Sign in with Facebook
Jon's Reviews > The Casual Vacancy
The Casual Vacancy
by
by
Find more of my controversial reviews at Scott Reads It
After rereading my review of The Casual Vacancy I realized it sounded sloppy and very unprofessional. I decided to edit my entire review and start from scratch.
I had such high expectations for The Casual Vacancy and I was extremely letdown. I'll admit that the only reason that I read this book is because I adore J.K. Rowling and her Harry Potter series. I was so excited to read a new J.K. Rowling book that I didn't care that The Casual Vacancy was nothing like her Harry Potter series. (That's not to say that I secretly wished that The Casual Vacancy was some sort of spin off or sequel to Harry Potter.)
Though J.K. Rowling's writing style is evident in The Casual Vacancy, nevertheless reading The Casual Vacancy felt like a form of torture. I lacked any emotional attachment or connection with the characters in The Casual Vacancy. The only emotions towards the characters in this book were repulsion and extreme distaste. The political structure of this book was portrayed in a manner that was unappealing and tedious.
I felt like The Casual Vacancy unnecessarily dirty and vulgar. I believe that J.K. Rowling was trying to differentiate from her children's books by adding rape, pedophilia, sex scenes, and adult content. How many times can you drop the f-bomb before it becomes irritating?
It is truly alarming how 5 star reviews I have seen that were written by people who have never even read The Casual Vacancy. It truly defeats the purpose of Goodreads to review and rate a book you have never even read.
I wish I had a better experience reading The Casual Vacancy. The Casual Vacancy was very dull and I struggled to read a few chapters. One day I hope I will attempt to finish The Casual Vacancy but for now I'm marking it as DNF.
After rereading my review of The Casual Vacancy I realized it sounded sloppy and very unprofessional. I decided to edit my entire review and start from scratch.
I had such high expectations for The Casual Vacancy and I was extremely letdown. I'll admit that the only reason that I read this book is because I adore J.K. Rowling and her Harry Potter series. I was so excited to read a new J.K. Rowling book that I didn't care that The Casual Vacancy was nothing like her Harry Potter series. (That's not to say that I secretly wished that The Casual Vacancy was some sort of spin off or sequel to Harry Potter.)
Though J.K. Rowling's writing style is evident in The Casual Vacancy, nevertheless reading The Casual Vacancy felt like a form of torture. I lacked any emotional attachment or connection with the characters in The Casual Vacancy. The only emotions towards the characters in this book were repulsion and extreme distaste. The political structure of this book was portrayed in a manner that was unappealing and tedious.
I felt like The Casual Vacancy unnecessarily dirty and vulgar. I believe that J.K. Rowling was trying to differentiate from her children's books by adding rape, pedophilia, sex scenes, and adult content. How many times can you drop the f-bomb before it becomes irritating?
It is truly alarming how 5 star reviews I have seen that were written by people who have never even read The Casual Vacancy. It truly defeats the purpose of Goodreads to review and rate a book you have never even read.
I wish I had a better experience reading The Casual Vacancy. The Casual Vacancy was very dull and I struggled to read a few chapters. One day I hope I will attempt to finish The Casual Vacancy but for now I'm marking it as DNF.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Casual Vacancy.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
February 23, 2012
– Shelved
September 28, 2012
–
Started Reading
September 28, 2012
–
10.54%
"So far, it's okay. I am not a big fan! This book is definitely not as exciting as HP."
page
53
September 28, 2012
–
10.54%
"So far, it's okay. I am not a big fan! This book is definitely not as exciting as HP."
page
53
September 29, 2012
–
Finished Reading
December 4, 2013
– Shelved as:
dnf
December 4, 2013
– Shelved as:
dnf
Comments Showing 1-50 of 117 (117 new)
message 1:
by
Alshia
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Jun 20, 2012 09:37AM
@Scott, Idk...Maybe you shouldn't read it. If you're going into the material thinking "Bleh, it's not HP", then you're probably not going to like and hence, give her a negative review on it. What do you think?
reply
|
flag
I don't know. I feel like J.K. Rowling will surprise me and create some original and new!
Sounds pretty ridiculous to me! They're muggles. It must be a stand alone novel, and the sad thing is people are going to buy a book that doesn't sound interesting because of the author. Is it an adult fiction book? I don't know any YA or early readers who be attracted o the cover, title, or blurb.
