Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

If you ever reread it, you may notice the stories are not as loosely connected as you first thought.

Well I suspect that is the case, Cecily, it just goes to show that I'm not terribly good at realizing some of the more "hidden" meanings and interconnections that lie in well-written fiction. I enjoy in my own not very enlightened way, reading good fiction, but I don't appreciate a lot of it in the same way that more perspicacious readers do.

There might well be a connection between all this and the fact that I was an English major in college for semesters 4 & 5 of my 8, then switched to math and got settled into the life-path that I've followed.

If you enjoy, then that's enough, surely?

Mind you, a few years ago, I was less able to notice some of the subtler aspects of much of what I read. The discipline of reviewing everything I read means I concentrate and analyse (and take notes as I go), so I am aware of far more. That and discussions with people on GR.

I've started to take notes also. But as you say, enjoyment is the key. And usually when I do review a work of fiction I sort of emphasize how much I enjoyed it (or not) and why, rather than try to do a lit-crit type of review.

I actually feel a little more confident in reviewing non-fiction, or at any rate feel that where I'm willing to express something about a non-fiction work I usually have objective reasons rather than just the subjective things that drive me to an opinion about fiction.

I don't read a lot of non-fiction, though I understand your logic about finding easier to review such books. Still, maybe now you're keeping notes, you'll surprise yourself.

Nice review, Ted. Your reservations reflect your reading experience and are well-stated. I really value the ability to express a negative view about a book without resorting to the derogatory (except of course in the context of a parody, haha). Your four star review is more articulate about the book's flaws than many one to three star reviews.

I had to read the book to unlock more of its mysteries, and endorse what Cecily has said: in more difficult books, sometimes the level of enjoyment multiplies with the level of engagement.

Thanks, Ian. I have started reading your own review of it, and want to finish that. The initial part of it seemed to reflect my own view, where you talked about "not getting" the connections between the stories.

So I'm keen to see what you finally discovered, something no doubt that escaped me, and no wonder, it appears that you did a lot of analysis of the book.

I'm also interested to see what all you say about the "filmic" aspects of the work. I saw the movie the day it opened here last December.

Although I enjoyed the book very much, I liked the film even more. In my own humble opinion the Germans did a masterful job of making a movie out of a very challenging novel. Rather than shy away from the in-and-out structure of the novel, they magnified it, turning the movie from eleven short stories into scores of vignettes.

Thank god I had read the book, though. I think I did have an advantage over others who hadn't.

The musical score was I thought quite magnificent, I down-loaded it the next day and have enjoyed it a lot.

So I think I'll let people like yourself who have already done the work enlighten me about some of the delights of the book which I've missed so far.

I'll concentrate on seeing the movie again.

Thanks, Ted. I want to watch the film a few more times, before writing anything substantive about it. However, I too loved it.

I also loved the film, Ted! I didn't enjoy the overdose of sentimentality too much, so I'd have to see if that comes from the book, when I finally read it, or simply from the typical proclivity of film-makers to add dollops of dripping, tear-jerking sentimentality in order to hook a wider audience.

Traveller wrote: "I also loved the film, Ted! I didn't enjoy the overdose of sentimentality too much, so I'd have to see if that comes from the book, when I finally read it, or simply from the typical proclivity of ..."

At a distance if three years I feel safe to reply that I love tear-jerking sentimentality. Always cleans out my tear ducts. 8 /

I struggled with that sixth story. In a way it would have been interesting to go back and reread the book while the first reading was still fresh in my mind, but even though I rated it highly, I didn't like the book well enough to do that.

Lisa wrote: "I struggled with that sixth story. In a way it would have been interesting to go back and reread the book while the first reading was still fresh in my mind, but even though I rated it highly, I di..."

Heh, I don't remember the middle story real well now. Perhaps I shouldn't have ditched the book. 8 (

Ted, It's still a muddle for me. If you ever get sufficiently interested there is always the library. I read this long ago enough that my memory is fading for the entire book.

I did think of the library. But I'm not sure that that middle muddle is interesting enough to push aside so many other readings. Maybe sometime.

It's not interesting enough for me. But it's something to keep in mind. No need to own it!

I love the movie, I may consider the book.