Community Reviews
Thomas Schlesser’s Mona’s Eyes is a massively informative novel about art history, but it fails as a basic literary narrative.
I usually oppose DNF as a personal principle. This book was probably the closest I ever got to breaking that principle. It was overly long, and the writing was redundant and repetitive. So why did I keep reading? I genuinely loved learning about all the art history. I am always analyzing all forms of art and dissecting the meaning behind them. Heck, I do the same with books and movies, which is why I have a Goodreads and a Letterboxd!
So what didn’t work for me? All of the fictional characters. Thomas Schlesser’s strength comes from his knowledge of art history, hence why he is a professor on the subject. Outside of that, his weakness comes from writing original characters with conflicts and developments. Mona never really acted her age. She was overtly whimsical. Henry wasn’t much of a multi-dimensional character, but an over-explainer. All the other characters were pretty forgettable. This book was a perfect example of where a co author would have seriously elevated the story. Maybe Nicholas Sparks?
The only reason I would give this book a higher rating than most reviewers was because it did actually educate me. Most books nowadays exist solely to entertain but lack any substance of knowledge. Hence why some people prefer to exclusively read nonfiction books. Obviously, the best case scenarios are books that can both entertain and educate. They are just so few of them.
I would still recommend the book, but with caution. If you read it as a nonfiction book to be educated about art history, you will be greatly satisfied. If you read it as a fictional story to follow the characters, you will be greatly disappointed.
I usually oppose DNF as a personal principle. This book was probably the closest I ever got to breaking that principle. It was overly long, and the writing was redundant and repetitive. So why did I keep reading? I genuinely loved learning about all the art history. I am always analyzing all forms of art and dissecting the meaning behind them. Heck, I do the same with books and movies, which is why I have a Goodreads and a Letterboxd!
So what didn’t work for me? All of the fictional characters. Thomas Schlesser’s strength comes from his knowledge of art history, hence why he is a professor on the subject. Outside of that, his weakness comes from writing original characters with conflicts and developments. Mona never really acted her age. She was overtly whimsical. Henry wasn’t much of a multi-dimensional character, but an over-explainer. All the other characters were pretty forgettable. This book was a perfect example of where a co author would have seriously elevated the story. Maybe Nicholas Sparks?
The only reason I would give this book a higher rating than most reviewers was because it did actually educate me. Most books nowadays exist solely to entertain but lack any substance of knowledge. Hence why some people prefer to exclusively read nonfiction books. Obviously, the best case scenarios are books that can both entertain and educate. They are just so few of them.
I would still recommend the book, but with caution. If you read it as a nonfiction book to be educated about art history, you will be greatly satisfied. If you read it as a fictional story to follow the characters, you will be greatly disappointed.
See why thousands of readers are using Bookclubs to stay connected.