Scan barcode
liberrydude's review against another edition
1.0
Could only make it to page 55. A very slow pace. Lots of moving around in time. Intro in 1965, then 1899, then 1864, and back to 1899 and nothing has happened-relationships of people are confusing. Just some PTSD Civil War veteran living in squalor and isolation in the wilderness with his dog. Visual imagery is heavy, overdone. I was annoyed and disappointed with this book and didn't have the patience or desire to continue to find the "excitement" that the summaries and reviews proclaimed was in this story.
salparadis3's review against another edition
This type of language may be enjoyable to some but I found it obnoxious. Too much prose and not enough movement. I just couldn't get into it and gave up.
greenrain's review against another edition
2.0
I really wanted to like this book. The descriptions of the Northwest were wonderful, although a little labored. My problem came about halfway through when I realized that every time a new character was introduced, I'd think, "Okay, what's wrong with this one? When will the not so subtle hint of his/her psychological trauma be revealed?" The murders, rapes, beatings, racism, etc. were piled on so thickly that they lost their horror. They began to feel more like cheap tricks to give a character quick depth and gravitas. Horrible things happen all the time, but this felt cheap like CSI: Miami or something like that.
breezeduvall's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
amysbrittain's review against another edition
4.0
This took me a long time to get into, but I'm so glad I didn't give up on it. I'd give the first half 3 stars and the last half 4. I loved the merging of stories and the luminous writing about tragedy, evolution of character, and boundless love--a gorgeous story.
sharonus's review against another edition
3.0
This was a beautifully written book which was why I stuck with it for so long. While the story was interesting, I had a hard time keeping the characters and the timeline straight. The worst parts for me were the graphic descriptions of violence. A large section of this book concerns the Civil War, and while I understand war is ugly, I had a hard time stomaching descriptions of things like bone saws and a man carrying his spilled intestines around in a bowler hat. There was also discussion of a very violent sexual assualt which will surely be a trigger for some.
peabodyjen's review against another edition
5.0
Man. I just finished this book and if I didn't have to rush off to work I would probably just sit here in stunned silence for a bit, reflecting on what I just read. This book is many things: beautiful, heart-wrenching, haunting, hopeful, and full of redemption. It's a story of loneliness, friendship, pain, and hope, and it will stay with me a long time. Rarely does a book make me cry, and this one did...tears of sadness, admiration, joy, and amazement at the human spirit and the special bond that exists between a man and his dog.
Well done, Lance Weller. Well done.
Well done, Lance Weller. Well done.
richardwells's review against another edition
4.0
This is an extravagant, thoughtful, graphic, and hugely entertaining book. The author describes it as a "literary" novel. Oh, lord, yet another genre - fiction is getting to be as bad a music - and I take it "literary" means language rich, as in prosody, or poetic, or musical, or "ruling itself alone." (My coinage.) Well, Wilderness is all those things, and as Lance Weller is suffering (and maybe reveling in) comparisons with Cormac McCarthy, and Wm. Faulkner, I suppose the book is "literary." Or as Cormac might say, "literary enough, until the real thing comes along." I'm being snarky to no good purpose, as I really liked this book - four stars in a five star system that I hate. And - I'd give it five stars but for one flaw, which I'll get to in a second.
In taking on the US Civil War, Mr. Weller has entered a field where giants walk, and I'd place those giants all the way back to Homer, that great cartographer of carnage, and emotional voyage, up to Michael Shaara's incredible "The Killer Angels," and Charles Frazier, whose Cold Mountain is near the top of the heap. But where I really get Wilderness is in how it elaborates on the idea that the Civil War is our very own Iliad, and his protagonist's journey enters the Odyssey's orbit.
Wilderness takes place at the battle of the Wilderness, a particularly ugly clash of men and material that was part of Grant's strategy of a war of attrition. Grant, that whiskey soaked son-of-a-bitch, seemed to have no compunctions about throwing as many bodies into the maw as could be devoured in the belief (true as it turns out) that the enemy would be devoured faster. It was total war, hand to hand, and resulted in piles of dead soldiers: 17,500 Union casualties, 7,000 Confederate in three days time, but considered a strategic victory because in percentages of the total the Reb's suffered the worst, and Grant pressed on. Abel Truman, our protagonist, was in the midst of it, and what he saw and felt marked him for life. Mr. Weller details the events through friendships taken by death, atrocities of shock and shell, and one short section that reads like the chronicle of deaths that Homer was so good at. Mr. Weller puts us squarely in the dream, and I was taken so far out of myself in the reading that, like all really good reads, time and space were suspended. The writing really is masterful.
Wilderness also takes place in the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest, and we move from the Iliad to an Odyssey as Abel, pretty much a beach-combing recluse goes on the hunt for a dog that was stolen from him by two really, really bad guys, and the adventures, and relationships that ensue.
So far, so good. Wilderness is a hell of a story, even with the 30 year gap between the battle and the dog. Abel is touching and deep, and a character I loved spending time with. Any dog lover is a friend of mine, anyway, and Abel has such a real relationship with Dog that it felt like me and my good dog Sam.
What's really important about all the above is that Wilderness is an empathetic read, and as a reader I was pulled so deeply into the dream I didn't want out.
