Les Miserables will be a tough read for some. Victor Hugo, in typical Nineteenth Century prose, is exceedingly verbose. His character introductions go on literally page after page, covering minute details that some modern readers will find tedious. Not only are they long, but they break the modern writing rule of "show rather than tell." When he presents new characters, we don't hear them converse or see their actions to form our own opinions. Hugo simply regurgitates a ten or twenty-page biography on them.

But this was how books were written then, and he did it as well as it could be done. The language is marvelous and rich, the characters interesting and complete, and the story sweeping and classic.

Jean Valjean, freshly released from a French prison, is caught stealing silver from an extraordinarily pious Bishop. Amazingly, this Bishop denies the silver is stolen, allowing Valjean to go free. Valjean, brutalized by nineteen years of life in "the galleys" and suffering poverty and maltreatment as an ex-convict, is so affected by this merciful act that he vows to reform. Seven years later he has changed his name and transformed himself into a righteous and contributing member of society, now a prominent factory owner and town Mayor. Life is good as he shares his profits and kind heart with the poor and unfortunate--until his past catches up with him. Valjean is then faced with an incredible predicament whose genius and complexity can be appreciated only by plowing through the full text.

Historically, this is an important literary work. Much of its political and religious sub-text may be lost, however, on those unfamiliar with the basics of the French Revolution. Like Valjean, readers will be better people for making the journey through this book. --Christopher Bonn Jonnes, author of Wake Up Dead.

Les Miserables begins in the same year as Dumas' Monte Cristo (1815) with the escape of Jean Vajean from prison, where he spent 20 years for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his family. After becoming the mayor of a French city under another name, Valjean meets a woman named Fantine and a police inspector named Javert. One's desperation will move his heart to pity while the other's relentless adherence to the letter of the law will cause him to live in perpetual hiding.

I read this book in high school and, to tell the truth, I can't really remember what I was thinking at the time I started it. After all, I don't think most high school students (myself included) would understand the full historical weight of such a work. If Monte Cristo is a historical lesson unto itself, Les Miserables is a veritable tome of 19th century French culture and politics. Weighing in at 1463 pages, Hugo's story will bore you sometimes but will also move you at least as much. This is the book wherein lies Hugo's famous account of the Battle of Waterloo (which, at about 60 pages, has apparently little to do with the actual storyline) in all of its detail, dark descriptions of Paris' sewers which were used by revolutionaries, and of course the vivid account of the city of Paris itself in all of its glory. Hugo names every street and shop and almost every other minor detail and character you could possibly imagine along the way. We follow the characters of Valjean, Fantine, Cosette (the daughter of Fantine), Javert, Thenardier, Marius and others for nearly 20 years. Aptly titling his work "The Miserable", Hugo takes us to the very bottom of Paris' underground world of poverty, prostitution, and suffering. Indeed, Les Miserables involves, like most novels, a struggle of sorts. But here everything seems more painful, more hopeless than your typical novel. The fictional characters, embedded in a stunningly detailed historical time and place, are unusually real and fallible. And in the end this is a story about justice, mainly for the weak and the opressed.

Now for some casual thoughts. The only other novel I've read that's similar to this one (at least in time and place) is Monte Cristo, so I often find myself comparing the two. Although they share a common historical backdrop, the two works are very different in feeling. Dumas' is a story of justice and revenge but it incorporates adventure and psychological thriller purely for entertainment. Monte Cristo is also a lighter read, more agile on its feet and quick to please; we get engaging and tense dialogue and characters who are slightly unbelievable in their wit or lack thereof. Les Miserables, however, is a heavy book (in more ways than one). Hugo takes all the time in the world to introduce us to each and every character and describe geographical, political, and historical events with a ferocious attention to detail. And while Monte Cristo is primarily about a single man and his fallible-ridden philosophy of vengeance, Les Miserables is about a whole society and its faults. Hugo's scope is thus incomparably more vast than your average novel.

After reading this book I felt like I'd been on an epic journey to other worlds and back, and at the end of it all I was...tired, very tired. But then again a lot of great literature is like that.

My experience with Victor Hugo's classic, Les Misérables, was quite by accident. While studying France's political turmoil during the 1800's, my tenth grade world history professor decided to waste some class time by showing us a video. At first, I paid no attention to the video, considering the fact that most of the movies he showed us were taped off of the history channel a good century ago. Soon I found myself intrigued with the plot twists and characters. After we finished the movie, I decided to read the book for English. Thinking that if the book was too boring, I had already seen the movie so I could fake my way through the essay test. I have never loved a book so much in my life! I found myself reading it during films in Spanish, under my desk in history, and losing sleep because I was staying up all night to read. I finished the complete unabridged novel in five days, a very enormous feat for a busy teenager! I found Javert to be the most interesting character and felt that if his dedication to justice hadn't been misguided, he could have been a hero in the story. He could have been Enjolras. I wish every high school student was required to read this book, although I know it would not bring them as much joy as it brought me. The only reason I love this story so much, is because it wasn't force-feed to me. I now have tickets to see the musical this summer in Toronto and can hardly wait to go. Everyone can find a character they identify with. Many young girls can relate to Eponine's love for Marius that is not returned, while others may relate to Enjolras' continued struggle for his beliefs. There are many lessons Hugo has included in this book: redemption, forgiveness, justice, honor, love, war, poverty, bravery, and the division among social classes. Even though this book was written in a different time, in a different place, its controversy and story will always live on because its themes are timeless.

nineteen eighty-four was definitely a book with a storyline that fit my interests. Politics, psychology, love, sex, and unexpected twists of plot make it an interesting read. As one is reading, it's almost as if the reader is stuck in the same kind of darkness and ignorance that is imposed upon the characters. Will the next page be another mundane day in the live of Winston or will there be exciting happenings as the characters defy the absolute authority of the party? The reader must feel around in the dark so to speak, and the chronological jumps only make it more unpredictable.

