Take a photo of a barcode or cover
lit_terary's reviews
499 reviews
Dracul by J.D. Barker, Dacre Stoker
1.0
1.5
This is marketed as a "genesis" story of Stoker's "Dracula", based on real events, however, it reads 100% as fiction, no question. Never have I doubted the story being pure fiction, and there's no authors' note that can change my mind. This is fiction, super boring fiction, too. Nothing compelling about it, and it's not strong enought to stand on its own.
The format of the book was also pointless; I understand that the authors wanted to replicate the “dossier” style of the original “Dracula”, but it made no sense in this book, as things are told in a very narrative, traditional way. For some reason, the fact that the chapters never resembled real diary entries annoyed me immensely. It was unnecessary.
Overall, very disappointed, it added nothing to the original, it was rather pointless.
This is marketed as a "genesis" story of Stoker's "Dracula", based on real events, however, it reads 100% as fiction, no question. Never have I doubted the story being pure fiction, and there's no authors' note that can change my mind. This is fiction, super boring fiction, too. Nothing compelling about it, and it's not strong enought to stand on its own.
The format of the book was also pointless; I understand that the authors wanted to replicate the “dossier” style of the original “Dracula”, but it made no sense in this book, as things are told in a very narrative, traditional way. For some reason, the fact that the chapters never resembled real diary entries annoyed me immensely. It was unnecessary.
Overall, very disappointed, it added nothing to the original, it was rather pointless.
Candide by Voltaire
3.0
I don't even know what prompted me to read (actually re-read) this. I was looking for something short and fun, and that's basically what I got. I liked the underlying message, me being a pessimist and all, but I feel like this book is much more layered than it appears, and for that I would've loved to read it with analysis or comment of sorts.
Killing Commendatore by Haruki Murakami
2.0
1.5
I just can't with Murakami. I gave him my last shot, but I'm done. No more of this nonsense. I don't vibe with magical realism, and that's a fact, but Murakami really takes the cake. Killing Commendatore reminded me a lot of Kafka on the Shore, and especially the journey the two protagonists go through is very similar in my opinion. However, while I could get a sense of purpose with Kafka on the Shore (no matter how utterly absurd and unfathomable to me), Killing Commendatore was just apparently pointless. No doubt Murakami knows what he's doing (or so I'm told, but I still don't get it from him), so I'm not going to sit here and say that what he wrote was meaningless, but that's what I felt while reaching the end of the book. So what? What am I supposed to do with this? What should I have gotten out of this book? No idea. Clearly it has to be me. I'm obviously lacking something and this is preventing me from understanding the genius that is Murakami, but that's me giving up. Not worth it. No more. I care about health too much.
All that being said, my actual concern and issue lie with Murakami's depiction of female characters - once again. Just to name a couple: the constant unrealistic, ingenuine, absurd, caricatural portrayal of women; the over-sexualization of underage girls from the perspective of creepy, old men who feel the need to comment any brain fart about girls' physique; the undying obsession with breasts that really is the fil rouge binding his entire oeuvre together; finally, a new addition, a rather nonchalant attitude towards rape. Those are just the ones at the top of my head. These are constants that I found in every book I ever read of his, and it saddens me to see that nothing has changed.
Like I said, maybe it's me. I mean, it has to be me. He's one of the most beloved contemporary authors out there, critically acclaimed, renowned worldwide. It must be me. Right?
Anyway, that's it for me. I'm out of here. No more Murakami for me, I'll leave it all to you aficionados.
I just can't with Murakami. I gave him my last shot, but I'm done. No more of this nonsense. I don't vibe with magical realism, and that's a fact, but Murakami really takes the cake. Killing Commendatore reminded me a lot of Kafka on the Shore, and especially the journey the two protagonists go through is very similar in my opinion. However, while I could get a sense of purpose with Kafka on the Shore (no matter how utterly absurd and unfathomable to me), Killing Commendatore was just apparently pointless. No doubt Murakami knows what he's doing (or so I'm told, but I still don't get it from him), so I'm not going to sit here and say that what he wrote was meaningless, but that's what I felt while reaching the end of the book. So what? What am I supposed to do with this? What should I have gotten out of this book? No idea. Clearly it has to be me. I'm obviously lacking something and this is preventing me from understanding the genius that is Murakami, but that's me giving up. Not worth it. No more. I care about health too much.
