Take a photo of a barcode or cover
__ceecee__'s Reviews (414)
Wow. A lot of people hated this book. The first page of the reviews alone is flooded with 1-stars. Like, whaaat? I feel have to defend this.
*Commence*
Granted, I read this when I was 15 or so. My teenage self probably would've rated this 5.1 stars. I've probably read it 5 times in my life. One of my best friends fell in love with it like I did, and when she lost her copy of this book, I gave her mine because I love her that much, and I figured I would find another copy in Booksale anyway.(I did, but I had no wish to spend my money on it when the time came.)Actually, I lost the first copy I had and I was really bummed about that. I then commenced to hunt for another copy (Which is actually hard to find), which I eventually found, and it is this copy I gave to my friend. Nice little story doncha think? ;)
Anyway, my other friends liked it, too. Why, you might ask?
I believe in soulmates. Though my definition of soulmates changes through the years, I believe Robert and Francesca were soulmates. Other people can't get past the fact that Francesca had an affair, when she was 40 no less. I'm not saying I condone infidelity. It's just I can place myself in Francesca's shoes. She's at a point in her life where she stops and thinks, How has my life come to this? This wasn't what she wanted. I think of the dreams I have and imagine landing in life where Francesca landed. I would feel really frustrated.
Let me quote Elizabeth Gilbert (Eat, Pray, Love) on soulmates, which I think fits R and F perfectly:
There's just something darn romantic about it. This book is barely 200 pages long, and yet it says so much. They spend 4 days together, and they're certain of their love for one another.
Imagine having that kind of certainty. Imagine.
Okay, so it's insta-love. The kind where they're drawn to each other without any explanation. But there's something so darn convincing about it.
And it's so damn melancholic. Robert James Waller wants to make you sad. But it's a good sad. No b.s. What's life without a few good cries? Waller's writing reminds of the beauty of sadness.
I gave this 4 stars because it's been a long time since I read this book. I probably exhausted myself from rereading it so much, much like you could get tired of listening to a song you play a thousand times a day. Maybe that's why I couldn't buy the book when I saw it at Booksale. I wasn't ready to read it again. I only remembered this now, despite it being one of my teen faves. Sheesh.
And yet, reading the excerpts from this novella, I'm beginning to love it again. Maybe it's time to reread it and re-evaluate it. There are books I felt were destined for me to come across. Why do some books catch your eye, and others don't? The Bridges of Madison County is one of those books, and it holds a special place in my heart.
*Commence*
Granted, I read this when I was 15 or so. My teenage self probably would've rated this 5.1 stars. I've probably read it 5 times in my life. One of my best friends fell in love with it like I did, and when she lost her copy of this book, I gave her mine because I love her that much, and I figured I would find another copy in Booksale anyway.(I did, but I had no wish to spend my money on it when the time came.)Actually, I lost the first copy I had and I was really bummed about that. I then commenced to hunt for another copy (Which is actually hard to find), which I eventually found, and it is this copy I gave to my friend. Nice little story doncha think? ;)
Anyway, my other friends liked it, too. Why, you might ask?
I believe in soulmates. Though my definition of soulmates changes through the years, I believe Robert and Francesca were soulmates. Other people can't get past the fact that Francesca had an affair, when she was 40 no less. I'm not saying I condone infidelity. It's just I can place myself in Francesca's shoes. She's at a point in her life where she stops and thinks, How has my life come to this? This wasn't what she wanted. I think of the dreams I have and imagine landing in life where Francesca landed. I would feel really frustrated.
Let me quote Elizabeth Gilbert (Eat, Pray, Love) on soulmates, which I think fits R and F perfectly:
People think a soul mate is your perfect fit, and that's what everyone wants. But a true soul mate is a mirror, the person who shows you everything that is holding you back, the person who brings you to your own attention so you can change your life.
A true soul mate is probably the most important person you'll ever meet, because they tear down your walls and smack you awake. But to live with a soul mate forever? Nah. Too painful. Soul mates, they come into your life just to reveal another layer of yourself to you, and then leave.
There's just something darn romantic about it. This book is barely 200 pages long, and yet it says so much. They spend 4 days together, and they're certain of their love for one another.
In a universe of ambiguity, this kind of certainty comes only once, and never again, no matter how many lifetimes you live.
