Celeste Ng's Reviews > The Good Earth

I hated the main character as well.

I disagree with you about learning history through fiction. I think it's a great way to learn about cultural and social movements to follow an experience (fictional or not) in it as long as it's well researched. I think people are smart enough to differentiate between fiction, option, perspective and actual events, and I don't think this is the sole source on information about China for anyone. You'd have to be blind and live in a hole if this is the only source of Chinese history you've been exposed to. But, I do there there are better books out there to learn about history from---"Wild Swans: Three Daughters of China", for example.

I think the world of literature would loose a great genre if we eliminated historical fiction.

it's a great way to learn about cultural and social movements to follow an experience (fictional or not) in it as long as it's well researched.

I agree--as long as it's well researched. Problem is, some of it's not--this is fiction, after all; you're allowed to make stuff up--and many people don't bother to find out.

I think people are smart enough to differentiate between fiction, option, perspective and actual events, and I don't think this is the sole source on information about China for anyone.

I'd really like to think so too. But I'm always surprised. As a reader and a writer and a teacher, I'm amazed at how few people read fiction with their critical-thinking hats on.

You'd have to be blind and live in a hole if this is the only source of Chinese history you've been exposed to.

Or live in one of the many, many areas of the U.S. where Asians make up a tiny fraction of the population, and your only contact with Chinese culture is through takeout. Again, you'd be surprised. I often underestimate how many people fall into this category, too. That is, until I actually visit such places, or meet such people, and get reminded. Chinese culture and history aren't part of most school curricula, let alone a presence in most people's lives--though this *is* slowly changing. In several generations, who knows?

I do there there are better books out there to learn about history from---"Wild Swans: Three Daughters of China", for example.

I agree completely. But this depends on the reader being interested enough to actually find out more in the first place--and on that reader recognizing that the novel might NOT be capital-H History. FWIW, "Wild Swans" is nonfiction, and for all too many readers, fiction is the *exact same* history, just told in a more palatable form.

I think the world of literature would loose a great genre if we eliminated historical fiction.

Did I say this? I didn't think I did, and I certainly didn't mean to imply it. I guess I can only reiterate what I said originally: "Most of the above complaint about this book has to do with the reactions of the people reading it, not with the book itself. But I think there's something in how the book is pitched, and in the narrative itself, that invites that."

I hope you're wrong, about people...but you're probably not. I live in a very educated and diverse area and take that for granted sometimes.

And no, you never suggested eliminating it; I just took it to the next level.

@ Brookyln:

Fair enough. I also live in a very educated and diverse area--and have been lucky enough to have lived in places like that all my life. So I take it for granted sometimes too. This is probably why I'm so surprised when I meet people who honestly have never met people of another culture, any other culture, and aren't even curious about it!

But I do expect it will change, slowly. It's getting harder and harder now to live your whole life without interacting with another culture, in real life or print--and I think that's a good thing.

If I were to summarize your review of the book minus all the mumbo-jumbo it would go something like this.

"I hate this book, I don't know why. Oh wait, I don't like people writing about cultures that they aren't subject to."

End.

Hi JC,

Sorry you didn't get much from the review. I think you must have missed this part--"[I:]n this case at least, I don't think it's because of the weirdness that arises from a Westerner writing about a colonized country." Because actually, I don't have a problem with "people writing about cultures they aren't subject to" as long as the novel that emerges is convincing. (Take White Ghost Girls, by Alice Greenway, for an example of a non-Chinese person writing an amazing, complex, and for me, fully convincing novel about Hong Kong in the 1960s.) For me, The Good Earth just wasn't convincing as a piece of fiction, regardless of where it's set.

You might also have missed my long paragraph in the middle about my concerns over people conflating novels with history textbooks, since that's my biggest problem with The Good Earth. As I pointed out in my original post, this is mostly to do with how people react to the book, rather than how the book is written.

In fact, in reading over my review, I don't see any place where I said anything about "people writing about cultures that they aren't subject to." That criteria also hardly applies to Pearl S. Buck, who spent a large part of her life in China.

Thanks for the comment, though. I'm actually delighted to know that I'm capable of mumbo-jumbo!

I trust you are aware that Pearl Buck grew up in China. Her parents were missionaries and raised her there. It's not as if she knows nothing about the nation. Nor is it her fault when people make more of the book than they should.

