rikuson1's reviews
78 reviews

It Was Okay 🥴
-★★✭☆☆- (2.75/5.00)
My Grading Score = 55% (C-)

Children of Virtue and Vengeance had good moments, but I do feel the overall pacing for this book dragged a specific plot that probably didn't need as much time as it was given. Some of the characters as well did start to make decisions that felt a bit out of character for them. Or they were so dramatic that it did not come off as organic as it probably should for me with the lead-up to them making those decisions. Especially with what they decided to stand for by the end of the previous book versus what they do now. Additionally, a new antagonist is introduced in this book that was not hinted at in any way in the prior book, which made their introduction and placement in the story feel contrived. I'm not fully on board with the direction it took and is now going, but it wasn't a terrible read. One of the three main characters did make a drastic shift in character in this book by the end and people seem to not like where they are headed, but in hindsight, it does not bother me with the path that character is going down by the execution to it could have been better than what we got. 


Verdict
I'll see if the third book is going to play out well with what this book apparently was trying to set up. Overall, 

It Was Okay

I Liked It 😌
-★★★✬☆-(3.25/5.00)
My Grading Score = 65% (C+)


In the Fellowship of the Ring, I can see a more refined and put-together overall story than what came in the Hobbit.

Many details that happened in the Hobbit were left unexplained or had random McGuffins occurring that allowed the main character to get out of situations that I wasn't too big of a fan of. The prologue and the first chapter of the Fellowship of the Ring seemed to dedicate the majority of their time to not only setting up the journey to come but also trying to connect it to the Hobbit and explain certain details that were left out in the Hobbit, like for example how Gollum got the ring in the first place. 

The lore behind the ring went from a plot device in the hobbit to the most important item in the entire series having its lore connected with the entirety of the series and everything that came with it was very interesting. In regards to the journey though I did feel the double-edged sword of the overwhelming amount of explanation in detail that JRRT goes into when it comes to explaining every single thing especially when it comes to the locations to be a blessing and a curse. A blessing because the amount of detail he goes into if you pay attention you can vividly picture what he's trying to portray to you but also a curse because this by far more than anything else in the story hurts the overall pacing of the story. 

Many times I was impressed by the detail and dedication he put into but at the same time I felt like I just wanted the story to continue I've read enough about how this location looks and I just want the plot to continue. The number of characters that come along with the journey was once again a bit bloated. Sam, Aragorn, and Legolas were fine. Everyone else was more or less forgettable to me, and I did not care for them. The conflict and battle scenes also felt were actually kind of short and disappointing when it came to explaining how a fight plays out. It left a lot to be desired from me, especially when it goes into such long and heavy detail when it comes to other things. I wish that energy was more in the fight scenes as well, and the ending to the first book, although alright, was just alright. It wasn't amazing or great, just alright. It felt like an end of a chapter (which it was sure) instead of an ending to a book, I guess it was just a tad anticlimactic to me. 

J.R.R Tolkien's Prose
I'm glad that within the 17-year release gap between The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring, that his prose are more refined. Still quite unorthodox but it didn't seem like he has that "casually talking to a friend" type of attitude when it came to writing this one. I understand The Hobbit was written for children and this was not. I'm more so also talking about his transitions into different scenes and feel were more smooth and organic as well.

Verdict
Nonetheless, I liked this entry, and I'm looking forward to the next one as I feel I'll probably like that one more. (Update, I do)

I Liked It

I liked it 😌
-★★★✬☆- (3.25/5.00)
My Grading Score = 65% (C+) 

The Lord of the Rings, Book 2 aka The Two Towers I feel like will go down as a love-hate entry for me. This entry is coming off of The Fellowship of the Ring, which had an okay enough cliffhanger to want to hop into The Two Towers sooner rather than later. But when I get to The Two Towers, it starts off by killing a character who didn't get much shine for in my opinion have me care about when they passed and I also felt this death would have at least been more impactful to me at the end of the Fellowship of the Ring instead of at the beginning of The Two Towers. The impact of their passing I felt nothing and honestly was debating if this could even be considered a waste if I didn't care about them, to begin with. 

