Rating: 
Summary: Henry Fleming is a PAINFUL character
Review: I can't help it. The symbolism is wonderful, the metaphors add beautifully to the story, and even the physical descriptions are well written. But I don't LIKE Henry Fleming! He's painfully adolescent, cowardly, ungrateful, and pathetic. And then at the end he triumphs! Its the triumphs of the Henry Flemings of the world that really drive me crazy. If I had been there I'd have whacked him over the head with my gun, too.
Rating: 
Summary: This book is horrible
Review: This book is horrible. The soldiers hardly do anything.I enjoy reading about the Civil War, but surely not in this book. I think the writers who raved about this book had to be drunk when they wrote those positive reviews. This book doesn't even deserve a half-star, but one star is the lowest you could go on this site. If you are looking for an EXCELLENT war story, read Walter Dean Myer's "Fallen Angels." Now that's a five star war book.
Rating:
Summary: Not worth the two or three dollars
Review: Reading The Red Badge of Courage was almost as pleasant as getting body hair waxed. The novel by Stephen Crane, while having extensive and descriptive figurative language, lacked a thorough plot, one with a beginning, middle, and end. I suggest to the reader if they want to get any pleasure out of it, to read it on a very superficial and shallow level. Reading it for school only takes away from the book and causes the student to become distracted with the pointing out of all the figurative language and color descriptions. In my opinion, the only way to enjoy this piece is to read it as a young kid that way no analysis is going to take place.
Rating:
Summary: the worst book ever
Review: THIS BOOK WAS SO BAD I HAD TO RENT THE MOVIE TO FINISH IT
Rating: 
Summary: 13 year old son gives it 3 stars, 11 year old gives it 4
Review: This is taken from the writing of my 13 year old: This is a book that gives a vivid picture of a young man struggling to overcome his fear of war. One of the strengths of the book was how Crane portrayed Henry's intense desire to be courageous in battle. Another thing I appreciated was the author's use of imagery to make the book more interesting. I respected how in the end, Henry was honest about his mistakes. This book did have it's share of weaknesses, though. I didn't like how I felt disgust for the main character during most of the story. Also, the epilogue ruined much of the book for me, when in an attempt to make Henry look heroic in his old age, Crane has him give his life attempting to rescue some barn animals. I would have given this book a higher rating had it not been for these few, but significant flaws. My 11 year old wrote: This is a story about a teenaged boy named Henry Fleming who goes to war and overcomes his fear of battle. This book had some strengths and weaknesses in it. One of the weaknesses of the story is that I wasn't able to like Henry in the beginning of the story because of his pride and selfishness. One of the strengths is that he admits his mistakes when the war is over. I would give the story a higher rating if Crane never allowed the men to use foul language and if he had not written the second half of the epilogue. If you enjoy stories of war, I suggest you read this book.
Rating:
Summary: i kept falling...
Review: ...asleep when i started reading this book. i had to read it as an assignment for my english class, and don't get me wrong...i love to read. but this one...let's just say that id rather kill flies. it was so boring and nothing about it was reasonable or interesting. i wouldn't recommend this book to ANYONE.
Rating:
Summary: Boredom and Imagination in the American Civil War
Review: I really have to wonder what the intention of this book was. Was it a history, to give readers an idea of what the war was like? If so then the author certainly failed. While there are not enough details provided in the book for certain innacuracies to be pointed out one glaring detail was the almost total lack of interaction with civilians in the war. But perhaps some great philosophical point is being raised here? Probably not because the lesson at the end of this book is hardly universal and most people learn it before they leave elementary school. If you want to read good, realistic books about wars (Civil War included), check out Bernard Cornwell.
Rating: 
Summary: Review
Review: When we play chess, what is always the first piece we give up to attain triumph? The pawn, obviously. This front line soldier that is forever, so superfluous. Never mind what happens to that inferior pawn. In this Civil War novel, Stephen Crane invited me into the mind-set of just such a pawn. He came into contact with terror when he turned and ran for his life, and sensed a crushing shame at realizing his buddies stayed behind to fight the enemy. The burden of his shame was so overwhelming that he could not deal with it with everyday terms and mentally, created an alternate reality in which HE became the hero because he fled while his friends were the failures for thoughtlessly staying behind to die in vain. But by a twist of fate, his misfortunes were reversed and he discovered valor within himself. We even see the "pawn's" hatred for the "king", as he inwardly fumes at the arrogant general who insultingly refers to him and his companions as "mule drivers". This book is "confusing" because war is complex and both horrible and attractive to the main character, and I suppose it is "mind-numbing" because it does not give the prefect answers to the problems of war that it raises, but rather requires thoughtful and patient reading. Though the book dealed a lot with courage, take a look at the struggle with guilt and duty this youngster went through.
