Not as good as Homer, 19 Sep 2008
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz and Blur has turned this book into an opera so I thought I should read it before I saw the show. The structure is something like the Iliad or Finn McCool. Each chapter is a new adventure but linked together they become the road story of bringing the Buddhist scripture from India to China. The central character is the human priest Tripitaka but his three disciples - Monkey, Pigsy and Sandy - are magical beings. Along the way and back to India they face 81 problems, ogres, monsters and so on, with the action flowing fast and furious, but not much narrative. It's rather like a chinese chopsocky movie with constant action and set pieces but not much subtlety or character development. It ends up being historically important but not really compelling. Lots of reviewers say the book is funny but that's true only in the sense that Robin Hood is funny; it's not a chuckle fest. Arthur Walsey has done an excellent straight down the line translation but I think I would have preferred a Rosemary Sutcliffe style retelling that might not have been as true to the original but would have brought the story more depth and life.

Dear Monkey!, 26 Jun 2008
The basic premise of this novel, in Chinese pinyin "xiyouji" which literally translates to "Journey to the West", sees a group of four set out on an epic journey to recover the Buddhist sutras from India and bring them to China. On the way they encounter various monsters, ghosts and demons trying to stop them. The four represent different sides of human nature, their journey to the "West" (actually India) mirrors the human journey of life and whilst Heaven is awash with beaurocracy, the Earth is littered with challenges and obstacles.

The Monkey King is perhaps the most famous character of all, bold, proud, brave and cunning, equipped with a magical staff, the ability to transform himself into over 70 different shapes and a whole host of magical powers. Tripitaka is the monk, humble, kind and naive, the epitome of the Buddhist devotee, but not averse to reciting a curse that can keep Monkey under control. Pigsy is the third main character, representing greed, sloth and lust, usually to be found eating, sleeping or chatting up the ladies. Sandy is the fourth, but pretty non-decript member of the group.

The story is humorous and satirical. It contains a lot of references to Chinese history and elements of Buddhism and Taoism (Daoism) which can be a bit confusing if you have no previous knowledge. Arthur Waley's translation is only a fraction of the original tome however, and those looking for a genuine translation of equal depth to the original should look elsewhere. Think of this as a distillation of some of the best bits.

Perhaps you need to live in China to realise just how important this novel is, not just as a piece of historical writing, but also in the Chinese contemporary imagination. If you're interested in China and Chinese cultural mythology, you should definitely put this on your reading list!

Fantastic intro, 17 Jun 2008
I read this in practically no time at all. If you're nervous about reading the unabridged Journey to the West and just want to see if you can get into Monkey, this is the book for you.

lovely introduction to chinese litterature, 03 Mar 2007
This is a wonderful translation/adaptation of a seminal Chinese novel. Monkey is much shorter than its original [`Journey to the West'] but it has been masterfully adapted.

For someone who is interested in getting acquainted with Chinese literature but might be a little intimidated by the thousands of pages in which many of those novels carry on, 'Monkey' is a great introduction. I was so enthralled by this book that I moved on and I read the whole `Journey to The West'. Now, having read both I must admit that the adaptation was exquisite. It is highly recommended to read the `Journey to The West' if you have the time but if not then make sure you find some time for `Monkey'. It is very entertaining, it has kept the plot focused and it will get you addicted to Chinese literature for life.

It is also a great introduction to Chinese culture as it presents chinese mythology much more explicitly than most novels do. And for the Kung Fu fans there are plenty of battles and info on the martial arts mentality. [Not being a Kung fu fan myself I almost got addicted just by reading the book].

Entertaining, but too abridged, 14 Oct 2005
Like many of the other reviewers, I read 'Monkey' largely due to my nostalgia for the TV series. I was intrigued by the 'true' story behind the adventures of Sandy, Pigsy and Monkey, so decided to give Wu's book a go. Originally written as 'Journey to the West' in the sixteenth century, it is an epic myth about the journey of a priest (Tripitaka) to retrieve some sacred Buddhist texts from India and return to China. For his protection, he is assigned three spirits who have all fallen out of favour with heaven: the gluttonous Pigsy, the ponderous Sandy and the mischievous Monkey. The book begins with the story of how Monkey earned his disfavour in a magical narrative which switches between his life as a king on earth and his antics in heaven. Then it moves on to his discovery by the priest, and their adventures in seeking out the scriptures, adventures that includes battles with evil demons, deceitful kings and angry gods.
'Monkey' is a fairy tale laced with Buddhist mythology and imagery. Although the language is fairly simple (the book can be read by children - at least ones who don't mind a bit of violence) there is a richness to the style that effortlessly conjures up an ancient oriental scene in the reader's mind. The story itself, like any good fairy tale, is full of holes and occasionally non-sensical, but this adds to the magical feel. In addition, the Buddhist backdrop adds a layer of complexity and depth that belies 'Monkey's status as a mere fairy tale. I learnt a lot from reading 'Monkey', and would recommend it as a good primer for learning about ancient Buddhism.
All of these positives are, unfortunately, overshadowed by one enormous negative. As the blurb points out, Wu Ch'en-en's 'Journey to the West' is an epic myth, with many separate adventures. It has been the tradition in translations to reproduce all of the chapters in abridged form. 'Monkey' doesn't do this. Instead, it reproduces a few chapters completely and ignores many others. Specifically, the chapters concerning concerning Monkey have been left in. This has two negative effects on the book. Firstly, there are obvious gaping holes where consecutive chapters appear disjointed and intervening narrative is clearly missing. This is not a terrible omission, because the narrative is so unlikely anyway that a few gaps don't disrupt it too badly, but it is annoying. Secondly, it means that Pigsy is a very minor character, and Sandy hardly figures at all, presumably because chapters in which they are prominent have been ignored. According to the blurb, all of Tripitaka's companions have allegorical significance, but it is impossible to get a sense of what Sandy and Pigsy contribute from this book. Because of it, 'Monkey' loses a lot of meaning from the original 'Journey to the West'. Instead it becomes just a fairy tale, albeit a very entertaining one.

Not as good as Homer, 19 Sep 2008
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz and Blur has turned this book into an opera so I thought I should read it before I saw the show. The structure is something like the Iliad or Finn McCool. Each chapter is a new adventure but linked together they become the road story of bringing the Buddhist scripture from India to China. The central character is the human priest Tripitaka but his three disciples - Monkey, Pigsy and Sandy - are magical beings. Along the way and back to India they face 81 problems, ogres, monsters and so on, with the action flowing fast and furious, but not much narrative. It's rather like a chinese chopsocky movie with constant action and set pieces but not much subtlety or character development. It ends up being historically important but not really compelling. Lots of reviewers say the book is funny but that's true only in the sense that Robin Hood is funny; it's not a chuckle fest. Arthur Walsey has done an excellent straight down the line translation but I think I would have preferred a Rosemary Sutcliffe style retelling that might not have been as true to the original but would have brought the story more depth and life.

Dear Monkey!, 26 Jun 2008
The basic premise of this novel, in Chinese pinyin "xiyouji" which literally translates to "Journey to the West", sees a group of four set out on an epic journey to recover the Buddhist sutras from India and bring them to China. On the way they encounter various monsters, ghosts and demons trying to stop them. The four represent different sides of human nature, their journey to the "West" (actually India) mirrors the human journey of life and whilst Heaven is awash with beaurocracy, the Earth is littered with challenges and obstacles.

The Monkey King is perhaps the most famous character of all, bold, proud, brave and cunning, equipped with a magical staff, the ability to transform himself into over 70 different shapes and a whole host of magical powers. Tripitaka is the monk, humble, kind and naive, the epitome of the Buddhist devotee, but not averse to reciting a curse that can keep Monkey under control. Pigsy is the third main character, representing greed, sloth and lust, usually to be found eating, sleeping or chatting up the ladies. Sandy is the fourth, but pretty non-decript member of the group.

The story is humorous and satirical. It contains a lot of references to Chinese history and elements of Buddhism and Taoism (Daoism) which can be a bit confusing if you have no previous knowledge. Arthur Waley's translation is only a fraction of the original tome however, and those looking for a genuine translation of equal depth to the original should look elsewhere. Think of this as a distillation of some of the best bits.

Perhaps you need to live in China to realise just how important this novel is, not just as a piece of historical writing, but also in the Chinese contemporary imagination. If you're interested in China and Chinese cultural mythology, you should definitely put this on your reading list!

Fantastic intro, 17 Jun 2008
I read this in practically no time at all. If you're nervous about reading the unabridged Journey to the West and just want to see if you can get into Monkey, this is the book for you.

lovely introduction to chinese litterature, 03 Mar 2007
This is a wonderful translation/adaptation of a seminal Chinese novel. Monkey is much shorter than its original [`Journey to the West'] but it has been masterfully adapted.

For someone who is interested in getting acquainted with Chinese literature but might be a little intimidated by the thousands of pages in which many of those novels carry on, 'Monkey' is a great introduction. I was so enthralled by this book that I moved on and I read the whole `Journey to The West'. Now, having read both I must admit that the adaptation was exquisite. It is highly recommended to read the `Journey to The West' if you have the time but if not then make sure you find some time for `Monkey'. It is very entertaining, it has kept the plot focused and it will get you addicted to Chinese literature for life.

It is also a great introduction to Chinese culture as it presents chinese mythology much more explicitly than most novels do. And for the Kung Fu fans there are plenty of battles and info on the martial arts mentality. [Not being a Kung fu fan myself I almost got addicted just by reading the book].

