Simona Hanxu Hanxu itibaren Jaboticaba - RS, Brezilya
Basically, this is my life plan! I can't wait to travel and start checking off all the amazing places listed in this book.
fun read in a Monty Python kind of way. Not interested enough to read the rest of the series, however, if some friend tells me it is worth it I might. 2.5 stars would have been my preferred rating.
It was ok, but I am liking J.Picoult's books less and less. Besides her two best, The Pact & My Sister's Keeper - all her books have been so-so at best. Only the second book - ever - I have not finished (but in fairness, I skipped ahead and read what happened and then stopped reading because I didn't like where it was going and was not interested in the 'in between').
I read this book in Spanish, so I have a feeling I missed some of the poetry and charm of this novel. Language differences aside, I was till impressed with this book. It is a charming and yet deep story. I read it because I simply love the Wes Anderson movie and I wanted to see what was different between the two stories. I figured this would clue me in a bit to his style and give me an idea of what he was all about when I saw what he changed a bit from the book. I also was looking at Roald Dahl’s craft. I have a certain amount of respect for children authors who make things deeper than skin surface. With the book, there is a humorous story that is framed by deeper ideas such as group competition over limited resources, motivation, love and service for your family, and ethical dilemmas (such as, if I am starving, does that allow me to steal?). We hear such egalitarian phrases such as “all animals under the surface of the earth are equal” or see a fantastic feast that unites all animals. What is interesting is that the animals are united against a common enemy, which also happens to the human animal. The book links this clearly, and begs the question, is there a way to unite without hating a common enemy? One thing about the protagonist, called Superzorro in the Spanish version, is that he is a great motivator. He encourages the refugees, appeals to their manhood in order to sacrifice for their families, and one learns a bit about being positive from him. Another strong characteristic for the protagonist, and one that is emphasized much more in the book I feel than the movie, is his love for his family and the sacrifices he makes for them. His wife become sick in the story so he tells her to rest and declares that stealing food “is man’s work” and carries out the theft with his kids and animal neighbors. When one animal brings up the shaky ethical situation, he points out that the farmers are trying to kill them, so therefore stealing isn’t a big deal. His logic is endearing, but more than that he seems to be the kind of leader you want to rally behind. Encouraging, positive, resourceful and full of sacrifice. How quaint. With regards to differences between this and the movie, I basically think they are two different stories. Wes Anderson took tremendous artistic liberation here and added incredibly to the original plot. In the book, there is no moving process to the big tree, no promise made 12 and a half fox years ago, four kids instead of one and the step child, no kidnapping or drastic escape plan, and so on. I guess this showed me that Wes Anderson is a story teller of his own. The parts he added make the story different and deep in a different regard. In the movie I think we see much more the process of conflict in an individual, how he works through doubt, and what it means to be a family. These themes are not really in the book, so the movie is essentially its own story. Both are damn good. Glad I read the book, in Spanish, but still great. I would read this to a 6-8 year old. I think it’s about right for that time period.