❥ 4 / 5 stars

I’m just curious. Is there anyone else who was satisfied with the ending? Because I believe I did. Although I ship Jo and Laurie so hard and it apparently broke my heart into pieces when it came to that chapter, I also think that they both eventually ended up with the right ones.

It doesn’t mean that I didn’t want them to be together, I did. I truly did but if they ended up together, would they be happy with their married life? This question kept coming up in my mind because Jo and Laurie were so much alike. Would it be better if they were just best friends to one another?


P.S. Despite the truth and what the author wrote, I’ll continue shipping Jo & Laurie and I’ll ship them in my heart forever!

¡Terminada la relectura!
He vuelto a caer rendida ante la capacidad de la señora Alcott para emocionar a los lectores hasta límites insospechados.
Cierto es que a veces el tono moralizante puede chocar (sobretodo porque muchas de las lecciones que intenta enseñar la autora no tienen sentido hoy en día), pero hay que ver más allá...
Mujercitas es un libro enternecedor, divertido y sorprendente del que nunca me cansaré.

Pd. SIGO ODIANDO A AMY CON TODA MI ALMA
PD2. Aquí mi vieja reseña del 2011... Sigo pensando exactamente lo mismo: http://cronicasenferrocarril.blogspot...

Some books read like a lifelong friendship, each page a warm or comforting embrace as you laugh and weep along with the characters. Little Women by L.M. Alcott is an enduring and endearing classic that will nestle its way so deep into your heart that you’ll wonder if the sound of turning pages has become your new heartbeat in your chest. To read the novel is a magical experience, and we are all like Laurie peering in through the March’s window and relishing in the warmth within. I have long loved the film adaptations and make it a holiday tradition to ensure I at least watch it every December (it has Christmas in it, it counts), so it was fascinating to finally read the actual novel and return to character I feel I’ve always known yet still find it fresh and even more lovely than ever before. Semi-autobiographical, Alcott traces the lives of the four March sisters, Meg, Jo, Beth and Amy, and their struggles to make their own way in a society that offers little use for women beyond the household. An emotional epic and moving family saga full of strong characters, sharp criticisms on society and gender roles, and a beautiful plea to dispense with the worship of wealth and find true purpose and value in simplicity, nature and generosity.

‘I've got the key to my castle in the air, but whether I can unlock the door remains to be seen.’

Little Women will leave your heart full and your pen dry from underlining the seemingly endless lovely passages. I’d like to thank Adira and her wonderful review for convincing me to finally actually read this and not just watch the movie again (I did last night though, because who doesn’t want to relive the joy of yelling “Bob Odenkirk?!” in a theater and later sobbing) because, just when I thought I couldn’t love this story more, now I’m fully engulfed by it. Surely enough has been written about this book already, but i like to ramble about things I love so here’s a more I guess (I’ll try to keep it shorter than usual [having finished writing it now, I failed]). But how can you not be with such incredible characters? Jo is of course the favorite, but I think part of loving this book is wanting to be Jo and realizing you are Amy, but each character touches your heart in their own way. Mr. Laurence and Beth’s connection with the piano and lost daughters makes me teary just writing this. Alcott based the story on her real family and one can read a genuine love for the characters pouring from every page.

‘Wealth is certainly a most desirable thing, but poverty has its sunny side, and one of the sweet uses of adversity is the genuine satisfaction which comes from hearty work of head or hand, and to the inspiration of necessity, we owe half the wise, beautiful, and useful blessings of the world.’

Alcott was a transcendentalist and many of her beliefs shine through in the novel. Much of this came from her father and one will be pleased to learn that the real Mr. March—Amos Bronson Alcott—was as radical in his time as his fictional counterpart. An abolitionist who also advocated for women’s rights, Amos became a major transcendentalist figure along with his friend, Ralph Waldo Emerson. Alcott’s mother was equally radical for her time too, and many of their teachings arrive here through Mrs. March to her children. There is, of course, the belief in nature as the ideal, such as when the March girls, having little jewelry, adorn themselves in flowers instead. Even Laurie states ‘I don’t like fuss and feathers,’ another instance of a return to simplicity over flashy status symbols. There is also the belief in generosity, which is seen throughout with the March family always involved in helping others, and the belief that hard work is important, but not for profit reasons but because it leads to spiritual and emotional happiness and freedom.

