Reading the Chunksters discussion

This thread is for anyone who wants to read ahead. Please leave comments here about your thoughts so I can add them to the discussions as we go along. Spoilers will be allowed in this thread, so if you've not read ahead be aware.


Posting guidelines:

When you start a new post, please indicate which week you are commenting on at the top and then proceed to make any comments about that section. This is helpful to me as I will be copying and pasting your comments into the discussion thread for that week when it opens. This way we will have all the comments for each section and each member in the correct threads and everyone can see and respond. You can copy & paste the weeks from the schedule below.

Schedule:

Week 1: 9/7 Pt 1 Prologue-Ch 2.V
Week 2: 9/14 Ch 2.VI-Ch 4.V
Week 3: 9/21 Ch 5-Ch 7.III
Week 4: 9/28 Ch 8-Ch 9.VI
Week 5: 10/5 Ch 10-Ch 11.II
Week 6: 10/12 Part 2, Ch 12-Ch13.V
Week 7: 10/19 Ch 14-Ch 15.IX
Week 8: 10/26 Ch 16-Ch 17.IV
Week 9: 11/2 Ch 18-Ch 20.V
Week 10: 11/9 Ch 21-Ch 22.V
Week 11: 11/16 Ch 23-Ch 24.VI
Week 12: 11/23 Ch 25-Ch 27.V
Week 13: 11/30 Ch 28-Ch 31.VI
Week 14: 12/7 Ch 32-Part 3, Ch 35.IV
Week 15: 12/14 Ch 36-End


I'll post a example for everyone's reference.

Example post:

Week 1: 9/7 Pt 1 Prologue-Ch 2.V


There were amazing guns and bi-planes in this chapter, and the main character is a clown.

Love this idea. Allows those reading to the schedule to stay together easily, but also lets those who like reading fast to do so. Great plan.

I love this thread. I got to the designated page 61 and I'm like "Nooooooooo". I was not ready to stop.

Sarah wrote: "I love this thread. I got to the designated page 61 and I'm like "Nooooooooo". I was not ready to stop."

Keep goin!! Just leave a note about the sections here! Yay Sarah!

Thanks Kristi! I'll still read them in sections and note which one I'm talking about. This book is going to be really great.

I'm interested in reading this book faster and I'm wondering if anyone wants to join me. Does anyone have suggestions on what kind of speed they'd like to read at? I'm planning on at least 2 sections for this week. I think the faster I read it, the more I'll enjoy it.

I'm afraid I've done more than just pick up the pace on this book. I'm already on Chapter 32 - III. Even though there are some glaring historical inaccuracies (ie. blatant falsities), it's been an incredibly enjoyable read for me. I actually have a hard time putting it down when I should.

Josh wrote: "Even though there are some glaring historical inaccuracies (ie. blatant falsities),"

I hope you will pop over to the separate thread for this and mention ones you've found. Follett has claimed to be entirely factually accurate about real events. Hmmmm.

He has? Excuse me while I go laugh myself to death...

Sarah wrote: "He has? Excuse me while I go laugh myself to death..."

On his website, ken-follett.com, he states "I do my best to make sure that the background to my stories is accurate. Most of my books are read before printing by some twenty people, usually including one or two experts – scientists, historians, or just people who have direct experience of what I’m writing about. But, somehow, mistakes always creep through…"

And then he reports the errors that he or others have found in his books. For Fall of Giants, I have posted the complete list of errors he recognizes in the Truth v. Fiction thread.

Thanks! There are a few things that I've been wondering about.

Can we get a general idea of how many people would like to speed the read up? if it's a majority I'd be happy to look into adjusting the schedule. If not I'm also glad to have you post here and I'll transfer the posts to their correct thread when we open it.

I can do 2 or 3 sections per week.

I am listening to the audio, so I can easily speed up.

I could do two or three sections a week as well

Everyman wrote: "Josh wrote: "Even though there are some glaring historical inaccuracies (ie. blatant falsities),"

I hope you will pop over to the separate thread for this and mention ones you've found. Follett ha..."

So far, you all have pointed out the ones that I've noticed. None of the inaccuracies have really bothered me much, but it is a little disheartening that he didn't do more thorough research if he wanted to present it as being somewhat historically accurate.

