I read this book as part of my challenge to read more classic literature in 2011. I feel like this book was an excellent choice. The writing was wonderful, particularly in Part One. Personally, I struggled with Part Two. I cannot put my finger on why exactly. I did not see a major change in the writing style or anything. Part Three felt more like Part One to me, I was able to get through it quickly.
(some spoiles below)
I originally found Emma to be an annoying character, but as I thought more about her I do not think all of it is her fault. She does have unrealistic expectations of what love and marriage are, but she had very little exposure to either growing up. She has a selfish nature that leads her to not be able to see beyond her own immediate desires to the wants or needs of others, but it seems that she was raised that way. In a lot of ways, I felt like her father should have held more of the blame for some of the ways that Emma approached life.
I felt that Charles was a little foolish as well for not seeing what was going on in his household right under his nose, but as I thought more about him I felt that his upbringing probably had an effect as well. His mother seems to be the stronger willed of his parents (or maybe the one whose influence affected him the most) and seems to be in charge of a lot of things. So it may not have been noteworthy to him that Emma wanted to be in charge of the finances. As much as he seemed to dislike his father, he seemed to have become his father. He focused on his own pursuits, particularly related to his work, and decided to not look too closely at Emma's actions.
The true victim in all of this was Charles and Emma's child. Her parents seemed to have little or no interest in her or her well-being. While both parents focused and died for their own "loves" or "passions," she ended up alone and working at a young age to support herself. While Emma's "loves" all moved on; her daughter paid the price for Emma's mistakes. As a parent myself, I think this is the one part or aspect of the book that really struck me hard.
(some spoiles below)
I originally found Emma to be an annoying character, but as I thought more about her I do not think all of it is her fault. She does have unrealistic expectations of what love and marriage are, but she had very little exposure to either growing up. She has a selfish nature that leads her to not be able to see beyond her own immediate desires to the wants or needs of others, but it seems that she was raised that way. In a lot of ways, I felt like her father should have held more of the blame for some of the ways that Emma approached life.
I felt that Charles was a little foolish as well for not seeing what was going on in his household right under his nose, but as I thought more about him I felt that his upbringing probably had an effect as well. His mother seems to be the stronger willed of his parents (or maybe the one whose influence affected him the most) and seems to be in charge of a lot of things. So it may not have been noteworthy to him that Emma wanted to be in charge of the finances. As much as he seemed to dislike his father, he seemed to have become his father. He focused on his own pursuits, particularly related to his work, and decided to not look too closely at Emma's actions.
The true victim in all of this was Charles and Emma's child. Her parents seemed to have little or no interest in her or her well-being. While both parents focused and died for their own "loves" or "passions," she ended up alone and working at a young age to support herself. While Emma's "loves" all moved on; her daughter paid the price for Emma's mistakes. As a parent myself, I think this is the one part or aspect of the book that really struck me hard.
Back to all reviews by this member
Back to all reviews of this book
Back to Book Reviews
Back to Book Details
Back to all reviews of this book
Back to Book Reviews
Back to Book Details
