Bel Canto, by Ann Patchett

SPOILER ALERT!

It was different.

I thought the ending was a little abrupt. Not to mention, odd.
Gen & Roxanne?
What happened to Mr. H? Did he go back to Japan? Get shot? Other?
He just sort of >poof< disappeared.

I hate it when books end that way; it seems like the author got bored and wrote 'whatever' just to finish it.

Are Caro and I the only people who read this book?

Shame on youse!

I read it when it first came out. As I mentioned when the group was picking a book to read, I don't think it's the best book Patchett has written.

Nuts! is right. I didn't even vote.

I just read the dang thing cuz ya'll voted on it.
So I could discuss.
Now all I'm left with is the cuss.

I read it. I did like it, but it think it would have been a much stronger book without the epilogue.

And thank you, CaroGirl-- there was something I didn't like about Roxane but I could never put my finger on it, but yes, that's it, she was too perfect.

Oh, and Mr. H-- I think he got shot. He took a bullet for whats-her-name...

I think it's interesting that Patchett tipped her hand so early in the book, only a few pages in, where she says that none of the terrorists will make it out alive (or something similar... I don't have the book in front of me).

I just reread this book, and I guess I'll be the lone dissenting voice here. I absolutely loved it.

I think Patchett put Gen and Roxane together at the end so that their love for Carmen and Mr. Hosokawa could live on. Roxane and Carmen had become close, and Mr. Hosokawa and Gen had worked together for so long. I didn't find it all that strange.

AmyBA said:

I read it. I did like it, but it think it would have been a much stronger book without the epilogue.

Click to expand...

Ditto that! I liked the book a lot... enough to give copies as gifts, but I told everyone to ignore the epilogue.

I liked it. It may become an all-time favourite. I'll know that if it captivates me again in a few years. The ending was a bit strange, but not so impossible, I think. I'm still trying to figure that one out.

I loved her characterization. The characters came alive for me and were, for the most part, rather complex. Roxanne was more complex than she's given "credit" for here. She was mercenary, a bit self-absorbed - witness how she handled the accompanist. It took the captivity, I think, to pull her out of it.

Tilting her hand early, was interesting. I think she did that to keep us grounded. I, for one, was cheering for their developing fantasies, especially for the young hostage-takers, but then I would stop and say, "But it can't work out," which made it rather poignant and bittersweet. Although I had forgotten that line from near the beginning, she made it rather clear, especially through Meisner's take on the situation, that it would all turn out badly for the hostage takers.

The language, descriptions, observations were so often marvellous. I'm going to have to read more of her books.

Roxanne was more complex than she's given "credit" for here. She was mercenary, a bit self-absorbed - witness how she handled the accompanist. It took the captivity, I think, to pull her out of it.

Yes. I agree with this. I didn't much like her at the beginning because of this.