Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

a very weak review

Minijack wrote: "a very weak review"

just because you disagree with my opinion doesn't mean that it's a weak review. I feel that I covered all my bases and I think I gave fair reasoning as to why I didn't enjoy the novel. I was thorough, and though the review might be negative at points, it is in no way weak or lacking in evidence for my viewpoint.

Sarah wrote: "Minijack wrote: "a very weak review"

just because you disagree with my opinion doesn't mean that it's a weak review. I feel that I covered all my bases and I think I gave fair reasoning as to why ..."

First of all, I do not think that your review is weak because of the divergence of our opinions. I rather meant the language, style of your writing and your shallow interpretation.

The very first "introductory" sentence of your review is pointless and typical for amateur writing. And the word "alright" is even worse - inclining some kind of unhealthy over-excitement concerning your own writing.

Then we have this common and deplorable approach when the reviewer is focused more on himself/herself than the author's book. Who gives a damn about your personal experiences? "I started", "I was touched", "me of my own relationship" - for Christ's sake... Everybody has a life so there is no value in comparing your personal experiences with the content of a novel.

Then we have your expectations. Once or twice you underlined that the book happened to be something different than your expected. OK, but how can that be London's fault?

But it's the ending of you review that's really killing me. "I know what Jack London was trying to accomplish, and that's why I granted it 2 stars instead of 1. I get it." Oh! Than you, your merciful Highness! Hahaha... Oh my God, this is what probably irritates me the most - you assess London's masterpiece badly but still think good about your pathetic writing. How inflated one's ego can be?

And finally, NO, you didn't GET IT. It was never Martin's goal to become rich and famous - he disregarded money at every point of his life since for him there were only two real values. One of them was love, beauty - the other. Fame? He created just for the sake of beauty, but he needed recognition only to prove his point - that he doesn't have to renounce his values to be worth Ruth's hand.

It makes me angry when you note that the ending was predictable. Martin Eden is not about evoking publicity's excitement with such cheap tricks. At some point the reader knows perfectly that Martin is going to kill himself, but it (I have to surprise you) is not an indication of one's perceptiveness. It is more important to notice at which point there is no way back and why there is no way back. Nonetheless, I'm not going to explain you the book...

Minijack wrote: "Sarah wrote: "Minijack wrote: "a very weak review"

just because you disagree with my opinion doesn't mean that it's a weak review. I feel that I covered all my bases and I think I gave fair reason..."
Wow, you went pretty far to try to deflate my "inflated ego." I still disagree with you about my review being weak. And what do you care if I found the ending predictable? It was. I literally let out a big sigh when I turned the last page. I never said it was his goal to become "rich and famous" (if you even read my review). I merely stated that becoming a writer was his dream, but the fame and fortune (hence "recognition") wasn't what he wanted when he set out to make his dream happen.

And seriously, why are you so concerned with my writing style? It's my damn Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ profile and I'll write my reviews with as informal of a style as I please. Do you expect all the reviews on here to be from professional critics or something? On the same note, what does it matter that I brought experiences of my own to relate to the novel? THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE DO. Regardless if the artist's intent was to prove something or to set a precedent (or, more specifically, to prove "that he doesn't have to renounce his values to be worth Ruth's hand"), when people read fiction, they form connections with characters. The way I happen to do that is by relating what I read to instances in my own life. And....We’re back to my earlier point: IT'S MY REVIEW. I am writing from a personal perspective, and the way I read a novel may differ from the way you read one because we're individuals.

Further, Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ is for people who love to read and share their thoughts on the books that they read with other people who love to do the same. It's unfortunate that negative people have to come on here to denounce the opinions of others, in an effort to prove something of their own self-worth. I have news for you MiniJack: not everybody is going to agree with you. Especially not with that uppity attitude of yours.

Not a "weak" review at all Sarah, I think it's perceptive and honest. I felt bored by this character too, and concerned that I wasn't getting it, mainly because the cover blurb screamed that he was London's "most vital and original character". I find him bland and quite arrogant actually. It's always good to see the views of others, even if some people don't understand that these posts aren't literary reviews but reaction pieces.

Martyn wrote: "Not a "weak" review at all Sarah, I think it's perceptive and honest. I felt bored by this character too, and concerned that I wasn't getting it, mainly because the cover blurb screamed that he was..."

THANK YOU. I totally agree. We're all entitled to our own opinions, and just because a book has literary clout does not mean I have to like it, nor am I obligated to appreciate the reasons it's appreciated. I had left this review long ago in frustration, but I'm glad now I can revisit it now without feeling so many negative things. Thanks for commenting, Martyn!

I'm sorry for all those lacking of personality and herd fanatics, but I truly agree with Sarah. I started reading this book full of enthusiasm when I stepped into this dime romantic/sentimental plot. Oh, come on. After the first pages I was like "well, don't worry, this thing is going to finish, you've read The Call of the Wild, it CAN'T go like this forever". Of course, it went even worse. Tons and tons of sweet nothing and mawkishness. This is for sure an edifying reading, but swallowing all those love pages is too much for me to afford.

never thought of it as cliche, but as you bravely put it, it is a cliche.

The story might be lacking but in many ways through the plot he conveyed what he wanted to say. I read somewhere it was kind of an autobiograhical account. Also Martin Eden is M.E so maybe...I can relate with you getting a bit bored but when this book is good, it is so great.. a week has passed and i'm still obsessing over it. I want to leave my home, my wife, my family and go on the road and just write. write. write. till i die. I'm not gonna do any of that but it is powerful and moving. Cliche? Let me go find my dictionary :) Sorry for long rant.

Omg this is Ruth and she became a critic.

The fact is that your review is both personal & perceptive, this in spite of some commentary to the contrary. Every book we read involves an act of translation, even if it is in our own language. So many factors define whether we feel drawn in to the book and you have taken pains to particularize your involvement with the novel by Jack London. Interestingly, when interviewed late in his life, Peter O'Toole commented that the novel, Martin Eden, was a book that had remained memorable more than any other he could think of. That impressed me enough to get a copy of the novel & I do plan to read it, though I haven't read Jack London since I was rather young & even then may have read abridged versions of his books. I suspect that you are more open to a variety of books than many at this site & that is to be commended!

lmao, this commet section is so funny! kind of agree with the minijack dude, no offense to anybody. It also irritates me whenever a novel with a relationship involved, many people would just focused on the relationship part instead of the more propounding aspects in terms of pursues, values, and so on. FYI If my commet bothers anybody just ignore me.

*profound

Someone please send "John Doe" a dictionary & a guide to English grammar.

Quo wrote: "Someone please send "John Doe" a dictionary & a guide to English grammar."

what a helpful & good-hearted gentlemen you are, sir! (full of tears)