jdroth

One of my favorite books. So rich and full of detail. And such a wonderful portrayal of the power of empathy.

I'm a life-long fan of dystopian fiction, and The Giver is a fine entry in the genre. Lowry's writing is clear and direct. Every word and scene seems to be present in service of the Story, and I appreciate that. The story itself is small-scale dystopia, about a community containing maybe a few thousand people. (There are precisely fifty children of any given age.) So, this novel feels like it's more a critique of cults than of society as a whole. I liked it very much.

This is a good book. In an alternate universe — if the author had made some different choices — it would be a great book.

I liked “The Midnight Library”, and was grateful to have read it. Honestly, it's exactly the book that I need for my life right now. I've been having some of the same thoughts and experiences as the main character, Nora Seed. I thought the overall concept was clever, and I liked some of the philosophical stuff that Haig explored.

That said, the book has a couple of glaring faults that drove me nuts.

First, there are parts that are tremendously awkward. Nora's conversations with characters in alternate timelines are often clumsy and frustrating. These moments (and there are many) don't contribute anything to the story after the first instance. We get it. We get that going to a new timeline is disorienting. We don't need to be shown it every single time.

Second, the climax is awful. It's as if it were written with film (bad film) in mind, not the written word. It's lame and kind of undermines everything that has come before. So frustrating.

Still, I'll end up recommending this book (with caveats) to many people, especially folks looking for something interesting to read for book clubs. This would prompt great discussions, I think. And, this is a book that I'll read again in the future. When I do, though, it won't be on audio. I need to be able to skip all of the repetitive, awkward transition scenes that ought to have been edited out (and probably were in the universe where this is a great book instead of okay).

This is a charming chapter book that plays as straight-forward childhood escapism for much of the time. But the penultimate chapter includes a couple of lovely insightful observations about life. Plus, I very much enjoyed how well the author brought 1967 to life. Lots of little details that reminded me of my youth.

I have mixed feelings about the book.

Its major shortcoming (in my view) is that it is overly long and dull. There's just far too much information here, much of which seems to be extraneous to the authors' central thesis. Maybe it seems overly long because I listened to the audio version? I don't know. Whatever the case, there are entire chapters that feel more like digressions than support for the primary argument.

Also, the book is built upon mountains of supposition. “Surely, it must be the case...” “One cannot help but assume...” And so on. The authors rightfully take other scholars to task for making assumptions and clinging to outdated notions, yet they commit these same crimes over and over and over again.

These qualms aside, there's a lot of fascinating material here.

There are some interesting Big Ideas about the grand scope of history (which boil down, essentially, to the Vulcan ideal: “infinite diversity in infinite combinations” — that is, human societies have existed in myriad forms over the past 12,000+ years, and it is impossible to generalize a progression of systemic organization) but there are also plenty of entertaining and enlightening nuggets to be found in the anecdotes and digressions.

I'd probably consider this a must-read for others who are interested in human history and the origins of civilization. I'm glad I read it. But don't expect it to be nearly as entertaining or well-written as, say, “Sapiens”. The research in “THe Dawn of Everything” may be more rigorous than the former, but former is a pleasure to read while the latter is a drag.