La Petite Américaine's Reviews > The Book Thief

The Book Thief by Markus Zusak
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
59329
's review

did not like it
bookshelves: worst-garbage-i-ve-ever-read, sucked, i-want-my-money-back, rants

** spoiler alert ** UPDATE: AUG 26, 2016: This review has been here 8 years, has 18 pages of 854 comments and 764 likes. There's no outrage for you to add in the comments section that hasn't already been addressed.
If you want to talk about the book, or why you liked it, or anything else, feel free.

UPDATE: FEB 17, 2014: I wrote this review 4 years ago on a foreign keyboad, so I'm well aware that I spelled Chekhov's name wrong. I'm not going to fix it, so please don't drive my review further up in the rankings by commenting on the misspelling. You're very dear, but I know his name is Anton and not Antonin. On that same note, you don't need to add comments telling me that I didn't like the book because I "don't know how to read" and "don't understand metaphors." I actually have an M.A. in in English Lit, so I do know how to read -- much better than you do, in fact. Now quit bothering me before I go get my PhD and then really turn into a credential-touting ass.

UPDATE: JULY 10, 2013: To all jr. high students who find themselves grossly offended by my review: please remember that every time you leave a comment here, you push my review up even higher in the rankings. Please save us both time and energy by not commenting. Thnx.

This was the biggest piece of garbage I've ever read after The Kite Runner. Just as with The Kite Runner, I'm (somewhat) shocked that this book is a bestseller and has been given awards, chewed up and swallowed by the literary masses and regarded as greatness. Riiiight.

The whole thing can be summed up as the story of a girl who sometimes steals books coming of age during the Holocaust. Throw in the snarky narration by Death (nifty trick except that it doesn't work), a few half-assed drawings of birdies and swastikas, senseless and often laughable prose that sounds like it was pulled from the "poetry" journal of a self-important 15 year-old, and a cast of characters that throughout are like watching cardboard cutouts walking around VERY SLOWLY, and that's the novel.

Here are some humble observations.

First, chances are that you, Mr. Zusak, are not Antonin Chekhov. You are, therefore, incapable of properly describing the weather for use as a literary device, and you end up sounding like an asshole. Don't believe me?

"I like a chocolate-colored sky. Dark, dark chocolate." Really? Do you, now?

"The sky was dripping. Like a tap that a child has tried it’s hardest to turn off but hasn’t quite managed.” Really?? Wow. Next you'll tell me that the rain was like a shower. I'm moved.

"Oh, how the clouds stumbled in and assembled stupidly in the sky. Great obese clouds." Yes. Stupid, obese clouds! They need an education and a healthy diet!

Next, chances are that you, Mr. Zusak, are not William Styron or any one of the other small handful of authors that can get away with Holocaust fiction. They've done their research, had some inkling of writing ability, and were able to tell fascinating stories. You invented a fake town in Germany (probably so you didn't have to do any research) and told a long-winded and poorly-written story, and in 500+ pages you couldn't even make it to 1945, so you sloppily dropped off and wrapped it up in 1943. What's the point of writing historical fiction if you can't even stay within the basic confines of that hisotrical event? For me, this does nothing more than trivialize the mass murder of over 6 million people. Maybe that's why a 30 year-old Australian shouldn't write about the Holocaust. But that's just me. Moving on.

But what really makes this book expensive toilet paper is the bad writing which is to be found not just in bizarre descriptions of the weather, but really on every page. Some personal favorites?

"The breakfast colored sun."

"Somewhere inside her were the souls of words."

"The oldened young man." WTF?!!?

"He crawled to a disfigured figure."

"Her words were motionless."

"It smelled like friendship." (Remind me to sniff my friends next time I see them.)

"A multitude of words and sentences were at her fingertips." (HUH?)

"Pinecones littered the ground like cookies."

Sigh.

All of this is quite funny coming from a book where the main character supposedly learns the importance of words. Further, I love that the protagonist comes to the conclusion that Hitler "would be nothing without words." Really? REALLY? Would Hitler be nothing without WORDS? What about self-loathing, misplaced blame and hatred, an ideology, xenophobia, charisma, an army, and a pride-injured nation willing to listen? Don't those count for something??

The shit-storm comes to an end when a bomb lands on our fictional town, wiping out everyone save for the sometimes book-thief main character. Of course. Because weak writers who don't know how to end their story just kill everyone off for a clean break and some nice emotional manipulation. Written for maximum tear-jerking effect, our main character spews out some great lines when she sees the death and destruction around her:

To her dead mother, "God damn it, you were so beautiful."