Imagine having that kind of certainty. Imagine.
Okay, so it's insta-love. The kind where they're drawn to each other without any explanation. But there's something so darn convincing about it.
And it's so damn melancholic. Robert James Waller wants to make you sad. But it's a good sad. No b.s. What's life without a few good cries? Waller's writing reminds of the beauty of sadness.
I gave this 4 stars because it's been a long time since I read this book. I probably exhausted myself from rereading it so much, much like you could get tired of listening to a song you play a thousand times a day. Maybe that's why I couldn't buy the book when I saw it at Booksale. I wasn't ready to read it again. I only remembered this now, despite it being one of my teen faves. Sheesh.
And yet, reading the excerpts from this novella, I'm beginning to love it again. Maybe it's time to reread it and re-evaluate it. There are books I felt were destined for me to come across. Why do some books catch your eye, and others don't? The Bridges of Madison County is one of those books, and it holds a special place in my heart.
This book was highly recommended to me by my friend. I really like her and she's as weird as I am and I love her book recs. Also, a lot of people, including my GR friends love this book. And then you look at me and ... Uh-oh.
I guess this book was just meh for me because I didn't like Holden. He complained and criticized a lot, but didn't actually do anything. I like flawed characters, but there should at least be a redeeming quality. I didn't see it. Yes, I really liked his Catcher-in-the-Rye speech, but that's it. After that the book ends just the same way as it began. As one other reviewer pointed out, "it didn't have a beginning, middle or end". It's like it was just one long diatribe of a whiny kid. *Queue BetterBookTitles.com *
Maybe I missed something? But until I found out what that is, this book remains meh, a book everyone loved but I didn't.
Gomenasai
I guess this book was just meh for me because I didn't like Holden. He complained and criticized a lot, but didn't actually do anything. I like flawed characters, but there should at least be a redeeming quality. I didn't see it. Yes, I really liked his Catcher-in-the-Rye speech, but that's it. After that the book ends just the same way as it began. As one other reviewer pointed out, "it didn't have a beginning, middle or end". It's like it was just one long diatribe of a whiny kid. *Queue BetterBookTitles.com *
Maybe I missed something? But until I found out what that is, this book remains meh, a book everyone loved but I didn't.
Gomenasai
It must be a trend in me, but I really love books that take me by surprise.
Take, The Pride of the Peacock. I have never heard of Victoria Holt before. I was 11, and desperate to read a book. So I found this book, and reading the synopsis, I was like, love story? *shrug* Okay, I'll read it.
I didn't even know I liked dark, somehow Gothic settings, which is what this book appeared to my eleven year old mind. It has suicide, dark secrets, mysterious deaths, and a girl falling for a man old enough to be her grandfather (!) What compelled me to read it was the mystery behind the opal ring. I had a heck of a time learning about opals, and in a way, I related to Jessica.
But what I really liked about this book was how much I enjoyed the love story. Jessica is set up by the man she loves to marry his son, and then is whisked away to Australia, the land of opals. Jessica is a headstrong girl, but feels out of place in this land, and what makes it worse is the air of hostility that seems to come from her strange husband. And yet, Jessica begins to fall for this man. We later find out that this aloof man is a just and well-respected boss of the opal mine, and, to my shock - and pleasure - was actually in love with the heroine all along!
I later found out about the romance suspense genre, which turned out to be not my cup of tea. I may not want to read more romance suspense, but The Pride of the Peacock will be one of my favorites.
Take, The Pride of the Peacock. I have never heard of Victoria Holt before. I was 11, and desperate to read a book. So I found this book, and reading the synopsis, I was like, love story? *shrug* Okay, I'll read it.
I didn't even know I liked dark, somehow Gothic settings, which is what this book appeared to my eleven year old mind. It has suicide, dark secrets, mysterious deaths, and a girl falling for a man old enough to be her grandfather (!) What compelled me to read it was the mystery behind the opal ring. I had a heck of a time learning about opals, and in a way, I related to Jessica.
But what I really liked about this book was how much I enjoyed the love story. Jessica is set up by the man she loves to marry his son, and then is whisked away to Australia, the land of opals. Jessica is a headstrong girl, but feels out of place in this land, and what makes it worse is the air of hostility that seems to come from her strange husband. And yet, Jessica begins to fall for this man. We later find out that this aloof man is a just and well-respected boss of the opal mine, and, to my shock - and pleasure - was actually in love with the heroine all along!