Rating: 
Summary: The Best! Ingore what others say!
Review: I absolutely loved the book! It gave a portrait of what war was really like. I have read a lot of war books and this is one of the best. I have read Johnny Tremain, Rifles for Watie, and When Will This Cruel War End, and others. I reccomend these books too.
Rating:
Summary: I had heard so much about this book but.......
Review: Critique I have decided to design my critique on the basis of Stephen Crane and the book itself. I have to declare that I was extremely angry at all the people who have acclaimed this book to be one of the best references to the atmosphere of the Civil War. First, I would like to state that when a book is exclaimed at describing the atmosphere of an event such as the Civil War it should describe it from all angularities. Not once did the book mention any noted person who partook action in the civil war. People such as Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, and Robert E. Lee have not been mentioned at all. I can personally describe to you, many problems that the Union army had in its management but Mr. Crane just inhibits the scenario by fabricating some of his characters to mock the lieutenants and generals in charge of a certain regiment or brigade. Another key implement in educing the atmosphere of the Civil War in a novel, would be to interact common day people into the book. People don't realize that the United States Civil War devastated the lives of the normal people more than any military man. There was only one scene in which there was interaction in the book on that basis. That was the scene consisting of Henry Fleming's departure from his mother. Lastly, on the atmospheric scenario, I cannot see how one can write a book on the Civil War without bringing out its essential clause onto the surface. Absolutely nothing was discussed regarding slavery. The very element which stifled the talks and brought forth the Civil War was slavery. I don't see how any author could avert this scenario from the overall picture of the book. I understand that his intent was not to dramatize slavery but there should have been some sort of external link connecting it in some way with the plot. I would also like to claim that Stephen Crane does an extremely poor job in linking his parameters within the plot. In the beginning of the story he describes how the youth is nervous about retreating from the battleground and how is philosophically thinking up of ways to describe his point. Though I personally believe that this is a lame counter plan for such mentality I will grant him the premise. What is pathetic is that he never again mentions how Henry overcame this great fear that he had. He shows that he runs away, watches his friend die, and recuperates with the army. Nevertheless, he never mentions how this dread of retreating was overcome. Another parameter within the plot which is left unmentioned is the transformation that occurs in Wilson. Crane established in the beginning of the story that Wilson had a very arrogant and protruding personality. He also hinted in the 3rd chapter about how he might be vulnerable to minute cases of defamation, but there is no analysis given in the entire book which might show one the transformation that Wilson had from being a conceited and supercilious person to becoming a kind and loving one. My third critique on the book is that it is just too boring. The context of the book is described in such asinine manners that it makes me feel a very unimaginative person-who had an 800 on the verbal section of the SAT - wrote the book. After the first half of the book was finished, Crane just basically repeated the scenes with different words. They fight, win or lose, sleep, wake up, and fight again. It seemed to me that I was reading a newspaper written in the 1850's. You might also notice this in my summary. I pondered for hours thinking on how I could make the second half of the book sound interesting but I think that I have not fully been successful in doing so. My last and most important critique on the book is that it should have been written in first person. Most of the people that I have protruded upon claim that the perspective one chooses to write a story from doesn't affect the story in any way but I think that it heavily does. In a book like this it is very important that one implicates the first person perspective and not the third person because I believe that the essential goal of the author is to show the mental disintegrations that the war caused amongst people. I am not claiming that physical details in a war story are unimportant. Rather, I am stating that in a book mental aspects have to be given a higher statute. Physical details can be accumulated through any newspaper or news magazine while mental aspects can usually not. There is no way the same impact can be drawn when you are describing the mentality of a person as a third person bystander. It does not provide the reader with the same type of personal mental connection with a character. I personally think that third person perspective should only be used when there is more than one definite main character. In conclusion I would like to state that although the intent of the Stephen Crane was positive and well thought of, he failed in influencing any type unique claim which supports the intent. I know that most people would personally disagree with me because I have just seemingly slandered one of the renown classics in the literature world but the information above does reflect my personal overview. If Stephen Crane was alive today I would advise him to read Uncle Tom's Cabin and take notes.
|
