Rating: 
Summary: Whatever happened to style AND clarity?
Review: I looked forward to reading this book because I thought Ragtime was excellent and from the reviews, I thought I would like this one. I was disappointed. Doctorow in interviews talked about his style of letting his thoughts flow and the reader must follow him, but I think that's simply a cop-out; an excuse for sloppy writing and a failure to edit anything. Much of the time, I had trouble following who the heck was doing the narration (Who is "I"?), the parody of songs was stupid, and there was just a failure of the author to communicate with his audience.Sure, some of the writing is beautiful, which makes it all the more disappointing when Doctorow just wants to take the money and run. He's capable of so much more. The Holocaust parts were excellent, the disillustioned priest searching for true meaning of religion in his life, melding Judaism and Christianity, had potential but was never fulfilled. I think it's probably politically incorrect to criticize Doctorow, but if this were someone's first novel, I think it might have been dismissed as the disconnected jumble it is.
Rating:
Summary: A grab-bag of unconnected ideas and stories
Review: I'd never read any Doctorov until now, but had heard him acclaimed as a great 20th century author. Not on the basis of this book, I don't think. The theology is old hat, the cosmology is old hat, and the renouncing of Christianity by one of the chief characters is hardly surprising. What is the reader to make of this hodge-podge? I looked for connections, and occasionally found them (even complete sentences reappearing for no apparent reason) but it was more as if Doctorov had a lot of material he'd never got round to using and decided to try and bung it all together under one cover, under the pretence that it was a novelist's journal. Trouble is the novelist is a non-character, and the so-called 'mystery' of the missing cross is a non-event (I think Doctorov forgot about it after a while) even though Pemberton, the failing priest sees it as a sign. We're treated to dissertations on a wild variety of matters, many of which are interesting in themselves, but few of which seem to contribute to the novel as a whole. Much of the material is superbly written, which for me made it all the more disappointing that the novel (collage?) didn't seem to go anywhere. I read it through to the last page, and couldn't see why much of it had been included. I got hold of the book in the first place because Time Magazine gave it a rave review. Obviously there's something wrong with my perspective!
Rating: 
Summary: Incomprehensible Disappointment
Review: I had really liked some of Doctorow's previous works especially Ragtime, so was anxious to check out his newest work which sounded intriguing. I got the audio book edition, as I usually enjoy listening to these in the car to occupy/save time. Unfortunately I for one was very disappointed in this one. Too much stream of consciousness and random thoughts. Little plot and no involving characters. Couldn't even finish it.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't expect the usual Doctorow with this novel
Review: Doctorow has garnered so many writing awards-the National Book Award, two National Book Critics Circle awards, the PEN/Faulkner award, and the National Humanities Medal from the president, just to name a few-each successive novel is eagerly anticipated and closely scrutinized. And while I have no doubt that most critics will applaud this latest effort, I found it frustratingly demanding and wearisome. Those hoping to find another "Billy Bathgate" or "The Waterworks" will be disappointed. In "City of God," Doctorow has chosen to go down a new and entirely different path than his past efforts. We are treated to a series of separate narratives that include a Holocaust survivor and discourses on everything from astrophysics to the lyrics of popular songs, to the meaning of life and role of God and religion at the end of the twentieth century. Many of the novel's moments are beautifully written, such as the recitations from the Holocaust survivor and the prayer offered by the Episcopalian minister at his wedding. And these moments are almost worth the time and trouble of wading through the remainder of the book. But many of the plot lines appear to lead to dead-ends, such as the prominent story of the cross that is stolen from the Episcopal church and ends up on the roof of the Jewish synagogue. Besides the torturous symbolism, what are we to make of this event that hangs over the story line but is eventually forgotten and dropped by the author? Readers beware-"City of God" has its satisfying moments (and they can be surprisingly rewarding) but you will be made to sweat for each one.
Rating: 
Summary: A deep, tricky read
Review: This novel is presented as a writer's notebook, and it is most effectively read as all coming from the same writer's pen, albeit in different voices. It is not easy to make plain sense of the narrative structure, but things do come together at the end, when the writer makes his most cogent summary of the backstory of his proposed novel (or maybe screenplay.) In any case, it's a challenging maddening effort, best read once carefully and then quickly and smoothly skimmed a second time. Only the reader can decide if it's worth it. I definitely thought it was.
Rating:
Summary: Say it ain't so, E.L.
Review: How did the author of "Ragtime" and "Book of Daniel" come up with this mess? He must have been cleaning out his literary refrigerator: "Let's see--here's a plot line that never went anywhere; here are some musings on Big Things that don't fit anywhere else; maybe I can finally get rid of these experimental ideas I never got around to using 25 years ago . . ." I hope this book was an aberration. I'd hate to see Doctorow go the way of Updike, continuing to write when he no longer has much of interest to say.
Rating:
Summary: City of God
Review: This is my first introduction to the writings of Doctorow, therefore I am unable to compare to his other works which I understand are written in a different style for each new work. However, I had to comment on this book for my sheer enjoyment of reading the words! One often reads a fiction book to enjoy a good story, but this book also was a pleasure to read for readings' sake. The story goes back and forth in time and does deal with the subject of one's faith in God and one often needs pause to think about statements made. But for beauty of the written word I highly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Not Much of a Read
Review: I have absolutely doted on Doctorow for years and was disappointed beyond measure with this latest self-indulgent effort. There is here, a sense of arrogant disregard for the reader - "follow me if you can" - that is far removed from the wonderful, and so readable stuff I was expecting. Rule 1 is, was, and always will be "People shouldn't want to put it down". Not this one I'm sorry to say. Yes I admit it, I couldn't be bothered to finish it.
Rating: 
Summary: He asks a good question
Review: He asks a good question. A shame to summarize, but I'll say it's whether or how we will fulfill our destiny. "Teleology", on page 256. He wonders what will keep us from fulfilling ourselves in an orgy of destruction. He also answers it, or supplies the answer, although I don't think he knows it (I heard him on a BBC interview, which led me to read the book): if a passionate, no-holds-barred examination of Frank Sinatra can make you love that guy, then the same "National Inquirer" or "MAD Magazine" treatment of the planet at large has to make you love it too. You, Mr. Doctorow (are you a real doctor-ow?), are the healer of the planet, the one who calls off God's wrath. Don't sulk like Jonah at how easily the people repent. We are Fools of Song.
Rating:
Summary: Philosophically lacking
Review: This book is not a great theological manifesto. The theology of this book is the same addled-brained, pseudo-Christian sophistry that liberal denominations like the Unitarians, Congregationalists and Episcopalians have been shoveling at us for 75 years. Great literature challenges the major spiritual and moral assumptions of the day. This book simply adopts them.
|
