Alexa, play “Champagne Problems” by Taylor Swift.

Tengo sentimientos encontrados...
Por una parte, me gusta que la historia sea tan fluida y refleje la vida de cuatro mujeres en su cotidianidad.
Por otro, me aterra el mensaje moral implícito en la novela. Definitivamente, en este siglo XXI, el paradigma de la mujer ha cambiado y voy a chocar con las ideas que se defendían hace un par de siglos. Sin embargo, me sigue causando incomodidad pensar en que mucho de lo que se refleja en la novela se sigue defendiendo por las mujeres. Y, por supuesto, me causa incomodidad ver cómo era la forma de concebirse en esa época. En fin, que me gustó pero me causó un gran conflicto.

PD. Leyendo un poco sobre la autora pienso que tendríamos que reivindicar su obra en otros sentidos. De entrada, saber que escribió "mujercitas" por necesidad económica, pero que su obra es monumental y abarca otros géneros literarios. O quizás apreciar la pluma intrépida de la autora, la manera de elaborar cuatro personajes memorables e icónicos, pero tener presente que, a pesar de ser una sufragista del siglo XIX, varias de las ideas reflejadas en este libro son cuestionables. Finalmente, siempre es problemática la literatura de otras épocas por el golpe ideológico. Una conclusión tengo: me alegra no haber nacido en el siglo XIX.

This book means SISTERHOOD... FAMILY… HAPPINESS…TOGETHERNESS… THANKFULNESS… GENUINENESS…SOLIDARITY…BELIEFS… RESPECT…UNCONDITIONAL LOVE…HONESTY…KINDNESS…


This is magical book, when I get into my hands for the first time, I was only eleven and for decades I kept on getting it into my hands, reread it several times and same words resonated different for me, awoke different feelings, made me look at the characters’ flaws and differences at brand new perspective.
Even though I know the ending: I laughed, I cried, I sighed, I smiled, I jumped, I felt peaceful and at the end I LOVED IT TRULY, DEEPLY so MUCH! Christmas is coming. You think there won’t be Christmas without presents and I think there won’t be any meaningful celebration without doing my yearly reading of this book and reconnecting with Holly March Sisterhood. Joe (tomboy, book-worn, hot-tempered, writer, definitely closer to my character), Meg (Romantic, sweet-natured, peace maker older sister), Beth ( sweet, shy, cute, friendly, fallen angel, musical prodigy) and Amy (spoiled, childish, artistic, elegant, refined youngest one): I LOVE YOU BOTH.


It is why this book is always my all-time favorite one! Time to reconnect with the sisters and feeling the best holiday spirit!

Although Louisa May Alcott's Little Women is probably one of my all time favourite books (and which I have read at least fifteen times since 1979), I actually have never managed to pen a review, simply because I really do not think I can (in my opinion) post a review that would do sufficient honour to either book or author. And with that in mind, this here review will in fact not be a standard review of Little Women either, but rather some personal and academic musings about both Little Women and questions such as censorship as well as influences of Little Women on Lucy Maud Montgomery’s The Story Girl and it’s sequel The Golden Road (and thus my review might also end up being a bit rambling, but I do hope that I will keep potential readers engaged all the same).

LITTLE WOMEN AND CENSORSHIP

Now it is really quite amazing to and for me that a children's novel written in 1868 can still (in this day and age) be so fresh, enchanting (often even socially relevant) and truly, for 1868, Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women is not only quite progressive and strivingly feminist, it is actually much more so than many books (especially books meant specifically for girls) written in the late 19th and even early to middle 20th century. And with that in mind, it just astounds me to no end (and massively infuriates me) that there there have actually been moves and petitions to have the novel banned and censored (since according to certain "activists" Louisa May Alcott's Little Women is supposedly not feminist enough and thus, due to its lasting popularity, inherently "dangerous" to girls/women, and thus supposedly warranting official censorship). Yes, Little Women is not a novel I would ever label as feminist in the late 20th, early 21st century way and manner of thinking, but for 1868, it was and remains exceedingly progressive indeed, a novel that not only promotes gender equality to a point, but also, and this is one of its prime advantages, Little Women pleads for and strives for true freedom of choice, especially for women (Meg is happy being a homemaker and wife, but that is her own choice, it is not in any way forced on her, while Jo goes alone to New York City, and supports the family with her work, and even Beth is not forced to attend school when it is reaslised that she is much much too shy and too afraid of strangers for this).

