You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
skaplouton 's review for:
Lever de soleil sur la moisson
by Suzanne Collins
I first gave it 4 stars on the emotions at 2 AM but instantly regretted it. It wasn’t a great book, not when the author has written way better.
Do I believe that denouncing propaganda is a great theme that should be more present? Yes. Was it well done? No and I think that is mainly because the main character/narrator was never victim of it. I have to say that I saw a theory, when the book was announced, that it was going to be with the point of view of Plutarch and how he got against the Capitol. This would have been a better approach.
It didn’t expand the lore as much as The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes: we got most of the book in Catching Fire. I thought that what was added wasn’t really necessary to learn and felt unexplained. The games felt super long and the big traumatic events felt rushed and down played. For example, we knew from Catching Fire that some characters would die from the Capitol and we knew from the previous books (and even the first half of this book) that the Capitol like creative torture, like brainwashing. So why did the last deaths feel so soft?
Also, we all knew that Haymitch was going to be alcoholic because of those events. Why didn’t we see the downfall?
I didn’t read this book in its original language, so my next comment touches the French translation: it was really poorly written. The tones weren’t making sense with the narrator, inconstant.
Edit: According to some other comments that I read, the writing isn’t the translator’s fault…
Do I believe that denouncing propaganda is a great theme that should be more present? Yes. Was it well done? No and I think that is mainly because the main character/narrator was never victim of it. I have to say that I saw a theory, when the book was announced, that it was going to be with the point of view of Plutarch and how he got against the Capitol. This would have been a better approach.
It didn’t expand the lore as much as The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes: we got most of the book in Catching Fire. I thought that what was added wasn’t really necessary to learn and felt unexplained. The games felt super long and the big traumatic events felt rushed and down played. For example, we knew from Catching Fire that some characters would die from the Capitol and we knew from the previous books (and even the first half of this book) that the Capitol like creative torture, like brainwashing. So why did the last deaths feel so soft?
Also, we all knew that Haymitch was going to be alcoholic because of those events. Why didn’t we see the downfall?
I didn’t read this book in its original language, so my next comment touches the French translation: it was really poorly written. The tones weren’t making sense with the narrator, inconstant.
Edit: According to some other comments that I read, the writing isn’t the translator’s fault…