To her dead best friend as she shakes him, "Wake up! I love you! Wake up!" (Didn't I see the same thing in that movie My Girl?)

Then she profoundly notes that her dead father "...was a man with silver eyes, not dead ones."

And this kind of angsty adolescent prose just never ended! It went on and on to form the one long-ass, senseless, disjointed story.

But that's ok. Take it all the junk, give it a quirky narrator, an obscure and mysterious title, throw in a Jew on the run from Nazis who likes to draw silly pictures of birds and swastikas, and market it all as Holocaust lit. Ahh, the packaging of bullshit makes for such a sweet best seller.

Swallow it down, America. Put it on the shelf next to The Kite Runner. You love this. You live for this.

SUCKED.
1711 likes · flag

Sign into 카지노싸이트 to see if any of your friends have read The Book Thief.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

July 24, 2008 – Shelved
May 11, 2010 – Started Reading
May 12, 2010 – Shelved as: worst-garbage-i-ve-ever-read
May 12, 2010 – Shelved as: sucked
May 12, 2010 – Shelved as: i-want-my-money-back
May 12, 2010 – Finished Reading
March 21, 2012 – Shelved as: rants

Comments Showing 201-250 of 1,263 (1263 new)


Anthony Marchetta Though we disagree I'll defend La Petite Américaine here. If you find yourself having to "cope" with a book's writing style then you have a problem; you're supposed to enjoy the writing style, not just deal with it.

I don't think La Petite Américaine specifically kept a list of references so she could mark what she didn't like. My guess, though I'll let her speak, is that she probably tried to like the novel but didn't, and then wrote a review explaining why she didn't like it.

This isn't me, but I've talked to people who finish every book they start just because they want to finish what they started. Or maybe she realized she didn't like it and decided to finish it so she could write a full, instead of partial, review. Who knows? It's her prerogative.


message 202: by Thomas (new) - rated it 3 stars

Thomas Harris Yes this author`s similes were dreadful. I know every writer can't come up with Wodehousian similes but COME ON!


La Petite Américaine "You obviously don't know how to read" has got to be my favorite response so far. Bwaahahahah thank you, dear Steph, for affirming every point I made about this book being written for morons (and / or junior high kids).

I didn't like the book because I thought the writing was crap. Or is that somehow not clear in my review?


message 204: by La Petite Américaine (last edited Sep 13, 2013 12:24PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

La Petite Américaine Steph wrote: " it was not written for the purpose so that you could have a little line up of references in your head and tick them off as"

Oh, you see, now this is precious. Because this is precisely how academics, literature lovers, English majors, PhDs, and literary critics read. We don't read to "lose ourselves" in a text -- we read to think, to discuss, and to "line up" merits and flaws in a novel.

"The whole PURPOSE of a novel is to lose yourself in the story."

Yes, surely, this is the purpose if you're young, incapable of critical thinking and are reading the book for some sort of diversion. Glad you're doing it with novels and not video games, in any case.

"Every novel has its pitfalls, because the character's LIFE has them."

No, dear. Novels have pitfalls because the author is inept.

"Or more importantly, why did you FINISH it?"

Well, that's easy. Because I pad ten bucks for it. When it's my own money, I like to finish what I start. When you get your first job, you'll understand what I mean.


La Petite Américaine Ok, 카지노싸이트, that's it. ARE YOU READING?? I think based on the number of subscribers I've landed you just by pissing people off enough to sign up and comment on my reviews, you totally owe me a job as in-house reviewer extraordinaire.

Just tell me where to sign. :-D


message 206: by Kristy (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kristy Miller I was caught by your disgust of the idea that Hitler was nothing without words. I think you're wrong, and here's why: Hitler never killed anyone himself. It was through his words, his expression and passion for his hate, that he inspired others to kill millions. Words were Hitler's greatest weapon.


La Petite Américaine Kristy wrote: "I was caught by your disgust of the idea that Hitler was nothing without words. I think you're wrong, and here's why: Hitler never killed anyone himself. It was through his words, his expression ..."
I don't disagree that his words were important. I do disagree that he'd be nothing without his words. I also said, "What about self-loathing, misplaced blame and hatred, an ideology, xenophobia, charisma, an army, and a pride-injured nation willing to listen. Don't those count for something?"