I later found out about the romance suspense genre, which turned out to be not my cup of tea. I may not want to read more romance suspense, but The Pride of the Peacock will be one of my favorites.
Sherry and Hero are idiots (Sherry most especially!), but I love them. Also, Sherry is the hero, and Hero is the heroine. Just a nice little fact I like to throw in there.
Sherry, or rather - Anthony Verelst, Lord Sheringham - is a fun-loving, selfish but good-natured young man, who can't wait to get his inheritance. Only thing is, he has to marry to get it. That premise sounds ridiculous even to me, now that I've read what I've written. But hear Georgette Heyer out: Marriage will mostly likely curb Sherry of his overindulgence. Of course, all Sherry cares about is to get control of his own inheritance, so, in a fit of pique, vows to marry the first woman he sees.
As luck would have it, he sees Hero Wantage, the girl who has adored him all her life since she was eight. In true Heyer fashion, we are taken into a romp through this couple and their friends' ridiculous escapades.
I love how Georgette Heyer creates her characters. Just look at Sherry, who is no dark and brooding man, but a regular young buck, a reveler and very self-indulgent. He is just like any other young man you could have met had you lived in the Regency era. And only Heyer could have made a hero out of that.
Sherry, or rather - Anthony Verelst, Lord Sheringham - is a fun-loving, selfish but good-natured young man, who can't wait to get his inheritance. Only thing is, he has to marry to get it. That premise sounds ridiculous even to me, now that I've read what I've written. But hear Georgette Heyer out: Marriage will mostly likely curb Sherry of his overindulgence. Of course, all Sherry cares about is to get control of his own inheritance, so, in a fit of pique, vows to marry the first woman he sees.
As luck would have it, he sees Hero Wantage, the girl who has adored him all her life since she was eight. In true Heyer fashion, we are taken into a romp through this couple and their friends' ridiculous escapades.
I love how Georgette Heyer creates her characters. Just look at Sherry, who is no dark and brooding man, but a regular young buck, a reveler and very self-indulgent. He is just like any other young man you could have met had you lived in the Regency era. And only Heyer could have made a hero out of that.
*3.75 stars
This book has been sitting on my shelf for 10 years, the poor thing. I finally decided to read it because I read [b:Graceling|3236307|Graceling (Graceling Realm, #1)|Kristin Cashore|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1331548394s/3236307.jpg|3270810], and all the while I was thinking, if I'm going to read a book about strong women in a medieval fantasy, I might as well read [b:The Ladies of Mandrigyn|1022658|The Ladies of Mandrigyn (Sun Wolf and Starhawk, #1)|Barbara Hambly|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1180304481s/1022658.jpg|170307]
You know when you read "The Ladies of Mandrigyn" you immediately think of warrior women, right? I thought it would focus on the women battling the villain's armies and defeating the Evil Wizard himself. But this book unraveled in ways I did not expect at all. For one thing, I didn't expect it to have such a romantic sub-plot.
Let's start from the beginning. Sun Wolf and StarHawk are the main characters in this story, and they are not the ladies of Mandrigyn. Sun Wolf is a mercenary and Starhawk is his second-in-command, who happens to be a woman. Sun Wolf is coerced (read: poisoned and withheld from its antidote) into teaching the ladies of Mandrigyn to fight, so that they could free their city from the rule of Altiokis, "deathless evil wizard". You see, all the men of Mandrigyn who were able to fight were enslaved by Altiokis, after their failure to protect the city. So, it's up to the women to run Mandrigyn and free the men. It is in this period that they find that they are very capable, and not fragile dolls as their men treated them. Also, there's Sun Wolf whose motto is "Don't fall in love and don't mess with magic" with powers he is not aware of. He takes in Starhawk, ex-nun-turned-mercenary, who tracks Sun Wolf after noticing he was missing, and realizes in the middle of the story that she was in love with Sun Wolf all along. Hence, romantic sub-plot!
I loved how Barbara Hambly portrayed women as "more than you think they are". I loved how they formed relationships despite social stratification. Once I got over the romantic sub-plot (which was actually good but kind of distracting), I enjoyed the humor in it, as well as the action, the supernatural elements,and of course, the characters. At least there was no agenda-pushing. Just a simple illustration of women's strengths, and yes indeed, we women are badass.
