Can someone please explain to me what was so great about the book?

Geez - aren't you supposed to warn people when you post spoilers???

Yes, I watched the series and I actually liked it. I thought it was very well made and I especially liked the acting and the directing. Even though people complain that they changed a lot of things from the book, I mean, they should already expect that to happen when a book adaptation is made.

It's pretty obvious that fairweather read the book a few times, but I would have to disagree on his/her point about the characters. I thought they were very poorly built because the good guys were very good and the bad guys were very bad. There was nowhere in between, to me they didn't come off as human, but just as characters from a book. I don't know how to explain it better than this but that's how I felt about them.

The suspense and the love story I agree. But the other points are just minor details that to me didn't really stand out in a book that big.

After I finish the book I'm reading right now I've decided to give it a second chance and maybe this time it'll change my opinion.





'A baby sleeps in all our bones so scared to be alone..'

I read and enjoyed "Pillars of the Earth" very much, even though - with one or two exceptions - I found the characters one-dimensional, especially the villains. The pacing was indeed excellent and the details of medieval life were genuinely interesting. It was extremely well-crafted but far from a literary masterpiece. And you needn't feel "sorry for" the people who didn't regard it as the experience of a lifetime. We have our own favorites, and mine do not include either Harry Potter or any of the Twilight books.

As for its subject matter, long before "Pillars of the Earth" there was Edith Pargeter's "Heaven Tree Trilogy," which also revolves around a boy driven to be an artist and the building of a breathtakingly beautiful medieval church. Pargeter's trilogy is a masterpiece, not merely a well-paced read but a story with heart and soul and sensitivity that extends even to its "villain" - a term I almost hate to use because he is so three-dimensional. Yes, he commits acts of cruelty, but far from being mere walking EEEvil and a plot device like William Hamleigh or Waleran, he is a man that compels both hate and devotion, and his redemption is thoroughly earned.

You'd think that someone who appears to have such vast education would know better than to offend those who don't share his/her taste in books.

Also comparing Ken Follett to -haha- Tolstoi (and yes, you'd think that a published author, reader of 'literally hundreds of books in dozens of genres' would know how to corectly spell Tolstoi) is quite honestly laughable for someone like you. Unless of course that someone is completly made up. If not then I feel deeply sorry for you.





'A baby sleeps in all our bones so scared to be alone..'

Haha...your last sentence was incredibly snobby. I am just saying. There are people out there that can read, say, The Scarlet Letter and thoroughly enjoy it ...and then turn around and read Harry Potter and enjoy it as well...though for very different reasons.

Plus, people can dislike this book, but have a real passion for other epic and/or classic pieces of literature. Just because they don't like this doesn't automatically mean they will be really into something like Twilight.

Aside from all that, in between your post and other posts from people that read Pillars...I am so excited to read it.

Anyway, good day to you. :)

Ooooohhhh a published author! That does give you the right to be a literary ass. Really, you "feel deeply sorry" for people like me who found this book less worthy than others. I feel deeply sorry for your need to belittle people who don't like the same books as you. If you don't ejaculate joy all over each page of this book you are relegated to the screaming teenage girl crowd?

I found most of this book to be an unrealistic irrational story. However it was mildly entertaining and did draw out some emotional reactions from the reader. Follett does a decent job of creating a medeival feeling world but the characters are so black or white and much of their actions so irrational that I could not rank this book very high. There are other facets of the book that bothered me but it has been several years since I read it and I no longer remember what they were.

I know you've written these comments a long time ago, LostSok, but I felt I must reply, because I so agree with your comments. I have not read this book, but I've just finished watching the series, and if it is any true depiction of the book, then that book must be a fantastic read. I so disagree with the OP on a lot of things he/she said, and can't understand his/her definition or understanding of the book and her disappointment.

I sat down and watched the first 5 eps straight on, and then a day later the last 3. I was gripped from beginning to end. I was very sad when Tom Builder died. It reminded me of the death of Sean Bean's character in Game of Thrones. A lot of people threatened to stop watching that show because of it, and I wondered if people got angry enough to stop watching Pillars of the Earth after Tom Builder died, especially the non-readers of the book. I was sad but I wanted to continue to the end.

You're right, if someone could find fault with this series/book, then maybe this isn't for them.




This is my signature and I'm sticking to it. lol

That's funny... First you claim to be a published author, then you hold books written by successful authors in contempt. I'm guessing the only thing you ever published was what you paid to have published. Books like painting and music aren't done for as art for arts sake, they are done to make money... the more money the make the more the world has said that the book or music is art... money defines art and some hack writer than can't write a book popular enough to provide money to live on isn't an artist they a wannabe.

LostSok -- I appreciate the comment, but why the need for the criticism of the OP's opinion?

Admittedly, the book was hard to put down and a great read. I have recommended the book, but its characters were not memorable, and I've never felt it was good enough to revisit--just a reader's opinion and I wouldn't expect this be the same for all those who read the book.

But to feel sorry for those who didn't have the same experience is a reach and a bit of a callow opinion. (Even Harry Potter, which is disparaged here, did allow some depth to many of its characters, albeit it at a young reader's level).

LostSok0523,

What a patronising remark. So what if people prefer twilight or harry potter, I personally do not like them, but at least they are actually reading books. You sir, sound like a pompous ass.

All right, that's it! No more Mr. Nice Gaius!

Hey! I like POTE and Harry Potter! :P