|
|
5.0étoiles sur 5
Ghostwriters?!, Jui 30 2004
Par Un client
This is, without a doubt, the best V.C. Andrews' book. II read a few reviewers had suggested that this book may have been written by the infamous ghost writer (I must admit, I do still read the books written after her death in 1987, but anyone who knows anything about V.C. Andrews knows that A) the books were not ghostwritten until the late 1980s, and B) stylistically, this absolutely must be her book.) I'm appalled that someone would be so irresponsible as to claim that the book was ghostwritten. It's brilliant, and I hardly think the "V.C. Andrews Empire" would take the trouble to write a single book rather than go with their series franchise, which has to be a better money maker. To those of you who haven't read this book yet: go buy it, and don't read ahead! For the rest of you, read ahead. About the book itself: My Sweet Audrina transcends popular fiction and is in fact a work of art. I first read this book when I was 13, and I'm 27 now, but it hasn't lost any of its appeal. I just read it. I admit, I was floored at 13 when the book's secret was revealed: I have no idea if I would've figured it out now ahead of time, given that I'm older and more sophisticated. However, some things remained the same: the book has the rare talent of making you feel that time is really passing, that you're really living through the years with this bizarre and extraordinary family. And although it is clearly a very unusual family, and although there are dramatic things that occur in it that don't ordinarily happen, it is still a very realistic story in other ways. I loved the other V.C. Andrews' books, but few of them gave me the feeling of providing rare insight into the failings, weaknesses, and quirks of individuals. The characters in this story have a lot of qualities, flaws, and virtues I've seen in others, and they are richly drawn character studies. I think that although some people have called characters such as Vera "a typical V.C. Andrews tramp" those who take the time to notice will see that she isn't typical. We learn quite a bit about why she acts the way she does: and although her behavior is exaggerated for dramatic purposes, anyone who has been rejected by a parent knows the insane behavior that can cause. The advice given by Audrina's Aunt Ellsbeth, and Billie, are perceptive pieces of information about human life, something we don't often see in Andrews' other books. Furthermore, I don't believe Arden is a boring character, nor should we reject him for what he did to Audrina. He felt rejected and cast away by her. Someone else brought up some of the plot lines as unnecessary, E.g. the strangely named Lamar Rensdale, but I think that was a necessary story to move the general plot along. Finally, about the ending, I don't think Andrews' was in any way condoning the smothering and abusive behavior of Damian with that particular ending. Pay close attention to the book, which is so hauntingly beautiful it deserves to be read several times over: Damian is repeatedly condemned for his behavior by all characters in the book and by Audrina herself. I think that, rather, she recognized that she owed it to Arden to work out their marriage, and that she loved Sylvia, whom she couldn't leave behind. As for her father, she was starting to realize that he would never change and to accept that. But the house was rightfully hers, and the point was that she thought she could run away from her past by running from the house, and at the end she realized that she couldn't run from her past. So it was more symbolic of her acceptance of herself and her past, her ability to heal and rise above what had happened to her, than anything we should take as Andrews' condoning "Papa's" selfish, dysfunctional behavior.
|