Steven wrote: "I trust you are aware that Pearl Buck grew up in China. Her parents were missionaries and raised her there. It's not as if she knows nothing about the nation. Nor is it her fault when people mak..."

Hi Steven,

Thanks for writing. Yes, I am aware that Pearl Buck grew up in China--I don't think I ever implied that she didn't know what she was talking about, but if I did that was not my intent. And yes, I'm keenly aware that it is not entirely, or even mostly, her fault when people make more of the book thsn they should: "...most of the above complaint about this book has to do with the reactions of the people reading it, not with the book itself. " Writers write the books they fele the need to write, in the ways that feel right to them, and what readers make of it is a whole other subject.

Your review of this book brought up a very good point. We should not take one book, especially written by an "outsider", and consider it the only truth about a culture.

It is also true of the first generation culture of Chinese women in San Francisco as written by Amy Tan. Thanks for reminding me that this is fiction.

Sheila wrote: "Your review of this book brought up a very good point. We should not take one book, especially written by an "outsider", and consider it the only truth about a culture. [...:]"

Sheila, when I got Goodreads's notification that I had a comment, I was *sure* this was going to be another message saying "How DARE you criticize The Good Earth? It taught me everything I know about China... and that's all I NEED to know!" So you can imagine how relieved I was to see that you got my point.

And you're absolutely right; this tends to happen with books written by "outsiders." When we're familiar with the culture, we're able to see gradations and make distinctions and recognize individuals. When we're not familiar with the culture, we tend to assume that everyone is alike. (I think psychologists call this "outgroup homogeneity bias.") And that's the basis of sterotyping--not to mention the exact opposite of what fiction usually tries to do: open you up.

Thanks so much for your thoughtful comment.

I read The Good Earth many decades ago. It was a different time and society, both in the US and China. I loved the book. I did wonder how today's society would view the book.

"As a story of love, partnership, and sacrifice in a marriage and family--this book does well," you say. So you do appreciate it to a certain level. I only wonder why you chose to give The Good Earth one star, since what you hate seems to be the "ignorant" assumptions that other readers have...which really has nothing to do with the actual content of the book itself.

As an ethnic Chinese person (are you Chinese too?) I didn't feel particularly offended when I read The Good Earth. And you know what? It DID teach me a lot about the country where I was born. I was able to connect with the housing and family arrangements, the crops (which, incidentally, reminded me of the time I helped my grandma pick snow peas), etc. It was also fun to match up the Chinese names and words with their pronunciations and characters. So for me, it was enriching, and I don't see why you should be so rankled when others feel a bit more knowledgeable about China after they've read this.

After all, the reviewer that you called out only said that the lessons in culture, history and class hidden within the Good Earth were "much-needed." Is he or she calling The Good Earth a valuable history textbook? In my opinion, probably not. I actually thought the reviewer was pointing out that The Good Earth presented China from a point of view that is often missed or overlooked.

Anyway, with all the "Made-in-China" labels we see everywhere, I don't know how anyone could think that the China portrayed in the Good Earth is the China of today.

Hi Gin,

Thanks for writing. I actually dislike the book itself (the story and the writing )personally, which is mostly why I gave it one star, but that's purely a matter of taste. Plenty of people I know do like it. I chose to focus the review on the context of the book--namely, what it appears to be doing and how it is often received by its readers--because those are to me more interesting and more important.

From what you write, you seem to have more background knowledge about Chinees culture than many. You noted that you were able to "connect" with the housing and family arrangements, the language, etc. Which is great! But I'd guess that there were also aspects of the book which didn't reflect your personal experience of the culture, and which you were able to separate from "fact" because of your background knowledge. Sadly, many readers don't have the background knowledge to do that, and they take the entire book as being factual and each character's actions as representative of all Chinese people. THAT is where I have a problem.

I imagine you're skeptical. And I wish I could be as optimistic as you are about people realizing that the China portrayed in The Good Earth is not the China of today. I mean, the book was written in the 1930s! And yet, take a look at many of the reviews on Amazon or of Goodreads: many readers conflate that 1930s, *fictionalized* China with Chinese culture and society today. Want more proof? Take a look at the page for Oprah's book club, which chose The Good Earth as a selection in 2004:

- From the first page: "Published in 1931, The Good Earth is still many readers' first glimpse at the inner life of China and its people." Note that it's not "the inner life of China and its people as they were in the 1930s." No, that really implies "as they still are today."

