I’m pretty sure his antagonist was all the stupid people in the whole world. I found the main character interesting if not likable. He’s an anti-hero. I thought that was a fascinating way to look at the world. It was based on the idea that our world is an illusion of light.
The science behind the invisibility was pretty interesting. I had to make myself finish this book and keep pencils far, far away from my eyes. When the plot finally picked up, instead of some much needed action the cool stuff was recapped in a conversation where he just describes all the action in the most dull way imaginable. These outsiders noticed something was not quite right (“Look how much time he spends alone!”) but not to the point that I found it very interesting. I thought it was told from the least interesting perspective possible –from the outside observers instead of the invisible man’s view and what he was struggling with. But the story itself moved at a snail pace. 28).” And he uses the word “hobbledehoy” which had the Downton Abbey fangirl in me grinning. 33)” and “The Anglo-Saxon genius for parliamentary government asserted itself there was a great deal of talk and no decisive action (p. 19),”violently firing out its humanity (p. Phrases like “the inhuman bludgeoning of all tentative advances of curiosity (p. Wells has a way with words and I really enjoyed his turn of phrase. I really liked the writing in The Invisible Man, but I thought the storytelling was awful. This masterpiece of science fiction is the fascinating story of Griffin, a scientist who creates a serum to render himself invisible, and his descent into madness that follows.
0 kommentar(er)
