The beautiful thing about literature, and art in general, is that people can connect to artwork in different waysāor not connect to it at all. I actually really enjoy it when other people have different opinions about literature than I do. Sure, itās nice to have people agree with you, but itās so boring when everybody in a room regurgitates the same opinion or idea.Ā
I thought it would be fun to look up bad reviews on Goodreads of my favorite booksāCrime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Weight of Ink by Rachel Kadish, and Code Name Verity by Elizabeth Weināand respond to them. This is a trend thatās been going around on Booktube, and although I didnāt really watch those videos š¬, I thought it was a fun concept. I enjoyed reading everyoneās different opinions (except for oneā¦ if you get to it, youāll know which one Iām referring to). Some of them are really rather funny.Ā
Crime and Punishment:
This one is just humorous. I disagree on both accounts, but stillā¦ clever.
Again, I appreciate the humor, and I donāt think that Christine intended much more than that. But, Iām gonna overanalyze it, because thatās what I do.Ā
Empathy is a huge part of the reading experience. Reading helps you understand different perspectives and ultimately makes you a better person. And gaining empathy through reading is much better than wallowing in a dark room with vodka. But if you have a good time thinking depressing thoughts, cheers to you. Thatās honestly rather impressive.Ā
Apparently, violence is a common theme among the one-star reviews. Also, flagellation is a really good word.Ā
Anyways, many people fall into the trap of reading classics āfor the sake of āThe Classicā novel.ā I happen to really enjoy reading the classics, but they were written during a different time, and thereās absolutely nothing wrong with not connecting with them. It doesnāt make you less of a reader or less prestigious.Ā
Also, reading is something to enjoy, and you learn from everything you read, so it doesnāt matter whether itās considered a āclassicā or not.
I cracked up when Fiona said, āmy own brain supplies that content enough as it is. Honestly, I prefer my own spirals to Rodyaās.ā Thatās the second time weāve encountered that theme of preferring oneās own depressing thoughts to Raskolnikovās. I personally donāt want to spend any time with mine. But, again, itās impressive.
Also, Raskolnikov is supposed to be unlikeable. The novel is an exploration of a deranged psyche, not a book that explores the ordinary experience of a person more akin to a teddy bear. I think learning to empathize with the unhinged character is a part of Dostoevskyās genius. But itās not for everyone.
A lot of the bad reviews address the length of Dostoevskyās manuscript. Honestly, I thought it was intentional and thought Raskolnikovās mental ramblings deserved the page count. Exploring the deep abyss that is the mind is inevitably going to take a while.
The quivering, sweating, and passing out was definitely there. Sara says that āthis seems to bother no one.ā I would argue that Dostoevsky made a point of it bothering everyone. I would also argue that even when Raskolnikov loved God, he still acted like a crazy person, until the very end, which was after a slight time jump.Ā
Ā
Weight of Ink:
A lot of the reviews discuss the academic aspect of the novel. I personally believe that Kadish did a magnificent job blending the academia and the fictional. There are philosophical digressions, but that was necessary, because the main character of the 1600ās timeline Ester was branching out into philosophy, something women did not do at the time. The philosophy was actually really fascinating, especially when Kadish blended it with her poeticsā¦ but this is coming from a Dostoevsky fan, so I guess you should take it with a grain of salt.
Anyways, I didnāt find a lot of 1-star reviews, so here are some two-star reviews.Ā
Haha, get itā¦ Weight of Inkā¦ lol.
I really appreciate that Emily recognized that the language was intentional and well-done, although itās not her thing. The Weight of Ink may be the most poetic novel Iāve ever read. And I read it at a time when I didnāt like poetry and I still fell in love with the book. Kadish intentionally wrote in an old-English-Shakespearean-but-definitely-not type of language, because Shakespeare and 1600ās London was an impactful part of the novel.
*I think Mary meant a āgem of a plotāĀ
I personally loved the metaphors; again, the poetic language is not for everyone.Ā
I knew next to nothing about the time period that the novel focuses on (or at least the Jewsā experience during that time period), so I really appreciated how much I learned through reading the book. Iām not entirely sure how historically accurate the book is; I do know that Kadish did a ton of research for it.Ā
Sorry, Seth. You rubbed me the wrong way. How could someone be so self-aware, but so hypocritical? āFar better than I could dream of producing,ā and then āwomenās writing lacksā warmth and āattention to detail,ā and then he admits that he couldnāt grasp the content. Also, is Kadishās āinterpersonal calculusā somehow not within the scope of āattention to detailā? From what I remember from high school, calculus was extremely detailed. You might be the problem there, buddy, not women writers.Ā
The relationships referred to in the review were much more than sexual encounters, but Seth admits that he couldnāt comprehend the āemotional underpinnings.ā Of course you can have your own opinion, but Kadish did a great job explaining why the relationships failed. But, maybe it makes sense to me because I speak the cold and dead language of women.
And he says āI believe women value sex less or at least differently since it is always freely available to themā… what??
This response to his review might be a little snarky, but moving on….
The multiple endings is a valid criticism that I actually kind of share. When I was reading the novel, I loved what I thought was the ending of the novel, and then I found out there was another chapter. I understand why Kadish ended it the way she did, but I personally thought that it would have ended better without the last one-page chapter.
When Suzanne listed the subplots that she didnāt feel added to the bookā¦ most of them were so incredibly important. Helenās arc wouldnāt have made sense without explaining what happened in her 20ās. The theater situation inspired Esterās rebellion. There were maybe two 21st century (small) sex scenes in a relatively long novel. Helenās accident was one of the most emotional parts of the novel and helped us understand her illness. The Patriciaās were lovely and I really enjoyed their interactions with Aaron.Ā
I enjoy how this reviewer, along with some others, says that the novel āhas been edited professionally,ā whereas other reviewersā main complaint is the editing. Ah, the beauty of subjectivity.Ā
Ā
Code Name Verity:Ā
I only discuss two reviews, because a lot of the reviews say the same thing.
Pia Zadora is an allusion that eludes me. And, again with the violence! Iām telling you, itās a theme in bad reviews.Ā
Anyways, I agree that some of the events in the novel are a little fantastic. But, it is a YA novel that I think is brilliantly conceptualized for a slightly younger audience. It also lets Julie bring in her delightful sense of humor.Ā
The line āinauthentic that it verged on inappropriateā showed up a lot in the reviews. Verbatim. So I think that a lot of the one-star reviewers read other reviews and subconsciously (or consciously) regurgitated that line. I mean, itās a good line. It is also a valid criticism, and one that obviously a lot of reviewers share.Ā
As far as the writing and tone goes, Iām not sure if I read it for the first time today, it would be among my favorite books. I first read Code Name Verity in middle school (I think; maybe slightly younger), and I recently reread it. If I was a literary agent or editor, Iām honestly not sure if I would say yes to the query based off of the first page.Ā
However, the first time I read it, I had one of the most severe reactions to this book than Iāve had over any book. I was sobbing on the floor of my kitchen while I tried to put up the dishes. Thank you for that, Elizabeth Wein. So it definitely did āevoke any sort of emotional responseā in me. And I enjoyed it the second time around, as well, although I was better at recognizing its flaws. It’s still a beautiful story and one of my favorites.
