PB’s
Comments
(group member since Jul 29, 2015)
PB’s
comments
from the 100 Classics and beyond... group.
Showing 1-20 of 122

Instead of assigning particular books to read per month, I figured the best way to tackle our classic reading list is to read at our own pace, and the format of the group is more like a Buddy Read group.
I hope to post my thoughts on here as I read! Please feel free to share yours as well.
Thank you!



The group will be on hiatus after our May read. Brothers Karamazov will be our last read for a while..
I am hoping to have the group back up in August, at the latest.
For now, happy reading!
The discussion spaces will be left available, so feel free to keep using it for our previous reads. Till next time!

Love your..."
Yes, I forgot to mention Boxer. I just felt so bad for him because he was such a hard worker and like you said, he is very idealistic and perhaps quite naive.. he poured out all his energy and he was taken advantage of and became a pushover. At one point in the novel, I thought that he would be the symbolic revolutionary who will be able to lead the other animals to the right path (during that very brief moment when he realized that something was amiss, and he almost unraveled the lies) , but alas, he was too satisfied to become just another pawn - he chose to be a follower instead of a leader.
I truly think that Napoleon jumped at the opportunity to get rid of him, not just because he could make a profit off of Boxer's hide, but simply because he could be a threat. All the animals admire Boxer.

It's very symbolic and poetic in a way, but it took a while for me not to be disturbed by the idea of animals attempting to overthrow a farm and eliminate the human race.
It would have been interesting if Snowball was played by a goat, because then it will literally be an "escape goat"
And now, on to The Tempest!
I would love to hear your thoughts on this.


HAPPY READING!!!


I'm so happy I was able to finish it before the end of the year, but a part of didn't want to say goodbye - I've developed such a liking to the characters.


She was more than human to me. She was a Fairy , a Sylph, I don't know what she was - anything that no one ever saw and everything that everybody ever wanted. I was swallowed up in an abyss of love in an instant. There was no pausing on the brink; no looking down, or looking back. I was gone, headlong, before I had sense to say a word to her.

Although I have a very bad feeling about little Emily :(
Did any of you start reading yet?

In response to your question, I think that the fact that the author is a woman has a lot to do with the more emotional side of the monster - in essence, the monster is not really asking his master the logic of "why" he was created, instead he is asking why he was created if only to be left alone and miserable. He is asking why he is different only because he wanted to belong. I think that a female author had a greater touch on exploring the more emotional, rather than logical, side of the monster. Excellent question, Victoria.

I'm now in the part where Frankenstein's creation is telling his side of the story... I feel so sympathetic with him. He is quite a riveting storyteller and there's not much I can do to help myself from picking up the book again and keep reading (forget about my upcoming exams haha)