Hey look I read a totally chicklitty book and liked it. Actually I don't really know what chick lit is but I am worried this might be it. I mean it is clearly a book for women... but lets pretend I'm not embarrassed to have read it. 100... Yay 100... I can calm down I am not a failure. Okay I liked this book. I as a general rule like any book about relationships in which the resolution is fuzzy at best and everyone is constantly making the wrong decision. I think that this really comes down to the fact that I really experience those types of books that I really battle with those issues on a day to day basis. I wrote once in another review: "a relationship of love can never be quite as perfect as a relationship of compromise." I'm sure at the time I was talking about the book and it was relevant, but I think it is also a statement about myself. These days we all grow up in a world where people are constantly getting divorced and changing their minds and falling out of love. I mean did our great grandparents go around falling out of love? it doesn't seem like it. The entire foundation of relationships it just seems shakey. and there isn't much that's worse than standing on shakey ground. There is a quote I have remembered since high school although I forgot the author long ago that goes something like "tread lightly the crust is thin." For years the world has really felt this way for me. Like If I tried to hard, if I really wanted the world was going to break. So I stayed quiet and I waited and I hoped that everything would turn out on its own. This book is about that. It is about not wanting to make decisions. Wanting to be in love, wanting to end up in the right, wanting everything to work out, but not being willing to shake the boat to make that happen. It's about how you get what you want without stepping on someone else to get it. I have this guy, who for years I've had some kind of a thing with. And in reality that thing is nothing. I've dated over the top of it, he's considered dating although I don't think it's worked out. We've gone through long periods of not speaking. There is a funny point in this book where Laura says 75% of relationships are ended by women, it might be the man's fault but he waits for the woman to actually end it. This book is really about that waiting. It's about how nothing will ever be over till you say it's over. It's about the fact that sooner or later someone has to say "put up or shut up" and without that, the thing, that background of I'll always love you it kinda haunts you. I like this book because I relate to that. I know what it's like to try to move on with your life while you are dealing with a ghost like that. I know that it's impossible. For me a book like this isn't about me wanting what's best for the character it's about the book being a lens to see myself. I don't cheer for the guy proposing at the... okay that movie it was some sports game... I wonder what would I do? It's a book that for me at least I think made me think. It didn't make me change, I won't leave this review and go tell him to "put up or shut up". But I'll have a better idea what is happening for me, and maybe for him to. This book begins with the quote: If you are not too long, I will wait here for you all my life. -oscar wildeI think that contradiction really catches the problem the book is grappling with, the problem so many of us are grappling with. Do we? can we? wait.
The prologue seemed promising, along with these moments in Part One: - "Here's the thing about going home again. You don't always know what you'll remember." (13)- "And suddenly I felt oddly aware of how clear the sky was... how everything was bright and fluid even while it was happening--already existing closer to memory than reality." (13) Then some pages later I realized we were moving downhill. Dave attempts to add dimension to the story with repetition, an integration of the history of wedding traditions and superstitions, and failed metaphors and symbolism. Instead we have a wordy surface-level account of an irritating protagonist who thinks she's more insightful than she is. Because the entire book is a verbal regurgitation of what confusion and growing up feels like, the discerning reader never connects with any real emotion. Dave chose to separate the book into five parts which made no sense other than underlining her inability to delve deeper.The narrator incriminates herself (and sums up my sentiment toward the book) in this line:"And I wish--I really wish--that I could begin to describe what it was like seeing her being seen that way by him." (196)I want to note that this was a book club pick... the only reason I decided to finish.
https://leonelescota.wordpress.com/20...In the middle of reading Laura Dave’s “London Is The Best City In America,” I thought to myself, “this would make a great movie,” and I made the big mistake of googling if the book has been optioned. Sure enough, it has been, and is being developed as a vehicle for Reese Witherspoon. Sigh. I can’t say I am a fan of hers though truth be told I have seen her give good performances. So when i resumed reading, of course I now envisioned her in the role. This is one of those great internal books – it is less plot driven and more character studies. Since London is my favorite city of all time, I have had this book for a while, and it has taken me a couple of starts and finally just kept on reading. It’s richly rewarding, but tries just a bit of your patience. You have to understand these characters deeply, or you may not be very sympathetic towards them. The book makes you think about your choices in life, and how you handle these choices. We all seek things, situations that make us happy, and sometimes we pay a price for them. I hope the film captures the essence of the book, and I am even keeping an open mind about Reese.
—Leonel
This was funny and really well-written for a light read (aka, realistic, yet not depressing). I really loved the anecdote about the offshore fisherman's girlfriend who would watch for her boyfriend as he came back into port, and then run away after she caught his eye. That way, she could leave him for a change. I should mention that I listened to this one on my commute, instead of reading it. My only beef is that while the person reading the book made an attempt to differentiate between the characters, the character from Georgia sounded just like the character from Arkansas, who sounded just like the character from Texas, who sounded just like Rosalynn Carter.
—Sarah
This book was very slow, not much happened.I mean, the writing was nice, the characters were distinguished, but i still have no idea why the book is called "London is the Best City is America".It's about this girl called Emmy, who broke off her engagement and started making a documentary about fisherman's wives, so she's a little bit sad and lonely. Her brother Josh is getting married soon but she finds out that he secretly loves someone else, so the go on this road-trip to meet this woman, named Elizabeth. So it's about them, and the wedding. I wouldn't say that I hated this book, but I didn't love it.What I liked about it:It was a perfect length, about 250 pages. The cover and spine are nice.It was nicely paced.Berringer, Josh's funny, cereal-eating friend. So I give this book 3 stars.
—Georgia