The predominating theme of the novel is the organization known as Ingsoc, or the english socialism movement-usually referred to as "the party." The party rules over one of the three superstates-Oceania. Oceania is constantly at war with one of the other two superstates, which are Eastasia and Eurasia. This war becomes significant later in the book as a vital contributing factor to the success of the party's absolute rule. In Oceania there are three classes. The inner party (approx. 1% of the population) is at the topmost rung of society-afforded all the luxuries one could ask for to live comfortably. They also have the privilege of being allowed to turn off the hated telescreens, through which the "thought police" constantly watch the activities of every party member. The outer party (of which Winston Smith is a member-approx. 18% of the population) are the group of people who are the most psychologically controlled. Most are assigned jobs which involve the changing of historical records and falsifying the media. They are poorly provided for and closely controlled. Anyone smart or ambitious enough to be a danger to the power of the party is eliminated, and through psychological control, even their closest friends (or more appropriately "comrades," as the party has abolished the concept of friendship) can be made to forget that the eliminated person ever existed. The party throughout the book is even hard at work creating a new language that will drastically narrow the ability of its speakers to think. All concepts which might be considered "thoughcrime" (i.e. ideas that might threaten the party) are destroyed by means of their removal from language-no words to describe them exist, and therefore the concepts cannot be grasped. The outer party is the cornerstone of Ingsoc. Third, there are the "proles," or proletariats. They make up the other 81% of the population. The proles are more or less free to do as they please, considered to be harmless, and happy enough to live very simple lives in blissful ignorance.

Winston Smith works for the Ministry of Truth, which ironically is in the business of fabricating intricate lies. Through the haze and stupor created by the psychological vice imposed upon him by the party, Winston occasionally has memories that the past was somehow better before the revolution that brought the party to power. Very early on in the book he has thoughts of escaping the watchful eyes of the thought police and living more freely. This eventually leads him to create a hiding place, and to fall in love with the secretly rebellious Julia. From here, Winston's adventure as a member of the secret "brotherhood" begins.

For the most part, I had a wonderful time reading this book. I had a lot of trouble putting it down at times. The detailed descriptions, deep ideological explanations and very powerful overall moods that Orwell creates not only make the story realistic, but makes you feel as if you are part of the story-you can feel the misery and quiet outrage under the party's oppression. You can taste the freshness and novelty of the freedom when Winston and Julia hide in their apartment in the prole neighborhood. The ending is rather depressing and disappointing, but getting there is definitely a fun head trip. One final word of advice-don't pick this book up with the intention of only reading for a little while...it's quite impossible to do so.

Although I have generally found Orwell to be a politically confused thinker, 1984 stands out as one of the best and most forward thinking works I have ever read. The amount of relevance this book has today is overwhelming, considering modern government propaganda techniques and the double edged sword of technology. This story serves as a warning to all who trust the government, especially in regards to privacy issues.

Winston Smith, while not the ideal romantic protagonist, is still compelling in his own right with his inspiring (and finally tragic) fight against Big Brother. The struggle that takes place between Winston and the government in 1984 is psychologically thrilling and intense, and it is still difficult for me to put the book down each time I read it. I am particularly drawn to the character of O'Brien, who represents to me the culmination of a path that all seasoned politicians and government officials travel down.

The year 1984 has come and past, but an extreme statist government similar to the one portrayed in the novel still may haunt us in the future.

"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four."

In the world depicted in this powerful novel, the use of logic is prohibited. Citizens are required to follow the Party's ideas, believe the Party's lies, hate the Party's enemies, rejoice at the Party's victories. If the Party contradicts itself (which is common), the members are forbidden to ask questions, but to follow blindly, as sheep led to slaughter. Big Brother perfected what the Communists only dreamed of -- absolute obedience, total loyalty to a cruel master. Even simple human emotions are discouraged.

What a perfect setting for a love story! Of course, there is romance entwined into the precise fibers of 1984, but the novel is not a love story. It's a society story, a political story. A story of human existence, if you will. This is a story about an eternal food chain. Though Winston's story is not the message, one grows to love him for endeavors to understand his twisted world.

I read this book after hearing about it for many years. People will hear of it for many years to come, no doubt. The main message of the novel leaves the reader reeling, suddenly needing some time to reflect. Questions arise in the reader's mind: What holds our society together? What keeps Communism from working in reality? Could this ever happen?

As a citizen of the US for all of my 17 years, I have come to value my freedom more after reading 1984. I'm thankful to live here where I can do pretty much anything I please, instead of Orwell's imaginary Oceania, where imagining committing a crime could land you several months of torture at "The Ministry of Love".

I can say for certain that this book isn't in my high school's literature curriculum. It should be. If we could learn to appreciate our liberty while we are young, the US would be a much better place.

To be honest with all you gentle readers, I don't much admire War novels, nor do I stand by the title of my review. Generally, I believe War is truly Hell.

But last Winter, in the grips of a bout of quasi-depression-for-teens following a move to the most FLAT province in Canada, I truly thought I was in Hell. An e-mail friend suggested Catch-22 to use up edgy cabin-fever time. Now, let it be known that my attention span for most novels dwindles quickly, especially if the book is slow to pick up. While significantly slower to get 'into' than most of the writing I chase, Catch-22 sucked me in, like Alice down the rabbit hole. It is sharply funny, engaging, and chock full of delightful characters. The main character is a thinker; a young man disheartened by war and his own mortality. His name is Yossarian, and since reading this novel, he has stood out in my mind as being one of the most...sculpted... characters in the history of literature.

Put simply, this book is a satire about World War 2. Coming from a kid sickened by the very idea of war, I can say that this book is worth whatever bills you have to fork over for it. It's not about war, per se, but more about the human condition. In addition, it made me laugh a few times, something that only a few other works of fiction have ever been successful in accomplishing. I finished this book feeling oddly... renewed. If you're looking for something 'new' (or, so old it's new) and engaging, I heartily recommend 'Catch-22' by Joseph Heller.

