Rating: 
Summary: Charming Story of a Rural Past
Review: I was born in an unpainted house beside the Tradewater River in Western Kentucky, a day's drive from John Grisham's fictional Black Oak, Arkansas. There was no cotton to pick. It was corn and hog country. My father was a tenant farmer not unlike Luke Chandler's grandfather, Pappy. I escaped the farm at three when my father got a job making plows at a factory in Indiana. Three years later he lost it when the stock market crashed. We came back home. This time to a little village along a railroad track. Like Grisham's hill people my father made a living killing hogs, peddling meat, cutting wood and doing odd jobs for better off farmers. The book's seven year old narrator aroused memories very much like his. I too hated gardening, loved picking coal along the tracks, rooted for the Cardinals, and dreamed of the city. At seven, unlike Luke, I do not remember panting to observe the nakedness of a comely teenage girl or witnessing even one murder. Yet, with the license of fiction, if Luke seems more like a boy of nine, this is still a charming story of a past which lives only in America's collective memory.
Rating:
Summary: "mighty" fine story
Review: When starting to read this book I had no clue what it was supposed to be about. The inside flaps and the back cover keeps everything vague, just admitting that it is about a '50s farmboy, his family, their farm hands, and the crop. This sounds a little like a nice little family story maybe even similiar to Tom Sawyer - and actually it is. A story of a moving quality of experiences and consequences, with other words a fine read. I don't want to talk about the book's story, because I think it is good not to know what a book really is about until you learn it from the book itself. You also could say the one of the best things about the book is that the publisher does not betray the reader and give him an idea of what the story is about - you might argue how you should chose a book if you don't have a clue what it is about. Well, as for this book, the story on the flaps and the book cover is indeed sufficient. To cut right to the chase, the book is good, because the story is fine. It is a story maybe a little inspried by works of Mark Twain and Charles Dickens although the literary quality definitely is not comparable with that of these authors. What I want to say is, the book is fine for a John Grisham. I have all of his books so far, and liked most of them, but entirely for their story and not for the writing, which is something I can't combine with a true writer - which Grisham positively is not. He is after all a lawyer who started writing and that's why all of his books where at least in some way about a lawyer except this one. This is not a bad thing - under circumstances -, but it is, if it is all you get for about eleven years or so. Lots of his books are boring or have at least too much lawyer 'n' courtroom stuff which makes it boring. This book obviously is different. There are no lawyers, no courtroom, nothing Grisham can identify with if he would not have grown up on a farm himself. I don't know if Grisham himself decided that his lawyers suck or if he just figured out that a change of scenery could pay more bills. Let's be honest: although this book is nice and pretty, really moving and so on, it is somehow artificial, appears to be at least, because Grisham desperately tried to change his reputation and to make something that could get his writing some fresh air. As I said, this book is good, and really treasureable, because it might be the best one Grisham has ever written, and, as I said, it's a fine story. Despite the fact that Grisham is doomed to write like a lawyer who started writing - with little literary beauty and grace, with bare words - this book is good, because for the first time in his career - it seems to me - he at least tried to give his writing more beauty and grace, making his characters deeper and more identifyable (although the seven year old narrator is kind of a satire to every seven year old kid - the kid's an ex-lawyer who started writing and is more than forty years old - and strongly reminds me of Calvin in the Calvin&Hobbes comics by Bill Watterson) - which he accomplished at times. I especially liked the ending about the book, because it was pathetic and somehow dramatic, the slight reflection of the quality works by Stephen King and John Irving have. In my opinion, if you are not one of those complete courtroom freaks - I honestly can't understand these folks, why would anybody like The Rainmaker or A Time To Kill except a lawyer, but these are supposed to be books and not trial protocolls, e.g. - this is a book everybody should read who likes OR does NOT like J. Grisham, because all of you might be in for some surprises. I liked the book very much, even if it was partially shallow and artificial, but I liked the narrator's tone, even if the idea that it is supposed to be the voice of a 7-year-old is ridiculous. Sometimes you just got to shut up that old critic that lives in the very all of us and just enjoy a story that is of good craftmanship and good heart. It will give your live a new perspective, for some time at least, as long as the story's still fresh in your mind, and - if nothing else - at least entertain you. What's more important than to retrieve a little entertainment out of the gray routines most of us call their lives?
Rating: 
Summary: A Summer Refresher
Review: As a long-time fan of John Grisham, I thoroughly enjoyed this departure from the courtroom norm. As the omniscient narrator, 8-year old Luke Chandler has all the humor and feelings we would expect from a child growing up in the 50's, in Arkansas. The story is a good read with fluid movement from beginning to end. Find your hammock and a glass of lemonade for best results........
