April Moran Female, 28, Married. USA

Don't judge a book by its cover we're told, but how can one not judge this book by its cover? The cover is actually one of the main reasons I bought the book. It's dreamy, artistic, and makes one curious as to what wonders it holds inside.

In addition to wonders, readers will find that this particular book also holds many questions, such as "Who are we?" and "Where does the world come from?" Once exposed to such questions there is no door to escape through. One can't help but wonder about the answers to such questions even when not reading the book. The lesson to be taken from this book is that none of these questions have definitive answers and that one shouldn't be surprised if the answers to the questions are questions themselves.

How does one even begin to tackle these loaded questions? The book presents readers with a framework or foundation in which they can use philosophy to answer the questions. The book teaches its readers that life itself can be seen and understood in many different ways depending on the framework one chooses.

As for the story itself, I have a few complaints. Firstly, sometimes it felt like too much information was packed into a tiny chapter. Perhaps it wasn't even that, but the text book feel of the philosophy lesson itself between Alberto and Sophie. It was very dry and factual which I would expect in a text book, but not in a novel. Sometimes I found myself wondering when the history would end and the story actually begin again.

In addition, I didn't really feel that the chapters transitioned very well. They were very redundant. In some parts, it felt like the author was rushing the story (the writing was poor and simple) in order to get the story itself to the next long text book like philosophy lesson.

When Alberto is actually teaching Sophie about the history of philosophy, the dialogue is sometimes problematic. For example, Sophie will occasionally interrupt Alberto with her own thoughts or statements which seem to be coming not from Sophie the character, but the writer. I know that a lot of people will argue that the writing/dialogue comes from the author, but the point I'm trying to make is that a lot of Sophie's responses and thoughts did not seem realistic coming from a 14 year old girl. Some of her responses seem too pre-made and she also catches on to the philosophy lessons rather quickly considering that we are told this is the first time she's been introduced to philosophy.

Towards the end of the book, we learn that Sophie and Alberto are merely characters in a book. The book is being written as a birthday present for a girl named Hilde. I thought this was really clever on the writer's part and I found myself smiling because even I was tricked and didn't see it coming. There are of course subtle but also very obvious hints that this is the case, and the reader knows something odd is going on, especially when we learn that the man's name who is writing the book is Albert (very similar to Alberto, Sophie's teacher.) The whole idea is very clever indeed, especially when broken down - this is a story of a girl and a man being written by a man for his daughter, which has been written by Jostein Gaarder. Story within a story that is a story itself ! :)

What if we too are merely characters in a book that is being written? Perhaps we can escape like Sophie and Alberto did when the writer wasn't thinking of them.

My last thoughts on the book concern the philosophy itself. Do we come away satisfied that we have learned something of philosophy, or do we put the book down in frustration and confusion? I think if anyone actually manages to finish the book they will either be REALLY confused or just a little more knowledgeable about philosophy. The pace of the book is so quick that most of the history gets lost and comes off as being very dry and rather confusing when jumping from one philosopher and time to another. I think the history of philosophy could have been written in a more grab your attention sort of way that makes readers feel like they are actually reading a novel and not a text book.

Did I actually enjoy the book? I enjoyed it in parts. Some parts were very interesting and I had trouble putting the book down, but then those mind boggling history lessons would sneak up and I'd grow rather bored again. It's not really a matter of my familiarity with philosophy, but more along the lines of the text book feeling I got during the lesson parts. Would I recommend it? I would, but only to individuals who enjoy philosophy or are interested in it. And yeah, I would mention that it goes back and forth between novel and text book.

On an interesting side note, I almost counted how many times "bagatelle" is used in the novel, but decided not to, lol. According to wikipedia, "a bagatelle is a short piece of music, typically for the piano, and usually of a light, mellow character. The name bagatelle literally means a "trifle", as a reference to the innocent character of the piece." In case anyone was wondering.. :)

I'm not a big fan of Nicholas Sparks, mainly because romance doesn't hold my interest for too long. However, I have found myself reading some of his books recently because many of them are being transformed into movies. Before I get diarrhea of the mouth, er, or fingers, I just want to clarify why I gave the book 1 star.

While reading The Last Song, I didn't feel that the novel was progressing at all. There were many parts in the book that were running on merely fumes. I kept searching for some aspect about the story to suck me in and create at least some form of suspense, and there just wasn't anything there.

