The Good Earth had its ups and downs, but I rank it high – top two or three among the Pulitzers I’ve read so far (eleven). Buck’s writing is beautiful, although I think it would slightly annoy one of my sisters for its florality. Slightly reminded me of the King James Bible in spots…but a bit less obscure. And it was well-blended – smooth and easy nonetheless.
I ran into one spot though where it started to annoy me. Not for the writing, but for the actions of the main character, Wang Lung. While it may have been sensible to the story, I hate it when the writer creates what seems a gratuitous tension within the characters themselves. Wang Lung was a man of the earth, but took a nasty turn at one point toward a frivolous endeavor that looked to have him abandoning one of his strongest character attributes – his love of the land. This gets resolved deeper into the story, but there was a moment where I really felt like abandoning the book…which I never would seriously consider, but still.
Despite that, I like the book almost completely. It’s a classic that should be read and not forgotten.
And speaking of abandoning a book…my next effort will be Adam Johnson’s 2013 Pulitzer winner, The Orphan Master’s Son. I’m sure I’ll make it through, but it may deal with something to which I’m especially sensitive: the oppression of the North Korean people. The Orphan Master’s Son is set in North Korea, and just in reading the introduction, I’m not sure I’ll like the subject matter. But we’ll see. A big part of my Pulitzer run is to broaden my reading while experiencing the quality that the prize represents. I’d never heard of the book before I looked at the list of Pulitzers, and when thinking of The Good Earth‘s successor, it just stuck out.
Also, I’ve checked this out on Kindle. It’s been a while, so we’ll see how that goes.