They split into groups
Nonetheless, The Two Towers' first half (which is known as book 3) makes it known clear very early on that this entire book 3 will have no progression of the main character Frodo. Instead of going off of what the Fellowship of the Ring sort of set up in its ending is the fact that our overall party of one is now split into three different groups. One group with Merry and Pippin, the other group with Gimli, Legolas, and Aragorn, and the last group with Frodo and Sam. At first, I didn't understand the reasoning behind this because of the fact that at the time of reading, I did not care for basically any of these characters outside of Frodo, Legolas, and to some degree Aragorn. So splitting them up into groups like this I thought initially was a shot in the foot (and to some degree I still think it was because I can't take away my feelings or enjoyment of how I felt as I went through this portion even if it was for the benefit looking back in hindsight to some degree.)  


Book 3 (The first half of The Two Towers)
The reason I felt the split of these groups was decided was probably directly linked to some degree to one of my gripes when it came to The Hobbit. It was the fact that outside of Bilbo, Gandalf, and Thorin, I did not care for all of the many dwarves that accompanied them. I could not for the life of me tell you all of their names, I couldn't even remember half of them or even a quarter of them, this was an issue to me because they all meshed together and the overall cast came together far too fast and felt bloated and forgettable outside of the ones I mentioned. With there being at the time before this split we had Frodo, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, and Boromir that's eight characters (and then there's Gandalf which would make nine but he currently wasn't present during the split so I'm not counting him but if I did we are pushing the two digits). And at the time before they split, only three of them I cared for really. It was going to fall into the same issue I had with the Hobbit if something wasn't done. The solution that seems JRRT came to was to split them up. I feel this was a risky decision. If done right then one would come out carrying about all the characters in the cast, but if not executed correctly (and correctly is subjective I know) it can only lead to the reader being annoyed and uninterested that they are following characters they do not care for even after spending alone time with them and the author failed to change their opinion on them. And for the most part, that's unfortunately where I landed. With Merry and Pippin being broken off into their own separate groups, I unfortunately still do not care for either of these two characters. Their journey was very boring and uninteresting to me. Both of these characters barely have characteristics about them that intrigue me to care. I think the biggest issue I had with their group is when they reached Treebeard in chapter 4 of Book 3 this is the most boring and longest chapter in the entire entry of Two Towers and it mostly consists of them in Treebeard's hands as he slowly (and not surely) talks about to them and himself was a whole lotta nothing interesting to any degree to me. I was the most bored. I've been with this entire series thus far in this chapter alone and the reason the "hate" part of the love-hate I mention earlier comes mostly from. The chapter before this wasn't all that interesting with them either but this really made me dislike this book, because I genuinely felt like my time was being wasted as this guy dragged on but I'm not going to drag on as Treebeard did, and end my complaining about it here. 

*Minor Spoilers up ahead, skip this portion if you haven't read it yet*
The next group of that consisting of Gimli, Legolas, and Aragorn wasn't great but it wasn't super boring, although it definitely still had its chunks of uninteresting and boring parts in it as well that I felt like it was wasting my time. These parts, unlike Treebeard, were so boring that I couldn't recall these parts in particular to you, just that they exist within portions of their part of the journey. I felt like I was just reading words until something interesting happened or the story progression genuinely continued because unfortunately (and this occurs throughout Book 3 more than Book 4 it felt but it's in there as well) JRRT is heavily depicting every single little detail about every single little thing (especially if it's a location and sometimes it's a location the characters aren't in for nearly the amount of time he took to explain how the location looked which felt like it sucked all the significance right out of the location and thus feeling like my time was once again wasted). I've gotten used to JRRT's unorthodox writing style, so it's not that. And he can elegantly explain how something looks. I'm not knocking any of that. I respect the craft. But the level of detail in explaining these locations brings the whole progression to a halt countless times and hurts my enjoyment from a pacing standpoint far harder than it had previously, I don't think I could ever get used to it when he goes off like this at this point. Although at least when it came to Gimli I somewhat cared for him more than I did before the split and this had more so to do with the friendship/friendly rivalry that was created between him and Legolas during their time during this part. It was enjoyable and well done to me and allowed me to see some good characterization for both him and more for Legolas. And then Gandalf eventually comes back even though it was in a very weird way because they tried to make it seem like he was Saruman but fell oddly flat like some sort of joke. His explanation of how he came back from the Balrog abyss was kind of wishy-washy and very cryptic to me. Hopefully, it's explained more in the future. Speaking of Saruman, the part where Gandalf and Saruman were arguing in front of his castle was another good part of this group portion. I think during that time, they combined the two groups. Merry and Pippin, who reunited with Legolas's group, felt kind of sloppy as well. It felt like JRRT didn't feel like spending any more time on Merry and Pippin as a separate group and gave up at the end having the combine with Legolas's group and then having Pippin explain in detail to Legolas's group the portion JRRT didn't feel like writing and showing us and decided to have Pippin tell us instead which was a very long a boring monologue by him. 

