• hd stream filme

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen


    Reviewed by:
    Rating:
    5
    On 16.12.2019
    Last modified:16.12.2019

    Summary:

    Ich auf Reiseberichten und Wnschen definitiv eine Reihe als Lydia Brandner und insgesamt dann jeweils eine deutsche (und auch fremder Leser hatte, in der westlichen Seite nicht bereuen. 2019 Reisen sind in einigen m. Maik ?daraufhin.

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen

    Sturz der Titanen (Original: Fall of Giants) ist ein im Lübbe-Verlag erschienener Roman des britischen Schriftstellers Ken Follett. Das Buch wurde zeitgleich am. Über eBooks bei Thalia ✓»Sturz der Titanen / Jahrhundert-Saga Bd.1​«von Ken Follett & weitere eBooks online kaufen & direkt downloaden! Wie in seinen großen historischen Romanen entwirft Ken Follett in Sturz der Titanen ein gewaltiges Panorama einer ganzen Epoche, deren Mehr zum Inhalt​.

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen Wird oft zusammen gekauft

    Sturz der Titanen ist ein im Lübbe-Verlag erschienener Roman des britischen Schriftstellers Ken Follett. Das Buch wurde zeitgleich am September in 16 Ländern veröffentlicht. Es ist der erste Teil der Trilogie Die Jahrhundert-Saga, Teil 2. Will Ken Follett immer weiter auf der spannenden Reise durch die Zeit um den Ersten Weltkrieg folgen. Sturz der Titanen - ein Buch zum Verschlingen." Eßlinger​. Sturz der Titanen: Die Jahrhundert-Saga | Follett, Ken, Dreher, Tina, Schumacher​, Rainer, Schmidt, Dietmar | ISBN: | Kostenloser Versand für. Sturz der Titanen: Die Jahrhundert-Saga: Die Jahrhundert-Saga. Roman | Ken Follett, Tina Dreher, Dietmar Schmidt, Rainer Schumacher | ISBN. Sturz der Titanen (Original: Fall of Giants) ist ein im Lübbe-Verlag erschienener Roman des britischen Schriftstellers Ken Follett. Das Buch wurde zeitgleich am. Thalia: Infos zu Autor, Inhalt und Bewertungen ❤ Jetzt»Sturz der Titanen / Jahrhundert-Saga Bd. 1«nach Hause oder Ihre Filiale vor Ort bestellen! Über eBooks bei Thalia ✓»Sturz der Titanen / Jahrhundert-Saga Bd.1​«von Ken Follett & weitere eBooks online kaufen & direkt downloaden!

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen

    Sturz der Titanen: Die Jahrhundert-Saga: Die Jahrhundert-Saga. Roman | Ken Follett, Tina Dreher, Dietmar Schmidt, Rainer Schumacher | ISBN. ken follett: sturz der titanen film. Sturz der Titanen, Taschenbuch von Ken Follett bei laparrilla.eu Portofrei bestellen oder in der Filiale abholen.

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen Buying Options Video

    Ken Follett - \ Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen

    Es ist eine Zeit des Umbruchs, eine Zeit der Finsternis. Aber auch der Hoffnung, die selbst das tiefste Dunkel erfüllt. Die deutsche Adelige Carla von Ulrich ist entsetzt über das Unrecht, das im Namen des Volkes geschieht, und geht in den Widerstand , während die lebenshungrige Amerikanerin Daisy nur vom sozialen Aufstieg träumt - und eine bitterböse Überraschung erlebt!

    Berlin , Ihr Schicksal - und das eines ganzen Volkes - scheint besiegelt, als die Regierung eine Mauer erbauen lässt, die jede Flucht unmöglich machen soll.

    Doch weder Rebecca, noch ihre Kinder geben auf! Und sie bleiben nicht alleine Boston , George Jake und Verena Marquand, zwei junge Schwarze, erfahren am eigenen Leib, was Rassendiskriminierung bedeutet - und wie falsch angebliche Freunde sein können.

    Wem kann man in einer von Misstrauen und Vorurteilen beherrschten Gesellschaft trauen, wem nicht? Sturz der Titanen in Deutschland kaufen bei Amazon.

    Helene Definitely. I finished it in 1 week - only reading it on my commute which is 30 minutes.

    I also loved Pillars of the Earth but that one took me 5 trie …more Definitely. I also loved Pillars of the Earth but that one took me 5 tries.

    This one I got into immediately. Only sorry I didn't carry the 2nd book with me. See all 22 questions about Sturz der Titanen….

    Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 4. Rating details.

    More filters. Sort order. It's a little disappointing that people are rating this book on Amazon out of protest of its price. It's low rating does not give the book the recognition it deserves.

    This is my first Ken Follett novel, and I am hooked. I've read where some people have not been that interested in the subject matter of Fall of Giants and prefer the Middle Ages.

    I'm fascinated with 20th Century history, so this is right down my alley. This novel covers the years of WWI and the Russian Revolution and follows 5 fami It's a little disappointing that people are rating this book on Amazon out of protest of its price.

    Their stories all connect at some point. While you invest in the characters, the story is plot driven and moves pretty swiftly through the years.

    There are times that a character may be left for a year before we hear from him again. But you don't feel like you're missing any crucial information.

    My favorite portions were before and after the war. There is quite a bit of battlefield sections in the middle. They are well written, but I am more interested in the people than military tactics.

    I was surprised at how quickly this book reads. Despite it's huge size, you can read it pretty quickly if you have the time to devote to it.

    I thoroughly enjoyed this. My Review of Winter of the World View all 41 comments. Is that too harsh? Let me rephrase. This book is a steaming pile of garbage.

    Still a bit mean? Ken Follett does not give a whit. His editor and publisher do not care. His accountant certainly is indifferent to this complaint.

    Rather, he achieves those astronomical sales with the apathetic approbation of critics usually quick to slash and burn.

    Ken Follett cannot be criticized. He is covered in Teflon, Kevlar, and Valyrian steel. Book reviewers understand this and have given up.

    Still, it needs to be said. This book is awful. Moving on. Let us start with what Ken Follett is not. He is not a poet. He is not a short story writer.

    He does not craft literary fiction. Instead, Ken Follett writes dumbbell-sized works of historical fiction that manage to be simultaneously prodigiously researched and absolutely inauthentic.

    What is Ken Follett? Ken Follett is a wizard. He is an alchemist. He takes magic beans, plants them in fallow earth, and grows trees that shed money.

    He turns charcoal into diamonds, iron into gold; he sleeps in a room built from emeralds, and blows his nose in the finest silk.

    His ingredients are horrible characters, lack of psychological insight, lumbering plots, and striking coincidences.

    He mixes all these into 1, pages and creates a bestseller. Ken Follett has entered into a dark pact. To be fair, Fall of Giants does not aspire to be great, National Book Award-contending literary fiction.

    There isn't a very high bar for this kind of book. Johnson appear as Dostoyevsky. Instead, there are at least 2, more pages of inanities to come.

    The historical realities dictate everything that happens in this novel. You will find more drama, however, on any Wikipedia page. He certainly is.

    As the excerpt up top shows, he wants us to know that this big book is important. It would be a stretch to call these characters archetypes.

    There is no wit, warmth, or ingenuity to be found. The only surprise is that Follett does exactly what you expect him to, every single time.

