Alhansor. Of course, this isn't in the novel. Pearly Soames if he is mentioned riding a horse is on a speckled grey horse. Not that symbolic of his demonic nature, which you only see in the last five percent of the book.
One would think with such a contrast that the themes of good and evil, and light and dark would be apparent right?
Somewhat. Though, it's hard to know with all the varying storylines that don't add up at the end. By the very end there is the black and white symbolism with the white horse Alhansor, but at the end of the day it isn't throughout the entire novel.
The other themes and symbols of love and time are there, but again with the series of events are not fully expanded on (nor believable).
The writing itself
Mark Helprin can write. Oh can he. Then again, that's probably the strongest part of this novel. He can write great sentences. He has a knack for descriptions, and can write some great scenes.
HOWEVER
He goes overboard. There are times he just goes on and on (and on) about certain things. Winter, billiards, restaurants, sledding, lights, the city of New York, and other places. At first, it was fine. After awhile, it gets tiring and bogged down. Descriptions should enhance a story, but not fill it to the brim and make everything else come second.
You see I'm in the camp of readers who does enjoy great writing, BUT it's not the END ALL and BE ALL OF BOOKS. You see a writer needs to have a connection with their material through the concept they are trying to write about through their plot, characters, themes, symbolism, and diction. All need to be working together, and some are going to be stronger than the other. However, in this novel the only thing it has going for it is the prose. It's beautiful, I won't deny it. However, it's a smoke and mirror effect. Writers can please the mind with great sentences, but readers like me want to see more than just pretty poetic terms and descriptions.
I want characters that come alive. I want themes and messages that will stick with me. I want to think about this novel long after I read it, and I am left frustrated.
There are so many wonderful ideas that this book has, but it FAILS to live up to its fullest potential. The writer was TOO AMBITIOUS and COULD NOT SUPPORT THE IDEAS. The writing might sway some to think this is a great work of literature, but literature is more than just the craft of writing. It needs to give me something to chew on, and this book fails to do so. It's incoherent, has poor characterization, too much time swapping without reason, and events that make little to no sense. There are no rules, when there should be a few.
This is probably by far the worst book I've read this year because it is so disappointing. It could have been great, but now I can see why the movie isn't doing well. It's not the acting, but the base material isn't strong enough to make a good script. What did the director see in this, since he changed so much to make it a love story instead? All I see is wasted potential, and an author who thinks he is extremely clever with all the philosophical ramblings he has in this novel. I'm sorry, that isn't enough for me.
This is the first book of 2014 I have read that I've been sorely disappointed by.
Synopsis:
Though he thinks the house is empty, the daughter of the house is home. Thus begins the love between Peter Lake, a middle-aged Irish burglar, and Beverly Penn, a young girl, who is dying.
Peter Lake, a simple, uneducated man, because of a love that, at first he does not fully understand, is driven to stop time and bring back the dead. His great struggle, in a city ever alight with its own energy and besieged by unprecedented winters, is one of the most beautiful and extraordinary stories of American literature.
WHAT A LIE OF A SYNOPSIS!
What is this story really about you may ask?
It's about overcoming the old and looking into the new and a mythical New York City where anything magical can happen. Where there are no rules, nothing makes sense, winters seem to be the only season that occurs, where horses can fly, people can time travel, people can see lights that nobody else can see, see the future, bring back the dead, and where true love conquers all.
This isn't magical realism, this is pure fantasy. There's no denying it. Magical realism you don't suspend your disbelief even when there are fantastical elements. It's integrated in a way that it doesn't even make you think that what's happening isn't possible. This is past magical realism into total fantasy.
A fantasy that makes no sense.
I tend to have a high tolerance for suspension of disbelief, but believe me even die hard fantasy lovers will be scratching their heads if they read this novel.
I don't normally care about rules, and sometimes there doesn't need to be. However, how can characters who did not have a magical horse time travel and live longer than they should? How can characters who are a hundred years old drive a sled and go up and down the stairs like they are in their thirties or forties? This isn't a suspension of disbelief, this requires the reader to think that anything is possible and that there are no limits. There has to be limits in fantasy, otherwise it becomes a parody.
What love story?
The synopsis says there is a love story in this novel. I say what love story? You mean the insta-love story that doesn't feel earned?
There is no real love story in this book. I don't know why the movie is centering on the part of this book that only takes up less than thirty five percent of the whole novel (thirty at the beginning and five percent at the TAIL END of the book).
Peter Lake is a burglar and a mechanic. A super genius mechanic who falls "in love" with Beverly Penn, an eighteen year old heiress of the Penn newspaper legacy and young woman diagnosed with Tuberculosis.
The "love" is so fast, so much insta-love that it makes me sick. I understand Beverly has TB and we know she has not much time. However, the first thing she wants is to have sex with Peter Lake. They do, and Peter hatches a plan to marry her for her money. A gold digger? I'm sorry this isn't what I would like to see. Then we find out that there love is true, and honest. Blah, blah, blah. It's much too quick! There's no development. We are supposed to believe this? Love comes with time. This is lust and teenage hormones. This is not the fairy tale love story the movie trailers are depicting.