In modern day, relatively few people read books which are written by contemporary authors, never mind authors from fifty years ago , but some books just stand out even to people who only have a minor knowledge of classic American literature. Joseph Heller's Catch-22 is one such novel. Set toward the end of World War II, the book follows a very vague plot line with a strange way of representing time but uses abundant, rich, and sometimes a little dark humor to weave an enthralling tale about the bombardier Yossarian and his struggle against reality, particularly the fact that he has to fly in a plane (with people whom he has never even met before shooting at him) just because he is told to.
The book is well written and it draws you (the reader) in by really relating you to the myriad characters and their unique quirks. There is little historical accuracy in this book and some things are so wrong that its downright funny, for example Milo Minderbinder's mess hall syndicate (M&M) which, run by a lowly mess officer, trades with countries and organizations all over the world (including Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia) turning a prophet using confusing tangles of twisted logic and the magic slogan "everyone has a share." The humor is by far the book's most prominent strength but the writing is a close second. The astoundingly detailed and descriptive prose makes the funny parts all the more zany and the heavy, semi-depressing parts so vivid and powerful that they are extremely moving at times. This combined with Heller's sharp wit and snappy 50's slang make this book an immensely entertaining read and certainly an example of a great American novel of merit.

Who is more dangerous to your sense of self-preservation, the enemy soldier who wants to kill you, or the superior officer who orders you into hostile fire? Joseph Heller took everything that is wrong and insane about war and bureaucracy and turned it loose onto the pages of CATCH-22.

Time does not progress in a linear fashion is this book. Characters that are furious when the minimum number of bomb-missions to be flown is raised to sixty are later appalled when it is raised to thirty. The pilots and crew are trapped in an endless circle of logic, time and red tape. Yossarian's attempts to preserve his life end with him exactly in the same place that he was before. Everything is structured so that escape is completely impossible. All the regulations and requirements keep looping around back upon themselves leaving Yoassarian with no options left.

The strange and bizarre characters that Heller created are really what give the book its teeth. Virtually every character has constructed a routine for himself (since this is set in the male-dominated military camps of WWII, just about all of the major characters are men) that distances him from the actual war effort. The leaders bury themselves into the deep sands of regulation and order, and grapple with tough problems like paperwork, the military hierarchy and organizing parades. The soldiers spend their time drinking, having sex with Italian prostitutes, getting into bar-fights or trying to get rich. What is interesting is that almost none of the characters even mention the opposing side in the war. CATCH-22's war is not about bravery or heroics, it is about selfishness and greed and insanity.

I disagree with those reviewers who have said that the order of the book appears random, as if Heller had written the book in a straightforward fashion and then merely shuffled the chapters around. With the book written in this way, we see the development of certain characters within their own bubble of time, freed from the distractions that other characters and their unrelated subplots would bring. It allows Heller to bring specific themes to the foreground when they are needed or let them sit in the background when they are not.

This is a really excellent book and I highly recommend it. I rate it at five stars because I honestly cannot find any fault with it. The book moves effortlessly from hilarity to tragedy while pausing only briefly to look at how the individual deals with the horror of war. Everything in this book is absolutely and hilariously absurd. One of Yossarian's friends, Milo, owns so many supplies and controls so much of the market that he is able to buy eggs at seven cents each, sell them at five cents and still run a handsome profit. A computer with a sense of humour decides to promote a man to major based purely on the fact that his last name (and his middle and first names) are the same word as the position.

This is a must read for everyone. The illogic will delight you, the humour will tickle you, and the reality of it all will scare the hell out of you.

Note: The Everyman's Library edition contains a new introduction by Malcolm Bradbury, a timeline for notable events in the period during which the book is set and the preface that Heller himself wrote for the 1994 re-issue. If you are planning on buying this book, I recommend getting the Everyman's Library edition, as the added features are quite worth it. Plus, it comes with one of those built-in cloth bookmarks that are so handy.

I am ashamed to admit it, but, yes, I have been reading for over 25 years and this is the very first time that I have ever read Jane Austen. None of her novels were required in high school, no literature class that I took in college used any as a text, and I had never thought to pursue her for sheer entertainment. It is quite sad, actually, for I find Austen much more accessible than some of the classic that I did have to wade through, including Wuthering Heights and The Scarlet Letter. Austen has recently seen a resurgence in popularity, likely due to the recent BBC and Hollywood adaptations of her books, including the Emma Thompson vehicle Sense and Sensibility.

Pride and Prejudice was Austen's second novel, following the success of Sense and Sensibility. Its original title was--and I'm not making this up a la Dave Barry--First Impressions. To my taste, this would have been a much more apt title, but it had been used by another author before Austen could get this book in print. The story is about the five Bennet sisters, who, while not orphaned or penniless, have few choices as to husbands because their father's estate is entailed on a male heir, and they have no brother. The father seems to have resigned them to their fate, but their mother wastes no opportunity to arrange a good match for her daughters. The two oldest--Jane and Elizabeth--are level-headed and quite understand the position that they are in, but the youngest three are flirtatious and giddy, a bad combination in winning society's eye. Disasters ensue when eligible bachelors Mr. Bingley and Mr. Darcy come to town, as well as the officers of the ---shire regiment.

The reason First Impressions would have been a better title is that each character--not just the main two, Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy--is constantly assuming things about other characters based on their initial reception of them. Mr. Darcy, in the country, is too proud to dance with any of the young women because of his mistaken impression that they are all declasse; Elizabeth forms her prejudices about Mr. Darcy because of her first meeting with him and this dance snub. The townsfolk think the best of Mr. Wickham because his first impression on everyone is quite favorable. And on and on and on.

Very interesting, but it goes on forever, as the characters can never be quite direct given the mores of the time. That does not mean that they can not be insulting, as a particularly vicious exchange between Lady Catherine and Elizabeth shows. I'm glad that I have now broken my Austen fast, but I think that I can wait awhile before digesting any more.