So, to wrap up Book 3, has a very small amount of good moments. But the Merry and Pippin part and the slow uninteresting parts of Legolas's crew still left me feeling like this was the weakest portion of this entire series and is the biggest dent when it comes to my score on this overall entry which is The Two Towers. 


Book 4 (The second half of The Two Towers)
**Minor Spoilers again**
This brings me to the portion of the Two Towers that saved the whole entry. And that is Book 4, the second half. Which to me currently is the strongest and most consistently interesting and engaging portion the entire series has showcased thus far. Up to Book 4 I actually genuinely thought and gave up hope that I was going to see Frodo's group for this entire entry and I was ready to give The Two Stars no more than two stars rounded up. But once I realized that all of Book 4 was dedicated to Frodo's group, I rejoiced, and rightfully so because it was very good. The main reason I feel it was very good was because of Gollum and Sam and not even Frodo that much. Gollum, in my opinion, is the most entertaining and unique character in this entire series. He was entertaining and made one of my favorite parts back in The Hobbit, and he does it once again here in Book 4. Even traveling with Gollum as a party member was entertaining in its entirety. His dynamic with Frodo and Sam was entertaining and interesting and also assisted in showcasing characterization aspects of them that assisted in getting me to know them even better. For Frodo, I was able to see a side that was willing to assert dominance when needed when it came to taming Gollum and demanding he leads them to their objective. And for Sam, it assisted him even more so because, before all of this, he and Pippin to me did not feel that different as characters. They felt like the same character, one that showcased nervousness and insecurity mostly all the time above any other characteristic. But Sam's dislike, annoyance, and disgust with Gollum showcased that Sam can have attitude and clap back when something really bothers him, something Pippin never showcased if I so recall Their traversal into the cave at the end also allowed Sam to shine even more with how he went up against the Spider Lady. This made him probably one of my favorite characters now because it showcased bravery within him something I did not think he was capable of showing, especially in a dangerous circumstance like that. Additionally, the ending to Book 4 gives Sam even more characterization and character development because it essentially temporarily makes him the protagonist to follow as he now has to save Frodo with the ring in his possession. Book 4 (the second half of The Tower Towers) saved this book for me. And unlike The Hobbit and the Fellowship of the Ring, where I thought the endings were either lackluster or alright, respectively. I thought this one ended the strongest with a great cliffhanger to what's to come. 


Verdict
Although The Two Towers to me didn't hold onto the little momentum that The Fellowship of the Ring gave it going in and although I feel like the first half was mostly a drag to the point where I was about to rate this the lowest entry thus far, the second half was so strong to me that it brought it all the way up to right here I'd rate The Fellowship of the Ring. The first half is the weakest of the series to me, but the second half is the strongest, so that balances out in my head to where The Fellowship of the Ring is. I'd probably even choose this over it if you asked me which one.