Entertaining, but too abridged, 14 Oct 2005
Like many of the other reviewers, I read 'Monkey' largely due to my nostalgia for the TV series. I was intrigued by the 'true' story behind the adventures of Sandy, Pigsy and Monkey, so decided to give Wu's book a go. Originally written as 'Journey to the West' in the sixteenth century, it is an epic myth about the journey of a priest (Tripitaka) to retrieve some sacred Buddhist texts from India and return to China. For his protection, he is assigned three spirits who have all fallen out of favour with heaven: the gluttonous Pigsy, the ponderous Sandy and the mischievous Monkey. The book begins with the story of how Monkey earned his disfavour in a magical narrative which switches between his life as a king on earth and his antics in heaven. Then it moves on to his discovery by the priest, and their adventures in seeking out the scriptures, adventures that includes battles with evil demons, deceitful kings and angry gods.
'Monkey' is a fairy tale laced with Buddhist mythology and imagery. Although the language is fairly simple (the book can be read by children - at least ones who don't mind a bit of violence) there is a richness to the style that effortlessly conjures up an ancient oriental scene in the reader's mind. The story itself, like any good fairy tale, is full of holes and occasionally non-sensical, but this adds to the magical feel. In addition, the Buddhist backdrop adds a layer of complexity and depth that belies 'Monkey's status as a mere fairy tale. I learnt a lot from reading 'Monkey', and would recommend it as a good primer for learning about ancient Buddhism.
All of these positives are, unfortunately, overshadowed by one enormous negative. As the blurb points out, Wu Ch'en-en's 'Journey to the West' is an epic myth, with many separate adventures. It has been the tradition in translations to reproduce all of the chapters in abridged form. 'Monkey' doesn't do this. Instead, it reproduces a few chapters completely and ignores many others. Specifically, the chapters concerning concerning Monkey have been left in. This has two negative effects on the book. Firstly, there are obvious gaping holes where consecutive chapters appear disjointed and intervening narrative is clearly missing. This is not a terrible omission, because the narrative is so unlikely anyway that a few gaps don't disrupt it too badly, but it is annoying. Secondly, it means that Pigsy is a very minor character, and Sandy hardly figures at all, presumably because chapters in which they are prominent have been ignored. According to the blurb, all of Tripitaka's companions have allegorical significance, but it is impossible to get a sense of what Sandy and Pigsy contribute from this book. Because of it, 'Monkey' loses a lot of meaning from the original 'Journey to the West'. Instead it becomes just a fairy tale, albeit a very entertaining one.

Knights with a twist, 26 Aug 2007
Alonso Quixone is a big fan of books on knights and chivalry before losing his sense and becoming convinced he is the knight Don Quixote de la Mancha. He had a thing for a country lass called Aldonza Lorenzo who he renames the Lady Dulcinea del Toboso, as every knight needs a lady to do great deeds for. He sets out to seek adventure, taking along the dense local Sancho Panca as his squire.

His exploits include the famous incident where Don Quixote tilts against windmills mistaking them for giants, seeing many an inn as a castle, rescuing damsels in distress and righting wrongs. Part one sees Don Quixote seeing things not as they seem and introducing the idea of enchantments against him. At the end of it they return home (after being tricked by some people from his town in costumes) and his family try to "cure" him by burning all his books and sealing the room they were stored in. It doesn't work and he sets out again with Sancho on more adventures. Part two sees a change in situation for the Don. A book of his earlier exploits has been published and his name is well known throughtout the country. He is taken advantage of by a Duke and Duchess among others who use his madness for sport. Sancho starts to overuse proverbs, but does finally get his position as govener of an island and prove his excellent judgement.

I really enjoyed this book, although it took ages to get through. It seemed like everytime I sat down to read it, I wouldn't get more than 30 pages further no matter how long I read for... It was worth the struggle though as the story is entertaining and well written. I started off laughing at the unfortunate pair, but later on I came to pity them both. The ending was very sad, mostly because Don Quixote recovered his wits. I recommend reading this, but maybe trying to read it over a longer period of time (the chapters are quite short).

The eternal classic, 31 Jan 2007
Don Quixote de la Mancha, the renowned, the valiant, the sage, the enamoured knight, the undoer of wrongs, the tutor of wards and orphans, the protector of widows, the destroyer of maids, he who owns no other mistress than the peerless Dulcinea del Taboso.
Cervantes is quite ironical with the picture of the knight embodied by the ridiculous but none the less moving character of Don Quixote. In a historical perspective one has to consider that the last book of chivalry was published in Spain in 1602 and Don Quixote was completed in 1615. The reading public at that time was thus quite ready to laugh at the fictional world of knights, castles, giants and dwarfs, enchantment and trials by ordeal. The publication of Don Quixote coincided with the realisation that the medieval military caste had little further use in a changing world. Therefore a knight-errant who, contrary to his literary heroes, is aged fifty, skinny and a poor rural gentleman. Sancho Panza is a fat, illiterate, lying and married squire lacking the gentility and education associated with chivalrous apprenticeship. It is interesting to note that Don Quixote did not die with the literary genre it parodies but has become a classic text of western cultural tradition.

Not the best version available.., 26 Aug 2006
Don't get me wrong, I love everything about the stories of Don Quixote, but I found this translation far too poetical and long-winded to actually read. I realise that this specific version was written 200+ years ago and in some ways may perhaps stay more true to the original version, but I definitely think there are better, easier to follow editions available. Also, the book isn't exactly a pleasure to look at, though I suppose that's why it's so cheap to buy. I would go as far to say that if you want to truly understand and enjoy Don Quixote, you should read it in its original form. This translation is only really suitable for someone who might also have the Spanish version and wants to read the two.

Worthy of its reputation, 08 Apr 2006
A pleasurable book to read,this translation of DON QUIXOTE made the story easy to understand, and for every reason it stands up to its reputaion as the best-loved novel. Confronting the conventions of Spanish society at his time some four hundred years ago, the author wittily and funnily exposes the folies of the time through the adventures , stories and misfortunes of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza.

In a broader sense it is the forerunner off other situations where individuals, communities or systems live a complete lie.This is truely an amazing book, one that you won't want to put down once you have started.DON QUIXOTE is a must read which you should include with other must reads like UNION MOUJIK, WAR AND PEACE, GULLIVER'S TRAVEL,CANTERBURY TALES. One thing for sure is that this new translation of DON QUIXOTE will make it a popular story even with the young.

The original comedy double act, 07 Feb 2005
'DQ' is the story of an old man (Don Quixote) who, having read one too many books about knights of old, goes a little potty and starts believing that he is a knight. He ropes a hapless neighbour (Sancho Panza) into service as his squire and together they go off seeking adventure and fortune. Quixote's madness turns windmills into giants and flocks of sheep into armies, and a peasant woman into the princess for whom he performs his deeds. Along the way they meet a series of people, most of whom exploit Quixote's madness by playing practical jokes and sending him on fool's errands. All the while his friends and family try to entice him back to his home and away from his madness.
Quixote and Panza are the original comedy double act (stupid but thinks he is clever, and stupid but knows it, respectively), and the pair's exploits are genuinely funny. Much of the comedy is slapstick (them getting beaten black and blue) with a good dose of toilet humour thrown in. In addition there is some great dialogue, largely centring on Sancho's attempts at wisdom. This is not merely funny for a four hundred year old book, it is just plain funny. Sancho in particular is a brilliant creation, and the book becomes more about him than Quixote by the end. The first book describes their initial sorties, the second describes their travels after they had become famous (due to the publication of the first book). I like this blurring of fiction and reality, and 'DQ' is the earliest example that I have come across.
However, there are flaws in this book. Cervantes frequently uses the introduction of new characters to get side-tracked into unrelated narratives, which starts to get annoying because they add little or nothing to the book. Cervantes, to his credit, seems to have realised this because in the second book he chastises the fictional author if Quixote's history (called Cid Benengali Hamed) for these mistakes. In addition, the book is very long and it is sometimes hard to see what some of the episodes add to it. Cervantes style improves immeasurably in the second book, probably due to the criticisms of the first book that he himself outlines, so it is definitely worth persevering if you are struggling. By the end he even introduces a tragic element, which is beautifully told; well enough to leave a lump in the throat. Although it is largely comic, the novel definitely has some depth, largely due to the utter believability of its two main characters, who feel very familiar by the end. (In addition I would recommend the translation by Tobias Smollett, which is very accessible but retains the Olde Worlde feel of the setting very nicely). It is an excellent read, funny and vivid, and not at all intimidating despite its size and age. Go on, try it.

Not as good as Homer, 19 Sep 2008
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz and Blur has turned this book into an opera so I thought I should read it before I saw the show. The structure is something like the Iliad or Finn McCool. Each chapter is a new adventure but linked together they become the road story of bringing the Buddhist scripture from India to China. The central character is the human priest Tripitaka but his three disciples - Monkey, Pigsy and Sandy - are magical beings. Along the way and back to India they face 81 problems, ogres, monsters and so on, with the action flowing fast and furious, but not much narrative. It's rather like a chinese chopsocky movie with constant action and set pieces but not much subtlety or character development. It ends up being historically important but not really compelling. Lots of reviewers say the book is funny but that's true only in the sense that Robin Hood is funny; it's not a chuckle fest. Arthur Walsey has done an excellent straight down the line translation but I think I would have preferred a Rosemary Sutcliffe style retelling that might not have been as true to the original but would have brought the story more depth and life.

Dear Monkey!, 26 Jun 2008
The basic premise of this novel, in Chinese pinyin "xiyouji" which literally translates to "Journey to the West", sees a group of four set out on an epic journey to recover the Buddhist sutras from India and bring them to China. On the way they encounter various monsters, ghosts and demons trying to stop them. The four represent different sides of human nature, their journey to the "West" (actually India) mirrors the human journey of life and whilst Heaven is awash with beaurocracy, the Earth is littered with challenges and obstacles.

The Monkey King is perhaps the most famous character of all, bold, proud, brave and cunning, equipped with a magical staff, the ability to transform himself into over 70 different shapes and a whole host of magical powers. Tripitaka is the monk, humble, kind and naive, the epitome of the Buddhist devotee, but not averse to reciting a curse that can keep Monkey under control. Pigsy is the third main character, representing greed, sloth and lust, usually to be found eating, sleeping or chatting up the ladies. Sandy is the fourth, but pretty non-decript member of the group.

The story is humorous and satirical. It contains a lot of references to Chinese history and elements of Buddhism and Taoism (Daoism) which can be a bit confusing if you have no previous knowledge. Arthur Waley's translation is only a fraction of the original tome however, and those looking for a genuine translation of equal depth to the original should look elsewhere. Think of this as a distillation of some of the best bits.