To say it's words alone that made up Hitler's movement = gross oversimplification.


message 208: by Kristy (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kristy Miller Lots of people have those other things, but if they can't express it no one cares. He would have just been another angry German without his words. To discount the power of words is to underestimate those whose use of them spreads hate.


message 209: by La Petite Américaine (last edited Sep 13, 2013 12:16PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

La Petite Américaine I call bullshit.

Lots of people have words, but they lack the charisma for effective delivery. Some people also have words and a great stage presence, but they're such goddamn lunatics that no one is going to listen (e.g., Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, you-fill-in-the-blank).

You need a combination of words, an ideology, charisma, energy, and a national culture (along with the that nation's army) in a mental state that's willing to listen and receive your words.

Think about George W. Bush. He sounds like a goddamn crazy man when we look back on his presidency and the things he said and did, but he was able to get away with everything by playing up his show before an audience of largely fearful and vulnerable Americans.

It's not just words. Believe me, if it was just words, a hell of a lot of great writers would be published right now who aren't.


message 210: by La Petite Américaine (last edited Sep 13, 2013 12:27PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

La Petite Américaine This is precisely why I can't stand fiction any more, especially not Holocaust fiction.

The best way to learn *anything* about the Holocaust is to watch documentaries about the time, study the period through a historical text, and read memoirs and biographies about those who lived through it. Oh, and if you're in D.C., go to the Holocaust Museum and ask them if there was anything else backing Hitler besides his words.

Writing a novel that tells readers that the Holocaust happened because Hitler was a wordsmith (and he wasn't, by the way -- he had speechwriters) does a disservice to history and the murders of over 6 million people. The fact that Zusak did literally nothing to ensure that his novel was even somewhat historically accurate makes this book all the more useless.

"Hitler was nothing without his words" is akin to saying "This book was good because it made me cry."

Ugh. No sale.


Anthony Marchetta To say it's words alone that made up Hitler's movement = gross oversimplification.

That wasn't what Zusak said though. Look at it this way:

I am running for President, to go to examples you seem to like. I have charisma, I have intelligence, and I'm well-spoken. But without money, it doesn't matter - I will NOT become President. Period.

That doesn't mean that money is the only thing that puts me in the running for President. I'm still not going to win if I don't have SOME other draw going for me. And there are a few types of draws that can get me at least in discussion for the Presidency...charm (likeability), intelligence, and, yes, speaking ability. But without money, I can have all the Presidential qualities in the world - it's not happening.

Hitler was a great speaker, one of the best of all time really, and I think that's part of what Zusak meant by the power of words (whether he wrote his speeches or not doesn't mean he didn't know how to orate, of course). Hitler knew what to say, or his speechwriters did; either way, he could have been charismatic, he could have been xenophobic or any of those things, but if he didn't know what to say or how to say it he would have been just another crank, lost to history as a footnote.


La Petite Américaine But what do you mean that's not what the author said? It's a direct quote, and it's repeated several times throughout the book.

The argument you present in your comment is exactly the same as what I'm saying -- one thing alone doesn't cut it, it's a combination of thins. And that is decidedly opposite of what Zusak says, and contrary to the entire premise of his novel.


Anthony Marchetta No, he didn't. He said "Hitler would be nothing without words", just like "A Presidential candidate would be nothing without money".

That's world's away from "Words alone made up Hitler's movement", which he didn't say.


La Petite Américaine Okay, then separate my words from the author's and you should still know that my opinion does not change, nor does it change Zusak's main point.

To say that words were the sole means of power that Hitler had (and that without words he'd be powerless) is goddamned lunacy.


Anthony Marchetta Oh, I know your opinion won't change, but what are opinions for if not to be challenged? Discussions about books are fun (when the two people talking don't hate each other. Then it's just aggravating.)

To say that words were the sole means of power that Hitler had...

That's still not what he said, though. If Hitler wasn't a good speaker, if he wasn't good at manipulating people through words, it doesn't matter how xenophobic he was or how charismatic. He had to know how to give the people what they wanted to hear, in a way they wanted to hear it. Just like, to use my analogy again, if a President doesn't have money every other quality doesn't matter.

I think a source of disagreement here is that you are taking the word "nothing" very literally. I take it a little bit more figuratively. Okay, Hitler wouldn't technically be "nothing" without words, but he would be a history book footnote if he wasn't so brilliant at manipulating people by giving them what they wanted to hear the way they wanted to hear it - words.

