M's Reviews > Winter Garden

I agree, mostly, except did you get to the inner story about Anya's life during the Siege of Leningrad? That part, I thought, was good although it didn't redeem the book for me.

I couldn't even. I was so turned off I had no patience. Couldn't get past 100 or so pages as it was. 4.0???? For that I am expecting Shakespeare of the freaking Bible. What the heck??

I completely agree -- I have no idea where the 4.0 came from. There are so many better books out there on goodreads with lower ratings; I'm beginning to question my policy of sticking with the 3.8+ books. If I hadn't been listening on audio, I probably would have put it down also but my expectations for an audiobook are much lower -- I just want something that will get me through the dishes, so unless a book is highly offensive and I really can't bear listening to it (A Confederacy of Dunces, for instance) I'm likely to stick with it even if I'm not loving it. With a text book that doesn't allow me to multi-task I'm more likely to resent the time I'm wasting with it; with an audiobook which actually makes it easier for me to get my housework done, I'll be more forgiving.

Yeah especially since I books I really enjoyed didn't do as well, by a long shot. Ah well. I really really can't stand obvious writing. I have thrown books across the room early on for that.

I suspect that the Siege of Leningrad story was the one she really wanted to write; it was a heck of a lot more inspired than the Meredith-Nina-Anya plotline, which I suspect was a contrived excuse to write the Siege of Leningrad story and stretch it to book-length.

What a bad idea. I just assumed if she was composing anything as unforgivably bad as the MNA part then what were the odds that I'd like a story that begins she was poor, a nothing?

You might be surprised (although you never know, since you tend to be more critical than I am); I really liked the Siege of Leningrad plotline.

Well maybe one day. I am still too annoyed...

Although I don't know any of the readers listed above, I have to add to this string. How is it possible that I've seen so many four- and five-star postings for this book? And so many comments on the "good writing"? What planet are those people living on? I'm halfway through disc 2 and am ready to throw the box out the window. The writing is simple, the characters are annoying, and the plot thus far is boring. I mean, really? Your mother is 80+ years old and you've never bothered to ask about her background or why she is the way she is? And the 30-something Jungle Jane Pulitzer-Prize-winning photographer? Whatever. I'm not even to the mother's story yet, but I feel that the sisters' stories through the first two discs were just added fluff and should have been edited out.

I'll probably stick with it until I get a chance to run to the library for a new audio book--no promises there. What I'd like to know is, is this book worth sticking with? Is the mother's fairy tale disaster story any better than the first two discs might lead me to believe?

And, if this is the same narrator as "If I Stay" (which I also hated), I'll have to blacklist her. Something about her tone drives me insane.

I can't say for sure, as I was so disgusted by the Sweet Valley High quality of the work that I never made it to the mom's story - it was hard to imagine after such poor writing, and such an unlikable character, that anything could save the book. But a lot of people did feel it redeemed it, so ...

Uck. Don't think I can swallow this one. Life's too short to waste time on bad books.

marg, I have not read and most certainly will not read this book, but I've trudged along (due to boocklub selections) through 2 other Hannah books and all I can say is, what was your sister thinking of?

This sentence caught my eye: "chick lit disguised as intellectual"?! In what universe, as Jessica points out above? I've found her books to fall way below even standard chick lit, and without doubt they can never be classified as 'intellectual' of any sort!

great review, yours, though! :) your indignation is heartfelt and amusing!

Okay, okay -- Marg's sister is here to defend herself. I had never read any Hannah books before, and while I wasn't exactly impressed with this one, my reaction was a bit milder than Marg's for a number of reasons. One was that I listened to this on audio, and my standards for audio tend to be lower -- if it entertains me while I do the dishes, I'm good. Second, while I absolutely hated the story taking place in the present, I did get caught up in the story taking place during the Siege of Leningrad. Overall, though, I tend to agree with Marg's assessment and "disguised as intellectual" was clearly a misnomer.

Excellent discussion. Love it! :)

Stop by any time! ;)

Sorry Khaya, didn't know you were 'the sister'! But good points all around--audio def is a different medium! :)

While I enjoy the occasional Kristin Hannah, calling any of them "intellectual" seriously stretches the term, yes.