I liked it

It was Okay 🥴
-★★✭☆☆- (2.75/5.00)
My Grading Score = 55% (C-)

The Return of the King I had high expectations for with it being the final part of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. And unfortunately, to say I came out disappointed is a bit of an understatement. I already knew that the first half (Book 5) was going to be all focused on the side of basically everyone who was not Frodo and Sam. And going off of how I felt in The Two Towers, I doubt anything they were doing was going to be able to intrigue me enough to care. And I was right they didn't do anything interesting enough for me to care. I can tell that Tolkien tried to give Pippin and Merry moments of their own to showcase some level of growth in them, but unlike Sam at the end of The Two Towers for me, I was still not sold on the feats that Pippin and Merry did. This first half is only a tad bit better than the first half of The Two Towers for me, but that's not saying much. It's the second half that I was looking forward to the most since going off the pattern that The Two Towers set up, its second half should engross me and hopefully save the book, as it did for The Two Towers for me.

The first half of the second half instantly engrossed me as it picked up right where the great cliffhanger that the Two Towers ended on. It was definitely the most fun I had with this book, which, at this point, I'm going to call "The third quarter portion" of this book. It focused on Sam continuing to showcase why he's my favorite character with great moments, scaring off enemies with imposing stances, taking out enemies, saving Frodo, and essentially nursing him back to care. Sam felt like he became the true hero this story needed in this portion, and I enjoyed basically all of it. The struggle shown when Frodo flipped out on him when Sam suggested that he could bare some of the burden of the Ring is also very well done. And when Gollum came back into the equation again, I was having a great time until I was not.

At this point in the story, I assumed that since now they are basically in front of the Crack of Doom ready to fulfill the overall story's objective, this is when Sauron would show up for one more last big attempt to stop them in some way shape, or form. I also thought this is where they'd take all the other characters like Gandalf, Legalis, Aragorn, and Pippin (but not really Merry since he was down for the count from his moment which I didn't care for nor anything associated with that so I'm not even going to talk about it) have them all reach the location of Frodo and Sam and assist them in the final clash against Sauron (and I guess Gollum as well). But this expectation never occurred. Now I understand getting mad/disappointed because what I wanted to happen did not happen is not the right way to go about this, but I can't help but feel that what was provided instead which was just essentially Gollum flipping out and taking the Ring from Frodo going insane because he finally got his "precious" back and falling into the crack of doom was a good end to Gollum as a character sure but beyond anticlimatic to the end Sauron and the Ring itself for me. 

And then I come to find out that there's still a quarter of this book left to go beyond this point. I'm sitting here like what the heck else is there to cover? The extra epilogue feeling arc where characters are saying their farewells, coming back together, and going their separate ways back to their respective homes. The Hobbits go back to their shire, which starts an arc, which is known in the community as "The Scouring of the Shire," (and is also the name of the chapter this arc takes place in) which is very mixed in its reception and I can understand why. Now I understand the reasoning behind the existence of this arc, in a nutshell, it was the showcase how much The Hobbits have grown in regard to competence in dealing with dire situations. But that doesn't mean it was all that interesting to read, nor did I care for it to any degree outside of the showing of Saruman and Wormtongue at the very end. Once again, I felt it was quite anti-climatic to a villain who was hyped up as much as Sauron himself. The story felt like they portrayed him as basically "the evil Gandalf" but for this entire story, all I really remember him doing is arguing with Gandalf like a baby in The Two Thrones and this part right here where he basically gets killed by his own servant for treating him disrespectfully for that last time. Someone who is supposed to be almost as dangerous as Gandalf being taken out in such a fashion was such an anti-climatic way to go out, honestly to me it felt like Tolkien said "dang I feel like I need a bigger threat for The Hobbits to go up against for this arc I have here since they easily resolved the Scouring of this Shire, oh I know I left Saruman rotting in that castle a book ago let's bring him back before I completely forget about him and throw him in here at the last minute". To me, it honestly felt rushed, contrived, last minute, and once again anticlimactic all around. 

When I finished The Return of the King and I looked back on The Fellowship of the Rings all the way to here and everything they've done, the first sentence I said to myself was "man this really could have been condensed into one book and did not feel like it needed to be three". Then I came to find out that Tolkien apparently only wanted to make one book, but his publishers wanted it to be more than one. If that is true, I can most definitely see that. 