All that being said, my actual concern and issue lie with Murakami's depiction of female characters - once again. Just to name a couple: the constant unrealistic, ingenuine, absurd, caricatural portrayal of women; the over-sexualization of underage girls from the perspective of creepy, old men who feel the need to comment any brain fart about girls' physique; the undying obsession with breasts that really is the fil rouge binding his entire oeuvre together; finally, a new addition, a rather nonchalant attitude towards rape. Those are just the ones at the top of my head. These are constants that I found in every book I ever read of his, and it saddens me to see that nothing has changed.
Like I said, maybe it's me. I mean, it has to be me. He's one of the most beloved contemporary authors out there, critically acclaimed, renowned worldwide. It must be me. Right?
Anyway, that's it for me. I'm out of here. No more Murakami for me, I'll leave it all to you aficionados.
La canzone dell'eterno rimpianto by Maria Rita Masci, Wang Anyi
3.0
I really don't know how to rate this because this is the book I'm working on for my uni dissertation. I didn't read it to enjoy it nor judge it, hence why it's so hard to form an opinion of my own. The title sure does reflect the tone and subject of the story. It's an intellectual and literary work, so it can be a bit dense to read - but I really don't know. Sorry.
Special Topics in Calamity Physics by Marisha Pessl
3.0
“Special Topics in Calamity Physics” is the debut novel of Marisha Pessl and follows Blue Van Meer, an intelligent and funny young girl trying to survive her senior year of high school in a new town. Don’t be mistaken, though, because this is no fluffy contemporary, YA, coming of age story. As a matter of fact, this book is often put in the dark academia category - which I adore - and usually mentioned in lists like “Books like Donna Tartt’s The Secret History”. I’m not even going to hide: I mainly read this because I set out to read any piece of literature even remotely reminiscent of Donna Tartt’s masterpiece.
The story started out in the best way possible, with Tartt’s influence clearly manifesting and peaking through with the introduction of a charismatic teacher leading a rather unlikeable bunch of snobbish rag-tag of misfits. On top of that, Blue comes through as a very endearing, likeable main protagonist and the relationship with her father really gave us some hilarious dynamics and comic antics that actually had me laugh a couple of times.
Another thing that I seemed to love in the beginning, was the distinct tone of the story: despite the nods at The Secret History, the atmosphere and mood of Special Topics in Calamity Physics really helped set it apart from the like of Donna Tartt and M. L. Rio and standing as its own book. While still being very heavy and dipped in academia, Pessl’s novel is way more humorous, way more effervescent, and way more lively. She really comes through as an extremely funny, endearing, witty and clever author, without taking herself too seriously. There’s an underlying lightheartedness in her writing that really keeps me hooked, and this is even more impressive considering that it was her debut novel.
Note: Also, I want to add, that the writing might not be everybody’s cup of tea: the format of the book kind of mocks and simultaneously mimics the style and tenor of an academic paper, and so it is dense (and I mean, jam-packed) of in-text references and citations. I personally loved it and thought it was hilariously brilliant and original, however, I do realize it could get a little too much if you see it as a derailment from the story, so bear that in mind if you considering picking this one up.]
I loved the protagonist and secondary characters, I loved the mood, I adored (and still do) the writing and overall humorous narrator’s voice: what could’ve possibly lowered the rating to a mere 3(.5) stars? The plot. I’ve started growing pickier and pickier when it comes to plot, and there’s very little that I condone when it comes to the structure of a story, so bear with me on this one.
In the first half of the book, we’re not really sure about the direction the story is going to take; we do know how things are going to end (sort of) and we know that something is going happen, we’re only left wondering how we will reach that end. That being said, the plot itself gives no hints about what we’re going to get and where we’re going to veer: events are depicted in a very scattered way, without an obviously visible red thread linking everything together, and while I found it a tad frustrating, I had faith that, ultimately, the author would be able to masterfully tie everything together. Well, spoiler alert, that didn’t happen.
