You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
dantewuff95 's review for:
A Children's Bible
by Lydia Millet
This book was my attempt at reading a more modern, adult work of fiction. I normally stick with old sci-if classics or kids books. However, this book requires you to somewhat think with a child’s mindset to really take in what’s going on.
The children of washed up intellectuals on vacation harbor resentment for their parents. They are neglectful, constantly drinking and when disaster strikes never step up to the task. The kids, but especially Eve’s young brother Jack, are the ones with common sense. They defy their parents and while the older kids drink and have sex, it was “less repugnant” than their parents acts. These parents despite all being graduates with good careers are aimless. The only exception to this are some adults who are homeless “angels”, a groundskeeper named Burl, and the owner of a property who saves them from some vagabonds.
The kids actually strive throughout the book to live. They “fight” for their lives and the lives of others, unlike their cowardly parents. Returning to Jack, this child is one of the youngest but is probably the most important character in the book. It isn’t fair to say he is competent; he isn’t experienced enough for that. But his innocence brings important perspectives to the book. He is the keeper of the Children’s Bible the book is named for and he uses it to make guide his decision to try to save animals from the disaster that occurs in the book like Noah did. With this vision for a time when the storms brought on by global warming, he sets the important distinction between most adults and children in the book have: hope.
Now, would this book be something I would say is up to its acclaim? Somewhat. The allegory isn’t hamfisted at all but I think it is slipped in a way that feels a bit inorganic. Yes, hope is something that brings a nice closing to the book but it feels somewhat slapped on the ending to make it feel less bleak. The children are abandoned by their parents in the end and the few adults that can help them exit the story hurriedly. I was especially confused with the owner of the cottage and her role. There is a scene where she comes out the sky from a helicopter like a real angel and apparently repairs the youngest vagabond’s leg. It seems to be implied that this was a sort of miracle but it never is elaborated on. So it just frustrated me rather than put things into perspective. The owner also references vague “rules” being broken by the vagabonds but there is no explanation as to how she knew they were at her home.
So, after much pondering, I would say this is a good book, but you aren’t missing anything by passing it up.
The children of washed up intellectuals on vacation harbor resentment for their parents. They are neglectful, constantly drinking and when disaster strikes never step up to the task. The kids, but especially Eve’s young brother Jack, are the ones with common sense. They defy their parents and while the older kids drink and have sex, it was “less repugnant” than their parents acts. These parents despite all being graduates with good careers are aimless. The only exception to this are some adults who are homeless “angels”, a groundskeeper named Burl, and the owner of a property who saves them from some vagabonds.
The kids actually strive throughout the book to live. They “fight” for their lives and the lives of others, unlike their cowardly parents. Returning to Jack, this child is one of the youngest but is probably the most important character in the book. It isn’t fair to say he is competent; he isn’t experienced enough for that. But his innocence brings important perspectives to the book. He is the keeper of the Children’s Bible the book is named for and he uses it to make guide his decision to try to save animals from the disaster that occurs in the book like Noah did. With this vision for a time when the storms brought on by global warming, he sets the important distinction between most adults and children in the book have: hope.
Now, would this book be something I would say is up to its acclaim? Somewhat. The allegory isn’t hamfisted at all but I think it is slipped in a way that feels a bit inorganic. Yes, hope is something that brings a nice closing to the book but it feels somewhat slapped on the ending to make it feel less bleak. The children are abandoned by their parents in the end and the few adults that can help them exit the story hurriedly. I was especially confused with the owner of the cottage and her role. There is a scene where she comes out the sky from a helicopter like a real angel and apparently repairs the youngest vagabond’s leg. It seems to be implied that this was a sort of miracle but it never is elaborated on. So it just frustrated me rather than put things into perspective. The owner also references vague “rules” being broken by the vagabonds but there is no explanation as to how she knew they were at her home.
So, after much pondering, I would say this is a good book, but you aren’t missing anything by passing it up.