Perhaps you need to live in China to realise just how important this novel is, not just as a piece of historical writing, but also in the Chinese contemporary imagination. If you're interested in China and Chinese cultural mythology, you should definitely put this on your reading list!

Fantastic intro, 17 Jun 2008
I read this in practically no time at all. If you're nervous about reading the unabridged Journey to the West and just want to see if you can get into Monkey, this is the book for you.

lovely introduction to chinese litterature, 03 Mar 2007
This is a wonderful translation/adaptation of a seminal Chinese novel. Monkey is much shorter than its original [`Journey to the West'] but it has been masterfully adapted.

For someone who is interested in getting acquainted with Chinese literature but might be a little intimidated by the thousands of pages in which many of those novels carry on, 'Monkey' is a great introduction. I was so enthralled by this book that I moved on and I read the whole `Journey to The West'. Now, having read both I must admit that the adaptation was exquisite. It is highly recommended to read the `Journey to The West' if you have the time but if not then make sure you find some time for `Monkey'. It is very entertaining, it has kept the plot focused and it will get you addicted to Chinese literature for life.

It is also a great introduction to Chinese culture as it presents chinese mythology much more explicitly than most novels do. And for the Kung Fu fans there are plenty of battles and info on the martial arts mentality. [Not being a Kung fu fan myself I almost got addicted just by reading the book].

Entertaining, but too abridged, 14 Oct 2005
Like many of the other reviewers, I read 'Monkey' largely due to my nostalgia for the TV series. I was intrigued by the 'true' story behind the adventures of Sandy, Pigsy and Monkey, so decided to give Wu's book a go. Originally written as 'Journey to the West' in the sixteenth century, it is an epic myth about the journey of a priest (Tripitaka) to retrieve some sacred Buddhist texts from India and return to China. For his protection, he is assigned three spirits who have all fallen out of favour with heaven: the gluttonous Pigsy, the ponderous Sandy and the mischievous Monkey. The book begins with the story of how Monkey earned his disfavour in a magical narrative which switches between his life as a king on earth and his antics in heaven. Then it moves on to his discovery by the priest, and their adventures in seeking out the scriptures, adventures that includes battles with evil demons, deceitful kings and angry gods.
'Monkey' is a fairy tale laced with Buddhist mythology and imagery. Although the language is fairly simple (the book can be read by children - at least ones who don't mind a bit of violence) there is a richness to the style that effortlessly conjures up an ancient oriental scene in the reader's mind. The story itself, like any good fairy tale, is full of holes and occasionally non-sensical, but this adds to the magical feel. In addition, the Buddhist backdrop adds a layer of complexity and depth that belies 'Monkey's status as a mere fairy tale. I learnt a lot from reading 'Monkey', and would recommend it as a good primer for learning about ancient Buddhism.
All of these positives are, unfortunately, overshadowed by one enormous negative. As the blurb points out, Wu Ch'en-en's 'Journey to the West' is an epic myth, with many separate adventures. It has been the tradition in translations to reproduce all of the chapters in abridged form. 'Monkey' doesn't do this. Instead, it reproduces a few chapters completely and ignores many others. Specifically, the chapters concerning concerning Monkey have been left in. This has two negative effects on the book. Firstly, there are obvious gaping holes where consecutive chapters appear disjointed and intervening narrative is clearly missing. This is not a terrible omission, because the narrative is so unlikely anyway that a few gaps don't disrupt it too badly, but it is annoying. Secondly, it means that Pigsy is a very minor character, and Sandy hardly figures at all, presumably because chapters in which they are prominent have been ignored. According to the blurb, all of Tripitaka's companions have allegorical significance, but it is impossible to get a sense of what Sandy and Pigsy contribute from this book. Because of it, 'Monkey' loses a lot of meaning from the original 'Journey to the West'. Instead it becomes just a fairy tale, albeit a very entertaining one.

Knights with a twist, 26 Aug 2007
Alonso Quixone is a big fan of books on knights and chivalry before losing his sense and becoming convinced he is the knight Don Quixote de la Mancha. He had a thing for a country lass called Aldonza Lorenzo who he renames the Lady Dulcinea del Toboso, as every knight needs a lady to do great deeds for. He sets out to seek adventure, taking along the dense local Sancho Panca as his squire.

His exploits include the famous incident where Don Quixote tilts against windmills mistaking them for giants, seeing many an inn as a castle, rescuing damsels in distress and righting wrongs. Part one sees Don Quixote seeing things not as they seem and introducing the idea of enchantments against him. At the end of it they return home (after being tricked by some people from his town in costumes) and his family try to "cure" him by burning all his books and sealing the room they were stored in. It doesn't work and he sets out again with Sancho on more adventures. Part two sees a change in situation for the Don. A book of his earlier exploits has been published and his name is well known throughtout the country. He is taken advantage of by a Duke and Duchess among others who use his madness for sport. Sancho starts to overuse proverbs, but does finally get his position as govener of an island and prove his excellent judgement.

I really enjoyed this book, although it took ages to get through. It seemed like everytime I sat down to read it, I wouldn't get more than 30 pages further no matter how long I read for... It was worth the struggle though as the story is entertaining and well written. I started off laughing at the unfortunate pair, but later on I came to pity them both. The ending was very sad, mostly because Don Quixote recovered his wits. I recommend reading this, but maybe trying to read it over a longer period of time (the chapters are quite short).

The eternal classic, 31 Jan 2007
Don Quixote de la Mancha, the renowned, the valiant, the sage, the enamoured knight, the undoer of wrongs, the tutor of wards and orphans, the protector of widows, the destroyer of maids, he who owns no other mistress than the peerless Dulcinea del Taboso.
Cervantes is quite ironical with the picture of the knight embodied by the ridiculous but none the less moving character of Don Quixote. In a historical perspective one has to consider that the last book of chivalry was published in Spain in 1602 and Don Quixote was completed in 1615. The reading public at that time was thus quite ready to laugh at the fictional world of knights, castles, giants and dwarfs, enchantment and trials by ordeal. The publication of Don Quixote coincided with the realisation that the medieval military caste had little further use in a changing world. Therefore a knight-errant who, contrary to his literary heroes, is aged fifty, skinny and a poor rural gentleman. Sancho Panza is a fat, illiterate, lying and married squire lacking the gentility and education associated with chivalrous apprenticeship. It is interesting to note that Don Quixote did not die with the literary genre it parodies but has become a classic text of western cultural tradition.

Not the best version available.., 26 Aug 2006
Don't get me wrong, I love everything about the stories of Don Quixote, but I found this translation far too poetical and long-winded to actually read. I realise that this specific version was written 200+ years ago and in some ways may perhaps stay more true to the original version, but I definitely think there are better, easier to follow editions available. Also, the book isn't exactly a pleasure to look at, though I suppose that's why it's so cheap to buy. I would go as far to say that if you want to truly understand and enjoy Don Quixote, you should read it in its original form. This translation is only really suitable for someone who might also have the Spanish version and wants to read the two.

Worthy of its reputation, 08 Apr 2006
A pleasurable book to read,this translation of DON QUIXOTE made the story easy to understand, and for every reason it stands up to its reputaion as the best-loved novel. Confronting the conventions of Spanish society at his time some four hundred years ago, the author wittily and funnily exposes the folies of the time through the adventures , stories and misfortunes of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza.

In a broader sense it is the forerunner off other situations where individuals, communities or systems live a complete lie.This is truely an amazing book, one that you won't want to put down once you have started.DON QUIXOTE is a must read which you should include with other must reads like UNION MOUJIK, WAR AND PEACE, GULLIVER'S TRAVEL,CANTERBURY TALES. One thing for sure is that this new translation of DON QUIXOTE will make it a popular story even with the young.

The original comedy double act, 07 Feb 2005
'DQ' is the story of an old man (Don Quixote) who, having read one too many books about knights of old, goes a little potty and starts believing that he is a knight. He ropes a hapless neighbour (Sancho Panza) into service as his squire and together they go off seeking adventure and fortune. Quixote's madness turns windmills into giants and flocks of sheep into armies, and a peasant woman into the princess for whom he performs his deeds. Along the way they meet a series of people, most of whom exploit Quixote's madness by playing practical jokes and sending him on fool's errands. All the while his friends and family try to entice him back to his home and away from his madness.
Quixote and Panza are the original comedy double act (stupid but thinks he is clever, and stupid but knows it, respectively), and the pair's exploits are genuinely funny. Much of the comedy is slapstick (them getting beaten black and blue) with a good dose of toilet humour thrown in. In addition there is some great dialogue, largely centring on Sancho's attempts at wisdom. This is not merely funny for a four hundred year old book, it is just plain funny. Sancho in particular is a brilliant creation, and the book becomes more about him than Quixote by the end. The first book describes their initial sorties, the second describes their travels after they had become famous (due to the publication of the first book). I like this blurring of fiction and reality, and 'DQ' is the earliest example that I have come across.
However, there are flaws in this book. Cervantes frequently uses the introduction of new characters to get side-tracked into unrelated narratives, which starts to get annoying because they add little or nothing to the book. Cervantes, to his credit, seems to have realised this because in the second book he chastises the fictional author if Quixote's history (called Cid Benengali Hamed) for these mistakes. In addition, the book is very long and it is sometimes hard to see what some of the episodes add to it. Cervantes style improves immeasurably in the second book, probably due to the criticisms of the first book that he himself outlines, so it is definitely worth persevering if you are struggling. By the end he even introduces a tragic element, which is beautifully told; well enough to leave a lump in the throat. Although it is largely comic, the novel definitely has some depth, largely due to the utter believability of its two main characters, who feel very familiar by the end. (In addition I would recommend the translation by Tobias Smollett, which is very accessible but retains the Olde Worlde feel of the setting very nicely). It is an excellent read, funny and vivid, and not at all intimidating despite its size and age. Go on, try it.

An island paradise, 19 Aug 2008
We all know about Robinson Crusoe, or at least we think we do. We know about the shipwreck and the years alone on the island and the footprint in the sand and "Man Friday".