So yeah, Hitler had other things besides words going for him. I just don't think that contradicts Zusak's point.


La Petite Américaine I can't argue this further at the moment because I am driving and dictating this message. But I will save for the time being, that I feel like you guys are inferring and coming to your own conclusions by putting words into the authors mouth. The direct quote says Hitler would be nothing without words. You guys are inferring a lot based on a very clear sentence, And the one that should be taken literally because it is so clear.


La Petite Américaine Anyway you can't just invent an author's Meaning or intent outside of the text. If you think that the author means something, support the claims with pieces from within the text. Guesswork is meaningless.

I thought the writing sucked, and I gave examples from the text :-)


Anthony Marchetta I don't think I'm inferring all that much, though. I mean, it's a fairly common phrase. "I am nothing without my beloved wife". Okay, I'm actually bones, skin, various organs, blood...but it's pretty clear what I mean. All of that would MEAN nothing to me without my wife.

Like with Zusak's point - all of that other stuff would MEAN nothing without Hitler's words.

I mean, yes, you could say it would also mean nothing without his xenophobia. Fine, but the focus of the book was words.


La Petite Américaine But given your example, don't you see how it's a gross oversimplification? It is sloppy writing.

Anyway, time to focus on highway driving


message 220: by Kristy (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kristy Miller I've returned ny copy to the library, so I don'thave the text to quote examples. Regarding your comment that we should take the author's words literally, if Rosa said to Liesel " Do this or I swear I'll kill you!" we should believe that she is planning a murder. Inference is partof reading! I would argue that authors rely on readers to infer meaning.


La Petite Américaine K, once again:

I'm not reading anything too literally. The entire premise of this book is the importance of words--it's a central theme to the novel. I called bullshit on the importance of words in the way the novel said they're important, using a quote and arguing my point.

Inferring meaning without having the text to support your claims is fine--but it's not analysis, it's guesswork, conjecture, and the kind of stuff worthy of a book club.


message 222: by sh (new)

sh I don't read novels but I completely laughed at the phrases you pointed out, because I have read similarly ridiculous stuff, particular from a book by Elizabeth Pisani (she's really full of herself, and by far the ONLY book I found annoying in terms of writing style, poor choice of expression and words etc - not facts - facts are facts she did well in that but anyway...). Some authors ought to write nicely... oh well. skipping this book not because of this review, but mostly because it's a novel. personal reasons - don't like them novels.


message 223: by Elizabeth (new)

Elizabeth You're review is too boring to read. Try being more succinct. You rant too much.


message 224: by [deleted user] (new)

All that this review told me is that I should steer clear of Charlotte Bronte


La Petite Américaine I don't follow


message 226: by Elena (new) - added it

Elena I was hesitant to pick this one up despite most of my friends loving it. I'm very touchy about holocaust and WW2 fiction and I hate it when authors mess with historical facts and/or write about stuff they know nothing about. So yeah, thanks for saving me from horrible suffering and clearing this up for me. Moving this to my 'never going to read' shelf.


La Petite Américaine Saved another one.


message 228: by Kiana (new) - rated it 4 stars

Kiana I am reading the book rite now and I lovvvveee it so far!!! I don't agree that you should insult the writer that is your thoughts not every one else's and I don't think that every one would like a book but that is not the writers fault. If you have so much to say and you think he could have done a better job maybe you should write a book and see what happens!


message 229: by Harvey (new) - added it

Harvey Karten Anton, not Antonin


La Petite Américaine Typos happen, especially on foreign keyboards.


message 231: by sh (new)

sh There are reviews you can, cannot, should, should not - count on to determine whether to read or not to read. This is one I'm counting on not to. Thanks for sparing me the agony of wasting my time.


message 232: by Kelly (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kelly Ignorance at it's best is what this review is.


message 233: by Vicki (new) - rated it 5 stars

Vicki wow


message 234: by Jared (new)

Jared Shemper thats pathetic


message 235: by Julia (new) - rated it 4 stars

Julia I personally enjoyed this book, but I have to agree some of the descriptions were not so great. Especially the one's you pointed out.

I also couldn't stand how often they used the word "silver" for Hans' eyes, and "lemon" or "yellow" for the color of Rudy's hair.

Otherwise, though, I thought it was pretty good. Hard to believe in some parts, but in other aspects very good.