I have always loved the style and social politics of the Regency period (the time of Jane Austen.) But when I read "Sense and Sensibility" in 7th grade I found the first few chapters lifeless, dull and hard to read. Two years later I was encouraged by a friend to give "Pride and Prejudice" a try. I did and have since become a complete Janeite. I am now able to peruse joyfully through "Sense and Sensibility" with a new understanding and appreciation of Jane Austen. The reason? "Pride and Prejudice" is fresh, witty and is a great introduction to Jane Austen's writing style without the formality of some of her other novels (unlike S&S and Persuasion Austen does not give us a 10 page history of each family and their fortune.) If you have never read Jane Austen or have read her other novels and found them boring, read Pride and Prejudice. The characters, and the situations Austen presents to them, are hysterical and reveal a lot about Regency society and morality. This book perfectly compliments a great writer like Jane Austen and is essential to every reader's library. The Penguin Edition of the book is stellar and I personally recommend it not only for the in-depth and indispensable footnotes, but also for the cover that is non-suggestive of any of the characters' appearances. In summary "Pride and Prejudice" is a great book for beginner Austen readers and seasoned fans, and Penguin Classics is a great edition for fully enjoying and understanding the book.

It doesn't get better than Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Whether you're the hopeless romantic or you just love the classics, you're going to love this book. Though I am only sixteen, I consider myself to be moderately well-read. I love reading, and, when I am between books, my life feels desolate and empty. One day, while in the most barren pit of ennui, I picked up Pride and Prejudice at my mother's recommendation. I do not ordinarily like my mother's taste in reading; her favorite books tend to be very dull, but so deep was my boredom that I succumbed to her suggestion. I wasn't displeased with what I found. I fell in love with the book at the first sentence. I brought my beloved book to the dinner table, to my classes and late into the night. I love everything about it. I love the characters; especially Elizabeth Bennet! I love the Victorian vernavular which works so well for this particular novel. I love the scintillating plot and the suspense created by knowing that Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy should be together but their pride and prejudice (hence the title) are temporarily keeping them apart. The language that the novel is written in might be a little more difficult to read than contemporary literature, but once one gets accustomed to it, it makes the novel even more pleasurable. I cannot imagine Elizabeth or Darcy or Bingley or any of the other characters speaking any less eloquently; it would ruin the whole experience! The flowery language completes the whole effect of reading a Jane Austen novel. If a disgruntled female reader put down Pride and Prejudice, pick it back up! I strongly suggest it because it may prove to be tedious at first but if read again, it would probably read more easily. I can offer no suggestions to the male reader, however, because generally this book, in ever essence, is a female novel. I am not saying that men would definetly not enjoy it; I'm simply saying that I have yet to meet any male who has not addressed this book in a very vehement manner. I simply love this book in its entirety, and I know it won't be too long before I pick it up again. Jane Austen surely knew what she was doing when she wrote this one! Her Pride and Prejudice will always have an honored spot on my bookshelf.

I initially approached this book with a great deal of trepidation. I had never read Dostoyevsky, and was concerned that I would get bogged down in some lengthy, mind-numbingly boring, nineteenth-century treatise on the bestial nature of man or something. I am happy to report this is not the case. Instead, and to my delight, it is a smoothly flowing and fascinating story of a young man who succumbs to the most base desire, and the impact this has both psychologically and otherwise on himself and those around him.

To be sure, the book seems wordy in places, but I suspect this has to do with the translation. And what translator in his right mind would be bold enough to edit the great Dostoyevsky? But this is a very minor problem.

What we get with Dostoyevsky is dramatic tension, detailed and believable human characters, and brilliant insight into human nature. Early in the novel our hero meets and has a lengthy conversation with Marmeladov, a drunkard. This conversation is never uninteresting and ultimately becomes pathetic and heartbreaking, but I kept wondering why so much time was spent on it. As I got deeper into the book, I understood why this conversation was so important, and realized that I was in the hands of a master storyteller. This is also indicative of the way in which the story reveals itself. Nothing is hurried. These people speak the way we actually speak to one another in real life, and more importantly, Dostoyevsky is able to flesh out his characters into whole, three-dimensional human beings.

And what a diverse group of characters! Each is fleshed out, each is marvelously complex. Razujmikhin, the talkative, gregarious, good-hearted, insecure and destitute student; Sonia, the tragic child-prostitute, with a sense of rightness in the world; Petrovich, the self-important, self-made man, completely out of touch with his own humanity; Dunia, the honorable, wronged sister: we feel like we know these people because we've met people like them. They fit within our understanding of the way human beings are.

Dostoyevsky also displays great insight into human nature. Svidrigailov, for example, talks of his wife as liking to be offended. "We all like to be offended," he says, "but she in particular loved to be offended." It suddenly struck me how true this is. It gives us a chance to act indignantly, to lash out at our enemies, to gain favor with our allies. I don't believe I've ever seen this thought expressed in literature before. In fact, it never occurred to me in real life! Petrovich, Dunia's suitor, not only expects to be loved, but because of his money, and her destitution, he expects to be adored! To be worshipped! He intentionally sought out a woman from whome he expected to get this, and is comletely flummoxed when she rejects him. His is an unusual character, but completely realized.

There is so much more to talk about: the character of Raskolnikov, which is meticulously and carefully revealed; the sense of isolation which descends on him after committing his crime; the cat and mouse game played on him by the police detective. I could go on and on. I haven't even mentioned the historical and social context in which this takes place. Suffice to say this is a very rich book.

Do not expect it to be a rip-roaring page turner. Sit down, relax, take your time, and savor it. It will be a very rewarding experience. And thank you SL, for recommending it.

Like many writers of his era, Dostoyevsky uses a lot of prose and little dialogue, which makes reading the book a bit of a plodding chore.

However, the story is anything but boring: Raskilnov, a poor student, comes up with the philosophy that killing an old female pawnbroker will actually be good for the world because she cheats people and is otherwise useless. It's premeditated --- he even counts exactly how many steps it takes from his place to her door.

The book also recounts the following few days when Raskilnov's mother and sister come to visit and he has to play his 'family role' i.e. "I'm a good son and brother when I'm not killing old women." In addition, he is involved with a family consisting of a dying mother, a father, 3 young sons and an 18-year-old daughter who must go into prostitution to support them.

So what happens to all of these characters in pre-Revolutionary Russia? What will be Raskilnov's punishment? Does he actually think he was right to kill? The answers unfold as you read this gem from the world of Russian literature -- so renown you feel like you really achieved something when you read it!

This novel stands out as one of the finest pieces of actual literature I have read. Top 5 at least.