Reading the book for the first time, after years of receiving it via the TV and the cinema, in heavily abridged or heavily revised versions, I was amazed to discover how much more there is to find.

The first joy is Defoe's prose, written with all the urgency and precision of a lifelong pamphleteer. Defoe never leaves any doubt as to what his character is trying to say or why he is trying to say it.
The second joy is the pacing. In the brief sections before and after his time on the island, Crusoe undergoes multiple shipwrecks, capture by pirates, escape from slavery, the life of a Brazilian plantation owner, the putting down of a mutiny and even an attack by wolves. Any one of these events could serve quite happily as the climax of another story. As it is, the only time the pace slows is during Crusoe's sojourn on the island and that is only appropriate to his condition.

The greatest joy of the book, though, is Crusoe himself. This is a very real character with very real failings. He is frequently arrogant, unthinking or even plain stupid but wins us over with the good grace with which he admits his faults. One minute he is praising the quality of his newly baked pots, the next laughing at himself for spending months on building a canoe too large and too far from shore for him ever to be able to drag it to the sea. All the while he struggles to give some meaning to his isolation, a meaning he chooses to find in his own vision of God (a God that, by remarkable coincidence, exactly mirrors Defoe's own, nonconformist vision of his Almighty). It's not an endeavour of which Richard Dawkins - or indeed I - would necessarily approve but it's certainly one appropriate to Crusoe's time and personality.

Robinson Crusoe has been analysed as a prototypical text of British imperialism, a moral text, a religious text and even a Marxist text. It has drawn the attention of Rousseau, Wilkie Collins, Coetzee and Joyce among thousands of others. Having read it, one suddenly sees why. The only thing it lacks is the wonderful theme music from the 1960s TV series.


Lengthy, but worth it, 25 Jun 2008
The original Robinson Crusoe story is said to have been told by an old sailor in a dark bar in Bristol, and said to be his own. Daniel Defoe heard closely and used it to inspire his novel. Modern authors (like French Le Clezio) made their versions a lot shorter, simpler, well, for kids. Defoe's work is of another dimension, much closer to reality.

Part Ray Mears Bush Craft, Part Religious Meditation, 14 Nov 2007
Acknowledged to be one of (if not the) first novel, the unexpurgated version of Robinson Crusoe is nothing like the childrens' book that most people grow up with. For starters, the vast majority of pages in the Penguin version are about the practicalities of living alone on a deserted island, including details accounts of catching, enclosing and raising goats, planting crops and strengthening his shelters. As other reviewers have said, this does become repetitive and it's not helped that Defoe interserpeses it with paragraphs wherein Robinson considers the nature of God and the road to salvation. Yes, Crusoe does become a more devout Christian as a result of staying on the island, but it's telling that this starts because of a terror that he's about to die and what will happen to him when he does.

The book begins with an account of Crusoe's upbringing, his determination to go to sea in the face of parental objection and a disastrous voyage that sees him sold into slavery. On his escape (helped by a fellow slave who Crusoe in turn sells into slavery!), he's rescued by a Portugese captain and taken to Brazil where he starts a plantation before his wanderlust takes hold again and he embarks on a voyage to buy slaves in Guinea, a voyage that ends in the shipwreck that leaves him stuck on an island for 28 years.

The casual attitude towards slavery may make modern readers uncomfortable. I was certainly shocked by the way Crusoe on several occassions wishes he had some slaves to work for him and his relationship with Friday is certainly one of benevolent white man bringing God to the savage.

The plot only really gets going in the final 80 pages when Defore introduces cannibals and deserters and has Crusoe engage in two daring rescues. Even now these sections are entertaining and the action really gathers speed as we follow Crusoe's deliverance back to civilisation and ending with a peculiar almost postscript of what happens when he decides to travel by land instead of sea and is attacked by ravenous wolves.

The novel is definitely worth a look, but will likely be unpalatable to some modern readers because of the extensive (and somewhat unconvincing) religious meditations.

Traditional and factual. Hard to complete comapared to modern novels, 24 Jun 2007
Robinson Crusoe is claimed to be one of the first novel's written in English (1719) and is a fictional autobiography of a man who is from a very average family in England at that time. The story moves from the main characters moving out of his family home and travelling the seas to his eventual shipwreck off the American coast.

I read this book over an extended period of time due to exams in School but also because they book is very laborious with a completely different style of writing to contemporary writers. At times it is written very factually that reminded me of a non-fiction book such as the treatment of certain animals and how to tame them.

For looking into how literature started and an abstract insight into general life in these times, the first part of the book, the story can be of relevance and provide enough stimulation to finish. Also as many reviewers have mentioned before the novel is also allegorical with the classic shipwrecked story on one level and the deep insight into humanity and how humans behave on the other. Despite some believing that this second level of thought provides more entertainment to the story and makes the book worth reading I personally did not find that stimulating.

However despite its downfalls I still believe Robinson Crusoe to be worth reading for its literature value (as in what the book did for literature, moving it along etc), but it also captures the practical issues with being stuck on a desert island very well. If looking for a page-turner I wouldn't advise this book but the storyline is still appealing.


Other links: Defoe went on to write a lesser known sequel: The further adventures of Robinson Crusoe.
Film: Castaway


Open your eyes., 14 Oct 2006
Just a quickie. Some of the above reviews remind us of how slow and boring this book can be and how repetitive. Well, guys, that's the point. How exciting do you suppose being stranded alone on an Island can be? What would you do to pass the time? Defoe takes us back to a time before T.V etc. Your day would be boring, although eventually menial tasks save ones sanity. Time does pass slowly as it looses relavance. It's not a classic for nothing.

Not as good as Homer, 19 Sep 2008
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz and Blur has turned this book into an opera so I thought I should read it before I saw the show. The structure is something like the Iliad or Finn McCool. Each chapter is a new adventure but linked together they become the road story of bringing the Buddhist scripture from India to China. The central character is the human priest Tripitaka but his three disciples - Monkey, Pigsy and Sandy - are magical beings. Along the way and back to India they face 81 problems, ogres, monsters and so on, with the action flowing fast and furious, but not much narrative. It's rather like a chinese chopsocky movie with constant action and set pieces but not much subtlety or character development. It ends up being historically important but not really compelling. Lots of reviewers say the book is funny but that's true only in the sense that Robin Hood is funny; it's not a chuckle fest. Arthur Walsey has done an excellent straight down the line translation but I think I would have preferred a Rosemary Sutcliffe style retelling that might not have been as true to the original but would have brought the story more depth and life.

Dear Monkey!, 26 Jun 2008
The basic premise of this novel, in Chinese pinyin "xiyouji" which literally translates to "Journey to the West", sees a group of four set out on an epic journey to recover the Buddhist sutras from India and bring them to China. On the way they encounter various monsters, ghosts and demons trying to stop them. The four represent different sides of human nature, their journey to the "West" (actually India) mirrors the human journey of life and whilst Heaven is awash with beaurocracy, the Earth is littered with challenges and obstacles.

The Monkey King is perhaps the most famous character of all, bold, proud, brave and cunning, equipped with a magical staff, the ability to transform himself into over 70 different shapes and a whole host of magical powers. Tripitaka is the monk, humble, kind and naive, the epitome of the Buddhist devotee, but not averse to reciting a curse that can keep Monkey under control. Pigsy is the third main character, representing greed, sloth and lust, usually to be found eating, sleeping or chatting up the ladies. Sandy is the fourth, but pretty non-decript member of the group.

The story is humorous and satirical. It contains a lot of references to Chinese history and elements of Buddhism and Taoism (Daoism) which can be a bit confusing if you have no previous knowledge. Arthur Waley's translation is only a fraction of the original tome however, and those looking for a genuine translation of equal depth to the original should look elsewhere. Think of this as a distillation of some of the best bits.

Perhaps you need to live in China to realise just how important this novel is, not just as a piece of historical writing, but also in the Chinese contemporary imagination. If you're interested in China and Chinese cultural mythology, you should definitely put this on your reading list!

Fantastic intro, 17 Jun 2008
I read this in practically no time at all. If you're nervous about reading the unabridged Journey to the West and just want to see if you can get into Monkey, this is the book for you.

lovely introduction to chinese litterature, 03 Mar 2007
This is a wonderful translation/adaptation of a seminal Chinese novel. Monkey is much shorter than its original [`Journey to the West'] but it has been masterfully adapted.

For someone who is interested in getting acquainted with Chinese literature but might be a little intimidated by the thousands of pages in which many of those novels carry on, 'Monkey' is a great introduction. I was so enthralled by this book that I moved on and I read the whole `Journey to The West'. Now, having read both I must admit that the adaptation was exquisite. It is highly recommended to read the `Journey to The West' if you have the time but if not then make sure you find some time for `Monkey'. It is very entertaining, it has kept the plot focused and it will get you addicted to Chinese literature for life.

It is also a great introduction to Chinese culture as it presents chinese mythology much more explicitly than most novels do. And for the Kung Fu fans there are plenty of battles and info on the martial arts mentality. [Not being a Kung fu fan myself I almost got addicted just by reading the book].