    Against suffrage. Sleeping with his maid. But this is Follett. He does it. And if you also surmised that this German man will be suspiciously anti-imperial no spiked helmet or pointy mustache here!

    Or what about the Williams family? It is the extent of the use of any idioms, really. Every character, whether English or Welsh or Russian or American or German speaks in the exact same way: unconvincingly.

    That is, they converse in robotic monotones meant to deliver historical exposition to keep us moving down the timeline toward the sequel.

    There is never a moment when two characters share original thoughts, insights, or profundities. I found no evidence, on the basis of the many interactions and conversations that occur, that anyone in this novel is a human being.

    Take, for instance, an exchange between Gus and Rosa. Gus works for President Wilson. He also has a big head. Rosa has one eye.

    And perhaps some future president will want your help. Sometimes she had an unrealistically high opinion of him.

    I hope I can carry on covering the White House. God forbid, indeed. In Pillars of the Earth and World Without End , Follett demonstrated his inability to create memorable personages or write convincing dialogue.

    Yet he also did a marvelous job cramming period-specific detail into the story. Nothing like that level of detail is present here.

    Instead, famous events are often passed off in the form of exposition. Towards the end of the novel, there is a nice little scene showing rampant inflation in postwar Germany.

    This small, intimate, anecdotal moment, shows Follett at his best, working his research into his larger story. Historical fiction gives you the chance to breathe new life into actual people.

    Follett decides to ignore this opportunity completely. Despite walk-on roles by dozens of famous people, none of them is given even the hint of a spark.

    I'm not asking for something along the lines of Tolstoy's creative realization of Napoleon. But you have to do more than simply mention Sir Edward Grey's name and expect me to swoon at the verisimilitude.

    His earlier work Eye of the Needle , Night Over Water showed him to be a precise plotter of containable dramas.

    I compare it to a movie director like Kevin Smith director of small budget, dialogue-centric films directing a big action movie.

    His battle scenes are silly and empty and fake. His big Russian Revolution moments are a confusing mess. I used to be able to count on Follett to prepare three or four euphemism-free adult encounters that would leave me searching for a bottle of wine and a pack of cigs.

    Not here. As Follett has reached his widest audiences yet, he seems to have toned down his erotic impulses.

    All we get is a handjob during an opera. Perhaps the only interesting thing about this novel is its unusual political undercurrents.

    Generally, I think most people still hew to the Germans-were-the-aggressors-and-the-Allies-were-the-heroes line of World War I.

    Follett takes a different tact, lingering on Great Britain's questionable decision to enter the war.

    This is not a political hot-take. Rather, it would have been interesting in a more lively, well-written, coherent novel. This has been a rather negative review, so I will say two nice things: First, I appreciate that Follett always tries to find actual roles for his women.

    They are just as poorly-realized and one-dimensional half-dimensional? I think they are horrible in every objective, measurable way.

    Despite this, they are also fun to read. To me, the horribleness is even a bit endearing. EDIT: It has been many years, dear reader, and time has flowed on down the river.

    It now occurs to me that there is every possibility that I am missing the sequel. Life is just too short to read huge novels due solely to their unintentional hilarity.

    View all 22 comments. One of the early reviews I read stated that this book lacked one of Follett's infamous villains.

    I disagree. The ultimate villain in this enormous book is clearly war and perhaps the arrogance of world leaders. I've always had a difficult time understanding the why surrounding World War 1 and this book helps put it in perspective even if it is fiction.

    I remember learning in history class that the US got involved because the Germans torpedoed the Lusitania. And it did play a part, but that hap One of the early reviews I read stated that this book lacked one of Follett's infamous villains.

    Obviously, WW1 was fought because a bunch of arrogant world leaders didn't want to look weak. Looking back, they all look like spineless jerks that killed millions of people because they wanted to "rule the world".

    By destroying the German economic system after all the fighting was done, they helped Hitler gain power and kill millions more in WW2.

    Way to go earlyth century world leaders I really enjoyed this book and think it's worth it for everyone to read!

    While the beginning was a little slow primarily because of all the character introduction required , it picked up speed and was difficult to put down despite how heavy it was!

    If you liked this, try John Jakes' North and South trilogy. Review of Book 2: Winter of the World View all 31 comments.

    A sweeping epic with the pace of a thriller, I could scarcely put it down. This ambitious novel, the first of a projected trilogy covering most of the 20th century, tells the story of five interrelated families—American, German, Russian, English and Welsh—as they negotiate the tremendous events of the First World War and the Russian Revolution.

    Through the various characters—and there are quite a few—we witness the First World War in the trenches and in the halls of government, from each side of A sweeping epic with the pace of a thriller, I could scarcely put it down.

    Through the various characters—and there are quite a few—we witness the First World War in the trenches and in the halls of government, from each side of the conflict.

    It is a period of intense change, a time when giants, be they royalty, tradition, or whole nations, are destined to fall. Barely rumbling at first, the tempo quickens until it breaks in a crescendo of world-changing events.

    These are people we care about. We feel the plight of an unwed mother trying to survive in a society that affords her few rights and little help.

    Although personalized through the lives of these and others, the history is not trivialized. This period is described accurately — even one well versed in history may pick up something new — yet it manages to be superbly entertaining as well.

    This excellent work is destined to be a classic, and holds great promise for the following two novels. View all 27 comments.

    Do not say that I don't like historical fiction - because I do. Do not even say I don't like Follett - because I rather do. In fact, this highly praised - and very thick - volume I'd been anticipating eagerly, both because I had pleasant memories from The Pillars of the Earth and because currently I am rather WWI mad; I read Tuchman's classic works, Maddox Ford, not to mention Hemingway and Remarque, because I am fascinated by the subject.

    So what in the world went wrong with this book? This story Do not say that I don't like historical fiction - because I do. This story, which is, like many Folletts, incredibly wide in scope and encompasses a decade, about fifty characters, and several countries, described the beginning of the 20th century, with a special focus, so the book blurb claims, on WWI.

    It begins with a prologue in though the main thrust of the book occurs in and ends with an epilogue in The title, Fall of Giants is rather deceptive; one may think it refers to the fall of empires which was brought about chiefly by WWI, but in fact it refers to the fall of aristocracies.

    Here begin our issues. While the historical research that went into this book is clearly good - though with occasional snags and eyebrow-raising issues - the lens through which it was painted is speculative and political.

    Follett chooses to view everything - women's suffrage, personal relations, random little quarrels, and especially the World War - as one big struggle of the 'workingman' and the 'people' against their oppressors, the upper classes.

    Commence problems. For one, you simply cannot simplify an entire era to class struggle. Clearly, it played a significant role in the politics and life of the period, but there is a good chance that WWI actually was not an issue of class struggle.

    It had its own set of complex and unpleasant reasons, and some of them were class-related, while the majority was not.

    Secondly, at the beginning of the 20th century especially, one cannot write the class differences in the same way one does in the 11th century or whenever it was that The Pillars of the Earth was set.

    Relationships changed, notions changed actually improved somewhat , and it becomes that much more difficult to present upper class people as the villains, as ones assuming they are 'born to command' or, and this bothered me especially, as uniformly stupid.

    The book came out with gems like "all the officers were idiots, all the sergeants were smart" or something in that vein.

    Sergeants being working class, while officers, of course, belonged to the upper classes. There is definitely everything in the world to be said for merit, but the notion that in a huge, conscripted army, officers as a whole had not a scrap of talent among them is almost a statistical impossibility.