Rating: 
Summary: No lawyers in this, thank God
Review: Well Grisham had tried something new and it sells because of his name. There is a murder and "mystery" on a rough and tumble setting. I prefer a mystery that makes me think a bit after I finish the book. This does not. A much more provocative read is Defenders of the Holy Grail by Ken Agori.
Rating:
Summary: Mind Capturing!
Review: This was my first read John Grisham novel, and I finished it in 2 days! It was very good. And I felt myself becoming a friend and confidante to Luke. Very, very good book, and I will defintely read another of his novels.
Rating: 
Summary: A little slow, but that's OK with me...
Review: Obiviously this slow southern story about cotton farming told through the eyes of a 7 year old boy was a huge departure from the legal thrillers we have come to expect from John Grisham. As a first attempt at a new genre, I give it a thumbs up. Reading it certainly put one back into a slower simpler place and time. The descriptiveness of the scenery and day to day life in a small town farming community in the early 1950's seemed quite realistic to me. At times it was tedious to read, particulary the minute details of the 1952 baseball season, but on the whole it was rather pleasureable. Good work Mr. Grisham.
Rating:
Summary: GRISHAM'S BEST
Review: I am a mystery fan and thought I might be disappointed by this new and unique offering by Grisham but I found this by far his best book and one of the best I have ever read. It is a simple novel about a subteen growing up in an earlier time on a southern cotton farm. No mystery, but unbelievably great reading. I could not put it down. Everyone in my family felt the same.
Rating:
Summary: Different
Review: A good book with a differance from the normal john grisham novels. The book takes u back to so many years in the life of the author and the struggles and hopes of a family,. A great book, but nothing to do with law firms
Rating:
Summary: A Charming Story Flawed by an Inauthentic Narrator
Review: It's Arkansas in 1952. The Chandler family is trying to scratch out a living on 80 rented acres where they grow cotton. Grandfather, father, and son all love baseball. Grandmother and mother provide great food and lots of love. During the harvest, they need to attract migrant workers from the Ozarks and Mexico. The story opens just before the first workers are hired and continues through to the end of the harvest. In the course of the picking, Luke Chandler learns a lot about life, love, morality, and the economic realities of farming. Many people will compare this book to To Kill a Mockingbird and Tom Sawyer. Mr. Grisham consciously modeled the book along the lines of both works, because he makes many allusions to them. Fans of Mr. Grisham's lawyer books will be disappointed to find out that there are no lawyers in this one. This book has many fine qualities. The sense of place is strong. You will be emotionally affected by the characters. The book raises many fascinating questions about morality and spirituality. The book also has some big weaknesses. The narrator is a seven year-old, Luke Chandler. No seven year-old has ever existed who is like this Luke, however. In many places he has the vocabulary of a college graduate . . . which greatly jars the authenticity of his voice. He also is able to gather information better than James Bond. Mr. Grisham could easily have remedied both problems, but did not choose to do so. As a result, he turned a serious novel into a sort of self-satire with a large wink to the reader that this is fiction, after all. The book has a lot of humor in it, but the humor is often coming from the sophisticated views of the author in ways that are not subtle enough. For example, there is an extremely obvious play on the fence painting scene from Tom Sawyer. Not satisfied with that, Mr. Grisham feels compelled to have Luke's mother make the allusion directly. In considering a moral dilemma about lying, Luke puts Hitler, Judas, and General Grant in together hell based on what he has been told. I came away hoping that Mr. Grisham would do more books like this one, but scale back his dramatics, the capabilities of his characters, and his own voice. Fiction has to seem like it could have occurred before we can comfortably enter into it. A Painted House allows you to do that sometimes (like during Saturday afternoon visits to town to do little boy activities) but not others (like during the events surrounding the scene with Hank and Cowboy on the bridge). After you have finished this book, I suggest that you think back to when you were seven. What were your biggest hopes, concerns, and dilemmas? What have you learned since then that has improved on those perspectives? What have you forgotten that you should refocus on? Select a worthy goal before you seek it out!
Rating:
Summary: Love Grisham but really hated this one!
Review: I have read all Grisham's books, most within a day or two. I still read this one fast, but unfortunately I read it fast because after a hundred pages or so I began to skim read. I do not like to skim and don't even remember the last time I have resorted to doing so because I normally love to absorb the details of a well-written book. Despite Grisham's attempt to depart from his typical style and bring us a nice story about a poor southern boy to life, I was bored to tears and raced through to see if it was ever going to get any better. I do like non-suspense literature but this is not Grisham's forte. Without lawyers, he is out of his element. John, please return to the stuff we love!
| 