LITTLE WOMEN AND ITS INFLUENCE ON TWO NOVELS BY L. M. MONTGOMERY

So while I was recently rereading Little Women, I was also at the same time rereading two of my favourite works by L.M. Montgomery (of Anne of Green Gables fame), The Story Girl and its sequel, The Golden Road. And having now completed these two novels, it becomes rather obvious at least to me how much both of these stories have in common with Little Women. Especially the character of Cecily King is very much akin to Beth March, both personality wise and her eventual fate (that she is also doomed to die young like Beth does). Now, I am NOT IN ANY MANNER saying or even insinuating that Montgomery actively plagiarised from Louisa May Alcott, and Cecily is also not just a replica of Beth March either (although the latter might well have served as a bit of a model for the former), but yes, the similarities are, for me at least, striking enough to believe that Montgomery was in all likelihood more than a bit influenced by Little Women when she wrote The Story Girl and The Golden Road (which also becomes rather apparent when one realises that both the March family and the King family create their own magazines, and that both of these magazines are similar in both style and content to a point, with the March girls' magazine being perhaps a bit more literate, which makes sense though, as the March sisters are from a literary and academic family, while the King family are basically simply and mostly PEI farmers).

SHOULD JO HAVE MARRIED LAURIE INSTEAD OF PROFESSOR BHAER?

I know that there are some, perhaps even more than some individuals who are not quite at ease with the fact that in Little Women Jo does not end up marrying Laurie, but Professor Bhaer. Now for me, I have always thought that while Jo and Laurie would make and do make great friends, they would have made horrible and even intensely problematic lovers, and the concept that Laurie and Jo are too similar in and with certain perhaps less than admirable parts of their personalities has always made sense to me. For if Laurie and Jo had married, I do believe that their personalities would have clashed, and not because they are so different, but because they are so similar with regard to willfulness, stubbornness, desire and emotionality. And the professor, he complements Jo and she complements him. Professor Bhaer calms her personality, even giving Jo’s writing a calming edge, while she, in turn, makes his own calm personality a bit more outgoing. And also, one has to think of the fact that from an academic standpoint, Jo and the Professor are actually much more complementary and complimentary than Laurie and Jo would and could ever have been. For Jo thrives on writing, literature, education, something that Professor Bhaer also exibits, but something that Laurie only shows marginally (mainly artistically and musically, and in this, he is actually much closer to Amy, and not Jo). And yes, in particular from an artistic and societal point of view, Laurie and Amy suit one another and much more than Jo and Laurie would have or could have meshed. Yes, Louisa May Alcott might indeed have originally envisioned in Little Women for Jo to not have been married at all (and there are actually some critics who consider her love for her sister Beth, her devotion to her, lesbian, and while I most certainly do not, it is indeed a common thread in some secondary analyses). And then, when the publishers clamoured for Jo to also marry, it makes sense, at least to me, that Alcott had Jo not end up marrying Laurie, but Professor Bhaer, an older, more mature man perhaps, but also someone whose intellect, whose philosophy, whose education and ideas regarding education, corresponded to and with Jo. For yes, I actually do think with Laurie, that Jo would not only have had too many battles and arguments, I think she also would probably have found the life of relative leisure that Laurie and Amy end up enjoying, rather tedious, even monotonous in the long run, when compared to and with the life that Jo and the Professor end up creating/having with their school at Plumfied, as demonstrated and described in the two sequels for Little Women, in Little Men and Jo's Boys.

