Reading the Chunksters discussion

We're at the end...What did you think of the book? The Writing style, characters, and situations??

Sigh. I know a lot of people are really liking it, but frankly, I save it for when I'm walking or in the grocery store and can listen for a long time and only half pay attention, because it's just not getting my attention at all. I'm determined to finish though, I'm almost there. Parts of it were brilliantly written and I loved some of the dialogue, but other parts I just wanted to pull my hair out and go "What on earth is going on and why on EARTH should I care???" I'm not sure why it's not getting me, but it's just not clicking for some reason.

I didn't like it either. Unlike you, I am not going to finish it. I found my mind wandering constantly while attempting to read part III and decided it wasn't worth continuing. I returned it to the library that day, and I don't regret it. The sad part is this is an era of history I find fascinating, so this should have been a good fit for me. Unfortunately, I couldn't stand her writing style and found large sections of the book to be boring.

For me, it's only 40 pages to go! I will certainly be relieved when it's over.
Actually I liked the style of the book - or would have enjoyed it in a modern literary fiction. Often I feel I lack the knowledge necessary to fully comprehend what is going on in the novel, and that is what really keeps me from liking it. Constantly I wonder about characters and setting, and why thing happen, also within the major plot.
It's a bit like trying to follow an advanced lecture on neurophysics (I'm a linguist, so I don't know anything about neurophysics). I struggle, and in most cases, fail. That is tiring and unsatisfying.

I just finished it. Glad to be done and don't have much else to say to it. On the other hand, I finished the Harry Potter book I was reading as well, so it will look like I read 1500 pages or so in a day, which will make my yearly stats go up quite a bit :)

I finished about a week ago and I'm in the minority because I enjoyed it. I thought parts were brilliant, and I especially loved Mantel's ability to make this period of time, so drastically different than what we live in today, seem current and relatable. I especially liked the witty moments and some of the razor-tongued language.

I didn't give it 5 stars, though, because I felt parts of the writing were muddled and the characters besides Cromwell were not deeply developed.

That being said, I'm still a little unclear why the title of the book is "Wolf Hall", the seat of the Seymours. Is it a play on how the court, like the Seymours' incestuous family, has thrown morality and accepted norms out of the window? A parallel between those who have been in power for a long time and Cromwell's rising household? He's headed to Wolf Hall at the end, as if all of his movements in the book have led him there, so maybe it is supposed to be aspirational? I have no idea, does anyone care to enlighten me?

I wondered about that as well, Kai; Wolf Hall didn't seem to play a huge roll in this segment of the story.

Alana wrote: ""What on earth is going on and why on EARTH should I care???" I'm not sure why it's not getting me, but it's just not clicking for some reason. "

I am so with you, Alana. It drained me. I finished it a couple of days ago because ... I just finished it. I usually enjoy the Pulitzer/ Noble/PEN/Booker winners. Literary fiction with elaborate and sophisticated language and nuanced themes appeals to me. I read classics quite often, and I am open to mainstream and occasionally even genre fiction, and even if I do not like a novel, I can at least appreciate either its originality or research or messages or esthetically pleasing language. This was a pure frustration and a daily battle.

This is truly not my book. It is a rare case when I can say such things, and I would have never thought I would say this, but I think this is the case.

The character of Cromwell is not likeable, although I believe it was the author's intention to present him in the softer light: he is dull, boring, boorish, formulaic, and still not multi-dimensional. The present-tense form was excessive and too showy, and this post-modern trick did not for me. It actually distanced me from the characters, and Thomas Moore was shown as a spiritual loony.

I know Mantel said that she researched a lot for the book, and she was trying to keep track of all the characters at different places, but I honestly believe, after reading this novel, that fiction gives you a certain poetic license to add up, to spice the story, to emotionally affect the readers, to lead readers, to suspend our disbelief. Otherwise, what is the purpose of fiction? Non-fiction can do the same job as well, and even better.

As far as the name is concerned, I believe it is the certain political message. Politics has a habit of turning people into voracious wolves who are willing to sell their souls. So the name of the hall where it all started seems to be quite adequate ...

And no, I am not ready for a sequel. On the other hand, it is good to know that there are people who enjoyed the novel because the diversity makes us all human! Books embody the ultimate freedom of choice to like or not to like. Yay and cheers to books!

So what star rating do you all think? It sounds like a 2 star book...thoughts??

I have it a 1.5 but rounded up to two. I rarely give I've star unless the writing is abhorrently atrocious and I didn't think it feel I'm THAT calibre, but for my lack of reading enjoyment I wouldn't put it any higher. that's just me tho.

Yes, definitely 2 stars. Which is a shame. This book is quite unique in its style, but I couldn't enjoy it.

I will have to agree. On a personal level, only two stars, but I think I can understand why others find it more readable.

I usually give two stars to either total trash books with poor plot and awful character development, like Sleepers or extremely politicized books that is more used like a tool to manipulate people or the books that are religiously and sexually 'clean', without offensive words, sexual scenes, and other implications, like The Prisoner of Cell 25

This is definitely above the mentioned criteria, and it is quality fiction, but alas, absolutely unrelatable on any level. So personally, it is a two-star read, but I see how people can appreciate the novelty of style, the present-tense edginess, the story and give four and five stars.

I usually, as I said, appreciate such things even if I do not like the book, but this book was a cold brick of unrelatable incessant wording ...

ok, so 2 stars it is...what a bummer!

I started reading with you guys ---- but like many of you, I got side-tracked by several (many) other books. I found myself reading cereal boxes as a diversion --- or anything without excessive pronouns that I would have to use a decoder ring to figure out who was talking :-D

I rated a 2 star ---- I really struggled with the writing style. I thought the pacing was off and I was getting literary whiplash as we went from discussing heavily political issues in one paragraph and in the next scene we have Cromwell holding his dead child in his arms. I did find some redeeming characteristics to Cromwell, which was Mantel's intent.

Overall, I think that I had really high expectations because I generally like historical fiction. Even knowing that the writing style was different, I was not able to connect with the story. Late in the game, I broke down and got the audio because this was my F2F bookclub pick. It was easier in audio, but I think I was the only one to finish in my book group.