First, let me pay tribute to "Everyman's Library Series". They make very handsome novels, complete with soft cream pages, and a built in fabric book mark. They all come in moroon, and add a certain pinache to any book collection. Best of all, they are well priced.

As for Crime and Punishment. I was very impressed. More often than not, I read the classics, and wonder how it is they have become classics. For Dostoevsky, there can be no doubt. And Crime and Punishment is his best known effort. Not his best though. C&P is the exploration of the world that it's hero/villain Raskolnikov occupies. He takes it apon himself to murder a particularly vile pawnbroker(thus making him a villain) under the guise of the highest moral resposibility. Well, no plan is perfect, and most of the book is an involved psycological examination of it's main character, the ways he tries to justify his crime to himself, and the people around him who have no idea what the hell is going on. Dostoevsky creates living breathing people that you care about in this tale. It's simple premise gives way to an incredibly complex story. The dialogues bewtween Raskolnikov, and Porfiry( the ever suspicious investigator) are wonderful. And then theres the clever and sneaky Svidrigailov, whom I found rather amusing at times. To me the book was very suspenseful. never knowing if or when young Raskolnikov would confess, or continue to hide in uncertainty due to the circumstancial evidence that linked him to the crime. SO many times I wanted to read to the end to find out. But I didn't, and neither should you. There's just so much depth to this book, I have no doubt it will recieve a return read. Perhaps in another 10 years I will read it, and get even more out of it. That's how all great books are. Highest recommendation.

George Orwell's Animal Farm is a superb animation of the Russian Revolutioon. The book is amusing and interesting; it includes a comic element as it synonymously demonstrates the evolution from the proletariat revolution to a totalitarian government led by the swine of the society. Orwell successfully simplified the not-so-simple theory of class stratification and Karl Marx's proposed solution of communism. Orwell's method of conveyance is incredibly inventive. He uses satire in the form of a fairy tale to share his indignation for ideological doctrines that would, if allowed, lead to the eventual destruction of a society. Each character in the story is representative of someone who was involved in the Russian Revolution. Old Major is Marx, and inspires the proletariat revolution by motivating the over-worked animals and educating them on the ways of the human beings, who represent the bourgeoisie. Orwell's creativity convinces the reader that the animals on the farm are intellectual beings, revolting against the tyranny of the humans. Animal Farm offers itself as an example of a responsible criticism of Marxism. The story gives us a peek at the Utopian vision, and then offers a long look at what results from using a Marxist approach at achieving it. I strongly reccomend this book, as it is entertaining and educational. Orwell succeeded in creating a fairy tale that evokes both sadness and laughter, while causing us to feel sympathy and even empathy for the working class animals. The book escapes complexity, but its message does not.

Taking a Russian history class and learning in detail about Joseph Stalin's rule would help one understand Animal Farm much better, as well as the characters. George Orwell's hatred of totalitarianism, especially that of the Stalinist USSR, formed the basis for this short satirical fiction.

A band of oppressed farm animals oust Jones, their cruel human owner and take over the farm. Led by two pigs, Napoleon and Snowball, the animals proceed to run the farm by themselves so they are no longer exploited.

Napoleon is clearly Stalin, while Snowball is based on Leon Trotsky, and the Old Major is Lenin. Squealer may be Molotov or Kaganovich, but I'm not sure. The first attack on the Farm by Jones and his men is based on the Russian Civil War (1918-1921), where disorganized factions of anti-communists attacked the Soviet Union from all sides, and lost. However, things don't always go in parallel, as the Old Major dies before the Revolution. Lenin of course precipitated the Revolution in 1917. And note the date of the liberation of Manor Farm: 12 October. That is close to 24 October, the date of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Other items: Boxer the horse is the epitome of the hard worker whose two sayings are "Napoleon is always right" and "I will work harder." In fact he may be Stakhanov, the worker whose team so efficiently met their quota in one of Stalin's 5-Year Plans, that the word Stakhanovite became synonymous with an A-One Soviet worker. And the inability of most animals to read only the first two letters of the alphabet hint at their being lowly, illiterate subjects blindly obedient to the State.

The Seven Commandments--ironic for a Biblical reference in an atheist system-- plays an important key to the book, as they keep changing during Napoleon's reign. They are: "Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy, 2) Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend, 3) No animal shall wear clothes, 4) No animal shall sleep in a bed, 5) No animal shall drink alcohol, 6) No animal shall kill any other animal, and 7) All animals are equal." However, as Napoleon consolidates his rule, the Commandments become slightly altered. For example, after the animal executions, analogous to Stalin's purges, the sixth Commandment has the words "without cause" appended. And talk about irony in using the name of Napoleon for the Stalin character when in fact Napoleon invaded Russia, the result of which increased distrust of the West by Russians.

Orwell's portrait of the totalitarian state would be finalized in his masterpiece 1984. Animal Farm was a preview for that grand work, but the final thing that comes through in this book is that the Stalinist regime was just as oppressive as the czarist regime, with the ordinary animals on the receiving end-i.e. "but some animals are more equal than others."

I enjoyed reading 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell. It is a book that if you don't read all that carefully can just be mistaken for a book about the revolution that happens in just one farm, but it is really much much more.
George Orwell was a very political writer in books such as '1984' and, this book, 'Animal Farm.' He was a socialist that was critical of Communism and hated Totalitaianism. He thought that the modern man was unable to deal with demands of his history, so it is interesting that he chose animals to tell this interpretation of government.
I see it as an interpretation of what went down in Germany during and prior to World War 2, starting with Stalin and going to Hitler. The different figures from actual history are sometimes blended into one character, but it still follows the same principles. The way that Orwell does this is very clever and creative. It takes the idea of talking animals to the next level and shows them using some extreme personification.
If you are contemplating this book, I think that you really should. It is a great way to see not only an interesting way to look at the government, but as the book progresses you will see a very interesting comment about human nature. I give it a good two thumbs up. It may not be that long or that thick of a book, but it is really good with good statements. ENJOY!!!

