Summaries and Customer Reviews are supplied by Amazon.com

Average Customer Rating:

PD James is a gifted writer	Customer Rating:
Well written story and well told. But print too small. A depressing story.

Perspective in Children of Men

Customer Rating:

P. D. James' novel, Children of Men is quite different from the film in that the action is, particularly in the first section (Omega), very internal and driven from the point of view of Theo, the protagonist. The chapters alternate from first person to third person. The reader is thus more or less experiencing the action from Theo's perspective. In the novel, the narrative is very internal. In the film, although the viewer shares Theo's perspective in a number of ways, the narrative is more external. I recommend reading the novel and viewing the film, as different experiences. The film is an action film but the novel, although less so, is very taut. James is a strong stylist and the book is a good read.

The Children of Men Doesn't Bear Out Its Great Idea

Customer Rating:

From ISawLightningFall.blogspot.com TWO-AND-A-HALF STARS P.D. James' The Children of Men is built around a single question: What would happen if women couldn't conceive? That's exactly what's on the minds of everyone on earth in the year 2021, not least of Theodore Faron, historian and only surviving relative to the despotic Warden of England, Xan Lyppiatt. Sterility has held sway over the human race for 25 years, and outlying towns are falling into disrepair as the population shrinks. Bizarre cults and mass suicides are the order of the day. The youngest generation, dubbed Omegas, roams the countryside, delighting itself with vandalism and murder. Even the sleepy academic circles in which Theo moves are being shaken. One day he is approached by a woman named Julian who wants him to use his influence with the Warden to secure much-needed humanitarian reforms. But Theo learns there's more to Julian than political ambitions -- she's pregnant. The setup is wonderful, a great idea. Unfortunately, "built around" is an accurate way of describing the story that accompanies it. Children was James' first and only detour into SF, and the inexperience shows. She alternates between exposition and action by erratically switching between first- and third-person perspectives. And "action" isn't really an appropriate descriptor, since nothing much happens in the first half of the novel. Readers must content themselves with long passages about crumbling infrastructure, political maneuvering and new social trends (dolls and kittens become inadequate substitutes for babies). Liberal trimming would have helped the pace, but the characters are another matter. To wit, they're a selfish and vapid bunch, quick with a sharp retort and slow to finish up mopey musings on religion and relationships, suicide and sex. (Indeed, I found it surprising that such subjects could be boring.) It's not that they're merely unlikable. They're uninteresting, so that you've stopped caring by the time the novel finally snaps into genre mode near the end. And yet, there are moments that make you want to forgive Children's sins. There are meditative passages on the decline of science following the quiet disaster and the inverse relationship between pornography and lovemaking, poignant bits about laying down wine that will never be drunk and a cancer-stricken father whose tin-can-sliced index finger becomes symbolic of his terminal disease. You can see the great idea inside all the wordiness and meandering motivations and ceaseless talk of swilling claret before blowing one's brains out. It's a shame that Children didn't have the strength to bring it forth.

different than movie in plot and themes

Customer Rating:

First of all - what a great premise for a story. I think that's what I actually enjoyed most by reading this book - is the description of the dystopia brought on by the infertility of humanity. How do people change knowing that there is no future for the human race? The world that James describes is not too much different than our own. Religion is exemplified by Rosie who's tenants are "corporate social responsibility and sentimental humanism" (All you need is Love) instead of theologies of sin and redemption. The Archbishop of the fragmented Church of England is a self-described Christian Rationalist who forbids infant baptism due to it being a superstition. Descriptions of other social aspects are also described such as the importance of pets, sex becoming "least important of man's sensory pleasures", and government led euthanizations called Quietus'. The ending of the book is quite a bit different than the movie - in fact much better (though I didn't overly enjoy the entire plot of the book - hence the four stars). Whereas in the movie, Science is seen as the savior of mankind, religion plays a larger role in the book. Also, in the movie suicide is shown in a positive light but the same cannot be said of the book. Overall a good book that I will likely pick up to read again in the future.

elegant retro entertainment

Customer Rating:

There is a certain theory of fiction about these days. It maintains that readers want conflict and action and anytime that's not spent setting up, describing, or analyzing the effects of action is wasted. By that theory, this is an awful book: broody and moody with a narrator who's interesting but not likable. On the other hand, there are pages in this book that you will reread just for the pleasure of the words. There is also one of the most quietly horrible chapters (chapter 9) about a ritual called the Quietus. Lynn Hoffman, author of bang BANG