unlikely pilgrimage of Harold Fry

Whatever .

I didn't ask you to review mine either but that didn't stop you, did it?

I thought it was alright. I didn't find it profound at all. Infact, I found Harold extremely irritating!

I didn't ask you to review my post!

As I said many times already, it's not about liking but about pretending it's more than a light read and giving awards.

You would know that from me saying: "Men also read no-brainer books from authors like Lee Child but they don't pretend they are great books and give them awards. Why do women do this?"

All this was put to rest about two weeks ago. If you are going to dig it up, try to say something new or at least more meaningful than "patronising much?".

What's it got to do with gender? Women like this book therefore all women are X?

Cote, patronising much?

I've not read this but I just finished Perfect by the same author. I loved it all the way through but then it had a twist that I didn't see coming because no one could have and like another poster said about Harold Fry I felt like I'd been misled. I had been thinking I wanted to read Harold Fry but now I'm not sure. Judging by this thread, mixed reviews?

Isn't Cloud Atlas a Richard and Judy book though?

Agree with Cote, it's in a genre dh and I call "faux lit", books pretending to be something profound to suck in the Richard and Judy crowd. I found it very cynical but I read it, willingly enough, there are other books in the genre I hate a lot more. I saw the twist coming right from the start, which didn't help. But to each their own, I'm sure I love many books that would leave others cold.

I read the book and loved it, another one I haven't read but it sounds to me might be similar is The Universe Versus Alex Woods.

Also the Night Rainbow is a lovely book, but sad.

I am chilled and indeed stopped commenting about a week ago

cote
Chill out. It's only a book.... :)

I loved this. I didn't think it was trying to be profound at all - in fact I thought it's beauty was it's simplicity. A lovely piece of storytelling. It read like a (funny, warm) fairy tale to me.

I've read the book and I thought it was simple but effective.
I enjoyed it and cried and cried for the last few pages.
I did read it on holiday and it was easy to read and an escape, it was also a contrast to the other books that I had with me. I therefore enjoyed the pace and simplicity of the story.

Cote - by all means talk about your thoughts on the book, but please leave your thoughts on women who read this book and enjoyed it out of the equation.

jamais - re "I read my fair share of chick-lit and easy literature, and yes, can "enjoy junk food for the mind". But I don't claim it is anything more than that, which I think is the point Côte is trying to make."

Exactly.

Lula - You haven't read the book, so you don't know what my comments were about. Are you picking a fight with me because you are just desperate for a fight?

"some people enjoy a bit of junk food for the mind?"

I know that, would you believe. And said so in the post you replied to. Men also read no-brainer books from authors like Lee Child but they don't pretend they are great books and give them awards. Why do women do this? I find it really depressing.

If you read my post properly, you would understand from the above that my problem with such "women's lit" light reads is that they are held up on pedestals and given awards, as if they are anything but beach reads. As if women don't or can't read better books, which we all know is not true.

"What counts in your world as a "real book"?... You could have said that without, like, denigrating the people who di enjoy the book and stuff. Like."

Again, if you read my post properly, you would see that "... real book. Like, with meaning and stuff" were words I would use but my guess at the thought processes of people giving such beach reads book awards. Hopefully, since you are such a smart person doing so much thinking at work

"Disclaimer: I haven't read the book, I just found your post patronising and rather rude to the OP."

I said nothing about the OP, but you are rude and patronising to me. That doesn't seem to bother you, at all.

The difference is, I was giving an opinion about a book (which I have actually read) and making general comments (not to OP in particular), whereas you are here for the sole reason of personally attacking me.

I shouldn't have explain this difference to a solicitor, so figure out on your own why you can't tell me what opinions to have and what to post, but I can say what I think about a book, its audience and awards. On a book thread. About a book I have actually read.

My Dad read it and really enjoyed it. I wouldn't have said it was written for women at all

When I read it,I mentioned to a friend that it was like a radio play. Then found out later that's exactly what it was originally. Explains its gentleness and not being realistic.

(actually scrap that, no need).

I read it and enjoyed it. I found it heartwarming and moving.

I don't particularly enjoy 'chick lit' and I don't enjoy being judged on which books I read.

Cote's post was a bit self-indulgent, I think.

I read my fair share of chick-lit and easy literature, and yes, can "enjoy junk food for the mind".

But I don't claim it is anything more than that, which I think is the point Côte is trying to make.

(Côte I had a question for you about something else, will pm you).

Well, I enjoyed it, and the other one by the same author.

Loved it . It wasn't realistic, but who the hell cares.

As for the patronising post from Cote up there - 'women' read it because 'women' enjoy it. Save the faux "I'm so depressed by the wimminhood' for people who care. Or post the 'Cote Approved Book List' and we'll all do our very best to ignore it only read books that don't depress you.