@Angela I agree. I personally am not attracted by its cover or blurb. But the thing is, she wrote it for a completely different audience. It's for adults. And I think it's fair to read a book just because of an author. Most adored HP and they thought that JKRowling was a brilliant enough author that they'd be willing to try anything she writes, especially with a completely different genre. She might even introduce readers, YA maybe, to a genre they won't normally read. It's no different than what she did with HP, getting all those people interested in reading in the first place. besides, she's doing something most successful authors don't even dare try. She's branching out, trying different things, doing what she wants.
Angela, I am a young adult and I am reading this book. So far I have pretty mixed feelings. Yes I am only reading this because it's by Rowling but isn't everybody?
I knew that's why people would buy it. I'm just wondering if it is going to be good. That's how so many books get a lot of hype, because of a famous author. Just saying it didn't interest me in the least and I was also wondering how many people were getting it for that reason. I don't doubt it could be a good book just not interesting to me in the least. Happy reading!
So far it's not very interesting but it may improve.
I've found the first half to be quite boring myself.
Yeah. Not much really happened and so I called it quits.
Being on page 15 after 3 days is not a good sign. Nothing happens. I wanted it to be a good story.... its not
Yeah I got it from the library and I decided there's no way I'll be able to read it in 14 days!!!!
I have to disagree. The plot, character development and writing is brilliant. Yes, it is full of language and sexually explicit content, but it's a book for adults, and it deals with real life. I should say - it portrays real life (in a very raw and insightful way). It's about character, attitude and the choices you make. Circumstance, perspective. All of those things human beings should ponder in order to create the life they truly want to live, or realize where their issues stem from. It's also a reminder that everyone has a story. I think it's an honest and brave departure - it's Jo keeping it real, and that's what I love about it.
I hope you pick it up again someday!
I might try to pick it up again someday. For now it's not the book for me, but who knows in a couple of years?
Hollie, I agree with the plot and character development being brilliant, but I'd say the writing is so-so. I've seen a reviewer call her writing "plain, ordinary, everyday prose that serves its purpose" and I think that's a fairly accurate summary. There is some clever language use, but it does become somewhat few and far between. Her strengths have always been in character and plot. True, the first 100-200 pages are all character grounding, but when the plot gets going, it REALLY gets going. There's a definite pay-off if you can stick it out, so anyone struggling just keep in mind that it DOES get better! As in Harry, she writes with a firm hand and really directs you as a reader, which is great for plot (but, unfortunately, this is why a lot of critics won't like it).
It picks up, so I'd really suggest another try!
I haven't gotten as far as you have, and I can't stand this book already. I am on page 33 and can't see any redeeming characters in it. I hate the writing style. It's just one gross situation or comment after another. I think she set out to write something as far removed from Harry Potter as she could. I for one am sorry that I spent the money on it.
I agree! I'm glad that I didn't spend anything on it either! I got it at the library and I really don't understand all the 5 Star reviews. Just because you loved Harry Potter doesn't mean you have to give it automatically 5 Stars!
The characters all seem the same to me and there isn't much plot to speak of. This book is vulgar just for shock value and I don't think I can finish it...glad I'm not the only one.
No I am not talking to those who actually liked the book but to those who said they only gave it 5 stars because Rowling wrote it. I saw several reviews saying they gave it 5 Stars because they loved Potter. If you read the book and enjoyed it fine but if you just give a book five stars because who the author is, I think that's ridiculous!
It's okay! One day I hope to finish this book because I think I need to have more of an open mind when reading!
Yeah I really do have a narrow minded teen perspective.
Nope. I'm 30. Still didn't like it.
I loved this book...and I picked it up because Jo wrote it, and HP is my favorite. I'm so glad I tried it out--I tend to avoid fiction these days, or not really enjoy it if I do read it (though there are definitely exceptions). It probably comes down to taste, like Jordyn said. Just because you personally didn't find it appealing, doesn't mean it's a bad book.
If you have to say (and I'm paraphrasing), once you get past the profanity, vulgarity, and boring political bits, it's really a good book, that tells me it's not so much that the book just doesn't fit my picky taste (I'm honestly not overly particular). It tells me that the book is really only suited to a certain audience. Whether a book is good or bad is purely subjective...you're not wrong to think it's good, and I'm not weird for thinking it's garbage.
