Reviews

March by Geraldine Brooks

shannoninnis's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

Perspective of Little Women’s father, Captain March. Such an intriguing idea. (Weird to say that about a book with graphic war and scenes of human brutality to humans, slavery) Cameos by Thoreau, Emerson, Hawthorne, John Brown. I thought this book might offend my love for Alcott; but it didn’t. Recommend. Warning: copious use of word N*****, and slavery.

_lilbey_'s review

Go to review page

adventurous emotional hopeful sad medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? Yes
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

ackl08's review

Go to review page

emotional reflective medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

teabooksandbreathe's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional informative reflective sad tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? Yes
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

dee3717's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

3.5

bonnybonnybooks's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

So many conflicting feelings on this one.

On the one hand – thank God this is much closer to [b:Year of Wonders|4965|Year of Wonders|Geraldine Brooks|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327936622s/4965.jpg|3211895] than [b:Caleb's Crossing|9684523|Caleb's Crossing|Geraldine Brooks|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1303284000s/9684523.jpg|14572532] in quality. Also on the one hand, Brooks has gorgeous historical writing – it feels very true to the time and mindset, it brought the period alive, it saw the appearance of historical figures (Thoreau and Emerson) that illuminated their characters without creating caricatures. Brooks definitely has talent for this genre.

On the other hand, this really, really should not have been a “side-telling” of [b:Little Women|1934|Little Women|Louisa May Alcott|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1309282614s/1934.jpg|3244642]. It feels like nothing more than a publicity stunt or a lazy way to frame the story. This book had so little to do with Little Women besides the character names and some basic narrative parallels (five daughters, father a chaplain in war who gets injured). Honestly, I do not even feel like the two books are connected at all. It is not a fleshing out of the original – it is an entirely other book that happens to be loosely related. This really, really should’ve been an “inspired” by book that didn’t claim a connection. Throw in a son, change the names, and no one would’ve connected the two. I think it’s easier to have the daughters be the March sisters than have to create whole new biographies for them, but it wouldn’t have felt like such a cheap and awkward ploy. I do not even have strong emotional ties to the Marches (and I am totally up for taking liberties with the original story - in my mind, always and forever, Jo and Laurie marry) and I still think it’s awkward that she made Papa March a patronizing cheater. Brooks really does have problems with good guys, doesn’t she? All her men are seemingly understanding and kind but underneath are a mess of condescending, patriarchical views of women.

This book also ends while March is still not fully into his character growth. He is still trying to save the world and getting angry at himself for failing. He is still aggravatingly idealistic. You’d think that he would have gained a more complex view of the world, but instead he falls back into his old habits of thinking he can save everyone and that people are either innocents or evil. He either absolves someone of all their sins (Ethan – not such a bad guy! [okay, he’s not, he’s just really, really bad at being a boss, but March still views this less as teaching leadership skills then showing him the moral way that is surely within him]) or thinks they are moral ruins (which maybe they are, but who knows). It doesn’t feel like March has learned anything, just gotten more and more disillusioned and bitter.

P.S. I always thought that “Marmee” was the March sisters’ word for “Mom.” But in this book its her actual adult nickname? So the girls called her by her first name? What? That wasn’t done in the 19th century. Why did Brooks do that? And it just sounds awkward that her husband is calling her Marmee.

P.P.S. Also, this is proof that Brooks can write convincingly from a man’s POV – now she has even less reason to not make Caleb (of Caleb's Crossing) the protagonist and narrator (or at least a secondary protagonist & narrator) of his book instead of making it another white girl!!

sue_ferris's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

Geraldine Brooks does it again. Another remarkable story told deftly.

jenlynne26's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional reflective sad medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? Yes
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.25

fourkellys1968's review

Go to review page

emotional inspiring reflective medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? Yes
  • Diverse cast of characters? Yes
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

3.75

Loved the tie into Little Women

jo961blue's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

I really wasn't keen on the idea of an author taking a character from another author's book, especially such a classic as "Little Women" and writing about their life, but this was an amazing novel. It totally deserves the Pullizer Prize!