Final opinion

on The Lacuna. I'm sure this is an excellent book. Idon't think Kingsolver is capable of writing a 'bad' or poorly written book. My reaction to it is quite another thing. The first approximate half, as I may have mentioned. deals with the triangle of Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky and their eternal arguments. That the losers went to Mexico for refuge means that they melded with the Hispanic culture there and particularly in the home of Rivera and Kahlo. I found this wild emotionalism hard to read at time. This probably has something to do with my age and my need for a calm, rational bit of writing. The writing rings true - it simply was the way she describes it. The last part is another story - a straightforward look at the life of a man who grew up under the aegis of these people. He was a final victim of one of America's less admirable issues gone wild.

I think my whole problem with the book is that I think nothing of reading a 500 page book in a day. But a book of this dimension is no Harry Potter book and cannot be absorbed at this rate.
I may go back one day and reread this at a somewhat normal rate, and may enjoy it more. I know that this happens from time to time when I am racing through a book. Still, my gut reaction of "I don't want to read all this mess" may keep me from it. I usually seek out and enjoy history
of any kind so I am puzzled by my reaction.

Do let my not enjoying it cause you not to read it for yourselves. And let me know if I am on or off base, and how you feel about it. I really mean this. If people I know and respect enjoy reading it, this tells me quite a bit about my own shortcomings, and I face these all the time.

Cheers.....