Kayla, I think you're responding to Jordyn? Personally I didn't think there was a dull moment, or "vulgar" parts either. Profanity, sure, if by "profanity" you mean "a bunch of sounds that humans who speak one particular language traditionally find to be disrespectful" then I suppose I agree.
I was responding mostly to Jordyn, yes. And by vulgar, I'm referring to phrases like, he still retained a vivid memory of her pink vulva (again, paraphrasing--I already returned the book to the library) or, he was so obese that people immediately thought of his penis, when he last saw it, how he washed it, etc. There's nothing vulgar about a vulva or a penis, but the context is gross and unnecessary. It does nothing for the story but increase it's shock value and remind you that this is "mature" fiction.
Oh, hmm. I can see how those might make people uncomfortable or be found annoying. I read this book aloud to my boyfriend, and we thought the bit about how people instantly thought about Howard's penis was pretty funny... I mean, it may be unnecessary to advance a plot (not that there was much of a plot in the book anyway--it was all character study), but it's pretty...accurate. I think most teenage boys would remember the first vulva they saw. They didn't strike me as shock phrases so much as just, well, things that cross people's minds. It didn't work for you; similarly my boyfriend thought that all the descriptions of sex were "grotesque" (I definitely thought that was intentional). But I thought they were really a small part of the book--nobody is reduced to their genitals.
To call a novel the most disappointing of the year you should probably read past page 60.
Amelia wrote: "To call a novel the most disappointing of the year you should probably read past page 60."If you can't read past page 60, that is disappointment enough.
I'm interested to know why you're disappointed though. Was it because it isn't Harry Potter? Scott implied that he and many fans only read the book because it was by Rowling and therefore they were definitely going to be disappointed because it's NOT Harry Potter. If it's not the type of book that you would normally read, don't read it! And, I'm sorry but I really don't think you can judge a book after page 60. You can say you didn't like it but to call it disappointing kind of implies that you put some sort of investment into it and to me, the disappointment for most people is invalid.
It's at its heart a character study/political drama. I've read many of these that I've enjoyed, this is not one. It's poorly paced, lacks any form of plot advancement and the characters (the most important part of this type of book, as the plot is inherently secondary in these stories) fall flat when examined. The only good words I can say about this book is that it's proficiently written. It reminds me of Ayn Rand's work, which I think are good examples of this type of book even if i didn't agree with their underlying messages.
I absolutely was not expecting Harry Potter. What I was expecting was superb writing and a story that's intriguing from the start. This book lacks both. There are many genres I don't normally gravitate toward, but have enjoyed on account of a great novel. By page 60 you can assess that Rowling has made a desperate attempt to create adult fiction, and failed. It felt to me that she was writing with a sense that people would buy her work no matter what she put down.
JoJo, besides Ayn Rand, what other character studies/political dramas do you recommend? I've been trying to find more books in the same genre as this one 'cause I thought it was so wonderful.
Sorry, but if you only read 60 pages, you should have marked it as didn't finish instead of rating it. It's completely unfair to judge a book by its first 60 pages, especially this one, because the first 60 pages are actually just introduction to all the characters. Also, if you read a book because of an author, not because you think the book sounds interesting in itself, it's your problem, not the author's, that you didn't like it. Jo has said a thousand times that it was not going to be anything like Harry Potter, yet that was what you expected. All in all, not a very fair basis to give a negative review on. 'The Casual Vacancy' is fantastic when the story really takes off, and by giving up at page 60 you're really robbing yourself of a great reading experience.
Katharina Ofelie wrote: "Sorry, but if you only read 60 pages, you should have marked it as didn't finish instead of rating it. It's completely unfair to judge a book by its first 60 pages, especially this one, because the..."Thank you, that's exactly what I was trying to say.
Also, I love how people are oh so shocked about the language, and find it too vulgar.. People in the real world talk like this! It's not like every single character does it. It's mainly the teens and the lower-class people who use this type of language in the book, and some of the others use it when they're angry, and that's realistic. Reading people's comments about it really reminds me of the character of Shirley in the novel, who is always closing her eyes to the hard realities of the real world, and living in her own little fantasy world where everything is pretty and proper. The language isn't even _that_ bad, at least not to me, and I'm a pretty normal, educated person, who has never been part of the kinds of tough environments described in the book. It's only shocking because GASP, it's JK Rowling, and apparently she's not supposed to write like that.
