Tony J. Djohan

• Rated 1 stars

“Maybe I'm too old for this thing, but this book must be one of the worst books I've read in years. I would not recommend this to anybody, including young readers and learners. It'd be a bad start.

The author is prone to repeat herself.
Say something, and then say it again in another way.
In the next sentence no less.

Every one of the characters is one-dimensional.
They're like single-use low-value disposable things.
Use 'em and toss 'em.

Plots are thin and amateurish.
Cliches piled upon cliches.
Trite and banal.

The only reprieve, one doesn't have to finish.
Write the review, and then remove from shelf.
Amen.”

Tony J. Djohan wrote this review Thursday, September 13 2007. ( reply | permalink )

1 of 2 members found this review helpful.

• Rated 4 stars

“When I started on On Beauty, I hadn't realized that it's a re-telling of Forster's Howard's End. So the revelation was... unspoilt. I had some suspicion, but it was when I got to the part where Carlene suddenly and awkwardly insisted on visiting a house in the country with Kiki that a bell rang on my head. And the note and the burning of it. And then more clues piled up. It was a nice little unveiling.[br/][br/]The prose is very funny, thoroughly enjoyable, and surely as close to a page-turner as a 'literary' novel could get. There's plenty of insight and beauty in the fleshing out of the story to keep it from being too 'light.'[br/][br/]Even though the subject matter of Smith's book revolves around bi-racial issues and liberal versus conservative values, I can't help viewing it in comparison with Forster's book. Over there, conflicts revolved around class issues, and intellectual versus bourgeois values, which I feel to be more relevant and persistent, even at present. Also after reading that book (and watching the superb movie), I get a better sense of the purpose, the point of the story. [br/][br/]One of the problems, I feel, is that events that happened in On Beauty was somehow not disastrous enough, especially set in the modern Anglo-Saxon context. They were almost mundane compared to the tragedy and damage that befell the Wilcoxes, the Schlegels and Bast.[br/][br/]That said, Smith definitely shows flair in creating characters. Kiki is a favorite (markedly different from and more flawed than the Margaret character in Howards End, whom I love very much). Even Howard seemed familiar, with all his cluelessness and intellectual certitude. [br/][br/]As a footnote, I think the method of 'skipping' the most dramatic scenes in the stories was quite effective and judiciously employed. A trick from Chekov's page?[br/][br/]Personally, I will certainly keep an eye on Smith's works.”

Tony J. Djohan wrote this review Tuesday, August 28 2007. ( reply | permalink )

• Rated 5 stars

“It's been quite some time since I read this book. However, it was one of the most memorable. I've discovered, with delight, that some authors have such command, such power with a language that reading their works is at one inspiring, and humbling. This book is enough to make me a lifelong admirer, a devotee even, of Arundhaty Roy.

I live and grew up in Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia. Born in a small town in the province. And as such, the world conjured by Roy have a very familiar, very real feel to me. The characters in the books I can almost recognize in my real life, neighbors, relatives. And to then delve into their minds and their passion so deeply that it almost felt like trespassing.

And the language, oh the language. There is a part of the book, towards the end. An Indian child was learning English, and playing with the words, and the sounds. It was insightful. Young foreigners beginning to learn English, such as myself, often play these games, sometimes unconsciously. Marvelous.”

Tony J. Djohan wrote this review Wednesday, August 8 2007. ( reply | permalink )

0 of 1 members found this review helpful.

• Rated 5 stars

“I bought the book after watching the movie. I love the movie, all those wit, the sparkle. Irresistable. Acting and direction are simply impeccable. I've watched it a couple of times, and there's just so much detail in the play delivered at a very brisk pace.

On reading the book, I find that the lengthy introduction by the author added several more layers to the story. The major discourse within the play is the contrast of two take on history, the more orthodox consensus-driven and the more flashy contrarian journalistic history, design to pique interests, rather than finding or agreeing on the most balanced views. Bennett, while acknowledging his aptitute in the latter, values the former. The essay served as a more formal exposition of his preference.

On another layer, this acknowledgement of the worth of the alternative approach, one in which he admitted to be less skilled in, created in the author a feeling of fraud. This feeling is beautifully amplified in the Irwin character, turned into a real deception about his academic background.

One can hear and feel various facets of Bennett's mind in each and every characters in the play. Simply marvelous. This play is further proof of the greatness of contemporary British theatre.”

Tony J. Djohan wrote this review Sunday, July 29 2007. ( reply | permalink )