    The problem is not the mere presentation of the facts; it is well-known that they were not much better than Follett presents, and in some ways even worse - though generally the guilty parties were not so much the nobility, anymore, as the great industrialists.

    The problem is that he shoves everything and every situation into the same tired framework, presents even quarrels of ideology in the light of 'if two women from different classes fight, the upper-class arrogance must be at fault', and has some serious trouble determining who 'people' are.

    For instance, in the description of the Russian revolution, he seems to neatly forget that the middle classes are as much 'people' as the factory workers are.

    The same is true for certain situations in England. The double standard the author applies tends to show in intelligence, awareness, common sense, Now there's a pretty reverse prejudice for you; people of the working classes universally seem to possess more common sense and presence of mind in the 'real world' than their airy, upper class counterparts.

    This propensity is so universal, it practically smacks of stereotyping. After pages, it tires one quickly. If the novel's only problem were excessive political correctness - expressed also in the descriptions of the war itself - I would chalk it up to modern sensibilities, misplaced, perhaps, but generally laudable.

    Though it still irritates me, I should not criticize the novel so severely as, meant for the popular reader, it seems that the historical writer almost feels obliged, today, to prop up the wretched of this world.

    Unfortunately, these are not its own detriments. The author, once again in a nod to popular, modern literature, makes much of passionate love, ascension from the 'everyman' and the superiority of that same 'everyman'.

    All topics which are the permeating slogans of the present day but whose actual validity is dubious.

    It's astonishing how many of his positive characters somehow wind up in key political roles. Two siblings from the same family, not to mention some three or four others.

    The coincidences that are created to somehow bring these characters to the top walks of life are not particularly inspired, nor endearing. The writing itself, though, was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

    A well-written book should be able to cover up for its flaws with the language it uses; this one, sadly, only emphasized them.

    The problem appears to be twofold; the author writes a shopping-list, rather than a story. He came. He sat down.

    Also, the transitions, sometimes within the same paragraph itself, sometimes between paragraphs, are fantastically awkward.

    We may well have the sentence "He picked up the glass. The war was beginning. He put the glass down.

    The second problem with the writing is that it is staggeringly, unabashedly didactic. Follett clearly writes for an audience which he supposes to be clueless, and makes no effort at all to conceal the history and sociology lessons he is giving.

    That also makes the dialogue sound awful, along the lines of: "You know, of course, that H. Asquith, the current prime minister Nobody in their right mind.

    His speech writing is tortuous in exactly the opposite way of Ford Madox Ford's elliptical ambiguity, and murder one's sense of reality in almost the same way.

    I wish this were a better book, because I wanted very much a good book that deals with WWI. I wish this were the wide-scope, sweeping, thrilling epic it's supposed to be, because there is nothing more enjoyable than an epic that leaves you breathless, gulping it down, wanting more.

    Something like M. Kay's Far Pavilions, without the colonialism. I wish it were all of these things, but it really isn't.

    It's a book far too long for its own good on the one hand, and not nearly long or detailed enough on the other. The author gulped down so much time and space, he literally has no time or room to descent to descriptions much.

    It's a didactic, preachy, fantastically un-nuanced piece of writing, which suffers from laundry0list qualities, and apparently did not go through the capable hands of an editor.

    View all 76 comments. After being highly impressed with the Pillars series created by Follett, I hoped to find as much depth and development in the Century Trilogy.

    The premise, following the fates of five interrelated families against a backdrop of world events is brilliant in its imagining and stellar in its delivery.

    The reader is introduced to Billy Williams early in the novel, as he enters the Welsh mining pits. His family acts as a wonderful bridge as Billy's sister, Ethel, a housekeeper for the aristocratic Fit After being highly impressed with the Pillars series created by Follett, I hoped to find as much depth and development in the Century Trilogy.

    His family acts as a wonderful bridge as Billy's sister, Ethel, a housekeeper for the aristocratic Fitzherberts, takes a fateful step outside her accepted caste.

    Lady Maud Fitzherbert herself crosses deep into forbidden territory, bridging the story into another family, when she falls in love with Walter von Ulrich, a German living in London while tensions mount and the Great War is imminent.

    Filling out the cast of characters is Gus Dewar, an American law student who begins new career in Woodrow Wilson's White House, and two Russian brothers, Grigori and Lev Peshkov, who seek the freedoms that America alone can offer them.

    Follett lays the early foundations of a very powerful and deeply intertwined novel sure to grow as history progresses, putting families, nationalities, and alliances to the test throughout.

    The historical arc of the novel, , covers a great deal and touches on some very important events. With the rise of the Great War developing throughout the early part of the novel, the reader is pulled in to view things from all sides.

    Additionally, the snapshot of Russia shows the discontent seen in the streets and the eventual rise of revolutionary sentiment.

    Underlying these political changes, discussion about universal suffrage cannot be ignored or discounted as important both within Europe and North America.

    Follett captures these threads and spins them inside the larger character development seen throughout the novel. It only adds to the greatness and intricate detail of this novel.

    This was my second reading of this novel, the first coming soon after its release. I felt that once the trilogy was done, I ought to take the time to read all three and see, with no interruptions, how the series grows and its characters develop.

    Fans of the Edward Rutherfurd multi-generational sagas will surely fall in love with this book, as will those who loved the nuanced character development of Jeffrey Archer who is currently penning his own multi-generational series.

    Follett has bitten off much in this trilogy, but has shown his ability to keep all his characters under control and following a decisive path.

    He captures the reader's attention and allows them to choose a favourite storyline, knowing full well that it may merge with another before the novel is done.

    I cannot wait to see how things develop as families intermingle and offspring hold alliances that may and will clash.

    Stellar work and I am so glad I came back to this for its full effect. Kudos, Mr. Follett for this wonderful opening novel in the series.

    You have my rapt attention. Enjoyed the way historic events are intertwined with the fate of five families of different walks of life and nationalities.

    Ken Follett manages to tell a story and include details describing the end of the Edwardian era, the dawn of the Russian empire and the Prussian military ambitions.

    This is an epic tale that equally focuses on Welsh miners or Russian workers and on the aristocrats. The fourth star is for keeping me interested.

    The story was enjoyable enough and certainly kept me entertained for a couple of days. The recreation of the early 20th Century was very vivid, and I was impressed by how well Follett applied his considerable skills in this respect to a variety of nations and social classes.

    To cover so many years in any decent amount of depth was a great challenge, to which Follett rises well. The story was fast-paced and the build-up to the War was particularly well managed.

    The particularly notable aspect of The story was enjoyable enough and certainly kept me entertained for a couple of days.

    The particularly notable aspect of Follett's storytelling is that he manages to weave together a great many themes in one fluid story: the First World War; political reform in Britain; social upheaval in Russia and the development of the United States as a significant world power.

    This was well executed and allowed a free-floing narrative to become established. Given that long periods of time could elapse between two appearances of each character, anticipation builds significantly over the course of the story and it is interesting to see how each character's situation has developed over days, months or even years.

    Nevertheless, there are some problems with the book, mainly in characterisation and in the relations between the characters in the story.

    Rather than allow the characters to be merely players on a bigger stage, Follett insists on engineering direct connections between them, no matter how unlikely the circumstances.

    Many of the meetings and sightings between characters, particularly during the War, are highly contrived. For instance not once, but twice, two characters, one German, one English, are posted directly opposite each other in the trenches: convenient, given that they are old school friends.