After stumbling in the dark for more than half of the book with a blindfold over our eyes and both our hands tied behind our backs, the story takes on an unexpected (major, emphasis on ‘unexpected’) turn. Don’t get me wrong, I love and deeply appreciate plot-twists and unexpected turns of events, but not this out of the blue. Say what you want, but I personally believe that there has to be some sort of foreshadowing during the unfolding of the story, no matter how tiny or disclosed; placing a plot-twist without any foreshadowing is lazy writing and you won’t change my mind on it. However, on top of being unpredictable - which I could’ve easily overlooked, I’m not that annoying - this new direction was also straight-up preposterous and ridiculous, to the point where it lost all credibility for me.
[Not really a spoiler, I wish I had known before I picked this book up, but still]SPOILER: the story moves from moody, mysterious and academic to a full-on espionage-type of crime, which is not what I had in mind when I picked up the book. Having the resolution involves convoluted conspiracy theories on secret terrorist societies was a bit cheap, especially when it had promised (probably it was only my misguiding wishful thinking) to focus more on character dynamics, interpersonal relationships and emotional/psychological turmoil. I wanted more intimate motives, not an FBI case. On top of that, the ending provided no closure whatsoever, so much so that I categorically refuse to call it an open ending. It almost gave me the feeling that the author had no idea how to tie everything and so just gave up and called it a day. I still feel the frustration, man.
Overall, it was a pleasurable book, especially for a debut, but it could’ve been so much better. So. Much. Better. Pessl has enormous potential, and I’m for sure intrigued to see how she evolved after her debut. Her writing, for one, was a complete surprise, I’m bewitched and I’m sold, looking forward to reading more of her.
The story started out in the best way possible, with Tartt’s influence clearly manifesting and peaking through with the introduction of a charismatic teacher leading a rather unlikeable bunch of snobbish rag-tag of misfits. On top of that, Blue comes through as a very endearing, likeable main protagonist and the relationship with her father really gave us some hilarious dynamics and comic antics that actually had me laugh a couple of times.
Another thing that I seemed to love in the beginning, was the distinct tone of the story: despite the nods at The Secret History, the atmosphere and mood of Special Topics in Calamity Physics really helped set it apart from the like of Donna Tartt and M. L. Rio and standing as its own book. While still being very heavy and dipped in academia, Pessl’s novel is way more humorous, way more effervescent, and way more lively. She really comes through as an extremely funny, endearing, witty and clever author, without taking herself too seriously. There’s an underlying lightheartedness in her writing that really keeps me hooked, and this is even more impressive considering that it was her debut novel.
Note: Also, I want to add, that the writing might not be everybody’s cup of tea: the format of the book kind of mocks and simultaneously mimics the style and tenor of an academic paper, and so it is dense (and I mean, jam-packed) of in-text references and citations. I personally loved it and thought it was hilariously brilliant and original, however, I do realize it could get a little too much if you see it as a derailment from the story, so bear that in mind if you considering picking this one up.]
I loved the protagonist and secondary characters, I loved the mood, I adored (and still do) the writing and overall humorous narrator’s voice: what could’ve possibly lowered the rating to a mere 3(.5) stars? The plot. I’ve started growing pickier and pickier when it comes to plot, and there’s very little that I condone when it comes to the structure of a story, so bear with me on this one.
In the first half of the book, we’re not really sure about the direction the story is going to take; we do know how things are going to end (sort of) and we know that something is going happen, we’re only left wondering how we will reach that end. That being said, the plot itself gives no hints about what we’re going to get and where we’re going to veer: events are depicted in a very scattered way, without an obviously visible red thread linking everything together, and while I found it a tad frustrating, I had faith that, ultimately, the author would be able to masterfully tie everything together. Well, spoiler alert, that didn’t happen.