Now I do hope that my musings and ideas regarding Little Women have proven to be entertaining, but also, that they have provided food for thought and perhaps a desire for a reread and for those of you who have not yet read this lovely and enchanting novel, a first read (it is a rewarding and emotional reading experience, but then again, I admit to being majorly biased).

Finally (and indeed, really and truly), there are indeed many many editions of Little Women. And my favourite at present is the Norton Critical Edition, as it also includes background, literary analyses (as well as a short bibliographic of Louisa May Alcott) and an extensive bibliography. Now if you are just desiring to read Little Women for its own sake, any edition (as long as it is unabridged and contains both the first and second part) will likely suffice. However, if you are interested in also perusing information about the novel, its historical background, reviews and critical literary analyses, give the Norton Critical Edition a try; you will not be disappointed (at least that is my hope).

ADDING FOR DECEMBER 29th, 2022

Honestly, while I guess I am glad that literary critics are still reading and analysing Little Women in the 21st century, I am also both massively annoyed and hugely frustrated that on December 24th, 2022, in the New York Times, journalist and author Peyton Thomas was trying to argue that Louisa May Alcott should somehow be considered as not a woman but rather a transgender man (and the same of course also for the character of Josephine March in Little Women). But really and in my opinion, ANYONE trying to portray either Louisa May Alcott or her Jo March is transgender is both anachronistically ignorant and also totally and utterly trashes both Louisa May Alcott as a person and what she achieved textually with Little Women, how avant garde and how feminist Little Women was for the 1860s/1870s. And no, Josephine March being described as a rather a tomboy in Little Women and the fact that Louisa May Alcott never married, this for me totally and utterly does NOT IN ANY WAY make either transgender (and that some literary critics are doing this, to truly makes me want to laugh derisively and also rather to scream and do a mayor eye roll).

This classic that so many have loved over the years, many having read it as young girls, is somehow one that I never read until now. It’s a lovely story, and I wonder how I would have felt about it, had I read it when I was younger. Like so many readers, Jo, the lover of books, the writer, is my favorite, a woman before her time, exhibiting independence and a desire for more in her life. It’s a coming of age story in so many ways as we see Meg, Jo, Beth and Amy develop over the years, each realizing their flaws and wanting to be better as they become women. They are guided by their mother, Marmee, who raises them alone for a a while during hard times while her husband is off doing his part in the Civil War. Had I read this years ago, I’m not sure I would have been as perceptive to the other things this story depicts - the societal norms of the time and the time itself, during and after the Civil War. Overall, even though it felt a bit old fashioned given when it was written and the time frame it covers, there are universal and timeless messages about the bonds of family, morality and love. It was an uplifting story that I’m glad I finally got to. I’m looking forward to the upcoming movie. I just couldn’t see it without having read the book.

"Christmas won't be Christmas without any presents", grumbled Jo..."

I was under the impression that I had missed Little Women in my youth and that it was one of those gaps in my education that keep nagging me. Then I started reading it, and realised that I know all characters, and the story, and the feeling of the novel as a whole. So either I have developed a psychic connection to my "to-read"-shelf, or I have actually NOT missed out on Little Women in my adolescence, just forgotten the process of reading it. I wonder which one of my two types of amnesia I prefer: the one where I know I have read the book but forgotten the content, or this recently discovered other one, where I think I haven't read the book but remember the content?

Either way, I find the beginning quite fitting. The March girls are discussing the sacrifice of their Christmas tradition to honour the bigger historical event of their times: the men fighting in the Civil War. There has been a Christmas discussion in my family for quite a while too, and it has also revolved around the craziness of mass consumption in times of difficulty. In our case, the back drop is not the American Civil War, but rather the more global threat of Climate Change looming like a frustrating Apocalypse that you can't avoid by being a confessed Atheist (quite the contrary, actually, it seems that those who still take the biblical revelations for granted truth can avoid feeling bad about the Climate Apocalypse!).