    While this did allow a reunion over the Truce of Christmas , enabling Follett to detail this interesting occurrence and add some emotional depth to the section, the second time it happens seems rather less well considered and seems to stretch the boundaries of belief.

    In another instance, the same German is noticed by an American soldier who believes he 'may have known him before the War'. Again, the sighting seems somewhat heavily contrived and does not add much in the way of emotion or character development.

    There are many occurrences like this within the book, and the more there are, the less easy they are to accept.

    It is a shame, as this does somewhat derail the narrative and as a result I could never quite find myself immersed in the story.

    One can't help but feel that the narrative my have been served better if Follett had not deliberately created links between so many characters, rather allowing more to progress through the story unnoticed by the others.

    Characterisation did also become a problem. For example, Earl Fitzherbert begins the story as very much a product of his time: a Conservative peer with a revulsion towards reform.

    However, he is not an unplesant person and, despite his infidelities, generally comes across reasonably well.

    When he reaches the War his natural gallantry and sense of honour come to the fore when he is forced to battle against the wills of stubborn senior officers in order to persuade the BEF to put up stauncher resistance against the Germans.

    Unfortunately, after this he becomes rather more of a charicature, almost becoming a pantomime villain towards the end. He becomes the typical 'donkey' officer, so beloved of mainstream history and so clear in the modern public imagination.

    Indeed, this is a problem with the recreation of the War throughout the book. Follett's is a modern, mainstream interpretation, mainly based on the thoughts of anti-war poets from the trenches and is firmly rooted modern perceptions.

    Much recent history on the period has demonstrated the gallantry of officers, as well as the numerous new tactics implemented by British high command in order to win the War: Follett prefers to rely on the popular imagining of waves of brave privates and NCOs being thrown repeatedly against barbed wire and machine guns while the officers sat safe in the dugouts.

    Such interpretations are not true. By the end of the War, the same officers, notably the much-maligned Douglas Haig, had turned a loose bunch of several million conscripts and volunteers into an extremely efficient military machine: no mean feat when one considers that the pre-War British army was only around , men at its height.

    Even during the peak of the Peninsular War and Waterloo campaign the army only reached the dizzying heights of , men. Moreover, Follett seems to create an anti-war feeling throughout the lower classes, with only the upper classes in all the countries in the book showing support for the War.

    This is certainly untrue and there is plenty of poetry from front-line troops who enjoyed their War and believed wholeheartedly in their purpose.

    I don't deny that there was anti-war feeling, but I do feel that Follett's interpretation is somewhat misleading in suggesting how widespread it was.

    The novel also seems to suggest that German support for the War extended no further than the upper classes and the diplomatic service: this is, again, disingenuous.

    I am no expert on the matter, but for a very convincing argument, Gordon Corrigan's 'Mud, Blood and Poppycock' is an essential counterpoint to many modern assumptions.

    Finally, the rapidity and ease with which the characters seemed to fall in love with each other became tedious.

    Every time it led to some rather stilted love scenes which broke the flow of the narrative. Furthermore, the relationships seemed reasonably unimportant and did not deserve as prominent a place in the overall story as they seemed to receive.

    The numerous times when characters declared their undying love for each other, or fell in love after the briefest of associations became irritating rather than engendering any emotional response to the situation.

    That said, I would recommend the book as it was an entertaining story and Follett's attention to historical detail is highly admirable, making it an enjoyable story.

    I look forward to the rest of the trilogy and my only hope is that the later characters might be more deserving of a response from the reader.

    Since I wrote the review the sequel has come out and I haven't even thought about picking it up. It's a shame, because I had heard good things of him, and will probably still try Pillars of the Earth which has sat on my shelf for far too long.

    View all 15 comments. Mar 24, R. So addictive! I am posting a review on YouTube. My review is entirely character-based, because the plot is just World War I.

    If you enjoy multi generational family sagas this trilogy is a must read. It has a healthy batch of heroes and assholes that make your skin crawl.

    View all 7 comments. Perhaps the human race would wipe itself out completely, and leave the world to the birds and trees, Walter thought apocalyptically.

    Perhaps that would be for the best. Not an easy task, I tell you that. As always, he is being hailed both as a genius and a complete failure as a writer, but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.

    I also think it depends on your expectations of his work. Do you expect perfect historical account seen from multiple POV's, or do you read him for the human drama and interpersonal relationships?

    Either way, I doubt you will be fully satisfied. The way he writes how people communicate with each-other is stiff, cold, unnatural and very robotic.

    There are no gradations, no nuances, no color to any of it. It is like a overly-dramatic Mexican soap-opera, where all the evil folks are only evil and all the good ones are pure as snow.

    Yes, they supposedly always go through some ethical or moral dilemma, supposedly they are tempted toward the darkness or light, and very predictably they go with their initial inclinations.

    If this type of drama works for you, you get plenty of it: " That was why they bought the paper. The novel takes place predominantly in England, France, America and Germany in the years before WWI and all the way to several of years after it finishes.

    It gives a very good overall look at the class, political, and international tensions which led the world to the first really major war in the 20th century.

    However, once again Follett is very ambitious at attempting to cover most of the war and the conditions of the people of the different sides under them, thus falling short in truly expressing the horrors of that time.

    Don't get me wrong, I think he does great in a "WWI History Review Class " kind of way, but when you take on this type of scope, it is difficult to make a real point of the different struggles, since everything becomes more of a lesson and less of a human condition portrait His prose does not help the matter.

    It is stiff and emotionless, despite being informative and succinct. At times I felt like I was reading telegrams from the front lines of the war.

    I can see how it would be very interesting and illuminating for people new to the subject or those who have learned only from one side of the conflict and this is why I think it has its place in contemporary historical fiction, but just as always, I wish there was more!!!!

    So much more! Funny to say that about a book of close to a pages. He takes sides by making the characters representing the ones he sympathies with the smart, likable, honorable and honest ones, the ones which by the positive slant of the story, the readers will gravitate to and root for.

    Thus we get the smart, independent and much more honorable than all others Billy, a Welsh miner with barely anything to his name, juxtaposed against the stick-in-the-mud conservative, oblivious of real life and emotions, unthinking, hating, callas and also a bit weak aristocrat Fitz, who has everything but wants more and the status-quo preserved as far as the class system is concerned.

    It is not the only example where we get to hate the aristocracy and think them incompetent and stupid, while the uneducated, simple, poor, and hard-working guys seem to always come up with the moral high ground.

    We are used to that though, since we got plenty of it in the Pillars of the Earth series. However, he changes that when it comes to Russia and goes another way with the wealthy in America and the uneducated classes there Gus, the American wealthy class politician who works for the president comes off as a boy-scout in training, earnest, honest and honorable, while the immigrants in the country are all criminals and rubbish Obviously not everything is neutral If I am being completely honest with myself, I do not think that any of us can write with complete neutrality, since everything goes through our perceptions and our personal ideologies and prejudices do end up on the page, no matter how much we try not to, so I am not really complaining, just pointing it out In a democracy the president is subject to the voters.

    President Wilson says a leader must treat public opinion the way a sailor deals with the wind, using it to blow the ship in one direction or another, but never trying to go directly against it.

    As long as you look at it this way and forgive omissions due to impossibility to cover everything in this format, I think this is a good book to give you the feel for the World during WWI.