Entertaining, but too abridged, 14 Oct 2005
Like many of the other reviewers, I read 'Monkey' largely due to my nostalgia for the TV series. I was intrigued by the 'true' story behind the adventures of Sandy, Pigsy and Monkey, so decided to give Wu's book a go. Originally written as 'Journey to the West' in the sixteenth century, it is an epic myth about the journey of a priest (Tripitaka) to retrieve some sacred Buddhist texts from India and return to China. For his protection, he is assigned three spirits who have all fallen out of favour with heaven: the gluttonous Pigsy, the ponderous Sandy and the mischievous Monkey. The book begins with the story of how Monkey earned his disfavour in a magical narrative which switches between his life as a king on earth and his antics in heaven. Then it moves on to his discovery by the priest, and their adventures in seeking out the scriptures, adventures that includes battles with evil demons, deceitful kings and angry gods.
'Monkey' is a fairy tale laced with Buddhist mythology and imagery. Although the language is fairly simple (the book can be read by children - at least ones who don't mind a bit of violence) there is a richness to the style that effortlessly conjures up an ancient oriental scene in the reader's mind. The story itself, like any good fairy tale, is full of holes and occasionally non-sensical, but this adds to the magical feel. In addition, the Buddhist backdrop adds a layer of complexity and depth that belies 'Monkey's status as a mere fairy tale. I learnt a lot from reading 'Monkey', and would recommend it as a good primer for learning about ancient Buddhism.
All of these positives are, unfortunately, overshadowed by one enormous negative. As the blurb points out, Wu Ch'en-en's 'Journey to the West' is an epic myth, with many separate adventures. It has been the tradition in translations to reproduce all of the chapters in abridged form. 'Monkey' doesn't do this. Instead, it reproduces a few chapters completely and ignores many others. Specifically, the chapters concerning concerning Monkey have been left in. This has two negative effects on the book. Firstly, there are obvious gaping holes where consecutive chapters appear disjointed and intervening narrative is clearly missing. This is not a terrible omission, because the narrative is so unlikely anyway that a few gaps don't disrupt it too badly, but it is annoying. Secondly, it means that Pigsy is a very minor character, and Sandy hardly figures at all, presumably because chapters in which they are prominent have been ignored. According to the blurb, all of Tripitaka's companions have allegorical significance, but it is impossible to get a sense of what Sandy and Pigsy contribute from this book. Because of it, 'Monkey' loses a lot of meaning from the original 'Journey to the West'. Instead it becomes just a fairy tale, albeit a very entertaining one.

Knights with a twist, 26 Aug 2007
Alonso Quixone is a big fan of books on knights and chivalry before losing his sense and becoming convinced he is the knight Don Quixote de la Mancha. He had a thing for a country lass called Aldonza Lorenzo who he renames the Lady Dulcinea del Toboso, as every knight needs a lady to do great deeds for. He sets out to seek adventure, taking along the dense local Sancho Panca as his squire.

His exploits include the famous incident where Don Quixote tilts against windmills mistaking them for giants, seeing many an inn as a castle, rescuing damsels in distress and righting wrongs. Part one sees Don Quixote seeing things not as they seem and introducing the idea of enchantments against him. At the end of it they return home (after being tricked by some people from his town in costumes) and his family try to "cure" him by burning all his books and sealing the room they were stored in. It doesn't work and he sets out again with Sancho on more adventures. Part two sees a change in situation for the Don. A book of his earlier exploits has been published and his name is well known throughtout the country. He is taken advantage of by a Duke and Duchess among others who use his madness for sport. Sancho starts to overuse proverbs, but does finally get his position as govener of an island and prove his excellent judgement.

I really enjoyed this book, although it took ages to get through. It seemed like everytime I sat down to read it, I wouldn't get more than 30 pages further no matter how long I read for... It was worth the struggle though as the story is entertaining and well written. I started off laughing at the unfortunate pair, but later on I came to pity them both. The ending was very sad, mostly because Don Quixote recovered his wits. I recommend reading this, but maybe trying to read it over a longer period of time (the chapters are quite short).

The eternal classic, 31 Jan 2007
Don Quixote de la Mancha, the renowned, the valiant, the sage, the enamoured knight, the undoer of wrongs, the tutor of wards and orphans, the protector of widows, the destroyer of maids, he who owns no other mistress than the peerless Dulcinea del Taboso.
Cervantes is quite ironical with the picture of the knight embodied by the ridiculous but none the less moving character of Don Quixote. In a historical perspective one has to consider that the last book of chivalry was published in Spain in 1602 and Don Quixote was completed in 1615. The reading public at that time was thus quite ready to laugh at the fictional world of knights, castles, giants and dwarfs, enchantment and trials by ordeal. The publication of Don Quixote coincided with the realisation that the medieval military caste had little further use in a changing world. Therefore a knight-errant who, contrary to his literary heroes, is aged fifty, skinny and a poor rural gentleman. Sancho Panza is a fat, illiterate, lying and married squire lacking the gentility and education associated with chivalrous apprenticeship. It is interesting to note that Don Quixote did not die with the literary genre it parodies but has become a classic text of western cultural tradition.

Not the best version available.., 26 Aug 2006
Don't get me wrong, I love everything about the stories of Don Quixote, but I found this translation far too poetical and long-winded to actually read. I realise that this specific version was written 200+ years ago and in some ways may perhaps stay more true to the original version, but I definitely think there are better, easier to follow editions available. Also, the book isn't exactly a pleasure to look at, though I suppose that's why it's so cheap to buy. I would go as far to say that if you want to truly understand and enjoy Don Quixote, you should read it in its original form. This translation is only really suitable for someone who might also have the Spanish version and wants to read the two.

Worthy of its reputation, 08 Apr 2006
A pleasurable book to read,this translation of DON QUIXOTE made the story easy to understand, and for every reason it stands up to its reputaion as the best-loved novel. Confronting the conventions of Spanish society at his time some four hundred years ago, the author wittily and funnily exposes the folies of the time through the adventures , stories and misfortunes of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza.

In a broader sense it is the forerunner off other situations where individuals, communities or systems live a complete lie.This is truely an amazing book, one that you won't want to put down once you have started.DON QUIXOTE is a must read which you should include with other must reads like UNION MOUJIK, WAR AND PEACE, GULLIVER'S TRAVEL,CANTERBURY TALES. One thing for sure is that this new translation of DON QUIXOTE will make it a popular story even with the young.

The original comedy double act, 07 Feb 2005
'DQ' is the story of an old man (Don Quixote) who, having read one too many books about knights of old, goes a little potty and starts believing that he is a knight. He ropes a hapless neighbour (Sancho Panza) into service as his squire and together they go off seeking adventure and fortune. Quixote's madness turns windmills into giants and flocks of sheep into armies, and a peasant woman into the princess for whom he performs his deeds. Along the way they meet a series of people, most of whom exploit Quixote's madness by playing practical jokes and sending him on fool's errands. All the while his friends and family try to entice him back to his home and away from his madness.
Quixote and Panza are the original comedy double act (stupid but thinks he is clever, and stupid but knows it, respectively), and the pair's exploits are genuinely funny. Much of the comedy is slapstick (them getting beaten black and blue) with a good dose of toilet humour thrown in. In addition there is some great dialogue, largely centring on Sancho's attempts at wisdom. This is not merely funny for a four hundred year old book, it is just plain funny. Sancho in particular is a brilliant creation, and the book becomes more about him than Quixote by the end. The first book describes their initial sorties, the second describes their travels after they had become famous (due to the publication of the first book). I like this blurring of fiction and reality, and 'DQ' is the earliest example that I have come across.
However, there are flaws in this book. Cervantes frequently uses the introduction of new characters to get side-tracked into unrelated narratives, which starts to get annoying because they add little or nothing to the book. Cervantes, to his credit, seems to have realised this because in the second book he chastises the fictional author if Quixote's history (called Cid Benengali Hamed) for these mistakes. In addition, the book is very long and it is sometimes hard to see what some of the episodes add to it. Cervantes style improves immeasurably in the second book, probably due to the criticisms of the first book that he himself outlines, so it is definitely worth persevering if you are struggling. By the end he even introduces a tragic element, which is beautifully told; well enough to leave a lump in the throat. Although it is largely comic, the novel definitely has some depth, largely due to the utter believability of its two main characters, who feel very familiar by the end. (In addition I would recommend the translation by Tobias Smollett, which is very accessible but retains the Olde Worlde feel of the setting very nicely). It is an excellent read, funny and vivid, and not at all intimidating despite its size and age. Go on, try it.

An island paradise, 19 Aug 2008
We all know about Robinson Crusoe, or at least we think we do. We know about the shipwreck and the years alone on the island and the footprint in the sand and "Man Friday".

Reading the book for the first time, after years of receiving it via the TV and the cinema, in heavily abridged or heavily revised versions, I was amazed to discover how much more there is to find.

The first joy is Defoe's prose, written with all the urgency and precision of a lifelong pamphleteer. Defoe never leaves any doubt as to what his character is trying to say or why he is trying to say it.
The second joy is the pacing. In the brief sections before and after his time on the island, Crusoe undergoes multiple shipwrecks, capture by pirates, escape from slavery, the life of a Brazilian plantation owner, the putting down of a mutiny and even an attack by wolves. Any one of these events could serve quite happily as the climax of another story. As it is, the only time the pace slows is during Crusoe's sojourn on the island and that is only appropriate to his condition.

The greatest joy of the book, though, is Crusoe himself. This is a very real character with very real failings. He is frequently arrogant, unthinking or even plain stupid but wins us over with the good grace with which he admits his faults. One minute he is praising the quality of his newly baked pots, the next laughing at himself for spending months on building a canoe too large and too far from shore for him ever to be able to drag it to the sea. All the while he struggles to give some meaning to his isolation, a meaning he chooses to find in his own vision of God (a God that, by remarkable coincidence, exactly mirrors Defoe's own, nonconformist vision of his Almighty). It's not an endeavour of which Richard Dawkins - or indeed I - would necessarily approve but it's certainly one appropriate to Crusoe's time and personality.

Robinson Crusoe has been analysed as a prototypical text of British imperialism, a moral text, a religious text and even a Marxist text. It has drawn the attention of Rousseau, Wilkie Collins, Coetzee and Joyce among thousands of others. Having read it, one suddenly sees why. The only thing it lacks is the wonderful theme music from the 1960s TV series.


Lengthy, but worth it, 25 Jun 2008
The original Robinson Crusoe story is said to have been told by an old sailor in a dark bar in Bristol, and said to be his own. Daniel Defoe heard closely and used it to inspire his novel. Modern authors (like French Le Clezio) made their versions a lot shorter, simpler, well, for kids. Defoe's work is of another dimension, much closer to reality.