And like the March sisters find their niches in a family of many wishes and needs and hopes and fears, we settle for different positions within our microcosm, enjoying a good conflict as much as any family, while worrying about each other and supporting each other in our respective dreams (and support meaning what it always does in families: partly helping, partly standing in the way of other members' interests).

So to all of you out there, trying to square the circle of personal and collective responsibilities in Christmas time: have a merry time, or if not, read a book - maybe a classic you thought you had missed?

My copy of this is probably 55 years old -- I've probably read it at least twenty-five times. One of my all-time favorite books. One of my favorite authors ever. Yes, it is old-fashioned -- it was old-fashioned fifty-five years ago. But that is the point pretty much in my opinion. This is a story of times past, of a family which functioned in a particular way in a particular time. This is also a story of what one person in a family might have wished were so all of the time in the family but wasn't. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Nov 2008/Dec 2008 rereading for the ??th time. Reading my Centennial Edition -- priced at $5.95 in 1968 -- pretty amusing that. I believe I bought this book second hand which surprises me as I thought I'd splurged and bought it the minute it was out -- perhaps in a fit of being good, I'd refrained and later bought this used copy to appease my Little Woman penchant retroactively.

Only 156 pages in and I'm as thoroughly hooked as always. Something peaceful about this story, speaks to me in a very profound manner. A bit of treacle is apparent but the story's truths are also as apparent as ever.

Two years ago, I read the first part of this novel and quite liked it. The March family consists of the most endearing characters, and I had fun reading about the four sisters and their growing up.
However, it wasn't until recently that I realized that I had yet to read the second part, which I set out to do. It was so great being back with these sisters and follow them in their future adventures, and I must say that I actually find the second part the strongest. It contains hopes and disappointments equally balanced, and it made me long to read even more about the four sisters (which part one didn't necessarily do).
This is a beautiful, moralizing story that we can all learn from. It speaks of how the world would be a much better place if we all lives according to Mrs. March's beliefs and education, and it makes for a wonderful story on growing up and being part of a family.

خوبی کلاسیک‌ها اینه خوندنشون مثل دنبال کردن رد تاریخ می‌مونه. از داستان‌های خودشون صحبت نمی‌کنم که اون‌‌جا هم تکه‌های تاریخ دیده می‌شه، از اینکه معروفیت و محبوبیت این کتاب‌ها در مورد خواننده‌هاش، طرز تفکر زمانه و اون کشور چی میگه حرف می‌زنم

زنان کوچک هر چه که نداره، نشان دهنده‌ی اینه که جامعه پذیرای یک داستان با محوریت زنانی بوده که همشون دست به انتخاب‌های یکسانی نمی‌زنند و به طور واضحی متفاوت زندگی می‌کنند. ۱۵۴ سال پیش که این کتاب نوشته، دیده و پذیرفته شده، ایران کجا بوده؟ ما چی می‌نوشتیم و می‌خوندیم؟ مسیر ما و اون‌ها از همین‌جا در حال شکل‌گیری بوده

بی‌دلیل نیست که حالا یک قرن و نیم بعد فهمیدیم که چه شعاری باید سر بدیم تا به جلو حرکت کنیم، کلماتی که در تک‌تک صفحات این‌ کتاب ساده دیده میشه
«زن، زندگی، آزادی»


پی‌نوشت‌
یک. این کتاب در دو بخش چاپ شده که کتاب کامل در واقع در برگیرنده‌ی هر دوی این بخش‌هاست. کتابی که نشر جنگل چاپ کرده در واقع نصفه هست

دو. کتاب صوتی دراماتایز شده و توسط مجموعه خوانده شده که بسیار جذابه

کانال تلگرام ریویوها و دانلود کتاب‌ها و صوتیشون
Maede's Books
۱۴۰۱/۸/۲

"Little Women" is one of my very favorite books. It was a book that my grandmother read to my mom, then she read to my sister and me. Barbara claims that it is the book that made her fall in love with reading. As a little girl, I remember wanting to be part of that large clan of women. Now, as
I reread this book to my own children, I am falling in love with these characters all over again.