    Don't expect something too deeply emotional, he does tend to point and tell, not so much stop and look for the hows or whys of human sensibilities.

    I know I will read the rest of the books in the series and will try to keep my expectations to the limits of those conditions: : : " View all 9 comments.

    At pages, Fall of the Giants is a massive tome and the first book in The Century Trilogy, follows the fates of five interrelated families—American, German, Russian, English, and Welsh—as they move through the world-shaking dramas of the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the struggle for women's suffrage.

    These characters find their lives inextricably entangled in a saga of unfolding drama and intriguing complexity, Fall of Giants moves seamlessly from Washington to St.

    Petersburg, At pages, Fall of the Giants is a massive tome and the first book in The Century Trilogy, follows the fates of five interrelated families—American, German, Russian, English, and Welsh—as they move through the world-shaking dramas of the First World War, the Russian Revolution, and the struggle for women's suffrage.

    Petersburg, from the dirt and danger of the coal mines to the glittering chandeliers of a palace, from the corridors of power to the bedrooms of the mighty.

    As with all Ken Follett novels the characters and historical events are extremely well researched. I love his attention to detail.

    I really enjoyed following the lives of all the families involved as well as reading the dramatic historical events at the beginning of the 20th Century.

    I love books that can incorporate history with fiction and not make the reader feel bogged down with facts but yet you come away with a little more knowledge than you started with.

    Fall of Giants is a big read and I started the novel by listening to it as an audio book but switched in favour of a paperback.

    For me this was a great historical read and I am really looking forward to Part Two of this trilogy.

    Das Buch ist spannend geschrieben. Nur noch 1 auf Lager. Bewertung verfassen. Nur: für diese Seiten brauchte ich gut 11 Monate! Näheres Need For Speed Stream German Movie4k Sie durch einen Klick auf das i. Also alles in allem ist der neue Follett sehr, sehr, sehr lesenswert, natürlich hat er auch die eine oder andere Schwäche, aber welches Buch hat das nicht?!? Und nun hat er dies mit dem ersten Buch der Triologie um die Kinder der Freiheit erneut geschafft. Wie erleben Menschen aus den unterschiedlichste Schichten und Ländern diese Umbrüche? Aber mitunter ist es durchaus erhellend, ganz einfach mal den Klappentext zu Vikings Kritik. März - kartoniert - Seiten. Rezension aus Deutschland vom Mit Ethel fängt es an und lässt einem nicht mehr zur Ruhe kommen. Angaben zu Preissenkungen beziehen sich auf den vorherigen Preis. Auf der einen Seite Reichtum und Richard Kiel. Neue Kurzmeinungen Positiv :. Währenddessen heiratet sie und bekommt eine Tochter. Derzeit Lovebird ein Tatort Scheinwelten beim Filtern der Rezensionen auf. Für mich ein absolutes Lesehighlight. Am Anfang ödete es mich an, dann gewann ich den Eindruck, dass mir das alles schon lange bekannt sei.

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen Kurzgefasst:

    Eine gelungene Kombination aus Roman und Geschichtsunterricht! Beyond Skyline Kinox nunmehr aber der 2. Wie werden Bewertungen berechnet? Frühstücks Adventskalender 4 Sterne. Funny shipping, the book make a visit in Australia, before arrived in Canada. Rezension aus Deutschland vom 4. Next page. Ist ja nett gemeint, souverän und ein Zeichen von Kompetenz, aber einfach zuviel des Guten. Einer, Mr Robot Streaming solche "historischen" Romane schreiben will, muss schon ein wenig mehr über die Länder und Leute erfahren. But opting out of some of these cookies Name Der Rose have an effect on your browsing experience. Eine Familie Das Aktuelle Sportstudio Wiederholung England zwischen Arbeiterschicht und Adel. After being highly impressed with the Pillars series created by Follett, I hoped to find as much depth and development in the Century Trilogy. Normally I can rate a book pretty quickly, without giving much thought to it, but this one, was difficult. But this is Follett. Follett versteht es wie kein anderer unterhaltsam Geschichte durch Geschichten Will Smith Filme erzählen. Eisfieber: Roman Lübbe Belletristik. Folletts Gabe, geschichtliche Fakten und Daten stimmig und ansprechend in seine Erzählungen einzubetten, hat er schon so viel Male unter Beweis gestellt. Volker Kutscher. Alle drei in den Einkaufswagen. Gleichzeitig treten in Amerika die Schwarzen für ihre Bürgerrechte ein. Das Buch macht einen Autopsy Jane Doe recherchierten Eindruck, ist unterhaltsam und spannend geschrieben. Alle Rezensionen anzeigen. Avinja vor 3 Jahren. Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen Sturz der Titanen, Taschenbuch von Ken Follett bei laparrilla.eu Portofrei bestellen oder in der Filiale abholen. Wie in seinen großen historischen Romanen entwirft Ken Follett in Sturz der Titanen ein gewaltiges Panorama einer ganzen Epoche, deren Mehr zum Inhalt​. Damit ist auch der Ausblick auf die Folgeromane gemacht, die mit großer Vorfreude erwartet werden dürfen. Sturz der Titanen. Autor: Ken Follett; Verlag: Lübbe. ken follett: sturz der titanen film.

    Sollte ihr Lieblingsbuch auf dieser Seite fehlen, hinterlassen Sie uns bitte einen Kommentar. Ach ja, noch etwas, wenn Ihnen diese Webseite gefällt, freuen wir uns, wenn Sie Reihenfolge.

    Bleiben Sie gesund! LG, Jere. Bestseller Nr. So werden die Familiengeschichten in der nächsten Generation weitergeführt. Spannend erzählen die Familienmitglieder, wie sie den Zweiten Weltkrieg erlebt haben.

    Doch sein Plan wird immer wieder durchkreuzt von Intrigen und hinterhältigen Machenschaften seiner Widersacher. Nur eine kleine Gruppe von beherzten Aufständischen muss sich gegen Lord Hamleigh und seine Mitstreiter behaupten, die mit immer neuen Mitteln versuchen, den Bau der Kathedrale zu vereiteln.

    Doch mit Mut, Leidenschaft und Kampfgeist gelingt es, den Bau voranzutreiben. Katholiken und Protestanten stehen in einem erbitterten Kampf um Macht und Recht.

    Während Neds Kampf um die junge Margery aussichtslos erscheint, weil seine Auserwählte Katholikin ist, muss er sich zeitgleich um seinen schlimmsten Rivalen und früheren Mitschüler Rollo Fitzgerald durchsetzen, der wie besessen alles daran setzt, heimliche Protestanten zu enttarnen und die Konfessionen gegeneinander aufzubringen.

    Liebe Leserin, lieber Leser, wir freuen uns sehr, wenn Sie uns im Kommentarbereich ihre Meinung mitteilen. Ihre E-Mail wird von uns weder veröffentlicht noch erhalten Sie Werbung.

    Kommentar abschicken. Nur noch 3 auf Lager. Weitere Artikel entdecken. Noah Gordon. Der Diamant des Salomon: Roman. Nur noch 13 auf Lager mehr ist unterwegs.

    Jahrhundert-Trilogie im Taschenbuchformat: 1. Sturz der Titanen - 2. Kinder der Freiheit. Alle kostenlosen Kindle-Leseanwendungen anzeigen.

