You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
kaitastisch 's review for:
The Plot Against America
by Philip Roth
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
I have read this book twice in the last few weeks, as I am writing a paper about it. I do think is a great book, esp. in the aspect of attacking this sense of superioty the United States tend to have. Similary as in Lewis "It can't happen here" about facism in America, it plays with the idea of "what if it did? What if the global superpower, exceptional in all categories, espically democracy, would become an autocratic, Isolationist state, with an anti-semetic President leading it."
I have read other reviews to this book, complaning about the long explanatory parts of the book or the many side characters, but I personally believe this were necessary for the story. One must not forget, this is not only an Alternative History, it's also written as an autobiography, so to archive what the book tries to archive, these things are important.
What I also think makes this book worthy to talk about is the depection of facism. Yes, there is alot a facist government can do, but it starts with the people. It starts with making facist hate socially acceptable again. Electing Lindbergh into the White House, espcially after the Den Moines speech, makes it acceptable for people to call Herman Roth "loudmouth jew" and accusing him of steeling, which leads to boycotts and riots in the end. In Germany, many boycots started before 1933, not because there was an order "from above", but out of the free will of the people.
I just wished the narrative would have stayed more consistend, in the sense of the play between Roths narrating I and experiencing I. What I mean with that is that sometimes, there are huge blogs of narrating I, how he explains the situation but only one the macro level (see Winchell riots). I think including more micro level narrating inbetween the blogs would have made it more engaging.
I do have to say, the end confused me a bit, but just as society in the novel we will also never know what exactly happened to Lindbergh, making the story more seem like a real autobiography.
Nevertheless, really interesting read.
I have read other reviews to this book, complaning about the long explanatory parts of the book or the many side characters, but I personally believe this were necessary for the story. One must not forget, this is not only an Alternative History, it's also written as an autobiography, so to archive what the book tries to archive, these things are important.
What I also think makes this book worthy to talk about is the depection of facism. Yes, there is alot a facist government can do, but it starts with the people. It starts with making facist hate socially acceptable again. Electing Lindbergh into the White House, espcially after the Den Moines speech, makes it acceptable for people to call Herman Roth "loudmouth jew" and accusing him of steeling, which leads to boycotts and riots in the end. In Germany, many boycots started before 1933, not because there was an order "from above", but out of the free will of the people.
I just wished the narrative would have stayed more consistend, in the sense of the play between Roths narrating I and experiencing I. What I mean with that is that sometimes, there are huge blogs of narrating I, how he explains the situation but only one the macro level (see Winchell riots). I think including more micro level narrating inbetween the blogs would have made it more engaging.
I do have to say, the end confused me a bit, but just as society in the novel
Nevertheless, really interesting read.