Take a photo of a barcode or cover
gracefool 's review for:
The Cat's Table
by Michael Ondaatje
Dreadful.
If you are someone who enjoys an actual coherent story, do not even insult yourself by picking up this book even if it were encased in gold as an incentive.
I had to read this novel for my literature class, and as much as I despise reading the other 600-page long Victorian classics revolving around class and marriage, through weekly publishments (meaning many of the plotlines were recycled so the author could reach their due date), this was by far a more tedious and lifeless read in comparison.
I entered this story believing it would commentate largely on social hierarchies through a child's innocent perspective. Instead, I was left confused and frustrated as to what the purpose of this novel was. Numerous characters were introduced who were apparently supposed to be strange and enamoring, but with every chapter I struggled to remember who was who outside of the trio (Michael, Ramadhin and Cassius) and Emily. The last few chapters I skimmed through, as I simply could not sustain any interest in a word I was reading.
A main fault lies with Michael, who is a passive protagonist. Why such literary sins still exist? Characters are manipulating him to do things, and even during the novel's climax (which I thought the boys' would have a role in causing/preventing), he is a bystander.
During and after the main event, apparently things are revealed about certain characters, something I only realised when my class discussed it, as my memory of characters was limited to: pigeon lady, the crushing botanist, the perverted storyteller and something about circus people.
If you are thinking of reading this book out of choice, don't. If you have to, there's limited (free and paid) resources that analyse and summarise this book for you. My sincerest apologies.
If you are someone who enjoys an actual coherent story, do not even insult yourself by picking up this book even if it were encased in gold as an incentive.
I had to read this novel for my literature class, and as much as I despise reading the other 600-page long Victorian classics revolving around class and marriage, through weekly publishments (meaning many of the plotlines were recycled so the author could reach their due date), this was by far a more tedious and lifeless read in comparison.
I entered this story believing it would commentate largely on social hierarchies through a child's innocent perspective. Instead, I was left confused and frustrated as to what the purpose of this novel was. Numerous characters were introduced who were apparently supposed to be strange and enamoring, but with every chapter I struggled to remember who was who outside of the trio (Michael, Ramadhin and Cassius) and Emily. The last few chapters I skimmed through, as I simply could not sustain any interest in a word I was reading.
A main fault lies with Michael, who is a passive protagonist. Why such literary sins still exist? Characters are manipulating him to do things, and even during the novel's climax (which I thought the boys' would have a role in causing/preventing), he is a bystander.
During and after the main event, apparently things are revealed about certain characters, something I only realised when my class discussed it, as my memory of characters was limited to: pigeon lady, the crushing botanist, the perverted storyteller and something about circus people.
If you are thinking of reading this book out of choice, don't. If you have to, there's limited (free and paid) resources that analyse and summarise this book for you. My sincerest apologies.