As I trooped on through the story (or lack of) I kept thinking that I had read this story before. Girl meets rich boy which presents a problem, but girl has exceptional qualities that make her equal to rich boy because she can play the piano and is accepted into Julliard? The novel did not read smoothly and it was like Sparks had just picked up an old dirty blue print, blew off the dust, and changed a few names here and there. The whole novel felt very rushed and mediocre. There was nothing new or interesting about the relationship that Ronnie and Will developed in the book.

Furthermore, the romance between Will and Ronnie seemed very unbelievable and wasn't developed very well. When I realized that the story was to take place on the beach, I felt like throwing the book at the wall right then and there, but I always give books a chance to hook me, and unfortunately that didn't happen until the very end.

In addition, the story is supposedly about a daughter reconnecting with her father and in the background she has a summer romance. After finishing the book, I felt confused because if the book is supposed to be about a daughter reconnecting with her father, why on earth is he not developed fully until the end? We hardly encounter anything about the father except tidbits here and there that don't really mean much.

I'm not entirely sure why Sparks built Marcus up so well in the beginning, only to get rid of him so easily in the end of the book. We're told and even convinced that Marcus is not a good person, and Sparks even builds some suspense in having his readers believe that something bad is going to happen between Marcus and Will with the fire problem, or Marcus and Ronnie. Nothing ever happens and I don't feel like Sparks did anything with Marcus, even though he spent so much time in the book developing his character.

Even though a review in the beginning of the book claims that Ronnie is a well developed character, I found her very flat. A writer can give us pages and pages of descriptions and dialogues concerning a character that we as readers are supposed to begin caring about, but after I had read so many pages and words about Ronnie, I still did not feel like she was reliable or even believable as a character until the story about her father unfolds.

The novel is very predictable. By the end, we know that Ronnie is not going to get into any trouble, we also know that nothing is going to happen with Marcus, and I'm pretty sure that most readers also knew that the father would end up dying, and that Ronnie would start playing the piano again. Very predictable and rather boring.

The novel finally started coming alive towards the end, when the father (Steve) reveals that he is sick. When I got to this point in the book, my interest level immediately increased, and I actually started caring for Ronnie and her father. I feel like Sparks could have started the book with her father dying instead of waiting until the end, and the story probably would have been a lot better. But then again, this is all just my opinion :)

My favorite quote from the book:

"But every evening in the hour before dusk and no matter what the weather, he reserved for himself an hour to walk the beach alone. When he returned, Steve often found himself thinking that the hour of solitude had been just what the pastor needed. There was something settled and peaceful in his expression whenever he returned from those walks. Steve had always assumed that it was the pastor's way of reclaiming a bit of solitude - until he'd asked him about it."

"No," Pastor Harris had replied. "I don't walk the beach to be alone, because that's not possible. I walk and talk with God."

"You mean pray?"

"No," Pastor Harris said again. "I mean talk. Never forget that God is your friend. And like all friends, He longs to hear what's been happening in your life. Good or bad, whether it's been full of sorrow or anger, and even when you're questioning why terrible things have to happen. So I talk with him."

"What do you say?"

"What do you say to your friends?"

..."We talk in the same way that you and I do."

"Does he answer?" Steve was skeptical.

"Always."

"You hear him?"

"Yes," he said, "but not with my ears." He put a hand to his chest. "This is where I hear the answers. This is where I feel his presence."”

Hanna's Dream is a very simple book - there's no fancy language or hard to get to metaphors. The beauty of this book is in the simplicity of the story. The writer presents everything to the reader on a dinner plate with fork and everything. I usually call these "lazy read" books, but that doesn't mean that they are bad books. I enjoyed reading Hanna's Dream because like the writer, I, too, love animals. The story wasn't heart wrenching or gut stabbing, but there were parts/dialogues (especially between Sam and Corinna) that had me feeling what they felt.

My favorite character in the book was Sam. When I first asked myself who I connected to the most, and who I enjoyed reading the most, I was surprised when my mind answered: Sam. Sam is very simple in character, and yes very diverse as well. His character is believable and his dialogue is superbly written. I learned the most from him and his wife's dialogues together. It would seem to me that they are the most well rounded in the whole book.

As I read further into the book, I found the Hannah/Harriet dichotomy interesting. Harriet, the manager of the zoo, is a foster child, just like Hanna. She was neglected by Maude and told that she was ugly. In addition, she was bounced from home to home, and didn't really have anyone in her life and even in her adult life had no one to lean on.

Both characters are very similar, even though Hanna happens to be an elephant. Hanna was neglected at an early age, with her mother being murdered. She also had no one to love her, initially and even bears physical scars from someone abusing her on the ship that transported her to the zoo. She was also bounced around from owner to owner - Max, Sam, and now Neva.