This book has been sitting on my shelf for 10 years, the poor thing. I finally decided to read it because I read [b:Graceling|3236307|Graceling (Graceling Realm, #1)|Kristin Cashore|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1331548394s/3236307.jpg|3270810], and all the while I was thinking, if I'm going to read a book about strong women in a medieval fantasy, I might as well read [b:The Ladies of Mandrigyn|1022658|The Ladies of Mandrigyn (Sun Wolf and Starhawk, #1)|Barbara Hambly|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1180304481s/1022658.jpg|170307]
You know when you read "The Ladies of Mandrigyn" you immediately think of warrior women, right? I thought it would focus on the women battling the villain's armies and defeating the Evil Wizard himself. But this book unraveled in ways I did not expect at all. For one thing, I didn't expect it to have such a romantic sub-plot.
Let's start from the beginning. Sun Wolf and StarHawk are the main characters in this story, and they are not the ladies of Mandrigyn. Sun Wolf is a mercenary and Starhawk is his second-in-command, who happens to be a woman. Sun Wolf is coerced (read: poisoned and withheld from its antidote) into teaching the ladies of Mandrigyn to fight, so that they could free their city from the rule of Altiokis, "deathless evil wizard". You see, all the men of Mandrigyn who were able to fight were enslaved by Altiokis, after their failure to protect the city. So, it's up to the women to run Mandrigyn and free the men. It is in this period that they find that they are very capable, and not fragile dolls as their men treated them. Also, there's Sun Wolf whose motto is "Don't fall in love and don't mess with magic" with powers he is not aware of. He takes in Starhawk, ex-nun-turned-mercenary, who tracks Sun Wolf after noticing he was missing, and realizes in the middle of the story that she was in love with Sun Wolf all along. Hence, romantic sub-plot!
I loved how Barbara Hambly portrayed women as "more than you think they are". I loved how they formed relationships despite social stratification. Once I got over the romantic sub-plot (which was actually good but kind of distracting), I enjoyed the humor in it, as well as the action, the supernatural elements,and of course, the characters. At least there was no agenda-pushing. Just a simple illustration of women's strengths, and yes indeed, we women are badass.
* As a comparison to [b:Graceling|3236307|Graceling (Graceling Realm, #1)|Kristin Cashore|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1331548394s/3236307.jpg|3270810] (I can't help it!), which I gave 3.5 stars. I never even thought I'd give 3.75 stars to a book, and I'll be avoiding that in the near future.
This book...hmmm...while there are things in it that I commend, there are also things which kept me from loving it.
I love that Katsa is a strong-willed, some would say kick-ass, girl, who managed to organize the Council at the age of sixteen. I don't read many YA novels with a heroine like her, what with the Twilight trend and all. It's not just a novel about saving a kingdom, but about empowering women. Most of the star characters here are strong women. Katsa is...strong but not to a point where she is bitchy. She's a strong woman with a soft heart, deep inside. And her relationship with Po is one to envy. I love how Cashore tied up the story in one book. I loathe how everything has to be in series nowadays. Even though there are 2 sequels to this, they're not required reading. The writing style was...peculiar, and the way she named the lands and names were also odd (I would say, poorly chosen). "Katsa" is a word in my dialect which means a sack used to hold flour. But that's neither here nor there. The way the story moved forward was interesting enough to keep me reading for more.
It's a book that should not be overlooked.
Saying that, I formed some pretty strong opinions about the issues that were tackled in this book. I think they could spoil the story (or the reading of it) so I'm hiding it behind a spoiler tag.
You've been warned
Katsa = K = Katniss
Po = P = Peeta
Giddon = G = Gale
Who else noticed this? lolz
Since Katsa sounded so close to Katniss (I sometimes read Katsa as Katniss), I couldn't help it. I can't help comparing them. I'm sorry. My judgment (who-cares-about-your-judgment-Ceecee!) - I like Katniss better than Katsa, Po is a stronger hero than Peeta, and Giddon and Gale are the same sorry losers-in-love, the poor dears.
Not only does this novel show women empowerment, it also shows a different take on marriage. From what I gathered, Cashore did this on purpose, her agendas being pushed on me. Why was it so important to show Katsa's aversion to marriage???? It totally distracted me from enjoying the story.
