Rating: 
Summary: "July's People" not everyone's cup of tea...
Review: "July's People," more than anything else, is a character study, exploring how certain individuals deal with role-reversal. Set in apartheid South Africa, the white "haves" control virtually everything, while the black "have nots" are a subjugated people. But the blacks revolt, and the country is in chaos. July, the long-time black servant of the white Smalls family, takes pity on them and guides them to his own, out-of-the-way village (and safety).In effect, July has gone from servant to savior, and the change in roles is not lost on him. He realizes the new importance he has gained, and begins to assert that authority. Before long, July sets his sights on the Smalls' family car. Because the Smalls' cannot drive it without risking capture and death, July assumes the role of driver, and soon, he is taking it out for errands without asking the Smalls' permission. This does not sit well with the Smalls who, despite their predicament, still see July as their servant (and he would never have done such a thing back home)! This is just one of many little conflicts, either real or imagined, that occur between the displaced Smalls and their host, July. I would say this was an "OK" book, but there are two items I must mention that did not thrill me. First, the book does not have much happening in the way of actual events. It is a short book, and I suppose that's part of the reason. But even so, relatively little happens here. The Smalls have a few adventures, like meeting July's family and the other villagers, and later, meeting July's tribal chief. But there's not much beyond those events. Again, Gordimer devotes most of the book to how the characters react to their new situation, rather than creating additional ones. Secondly, although it has been noted elsewhere, I must mention the use of punctuation in the book. Gordimer uses dashes (-) where many other marks should be (", ;, :, etc.). This made for difficult reading at first, but I will say that I did, eventually, become accustomed to it. I would recommend reading it in as few sittings as possible, however; otherwise, every time you pick up the book, you will have to "re-acquaint" yourself with Gordimer's writing style. I confess I did not like this style. More than once I found myself re-reading entire paragraphs, or even pages, because I wasn't sure which character had just spoken, or to whom. I don't find that "artistic," as others have written; just annoying. (But don't let that be the deciding factor of whether or not you'll read it; as I mentioned, you will get used to it after a few pages.) Final rating: three stars. Interesting concept and character study, but could have been more eventful. Punctuation/writing style didn't help.
Rating: 
Summary: Haunting and futuristic
Review: A haunting, futuristic novel, imagining whites fleeing from black terror in South Africa. Explores the complex relationship between blacks and whites, masters and servants, and individuals and their environment.
Rating:
Summary: Haunting and futuristic
Review: A haunting, futuristic novel, imagining whites fleeing from black terror in South Africa. Explores the complex relationship between blacks and whites, masters and servants, and individuals and their environment.
Rating: 
Summary: Gordimer's Best
Review: A masterpiece, containing one of the all time great lines of modern prose: "It was a miracle; it was all a miracle: and one ought to have known, from the suffering of saints, that miracles are horror." I wouldn't be surprised if some "readers" didn't get it, however; they too often are confounded by the British tradition of now and then preferring dashes to indicated dialogue instead of quotes. A perfect novel.
Rating:
Summary: A Necessary Nightmare.
Review: As an expatriate south african, I can safely say that Nadine gordimers' "July's People" has had an impact that I have not felt since Brink's "Dry White Season". Gordimer captures perfectly the energy, volatility, and sweet sadness of the African experience, and I speak of that experience from a colour-blind place. The fluid prose and Doctorow-like economy of punctuation gives the reader the true flavour of the culture. I cannot recommend Ms. Gordimer more highly. Her contribution to the expansive and glorious solemnity of African literature puts her in much the same league as Credo Mutwe and the luminary Laurens Van Der Post.
Read July's Children. Give yourself time, because you will be stopping to weep at regular intervals.
Rating: 
Summary: Not an Easy Read
Review: As it was already mentioned, this book is very complex and difficult to read. It takes a while for you to get used to the odd style. I think it was a good book for showing the problems and misunderstandings between whites and blacks and the fact that it showed you the daily, everyday life in the village. I did not like the ending at all, it leaves the reader asking "What actually happened?", although this is not uncommon in this book. I would recommend this book for people who want to be challenged and want a good read about South Africa and their people.