You can't mark a book as didn't finish, only read, currently reading, or want to read.
Kayla wrote: "You can't mark a book as didn't finish, only read, currently reading, or want to read."You can if you make a didn't finish shelf.
And whether you and the people you hang out with use that kind of language is not the point. The amount of profanity in this book takes away from the story and is completely unnecessary and over the top. Like I said before, it seems that this book is geared toward a pretty specific and fairly small audience. The bottom line, though, is that a person's review of a book is purely subjective. It's kind of silly to sit there and try to convince others that they're wrong for not liking it, whether they read the whole thing or not. I, for one, don't feel I've robbed myself of anything, but rather saved myself from wasting what little free time I have reading a book that would ultimately leave me disappointed.
Thanks for the tip, Scott.
Kayla wrote: "And whether you and the people you hang out with use that kind of language is not the point. The amount of profanity in this book takes away from the story and is completely unnecessary and over th..."Yes, I think it is important, because some people are more used to hearing that type of language than others and therefore will not react as strongly to it as others. I'm just pointing out that I'm not used to hearing that type of language, yet I don't find it "unnecessary and over the top". Also, I think that you hear much worse language in many popular films and in music, but it seems more shocking to people when they see it in print. Maybe some people just need to be a bit more open-minded and realise that this is actually the reality of some people. But maybe you don't like realistic books? Then I don't understand why you'd pick up a book of social realism in the first place?
And another thing: I'm not trying to tell people what to think of this book, and I'm not telling you that you're wrong for not liking it, but what I'm saying is that if you haven't finished the book you cannot give a valid review of it. You need to see a book as a whole entity, especially this one, because it changes dramatically towards the end, and the events in the last parts of the book completely changes your view of some of the characters and some of the things that happened earlier in the book.
Finally, I don't agree that this book is "geared toward a pretty specific and fairly small audience", but I would like to know what kind of audience you believe this is. Because if you mean people who generally enjoy sexual/violent books, I can assure you that I'm not one of those people. I normally avoid violent books, and sometimes skip over sexual content if I feel like it's too much, but nevertheless I loved this book.
I completely agree with you... *not comparing this with Harry Potter in mind*
I found all those abuses, completely unnecessary too.... I did read it to the end... but it didn't offer much...
I am tired of the reviews by people that just want to give J.K. A good review. It's sad. This book is not good.
Rachel wrote: "I am tired of the reviews by people that just want to give J.K. A good review. It's sad. This book is not good."I totally agree. I rate books based on how the book is in my opinion, not based on who the author is. Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series was okay in my opinion (2.5 Stars) but The Host was one of my favorite books ever.
librarianka I agree with you on one, she does take a while to set up the scene. Because there are quite a few families and quite a few characters in all those families it takes almost to mid book to start "getting them". It did take me a while but I persevered and I do not regret it. I liked the book very much. It drew me in completely and I think it was very effective portraying human relationships, the struggle for power within individual families as well as on the small political arena of Pagford. This book has a lot of power to move you if, only if you allow it. I wasn't going to give up to quickly on J K Rowling simply because I have a ton respect for her as both a writer and a human being. I knew that with her talent and life experience she does have a lot to say, and a lot of light to shine into dark corners of life.(less)
So you voted 1 because there was no magic or Harry Potter in it, even though you've only read 60 pages of a slow burning book. Why didn't you just write to the author and ask that she start doing books fit for 12 year olds again?
Did you read his review mark? I've read it twice now and still find it a boring, desperate attempt to be 'adult' fiction.
I'm not sure what made you question if I read his review JoJo?"I read about 60 pages before I quit." was the highlight of it.
Because you qoute reasons that aren't in the review. You make assumptions about the reviewer and as much as say he is the mental equivalent of a 12 year old. Your remarks of it being a slow burn are accurate, though it's more of a slow fizzle. I don't understand how so many people can be so angry and defensive over someone else's opinion when they are subjective in nature.
Mark, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I didn't like the Casual Vacancy at all and I can like whatever I like. Anyway Harry Potter isn't only for 12 year olds and I find it ridiculous that you are trying to insult me for liking HP. Not everyone who likes HP is 12, sorry to break it to you.