It really got to me. I have very strong feelings on the way love is showed in this book. Why is Katsa so averse to marriage, even marrying Po? Katniss didn't want to marry and have children because she didn't want to submit her kids to the Hunger Games, and that's a totally understandable reason. While Katsa doesn't want to get married because she doesn't want to be constricted by the norms: she will play hostess to her husband and will eventually be required to sire an heir. But if that's all that's keeping her from committing herself to the person she loves...I think that it's a selfish reason.
Isn't it ironic how some hetero couples are averse to marriage, choosing instead to just be "partners", and then there's the whole Prop-8 thing where homo couples are fighting for their right to marry? I know a lot of couples who haven't married yet, despite having 2,3 children, and I respect that. But to me, marriage isn't just a norm that everyone has to follow. I would marry the person I love because that's how I show my commitment to him. And it's hard to commit, but if that means a little sacrifice - to work hard at a commitment(and I'm lazy at that!) - then I would gladly do it.
I understand the whole we-don't-want-to-get-married-but-we're-still-going-to-commit-to-each-other thing, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
And Po, sweet perfect Po. It's like Katsa subconsciously made up the guy she really wanted and needed, and then Po came into being. Po is everything Katsa needed: laughter, understanding, assertiveness in the face of Katsa's stubborness. These two are perfect for each other, so why don't I feel even a little giddy about them? I like reading love stories, okay, and I want to feel giddy!
I guess my problem is that Katsa, until the end of the book, still believes that to commit to Po would be to give up her freedom. I just don't see that. Love is all about giving and taking. I believe that love is thinking what's best for the other person, a sort of selflessness; at least, it's not self-centered. Po probably wants to marry Katsa, but because he respects Katsa's wishes, he gives in. God, Po, stop being so perfect. But does Katsa take the time to consider what Po might feel? Katsa will still do as she pleases. I understand that Katsa is only 18 at the time and time will tell if she will change, but with an ending as unsatisfying as that, it frustrates the hell out of me.
Like one reviewer says, if the roles were reversed, if Po was the one who said "I love you Katsa, but I don't want to marry you, I don't want to take away your freedom, nor will I give up mine", and Katsa agrees with it, I would say "Cut the b.s.!"
So overall, Graceling is good as a fantasy novel (world-building and such), but the execution and the feminist propaganda deterred my enjoyment of it.
I love that Katsa is a strong-willed, some would say kick-ass, girl, who managed to organize the Council at the age of sixteen. I don't read many YA novels with a heroine like her, what with the Twilight trend and all. It's not just a novel about saving a kingdom, but about empowering women. Most of the star characters here are strong women. Katsa is...strong but not to a point where she is bitchy. She's a strong woman with a soft heart, deep inside. And her relationship with Po is one to envy. I love how Cashore tied up the story in one book. I loathe how everything has to be in series nowadays. Even though there are 2 sequels to this, they're not required reading. The writing style was...peculiar, and the way she named the lands and names were also odd (I would say, poorly chosen). "Katsa" is a word in my dialect which means a sack used to hold flour. But that's neither here nor there. The way the story moved forward was interesting enough to keep me reading for more.
It's a book that should not be overlooked.
Saying that, I formed some pretty strong opinions about the issues that were tackled in this book. I think they could spoil the story (or the reading of it) so I'm hiding it behind a spoiler tag.
You've been warned
Spoiler
Katsa = K = Katniss
Po = P = Peeta
Giddon = G = Gale
Who else noticed this? lolz
Since Katsa sounded so close to Katniss (I sometimes read Katsa as Katniss), I couldn't help it. I can't help comparing them. I'm sorry. My judgment (who-cares-about-your-judgment-Ceecee!) - I like Katniss better than Katsa, Po is a stronger hero than Peeta, and Giddon and Gale are the same sorry losers-in-love, the poor dears.
Not only does this novel show women empowerment, it also shows a different take on marriage. From what I gathered, Cashore did this on purpose, her agendas being pushed on me. Why was it so important to show Katsa's aversion to marriage???? It totally distracted me from enjoying the story.