Rating:
Summary: Most beautifully written book I've read in years
Review: Bam and Maureen Smales--wealthy, white South Africans--awaken in the village of July, their servant of many years. As the revolution rages around them, the three main characters (like the country itself) discover that their identities, roles, and rules have dissolved or been reordered. "July's People" documents their struggle to redefine themselves and their relationships. July's People is not an easy read. The complexity of Gordimer's narrative reflects the complexity of her characters and the complexity of their situation. An "easy" book would hardly serve such topics. Gordimer's writing is tight (less than 200 pages) and natural (her dialog "sounds" human). There are few writers whose skill I envy more than Gordimer's. HIGHLY recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Difficult, tedious and annoying yet makes you think
Review: Gordimer's style of writing is both difficult and annoying. Many believe that this adds to the quality of the story as the confused style reflects the confused state of mind felt by the characters at the time. I felt that this deterred many a reader and because of that the message of her novel was missed by many. She does express many eye opening views on the troubled lives of people in a country in turmoil, South Africa, but this is shadowed by a wriing style that few manage to pick up on. One wonders how this book came to be published, if it were not for a topic so that desperately needed to be showed to the rest of the world.
Rating:
Summary: I am in awe of this book
Review: I don't understand the confusion over the writing. I've read other noted experimental novels that were much more difficult (ie Calvino) but writing can (and should) take so many forms, why does it always have to be predictable and follow convention? In this book the structure worked for me and I admire the way she manipulated language to create an intended mood. What is interesting is that this is a book of conjecture or futurism, written when the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa was taking real shape and getting serious global attention, and when the white people were becoming more aware as to what was really happening in the townships (the news was heavily regulated by the apartheid regime). Gordimer was working out what might happen if there was real violence and revolution in the streets. It must have been a very scary time, not knowing how it was all going to turn out and whether South Africa would go down the same road as other African countries where clashing clans exterminate each other on a regular basis. She had to consider what would happen if their lives would be in jeopardy to the point that they would have to flee and go in hiding. What a scary concept, one we have only recently had to contemplate after 9/11 woke us up to terror in our midst. (I personally had a fantasy of what I would put in the suitcase and which direction I would head if I felt that the attacks were going to continue). While there was violence during the revolution in South Africa, it wasn't nearly as bad as the book projected. In reality, the revolution happened without a violent overthrow of the government but with a democratic and relatively (relative to other similar changes of government) peaceful election (thank you Mandela). The violence that occurred was sporadic, and there were bombings during the uncertain times while the government was de-stabilized. But white people weren't pulled from their homes or farms and killed in mass numbers. The way I gather it the "white flight" was from, for example, Johannesburg into the suburbs. However, back to the novel. I thought it was a great character study and attempt to dissect what it might feel like to be forced into your worst nightmare, your world turned upside down due to civil war, how Gordimer, who likely had black servants in her household (and maybe still does?) would feel if this situation were to happen. It was her version of how one might handle the worst case scenario. Details like what she would do without tampons, and how her children adapted so easily, gave the novel depth. People think that not much "happens" in this book, but in life things don't tend to happen with the rapidity that they do in novels or movies. Life happens slowly, and people lose sleep trying to figure out how to decide what to do next, how to handle a situation, going through the "what ifs." The big thing has happened that set the plot in motion - they were forced to leave behind their entire material lives and start over in a strange place where everything was unfamiliar and they had to rely on their servant's kindness. One by one they lost even the smallest "things" they had left that made them feel safe and like they had choices. The car was gone. The gun was taken. Even their clothes were falling apart. What more was there to lose? What do you have left when your possessions are gone? Is a marriage enough to survive on? How do you fill the empty days? It is a fascinating topic and Gordimer only scratches the surface of this complex issue. I only give this a 4 star instead of 5 because I am really frustrated with the ending. I want to know what happened. I don't like being left hanging after getting involved with this family. I wish there was more about this from other readers. My thought is that since it was a novel based on conjecture, she left the ending open to speculation, indicating that the future can't be predicted, and she wasn't willing to bring her "what if" to a final conclusion, anything could happen.
Rating:
Summary: A SEX NOVEL WITH CONFUSSION
Review: I have never read a novel which keeps its readers in suspense as to "who is saying what". The method of placing a (---) to indicate that a character is speaking is , in my opinion, not an effective method. This creates confussion. The first chapter is just as confusing as the last chapter. In the first chapter, I wonder if the 'Bakkie was the hut' and if the Smales reached the village or they are still travelling. In the last chapter, I wonder where Maureen runs to and if it's to the Helicopter, why and what took placed, did the rest of her family run to the helicopter as well? If the helicopter took her away, did she go back home? Maybe there is a part two ( 2) to 'July's People'. The novel contains a lot of sexual paragraphs; especialy when Maureen's way of dress is mention and her sexual intercourse with Bam . At one time I almost believe that July and Maureen was about to have a sexual relationship. The case of Maureen's menstration was dealt with so outrageously, it is " Not fit for children to read". I believe children should be kept far from ' July's People' or should the book be called ' The Life of Maureen'. I was also up set with the use of the ' F ' word in the novel.
| 