Part Ray Mears Bush Craft, Part Religious Meditation, 14 Nov 2007
Acknowledged to be one of (if not the) first novel, the unexpurgated version of Robinson Crusoe is nothing like the childrens' book that most people grow up with. For starters, the vast majority of pages in the Penguin version are about the practicalities of living alone on a deserted island, including details accounts of catching, enclosing and raising goats, planting crops and strengthening his shelters. As other reviewers have said, this does become repetitive and it's not helped that Defoe interserpeses it with paragraphs wherein Robinson considers the nature of God and the road to salvation. Yes, Crusoe does become a more devout Christian as a result of staying on the island, but it's telling that this starts because of a terror that he's about to die and what will happen to him when he does.

The book begins with an account of Crusoe's upbringing, his determination to go to sea in the face of parental objection and a disastrous voyage that sees him sold into slavery. On his escape (helped by a fellow slave who Crusoe in turn sells into slavery!), he's rescued by a Portugese captain and taken to Brazil where he starts a plantation before his wanderlust takes hold again and he embarks on a voyage to buy slaves in Guinea, a voyage that ends in the shipwreck that leaves him stuck on an island for 28 years.

The casual attitude towards slavery may make modern readers uncomfortable. I was certainly shocked by the way Crusoe on several occassions wishes he had some slaves to work for him and his relationship with Friday is certainly one of benevolent white man bringing God to the savage.

The plot only really gets going in the final 80 pages when Defore introduces cannibals and deserters and has Crusoe engage in two daring rescues. Even now these sections are entertaining and the action really gathers speed as we follow Crusoe's deliverance back to civilisation and ending with a peculiar almost postscript of what happens when he decides to travel by land instead of sea and is attacked by ravenous wolves.

The novel is definitely worth a look, but will likely be unpalatable to some modern readers because of the extensive (and somewhat unconvincing) religious meditations.

Traditional and factual. Hard to complete comapared to modern novels, 24 Jun 2007
Robinson Crusoe is claimed to be one of the first novel's written in English (1719) and is a fictional autobiography of a man who is from a very average family in England at that time. The story moves from the main characters moving out of his family home and travelling the seas to his eventual shipwreck off the American coast.

I read this book over an extended period of time due to exams in School but also because they book is very laborious with a completely different style of writing to contemporary writers. At times it is written very factually that reminded me of a non-fiction book such as the treatment of certain animals and how to tame them.

For looking into how literature started and an abstract insight into general life in these times, the first part of the book, the story can be of relevance and provide enough stimulation to finish. Also as many reviewers have mentioned before the novel is also allegorical with the classic shipwrecked story on one level and the deep insight into humanity and how humans behave on the other. Despite some believing that this second level of thought provides more entertainment to the story and makes the book worth reading I personally did not find that stimulating.

However despite its downfalls I still believe Robinson Crusoe to be worth reading for its literature value (as in what the book did for literature, moving it along etc), but it also captures the practical issues with being stuck on a desert island very well. If looking for a page-turner I wouldn't advise this book but the storyline is still appealing.


Other links: Defoe went on to write a lesser known sequel: The further adventures of Robinson Crusoe.
Film: Castaway


Open your eyes., 14 Oct 2006
Just a quickie. Some of the above reviews remind us of how slow and boring this book can be and how repetitive. Well, guys, that's the point. How exciting do you suppose being stranded alone on an Island can be? What would you do to pass the time? Defoe takes us back to a time before T.V etc. Your day would be boring, although eventually menial tasks save ones sanity. Time does pass slowly as it looses relavance. It's not a classic for nothing.

About the bigness of a Bristol barrel, 18 Nov 2005
It has been suggested that only one reader in ten thousand can appreciate the full merit of Gulliver’s Travels as it is a satire on forgotten politics. Do not be misled, this is a timeless classic. The absolute relation to the past whether to politics or otherwise is not an essential premise for one’s amusement of this book. The novel operates on many levels and the reader can easily make a rudimentary guess (without but usually with the aid of notes) at the satire. Political history has a reoccurring theme and much of what Swift wrote three hundred years ago resoundingly rings true today. We can plainly identify repeating general patterns and specific examples of events from the last three hundred years which mirror exactly what Swift alluded to -we do of course have the advantage of retrospection to amplify or even reassign the meaning.

The literal reading and interpretation of little people, giants, a flying island and talking horses can be dazzling. No-kidding, great imagination, marvellous observation and juxtapositional brilliance. Highlights are the whole of Part II and references to the ‘Academy’ in Part III (definite ‘laugh out loud’ humour).

Swift makes arguments and counter arguments along with very credible undisputable criticisms of humankind without preaching in a work of genius. There are lessons for us all here, we can take delight in the book and take heart from the value of its reading.

A word about the edition., 25 Dec 2004
The literary worth of this text is beyond doubt. Rather than extol its merits - beyond the fact that Swift's prose is of unsurpasssed clarity and elegance - I will warn prospective buyers that, for serious, or even intelligent, reading, this edition is unsuitable. An understanding of its contextual allusions and references is necessary to appreciate the satire of Gulliver's Travels, but this edition is lacking in notes. Of course, it is ideal for children, but readers searching beyond the surface fable should look elsewhere. (Oxford University Press or Penguin Classics, I suggest.)

A brain-raking model in English literature, 06 Jan 2004
I am rather disappointed by the book that definitely is a classic. Lilliput is just another image of monarchy, but in no way different from what Swift knew. The criticism comes from the scale of the people who are extremely small. Brogdingnag does not change this approach, only the scale of the people who are extremely big, though in this case there is a direct criticism of the exploitation the « grotesque » Gulliver is the object of. Laputa, Balnibarbi and Luggnagg show a strange floating saucer in a kingdom dominated by unpractical scientists who try to do everything upside down. It is a satire of scientists in general who are so little concerned by the welfare of the community that they can ruin just for the sake of implementing their hypotheses. Glubbdubdrib is funnier because it enables Gulliver to meet all kinds of people from the past and this leads to remarks about philosophers or politicians or generals that show how small and little and even tiny they were. Japan only shows the extreme anti-christian policy that can be reached there and the extreme self-centeredness of the Dutch, which is probably a criticism of the crown in England. But the last voyage to the country of the Houyhnhnms is by far the best because here we reach both a severe criticism of the human race reduced to its animal instincts and behaviors, and a utopian society in which evil does not exist because it cannot even be conceived, because it is totally out of reach for these kind reasoning and reasonable horses. And yet Gulliver is expelled because he is a Yahoo, no matter what, and the natural reason of these dominant horses leads to rejection, after having found in Gulliver's explanations a solution to get rid of the Yahoo by sterilizing them into extinction, just the way men do with horses in European countries, just a little bit more systematically. This leads to the idea that genocide and ethnic cleansing is a natural attitude, an attitude that goes along with natural reason that says that the species standing in the way of reason have to be exterminated. But the book never reaches that level of thinking, since Swift could not know about such policies that will flourish in later centuries, and yet the Irish occupation should lead him to some idea of what such a principle can lead to. Thus at a second level of reading we find a criticism of « natural reason » though it is not fully expressed and developed. After all it is that « natural reason » that led, already in Swift's times, to the genocide of Indians in America : they were not human, they were attributed all kinds of shortcomings like aggressivity, the love of war, the lack of cleanliness, a strong stench, and many other elements of the type. We can even note that beyond the genocide, the sterilisation policy will be implemented, but not on males, rather on females, and this in some US states up to the 1950s and maybe the 1960s. And this policy initiated by the Scandinavians in the early 20th century (and it was to last at least fifty or sixty decades) was to be systematically used against physically or psychologically impaired people. Hitler will follow that model, pushing it one bit further. In a way the book becomes then some vision of the future. This book hence is a prefiguration of many other books on the subject, such as « The time Machine », « Brave New World », « Animal Farm », etc. This book seems to be the archetype of a literary genre in English literature, and of course the archetype of many films dealing with the same subject, particularly extraterrestrials.To conclude I will say that such a book is definitely not for children even if it is often assigned to young children in some schools.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

Relatively Great, 24 Aug 2001
This is not a children's book. Swift ensured that Gulliver's account is an easily readable piece of literature, but this is certainly not a book to be read on the surface. The depth of ideas and satire is unmatched by any other author. The first two chapters concentrate on the problems of our political systems and ridicule our customs. Gulliver is cleverly interposed in two worlds of opposites - in one he is a giant, in the next he is a dwarf. Swift uses this fact to show how everything is only relative to what you compare against. The final two chapters take a deep, long swipe at the failings of humanity - going right to the very bones. Again Swift uses the device of comparison and relatity to satirise his targets - the main one being humankind's lack of reason. DO NOT think that you have read this book if you have only watched it on TV, it is so much more than that. Read it if only to hear of the experiment to harvest sunbeams from cucumbers.

Classic piece of English satire, 13 Jun 2001
Gulliver's Travels is widely regarded as a children's book, when in fact it is a comic and yet strongly political view of English society from many different perspectives. The ludicrous places that Gulliver visits are all based on England, but with just one of 'our' features completely overemphasised, ie our love of science and reason, in order to parody it and to highlight faults in society. I love Gulliver's travels, because it is one of the few so-called 'classics' that are accessible to the modern reader; the fact that children can read it shows how clear Swift's writing is. In fact, it's like a reverse Harry Potter - the grown-up's book that kids love too!

Not as good as Homer, 19 Sep 2008
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz and Blur has turned this book into an opera so I thought I should read it before I saw the show. The structure is something like the Iliad or Finn McCool. Each chapter is a new adventure but linked together they become the road story of bringing the Buddhist scripture from India to China. The central character is the human priest Tripitaka but his three disciples - Monkey, Pigsy and Sandy - are magical beings. Along the way and back to India they face 81 problems, ogres, monsters and so on, with the action flowing fast and furious, but not much narrative. It's rather like a chinese chopsocky movie with constant action and set pieces but not much subtlety or character development. It ends up being historically important but not really compelling. Lots of reviewers say the book is funny but that's true only in the sense that Robin Hood is funny; it's not a chuckle fest. Arthur Walsey has done an excellent straight down the line translation but I think I would have preferred a Rosemary Sutcliffe style retelling that might not have been as true to the original but would have brought the story more depth and life.