I read Jane Eyre for my AP Lit. Class in the 12th grade. I figured, oh just another boring book. WOW! was I completely mistaken. ALthough long, Jane Eyre could have been 1,000 pages and I still would have read every page, with joy. The growth Jane Eyre, the novels main character and Protagonist, goes through throughout the novel is amazing. Born into an unloving world, with rejection and anger at every corner, Jane is forced to keep herself company and therefore, her only friend is herself. Adopted by her uncle, who soon dies, Jane is forced to live with her aunt Reed. I dont want to summarize about all this stuff, I am going to get down to the nitty-gritty. The novel mainly centers around Jane and her love for Rochester. When Jane becomes eighteen, she is hired to govern at the mansion of Rochesters, and to guide and teach his daughter, Adele. The marvelous love story between Jane and Rochester is as intense as anything you will ever read. At times while reading the novel, I would have to put the novel down and take in what I was reading. The passion and heart exhibited by these two characters was at times unbearable. If you want to read a true novel, full of power and emotion, read Jane Eyre- the best novel ever written. :-)

When I first read Jane Eyre, I (and I think many others) was taken in by the odd combination of romance and ominous overtones that makes Jane Eyre such a unique book. Of course, the Victorian-era writing and social commentary also made an impression.

But upon reflection, underneath all of this is a story of people with difficult lives learning to find and accept each other and hopefully coming to peace and happiness despite long odds. Maybe my second reading just comes from a twenty-first century mind reading things into a nineteenth century book that just aren't there. But to me, the book does have the feel of a modern story of hardship as well as a Victorian story of people trying to overcome their backgrounds to find love.

Jane Eyre tells the life story of an orphaned girl sent away to a harsh boarding school by a cruel aunt. Despite the harsh nature of the school, Jane thrived at the school since she is finally out from her aunt's crushing dislike for her. She graduated and took a job as a governess for a girl in the care of a mysterious man who spent much of his time traveling abroad, Mr. Rochester.

At first, the two do not like each other. This is compounded by the fact that Jane thinks she is plain looking and not worthy of his company. But the two develop a peculiar friendship, and there are many signs that their feelings are deeper. But Mr. Rochester is busy courting other ladies at the time. Mr. Rochester also seems to have a secret that he will not divulge to Jane but may have serious consequences for her.

Jane's job as a governess and the friendship that develops make it seem that the book will quickly become a Jane Austen book (which of course, would not have been a bad thing) in which the man and woman from different classes find love with one another, but from the point of the friendship blooming, Jane Eyre takes a few remarkable twists and turns that I had not expected and that make for real page-turning.

But it is as much the quiet desperation of both Jane and Mr. Rochester and their struggle to find each other despite this that makes Jane Eyre a book truly worth reading and treasuring.

I read this book in junior high school and, like so many other girls, fell head over heels in love with Mr. Rochester; after all this time, the book is still a terrific read. The first part is classic Cinderella with an interesting twist. Jane is an orphan who is abused and mistreated by her rich and evil stepmother and her nasty cousins; unlike Cinderella, Jane stands up age age 10 and fights back. She is promptly shunted off to a school for girls from poor families, where she spends the next eight years. Needing a change of scene and environment, she answers an advertisement for a governess and enters the household of Mr. Rochester. Rochester, however, is no Prince Charming; he's 17 or 18 years older than Jane, hard, bitter, cynical, selfish, and, unknown to all but a few, encumbered with a wife who is the prototype of the "mad wife in the attic". Rochester is a romantic at heart, however; he is captivated by Jane's innocence and simplicity. We all know how the book comes out so there is no sense in rehashing the plot; suffice to say that Bronte is a marvelous storyteller. The one problem I have with Jane Eyre is the same that arises in Bronte's other books, and that is her stifling insularity; she seems unable to find value in anything that outside her own narrow, English Protestant frame of reference. However, this is a small caveat in this book. "Jane Eyre" is a classic romantic novel that has entranced generations of readers and looks good for generations to come.

An outstanding book. This book is a decent look at humanity. It is a simple explanation of human nature. All of these are descriptions of a novel I recently read by the name, "Of Mice and Men" by a well-known author John Steinbeck. I would rate this book 8 on a scale of 10 because I learned so much about the way we treat others and their reactions, told through a man who has had much experience with the subject. Lennie, a big dumb, jock, was born slow, mentaly incapable of reacting to daily life. After George, a caring yet riggid man befriends him early in child hood, the two become traveling partners and best buddies. George becomes weary of Lennie's childish ways and misachievous antics, which continually causes the pair trouble and forces them to skip around the country.
"That ranch we're goin' to is right down there about a quarter mile. We're gonna go in an' see the boss. Now, look-- I'll give him the work tickets, but you ain't gonna say a word. You jus' stand there and son't say nothing. If he finds out what a crazy ... you are, we won't get no job, but if he sees ya work before he hears ya talk we're set. Ya got that?"
This story is special because all aspects of diction, from all characters are described in simple English. The story had no useless vocabulary or pointless explaining, just a plain dexcription of the people. The story also uses vivid imagery when George tells Lennie about how they were going to own a ranch and Lennie can raise rabbits. Steinbeck reveals the simle truth about racism, dgradation, and jelousy. People in the book are struggling to overcome an obstacle that holds them back. At their final stop, they meet all types of people, which teach them about diversity and how to deal with it. The story's resolution reveals how humans deal with the sorrow of our society. The outcome may shock us, yet it seems just in it's own irony. I sincerely suggest this book to those looking to explore humanity and to those who would like to know what friendship and loyalty is and if you liked "To Kill a Mocking Bird" or "The Catcher in the Rye", you will like this book because I, Jamil Faruque a student of Falls Church HS, have read both of these books which shows similarities with "Of Mice and Men"

My name is Kelly, and I am a junior in high school and I was recently assigned to read John Stienbeck's novel OF MICE AND MEN. I thouroughly enjoyed reading this book, for many different reasons. For instance, Steinbeck uses a storyline that grabs the attention of all ages, young or old. In the begining, we are introduced to George and Lennie the novel's two main characters. They are fleeing from their former hometown in search of a new job opportunity on a ranch located in the Salinas Valley. The two fathem a dream of owning their own ranch one day with lots of acres and rabbits. They work out a plan to earn money so this dream can be fulfilled. While on the ranch the young childish Lennie is objected to numerous situations, in which they put George in akward posiitions. George's loyalty is constantly tested throughout the novel. With a surprise ending their dream seems to fade away. This book is one everyone should read, because it teaches the meaning of friendship and the "American Dream".

