Rating: 
Summary: Long, but well worth it
Review: This is one of my favorite books of all time. This is arguably Ken Folletts masterpiece. He does a wonderful job of putting you into the Middle Ages, and it doesn't seem fanciful at all. His plain language and the characters that are chosen to follow around make the book very believable. He also does a good job of tying it into the history of the time and introducing you to popular figures of the time, like Thomas Beckett and Henry II. After reading the book for a while, you will really start to think and feel like you are living in the Middle Ages, where other books make you feel like you are a visitor. Here, the technology is really all that is different, but the human emotions are not different from today. Greed, lust, vengence, charity are all present, and the book comes full-cirlce to the beginning. I recommend this book to anyone who has the time. This book is an epic and will become a classic.
Rating: 
Summary: Boring and Unchallenging
Review: The raves for this book really astonish me. If I had to take a wild guess I would say that the people claiming it's the best book they've ever read are very, very young people who haven't widely sampled much literature yet in their lives.The method for keeping the reader in 'suspense' is to have first the good guys winning, then the bad guys winning, then the good guys winning, then the bad guys winning... On and on and on... The characters are so one-dimensional. It's as if the author did a quick outline before starting the book and gave each character a single trait to go on. In William's case it would have simply been "Bad." In Tom's it would have been "Simple but hardworking." No one surprises you - They start out a certain way and end the same way. No development whatsoever. I thought if I had to read about Aliena's "mass of unruly curls" one more time I would throw the book across the room (which I almost did anyhow). I thought it was lazy, unchallenging and monotonous. You need perhaps two brain cells to read it and those don't even have to be fully awake.
Rating:
Summary: Something different from Ken Follett
Review: My local bookshop owner handed me a copy of Ken Follett's Pillars and said that I would enjoy it. At first I was skeptical, because I am not a big fan of Ken Follett, but when I read the new introduction by Follett in the book I was intrigued. In it he talks about how writers should stick with the type of book/story that got them a bestseller and it's a folly to deviate. But he did. He also says that the critics overlooked this book, yet it has beeen a strong seller, which has been mainly due to word of mouth (I hadn't heard about the book), which is the best kind of advertising. I couldn't agree more and it is an amazing book. The fictional story follows the building of a cathedral in 12th century England. Not only is the architectural history wonderful, but so are the various characters Follett populates the book with. The story is immensely capitvating, with good vs. evil (it is a cathedral after all) battling it out all the way. I'm not a big fan of historical fiction, especially the Medieval kind, but I found this book a great page turner and am glad Follett meandered down this path away from his usual genre. Good for him!
Rating: 
Summary: Plot a bit juvenile, but worth it for the history
Review: I looked for this book on the recommendation of a friend, and on the strength of the glowing reviews, bought it. I read it on a ten-day vacation in Florida. Based on Follett's extensive credits for those who helped him with research, I assume that the history is at least sort of close, and for that reason I'm glad I read it. But the plot itself and the character development are quite disappointing. My guess is that if this were Follett's first work, he'd have trouble selling a second. You can read a detailed summary of the main plot points elswhere, but really here's the really quick version: An aspiring master stone mason, who's a really, really good guy, wants to build a cathedral very badly. He leads his family around the countryside, looking for work and almost starves everyone to death. On the way he runs into a really, really bad guy, who ends up haunting him and his family for the rest of his life. Finally he finds some token work at a wannabe cathedral run by another really, really good guy, the prior, who has his own arch enemy, another really, really bad guy who happens to be his boss. Through a bunch of contrived events the mason ends up rebuilding the wannabe cathedral and turning it into an almost-top-notch cathedral. His son and step-son end up finishing it off. His son is an almost really, really bad guy and pretty much screws it up when he takes over from his father, but the step son (another really, really good guy) finishes it off in grand form, and even makes some Amazing Leaps Of Logic, advancing the technology (was that a word back then? Follett thinks so) of stone masonry by Leaps And Bounds (!) Other reviewers of this book praise Follett for the complex characterizations. Look folks, I don't want to insult anyone, but for complex characterizations of realistic characters you're going to have to go somewhere else. The main characters here are as two-dimensional (make that one-dimensional) and as cardboard as they come. They are either really good people, or really bad people. There are some attempts and giving the good guys some faults and the bad guys some virtues, but they come off as contrived, and not even that well written. In very good novels, you see the plot not as something contrived by a writer, but as something that naturally grows out of the aspirations and desires of the characters interacting with each other. You perceive real people living out their lives and doing real things for real reasons. In this story I got the distinct impression that if Follett decided something good should happen, miraculously the bad guys couldn't stop it; then when he wanted something bad to happen the bad guys did something outrageous that the good guys couldn't stop. And back and forth, and back and forth. As well, everyone seemed to have some amazingly twentieth century ideas about the role of women in the world. Even the bad guys, when they treated women poorly, came off more as modern day bikers having their way with some hapless victim than people rooted in the "truth" (as they would have thought about it at the time) that God made women subservient to men. All-in-all, I thought the plot and characterizations were more like something aimed at junior-high readers. Having said all that, I still found the history interesting. There is one section where the master builder has to draw some plans for the new cathedral, and as a professional draftsman myself, I was quite interested in the manner he made his "drawing paper", and in some of the geometric relationships on which he based the cathedral. In summary: An interesting read on the beach on vacation, but don't imagine you will be getting a really great work of art.
