Atonement

I really enjoyed reading Atonement. The writing style is interesting and propels you through the story, while stopping to share great details that couldn't be included in the film version. The film is mostly devoted to the book, though, so it's still enjoyable to read even if you've seen the film.

Enjoyed this novel!

This production was a pleasure to listen to. Happy with the reading. I enjoyed the book much more than the movie.

I loved everything about this novel—the storytelling, the inner dialogue which rang so true, and the structure of telling a story in a kind of wave form: the plot moved forward like the tide hitting the beach, then was drawn out in an undertow, going back in time, then flowing in again as another point of view of the same time, and thus it keeps progressing and surprising. What tension, what detail, what a wonderful portrait of a child writer awash in the drama of her fantastic certainty and imagination. I wager anybody who writes will remember themselves through the character of young Briony, whose self-aggrandizing fantasies and need to be the hero of her own drama lead to tragedy. She embodies a time of life that some of us grow out of and then hate ourselves for … until we mature enough to realize that everybody does this stuff and we forgive ourselves for being human. But in this astonishing masterpiece, McEwan, whom I would call a “writer’s writer” because of his ability to reveal that very private process that is usually unspoken, takes us well past that … to atonement.Usually I’m bored by a lot of inner dialogue. I’ve come to associate it with Women’s Fiction where mostly I find it to be overwriting. I had no problems with whole chapters of inner dialogue in this book—perhaps because so much of it was the kind of psychological searching for who and how we really are that I’ve always done. Plus, the writing is spectacular.

Did McEwan write a boring, indulgent book about a writer as a criticism of boring, indulgent writers? Maybe. Does the central romance feel forced and unrealistic intentionally and with good reason? Possibly.The language of this novel is lovely. I liked much of it. That beginning, though. Worse yet, that ending. My guess is that each is intentionally challenging. But that doesn't necessarily make them good ideas...

The first half has interesting bits, but starts to feel very contrived with its vase, migraine-tortured mother and BIG EVENT. The second half left me bored. The richness of detail of war-torn France and Briony's path to become a nurse felt like too much of a break from the Part one. I felt like if the author was willing to take us so far away from the BIG EVENT and take us into the BIG world event without any stable bridges, why should I continue to be interested in or concerned about any poor individual's particular romance? The writing itself is rich, perhaps a we bit too rich for me, but really it was the break in story and focus that lost me.