Rating: 
Summary: This book is GOOD
Review: I read this book about 6 monthes ago and it still haunts me. It was a wonderful tale of a woman's own ghosts and memories. I was thoroughly engrossed from the first page. Margaret Atwood created a masterpiece that entwines the reader into a woman's past.
Rating:
Summary: brilliant, startling stuff.
Review: I thought this book was amazing. Not only does Atwood weave a heartbreaking, beautiful, tormented tale, she does it with exquisite style and grace. Her words suck you into the page. There were many times (as in all of her books) that I had to stop and reread a line aloud because it was so good- just right on the mark. This is not an easy, blow by the seat of your pants read. If you're looking for late night fluff to divert your attention for a few hours (and there's nothing wrong with that) then I would say: stay away from this book. I don't believe it was meant to be read quickly. I am a fast reader and I generally whip through books... this one takes a bit longer- but it's worth it, and I think it's good when a novel asks you to pay attention. When I finished the book I felt taken aback and admittedly, a bit teary... and, the best part... I just wanted to read it again. It was that good! It's a story about sisters, aging, science fiction, marriage, deception and a gamut of other fantastically written things. GET IT NOW!
Rating: 
Summary: Skilled writing, but a dull subject
Review: The thing I liked best in this book was The Blind Assassin. Not the tedious and degrading love story recounted in Laura Chase's book of that name, but the actual story of the blind assassin and his tongueless maiden. The book Atwood wrote is tedious, and the characters uninteresting, except for Laura herself; but Atwood begins to tell a very interesting account of the blind assassin, and then ends it lamely, as if she didn't care about it--OK, her character who was telling the story didn't care about it much. It wasn't much more than just an idea for a story which needed more development, but Atwood would have done better to focus on it, and toss out the rest of this novel. She writes like a poet, when she isn't being unecessarily vulgar, and I liked some of her observations; but I don't like these characters as much as she did. Does anyone else see the characters and situations from the movie Titanic in this book? The Rose (of Titanic) who is almost willing to knuckle under to pressure from family and peers and become the rich man's spoiled bride, transforms into Iris. Only Iris does marry the rich man, and it ruins her life. The Rose who won't behave as expected--who is passionate and empathetic--becomes Laura Chase. Rose nearly jumps overboard into the ocean at the beginning of the movie, Laura does commit suicide by driving a car off a bridge into a river. The Rose of the movie becomes two sisters in the book. Movie Rose is warned to submit to her rich fiancee to save her family from ruin, and, later, to save her lover's life. The book Iris/Laura are given the same two choices. The movie's Jack Dawson is a young adventurer and artist, who draws pictures of Paris prostitutes. The book also has a Jack Dawson type, but he is a socialist adventurer who writes lurid space operas for magazines like Amazing Stories. Both versions of Jack can produce art of a high quality when they wish to, but neither takes his art completely seriously. Rose begins the movie as an old lady whose only family--as far as we can see--is her grandaughter and old Rose narrates the story. In the book, Iris' only family is her grandaughter, and old Iris tells us this story. The book's Iris, Rose and company all go sailing on a cruise ship, the Queen Elizabeth, that is the most fabulous cruise ship yet built, and is on its maiden voyage. It doesn't sink, however. Something else I noticed. There are several movies that begin by showing us the death of a main character, then telling us this character's story, just as this book begins by telling of Laura's suicide, then telling us about Laura by way of her sister Iris. Citizen Kane is such a movie, as is The Third Man and Sunset Boulevard. More importantly, so is the movie Laura. But I wouldn't want to mislead anyone: the Laura of the book really is dead. There is a bit of a mystery here, but readers will probably figure it out early, when they still have more than half the book to get through.