But everyone has a different opinion :).


message 236: by Danielle. (new) - added it

Danielle. Bless this damn review.


message 237: by Jaz (new)

Jaz This book came up in my recommendations, because I want to read The Boy In Striped Pajamas.
I did a little research and it sounded like one heck of a read and "something different", for me. After reading this review and a handful of comments after, I am not sure I will bother, now.
I have never heard of Zusack. To me, he's a new author. I love historical fiction, and I am in the process of branching out to Holocaust fiction. Is this really so terrible? I have downloaded a sample for my kindle. I think it has three chapters. I hope all it's terribleness shows up in this chapters. I don't want to pay for it, feel like I like it, and then hate it.


message 238: by Jaz (new)

Jaz This book came up in my recommendations, because I want to read The Boy In Striped Pajamas.
I did a little research and it sounded like one heck of a read and "something different", for me. After reading this review and a handful of comments after, I am not sure I will bother, now.
I have never heard of Zusack. To me, he's a new author. I love historical fiction, and I am in the process of branching out to Holocaust fiction. Is this really so terrible? I have downloaded a sample for my kindle. I think it has three chapters. I hope all it's terribleness shows up in this chapters. I don't want to pay for it, feel like I like it, and then hate it.


message 239: by Ric (new) - added it

Ric Roy chowdhury This book is not for people who like Vampire Academy and Twilight. So, please don't read it if you have read the books I mentioned above. Dear La Petite Américaine, I bet you had an orgasm after reading VA and Twilight brought a barage of tears to your eyes.


message 240: by Raven (new) - rated it 4 stars

Raven Valentino This review is written by nothing more than a self-loving ego maniac, i was wonderring if you have ever written and published a book thats in the best seller and waiting to be released in cinema's?- the review pointed out yes if i must say so some bad parts, but let me tell you it had a lot more good parts in it aswell, to all the people who wanted to read it, dont be put off by this review go read it and have your own opinion on it.


message 241: by David (new)

David Yeah I was planning to read this but nvm!!!


message 242: by Chloe (new) - added it

Chloe .......This is one of my favorite books this year oddly enough for the same reasons you all hated it. I loved the character Death and thought that it was the coolest narration ever. Max's books that he wrote wore so deep and meaningful to me. Oh and as for the whole "Hitler would be nothing without his words" he techincally did convince a whole country to blame a group of people. How did he convince them? WITH WORDS

As much as I loved The Book Thief this review was freaking hilarious none theles!


message 243: by Anna (new) - rated it 4 stars

Anna obviously someone doesn't know how to appreciate great books.


message 244: by Darcy (new)

Darcy I haven't read this book and have no intention of reading it but I love this review!


message 245: by La Petite Américaine (last edited Nov 10, 2013 09:22PM) (new) - rated it 1 star

La Petite Américaine Raven wrote: "This review is written by nothing more than a self-loving ego maniac, i was wonderring if you have ever written and published a book thats in the best seller and waiting to be released in cinema's?..."

@Raven: Can you fix your grammar / spelling / punctuation before commenting again? I really can't communicate with people who can't write proper English -- it's just too annoying.

In fact, I may have to delete your comment altogether...the butchered English is irritating me.


message 246: by Fleur (new) - rated it 5 stars

Fleur haha, I loved the book but I also love how you hate it.


message 247: by A (last edited Nov 16, 2013 07:42AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

A Looks like you hate this book as much as I hate The Fault in our stars by John Green. Anyways, I disagree with this review but I would love to hear your thoughts on The fault in our stars.


Anthony Marchetta "The Fault in our Stars", I will admit, does actually sound REALLY bad. Just a lot of navel-gazing on life while teenagers have conversations where they say things no human utters in normal conversation. And one of them dies, because sad.


La Petite Américaine Never read Fault in the Stars....


Anthony Marchetta It's extremely popular. I know teenagers absolutely love it, especially teenage girls. John Green has a bit of a cult following. I've actually seen him compared to Zusak (which tells me that you in particular wouldn't like it, actually).

Still, it's well reviewed and incredibly popular. One thing I never bought though, and still don't buy, is that kids with cancer suddenly become magically wise. Yeah, right. They become terrified and confused and depressed and angry. They don't magically gain great insight and the ability to give long monologues about the meaning of life.

I don't know. It sounds like exactly the kind of book that would make me roll my eyes in disgust. And I'm perfectly willing to try reading John Green.


back to top