Violet wells's Reviews > Paradise
Paradise (Beloved Trilogy, #3)
by
by

Sometimes you have to hold up your hands as a reader and admit maybe you didn’t do a book justice. I found Paradise really difficult to follow. Mainly this is due to there being no central character. The central character instead is a town called Ruby where only blacks live and are free of white legislation and a nearby building known as the convent. The awfulness of men and magical prowess of women is its theme. Well not quite but the divisions drawn here are not between blacks and whites but between men and women. The men drawing their inspiration from the past, the women much more inclined to look forward.
I’d be interested to know how many characters there are in this novel. I would guess about a hundred and they all have significance which for me meant Morrison was asking too much of the reader. No doubt a novelist lives obsessively in the novel she’s writing. As a reader this isn’t the case. We have the rest of our life to get on with every day. If a character who has only had two lines reappears after a hundred pages it’s almost cruel to expect us to remember him or her. And yet if we don’t remember them here we are punished, shoved out of the narrative. To fully appreciate this novel I’d guess you’d have to read it in three sittings. Unfortunately I was only managing to read about twenty pages a day. On top of that I wasn’t really convinced by any of the characters.
At the beginning, a lynch party of men set out with guns and various other weapons to put an end to the reign of a few mysterious women living in the building outside the town. A witch hunt in other words. The men have managed to convince themselves these women are ungodly. The novel then goes backwards in time to document both the history of the small town of Ruby and the various women who have ended up at the convent. There’s some cleverness in the construction of this novel � I liked how it turns full circle which does create a lot of intrigue - but there’s also a good deal of clumsiness. For starters the characters aren’t particularly memorable with perhaps one or two exceptions. A lot of them, especially the men, seemed interchangeable. Neither is the prose as haunting and exalted as Morrison’s usual fare. So though I felt I didn’t do it justice I can still say with conviction it’s no Beloved. In fact it’s my least favourite of the Morrison novels I’ve read.
I’d be interested to know how many characters there are in this novel. I would guess about a hundred and they all have significance which for me meant Morrison was asking too much of the reader. No doubt a novelist lives obsessively in the novel she’s writing. As a reader this isn’t the case. We have the rest of our life to get on with every day. If a character who has only had two lines reappears after a hundred pages it’s almost cruel to expect us to remember him or her. And yet if we don’t remember them here we are punished, shoved out of the narrative. To fully appreciate this novel I’d guess you’d have to read it in three sittings. Unfortunately I was only managing to read about twenty pages a day. On top of that I wasn’t really convinced by any of the characters.
At the beginning, a lynch party of men set out with guns and various other weapons to put an end to the reign of a few mysterious women living in the building outside the town. A witch hunt in other words. The men have managed to convince themselves these women are ungodly. The novel then goes backwards in time to document both the history of the small town of Ruby and the various women who have ended up at the convent. There’s some cleverness in the construction of this novel � I liked how it turns full circle which does create a lot of intrigue - but there’s also a good deal of clumsiness. For starters the characters aren’t particularly memorable with perhaps one or two exceptions. A lot of them, especially the men, seemed interchangeable. Neither is the prose as haunting and exalted as Morrison’s usual fare. So though I felt I didn’t do it justice I can still say with conviction it’s no Beloved. In fact it’s my least favourite of the Morrison novels I’ve read.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Paradise.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
July 13, 2016
– Shelved
July 13, 2016
– Shelved as:
to-read
September 25, 2017
–
Started Reading
October 21, 2017
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-26 of 26 (26 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Dolors
(new)
Oct 21, 2017 05:30AM

reply
|
flag


It's the first of hers I've really struggled with, Dolors.

That's interesting, Karen, because often I felt this book was much better than my reading of it. Poses the question of whether it’s legitimate to compose a novel in such a way as to require quick reading to bring out all its qualities. Now and again a novel does demand more attention than I’m as the reader capable of giving it. I admired her for putting me to the test but ultimately couldn’t quite decide who had failed the test, me or her. Perhaps six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Staggered by the amount of characters you mention, even without a mind like a sieve it sounds an uphill tussle. Nice pithy review!

Staggered by the amount of characters you mention, even without a mind like a sieve it sounds an uphill tussle. Nice pithy re..."
They've all got oddball names too which doesn't help. Not only that, often they've got two names and she keeps alternating between the two. Half the time I completely lost track of who everyone was.


Yep, I only had a clear idea of who a couple of characters were, the rest were continually eluding me. It felt like an early rehearsal of what dementia might be like.

Your opening line about readers sometimes having to admit they haven’t done a book justice also caught my attention, Violet. If there was a ‘handbook for readers�, these are the kinds of issues I’d enjoy seeing thrashed out.

Thanks Jaline.

That would be a fascinating topic for debate. No one would dispute that our enjoyment of novels has a lot of subjectivity in it. And I enjoy reviews that recognise this. But I also enjoy reviews that acknowledge novels as being subject to objectively formulated laws of quality. There is a lot of science in literary criticism. What I like less are reviews that gush or rant as if everything said is scientific fact and you must be an imbecile if you have a contrary opinion. Sometimes we need to admit we can enjoy things which perhaps are unworthy of our love or we hate things because they stretch our mental abilities beyond their limits. I have to say all my friends here fall in the former categories but now and again a review appears on my feed that reads like someone blaming the EU for everything bad without a shred of evidence that what they’re saying is founded in anything but a belligerent and cherished ignorance.

But there are also ‘vogues� in literary criticism. Hemingway, for example.
Virginia Woolf suffered at the hands of literary critics in her lifetime. And she in turn misjudged a few of her contemporaries.
It’s tricky.

But there are als..."
Yep, and it's inevitable that future generations will have a new set of ideas. What I mean is there are objective fundamental criteria for assessing the quality of novels as works of art rather than just enjoyable escapism. Doesn't mean any of us will be conclusively right or wrong but they do provide a helping hand.




But like you said I think this was my own limitation. It’s a good story and one needs to be a better reader to do it justice.