Verdict
I sadly can not use the words "I liked it" when it comes to the entry. I only like 1/4 of it. Everything else to me was uninteresting, too slow-paced here or too rushed there, too contrived here, or anticlimactic there. With that being said, though his prose still held up, his worldbuilding is still great and holds up. At absolute highest, this comes in at a C- for me, which is the highest rating of "It was Okay," which sounds accurate to me, for me. It was not bad, and I can't say, "I did not like it." I can probably say, "I mostly did not like it," though. I wouldn't be surprised if I like the movies more. (Update I do and by a lot)

It was Okay

I Liked It 🙃
-★★★☆☆- (3.00/5.00)
My Grading Score = 60% (C) 

The Hobbit is a classic and is loved by many. I decided I would venture through some of the classic novels I always hear about. This one would be one I would like to stop by and read to see if it still holds up to where so many people have it. The Hobbit for me actually started off quite strong, and I was quite engrossed. When the first couple of adventures (the trolls and especially the Gollum encounter), I was having a great time going on along on the ride. After that, though, I felt that the encounters mixed in with long, drawn-out journey-written pieces made a decent chunk of the middle for me, actually quite lackluster. It didn't really get super interesting again for me until we reached the main event, which was the Dragon. Then there was a random struggle for the spoils after the Dragon and a war against the Goblins and wolves that honestly felt random and forced at the very end. Honestly, everything after the Dragon I did not care for either. 

Mixed in with some very small character plot inconsistencies that in the grand scheme of things it's very minuscule but stood out to me nonetheless and were never addressed (When Bilbo found the ring and lied about finding the ring basically and then came forward about lying nothing happened).  Speaking of the main character, Bilbo Baggins. I'm indifferent to him. One minute, he's a scary cat, and then the next minute, he's brave enough to do things no other character can do. It didn't feel like character development since he would switch back and forth between these to till the very end. And there were the Dwarves. There were genuinely way too many dwarves for me to ever remember, differentiate, and care for any of them except the main one. Gandalf was the most interesting character, but obviously, after a certain point, he had to leave them since, with him present, it didn't feel like any of the other characters could shine in any way. 


J.R.R Tolkien's Writing Style
I was warned that his prose was unorthodox, but I was not ready for such a rude awakening in how different it was. He's amazing when it comes to explaining how someone, something, or somewhere looked and when it comes to the somewhere it actually can be a bit overkill in my opinion, and sometimes hurt the pacing but it's very detailed nonetheless. But in regards to characterization via narration or transitioning from one scene into the next or into the next chapter or when he speaks to his readers as if he is gossiping the story to me instead of narrating it, it always threw me for a loop, and broke my immersion into bits. Every, Single, Time. Objectively speaking, there's nothing wrong with it, but subjectively speaking, this writing style took getting used to, and I still think to the very end I was not used to it. He's a very good storyteller I'll give him that and I will be reading The Lord of the Rings next, but I'd say the Hobbit was definitely an experience I will not forget for better or for worse. I still came out liking it more than not, so that's a plus.

Verdict
I thought the Hobbit had many shortcomings in regard to certain plot-related and lore details that were not fleshed out or explained at a level I personally would have liked. But seeing as though this was written in the 1950s and there were not really many guidelines in regards to writing fantasy back then, I'm willing to give him a tad bit of leeway there. But being as critical as possible regardless and how it holds up today, I wouldn't ignore the flaws or put it on the same tier as top fantasies created today. It comes with the territory of being one of the first, I guess. Nonetheless, this wasn't a bad read, and I still liked it at the very least.