Kristi wrote: " Can we get a general idea of how many people would like to speed the read up? if it's a majority I'd be happy to look into adjusting the schedule. If not I'm also glad to have you post here and I'll transfer the posts to their correct thread when we open it. "

I do not think it would matter for me. I'll probably have the book finished by this afternoon/evening.

Well, I didn't get it finished yesterday afternoon. The day got a little crazier than anticipated. However, as much as I'm enjoying the book, the last few chapters are really starting to feel rushed and rather weak. Especially in the new relationships toward the end. It doesn't feel as natural as Follett may have been aiming for, or he was rushing to conclude the novel.

Josh wrote: " It doesn't feel as natural as Follett may have been aiming for, or he was rushing to conclude the novel. "

Or perhaps he is trying to introduce some new characters that he hopes will lead you into the next book in the sequence -- after all,he's going after a full century, so he has to keep killing people off and bringing in new ones, and he may want to introduce the new ones in this book to hook you into the next (I'm not at the end yet, but I can already tell you that I won't be continuing with the series!)

Everyman wrote: "Josh wrote: " It doesn't feel as natural as Follett may have been aiming for, or he was rushing to conclude the novel. "

Or perhaps he is trying to introduce some new characters that he hopes will..."

I'm not going to spoil anything, but there really isn't any introduction of "new characters", per se. He just skips a LOT of time, and it doesn't really put things together naturally.

I will be continuing with the series. I thoroughly enjoyed the book, although the ending was definitely rushed, and just barely sufficient for me. Surely the next two will be more concise.

I'm also not planning on finishing the series.

Josh wrote: "Everyman wrote: "Josh wrote: " It doesn't feel as natural as Follett may have been aiming for, or he was rushing to conclude the novel. "

Or perhaps he is trying to introduce some new characters t..."

Josh, this thread is for discussions of the weeks. it's ok to post what week you read and then have some commentary on the section, it's not a spoiler in this thread. Please post your thoughts so that you also get them in the threads.

I will take your posts here and add them to the discussion threads as they open.

Kristi wrote: "Josh wrote: "Everyman wrote: "Josh wrote: " It doesn't feel as natural as Follett may have been aiming for, or he was rushing to conclude the novel. "

Or perhaps he is trying to introduce some new..."

Perhaps I shall just refrain from any type of discussion? I haven't spoiled anything, just thoughts on his writing style and points. Sorry if I somehow have failed to abide by any rules.

Josh, we're just supposed to put what week we're discussing before we put a comment up. That way when we get to that week, Kristi can copy and paste your comments in so that everyone discussing that section can see them. It's a helpful route for people who want to read through it quickly. Then you can give your opinion and participate in discussions without having to slow yourself down. The more people involved in the discussion, the more fun it is for all of us. :)

Kristi, if he's finished the book and is talking about the whole thing, can he just put 'Final Thoughts' or something like it at the top?

Sarah wrote: "Josh, we're just supposed to put what week we're discussing before we put a comment up. That way when we get to that week, Kristi can copy and paste your comments in so that everyone discussing tha..."

yes, "final Thoughs" would be great...I can add the comment to the final thread when I open it.

Example Speed reader post

Week 8: 10/26 Ch 16-Ch 17.IV

-text with your commentary-


----------------------------------------------
This is all you need to post here. I will take your comment and once the thread is opened I will paste it to the correct thread. If you are commenting on the whole book just put "Final Thoughts" as the section title.

Week 8: 10/26 Ch 16-Ch 17.IV

I've only just started this section, but so far Billy's Da's "apology" consists of "I've been proud. But here's why I know best."

It's really not much of an apology. Billy joining the military was really no surprise. I was surprised that they were specifically asking coal miners not to join.

Week 8: 10/26 Ch 16-Ch 17.IV

I'm so glad to see that Maud didn't get pregnant, mainly because it would have strained believability to have so very many pregnancies. Speaking of, what about Mildred? Is little Lloyd going to have a cousin?

Somehow it seems odd that it's all the way into 1916 before we see a battle. And what a disaster of a battle it was. Even with Billy's wits gaining them an advantage they still managed to lose the battle. The only thing that was gained was a few English lives.

When I first read the comment that the French lost a quarter of a million men at Verdun, I kind of just rolled on and dismissed it as a statistic. Then I realized it was 250,000 people who had their own lives and they all died. It's so much less impressive as a statistic.