- from the first question page: "In Chapter Nine, Wang Lung cries recklessly, 'Oh, you are too wicked, you Old Man in Heaven!' Talk about this in relation to other religious elements in the book so far. What does the Chinese attitude towards religion seem to be?" If this question isn't encouraging readers to make generalizations about an entire culture based on one fictional character, I don't know what is. And again, notice that it uses the present tense: "What does the Chinese attitude towards religion seem to be?"--implying that these attitudes are still true now.

- from the third page of questions: "Much of the latter part of the novel is taken up with death, marriage and procreation. Discuss what you have learned from this book about the Chinese culture in relation to these major life milestones." It's hard to argue here that this book isn't being treated like a textbook on Chinese culture. Or that any real distinction is being made between "the China portrayed in The Good Earth" and "the China of today."

I could go on--but perhaps you see my point? Yes, this is only one site about The Good Earth, but keep in mind this is Oprah's book club, which has millions of followers, and which propelled this book back to the top of the bestseller lists. These questions actively encourage readers to look at the novel--a MADE-UP book--as if it's a history text, and to make generalizations from the novel to "the China of today." And sadly, that's pretty typical of most readings of the book I've seen. Those "Made in China" labels don't seem to be getting the point across. Oddly, I can't think of many other books that are this old that are still treated as if they are current history.

Incidentally, I find it fascinating that this book (or is it the review?) stirs up such strong reactions--such strong reactions, in fact, that people keep writing in to defend their right to conflate fiction with history, and the right to make generalizations about a culture based on a 70-year-old novel. I'm in the middle of writing a piece for The Huffington Post about this very topic and will post the link here when it's up.

The author was brought to China as an infant and at one point knew Chinese better than she did English. She also knew a good bit about the culture and customs of a Chinese farmer of that time and area particularly because she accompanied her husband in his job as an agricultural specialist stationed in China.

I'd say she's just as much of a Chinese native as a Westerner. She holds that the book is an accurate depiction of how life was for some and I trust it enough.

Hi Jason,

Yes, I know: Pearl S. Buck knew a lot about China. (See above, #12). But even if someone knows about a subject, it doesn't mean that they necessarily choose to depict it accurately--fiction writers choose to distort, exaggerate, and plain old make up things for all kinds of artistic reasons.

Likewise, even when writers do intend to portray things accurately, it doesn't mean they succeed. I'm not criticizing Pearl S. Buck specifically here, but writing, by its very nature, is subjective; that goes double for fiction, which--can I repeat this enough?--is NOT honor-bound to stick to the facts.

And finally, even if we grant that the book is an accurate description of China as it was in Pearl S. Buck's time, that doesn't imply it still is today. William Faulkner wrote As I Lay Dying in 1930, one year before The Good Earth Came out. Is it fair to assume that book is (still) representative of the south today, let alone all of America? I sure hope not...

I liked this review, even though I don't really agree with what the reviewer is saying.

To me, the book is good fiction; I wasn't looking to be educated on the topic of China. The fiction itself could be about any culture; we here in the western world can look around us and find many families like theirs where the woman works her guts out, yet still is as little appreciated as the good earth on which the man is toiling.

I do not like the way a newborn's worth is merited by way of being male or female, but that's exactly how many people view things. Not everyone, however, comes right out and admits - a boy would have been better.

Mind you, in a country that severely oppresses its female population, a woman would be expected to favour a male's birth. I, for one, wouldn't like to give birth to a girl in a culture where the child is going to be used for a slave to men, or a man's family.

But 'The Good Earth', as a piece of fiction, in my opinion is excellent. When I mark off my 1 to 5 star, that is what I have in mind - how it worked out as a read. A good read? A poor read? Good writing? Bad writing?

I am not judging what people are expected to think, or what they do think. I'm judging the novel itself - good or bad.

I guess, being an editor, as Cynthia is, gives one a different viewpoint when reading.

And I guess, being Chinese, would give one a different viewpoint on a book. Furthermore, being a Chinese MAN would give one a different viewpoint.