Dear Monkey!, 26 Jun 2008
The basic premise of this novel, in Chinese pinyin "xiyouji" which literally translates to "Journey to the West", sees a group of four set out on an epic journey to recover the Buddhist sutras from India and bring them to China. On the way they encounter various monsters, ghosts and demons trying to stop them. The four represent different sides of human nature, their journey to the "West" (actually India) mirrors the human journey of life and whilst Heaven is awash with beaurocracy, the Earth is littered with challenges and obstacles.

The Monkey King is perhaps the most famous character of all, bold, proud, brave and cunning, equipped with a magical staff, the ability to transform himself into over 70 different shapes and a whole host of magical powers. Tripitaka is the monk, humble, kind and naive, the epitome of the Buddhist devotee, but not averse to reciting a curse that can keep Monkey under control. Pigsy is the third main character, representing greed, sloth and lust, usually to be found eating, sleeping or chatting up the ladies. Sandy is the fourth, but pretty non-decript member of the group.

The story is humorous and satirical. It contains a lot of references to Chinese history and elements of Buddhism and Taoism (Daoism) which can be a bit confusing if you have no previous knowledge. Arthur Waley's translation is only a fraction of the original tome however, and those looking for a genuine translation of equal depth to the original should look elsewhere. Think of this as a distillation of some of the best bits.

Perhaps you need to live in China to realise just how important this novel is, not just as a piece of historical writing, but also in the Chinese contemporary imagination. If you're interested in China and Chinese cultural mythology, you should definitely put this on your reading list!

Fantastic intro, 17 Jun 2008
I read this in practically no time at all. If you're nervous about reading the unabridged Journey to the West and just want to see if you can get into Monkey, this is the book for you.

lovely introduction to chinese litterature, 03 Mar 2007
This is a wonderful translation/adaptation of a seminal Chinese novel. Monkey is much shorter than its original [`Journey to the West'] but it has been masterfully adapted.

For someone who is interested in getting acquainted with Chinese literature but might be a little intimidated by the thousands of pages in which many of those novels carry on, 'Monkey' is a great introduction. I was so enthralled by this book that I moved on and I read the whole `Journey to The West'. Now, having read both I must admit that the adaptation was exquisite. It is highly recommended to read the `Journey to The West' if you have the time but if not then make sure you find some time for `Monkey'. It is very entertaining, it has kept the plot focused and it will get you addicted to Chinese literature for life.

It is also a great introduction to Chinese culture as it presents chinese mythology much more explicitly than most novels do. And for the Kung Fu fans there are plenty of battles and info on the martial arts mentality. [Not being a Kung fu fan myself I almost got addicted just by reading the book].

Entertaining, but too abridged, 14 Oct 2005
Like many of the other reviewers, I read 'Monkey' largely due to my nostalgia for the TV series. I was intrigued by the 'true' story behind the adventures of Sandy, Pigsy and Monkey, so decided to give Wu's book a go. Originally written as 'Journey to the West' in the sixteenth century, it is an epic myth about the journey of a priest (Tripitaka) to retrieve some sacred Buddhist texts from India and return to China. For his protection, he is assigned three spirits who have all fallen out of favour with heaven: the gluttonous Pigsy, the ponderous Sandy and the mischievous Monkey. The book begins with the story of how Monkey earned his disfavour in a magical narrative which switches between his life as a king on earth and his antics in heaven. Then it moves on to his discovery by the priest, and their adventures in seeking out the scriptures, adventures that includes battles with evil demons, deceitful kings and angry gods.
'Monkey' is a fairy tale laced with Buddhist mythology and imagery. Although the language is fairly simple (the book can be read by children - at least ones who don't mind a bit of violence) there is a richness to the style that effortlessly conjures up an ancient oriental scene in the reader's mind. The story itself, like any good fairy tale, is full of holes and occasionally non-sensical, but this adds to the magical feel. In addition, the Buddhist backdrop adds a layer of complexity and depth that belies 'Monkey's status as a mere fairy tale. I learnt a lot from reading 'Monkey', and would recommend it as a good primer for learning about ancient Buddhism.
All of these positives are, unfortunately, overshadowed by one enormous negative. As the blurb points out, Wu Ch'en-en's 'Journey to the West' is an epic myth, with many separate adventures. It has been the tradition in translations to reproduce all of the chapters in abridged form. 'Monkey' doesn't do this. Instead, it reproduces a few chapters completely and ignores many others. Specifically, the chapters concerning concerning Monkey have been left in. This has two negative effects on the book. Firstly, there are obvious gaping holes where consecutive chapters appear disjointed and intervening narrative is clearly missing. This is not a terrible omission, because the narrative is so unlikely anyway that a few gaps don't disrupt it too badly, but it is annoying. Secondly, it means that Pigsy is a very minor character, and Sandy hardly figures at all, presumably because chapters in which they are prominent have been ignored. According to the blurb, all of Tripitaka's companions have allegorical significance, but it is impossible to get a sense of what Sandy and Pigsy contribute from this book. Because of it, 'Monkey' loses a lot of meaning from the original 'Journey to the West'. Instead it becomes just a fairy tale, albeit a very entertaining one.

Knights with a twist, 26 Aug 2007
Alonso Quixone is a big fan of books on knights and chivalry before losing his sense and becoming convinced he is the knight Don Quixote de la Mancha. He had a thing for a country lass called Aldonza Lorenzo who he renames the Lady Dulcinea del Toboso, as every knight needs a lady to do great deeds for. He sets out to seek adventure, taking along the dense local Sancho Panca as his squire.

His exploits include the famous incident where Don Quixote tilts against windmills mistaking them for giants, seeing many an inn as a castle, rescuing damsels in distress and righting wrongs. Part one sees Don Quixote seeing things not as they seem and introducing the idea of enchantments against him. At the end of it they return home (after being tricked by some people from his town in costumes) and his family try to "cure" him by burning all his books and sealing the room they were stored in. It doesn't work and he sets out again with Sancho on more adventures. Part two sees a change in situation for the Don. A book of his earlier exploits has been published and his name is well known throughtout the country. He is taken advantage of by a Duke and Duchess among others who use his madness for sport. Sancho starts to overuse proverbs, but does finally get his position as govener of an island and prove his excellent judgement.

I really enjoyed this book, although it took ages to get through. It seemed like everytime I sat down to read it, I wouldn't get more than 30 pages further no matter how long I read for... It was worth the struggle though as the story is entertaining and well written. I started off laughing at the unfortunate pair, but later on I came to pity them both. The ending was very sad, mostly because Don Quixote recovered his wits. I recommend reading this, but maybe trying to read it over a longer period of time (the chapters are quite short).

The eternal classic, 31 Jan 2007
Don Quixote de la Mancha, the renowned, the valiant, the sage, the enamoured knight, the undoer of wrongs, the tutor of wards and orphans, the protector of widows, the destroyer of maids, he who owns no other mistress than the peerless Dulcinea del Taboso.
Cervantes is quite ironical with the picture of the knight embodied by the ridiculous but none the less moving character of Don Quixote. In a historical perspective one has to consider that the last book of chivalry was published in Spain in 1602 and Don Quixote was completed in 1615. The reading public at that time was thus quite ready to laugh at the fictional world of knights, castles, giants and dwarfs, enchantment and trials by ordeal. The publication of Don Quixote coincided with the realisation that the medieval military caste had little further use in a changing world. Therefore a knight-errant who, contrary to his literary heroes, is aged fifty, skinny and a poor rural gentleman. Sancho Panza is a fat, illiterate, lying and married squire lacking the gentility and education associated with chivalrous apprenticeship. It is interesting to note that Don Quixote did not die with the literary genre it parodies but has become a classic text of western cultural tradition.

Not the best version available.., 26 Aug 2006
Don't get me wrong, I love everything about the stories of Don Quixote, but I found this translation far too poetical and long-winded to actually read. I realise that this specific version was written 200+ years ago and in some ways may perhaps stay more true to the original version, but I definitely think there are better, easier to follow editions available. Also, the book isn't exactly a pleasure to look at, though I suppose that's why it's so cheap to buy. I would go as far to say that if you want to truly understand and enjoy Don Quixote, you should read it in its original form. This translation is only really suitable for someone who might also have the Spanish version and wants to read the two.

Worthy of its reputation, 08 Apr 2006
A pleasurable book to read,this translation of DON QUIXOTE made the story easy to understand, and for every reason it stands up to its reputaion as the best-loved novel. Confronting the conventions of Spanish society at his time some four hundred years ago, the author wittily and funnily exposes the folies of the time through the adventures , stories and misfortunes of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza.

In a broader sense it is the forerunner off other situations where individuals, communities or systems live a complete lie.This is truely an amazing book, one that you won't want to put down once you have started.DON QUIXOTE is a must read which you should include with other must reads like UNION MOUJIK, WAR AND PEACE, GULLIVER'S TRAVEL,CANTERBURY TALES. One thing for sure is that this new translation of DON QUIXOTE will make it a popular story even with the young.

The original comedy double act, 07 Feb 2005
'DQ' is the story of an old man (Don Quixote) who, having read one too many books about knights of old, goes a little potty and starts believing that he is a knight. He ropes a hapless neighbour (Sancho Panza) into service as his squire and together they go off seeking adventure and fortune. Quixote's madness turns windmills into giants and flocks of sheep into armies, and a peasant woman into the princess for whom he performs his deeds. Along the way they meet a series of people, most of whom exploit Quixote's madness by playing practical jokes and sending him on fool's errands. All the while his friends and family try to entice him back to his home and away from his madness.
Quixote and Panza are the original comedy double act (stupid but thinks he is clever, and stupid but knows it, respectively), and the pair's exploits are genuinely funny. Much of the comedy is slapstick (them getting beaten black and blue) with a good dose of toilet humour thrown in. In addition there is some great dialogue, largely centring on Sancho's attempts at wisdom. This is not merely funny for a four hundred year old book, it is just plain funny. Sancho in particular is a brilliant creation, and the book becomes more about him than Quixote by the end. The first book describes their initial sorties, the second describes their travels after they had become famous (due to the publication of the first book). I like this blurring of fiction and reality, and 'DQ' is the earliest example that I have come across.
However, there are flaws in this book. Cervantes frequently uses the introduction of new characters to get side-tracked into unrelated narratives, which starts to get annoying because they add little or nothing to the book. Cervantes, to his credit, seems to have realised this because in the second book he chastises the fictional author if Quixote's history (called Cid Benengali Hamed) for these mistakes. In addition, the book is very long and it is sometimes hard to see what some of the episodes add to it. Cervantes style improves immeasurably in the second book, probably due to the criticisms of the first book that he himself outlines, so it is definitely worth persevering if you are struggling. By the end he even introduces a tragic element, which is beautifully told; well enough to leave a lump in the throat. Although it is largely comic, the novel definitely has some depth, largely due to the utter believability of its two main characters, who feel very familiar by the end. (In addition I would recommend the translation by Tobias Smollett, which is very accessible but retains the Olde Worlde feel of the setting very nicely). It is an excellent read, funny and vivid, and not at all intimidating despite its size and age. Go on, try it.