***FIRST ALL TIME FAVOURITE read in 2024***

Thinking about the number of books I DNFed before picking up this book, I was so sure that this book will be either one of the DNFs or will actually surprise me. Guess which one it is!

I, for sure, can say that this story is not fictional. The characters are too real and the way they are talking is more realistic than most nonfiction books/memoirs. Yes, you can try it for yourself if you haven’t read this book yet.

There are two parts of Little Women. I have chosen the complete one to read and yes, I think I have done the right thing as now I am an adult who accepts people and situations as they are. Because if I weren’t, I would just be happy reading the first part. If you want an happy ending to the story, I would suggest you to read the first part ONLY. It has 23 chapters and it has a very wholesome happy ending. The young girls and their mother struggled a lot as their father is away at war. However, everything comes together towards the end and everyone’s content. The characters and the reader too I am saying. Yes, until this part can be considered as a whole complete book.

If you are someone like me who just doesn’t need the fluff and happy endings when we know the characters are struggling as much as they are realistic, I would totally recommend you read the second part as well.

You will cry for one character. And then, the dam breaks and you will cry for every character in the book thinking about this character.

The second part of the book has some heavy trigger regarding loss of family and grief. I got triggered as I wasn’t expecting it and I had a difficult time completing the book as and when it happened.

I would tell you not to pick up Little Women just because it is widely read or popular and it is so many people’s favourite. But read it when you want to read something realistic, ugly or beautiful when it comes to real life and if you want to feel connected with someone whose priorities change as we grow up and grow older.

Even though I expected to like this book when I read it, I never thought the book would turn out like how it is. Guess I was pretty ignorant regardless of how many people have discussed about it for decades now. I stuck with my reading values and haven’t even tried to know what the book is about even though it was everywhere! This has made all the difference I feel!


I cannot choose a favourite character as I find all the characters pretty realistic and well written. However, I would love to know more about Meg and Beth. The first and the third sisters.

The book is mostly from the perspectives of Jo and Amy, the second and the fourth sisters.

Their personalities are so different yet so similar in how straightforward and realistic they are.

I love their mother so much. She’s the perfect comforting soft character who everyone can rely on but she’s also someone who demands love and respect at the same time. I wish there are more parts featuring the father. This is the only character which seems somehow fictional in the entire book.

(Am I writing an essay here?!!!! I didn’t want to yet I want to say so much!!!!!)

Coming to the love interest, as much as we do not want them to be realistic and boring (yes, I mentioned it!), the guy seems to be pretty clueless when it comes to what Jo means when she’s pretty expressive of what she says or does when it comes to the relationship (yes, she is the main character when it comes to the romance parts yet she isn’t there when it comes to this part, if you know what I mean!). I can relate so much with her when she says those words expressing herself clearly and what she feels about the guy TO THE GUY.

I love this book more so because of the honest ways the characters express themselves. There’s no room for misunderstandings or miscommunication. This I truly appreciate.

(Damn I am tired typing all this and trying to breath easier with all the emotional damage the book did to me with its last few hundred pages… I will continue when I get better)

if i were a 15 year old girl in 1870 then maybe this book would be a full five stars. hell, if part one was a standalone from part 2, it probably would've gotten 5 stars. but i join the hoard of people who are so disappointed in how this book resolves.

i can already hear the voices of people coming to this book's defense re:the publishing era and louisa being forced into changing the plot of certain things, but this was just a disappointment in the end and i felt like the women in part 2 weren't even the same as the first part. also part 2 was boring and i'm sad i spent THREE (!!!) weeks on this book just to feel like it was okay.

the 2019 movie redeemed a lot of it for me and one day i may reread this and research it better beforehand so i'm better prepared for what to expect but i was hoping this would blow me away and sadly i remain sitting