‘Then let me advise you to take up your little burdens again; for though they seem heavy sometimes, they are good for us, and lighten as we learn to carry them. Work is wholesome, and there is plenty for every one; it keeps us from ennui and mischief; is good for health and spirits, and gives us a sense of power and independence better than money or fashion.’

Towards the start of the novel, the mother advises the children to be like Christian from John Bunyan’s allegorical novel The Pilgrim's Progress and we can see how Little Women follows a similar fashion of Pilgrim’s being knowledge gained through the travel of a life lived, and each daughter is shown to face certain trials and must learn to bear their burdens, like Jo’s anger, Amy’s desire to be liked, Meg’s desire for vanity, Beth’s passivity. But the largest burdens here are those of love and labor.

‘Women, they have minds, and they have souls, as well as just hearts. And they’ve got ambition, and they’ve got talent, as well as just beauty. I’m so sick of people saying that love is all a woman is fit for.’

The relationship to work is threaded through the entire novel. We have Jo and Amy who wish to be great and break from the traditional mold for women in society. Jo wants to be a writer, though she only publishes scandalous stories under a false name, and Amy desires to be a painter. And neither will settle for anything less than greatness ‘because talent isn't genius, Amy states, ‘and no amount of energy can make it so. I want to be great, or nothing.’ Meg and Beth, on the other hand, show different routes a woman can take. The novel questions if women can find happiness outside marriage and caring for a household, and these struggles bash against social expectations along the way.

‘ I'll try and be what he loves to call me, 'a little woman,' and not be rough and wild; but do my duty here instead of wanting to be somewhere else.’

‘ I can't get over my disappointment in not being a boy,’ Jo quips, and a major part of Little Women is a critique of gender roles and how they stifle people in society. Laurie is an excellent foil to Jo, in many ways, but is also a way that Alcott addresses and subverts gender expectations. Jo and Laurie both use shortened versions of their name that seem to cross gender expectations (even though Laurie didn’t like being called Dora) and in many ways Jo tends to represent more masculine behavior while Laurie often a more feminine role. While Meg dresses in finery and tries to fill the traditional role of a woman, Jo prefers to romp in nature in simple or dirty garments and behave, by her own admission, like a boy.

Recently there has been a lot of discussion on the author’s gender and sexuality, with even the New York Times writing an opinion piece wondering if Alcott or Jo was a trans man. I know that frustrates some people but personally I find it interesting to think about, even if a bit anachronistic, but it seems to be a genuine question people investigate about authors who subvert gender expectations (think how often it was avoided to discuss Virginia Woolf’s sexuality in the past and now we have letters and look at scenes in Mrs Dalloway and think “oh yea, that makes total sense”). Honestly, I say Jo is whatever you want Jo to be. Trans, lesbian, ace, or just a girl pushing back on gender norms. I think the key detail is that Jo was breaking out of the mold, so let that empower you as you best see fit. Personally I thought the marriage to Friedrich felt tacked on anyways (I enjoy the way the Gerwig adaptation addresses this) but, side note, I do see how Alcott weaves in the transcendentalist notion of the “universal family” and belief in learning about and supporting other cultures here. Friedrich is German, Meg marries the English John, and Laurie is said to be half-Italian, which all comes as a rebuttal to the anti-immigration sentiments of the times.

‘I like good strong words that mean something,’ Jo says and that appeals to my love of language as well. This book deals with love in many ways, but feels like a romance between book and reader as you enjoy every page. Little Women was ahead of its time and still stands proudly today as an endearing work that dares challenge social convention. But most importantly, it feels like a friend. Finishing is hard as now I’ll miss the days with the March sisters, and I find books that take you from childhood to adulthood often hit the hardest because you feel as if you’ve grown up together. An emotional read, also a genius one, Little Women is a favorite now forever.

5/5

‘ Watch and pray, dear, never get tired of trying, and never think it is impossible to conquer your fault.’

☀️A delightful story set in the era of America’s Civil War.

The sisters grow up and their various romances take them one way or the other.

Jo is the author, Louisa May, bold Jo the writer. Which is refreshing to know.

✍

4/5 ★'s audiobook


This was such a lovely listen. I enjoyed it from start to finish, all nineteen and a half hours!

There was, of course, much added to the unabridged version that didn't necessarily need to be there. But I found myself enjoying all of the little shenanigans, even if it did take a long time to get through.



Now, as this was a different time, it can be hard to listen through some of the advice that is given to women (and women only). But I decided instead of resisting it completely, swapping out "women" with everyone.