I was very surprised that Harriet never realized in the book just how similar her situation was to Hanna's. She could have learned from Hanna and leaned on her. But Harriet is always too busy in the novel with trying to steal someone else's life (Max's) instead of living her own. Perhaps the lesson here is that we could all learn from animals. Also, both names start with an H, intentional perhaps?

"From her night table Harriet pulled a thick stack of unframed pictures and fingered them like rosary beads. She left on top a close-up of the face of a young elephant, its left eye mangled and swollen shut, the eyelid pulpy and weeping blood. Under the picture was written in faint pencil, OUR DEAR GIRL. The photograph was of Hannah, freshly orphaned: Hannah, Maxine's crowning achievement, the object of her final passion. A big, awkward, wounded creature who was lucky enough to be loved by a woman who saw beauty where there wasn't any. Along the bottom of the photograph was written, THE FINAL RED TAPE IS DONE, AND WE SHALL HAVE HER!"

There's also an aspect of religion in this book. Sam and Corinna lose their baby, and Corinna never really forgives God until she and Sam start believing that Hannah is their dead baby's incarnate. The message that I found here is: always hope, and always stay optimistic because God works in mysterious ways.

The book overall is a "cute" read. I label it cute because as I stated above, it's very simple and straight to the point. There's no hallways to get lost in or rocks to stumble on. It was a very quick read, and I enjoyed reading about Hannah, the elephant. Will I remember this book, 6 months from now? Probably not, unless someone sparks my memory

When I realized that Wally Lamb had written another book after so many years, I was excited! Especially when the library informed me that I was the first to check it out. I've read Wally Lamb's other two novels, "She's Come Undone," and "I Know This Much is True," and I wasn't disappointed. I read both of them while I was working on my B.A. of English and he became one of my favorite writers. After years of waiting, I had pretty much given up on Lamb writing another book. Surprise !!

My first thought was: Wow, that's a monster! It wouldn't even fit in my purse :) lol. To the book...

There wasn't one dull moment throughout the book. The story line was nice with a variety of characters that were very well rounded. My favorite character was Lolly, even though she died half way through the book. I related to her more because she defied the norms of her time. Being a lesbian and raising her brother's child, while keeping a farm and a prison running.

Wally Lamb creates characters that the reader will miss once they are finished with the book.

The protagonist, Caleum Quirk, says that we are all stuck in a maze of sorts, that we get lost in. This is what the book is about. Columbine, the Iraqi war, post traumatic stress disorder, and just ordinary life. We all have our own mazes that are there for a purpose - and we must embrace our prison in order to find what we need. Another quote that is repeated quite frequently throughout the book is: In searching for what we want, we end up finding what we need.

Caleum Quirk wanted just an ordinary life - he discovered his family secrets that at first were shocking, but later on he realized that he needed to know these things, and in knowing them, he became more at peace.. (the conclusion, when he has his epiphany, and says, this was the hour I first believed.")

Maureen wanted her stress to go away from her experience of Columbine - she ended up going to prison for running over a boy while high from drugs she stole at the hospital she worked at. She needed to go to prison, because there, she found a way to heal herself through healing others in the prison hospice.

Obviously, Al found the mustang he wanted - and in doing so, he also found the woman that he had needed for so long :)

There are many characters that go on quests/journeys to find what they want, and end up getting what they need instead.

The book is wonderful. I would go on and on about just how superb it is, but then no one would probably read this :) The book is long and weighs at least 5 lbs, but it's definitely worth reading. I got more out of this book than I've received in the past 5 books I've read. And not only is this book a good read, but it has something to offer each reader.

Thank you, Wally Lamb for such a wonderful book !!

An interesting book. It read like a historical research paper, but it was unique. I didn't particularly like the historian's intrusions, every time he saw fit to add something. I got bored half way through the book, but trooped on. I owe Doris Lessing that much. I didn't learn anything new, which is a prerequisite for any book I read. This book reminded me of that movie that came out last year, "The Wicker Man." I'm not sure what Lessing was doing here - perhaps experimenting? (chuckle) Some bits were funny, however I found that a lot was repeated, over and over. I suppose this book will now be an interesting conversational topic and it's worth reading just for how interesting it is.

I didn't particularly like Sophia. She was too concerned with trying to get that man to fall in love with her when she should have been trying to save her friend. I thought the writing flowed well, and I learned a lot about Russia and Stalin. I probably won't remember it either, as someone below admitted. Some of the descriptions and metaphors are nice as well; especially the red scarf metaphor. I recommend it :) It definitely wasn't boring.

