Monday, April 24, 2006
L'écume des jours - Boris Vian - ****
Un livre surprenant. Je ne connaissais pas l'auteur ni l'argument, mais le nom "Boris Vian" me disait "auteur français célèbre" et j'ai voulu en savoir plus. Le livre reposait dans un étagère chez Sergio depuis qui sait combien d'années ...
C'est un livre court, avec un histoire vivante et des personnages très attachants. Le langage est extrêmement poétique et surréaliste, sans que l'argument perde de l'importance pour autant. Je préfère ne rien dire sur le contenu parce qu'il sera encore plus plaisant à lire si on ne connait rien, comme c'était mon cas. Une vraie gorgée d'eau fraiche!
J'aurais adoré étudier un livre comme ça à l'école. Il est facile à lire, très touchant et plein de possibilités de discussion tant sur le fonds que sur la forme.
Définitivement il mérite quatre étoiles!
C'est un livre court, avec un histoire vivante et des personnages très attachants. Le langage est extrêmement poétique et surréaliste, sans que l'argument perde de l'importance pour autant. Je préfère ne rien dire sur le contenu parce qu'il sera encore plus plaisant à lire si on ne connait rien, comme c'était mon cas. Une vraie gorgée d'eau fraiche!
J'aurais adoré étudier un livre comme ça à l'école. Il est facile à lire, très touchant et plein de possibilités de discussion tant sur le fonds que sur la forme.
Définitivement il mérite quatre étoiles!
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
The Scarlet Letter - Nathaniel Hawthorne - ***
Lately I seem to stumble upon not very satisfactory reads, so I thought: A good classic is what I need, you can't go astray with that. Since I have read very few American classics, The Scarlet Letter seemed a good choice.
The book is nothing spectacular. The English is quite difficult to read (I guess it is normal since it was written in 1850, but still a pain) and the characters are interesting but distant.
I didn't totally dislike the book. The subject is quite appealing and the evolution of the characters is very touching. However, I never felt close to them in any way, they seem a bit artificial. Maybe this due to the fact that I am a woman of the 21st century and therefore have difficulties understanding a woman in 17th century Puritan New England, specially when the story is told by a 19th century writer. Maybe ... To me, the characters (Hester Prynne, Mr. Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth) just seemed a bit flat.
As I said earlier, what I liked about the book is the evolution of the characters. The book is basically about how a same deed (the adultery) affects three people differently; more precisely, how those who seem at fault first are maybe those who have behaved better in the end.
The book is nothing spectacular. The English is quite difficult to read (I guess it is normal since it was written in 1850, but still a pain) and the characters are interesting but distant.
I didn't totally dislike the book. The subject is quite appealing and the evolution of the characters is very touching. However, I never felt close to them in any way, they seem a bit artificial. Maybe this due to the fact that I am a woman of the 21st century and therefore have difficulties understanding a woman in 17th century Puritan New England, specially when the story is told by a 19th century writer. Maybe ... To me, the characters (Hester Prynne, Mr. Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth) just seemed a bit flat.
As I said earlier, what I liked about the book is the evolution of the characters. The book is basically about how a same deed (the adultery) affects three people differently; more precisely, how those who seem at fault first are maybe those who have behaved better in the end.