After stumbling in the dark for more than half of the book with a blindfold over our eyes and both our hands tied behind our backs, the story takes on an unexpected (major, emphasis on ‘unexpected’) turn. Don’t get me wrong, I love and deeply appreciate plot-twists and unexpected turns of events, but not this out of the blue. Say what you want, but I personally believe that there has to be some sort of foreshadowing during the unfolding of the story, no matter how tiny or disclosed; placing a plot-twist without any foreshadowing is lazy writing and you won’t change my mind on it. However, on top of being unpredictable - which I could’ve easily overlooked, I’m not that annoying - this new direction was also straight-up preposterous and ridiculous, to the point where it lost all credibility for me.
[Not really a spoiler, I wish I had known before I picked this book up, but still]
Overall, it was a pleasurable book, especially for a debut, but it could’ve been so much better. So. Much. Better. Pessl has enormous potential, and I’m for sure intrigued to see how she evolved after her debut. Her writing, for one, was a complete surprise, I’m bewitched and I’m sold, looking forward to reading more of her.
Women Who Run with the Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype by Clarissa Pinkola Estés
2.0
This is, 100%, not the book for me and not what I was looking for me. It was very hard for me to recognize my self in this model of femininity and womanhood. For one, I could not be further apart from this "wild woman" archetype: it’s not me and it’s now what I want/need to be. As a result, majority of what the author preaches and teaches flew over my head, unaccounted for. The way the book is structured also doesn’t help to carry the message across at all, but that might for me and me only. At first I was intrigued by the pedagocical vein of these "essays" (if we can even call them that), but after 200 pages it was already getting extremely repetitive and pedantic. Throughout the book, I felt like she was reiterating the same things ovee and over again, without adding anything new. Of course, Pinkola Estés has some points (not many I could make my own and interiorize - there was only one passage that really spoke to me) but overall the book’s message felt somehow dated and stale, surely not some type of groundbreaking feminism as it was trying to be. I think its scope was also pretty limited and limiting, failing to ackowledge the multiplicity of the female experience and how the "wild woman" is not the only/best way of living. The way she tackled certain topics was rather tunnel-visioned and tone-deaf, and very simplicistic.
The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss
3.0
2.5
*overrated, don't hate me bye* This one is a long ass character-driven fantasy, with little magic and a whole lot of drama, plus the pace was kind of slow and pretty much devoid of action. The writing was kind of good, but a little conceited and pretentious at times. I like the university environment, but after a whilr it felt dragged-out because so many irrelevant things distracted and took space from the actual school experience (meaning that we get no classes, no magical lessons nor interesting bits). Overall it was ok-ish, didn’t love it, didn’t hate it. My main issue is Kvothe: simply insufferable. Unlikable in a way that it's clear it wasn't intented by the author. He’s self-absorbed, self-centered, arrogant, conceites, cocky and ignorant. Doesn't display a single freacking flaw other than some impulsiveness (which is never addressed as a flaw, though, even though it often makes him look like an asshole). His only flaw is that he was born perfect. There’s nothing left to learn for him, thus there’s no development, not on his character nor his skills. Flat as a board. A special-snowflake-Chosen-one without the prophecy.
*overrated, don't hate me bye* This one is a long ass character-driven fantasy, with little magic and a whole lot of drama, plus the pace was kind of slow and pretty much devoid of action. The writing was kind of good, but a little conceited and pretentious at times. I like the university environment, but after a whilr it felt dragged-out because so many irrelevant things distracted and took space from the actual school experience (meaning that we get no classes, no magical lessons nor interesting bits). Overall it was ok-ish, didn’t love it, didn’t hate it. My main issue is Kvothe: simply insufferable. Unlikable in a way that it's clear it wasn't intented by the author. He’s self-absorbed, self-centered, arrogant, conceites, cocky and ignorant. Doesn't display a single freacking flaw other than some impulsiveness (which is never addressed as a flaw, though, even though it often makes him look like an asshole). His only flaw is that he was born perfect. There’s nothing left to learn for him, thus there’s no development, not on his character nor his skills. Flat as a board. A special-snowflake-Chosen-one without the prophecy.
4 3 2 1 by Paul Auster
3.0
[This book was tough to get through, so dense and tiring. Highly recommend you take notes as you read!]