In A Thousand Splendid Suns, I wonder how it was taken by people who actually live (or lived) in the middle east; did some of the men throw back their heads and laugh after reading the book? Did they turn to their brothers and say - are you kidding? My wife rules the damn household!

And it may be that people from the middle-east who have long lived here in Canada or the US feel exactly that way.

I wonder how the women themselves feel about it.

You take a book that's written right here in North America, by a NA author, with the scenario right here in New York or Toronto . . . depending on how the author views his/her life, will affect the characters in the novel.

Hypothetically speaking, let's say the heroine is a woman in Brooklyn; her husband's a bloody lout who gambles away his paycheck and bullies his wife out of anything she herself earns on booze and gambling.

Wouldn't someone from another country, who has never been the the US say to their wife/husband or friend 'hey! Lookee here! See what they do in New York? Now that's just awful!

Or, let's say it's a book where the heroine in the book does really well in life - great husband, lovely, healthy kids, good parents and inlaws, yet she doesn't appreciate any of it - just complains and rants on about how she doesn't get her way about this that and the other thing.

Someone who isn't familiar with the people or our customs could say 'oh, Lordy! Look at the way their women carry on!'

Well, I think that's the way it is here in Pearl Buck's book. Not every family in that community is like the husband in our book; not every wife in that community is like the wife.

Isn't that made clear when he is critical of the way his uncle/cousin raises his daughters? They're allowed to run around town socializing with men right in front of everybody.

It is with these thoughts in mind that I disagree with the reviewer here; I do not think the author is intending to give a stereotyped view of China and its people.

Heh! Heh! I wonder if anybody from China or the Middle East thinks all black men here, marry white women, play golf, fool around and attract exhorbitant attention from the media?

;-)

Carly, I actually agree with you--I don't think the author intended any sterotypes when she wrote the book. And you are correct, my review is really not about the book itself (characters, plot, writing) as much as it is about how the book is perceived by many today and the place it occupies in our (American) culture. But that's part of our understanding of the book too, isn't it? What we make of the book ends up being part of our reaction to it, perhaps even more so than what the author might have intended.

I have just posted more thoughts on this topic (and this book) on the Huffington Post, here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/celeste...

And yes, let's hope that those in other countries are perceptive enough to realize that not every American is like Tiger Woods!

well, I definitely wouldn't say that The Good Earth is the only lesson to teach one who the Chinese are - who could possibly boil down the identities or life experiences and perceptions of millions of people into one novel?! - but it definitely is at least one good lesson.

As a point of interest, here's some of the opinion on this book from one Chinese person, author Anchee Min:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125682489

and as a by the way, Min's memoir, Red Azalea, is another great lesson about China... but again, only one more

EDIT: And as an added note upon reading some of the discussion here, you might be surprised at the level of technology (or lack thereof) still present in rural areas of China. The cities and the countryside truly experience very different lifestyles. One has only to look at the current drought in the southwest and the fact that many city-dwellers are only vaguely aware of how bad it really is at present, while village families are struggling along on very very small daily water rations. I don't think that Buck's book can really be viewed as inaccurate, though, again, only representing a sliver of the Chinese experience and culture, which can be both wonderful and incredibly complex.

Trice, thanks for the comment and the links. Yes, as with any large country, different regions of China offer very different lifestyles. Some rural areas are still very poor. But it would be a shame if that were the only portrait of China Westerners ever saw, just as it would be a shame if, say, urban ghettos in the U.S. were all non-Americans ever heard about. That's part of why it's so very troubling to me when readers read something like The Good Earth, take it as fact, and read nothing else. Believe me, this absolutely does happen.

So while I'm still hesitant to point anyone towards ANY piece of fiction for a "lesson" about any culture--because again, fiction is not bound to facts, and not necessarily intended to "teach" you anything!--reading a variety of books for a variety of viewpoints is at least a slightly better method. It's kind of a blind-men-and-the-elephant scenario: look at too small a section, and your perceptions may be way off.