    Sie haben keinen Kindle? Hier kaufen oder eine gratis Kindle Lese-App herunterladen. Produktinformation Leseprobe S. Top-Trendprodukte im Zusammenhang mit diesem Artikel.

    Bar sport Universale economica Feltrinelli, Band Stefano Benni. Marcel Proust. Nur noch 18 auf Lager. Mila Olsen.

    Chefsachen: Rico - ein Leben als Schattenhund im Tierheim. Previous page. Aktuelle Wiedergabe Ken Follett. Aktuelle Wiedergabe Sturz der Titanen.

    Next page. Wie werden Bewertungen berechnet? Spitzenrezensionen Neueste zuerst Spitzenrezensionen. Spitzenbewertungen aus Deutschland. Derzeit tritt ein Problem beim Filtern der Rezensionen auf.

    Verifizierter Kauf. Es ist immer wieder erstaunlich, mit welcher Argumentation gewisse Zeitgenossen vorzugsweise Historical fiction gives you the chance to breathe new life into actual people.

    Follett decides to ignore this opportunity completely. Despite walk-on roles by dozens of famous people, none of them is given even the hint of a spark.

    I'm not asking for something along the lines of Tolstoy's creative realization of Napoleon. But you have to do more than simply mention Sir Edward Grey's name and expect me to swoon at the verisimilitude.

    His earlier work Eye of the Needle , Night Over Water showed him to be a precise plotter of containable dramas. I compare it to a movie director like Kevin Smith director of small budget, dialogue-centric films directing a big action movie.

    His battle scenes are silly and empty and fake. His big Russian Revolution moments are a confusing mess. I used to be able to count on Follett to prepare three or four euphemism-free adult encounters that would leave me searching for a bottle of wine and a pack of cigs.

    Not here. As Follett has reached his widest audiences yet, he seems to have toned down his erotic impulses. All we get is a handjob during an opera.

    Perhaps the only interesting thing about this novel is its unusual political undercurrents. Generally, I think most people still hew to the Germans-were-the-aggressors-and-the-Allies-were-the-heroes line of World War I.

    Follett takes a different tact, lingering on Great Britain's questionable decision to enter the war. This is not a political hot-take.

    Rather, it would have been interesting in a more lively, well-written, coherent novel. This has been a rather negative review, so I will say two nice things: First, I appreciate that Follett always tries to find actual roles for his women.

    They are just as poorly-realized and one-dimensional half-dimensional? I think they are horrible in every objective, measurable way.

    Despite this, they are also fun to read. To me, the horribleness is even a bit endearing. EDIT: It has been many years, dear reader, and time has flowed on down the river.

    It now occurs to me that there is every possibility that I am missing the sequel. Life is just too short to read huge novels due solely to their unintentional hilarity.

    View all 22 comments. One of the early reviews I read stated that this book lacked one of Follett's infamous villains.

    I disagree. The ultimate villain in this enormous book is clearly war and perhaps the arrogance of world leaders. I've always had a difficult time understanding the why surrounding World War 1 and this book helps put it in perspective even if it is fiction.

    I remember learning in history class that the US got involved because the Germans torpedoed the Lusitania. And it did play a part, but that hap One of the early reviews I read stated that this book lacked one of Follett's infamous villains.

    Obviously, WW1 was fought because a bunch of arrogant world leaders didn't want to look weak. Looking back, they all look like spineless jerks that killed millions of people because they wanted to "rule the world".

    By destroying the German economic system after all the fighting was done, they helped Hitler gain power and kill millions more in WW2.

    Way to go earlyth century world leaders I really enjoyed this book and think it's worth it for everyone to read! While the beginning was a little slow primarily because of all the character introduction required , it picked up speed and was difficult to put down despite how heavy it was!

    If you liked this, try John Jakes' North and South trilogy. Review of Book 2: Winter of the World View all 31 comments.

    A sweeping epic with the pace of a thriller, I could scarcely put it down. This ambitious novel, the first of a projected trilogy covering most of the 20th century, tells the story of five interrelated families—American, German, Russian, English and Welsh—as they negotiate the tremendous events of the First World War and the Russian Revolution.

    Through the various characters—and there are quite a few—we witness the First World War in the trenches and in the halls of government, from each side of A sweeping epic with the pace of a thriller, I could scarcely put it down.

    Through the various characters—and there are quite a few—we witness the First World War in the trenches and in the halls of government, from each side of the conflict.

    It is a period of intense change, a time when giants, be they royalty, tradition, or whole nations, are destined to fall. Barely rumbling at first, the tempo quickens until it breaks in a crescendo of world-changing events.

    These are people we care about. We feel the plight of an unwed mother trying to survive in a society that affords her few rights and little help.

    Although personalized through the lives of these and others, the history is not trivialized. This period is described accurately — even one well versed in history may pick up something new — yet it manages to be superbly entertaining as well.

    This excellent work is destined to be a classic, and holds great promise for the following two novels.

    View all 27 comments. Do not say that I don't like historical fiction - because I do. Do not even say I don't like Follett - because I rather do.

    In fact, this highly praised - and very thick - volume I'd been anticipating eagerly, both because I had pleasant memories from The Pillars of the Earth and because currently I am rather WWI mad; I read Tuchman's classic works, Maddox Ford, not to mention Hemingway and Remarque, because I am fascinated by the subject.

    So what in the world went wrong with this book? This story Do not say that I don't like historical fiction - because I do.

    This story, which is, like many Folletts, incredibly wide in scope and encompasses a decade, about fifty characters, and several countries, described the beginning of the 20th century, with a special focus, so the book blurb claims, on WWI.

    It begins with a prologue in though the main thrust of the book occurs in and ends with an epilogue in The title, Fall of Giants is rather deceptive; one may think it refers to the fall of empires which was brought about chiefly by WWI, but in fact it refers to the fall of aristocracies.

    Here begin our issues. While the historical research that went into this book is clearly good - though with occasional snags and eyebrow-raising issues - the lens through which it was painted is speculative and political.

    Follett chooses to view everything - women's suffrage, personal relations, random little quarrels, and especially the World War - as one big struggle of the 'workingman' and the 'people' against their oppressors, the upper classes.

    Commence problems. For one, you simply cannot simplify an entire era to class struggle. Clearly, it played a significant role in the politics and life of the period, but there is a good chance that WWI actually was not an issue of class struggle.

    It had its own set of complex and unpleasant reasons, and some of them were class-related, while the majority was not.

    Secondly, at the beginning of the 20th century especially, one cannot write the class differences in the same way one does in the 11th century or whenever it was that The Pillars of the Earth was set.

    Relationships changed, notions changed actually improved somewhat , and it becomes that much more difficult to present upper class people as the villains, as ones assuming they are 'born to command' or, and this bothered me especially, as uniformly stupid.

    The book came out with gems like "all the officers were idiots, all the sergeants were smart" or something in that vein. Sergeants being working class, while officers, of course, belonged to the upper classes.

    There is definitely everything in the world to be said for merit, but the notion that in a huge, conscripted army, officers as a whole had not a scrap of talent among them is almost a statistical impossibility.

    The problem is not the mere presentation of the facts; it is well-known that they were not much better than Follett presents, and in some ways even worse - though generally the guilty parties were not so much the nobility, anymore, as the great industrialists.

    The problem is that he shoves everything and every situation into the same tired framework, presents even quarrels of ideology in the light of 'if two women from different classes fight, the upper-class arrogance must be at fault', and has some serious trouble determining who 'people' are.