This is one of those books where the idea was way more ambitious than the execution. The story is four-fold, following the same character, Archie Ferguson, living through four different versions of his life. It presents itself as a book about choices, consequences and the many, varying ways our life can unfold depending on the choices we make; however, there's very little of that, and this is the most disappointing and most prevailing issue for me.
The four "stories" develop completely independently, almost as if they were four distinct, separate books. I found nothing linking them together - other than the very convenient presence of a few common characters - which seriously makes me question the reason for this book's existence in the first place. At some point, I would've expected the story-lines to intersect, meet, intertwine, or for the character to be faced with some daunting decisions or crossroads in all "versions" of himself to give a nice, layered picture of how decisive some choices can be. But, no: all we get is four very generic coming-of-age stories that have nothing to offer other than some of the longest, most boring, conceited ramblings I've ever read.
The lack of consequentiality, turning points and links make this seem like a very tedious writing exercise, rather than a full-fledged book with a clear purpose. On top of that, individually the four stories aren't strong enough to stand alone, as they are flat and devoid of any intriguing element. The last third of the book was tragically anti-climactic, with History completely taking the attention away from the main plots. These final chapters are a constant info-dump of chronological, historical and political events I couldn't care less about. I usually love it when fiction books leave enough space to portray the socio-political climate in which the story takes place, but it just didn't work with this one.
Another issue for me was Auster's writing style: I found it to be so stale and aseptic in a way that left me completely detached from the story from beginning to the end (but I see how this is only a matter of taste, it certainly wasn't the deal-breaker).
Overall I can't say that this is a bad book. It's not, it's solid. However, I wish the author had dared a little bit more given how interesting the main idea was. Such potential.
This is one of those books where the idea was way more ambitious than the execution. The story is four-fold, following the same character, Archie Ferguson, living through four different versions of his life. It presents itself as a book about choices, consequences and the many, varying ways our life can unfold depending on the choices we make; however, there's very little of that, and this is the most disappointing and most prevailing issue for me.
The four "stories" develop completely independently, almost as if they were four distinct, separate books. I found nothing linking them together - other than the very convenient presence of a few common characters - which seriously makes me question the reason for this book's existence in the first place. At some point, I would've expected the story-lines to intersect, meet, intertwine, or for the character to be faced with some daunting decisions or crossroads in all "versions" of himself to give a nice, layered picture of how decisive some choices can be. But, no: all we get is four very generic coming-of-age stories that have nothing to offer other than some of the longest, most boring, conceited ramblings I've ever read.
The lack of consequentiality, turning points and links make this seem like a very tedious writing exercise, rather than a full-fledged book with a clear purpose. On top of that, individually the four stories aren't strong enough to stand alone, as they are flat and devoid of any intriguing element. The last third of the book was tragically anti-climactic, with History completely taking the attention away from the main plots. These final chapters are a constant info-dump of chronological, historical and political events I couldn't care less about. I usually love it when fiction books leave enough space to portray the socio-political climate in which the story takes place, but it just didn't work with this one.
Another issue for me was Auster's writing style: I found it to be so stale and aseptic in a way that left me completely detached from the story from beginning to the end (but I see how this is only a matter of taste, it certainly wasn't the deal-breaker).
Overall I can't say that this is a bad book. It's not, it's solid. However, I wish the author had dared a little bit more given how interesting the main idea was. Such potential.
Foundation by Isaac Asimov
3.0
I don't like drawing comparisons, but this one reminded me a lot of "Dune", especially in terms of writing style - without being as verbose and dragged out as Herbert. It's an old sci-fi and it shows: it relies heavily on talking rather than showing, and on erratic conversations instead of comprehensive explanations. Cool idea, but execution could've been richer.
Storia della bellezza - Storia della bruttezza by Umberto Eco
4.0
This one is a gorgeous book to own and look at. Interesting content and a rich selection of images to lead you through it. Mostly feels like reading an art catalogue, but it gives valuable insights on how the perception of "ugliness" has changed and evolved era after era. Simply a stunning book to collect and to keep on your coffee table,