I think that if everyone were taught these lessons instead of them just being a "womanly expectation" we could benefit from a lot of them! Religion comes into play with this also, but of course, what can you do? It was the 1800s.

I didn't find it to be overwhelmingly religious either, so no worries if you have your own religious trauma like me.



Oh, how this book made me cry!! I couldn't believe the overwhelming emotion I felt during what is obviously a spoiler I cannot mention. But know that there are parts to this tale that will leave you (if you are like me) balling as if you just finished "The Notebook"!

I took much away from this read. Many life lessons can come from reading this book with an open mind and while reminding yourself of the period.

I highly recommend it if you have never given it a read! I am trying to branch out into the "classics" — so this was a fabulous start.

I'm definitely a victim of modern society when I find this book slow. Had I read it in its day (or even as a youth) it would probably be fantastic, but as it is I'm finding the life lessons saturated in every chapter a little much, not sweet. Which brings me to Beth. Back in the day sweet, mild, submissive were prime female qualities. Now I look at the picture of her on the front cover with her empty eyes and blank stares and she looks sweet in a mentally challenged way. And Jo who is endearing because she is quirky, clumsy, and bold while meaning well and therefore not prime marriage material show prime female qualities for today of intelligence, wit, and assertiveness. So you see, the characteristics that are supposed to endear me annoy me and the ones I'm supposed to find sympathy for, I relate to.

I couldn't finish the book. I tried, but it was too much like homework. Plus it bothers me that Jo rejects Laurie and that little diva Amy catches him with the shallow characteristics of her looks when he is way too good for her. Maybe I'm tainted with the image of Christian Bale in my head, but I still think Jo would have made such a better companion to him. So I didn't even have motivation to wade through boredom to read a conclusion that upset me.

As I read Little Women, I could not help but equate it to the warmth of a hug on a cold winter’s day, of the giggles of sisterhood, of the joy of childhood, and of the magic of love - however we experience it. Louisa May Alcott crafts a world so incredibly pure to the point where at times it is breathtaking. This coming-of-age story introduces you to the March sisters: Meg, Jo, Beth, and Amy whose father serves as a union chaplain while their mother struggles to make ends meet as their fortunes dwindle. When the family perform an act of kindness for a family even less fortunate than they are, their story begins. We witness the girls grow beyond this as they experience love, heartbreak, joy, hardship, success, and failure. Relationships form, bonds strengthen, and the boundaries of sisterhood are tried and tested. Despite the novel originating from the 19th century, there is something so relatable about its earnest depiction of these women. Their dreams, hopes, desires, and hardships all resonate so deeply - at times it feels as if Alcott herself knows you inside and out. This, of course, is impossible so what makes it all the more beautiful is how little the experiences of women have changed despite the centuries gone by. You either are a Meg, Jo, Beth, or Amy. If not, you know a Meg, Jo, Beth, or Amy.

I can confidently say that this is a book I will revisit, pass on to my future children, and treasure forever. Such a beautiful tale of love, of family, of women, and of life.

A timeless classic that I enjoyed just as much now as I did when I first read it at school.

There is much to enjoy in 'Little Women', especially if you prefer the values of life taught in conservative religious daycare centers, gentle reader.

Marmee March, who is obviously a fertility goddess, raises four young human girls - Margaret (16), Jo (15), Beth (12) and Amy (9) - by herself during the Civil War. Chaplain March, rumored to be the human father of the four girls but who I believe is actually a zombie or a holy ghost, has volunteered to serve President Lincoln's troops by ministering to the soldiers at the warfront while his wife and children soldier on in genteel poverty in Massachusetts, taking jobs such as governess or companion to elderly rich people.

Each girl has a distinct personality at the start, unfortunately. But by the last page, having learned in depth the housecleaning and cooking skills allowed 19th-century females to learn, as well as in finishing up the rest of their meager basic education filtered through Christian values into a loving acceptance of their erasure as individual personas, they all successfully transition into modest obedient self-effacing wives and mothers. One is fortunate to find a position as a trophy wife, while another becomes a proliferate baby maker. Last but not least, it appears one of the women may become a respectable daycare operator, specializing in the emasculation of males. I do not want to speak too much about the one who escaped this Utopia. That was sad.