Rating:
Summary: Beautifully Written Book in Need of Better Plot
Review: Twenty minutes ago I finished a book that has taken up much of my time these last two weeks. There were many moments when I believed that my time was well-spent. However my overall feeling is one of disappointment. Margaret Atwood is a gifted novelist. Few can dispute this. She weaves words together with skill and passion. The problem with The Blind Assassin is that she spent so much time on the language that she neglected the plot. The story became tedious early on and even when the surprising revelations were made towards the end of the book, they came too late to save it. The characters were mere shadows of themselves, despite the sheer girth of the novel. Even Iris is seen as a paperdoll, manipulated by those around her. Maybe that is what Atwood wanted to show. I gave the novel three stars due to its wonderful language and technical superiority (novel within a novel, newspaper excerpts, etc.) If the Booker was awarded for the above-mentioned traits, it deserves it. I just cannot give 5 stars due to the unsatisfying plot, pace and character development.
Rating:
Summary: painful but excellent
Review: The Blind Assassin is marvellously written and well conducted (as a symphony). The characters are described not as they are but as they are felt by Iris, the real only protagonist and puppet-mover of the story. "Vengeance is a course that has to be eaten cold" and Iris is a proof of that. The book makes a lot of emotions to emerge from our depths and it is what I consider an introspective "painful" book. It hurts but it is worthwhile and...that is life!
Rating:
Summary: I can't argue much with the criticisms, but...
Review: I loved this book. One reviewer in particular said that he normally reads a book "in one night". (Which from my perspective, gives a good image of the person's reading habits. Golly, "War and Peace" and "Anna Karenina" make good one night reads, don't they?;) The "Blind Assassin limited him to 10 pages, and then he needed to put it down. This novel sure isn't Tolstoy, however, in fairness. Frankly, I think reading this in short spurts was Atwood's intent. The characters might have seemed one-sided, aloof and detached, but the writing was just too rich. It almost demanded reading a few chapters at a time and putting it down. Think of this book as a huge jigsaw puzzle. The puzzle may look confusing and at times pointless, but once put together, you get a complex story with what I think is a very satisfying conclusion. There are descriptive passages which at first seem tossed-off, but are rich in detail, truths, and not without some well-deserved sarcasm. And this is NOT "The Handmaid's Tale", nor is this her best work. And if you are genuinely unfamiliar with Atwood's work, this could be off-putting. But if you really like her and are willing to go the distance with the book, I think you'll enjoy it. (I took two weeks with it--taking breaks with other books at the same time.) Yeah, I gave it five stars, but I couldn't argue with those who gave it but four. It's well worth a try.
Rating: 
Summary: Dismal book with shallow characters
Review: My guess is The Blind Assassin won the Booker Prize because Atwood does successfully interweave all the different aspects of her storytelling, including the novel within the novel, very well. But, the book was dull, long-winded and did not hold my attention at all. I normally read a book a day. This book took me over a week to read as I kept picking it up, reading ten pages and shoving it aside. The characters were unlikeable, lethargic and did nothing. Even Iris, who is looking back on her life with regret, didn't really do anything - she just sat there and let everyone else around her have their lives destroyed. But, even then I didn't care enough to even hate Iris, she was just simply there like a whisper of smoke - no substance, no character, no appeal - vaccuous. I expected much better, not only because of the Booker, but also because I have read all of Atwood's previous books and liked them very much. This was just too long and too uninteresting to hold my attention. An interesting idea but I think Atwood could have written it in a much more captivating way. Very disappointing.
Rating: 
Summary: Certainly not for me...
Review: What a boring, fragmented, long-winded book this is. In "The Blind Assassin" Margaret Atwood has produced a cast of characters so unsympathetic and one dimensional that one cares very little about them or what happens to them. On top of that, her writing is so heavy handed that she telegraphs all of their "sordid secrets" well ahead of their denouement. This is one foot-dragging plod from start to finish.
Rating:
Summary: Atwood challenges her readers
Review: THE BLIND ASSASIN assumes that the reader wants to be fully engaged with the novel - the structure Atwood has chosen demands it. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience.
Rating: 
Summary: A Really Different Book..!
Review: I have to say that the Margaret Atwood's books I have read are always highly interesting and very well-written including this one with its' intriguing "story within a story" plot device. Although I felt at times it slowed things down a bit,it's a trick that she pulls off very well and in lesser hands would'nt have worked at all. This book to me is a love story but, unlike most of them, it also makes you think..!
| 