Of course it isn't the definitive lesson on China, but it is a much better book than one star. It was also written nearly 80 years ago.
Actually, many of my Chinese friends who have read it think it is very, very good.
It shouldn't be faulted because some readers have inflexible ideas about morality. Your argument seems to be that the author's delivery of the story, while an accurate portrayal of a time and a place, doesn't do enough to prepare the reader's for the cultural differences many Western readers encounter. It doesn't do enough to disclaim itself? It's a novel. It's kind of a hard sell - it's entirely up to a reader how much they can stretch their mind and how much they can accept.
Two options: dumb down the characters to be more Western in nature so that Westerners can bond and identify with them emotionally (this would compromise accuracy), or turn the novel into a history and cultural lesson, to the point where it's no longer really a story.
Isn't the real problem just that there isn't more literature on life in China?

Actually, because this was written during a time when people thought of the Chinese as being sneaky low lives closer to animals than actual humans, this was quite a breakthrough in how people viewed the Chinese at the time.

It was actually quite revolutionary, especially since it was written by a Westerner (because back then, you can't believe anything a Chinese person could say).

It is not the historical data within this book I am interested in. It is not the way people refer to it that concerns me. I do not consider it a history lesson. Its humanity is beautiful. This will sound cliched, but a rose is all the more beautiful for its thorns. The characters in this book are all the more beautiful for their flaws. Is this book not a well-written portrayal of how exquisitely painful the journey of life can be? Look for this maybe next time you read a book like it?

Kamilla wrote: "Of course it isn't the definitive lesson on China, but it is a much better book than one star. It was also written nearly 80 years ago.
Actually, many of my Chinese friends who have read it think i..."

Well spoken

I understand your concern about people talking about this book as a history lesson on Chinese culture, but I do think that is does have important historical information to impart. However, I think that the history it informs is more about Western views of China at the very specific cultural moment in which it was written (1931) rather than about the Chinese themselves and I think you are correct that people over look this.

Clearly, your review begs a response. First, I will say that i speak from the perspective of a white guy. Although I read this book several years ago, when I was a teenager, I felt that this book did give me insight into Chinese culture, much in the same way Shogun did into Japanese culture. However, I never felt either of these books claimed to be anything more than an impressionist portrait of said cultures.

I think my point is this: self-centered, close-minded people will jump to self-centered, close-minded conclusions no matter what book they read. If a person believes she has a deep understanding of the culture of a sixth of the worlds population based on one book, I think it's pretty clear the problem is not in the book.

I will not argue with your feelings about the book; they are your own. I will say that it seems that your view of the book was significantly colored by your take on it's significance to others. Of course, I can definitely imagine feeling this way myself; people read a book about the Southern US and think they know about my culture? Ridiculous. That said, my dislike of western novels has nothing to do with the fact that I have met people from many different countries who truly believed that everyone in Texas is a cowboy and rides a horse until they met me.

All that said, I was wondering if you have read American Shaolin, a much more light hearted autobiographical novel written by a white man. If so, your take?

Had your one star been only to alert people who oversimplify learning history down to reading ONLY one novel, or learning today's China from an 80-year old novel, this would seem a good strategy to me. Although theoretically it would be unfair to blame Pearl S. Buck for those, no one could really hurt her, as she has long gotten away with her Nobel and left so many fans behind even to date.

But you repeated that the one star had indeed been awarded on the merit of the novel itself. As the reviews published here are meant to help choose books, they are supposed to be rational, not irrational. So why do you "hate this book"? Is it the main character Wang Lung, whom you "hated...so much"? If so, then again why? Is it his unfaithfulness to his primary wife? If so please consider that polygamy had always been customary, moral, and "lawful" in China, up to ~1950. In Wang Lung’s time, there was NO such concept as to be a SHAME to recruit concubines, even in the common women—They unfortunately could not imagine any better situation then.

By the way, I use the word "shame" instead of "sin", because there was not, and still is not, the notion of "sin" in the true religious sense in the Chinese as a people, who has always been nonreligious, which is a quite unique case in humanity.