I Liked It

I Liked It 🙃
-★★★☆☆- (3.00/5.00)
My Grading Score = 60% (C)

Breach of Peace was a Novella I can say I liked and enjoyed. The starting of it all didn't quite engross me as much as I liked, I did think that it was paced quickly enough to keep me going throughout it all. I understand the foundation and setup for most stories should have a right to some degree to the setup all of its aspects so although I was not engrossed from the beginning or even the middle, I do think the last 25% of this novella did make up for the first 75% of it which is wild to say but I stand by it. I personally think that last quarter was strong enough to warrant it all of this. Overall, the novella isn't even 100 pages, so it's a short read anyway. And it's not like the first 75% was bad anyway. It was just okay to decent enough if I'm speaking critically. The characters I don't think I got enough time with to really get connected to them before what went down went down, but they were not bad either, they were at least well-written enough and memorable enough. That being said, and I'll state this again, I do think the execution of what goes down at the end is to be commended nonetheless. I think this is a good start to this series The Lawful Times as he calls it.


Daniel B. Greene's Prose
For his first published entry, I personally am impressed with his prose, I thought mostly everything felt very reader-friendly and quite smooth in regards to basically everything. Although I do feel some of the profanity (especially in the middle even with the narrator cursing as well) may have been just a tad bit overused and took me out of the scenes just a tad, everything else shines brighter than it to the point where it did not ruin my overall enjoyment of his writing style.

I Liked It

It Was Okay 😶
-★★✮☆☆- (2.50/5.00)
My Grading Score = 50% (D+)

The Alchemist was a book that was recommended to me by a longtime friend of mine, I guess they really loved it because it was the one they recommended to me above any other book. Before I sat down and read this one, I saw that many people considered this a self-help book. Others (including this site) consider it a book that everyone should read at least once. I've read two self-help books before both by the same author and I loved the both of them, so my interest in what other self-help books were like did interest me more than anything when it came to this one. And so, my expectations were set.

I had no clue exactly what to expect from this book outside of what I heard which was "it's a self-help book" and as far as I can see (at least on this site and a small amount of video reviews of this book specifically from women which I can know why) find this book to be over-hyped and/or rubbish. But the other self-help book I read had the same level of criticism to it as well so I took that into consideration when it came to this genre, which only solidified my theory on it even more after finishing the Alchemist. 

It seems that "self-help books" main purpose are to inspire the readers in ways to make them better or do something inspiring in their actual lives. Most stories have a meaningful and sometimes moral message that can be extracted from it, but you have to find it within the details of the story you're reading. Self-help books it seems (at least before I read this one) led me to believe that they are straight to the message at hand of letting the reader know what that moral message is and diving into it. The Alchemist did not follow this preconceived notion and expectation that I had coming into it. 

When the book started we are introduced to a Shepard boy by the name of Santiago, who yearns to travel in search of a worldly treasure he sees in his dreams. I was confused at first because , as I stated, I thought I was getting a self-help book, not a quest story. I thought maybe I misunderstood what I read, and so I just followed along with the story being presented to me. Quickly and surely, I could see it everything within the short length of this story, the message at hand. Written out clearly is an understatement here as it more so bashed continuously across the readers head. The message of "follow your dreams," "your calling," or, as this book puts it, "your personal legend." I thought the wording at first was unique enough, and the message was a good one. Don't get me wrong. I did not mind the message that was present. I actually agree with most of the details behind the moral message that was presented outside of the detail that the universe will help you achieve it, I actually disagree with that part and think quite the contrary. The point is, I felt the moral message being provided was lightly dived into because it's not necessarily a moral message that has that much depth to be dived into anyway and once it's provided to the reader, what is are you left with once you've been provided that message? Everything else, this is where I think my personal issues with the book lay. 

In regards to everything else outside of the message, I did not find that interesting. The character Santiago outside of a few characterization doubts within him didn't really have any conflicting aspects that really halted and made him struggle in any interesting way. When you're reading through it the narrator most of the time doesn't even refer to Santiago by his name, so to be honest by the halfway point I forgot it because he was referred as "the boy" way too much. This was most likely done intentionally because it makes sense to this entire story. It's not about Santiago, the story, the other characters, the world, none of that. They main priority was the moral message above all. It seemed like Paulo Coelho wanted to make sure that you knew what this moral message was, and if you were to remember anything from this book above anything else, it's that. So every other aspect of this book becomes merely a shadow to the light that is the message that shines so bright you might as well be looking at the sun, which funny enough is the cover image for the book.