Veamos, entiendo que se escribió en 1868, de verdad que lo entiendo. Soy muy consciente de la época y del rol de la mujer en ese momento. Pero Jane Eyre es previo a esos años y es algo por completo diferente. No los voy a comparar porque no es justo, son historias distintas. Solo quería ejemplificar que aun dentro del rol de la mujer en ese momento, se podía hacer algo que no fuera tan moralista.

La historia narra la vida de las hermanas March a lo largo de los años desde que son adolescentes, casi niñas, hasta que están casadas y con hijos.

Sé que me demoré mucho en leer este libro, pero la verdad es que mientras la primera mitad fue divertida la segunda se me hizo eterna y aburrida. Terminé leyendo en diagonal porque ya no aguantaba más y solo quería terminarlo. No digo que el libro sea malo, sino que para mí en este momento fue demasiado aburrido. Es que en realidad el libro no tiene trama, es la historia de las hermanas creciendo, aprendiendo y enamorándose y eso está bien. Es perfectamente válido.

Adoro la relación de hermanas, el cariño que se tenían y que tenían con Laurie y su abuelo. Me pareció muy tierno todo y adorable. Es muy lindo que el eje del libro fuera la relación de hermanas de ellas, algo que se suele dejar de lado por el amor, que fue más o menos lo que sucede al final cuando cada una está por su lado, quizá por eso me gustó mucho menos.

El libro es bueno. Muestra relaciones sanas y muy bonitas, ya sea de familia y de pareja. Es cierto que por momentos parece romantizar un montón la pobreza y la vida simple. A lo que se suma el tono moralizador que tiene el libro y parece ser una biblia de como ser una buena mujer en el sXIX, aprender a respetar al esposo, a ser buena madre, a aceptar la pobreza y sacar el mejor lado de ella. Creo que eso es lo que más me chocó, repito que entiendo el año en el que está escrito, pero es tan evidente que es un libro para mujeres para que sean felices con lo que tienen y aprendan a ser buenas madres y esposas que no puedo evitar molestarme.

Incluso con Jo, que es esta chica liberal y con pensamientos modernos todo el final, todo el tema de que está sola, de que su sueño no se cumple, y termina casada con un hombre que le dobla la edad y es pobre, pero ¡vaya! está enamorada... No lo sé. De verdad lo detesté, creo que me gustaba más en las películas, ahí era más soportable, pero aquí no. Por momentos incluso me daba la sensación de que la autora intentaba decir que no deberíamos ser como Jo, porque al final miren como terminó. Jo siempre era la torpe, la fea, la que no podía controlar la lengua, la menos femenina. Vamos, que es el estereotipo de feminista que la gente tiene.

Sí, detesto a Amy, pero como personaje me gusta. De hecho, cuando Amy decide que tiene que casarse con alguien con dinero para mantener a sus hermanas lo encuentro super noble. Amy adoraba el status quo de esa época, le encantaba ser mujer y los roles creados para ella, pero al mismo tiempo era inteligente y fría al respecto. Incluso con su sueño sobre ser artista, encuentro notablemente ambicioso que decidiera que las opciones eran ser una genia o ser mediocre. Suena tonto o drástico, pero era su sueño y ella lo quería en su máximo esplendor o no lo quería. Y me gusta eso.

Por cierto, encuentro terrible que ninguna de las hermanas consiguiera su sueño y que eso al final se usara como moraleja de que eran sueños infantiles y que lo importante era lo que tenían ahora... FAMILIA. Sí, Jo y Amy dicen que quieren seguir intentando vivir su sueño de alguna manera, pero me sigue pareciendo terrible.

Sé que estoy sonando sumamente amargada y drástica porque al final el libro tiene más de 150 años y no puedo andar pidiendo feminismo en obras así cuando otras modernas todavía son increíblemente machistas. Lo sé. LO SÉ. Sin embargo, he leído grandes personajes femeninos en obras de Shakespeare, está la maravillosa Jane Eyre, están las obras de Jane Austen. Entonces, tampoco era pedir mucho que este libro me diera algo un poco más moderno, pero solo era una obra moralista sobre lo bueno que es el trabajo bien hecho, la romantización de la pobreza, como ser madre es lo mejor de la vida de la mujer, sobre los roles de la esposa y sobre como algunos sueños no son tan importantes cuando se tiene familia.

I finally read Little Women! Jo is one of the most relatable characters of all time for me. I feel like this book came into my life at the perfect time. Here’s a reading vlog of my experience reading this: https://youtu.be/MkzZAxk4MLQ

Read this many years ago, and it was delightful to reconnect with this wonderful classic once again.