Family
Author: Micol Ostow
Published: April 26th, 2011
Publisher: EgmontUSA
Goodreads Summary: "i have always been broken. i could have. died. and maybe it would have been better if i had. It is a day like any other when seventeen-year-old Melinda Jensen hits the road for San Francisco, leaving behind her fractured home life and a constant assault on her self-esteem. Henry is the handsome, charismatic man who comes upon her, collapsed on a park bench, and offers love, a bright new consciousness, and—best of all—a family. One that will embrace her and give her love. Because family is what Mel has never really had. And this new family, Henry’s family, shares everything. They share the chores, their bodies, and their beliefs. And if Mel truly wants to belong, she will share in everything they do. No matter what the family does, or how far they go.
Told in episodic verse, family is a fictionalized exploration of cult dynamics, loosely based on the Manson Family murders of 1969. It is an unflinching look at people who are born broken, and the lengths they’ll go to to make themselves “whole” again."
Concept/Ideas: 4/5
Storyline/Plot: 3/5
Characters: 3/5
Writing Style: 3/5
Overall Rating: 3/5
I pretty much know as much as a person can know on the Manson family case, but personally I just couldn't get into this book despite my intense facination of the murders in general. Like many of the others who reviewed this book, I'm one of those people. One of those people who totally got pulled into the Manson family, the case, the 60s, Sharon Tate, and the whole helter-skelter 'ness' of it all. Fascinating stuff.
The ideas were great, and I liked that she tried to recreate the case into poetry and verse. But I just don't know that it went over too well. It got confusing, and the way she wrote it got annoying by the end of the book. Good ideas, good potential, but not executed in the best way. At the end, it left me wondering, what the hell just happened? Although we all know how it ends, the way she wrote it was completely confusing. It seemed as if Mel let "the singer" go, as in, didn't kill her and let her run free. But it was written in a way that made me wonder, did she actually flee into the "inky night", or was that seriously just a metaphor for actually killing her, meaning her soul flew into the night? Considering in real life we know what happens, I'm going to assume it's a metaphor. Still, this was not the greatest "re-telling". There was so much repitition, and random < rise > < henry > shit that it was ridiculous. It could have added to the book given the right amount, but this didn't do it. It just made the book confusing and put it all over the place.
Cover art: Vert relevant to the case in real life, but not a huge fan of the cover in general. It captures your attention though, i'll give it that.
Would this book make a good movie?: Well, considering the book is based on the real life events, no. We have already re-created this case so many times, although I'm always open to a more recent one.
Storyline/Plot: 3/5
Characters: 3/5
Writing Style: 3/5
Overall Rating: 3/5
I pretty much know as much as a person can know on the Manson family case, but personally I just couldn't get into this book despite my intense facination of the murders in general. Like many of the others who reviewed this book, I'm one of those people. One of those people who totally got pulled into the Manson family, the case, the 60s, Sharon Tate, and the whole helter-skelter 'ness' of it all. Fascinating stuff.
The ideas were great, and I liked that she tried to recreate the case into poetry and verse. But I just don't know that it went over too well. It got confusing, and the way she wrote it got annoying by the end of the book. Good ideas, good potential, but not executed in the best way. At the end, it left me wondering, what the hell just happened? Although we all know how it ends, the way she wrote it was completely confusing. It seemed as if Mel let "the singer" go, as in, didn't kill her and let her run free. But it was written in a way that made me wonder, did she actually flee into the "inky night", or was that seriously just a metaphor for actually killing her, meaning her soul flew into the night? Considering in real life we know what happens, I'm going to assume it's a metaphor. Still, this was not the greatest "re-telling". There was so much repitition, and random < rise > < henry > shit that it was ridiculous. It could have added to the book given the right amount, but this didn't do it. It just made the book confusing and put it all over the place.
Cover art: Vert relevant to the case in real life, but not a huge fan of the cover in general. It captures your attention though, i'll give it that.
Would this book make a good movie?: Well, considering the book is based on the real life events, no. We have already re-created this case so many times, although I'm always open to a more recent one.
No comments:
Post a Comment