Celest -- I did not know what you implied on here so I read your article on Huffington. I agree this propensity to simplify and make digestible other cultures with one book of fiction or one movie or one melodrama is disturbing, but it is also a timeless tactic to introduce new peoples as an exotic treat to the Thinking averse in a given population. Yes there are those that really are bothered by being analytical as an adult because they felt stupid as a kid and have a learning disability that they are self conscious about. Or they were always discouraged from thinking for themselves. I remember a friend of mine who moved away from the now dead factory belt of the MIdwest once told me how she was teased for reading and was once told by an adult , "haven't you read yourself enough books yet?" Like reading is "real nice but now its time to get in a union and go to work for an auto plant." I promise you having many many many friends from all around our midwestern manufacturing belt, this attitude as well as a kind of oppressive conformist atmosphere used to be common place. The point is that Oprah is going to be trying to get people to expand their minds even if they are really reaching to do so. I personally can see why you would be bothered by the questions they bring up, but I also think that its not quite as bad as you worry it is or could become. There are always going to be a certain number of people that will have very crude understanding of things that lay outside their immediate world. I mean the Bell Curve, economics, and certain types life style choices are simply an a immutable part of life for the foreseeable future. That acknowledged, I do think that as a result, its important what sorts of simple symbolic books get chosen to be ambassadors for a country, preferably not books that are works of fiction. My own take is that this process though is not a thought out one but a rather random set of forces that much more to do with other concerns like politics and the desire for a well made movie to be immortalized. In the case of this book, I just think it captured western imagination and is well written so now its on a number of reading lists. For my part I do not mistake this book for giving me any special insight into chinese culture. I lived in the bay area with some Chinese people that were here from college and I still do not feel that I have much insight into the culture. But then I have a profound respect for how big a topic area a people culture covers and how it is not something to be knee jerk about. If you surround yourself with folks that are not knee jerk thinkers and you recognize that some will be but recognize that it just part of the cost of living in a free society, then I think you needn't be too worried. Be worried when you do not have a forums like the Huffington post or Good reads to express your feelings freely. Not that some of your insights about how people lazily do construct simplistic false images of foreign places and people are not accurate, quite the opposite, they are simply are part of life in a free society where not everyone is equally intelligent, equally disposed to or educated for careful thinking.


If I were you, I would take your own advice and realize that, a lot has happened since 1930 and so you need not feel that this book is addressing modern China. I certainly do not. I think I would just enjoy the book for what it is, a compelling book told in a certain setting. Then understand that there are always those who are going to eat a taco and suddenly call themselves an expert on all things mexican. Its part of the list of human traits that are ever present and always disappointing. But you can at least be comforted that caricatures or misplaced popular symbols for various cultures and people are universal but they do not fool the average person with a real passion for the truth. its really rather futile to worry too much media that you feel is misleading about a topic, unless you see a clear organized pattern of cultural slur going on for possibly other more organize nefarious purposes. Otherwise, the normal course of discussion will separate the wheat from the chaff. At least that is what I think.

Read the memoir Red Azalea for a look at China during the Cultural Revolution under Mao. A true look at China's nasty side and very sobering.

I really, really like your essay on the Huffington Post about this. The book club prompts you quote and their encouragement to universalize the experiences of a few fictional characters to stand in for all Chinese people who have ever lived are truly outrageous. I liked "The Good Earth," but I agree that it, and other books from readers' non-native countries and cultures, should be read responsibly. Thank you for articulating this critique so well.

Very odd to judge a book based on the actions of people you have no control over. ("concerns over people conflating novels with history textbooks, since that's my biggest problem")

I've read this book several times and am disappointed by the harsh criticisms it generated amongst quite a few people. If anyone is naive enough to believe that Pearl Buck was writing with any intention other than portraying a slice of life in an enormous country with great diversity, as she did in all her novels, they should read the excellent biography of her own life. I was brought up and lived much of my adult life in a Chinese community and there is no doubt in my mind that her characterizations are authentic. Light years have passed since this book was published and today's China is a far cry from the way it was then, but the mindset is very ingrained and not necessarily modified by rebellion, war, occupation or cultural revolution. Of course any book has to be read in the context in which it was written, even the wonderful "Wild Swans" or the hundreds of books that follow on that note. At the end of the day, they tell a story..simple as that.

I'm not certain what others may think, but I've just returned from living in china and I think that this book does give some interesting insight into the philosophical governance of the Han people. Of course it should not be the be all end all of someone's understanding of china, but it's an interesting insight. Furthermore, I do believe that it parallels that which I observed in China.