This novel is about friendships and dreams shared by two men named George and Lennie. They dream about one day owning a farm. George acts as a father figure to Lennie, who is large and simpleminded, calming him and helping him to control his physical stength. After the death of Lennie's Aunt Clara, George took care of Lennie. As the author, John Steinbeck did an excellent job introducing each character. I really connected with all the characters. The theme of friendship, struggle, and following a dream was beautifully written. I thought that the book Of Mice and Men was great because it never got boring. I was not able to put the book down. This novel will leave you with a lot of diffrent emotions; it touched me deeply because it reflected true events in my life about hardship and friendships. I recommend this book to everyone.

Brave New World
Aldous Huxley takes us on an adventure into the future to witness society's possible outcome in his famous science fiction novel, Brave New World. Written in 1932, Huxley presents society a century or two ahead of time, predicting the capabilities of mankind with the consistently rapid development of technology. Huxley grasps imaginative readers and provides them with opportunities to expand their horizons in predicting the future.
Taking place in London, society is set up in a Utopian form of government where everyone is treated the same. In the novel, feelings such a love, sadness, and gladness are not accepted; instead, people take a drug called "soma" to stop their mixed feelings and make them forget about their problems. Babies are no longer born to their mother and father; instead, they are born in predestined nurseries, and there are five different types of people: the Alphas and Betas and the Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons. In a communist type government, each type of person is conditioned and trained to know their purpose and job in life at a young age by using repetition of words on the infants. I found this method used by Huxley fascinating as it closely relates to many experiments used by the famous Sigmund Freud such as the salivating dog. Every time he rang a bell in front of the dog, he would give the dog a treat and the dog would then salivate. Eventually, the ringing of the bell alone would cause the dog to salivate, even if there was no treat; this is impressively the type of conditioning that Huxley uses on the people-they are experimented on by the use of repetition physically and verbally.
The structure of the story is in third person and is shown by many different characters from the book as many characters play crucial roles in the famous novel. Bernard in the story symbolizes the famous communist leader Karl Marx as he strives in the story to keep everyone equal no matter the circumstances. "Ford", the higher spirit that everyone worships, represents Henry Ford where the people are treated in an assembly line fashion. The lusting Lenina is a sex symbol that represents the image of people avoiding their problems with sex and drugs; no one faces their problems, they all turned away, especially Lenina. Lenina is an object to men, the woman that every man wants to sleep with. Main character, John, also known as the 'Savage', is an important factor in the novel as he's from the normal civilization that we basically had in the past with the Native Americans. John is taken into the 'New World' and attempts to express to the people the meaning of emotions and different feelings, but everyone is extremely confused by his way of life and are more entertained than convinced. Another important character in the story is a man by the name of Mustopha, one of the ten world controllers. He displays himself as a full believer to the communist ways, but deep down he wishes the structure of society were different as he hides religious literature in his office such as Bibles and scriptures. Mustopha tries to tell himself and the Savage that the new way is better, " [...] And if ever, by some unlucky chance, anything unpleasant should somehow happen, why, there's always soma to give you a holiday from the facts. And there's always soma to calm your anger, to reconcile you to your enemies, to make you patient and long-suffering. In the past you could only accomplish these things by making a great effort and after years of hard moral training. Now, you swallow two or three half-gramme tablets, and there you are. Anybody can be virtuous now. You can carry at least half your mortality about in a bottle. Christianity without tears-that's what soma is."
Huxley may shock readers with his incredible predictions of the future society as he proves to be on the right path. In fact, Huxley is so accurate that readers criticized his work when Brave New World first came out, claiming that his work was way out there and far too sexual; but taking a look at the casual sex in our generation today, Huxley's on the right track. In Brave New World, the Savage attempts to help convince the people of London that their ways are unhealthy and that they need God to reflect on their lives, "If you allowed yourselves to think of God, you wouldn't allow yourselves to be degraded by pleasant vices. You'd have a reason for bearing things patiently, for doing things with courage."

NOTE: Let me preface this review by stating that if I could, I would give BRAVE NEW WORLD 4.5 stars out of 5.

Aldous Huxley's BRAVE NEW WORLD provides us with a startling vision of the future. His is a world where individuality and independent thought have been entirely replaced by man's constant attention to our primieval senses of taste, touch, smell, and physical pleasure. The class system is in full force, operating on the basis of genetic engineering and predeterminism. Everything is ordered, and everyone is satisfied.

There are several problems inherent in Huxley's idea of the future. Unlike George Orwell's "1984," which I fully recommend as a more salient and powerful vision of human nature operating in unintended ways, BRAVE NEW WORLD fails to address several key issues, only one of which I will raise. Men who create change through science are singularly independent and creative. These men, if not other men, will undoubtedly realize that the progression of science, and thus mankind, can only occur through the continuous invention and dissemination of novel ideas. The very idea of genetic standardization goes against one of the fundamental principles of life science: diversity in genetics. The universal, centralized genetic engineering proposed in BRAVE NEW WORLD (without which his utopia cannot exist) can only occur under very specific and thus highly unlikely conditions. This logistical weakness reduces BRAVE NEW WORLD from a potential masterpiece to merely a good book.

Admittedly, Huxley causes us to think about very pertinent issues; however, the flaws in BRAVE NEW WORLD reduce the applicability and force of his ideas. We are able to dismiss them as amusing and frightful, but highly improbable. On the other hand, a truly masterful vision such as "1984" contains dilemmas stemming from paradoxes within human nature which cannot be resolved.

Overall, I would recommend purchasing this book for its ability to provoke thought. It's also written with an entertaining and effective style which adds to the readability. However, note that there are some logistical problems that you will notice if you do a careful reading.

After perusing the reviews of this book, good and bad, I was surprised to see little or no comment on one of its major themes: conditioning.