    For instance, in the description of the Russian revolution, he seems to neatly forget that the middle classes are as much 'people' as the factory workers are.

    The same is true for certain situations in England. The double standard the author applies tends to show in intelligence, awareness, common sense, Now there's a pretty reverse prejudice for you; people of the working classes universally seem to possess more common sense and presence of mind in the 'real world' than their airy, upper class counterparts.

    This propensity is so universal, it practically smacks of stereotyping. After pages, it tires one quickly. If the novel's only problem were excessive political correctness - expressed also in the descriptions of the war itself - I would chalk it up to modern sensibilities, misplaced, perhaps, but generally laudable.

    Though it still irritates me, I should not criticize the novel so severely as, meant for the popular reader, it seems that the historical writer almost feels obliged, today, to prop up the wretched of this world.

    Unfortunately, these are not its own detriments. The author, once again in a nod to popular, modern literature, makes much of passionate love, ascension from the 'everyman' and the superiority of that same 'everyman'.

    All topics which are the permeating slogans of the present day but whose actual validity is dubious. It's astonishing how many of his positive characters somehow wind up in key political roles.

    Two siblings from the same family, not to mention some three or four others. The coincidences that are created to somehow bring these characters to the top walks of life are not particularly inspired, nor endearing.

    The writing itself, though, was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. A well-written book should be able to cover up for its flaws with the language it uses; this one, sadly, only emphasized them.

    The problem appears to be twofold; the author writes a shopping-list, rather than a story. He came. He sat down. Also, the transitions, sometimes within the same paragraph itself, sometimes between paragraphs, are fantastically awkward.

    We may well have the sentence "He picked up the glass. The war was beginning. He put the glass down. The second problem with the writing is that it is staggeringly, unabashedly didactic.

    Follett clearly writes for an audience which he supposes to be clueless, and makes no effort at all to conceal the history and sociology lessons he is giving.

    That also makes the dialogue sound awful, along the lines of: "You know, of course, that H. Asquith, the current prime minister Nobody in their right mind.

    His speech writing is tortuous in exactly the opposite way of Ford Madox Ford's elliptical ambiguity, and murder one's sense of reality in almost the same way.

    I wish this were a better book, because I wanted very much a good book that deals with WWI. I wish this were the wide-scope, sweeping, thrilling epic it's supposed to be, because there is nothing more enjoyable than an epic that leaves you breathless, gulping it down, wanting more.

    Something like M. Kay's Far Pavilions, without the colonialism. I wish it were all of these things, but it really isn't. It's a book far too long for its own good on the one hand, and not nearly long or detailed enough on the other.

    The author gulped down so much time and space, he literally has no time or room to descent to descriptions much.

    It's a didactic, preachy, fantastically un-nuanced piece of writing, which suffers from laundry0list qualities, and apparently did not go through the capable hands of an editor.

    View all 76 comments. After being highly impressed with the Pillars series created by Follett, I hoped to find as much depth and development in the Century Trilogy.

    The premise, following the fates of five interrelated families against a backdrop of world events is brilliant in its imagining and stellar in its delivery.

    The reader is introduced to Billy Williams early in the novel, as he enters the Welsh mining pits. His family acts as a wonderful bridge as Billy's sister, Ethel, a housekeeper for the aristocratic Fit After being highly impressed with the Pillars series created by Follett, I hoped to find as much depth and development in the Century Trilogy.

    His family acts as a wonderful bridge as Billy's sister, Ethel, a housekeeper for the aristocratic Fitzherberts, takes a fateful step outside her accepted caste.

    Lady Maud Fitzherbert herself crosses deep into forbidden territory, bridging the story into another family, when she falls in love with Walter von Ulrich, a German living in London while tensions mount and the Great War is imminent.

    Filling out the cast of characters is Gus Dewar, an American law student who begins new career in Woodrow Wilson's White House, and two Russian brothers, Grigori and Lev Peshkov, who seek the freedoms that America alone can offer them.

    Follett lays the early foundations of a very powerful and deeply intertwined novel sure to grow as history progresses, putting families, nationalities, and alliances to the test throughout.

    The historical arc of the novel, , covers a great deal and touches on some very important events. With the rise of the Great War developing throughout the early part of the novel, the reader is pulled in to view things from all sides.

    Additionally, the snapshot of Russia shows the discontent seen in the streets and the eventual rise of revolutionary sentiment.

    Underlying these political changes, discussion about universal suffrage cannot be ignored or discounted as important both within Europe and North America.

    Follett captures these threads and spins them inside the larger character development seen throughout the novel.

    It only adds to the greatness and intricate detail of this novel. This was my second reading of this novel, the first coming soon after its release.

    I felt that once the trilogy was done, I ought to take the time to read all three and see, with no interruptions, how the series grows and its characters develop.

    Fans of the Edward Rutherfurd multi-generational sagas will surely fall in love with this book, as will those who loved the nuanced character development of Jeffrey Archer who is currently penning his own multi-generational series.

    Follett has bitten off much in this trilogy, but has shown his ability to keep all his characters under control and following a decisive path.

    He captures the reader's attention and allows them to choose a favourite storyline, knowing full well that it may merge with another before the novel is done.

    I cannot wait to see how things develop as families intermingle and offspring hold alliances that may and will clash. Stellar work and I am so glad I came back to this for its full effect.

    Kudos, Mr. Follett for this wonderful opening novel in the series. You have my rapt attention. Enjoyed the way historic events are intertwined with the fate of five families of different walks of life and nationalities.

    Ken Follett manages to tell a story and include details describing the end of the Edwardian era, the dawn of the Russian empire and the Prussian military ambitions.

    This is an epic tale that equally focuses on Welsh miners or Russian workers and on the aristocrats. The fourth star is for keeping me interested.

    The story was enjoyable enough and certainly kept me entertained for a couple of days. The recreation of the early 20th Century was very vivid, and I was impressed by how well Follett applied his considerable skills in this respect to a variety of nations and social classes.

    To cover so many years in any decent amount of depth was a great challenge, to which Follett rises well.

    The story was fast-paced and the build-up to the War was particularly well managed. The particularly notable aspect of The story was enjoyable enough and certainly kept me entertained for a couple of days.

    The particularly notable aspect of Follett's storytelling is that he manages to weave together a great many themes in one fluid story: the First World War; political reform in Britain; social upheaval in Russia and the development of the United States as a significant world power.

    This was well executed and allowed a free-floing narrative to become established. Given that long periods of time could elapse between two appearances of each character, anticipation builds significantly over the course of the story and it is interesting to see how each character's situation has developed over days, months or even years.

    Nevertheless, there are some problems with the book, mainly in characterisation and in the relations between the characters in the story.

    Rather than allow the characters to be merely players on a bigger stage, Follett insists on engineering direct connections between them, no matter how unlikely the circumstances.

    Many of the meetings and sightings between characters, particularly during the War, are highly contrived. For instance not once, but twice, two characters, one German, one English, are posted directly opposite each other in the trenches: convenient, given that they are old school friends.

    While this did allow a reunion over the Truce of Christmas , enabling Follett to detail this interesting occurrence and add some emotional depth to the section, the second time it happens seems rather less well considered and seems to stretch the boundaries of belief.

    In another instance, the same German is noticed by an American soldier who believes he 'may have known him before the War'.