Beverly is not an admirable heroine. She is whiny, and when she isn't whiny she can see lights that no one understands. She can confused physicists by the equations she writes in notebooks about how she can hear and see the stars and the light. How she can hear its music. Beverly is a seer of sorts, but Helprin doesn't come out and say this at all. Then she can protect Peter Lake with her love after
Spoiler
she diesPlot
This novel at seven hundred and seventy eight pages should have a plot, right?
Nope. It does not.
It might consider itself having a plot if the events made any sense, and if the events had a reason for existing.
Why was there a battle at the Lake of the Coheerees at the near end of the novel? If there was shouldn't there been points that lead up to this eventual battle between the citizens of the lake and the Short Tails?
How in the world did three characters, a priest, a friend of Peter Lake's, and a third associate not die either? They had a job? A job to build a bridge? The bridge that brought the light, but ended up failing?
All I can gather is that this novel wants to play with in tribute to the early 1900's era of New York City. A mythical New York City that does not exist, and to plunge onwards to the year 2000. The time frame of 100 years. That things will change, new eras will rise and the closing of old eras will always be hard to recover from.
I think the author was admirable in what he wants to cover, but sadly from a plot perspective he fails to keep a coherent story together. He jumps around way too much without keeping his audience in the know.
When you jump timelines you need to be clear to the readers as to when events are occurring. In the beginning, this is not an issue but after the halfway point it becomes an issue. There are times I read when I wasn't sure if it was the early 1900's, the mid 1980's, and only when the author mentioned that it was two weeks before 2000 did I know what time period I was in.
The plot did not help the characters either, or their stories. The novel wanted to tackle so many things that it left out characters who are fully developed. There are so many characters in this novel that once you start to even care about a certain character, or two, then there are other characters that are introduced. Some come back into the story and earn their keep, others I'm still not understanding their whole part in this novel.
The author thinks he is clever in writing this story, and the ending by far is the most infuriating. It's a cop-out classic:
Spoiler
by not letting you know what happened to Peter Lake, to let you decide as a reader. Oh please! His story isn't that compelling that we even want to know if he lived or died. He should die if you ask me, and did. He was old. Althansor went back to heaven, because he symbolized an angel. Pearly Soames should have died too, but he didn't. For the love of all that is right in the world, the ending made no sense as to the whole plot of the novel!Themes and symbols
When I first was interested in reading this book it's when I found out after I saw the movie trailer it was a book. There was a picture I found of Peter Lake and Pearly Soames on horses.
(Sorry for the monochrome, but I couldn't find the colored one).
This was an awesome image. Pearly Soames on the black horse and Peter Lake on the white horse, Alhansor. Of course, this isn't in the novel. Pearly Soames if he is mentioned riding a horse is on a speckled grey horse. Not that symbolic of his demonic nature, which you only see in the last five percent of the book.
One would think with such a contrast that the themes of good and evil, and light and dark would be apparent right?
Somewhat. Though, it's hard to know with all the varying storylines that don't add up at the end. By the very end there is the black and white symbolism with the white horse Alhansor, but at the end of the day it isn't throughout the entire novel.
The other themes and symbols of love and time are there, but again with the series of events are not fully expanded on (nor believable).
The writing itself
Mark Helprin can write. Oh can he. Then again, that's probably the strongest part of this novel. He can write great sentences. He has a knack for descriptions, and can write some great scenes.
HOWEVER
He goes overboard. There are times he just goes on and on (and on) about certain things. Winter, billiards, restaurants, sledding, lights, the city of New York, and other places. At first, it was fine. After awhile, it gets tiring and bogged down. Descriptions should enhance a story, but not fill it to the brim and make everything else come second.
You see I'm in the camp of readers who does enjoy great writing, BUT it's not the END ALL and BE ALL OF BOOKS. You see a writer needs to have a connection with their material through the concept they are trying to write about through their plot, characters, themes, symbolism, and diction. All need to be working together, and some are going to be stronger than the other. However, in this novel the only thing it has going for it is the prose. It's beautiful, I won't deny it. However, it's a smoke and mirror effect. Writers can please the mind with great sentences, but readers like me want to see more than just pretty poetic terms and descriptions.
I want characters that come alive. I want themes and messages that will stick with me. I want to think about this novel long after I read it, and I am left frustrated.
There are so many wonderful ideas that this book has, but it FAILS to live up to its fullest potential. The writer was TOO AMBITIOUS and COULD NOT SUPPORT THE IDEAS. The writing might sway some to think this is a great work of literature, but literature is more than just the craft of writing. It needs to give me something to chew on, and this book fails to do so. It's incoherent, has poor characterization, too much time swapping without reason, and events that make little to no sense. There are no rules, when there should be a few.
This is probably by far the worst book I've read this year because it is so disappointing. It could have been great, but now I can see why the movie isn't doing well. It's not the acting, but the base material isn't strong enough to make a good script. What did the director see in this, since he changed so much to make it a love story instead? All I see is wasted potential, and an author who thinks he is extremely clever with all the philosophical ramblings he has in this novel. I'm sorry, that isn't enough for me.