The separation allowance was actually quite interesting. The women were entitled to it but somebody else could just deny it to them based on their own biases. Especially at a time when these women have lost their main means of support and are being paid a quarter of what men would be paid in the same line of work. I can't imagine a more desperate feeling. I wouldn't be surprised if these horrid women were assaulted on a regular basis out of frustration and despair.

Fitz: Fitz himself had never organized anything more complicated than a cricket team, and the daunting complexity of the war machine made him vividly aware of his inexperience. For a moment I thought maybe Fitz had some redeeming quality. That he would take a good look at himself and become a better person. Instead he just became more annoying. Between following the orders even though he knew it was a slaughter, and his refusal to let the 16 year old boy go back, even though he had a way to save face.

That was the most terrible part of this particular section. I couldn't believe they were executing a 16 year old boy. It was absolutely terrible.

I'm wondering how severely Fitz is going to be injured.

Two curiosities:

Walter's perspective - It reminded him of the adventure stories he used to read as a schoolboy. Usually they featured square-jawed young Germans menaced by Red Indians. Why in the world would there be stories about Germans vs. Indians? They're on opposite sides of the world practically. Why would these stories exist?

Maud - She wakes to the sound of her windows rattling and is told that it's the guns in France. What is going on in this passage? I can't see how war in France would rattle windows in England.

Week 8: 10/26 Ch 16-Ch 17.IV

That battle was a complete bloodbath. Imagine seeing lines after lines of comrades being shot down and knowing that you are next. It must have taken a lot of willpower to run onto that battlefield, knowing that your life would probably be over in a second.

The execution of Owen gave me a sick feeling in my stomach. I know this was what they did to deserters, but it still is a cruel practice - killing someone who is terrified of running to his death.

The battle of the Somme was apparently the loudest man-made noise in history up to that point, and the explosions were so violent that they could be heard in London where they made the windows rattle. It happened a few times throughout the war. The explosion of Messines Ridge in Belgium was also heard in London. England is not that far away from mainland Europe but it is still quite impressive that the sound travelled that far. The people who survived the battlefield must have had serious hearing problems afterwards.

My thoughts after finishing the novel

So it's been a couple of weeks since I finished The Fall of Giants. I couldn't restrict myself from just flying through this book. So this is what I thought.

(view spoiler)[The book was a little too perfectly wrapped up. I expected some key characters to die and make me cry a little, but it didn't happen. In a way wish George R. R. Martin would re-write this novel, because then he would really up the drama. Instead everyone kind of just "lived happily ever after". This is war we are talking about. How could Follett miss out on the opportunity to really bleed some hearts?! Overall, this was a feel-good kind of novel, and that is not what I wanted from it.

When it came to characters I also hated how Billy, Ethel and Grigori were oh-so-righteous. They just couldn't do nothing bad or selfish. Every word that escaped their mouths was for the good of the other and to trample all evil. Billy's trial made me laugh. Like it was that easy for a miner/soldier/kid to put his superior officers in place with his vast knowledge of the law and witty tongue. And who got to lead the battles while cowardly nobility hid or got shot in the leg? Billy of course. Meh. Ethel was pretty much a super woman that was best at everything. Best housekeeper, best lover, best seamstress, best journalist, best politician - she was just so perfect at everything she did, she never made a wrong move. Even getting pregnant out of wedlock propeled her to success. When it came to Grigori, he was passionate about revolution and freedom so much, he could never be swayed into corruption like some other Bolsheviks. He loved Katerina through everything even though she practically used him (I will never forget how she married Grigori and sent him to war just to get support money). He was so amazing, he even got to save Lenin. Whoa! Well you get my idea.

I liked Maud and Walter, as characters, but I wanted their story to be a bit more tragic (I know, I'm terrible). I liked how meaty this novel was and how every major player was well fleshed out. The flow was quite consistent, even though the Russian Revolution bit kind of bored me. I don't know how accurate the book is, since I'm not a Great War buff, but it made want to read some nonfiction to compensate for that flaw, and that's already something. Am I going to read the next installment in the series? Absolutely. But I need it to be more heart-wrenching. (hide spoiler)]

Andrea wrote: "My thoughts after finishing the novel

So it's been a couple of weeks since I finished The Fall of Giants. I couldn't restrict myself from just flying through this book. So this is what I thought.
..."

I'm inclined to disagree with you on several points.