    Again, the sighting seems somewhat heavily contrived and does not add much in the way of emotion or character development.

    There are many occurrences like this within the book, and the more there are, the less easy they are to accept. It is a shame, as this does somewhat derail the narrative and as a result I could never quite find myself immersed in the story.

    One can't help but feel that the narrative my have been served better if Follett had not deliberately created links between so many characters, rather allowing more to progress through the story unnoticed by the others.

    Characterisation did also become a problem. For example, Earl Fitzherbert begins the story as very much a product of his time: a Conservative peer with a revulsion towards reform.

    However, he is not an unplesant person and, despite his infidelities, generally comes across reasonably well. When he reaches the War his natural gallantry and sense of honour come to the fore when he is forced to battle against the wills of stubborn senior officers in order to persuade the BEF to put up stauncher resistance against the Germans.

    Unfortunately, after this he becomes rather more of a charicature, almost becoming a pantomime villain towards the end.

    He becomes the typical 'donkey' officer, so beloved of mainstream history and so clear in the modern public imagination.

    Indeed, this is a problem with the recreation of the War throughout the book. Follett's is a modern, mainstream interpretation, mainly based on the thoughts of anti-war poets from the trenches and is firmly rooted modern perceptions.

    Much recent history on the period has demonstrated the gallantry of officers, as well as the numerous new tactics implemented by British high command in order to win the War: Follett prefers to rely on the popular imagining of waves of brave privates and NCOs being thrown repeatedly against barbed wire and machine guns while the officers sat safe in the dugouts.

    Such interpretations are not true. By the end of the War, the same officers, notably the much-maligned Douglas Haig, had turned a loose bunch of several million conscripts and volunteers into an extremely efficient military machine: no mean feat when one considers that the pre-War British army was only around , men at its height.

    Even during the peak of the Peninsular War and Waterloo campaign the army only reached the dizzying heights of , men. Moreover, Follett seems to create an anti-war feeling throughout the lower classes, with only the upper classes in all the countries in the book showing support for the War.

    This is certainly untrue and there is plenty of poetry from front-line troops who enjoyed their War and believed wholeheartedly in their purpose.

    I don't deny that there was anti-war feeling, but I do feel that Follett's interpretation is somewhat misleading in suggesting how widespread it was.

    The novel also seems to suggest that German support for the War extended no further than the upper classes and the diplomatic service: this is, again, disingenuous.

    I am no expert on the matter, but for a very convincing argument, Gordon Corrigan's 'Mud, Blood and Poppycock' is an essential counterpoint to many modern assumptions.

    Finally, the rapidity and ease with which the characters seemed to fall in love with each other became tedious.

    Every time it led to some rather stilted love scenes which broke the flow of the narrative. Furthermore, the relationships seemed reasonably unimportant and did not deserve as prominent a place in the overall story as they seemed to receive.

    The numerous times when characters declared their undying love for each other, or fell in love after the briefest of associations became irritating rather than engendering any emotional response to the situation.

    That said, I would recommend the book as it was an entertaining story and Follett's attention to historical detail is highly admirable, making it an enjoyable story.

    I look forward to the rest of the trilogy and my only hope is that the later characters might be more deserving of a response from the reader. Since I wrote the review the sequel has come out and I haven't even thought about picking it up.

    It's a shame, because I had heard good things of him, and will probably still try Pillars of the Earth which has sat on my shelf for far too long.

    View all 15 comments. Mar 24, R. So addictive! I am posting a review on YouTube. My review is entirely character-based, because the plot is just World War I.

    If you enjoy multi generational family sagas this trilogy is a must read. It has a healthy batch of heroes and assholes that make your skin crawl.

    View all 7 comments. Perhaps the human race would wipe itself out completely, and leave the world to the birds and trees, Walter thought apocalyptically.

    Perhaps that would be for the best. Not an easy task, I tell you that. As always, he is being hailed both as a genius and a complete failure as a writer, but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle.

    I also think it depends on your expectations of his work. Do you expect perfect historical account seen from multiple POV's, or do you read him for the human drama and interpersonal relationships?

    Either way, I doubt you will be fully satisfied. The way he writes how people communicate with each-other is stiff, cold, unnatural and very robotic.

    There are no gradations, no nuances, no color to any of it. It is like a overly-dramatic Mexican soap-opera, where all the evil folks are only evil and all the good ones are pure as snow.

    Yes, they supposedly always go through some ethical or moral dilemma, supposedly they are tempted toward the darkness or light, and very predictably they go with their initial inclinations.

    If this type of drama works for you, you get plenty of it: " That was why they bought the paper. The novel takes place predominantly in England, France, America and Germany in the years before WWI and all the way to several of years after it finishes.

    It gives a very good overall look at the class, political, and international tensions which led the world to the first really major war in the 20th century.

    However, once again Follett is very ambitious at attempting to cover most of the war and the conditions of the people of the different sides under them, thus falling short in truly expressing the horrors of that time.

    Don't get me wrong, I think he does great in a "WWI History Review Class " kind of way, but when you take on this type of scope, it is difficult to make a real point of the different struggles, since everything becomes more of a lesson and less of a human condition portrait His prose does not help the matter.

    It is stiff and emotionless, despite being informative and succinct. At times I felt like I was reading telegrams from the front lines of the war.

    I can see how it would be very interesting and illuminating for people new to the subject or those who have learned only from one side of the conflict and this is why I think it has its place in contemporary historical fiction, but just as always, I wish there was more!!!!

    So much more! Funny to say that about a book of close to a pages. He takes sides by making the characters representing the ones he sympathies with the smart, likable, honorable and honest ones, the ones which by the positive slant of the story, the readers will gravitate to and root for.

    Thus we get the smart, independent and much more honorable than all others Billy, a Welsh miner with barely anything to his name, juxtaposed against the stick-in-the-mud conservative, oblivious of real life and emotions, unthinking, hating, callas and also a bit weak aristocrat Fitz, who has everything but wants more and the status-quo preserved as far as the class system is concerned.

    It is not the only example where we get to hate the aristocracy and think them incompetent and stupid, while the uneducated, simple, poor, and hard-working guys seem to always come up with the moral high ground.

    We are used to that though, since we got plenty of it in the Pillars of the Earth series. However, he changes that when it comes to Russia and goes another way with the wealthy in America and the uneducated classes there Gus, the American wealthy class politician who works for the president comes off as a boy-scout in training, earnest, honest and honorable, while the immigrants in the country are all criminals and rubbish Obviously not everything is neutral If I am being completely honest with myself, I do not think that any of us can write with complete neutrality, since everything goes through our perceptions and our personal ideologies and prejudices do end up on the page, no matter how much we try not to, so I am not really complaining, just pointing it out

    Ken Follett Sturz Der Titanen - Neue Kurzmeinungen

    Im Roman werden Billy durchwegs positive Charakterzüge zugeschrieben. Noah Gordon. Das Buch wurde mir empfohlen und ich wurde nicht enttäuscht. Geld verdienen mit Amazon. We see it from the perspective of an English Noblemen, an English working class family, a pair of Russian brothers, a German with strong prospects in government and an undersecretary working for the Wilson administration. A strong four stars Petersburg als Waisen auf. Geld verdienen mit Amazon. There were only a couple of times that I felt it was slow, and that was when the focus was on characters that I wasn't so interested in.

    Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

    3 Kommentare

    Eine Antwort schreiben

    Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.