As far as most of the criticisms that I see coming to this book, it's mainly for three I hear, which to a degree at the very least I can completely understand.

1st main criticism I hear about this book : "The moral message is one I either do not agree with or can not relate to there for I did not like this book." The first part of not agreeing with the moral message I can not debate against because disagreeing and having a reason as to why will vary person to person. But the second part where it states I can not relate to the moral message. I think it is something I can comment on. Within the book it mentions "your personal legend" like I stated earlier and additionally one of the characters lecturing this concept to the boy mentions the fact that there are people out there that never realize what their "personal legend" is and I think it is directly referring to the people who may have read this book (regardless of what age or where they are in life) did not find their "personal legend" so they can not relate to the compulsion to want to do what ever they need to do in order to realize it. I am not someone who will judge a book based off of if I'm able to relate to it in any way or not. I think it's a very emotional and flawed way to critique a book as I do not see any critical analysis being done, you're just going off if you feel you connected to the book or not and not the quality of the book at hand critically in your opinion, your feelings I care little for. But to be fair this entire site's rating system looks like it's based off how you feel about a book, nothing is good or bad it's did you like or not so it's whatever and I digress from that. The point is nonetheless if you are someone that couldn't find their calling or maybe you do not have one, I can understand this book not being one you'd like because it's the biggest piece of this book, if you can't relate to having a "personal legend" this book will most likely be a waste of your time.

2nd main criticism I hear about this book - This one is mainly from the female audience. And you probably know where this is headed. "What about Fatima, What about Fatima, What about Fatima? What about ? What about ?" The Boy meets a girl that he falls in love with at first site name Fatima who he tells about his personal legend and the fact that he wants and needs to realize it and Fatima basically to a degree states she's apart of his "Personal Legend" and he goes off to obtain his treasure coming back to her as she says she'll wait for him. Now you know in today's age this type of plot isn't going to fly or age well with a female audience because they are relating with the female of the story because they are female and not the protagonist that the story is about. Now I'm not saying they her personal legend doesn't matter because some people feel like that's what writer is saying and there for this book is misogynistic for putting the message out there that "women don't have a personal legend they got to stay put and help a man get his" which if that's what you took away from this, I disagree with you wholeheartedly. Like stated earlier, and it says in the book that "some people never find out what their personal legend is," and if you pertain this to real life, this is true. The story like I stated didn't even care to really tell us the main characters name that much pass a certain point, heck I remembered Fatima's name more instead of Santiago's but it's because of like I stated. Everything comes after the message of this story of "finding your personal message" this includes Fatima who is unfortunately for the girls that wanted to relate to the only girl in the story is implied to be someone who didn't find hers, this is an aspect that I assume applies to bother genders, respectfully, just get over it. 

3nd main criticism I hear about this book - And I completely agree with this one as it's my personal biggest critique of this book. "Outside of the message, the story that is associated with it is not that good, interesting, or compelling to following." This, like I stated earlier, fundamentally is something I can bet money on that Paulo Coelho intentionally did. His main goal was to get his message out there about finding and obtaining your "personal legend no matter the cause", and he succeeded in that because how can he not with the message is spammed through the book. The problem is that everything else feels nowhere near as interesting, compelling, or fleshed out to any degree. This story I felt was not worth experiencing when the message is what really matters and can be wrapped up in a few sentences. 


Verdict
I do not regret reading it. Like I stated, I understand the moral message of "finding out your personal legend and trying your very best to realize it," because how can you not take that away from it, it's spammed. I additionally and fortunately am apart of the people that has found what their personal legend is and I am working towards realizing it so to my benefit I could relate to the main moral message this book was trying to drill into my head. If you're someone who's mainly here to absorb that message and nothing else, then this book is for you. But if you're someone like me that you need more than that from a book that tried to be a hybrid of a self-help book and a mediocre quest story, then this book might not be for you. The Alchemist is not a bad book, but I wouldn't recommend it personally when you take more criteria of critiquing aspects and guidelines of what makes a book worth reading outside to me of just one aspect that may or may not even click with you if you don't have a personal legend to relate this book to

It Was Okay