(view spoiler)[
I certainly can't agree that this is a 'feel-good' book. It's part of a trilogy, and although harrowing and incredibly difficult things had happened to the characters, they progressed (mostly) in a rather persistent and in some cases, a subversive fashion. With that fact, I think he was unwilling to kill off characters a la Martin, because they may be central, if not pivotal in some point, of the plots of the remaining books. I haven't read them, so I don't know for sure.

Also, I think the book was wrapped up perfectly, albeit slightly rushed. It certainly sets the stage for characters to return for WWII, but also for the children of these characters to be involved directly. It's interesting to think about, and how he may utilize this to maximize the potential for the sequels.

I don't think Billy and Ethel were being too righteous, nor magnanimous. The characters certainly shared their flaws (premarital sex, mind you, and they both were guilty!), selfish moments, and the like. Yes, the pressed for the good of others, but that doesn't mean that what they did on occasion was not inherently wrong.

Grigori was passionate because of his nature. The point was explicitly made that he mothered his younger brother after their parents deaths. Did he love passionately? Yes. Did he do everything with passion? As far as I could tell, yes.

I think the characters of Maud and Walter were presented as a kind of red herring. I even expected their story to be more tragic, however I was happy to see that it wasn't. The worries that each other shared, the time apart... to me, that was gut-wrenching, as although I never experienced it with the pretense of war, I have experienced distance which makes things difficult in a relationship.

I'm confident that the next novel will have more drama relating to the families, and tying them together. Otherwise, it's more of a frame story than anything, albeit one that I'm thoroughly enjoying so far. Now, the only question is: When will I find time to start and finish Book II?! Haha.
(hide spoiler)]

Week 10: 11/9 Ch 21-Ch 22.V
Week 11: 11/16 Ch 23-Ch 24.VI

I think I finally figured out why this book feels so different from other Follett books. In other books, like Pillars of the Earth, his characters have all of these dramatic ups and downs in their lives. Good things happen to bad people, bad things happen to good people, there are dramatic reversals of fortune, but the point is that these things are happening to the characters. In this novel it feels like the characters are just plunked down in major events so you know what those events are. I think this is why the novel feels so thin to me.

One of my favorite sentences, possibly in the entire book, happens in this section: Fitz was no good at the crossword puzzle challenge of decoding - he could never even work out the murderer in a Sherlock Holmes mystery This really made me laugh.

Is anybody bothered by the fact that Bea and Fitz continue to call their son "Boy" rather than calling him by his name? This is weird to me.

Word of the week: poltroonery Completely awesome.

The peace proposal was interesting, as was the sentiment that peace was unachievable because everyone had forgotten what they were fighting for and now they were just fighting to win.

I thought Ethel marrying Bernie was kind of odd. She held out for so long. I couldn't even begin to believe that she was considering Fitz's proposal. Lust seems to be the undoing of several characters in this novel.

I really liked seeing Rosa Hellman again. She's begun to really grow on me.

I think the bulk of the interesting info happened in Russia this time around. There were so many horrible situations. I think the most difficult for me was when they were ordered to fire on their compatriots. I can't even imagine the dilemma this would put you in. I was leaning towards the "fire over their heads" solution as well. I was very very happy when the soldiers ended up firing on the police.

Grigori says something at one point about "smokeless ammunition". Does anybody know what this is?

Then of course you have the downside of the revolution - the near gang rape of the woman in the doorway and when the 10 year old boy shot someone on accident. This reminds me of the horror and violence in A Tale of Two Cities.

I was appalled that the farmers and millers are refusing to supply more flour because they were insisting on getting paid. I know that it's necessary to feed your family, but like the corruption of the officers, it's also necessary to have compassion for others. Would it have hurt them to lower their prices? And yet, without this pressure, would the Russian Revolution have started at this particular point in time?

Reading this book has exposed two major areas where I lack knowledge. The Russian Revolution, which I know absolutely nothing about, and World War I which I know very little about. I was surprised that the U.S. entered the war so late. April 6, 1917. Would the war have been over sooner if we had entered in earlier?

I need to hit the non-fiction.

Sarah wrote: "Grigori says something at one point about "smokeless ammunition". Does anybody know what this is?"

Prior to WWI, most gunpowder used in warfare was not smokeless. Over the years, there had been slow progress in developing smokeless powder, which was used much more extensively during WWI and onward.

What made it smokeless?

Sarah wrote: "What made it smokeless?"