It really got to me. I have very strong feelings on the way love is showed in this book. Why is Katsa so averse to marriage, even marrying Po? Katniss didn't want to marry and have children because she didn't want to submit her kids to the Hunger Games, and that's a totally understandable reason. While Katsa doesn't want to get married because she doesn't want to be constricted by the norms: she will play hostess to her husband and will eventually be required to sire an heir. But if that's all that's keeping her from committing herself to the person she loves...I think that it's a selfish reason.
Isn't it ironic how some hetero couples are averse to marriage, choosing instead to just be "partners", and then there's the whole Prop-8 thing where homo couples are fighting for their right to marry? I know a lot of couples who haven't married yet, despite having 2,3 children, and I respect that. But to me, marriage isn't just a norm that everyone has to follow. I would marry the person I love because that's how I show my commitment to him. And it's hard to commit, but if that means a little sacrifice - to work hard at a commitment(and I'm lazy at that!) - then I would gladly do it.
I understand the whole we-don't-want-to-get-married-but-we're-still-going-to-commit-to-each-other thing, but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
And Po, sweet perfect Po. It's like Katsa subconsciously made up the guy she really wanted and needed, and then Po came into being. Po is everything Katsa needed: laughter, understanding, assertiveness in the face of Katsa's stubborness. These two are perfect for each other, so why don't I feel even a little giddy about them? I like reading love stories, okay, and I want to feel giddy!
I guess my problem is that Katsa, until the end of the book, still believes that to commit to Po would be to give up her freedom. I just don't see that. Love is all about giving and taking. I believe that love is thinking what's best for the other person, a sort of selflessness; at least, it's not self-centered. Po probably wants to marry Katsa, but because he respects Katsa's wishes, he gives in. God, Po, stop being so perfect. But does Katsa take the time to consider what Po might feel? Katsa will still do as she pleases. I understand that Katsa is only 18 at the time and time will tell if she will change, but with an ending as unsatisfying as that, it frustrates the hell out of me.
Spoiler
(I have been told that it doesn't get better, so, *keyboard smash*)Like one reviewer says, if the roles were reversed, if Po was the one who said "I love you Katsa, but I don't want to marry you, I don't want to take away your freedom, nor will I give up mine", and Katsa agrees with it, I would say "Cut the b.s.!"
So overall, Graceling is good as a fantasy novel (world-building and such), but the execution and the feminist propaganda deterred my enjoyment of it.
You can only read so much praise for a book before you're finally tempted to read it. I really wanted to like this book. Based on the numerous quotes and likes it got from Tumblr, it made me think I could relate to it, and eventually love it. Because, hey, I'm a wallflower too! I found it difficult to relate to other people in high school. I had a few but true friends.
Charlie should have been my spirit animal.
Maybe it's bad to expect to like the book. Maybe it's wrong to start a book with high standards. Maybe it's just me.
In any case, I found it be an "okay" book. I found the letter format not working for me. The number of times Charlie cried made me want to strangle him or slap him into consciousness. Look, I don't think it's bad for a person to cry. I think it's healthy. But there's just something about Charlie that was a bit too much.
Browsing through the quote gallery, I remember why I wanted to read it so much. There's so many quotable quotes. They looked so cool (though the number of times Charlie mentions "sad" and "infinite" had me pulling my hairs from sheer vexation). I didn't expect that if you mixed them altogether in the book, it wouldn't be as impressive as when they were just stand-alone quotes.
Overall, I couldn't find it realistic nor relatable, maybe because of the way Charlie wrote it. There were good moments (see added quotes) but in the end, it did not impress me.
Charlie should have been my spirit animal.
Maybe it's bad to expect to like the book. Maybe it's wrong to start a book with high standards. Maybe it's just me.
In any case, I found it be an "okay" book. I found the letter format not working for me. The number of times Charlie cried made me want to strangle him or slap him into consciousness. Look, I don't think it's bad for a person to cry. I think it's healthy. But there's just something about Charlie that was a bit too much.
Browsing through the quote gallery, I remember why I wanted to read it so much. There's so many quotable quotes. They looked so cool (though the number of times Charlie mentions "sad" and "infinite" had me pulling my hairs from sheer vexation). I didn't expect that if you mixed them altogether in the book, it wouldn't be as impressive as when they were just stand-alone quotes.
Overall, I couldn't find it realistic nor relatable, maybe because of the way Charlie wrote it. There were good moments (see added quotes) but in the end, it did not impress me.