An island paradise, 19 Aug 2008
We all know about Robinson Crusoe, or at least we think we do. We know about the shipwreck and the years alone on the island and the footprint in the sand and "Man Friday".

Reading the book for the first time, after years of receiving it via the TV and the cinema, in heavily abridged or heavily revised versions, I was amazed to discover how much more there is to find.

The first joy is Defoe's prose, written with all the urgency and precision of a lifelong pamphleteer. Defoe never leaves any doubt as to what his character is trying to say or why he is trying to say it.
The second joy is the pacing. In the brief sections before and after his time on the island, Crusoe undergoes multiple shipwrecks, capture by pirates, escape from slavery, the life of a Brazilian plantation owner, the putting down of a mutiny and even an attack by wolves. Any one of these events could serve quite happily as the climax of another story. As it is, the only time the pace slows is during Crusoe's sojourn on the island and that is only appropriate to his condition.

The greatest joy of the book, though, is Crusoe himself. This is a very real character with very real failings. He is frequently arrogant, unthinking or even plain stupid but wins us over with the good grace with which he admits his faults. One minute he is praising the quality of his newly baked pots, the next laughing at himself for spending months on building a canoe too large and too far from shore for him ever to be able to drag it to the sea. All the while he struggles to give some meaning to his isolation, a meaning he chooses to find in his own vision of God (a God that, by remarkable coincidence, exactly mirrors Defoe's own, nonconformist vision of his Almighty). It's not an endeavour of which Richard Dawkins - or indeed I - would necessarily approve but it's certainly one appropriate to Crusoe's time and personality.

Robinson Crusoe has been analysed as a prototypical text of British imperialism, a moral text, a religious text and even a Marxist text. It has drawn the attention of Rousseau, Wilkie Collins, Coetzee and Joyce among thousands of others. Having read it, one suddenly sees why. The only thing it lacks is the wonderful theme music from the 1960s TV series.


Lengthy, but worth it, 25 Jun 2008
The original Robinson Crusoe story is said to have been told by an old sailor in a dark bar in Bristol, and said to be his own. Daniel Defoe heard closely and used it to inspire his novel. Modern authors (like French Le Clezio) made their versions a lot shorter, simpler, well, for kids. Defoe's work is of another dimension, much closer to reality.

Part Ray Mears Bush Craft, Part Religious Meditation, 14 Nov 2007
Acknowledged to be one of (if not the) first novel, the unexpurgated version of Robinson Crusoe is nothing like the childrens' book that most people grow up with. For starters, the vast majority of pages in the Penguin version are about the practicalities of living alone on a deserted island, including details accounts of catching, enclosing and raising goats, planting crops and strengthening his shelters. As other reviewers have said, this does become repetitive and it's not helped that Defoe interserpeses it with paragraphs wherein Robinson considers the nature of God and the road to salvation. Yes, Crusoe does become a more devout Christian as a result of staying on the island, but it's telling that this starts because of a terror that he's about to die and what will happen to him when he does.

The book begins with an account of Crusoe's upbringing, his determination to go to sea in the face of parental objection and a disastrous voyage that sees him sold into slavery. On his escape (helped by a fellow slave who Crusoe in turn sells into slavery!), he's rescued by a Portugese captain and taken to Brazil where he starts a plantation before his wanderlust takes hold again and he embarks on a voyage to buy slaves in Guinea, a voyage that ends in the shipwreck that leaves him stuck on an island for 28 years.

The casual attitude towards slavery may make modern readers uncomfortable. I was certainly shocked by the way Crusoe on several occassions wishes he had some slaves to work for him and his relationship with Friday is certainly one of benevolent white man bringing God to the savage.

The plot only really gets going in the final 80 pages when Defore introduces cannibals and deserters and has Crusoe engage in two daring rescues. Even now these sections are entertaining and the action really gathers speed as we follow Crusoe's deliverance back to civilisation and ending with a peculiar almost postscript of what happens when he decides to travel by land instead of sea and is attacked by ravenous wolves.

The novel is definitely worth a look, but will likely be unpalatable to some modern readers because of the extensive (and somewhat unconvincing) religious meditations.

Traditional and factual. Hard to complete comapared to modern novels, 24 Jun 2007
Robinson Crusoe is claimed to be one of the first novel's written in English (1719) and is a fictional autobiography of a man who is from a very average family in England at that time. The story moves from the main characters moving out of his family home and travelling the seas to his eventual shipwreck off the American coast.

I read this book over an extended period of time due to exams in School but also because they book is very laborious with a completely different style of writing to contemporary writers. At times it is written very factually that reminded me of a non-fiction book such as the treatment of certain animals and how to tame them.

For looking into how literature started and an abstract insight into general life in these times, the first part of the book, the story can be of relevance and provide enough stimulation to finish. Also as many reviewers have mentioned before the novel is also allegorical with the classic shipwrecked story on one level and the deep insight into humanity and how humans behave on the other. Despite some believing that this second level of thought provides more entertainment to the story and makes the book worth reading I personally did not find that stimulating.

However despite its downfalls I still believe Robinson Crusoe to be worth reading for its literature value (as in what the book did for literature, moving it along etc), but it also captures the practical issues with being stuck on a desert island very well. If looking for a page-turner I wouldn't advise this book but the storyline is still appealing.


Other links: Defoe went on to write a lesser known sequel: The further adventures of Robinson Crusoe.
Film: Castaway


Open your eyes., 14 Oct 2006
Just a quickie. Some of the above reviews remind us of how slow and boring this book can be and how repetitive. Well, guys, that's the point. How exciting do you suppose being stranded alone on an Island can be? What would you do to pass the time? Defoe takes us back to a time before T.V etc. Your day would be boring, although eventually menial tasks save ones sanity. Time does pass slowly as it looses relavance. It's not a classic for nothing.

About the bigness of a Bristol barrel, 18 Nov 2005
It has been suggested that only one reader in ten thousand can appreciate the full merit of Gulliver’s Travels as it is a satire on forgotten politics. Do not be misled, this is a timeless classic. The absolute relation to the past whether to politics or otherwise is not an essential premise for one’s amusement of this book. The novel operates on many levels and the reader can easily make a rudimentary guess (without but usually with the aid of notes) at the satire. Political history has a reoccurring theme and much of what Swift wrote three hundred years ago resoundingly rings true today. We can plainly identify repeating general patterns and specific examples of events from the last three hundred years which mirror exactly what Swift alluded to -we do of course have the advantage of retrospection to amplify or even reassign the meaning.

The literal reading and interpretation of little people, giants, a flying island and talking horses can be dazzling. No-kidding, great imagination, marvellous observation and juxtapositional brilliance. Highlights are the whole of Part II and references to the ‘Academy’ in Part III (definite ‘laugh out loud’ humour).

Swift makes arguments and counter arguments along with very credible undisputable criticisms of humankind without preaching in a work of genius. There are lessons for us all here, we can take delight in the book and take heart from the value of its reading.

A word about the edition., 25 Dec 2004
The literary worth of this text is beyond doubt. Rather than extol its merits - beyond the fact that Swift's prose is of unsurpasssed clarity and elegance - I will warn prospective buyers that, for serious, or even intelligent, reading, this edition is unsuitable. An understanding of its contextual allusions and references is necessary to appreciate the satire of Gulliver's Travels, but this edition is lacking in notes. Of course, it is ideal for children, but readers searching beyond the surface fable should look elsewhere. (Oxford University Press or Penguin Classics, I suggest.)

A brain-raking model in English literature, 06 Jan 2004
I am rather disappointed by the book that definitely is a classic. Lilliput is just another image of monarchy, but in no way different from what Swift knew. The criticism comes from the scale of the people who are extremely small. Brogdingnag does not change this approach, only the scale of the people who are extremely big, though in this case there is a direct criticism of the exploitation the « grotesque » Gulliver is the object of. Laputa, Balnibarbi and Luggnagg show a strange floating saucer in a kingdom dominated by unpractical scientists who try to do everything upside down. It is a satire of scientists in general who are so little concerned by the welfare of the community that they can ruin just for the sake of implementing their hypotheses. Glubbdubdrib is funnier because it enables Gulliver to meet all kinds of people from the past and this leads to remarks about philosophers or politicians or generals that show how small and little and even tiny they were. Japan only shows the extreme anti-christian policy that can be reached there and the extreme self-centeredness of the Dutch, which is probably a criticism of the crown in England. But the last voyage to the country of the Houyhnhnms is by far the best because here we reach both a severe criticism of the human race reduced to its animal instincts and behaviors, and a utopian society in which evil does not exist because it cannot even be conceived, because it is totally out of reach for these kind reasoning and reasonable horses. And yet Gulliver is expelled because he is a Yahoo, no matter what, and the natural reason of these dominant horses leads to rejection, after having found in Gulliver's explanations a solution to get rid of the Yahoo by sterilizing them into extinction, just the way men do with horses in European countries, just a little bit more systematically. This leads to the idea that genocide and ethnic cleansing is a natural attitude, an attitude that goes along with natural reason that says that the species standing in the way of reason have to be exterminated. But the book never reaches that level of thinking, since Swift could not know about such policies that will flourish in later centuries, and yet the Irish occupation sho