Previously, gunpowder was predominately made with sulfur, charcoal and saltpeter. The sulfur, and particularly charcoal, creates a lot of smoke, and with the saltpeter acting as an oxidizer, exacerbates the effect.

Throughout the years of firearm weaponry, smoke from the gunpowder would cloud the battlefield, which made it particularly difficult for commanders to issue commands to their troops, let alone the troops would have trouble seeing the enemy to fire upon. So, throughout the 19th century, and early 20th century, there had been strides to improve the efficiency of gunpowder, and to produce a variety that is smokeless.

Was it more expensive to produce?

Sarah wrote: "Was it more expensive to produce?"

By the time of WWI, it had come down considerably in price, I'm sure. However, there was no doubt a stockpile of readily accessible non-smokeless gunpowder that they tried to avoid using.

Thanks. I couldn't understand why they would be using two types.

I finished the book yesterday. is there anyone who also finished the book? Do we need to ask Kristi to open a folder where we can discuss the whole book?

Several people have. The ones that have haven't been very active though. I think the final thread goes up next week. We only have the one that starts Monday and the next Monday is the final one. I'm anxious to finish the book.

Zulfiya wrote: "I finished the book yesterday. is there anyone who also finished the book? Do we need to ask Kristi to open a folder where we can discuss the whole book?"

I finished the book several weeks ago, and was shot down on any attempt to discuss points.

Josh, I think if we use spoiler html, we will be fine. I propose to use spoiler references and let people know before they click on the spoiler link that it is about the whole novel.

Anyway, this is what I posted in my review after I finished reading this novel. It does contain spoilers, so beware and click on the spoiler link ONLY if you have read the book.

(view spoiler)[ This massive (page-wise) book is the opening novel of the eponymous trilogy. With all the move and hassle of buying a new home, I did not physically read it, but I listened to the Audible audio book. Due to the impossibility of past cross-references, I was not able to page back and verify some information, but the book was easy to follow. This is the case when some drawbacks of the book eventually became its strengths in its audio version.

It is obvious that the book that is so massively popular would not be the high-brow, elegant, and elitist fiction, but it was still very enjoyable. Yes, the characters were often too straightforward and slightly predictable, but there were scores of them, and because of their easy-to-decode nature and theatricality of their features, they were easy to remember, too; it is especially important if you are listening to the audio book.

The plot lines were occasionally too predictable and slightly soap-operish (like in the case with numeral pregnancies), but it was also easy to remember, and it is highly important when there are several plot-lines that intertwine and crisscross the fabric of the text.

On the other hand, Follett allows his characters to be politically active even if I or maybe he does not share the same ideas and beliefs. I am not happy with Fitz’s opinion about the role of women, aristocracy, and democracy, but I still appreciate that Follett lets him be and does not try to change his opinion, neither is he trying to make him truly evil. Surprisingly, despite the slightly formulaic nature of his characters, all of them have redeeming features, and I do not hate any of them. Besides, closer to the end of the novel, even the most straightforward characters become more subtle and complex. Some might say that final chapters is not exactly the place in the novel when and where one develops his or characters, but it is only the first novel of his trilogy, so with the other two in mind, Follett is allowed to take his time to develop his characters and make them more literary complex.

Overall, I do not mind reading the other two books. It is not the special literary treat for the language and literature lovers, but it is likable, entertaining, relatively well researched, and delivers complex political ideas without boring its readers.

P.S. The description of the military episodes is one of the most important achievement of this novel – it is utterly believable, convincing, memorable, touching, realistic, gritty, and very disturbing as any description of war should be (hide spoiler)]

Andrea wrote: "My thoughts after finishing the novel

So it's been a couple of weeks since I finished The Fall of Giants. I couldn't restrict myself from just flying through this book. So this is what I thought.
..."

(view spoiler)[ Andrea wrote: "I liked Maud and Walter, as characters, but I wanted their story to be a bit more tragic (I know, I'm terrible)."

I have a suspicion that Maud and Walter will suffer a lot in the next book. Possibly in book II, Follett will focus more on WWII, and Maud and Walter might be those few who would not succumb to the Nazi propaganda. Follett even mentioned that some of Walter's relatives were already intoxicated by the idea of German supremacy. Walter and Maud as a couple is one of the reasons why I want to read book 2 in the trilogy (hide spoiler)]