This is also very good. Someone...anyone...(Jarhead maybe?)explain why this book is not just as good as Pillars. They are basically the same book with the second being the continuation of the first albeit 200 years later. Ken Follett really has mastered the art of getting the reader to become what I like to call "intimately invested" in the characters he has created. For me to read a book or rather two books that were both 1000 pages in less than 4 months is rare. Actually it has never happened. That has to tell you something about these books. My dad has always told me James Clavell's Noble House is a good read. As a kid I was alway intimidated by how big it was. Maybe I will pick it up sometime...I am sure he still has it.
3 comments:
I prefer Clavell's Shogun to Noble House; but all of his Asian books are worth are read.
Well my dad has a lot of Clavell's books...I think I was 5 when he started trying to get me to read them. He might have liked Shogun better as well. I vaguely remember a tv miniseries with a big actor at the time playing the main role. Can't remember his name. Richard Chamberlain maybe...I just remember at the Japanese boiling white men alive in a big pot a the beginning. That memory has stuck in my head...not sure why.
You wussies. I read King Rat, Tai-Pan, Shogun and Noble House all before I was 16!
World was good, but I just didn't feel like the characters were as developed as they were in Pillars. Maybe that's because I didn't read them both in the same month (you geek).
And in all fairness, I used to be a big novel reader, and now I'm mostly a non-fiction reader, so my tastes have changed quite a bit. That may be where my disconnect lies between the two Follett novels.
Post a Comment