In Huxley's vision the children of tomorrow are assembled (most with missing parts) in factories, then given subliminal treatment for the whole of their formative years. As adults they dutifully regurgitate catch phrases ('everybody belongs to everybody') and take the drug Soma to calm any inclination toward passionate activity.

Is this not how we grow and learn? Observing out parents and peers in the early years, aping their fears and desires, then being routinly drilled through 12 to 20 years of schooling the 'rules' of society, from Red Light Green Light to DARE and onward? And when stress and discomfort inflict the masses, isn't alcohol, tobacco, TV and McDonalds there to soothe all the troubles away? A crude version of 'Brave New World', perhaps, but steadily evolving as the few bright minds of the world today work to make our lives a little easier.

In the book every person is separated into a caste: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, ect., and are strictly taught to avoid contact outside these defined boundaries. This idea is contemporary: these 'castes' actually do exist, here and now, in terms of intellect and upbringing, and is a reason why pop culture in the U.S. is so varied and so much of it is invaribly crap. As the World Controller states: "...eight-ninths below the water line, one ninth above."

Enter into this sterile landscape of happy consistancy John, a 'savage' raised by Indians but never accepted, a tortured soul who reads Shakesphere and embraces isolation to the point that the tempting flesh of another drives him into a frenzy of guilt and rage, all deriving from and focused to his mother figure. As the book relates the experiences of his early years and winds up to its inevitable conclusion for this stranger in a strange land, we see that John is just as unable to escape his conditioning as the hypnopadia-trained clones of this miserably perfect furture.

Some claim that Huxley is too obvious in his presentation, but I disagree: buried in the text are critisms of our society, sexual repression in particular, and truths about entertainment that none can deny--that all of it derives from suffering. 60+ years after its publishing, BRAVE NEW WORLD is far more contemporary and insightful than most the bestselling drivel thrown at us today. You may like it or hate it...but you cannot walk away without a change in your thought patterns.

Let me preface this review by saying that I absolutely LOVE Steinbeck. I would consider him one of my five favorite authors. I think East of Eden is one of my favorite books of all time. I especially like Cannery Row and Tortilla Flat. I even liked The Wayward Bus.

HOWEVER, having said that, I must say that I cannot handle The Grapes of Wrath. My tolerance for pain is not nearly high enough. I have to be honest - I've never actually read the entire book. It's much to difficult to read through the tears in my eyes. I am sure that it is, like most of his other novels, a well-written, fascinating account of the lives of some very interesting people. I simply cannot willingly subject myself to such abject despair. I read novels for enjoyment, and I don't enjoy the feeling of having my heart pulled apart piece by piece, page by page.

Undoubtedly it is to Steinbeck's great credit that he is able to draw that kind of emotion out of a person through simple words on a page. Only one or two books have ever been able to move me in that way. Unfortunately, it is not a feeling I desire. Perhaps I'm overly sensitive. The book made me want to open up a vein, but apparently millions of people loved it...

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are the values upon which our country was founded. Yet history has shown that this has not been the case for many people living in the United States. Americans have been restricted from these rights because of unalterable circumstances such as race, sex, religion, or in the case of Grapes of Wrath, because of economic status. The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck takes place during the 1930's, a time of nation wide economic hardship. Many books have been written about the great depression but this book is unique in its focus on another great tragedy effecting the country at the same time. The great dust bowl caused the migration of thousands of people from the Midwest US to the state of California in search of a better life for their families. This book addresses the hardships suffered by those families. This book is very effective in portraying these struggles both generally and personally. Steinbeck chose to alternate chapters between general descriptions of the country's struggles and the story of one specific family by the name of Joad. The general descriptions display the widespread difficulties people everywhere were suffering by describing the people as a general, family unit, "And the man, the leader of the family, leaned from the car. Can we pull in here an sleep?" (Steinbeck, p268) These chapters addressing the "big picture" were followed by chapters that brought the issue to life by displaying the struggles of the Joad family. This alternation of big picture, small picture story telling resulted in a well-rounded image of a time period in American history. So much can be gained from this book it is a definite asset to anyone's reading list. Not only is it a great chronicle of history, it is a story about the American dream, and the quality of life. The length of the book shouldn't provide an obstacle for a reader seeing as how it is neither exceptionally long nor short and it maintains a good amount of excitement and adventure throughout the novel. The only thing that may be distracting to some readers is the periodic breakaway from the main story line. However, if one can see this as a valuable literary device instead of an obstacle, it will actually provide a greater understanding of the time period. The Grapes of Wrath provides a great insight into a period of history. By reading the book, the reader is left with greater understanding and empathy for those who lived during the dust bowl of 1930. The bravery and strength that is demonstrated by the Joad family is both phenomenal and inspiring. It is a good example for people today who are suffering through difficult times. When these people where faced with hardship, they did not roll over and die. They picked up their lives and their families and they set out determined to find a way to protect and provide for themselves. At a time when everyday people in our country are turning to drugs, gangs, or crime as solutions to their problems, a great lesson can be learned from these families: The world is not perfect but that is no excuse to give up on life. And life was the picture John Steinbeck was trying to relay in his book. A raw, honest look at life during a time of great hardship and trial. The Joad family was an excellent portrayal of a typical family from the Midwest in search of the better life they had been promised elsewhere. Steinbeck characterized the family through dialogue that depicts both the diction and accent of a typical Midwest family in the 1930's, " 'You jus' goin wes'?' 'Jus' on our way.' 'You ain't never been in California?'" (278). Choosing to maintain the dialogue in this natural state adds to the authenticity of the novel and creates a better picture for the reader.

I will never forget how this book captivated me in so many ways. An American classic that will stand the test of time. I got the pleasure of being assigned this book in 10th grade as part of literature class. I was forever changed by this book, and helped fuel me to read more challenging books.

John Steinbeck helped me to realize the poverty, the trangressions, and some hope of the Depression. It helped put me in focus with the pride problems that the family had during the collapse of an entire society during America's most trying times. It is well written and very captivating. It had me in tears more than once. It also reads much like The Bible at times, in its prose and style. It catalogs a family's journey from farmers to migrant workers that is easily readable and a classic that helped define a generation.

A great book- and a must have.