Here's where things go wrong, and the book looses a star: Mr Weller's good men and women are, for the most part, rounded, which is to say we're witness to their flaws as well as their goodness, but his bad guys are nothing but bad. In fact, the bad guys are as bad as any from the McCarthy canon - monsters without humanity. That makes for entertainment, but not illumination, but , for the sake of entertainment, I'm able to let that go; what I'm not able to let go of is his treatment of slaves. Every slave is a saint. In the midst of battle, in relationship with women, on the road, homesteaders - saints, everyone, all, without exception.
Damn!
Here is a book so good I'd boost it up to classic, and this one thing that knocks it back a star. I'm not so vain as to think my opinion means much of anything to anyone but myself, but there you have it.
Last thing: the prologue didn't set me up all that well for the story, and the story got so deep I had to re-read the prologue in order to figure out why it was there. It might have served better as an epilogue - or been left out all together.
And, this is what a review sounds like after having rapidly downed two cups of Seattle strong coffee.
In taking on the US Civil War, Mr. Weller has entered a field where giants walk, and I'd place those giants all the way back to Homer, that great cartographer of carnage, and emotional voyage, up to Michael Shaara's incredible "The Killer Angels," and Charles Frazier, whose Cold Mountain is near the top of the heap. But where I really get Wilderness is in how it elaborates on the idea that the Civil War is our very own Iliad, and his protagonist's journey enters the Odyssey's orbit.
Wilderness takes place at the battle of the Wilderness, a particularly ugly clash of men and material that was part of Grant's strategy of a war of attrition. Grant, that whiskey soaked son-of-a-bitch, seemed to have no compunctions about throwing as many bodies into the maw as could be devoured in the belief (true as it turns out) that the enemy would be devoured faster. It was total war, hand to hand, and resulted in piles of dead soldiers: 17,500 Union casualties, 7,000 Confederate in three days time, but considered a strategic victory because in percentages of the total the Reb's suffered the worst, and Grant pressed on. Abel Truman, our protagonist, was in the midst of it, and what he saw and felt marked him for life. Mr. Weller details the events through friendships taken by death, atrocities of shock and shell, and one short section that reads like the chronicle of deaths that Homer was so good at. Mr. Weller puts us squarely in the dream, and I was taken so far out of myself in the reading that, like all really good reads, time and space were suspended. The writing really is masterful.
Wilderness also takes place in the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest, and we move from the Iliad to an Odyssey as Abel, pretty much a beach-combing recluse goes on the hunt for a dog that was stolen from him by two really, really bad guys, and the adventures, and relationships that ensue.
So far, so good. Wilderness is a hell of a story, even with the 30 year gap between the battle and the dog. Abel is touching and deep, and a character I loved spending time with. Any dog lover is a friend of mine, anyway, and Abel has such a real relationship with Dog that it felt like me and my good dog Sam.
What's really important about all the above is that Wilderness is an empathetic read, and as a reader I was pulled so deeply into the dream I didn't want out.
Here's where things go wrong, and the book looses a star: Mr Weller's good men and women are, for the most part, rounded, which is to say we're witness to their flaws as well as their goodness, but his bad guys are nothing but bad. In fact, the bad guys are as bad as any from the McCarthy canon - monsters without humanity. That makes for entertainment, but not illumination, but , for the sake of entertainment, I'm able to let that go; what I'm not able to let go of is his treatment of slaves. Every slave is a saint. In the midst of battle, in relationship with women, on the road, homesteaders - saints, everyone, all, without exception.
Damn!
Here is a book so good I'd boost it up to classic, and this one thing that knocks it back a star. I'm not so vain as to think my opinion means much of anything to anyone but myself, but there you have it.
Last thing: the prologue didn't set me up all that well for the story, and the story got so deep I had to re-read the prologue in order to figure out why it was there. It might have served better as an epilogue - or been left out all together.
And, this is what a review sounds like after having rapidly downed two cups of Seattle strong coffee.
mimima's review against another edition
3.0
A gift from a dear friend, and Goddaughter, who knows the author. This debut novel is absolutely, gorgeously, luminously written even though the story is tough and brutal. The story was a less important part than the writing, although the strands of the story that I wasn't sure fit together, ended up woven nicely at the end.
jdscott50's review against another edition
3.0
Lance Weller's novel has all the elements of a good story. Lyrical prose and duality of the Wilderness. On one hand, it represents death and destruction and on the other healing. If he worked more on those elements I would have liked the story better. The sub-characters and sub-plots take away from the story and serve as a generic role for the changing of Abel (even the name itself makes too obvious a point).
Abel is an ex-soldier who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War. Wounded in the Wilderness campaign he is healed from his wounds by ex-slaves that result in a change. It seems like there should be more probing into the character or the environment. I felt the strength of the story was Abel's connection to his dog. Abel is a hard man, made stone by the death of his family and the violence of war. One of the more powerful scenes for me was when he was carrying a wounded dog away from harm and tells only the dog, "I get so tired. I get so damned tired." As if in his harsh environment and as hard as he is, the dog is the only one he can confess and reveal his true self. The rest of the story seems hollow in comparison.
Abel is an ex-soldier who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War. Wounded in the Wilderness campaign he is healed from his wounds by ex-slaves that result in a change. It seems like there should be more probing into the character or the environment. I felt the strength of the story was Abel's connection to his dog. Abel is a hard man, made stone by the death of his family and the violence of war. One of the more powerful scenes for me was when he was carrying a wounded dog away from harm and tells only the dog, "I get so tired. I get so damned tired." As if in his harsh environment and as hard as he is, the dog is the only one he can confess and reveal his true self. The rest of the story seems hollow in comparison.