I thought this book was rather strange. I also found it difficult to follow the family line as the book progressed and kept turning back to figure out who the next story was about. Although when the story got to Annie, the nurse, it seemed that the stories unfolded more clearly. I didn't really care for some of the stories, but there were a few that tickled me!! The story about the girl who had problems and escaped from the mental institution was a favorite - especially when she put her sister's dress on over her scrubs - this got me laughing! I also liked the story about the little girl who was obsessed with Herman Melville and the Beatles. She reminded me of myself when I was a girl. Once I finished the book, my initial thoughts were trying to figure out what the point of the book as a whole is. I'm thinking that it's just a family of women who defied societal norms in their day. Or perhaps the message readers are to swallow is that oddities stay within families, even years later? My overall opinion is that the book is unique in itself and definitely worth reading, at least for the few stories in it that one won't be able to forget and also for the comical aspect. I enjoyed the titles of the stories and the puzzles of trying to figure out the symbolism within each one. I finished this book in about three days, which should have been one. I feel that this book is meant to be read in one sitting - perhaps then there wouldn't have been any confusion as to who was who in the stories :)

As with every book by Kundera, I finished it and was stunned. I never really know where to begin with his books. I love them, that's for sure, and he's one of my favorite writers, but he touches upon so many things in each book that I always feel that I missed something! The beauty of Kundera's writing is the way he portrays the human psyche. I haven't read too many writers that do such a fantastic job of defining a character's thoughts as he does. What I really enjoyed about Slowness is that it was in fact very comical. There were parts that were so silly that I couldn't help but laugh. Especially the part where a certain someone is fixated on a certain woman's body part, a part of her behind, and so fixated that he can't even think of anything else to say except that the moon looks like an asshole! The part of the book that I feel readers are to take away from this book lies in this quote:

There is a secret bond between slowness and memory, between speed and forgetting. Consider this utterly commonplace situation: a man is walking down the street. At a certain moment, he tries to recall something, but the recollection escapes him. Automatically, he slows down. Meanwhile, a person who wants to forget a disagreeable incident he has just lived through starts unconsciously to speed up his space, as if he were trying to distance himself from a thing still too close to him in time. In existential mathematics, that experience takes the form of two basic equations: the degree of slowness is directly proportional to the intensity of memory; the degree of speed is directly proportional to the intensity of forgetting.

I like this quote, and the idea, mainly because I think it is true. This is why I adore Kundera; he writes his thoughts down in a way that no one else has. He takes the ideas that we only think about, and brings them to life through his writing.

Do I recommend the book? HELL YES !! Anything written by Kundera is worth reading. :)

I really enjoyed reading this book, and pretty much read it in one sitting. It was comical, well written, and educational. This book had me chuckling every so often that even my dog looked up with questioning eyes. The plot was ridiculous in itself - the panties left in his jacket, the invitation for punishment. Besides the comical aspect - there were more deeper issues if one dug deep enough. The death vs deaf dichotomy, the whole idea that deafness is comical, while blindness is tragic. I believe that over 70% of people living in the United States don't even know how to listen and are in a way symbolically, deaf. It is easy to hear someone speaking, and rather difficult to actually sit and listen. On the other hand, learning to live with deafness as it progresses is also a type of death, as the protagonist pointed out. The book flowed very well and kept me up for most of the night. I definitely recommend this book. I'm now curious about the writer's other books - are they as well written and comical??

When I finished reading, I wanted to know what happened to Owen !! I don't know if you guys felt the same way, but the book left me craving to know what happens to him. But, that was the whole point of the story. We suffer because we can't ever surmise what life is going to throw our way, or take away. The metaphor of the dark ties in nicely with the idea that we are all in the dark; we don't have a manual that tells us how to live life, or what to do if caught in bad situations. We do what our nature tells us to do, whether that is watching movies with our grandfathers, or creating fictional stories in our rooms once everyone has closed their eyes.

This book reminded me a lot of Kurt Vonnegaut's (spelling?) books. The story that August creates at night so that he can escape from painful memories was very believable. I felt like I was there, right with Owen, wondering what the hell was going on with America. The writing flowed nicely without any awkward moments in the novel.

The book is mainly about discovering ourselves when we feel that we are broken inside. The book describes the things that we hide from the public, the things we are ashamed of, like watching movies all day and then falling asleep. And it's also about learning to let go and live again. This was a very short read, but it was packed with meaning.