BOOKSELLER BY NICOLE

To be frank, I was not a fan of Bookseller for several reasons. Firstly, I believe our society has been very interested in Afghani culture, almost obsessed even. That being said, I agree with Devika, I have read so many book on the topic to the point where I have trouble enjoying these sort of books. I realize that this shouldn't devalue Bookseller or sway my opinion of it because Bookseller is certainly quite different from the other books I have read. However, compared to the Kite Runner, Bookseller is not as interesting and captivating. The Kite Runner was a profound, intelligent, heartfelt book that really affected me because I could see that Hosseini really portrayed his life with a wonderful authenticity; therefore, Sierstad's writing seems to lack this authenticity that gave life and feeling to the Kite Runner. I understand that her writing is unique and deliberate in that she chooses to take this distant perspective- kind of like looking into a window and observing- but I still found it difficult to enjoy. All in all, I respect her attempt at giving us a different take on the culture we read about so often, but why read a book if it has no effect on you?

Annie Dillard

I really, really liked her descriptive phrases. There was a sort of eloquent beauty in her words that was simple but poetic. I felt that it really didn't have a concrete plot, so it was a bit difficult to read and stay into, and it felt a little self-indulgent.

Annie Dillard anyone? I love her endless metaphors...

First They Killed My Father

I finished the book, and personally, this book was quite depressing. It was touching though, because I feel that Loung's perspective and writing voice gave the book a more sentimental and personal aura to it. I really felt like I could understand and know what Loung was going through. The little "dream sequences" in the italics that she recounts also offer that sense of her trying to have a explanation for something that will never be able to be explained. It's like a coping mechanism, a way that she can know/make herself believe what happened to her beloved family. I agree with Nell completely, I thought it was interesting to read it with the same context as the narrator. I knew as much about the genocide as Loung did (I had just heard of it but nothing else) and that voice contributed to the overall pathos of the novel.

FTKMF

I'd have to say that the book was very interesting, although deeply depressing. I felt like the author was certainly believable, and wrote like she was actually living it at the time. However, I felt like it was almost too much to be true, or at least to believe. I kept having to remind myself that this had actually happened. I guess it reminded me of books about the Holocaust in that way.

First They Killed My Father

I finished the book, and though I can't say I *enjoyed* reading it (too depressing) I thought it was well written and did what Loung Ung wanted it to. I don't think it was written to inform (but it did do that), more to relate the author's personal experiences of the Cambodian genocide and gives a human face to events as opposed to the factual history a reader might get from another source. Having it written in present tense and from a child's perspective made it more powerful in that sense. Ung didn't understand what was happening or why at first, and the reader experiences this confusion along with her (even though he or she understands the bigger historical context). The use of italics does this too; it isn't concrete facts, it's what Ung thinks happened to her family - she doesn't and will never really know, and neither will the reader.