I am currently reading A Parade’s End by Ford Maddox Ford. I am very much in love with it. But I’m not quite finished it, so I can’t quite give it the review it deserves. But Christopher Tietjens goes to the top of my list for the best male characters ever written. Even though he’s supposedly the last of them, he’s one of the best fictional gentleman to ever grace the leaves of a book. He gives a man like Mr. Darcy or Colonel Brandon a run for his money.
I absolutely detested Catcher in the Rye. Holden Caulfield was such a whiner, a complainer. He was just completely determined to find fault with everyone and everything and his own situation and refused to do anything about it. And everyone’s a phony, in the book, and so is he, but really what does that even mean? He said it so much the word lost its meaning by the end of the book. I just… I couldn’t. I understood it well enough to write about it for school but I can’t get behind a book with a character I don’t like. And I don’t mean villains. I love to hate characters, to find something redeemable in a completely detestable personality. But there was nothing worthwhile about reading that book. Why? Why do lit teachers salivate over having us read that book. Is that the point?
I love how I found more to write about a book I hated than a book I actually like, but give me some allowance that I haven’t finished Parade’s End.