I don't often comment on reviews, but this one got my hackles up, probably because I really like "The Good Earth" and I dislike when people write misleading reviews. This book is not responsible for people's ignorance and lack of critical thinking. There is nothing in the text that asks readers to make generalizations about China or Chinese people. If you hate the way this book is marketed, you should reserve all your hackles for Oprah's book club, as they are the ones that picked this book out of obscurity and decided that it has anything relevant to say about modern day China and Chinese people. Don't get me wrong, I think it's sleazy and damaging for Oprah's book club to market "The Good Earth" as a lesson about China, but when you post a review on goodreads you are supposed to say something relevant about the book. While I agree with your points, they are just as out of place when rating a book as someone who gives "Twilight" 5 stars because they think Robert Pattinson is hot. It's not fair to the book's reputation or to the integrity of this site to give a book one star based on something that has nothing to do with the text.

I disagree with pretty much everything you have written in your review. I "liked" it anyway. But 1 Star? You must have hated it. I especially disagree with your rating. By any standard, this book deserves more.

My book group just finished reading and discussing Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. We in the West have no clue who Genghis Khan was or the people from whom he came. In our grammer and high school education we are taught virtually nothing about him or the Mongols and their contributions to civilization. We were only taught how uncivilized they were. Jack Weatherford obviously does not tell the whole story in his book either but I believe if we read enough non-fiction and read even enough fiction where often great truths are contained, what is true eventually reveals itself.

You wrote a very passionate review and for that I liked it. But I have to wonder where you are coming from. This seemed more about something else than the review of a book. I think where we differ the most is that for you this was a book about Chinese, for me, it was a book about all of us.

So we should judge books not on their literary merit but on other people's interpretation of it? Riiiiiiight.

Robert wrote: "I think where we differ the most is that for you this was a book about Chinese, for me, it was a book about all of us. "

Robert, I really agree with your point here and I think Buck is skillful enough to communicate that to most of her readers. I'm shocked that someone was immune to her totally insightful writing!

How others view the book is not the books fault. That is the readers fault.

It's so nice to see a one star review first on the list for this book. I found this book to be beyond awful. It may have been due to it being a forced read in school, but I doubt it. I have disliked very few school chosen reads,, but thus made me wish I was illiterate.

Oh, and Chelsey.... Oprah didn't pluck this book out of obscurity... It's been a recommended read for high schoolers for years and years. That's like saying To Kill a Mockingbird or Where the Red Fern Grows are obscure titles. Really?

After reading all of the comments to this review, and yes I personally gave the book 5 stars, there is something I would like to point out. That even non-fiction books, whether they be travel books or personal diaries are subject to the author’s personal experiences and their mentality, upbringing, prejudices, etc., therefore they cannot be taken as representing 100 percent accuracy. We all know that even textbooks are subject to the same, they are tainted with the author’s personal agenda whether knowingly or unknowingly. Calling out a fictionalized story on that point is the height of ignorance at best. In my opinion, it only serves to show the reviewer’s attempt at justifying her “hating” of the book by pointing the finger outside of themselves in order to try and give their hatred of the book a greater credence. It was not necessary, since they have a right to hate the book just because they hate it.

Tiberius I have never heard of "The Good Earth" being on any recommended reading list for high schoolers; I couldn't even find it on my high school library shelves or catalogue while I was there. You live in America; I don't, which could mean that there is a difference in which books are selected to be part of the school curriculum. Don't assume that every country and region prioritizes the same books as yours does.

I didn't like the main character either but his flaws made me feel like he was an actual person rather than just another character. I actually really liked this book and some of the superstitions, the ignorance of some of the characters, the traditions and "machismo" t that I saw in some, made me compare some of the things I see in todays culture as well. I come from a family of hispanics and I've seem a few people have the same mentality which actually made me relate to the book even more. Everyone struggles with something be it emotional our physical and I ferro this book spewed a bit of both seeing as the family feel apart in the end :/

"As a story of love, partnership, and sacrifice in a marriage and family"

- well, in my opinion this book is about the human life. People are not "black&white", there is a bit of everything in every human. First I found Celeste's review ridiculous, now I think that sentence explains her opinion. Maybe its just because I am probably much older.

well I didnt read ALL the reviews .. I could see some +ve some -ve for me as an impressionable 12 yo I forever thank my sister Barbara for giving me this book & opening up a whole new world called reading .. a place I never knew existed until then .. all that crap people wrote on these reviews about the falsehoods in this novel .. so what !! move on and see the richness afforded by your imagination, novels can lead our mind to another dimension .. get out of your box people !!!