Haven't read this one yet, but I have a couple others of hers waiting for me to get around to them. (My dad reads them when he flies, and I get them afterward.)

Not a problem, Maia. I didn't exactly give the book a glowing review myself, and even if I had, I would still enjoy hearing from people who felt otherwise.

Rivka, your dad reads them? I love that! Is he a chick lit fan?

He mostly reads more traditional masculine fare (Sandford, Grisham, Archer, Kellerman, Scarpetta). But occasionally he does read some chick lit.

(And if he ever discovers I have mentioned this in a semi-public place, I am DEAD. ;) )

Don't worry; I'll never tell. Between you and me, when my husband is having trouble falling asleep he always asks me for some chick lit (and complains because I usually don't have any).

:D

I don't think anyone should review a book they did not read through to the end, especially so harshly.

Claudia wrote: "I don't think anyone should review a book they did not read through to the end"

You are of course entitled to that opinion. But many people (me included) disagree. Knowing that someone couldn't stomach a book enough to finish it is useful information for me.

I emphatically second that, Rivka. I also think that the beauty of a website like goodreads is that anyone is free to review what they like, as they like. And anyone is free to skip over a review that they feel has no credibility. The only "shoulds" or "should nots" on a site like this, in my opinion, pertain to good manners, not to the decision of whether or how to review a book.

Yeah I never get the whole 'should's thing on these websites. It's like the listserv I'm on for teachers - on occasion someone will express irritation that people post XYZ sort of things - but what stops a person from simply ignoring or deleting? I don't hold anyone accountable for their reviews - I don't feel I am owed anything here.

Agreed. For example, I'm not a fan of filling reviews with pictures but it would never occur to me to post a comment on a total stranger's review criticizing their choice to include pictures. If the pictures bother me that much, I simply don't read the review.

Yes! I don't get that either - the urge to comment thing. Maybe I am more timid or something but the only times I have commented on someone's review without knowing them (or even with, for the most part) has been to commend them for a job particularly well done (and even then I feel a little weird about it) - it's fascinating to me all the different ways people respond to things which I guess is part of what's nice about these networks (mostly).

I think there's something about the internet and its anonymity that reduces people's social inhibition. I would certainly never approach a total stranger face-to-face and express unsolicited criticism the way people do on goodreads. I actually do occasionally comment on strangers' reviews here on goodreads, but like you, it's generally to offer praise, or at most, polite disagreement with a specific point. Why would someone want unsolicited criticism from someone they don't even know?

Good point, the double standard or whatever it is between real life interactions and internet. Absolutely - people are divorced from bodies, identities, and almost existence as real people when you have removed so many factors. I have to stop myself sometimes (particularly on said snooty listserv) from getting defensive and furthering this issue when a thread gets all attitude and says things 1 - without tone or facial expression to diffuse tension and 2 - without proper realization that there are actual people whom you don't really know. But with all of these sites I have to remember that as free as I am to review as I see fit people are equally free to feel and say whatever they want. As I told you I only once deleted a comment and that was because it was so vitriolic and ad hominem that I felt it just was disgusting. Otherwise I am happy to take the place among other writers in the world whose obnoxiousness will yield fans as readily as critics :)

YES! Kristin Hannah's books along with so many other bestsellers are Trash.

I find this kind of review incredibly useful because I always know I'll love any book you rate poorly and hate any book you rate highly.

I agree with your assessment of the first 1/2 of the book. You missed a pretty darn good ending imo. It saved the book for me.

By Chapter 8, approximately 100 pages in, I texted my friends to ask if I was ever going to care about any of the three women. At that point, I wanted to smash the sisters’ heads together and punch the mom in the face. I only really enjoyed the “fairy tale,” and even though the end was fraught with forgiveness and change, I never really warmed up to them. And the actual ending was a bit much… I mean the Alaska/Stacy/Anya part. Really? Too unrealistic and ridiculous for words.

Could not agree more.

I agree, this was awful. My least favorite KH book so far.