Rating:
Summary: Terrific!
Review: This is on my Top Ten list. It's definitely a departure for Follett, which has inspired a few negative reviews that I think are not well-founded. Whether you're a fan of historical fiction or not, this is a very enjoyable read. It is longer than most novels but it reads lighter than most in its genre, feeling somewhere between hardcore historical fiction (The Sunne In Splendor) and Follett's more typical books (The Key To Rebecca). I've recommended this book to many, and all have loved it regardless of what they normally read.
Rating: 
Summary: Well-researched story of cathedrals and medieval politics
Review: Our introduction to author Ken Follett was an awesome, educational, yet suspenseful medieval tale about Gothic cathedral building (some took 20 to 30 years to erect) and the politics (and to some degree, the sexual mores) of 12th century England. The stone building techniques of these early masons (from whom today's Masonic Order descends), and their rivalry in building cathedrals to stretch to the heavens, seemed incredibly well researched, forming an interesting historical primer in itself. Add to the scene the often violent clashes between the classes, and their feuding overlords, along with kidnapping and sexual preying on women galore (not for the weak of heart), with a healthy dose of politics even among the monks and churchmen, and you get quite a recipe for suspense and intrigue. It's difficult to summarize the plot of this lengthy novel, as it follows several leading characters over the course of three decades or so, but suffice to say that Follett's story-telling prowess is undoubtedly at his finest in "Pillars". His legion of fans agree, despite the one-of-a-kind nature of this particular tale and its setting. We commend this book to your attention!
Rating:
Summary: Thrilling Read
Review: Follett virtually never disappoints; and I've found his historical novels thrilling and provocative on a number of levels. "Pillars of The Earth" may be his best ever. Thoroughly enjoyable despite accurate relation of the brutality of the era in which it takes place. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: One of my top 5 favorites
Review: The Pillars of the Earth is one of my favorite novels. I first read it in college - when I should have been reading other items - read again in my middle 20's, and again just this last year. The historical information, along with the rich character development, makes this novel intriguing, entertaining, and educational. A friend once described this book as a sort of medieval soap opera. If you enjoy characters that develop well, and all seem to be entwined in one another's' lives, then this book will not let you down.
Rating:
Summary: Disturbing
Review: Being a Ken Follett fan and reader of many of his books, I found Pillars far below his level of writing. The excessive violence, preditability of characters was inevitable. After reading the first three hundred pages, I just found it not worthy of the time spent reading this under par Follett novel.
Rating:
Summary: Not what I was hoping for
Review: I understand the time period the book deals with and all that goes along with that period, but I don't need graphic sexual depictions, whether pertinent to the story or not, and/or overly foul language to get me interested. I enjoy Fantasy and Mythology, sword-slinging and magic-making type novels where Good struggles and wins over Evil, and I don't mind a bit of violence now and then because that's a part of war and dark times (I know, the other stuff is too), but I've read other authors (Robert Jordan, i.e.) who have the ability to convey these "certain messages" without actually "spelling it out" in graphic detail. To some this might deem the story less interesting or intrigueing, but I would have rather seen the historical attributes pushed to the fore and the human attributes of certain characters in certain situations toned down to a more tolerable level. I could not enjoy the rest of this book because I got gun-shy about what was coming on the next page. If you get this book to read, don't leave it lying around for the kids to find. Call me what you will, but I'm glad I got this book at a used book store for only a quarter. I'll be trading it back in real soon.
|
