What do you think?
Rate this book
Bright Flows the River
He had built an empire out of a worthless scrap of farmland, rising from the wrong side of the tracks to move gracefully within the inner circles of the very the American dream came true for him; now it was turning into a one night he tried to kill himself in his car; suddenly he was forced to come to terms with what he'd been and what he'd drama of a man's struggle for power.
Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1978
446 people are currently reading
598 people want to read
About the author
Taylor Caldwell
153 books558 followers Also known by the pen names Marcus Holland and Max Reiner.
Taylor Caldwell was born in Manchester, England. In 1907 she emigrated to the United States with her parents and younger brother. Her father died shortly after the move, and the family struggled. At the age of eight she started to write stories, and in fact wrote her first novel, The Romance of Atlantis, at the age of twelve (although it remained unpublished until 1975). Her father did not approve such activity for women, and sent her to work in a bindery. She continued to write prolifically, however, despite ill health. (In 1947, according to TIME magazine, she discarded and burned the manuscripts of 140 unpublished novels.)
In 1918-1919, she served in the United States Navy Reserve. In 1919 she married William F. Combs. In 1920, they had a daughter, Mary (known as "Peggy"). From 1923 to 1924 she was a court reporter in New York State Department of Labor in Buffalo, New York. In 1924, she went to work for the United States Department of Justice, as a member of the Board of Special Inquiry (an immigration tribunal) in Buffalo. In 1931 she graduated from SUNY Buffalo, and also was divorced from William Combs.
Caldwell then married her second husband, Marcus Reback, a fellow Justice employee. She had a second child with Reback, a daughter Judith, in 1932. They were married for 40 years, until his death in 1971.
In 1934, she began to work on the novel Dynasty of Death, which she and Reback completed in collaboration. It was published in 1938 and became a best-seller. "Taylor Caldwell" was presumed to be a man, and there was some public stir when the author was revealed to be a woman. Over the next 43 years, she published 42 more novels, many of them best-sellers. For instance, This Side of Innocence was the biggest fiction seller of 1946. Her works sold an estimated 30 million copies. She became wealthy, traveling to Europe and elsewhere, though she still lived near Buffalo.
Her books were big sellers right up to the end of her career. During her career as a writer, she received several awards.
She was an outspoken conservative and for a time wrote for the John Birch Society's monthly journal American Opinion and even associated with the anti-Semitic Liberty Lobby. Her memoir, On Growing Up Tough, appeared in 1971, consisting of many edited-down articles from American Opinion.
Around 1970, she became interested in reincarnation. She had become friends with well-known occultist author Jess Stearn, who suggested that the vivid detail in her many historical novels was actually subconscious recollection of previous lives. Supposedly, she agreed to be hypnotized and undergo "past-life regression" to disprove reincarnation. According to Stearn's book, The Search of a Soul - Taylor Caldwell's Psychic Lives, Caldwell instead began to recall her own past lives - eleven in all, including one on the "lost continent" of Lemuria.
In 1972, she married William Everett Stancell, a retired real estate developer, but divorced him in 1973. In 1978, she married William Robert Prestie, an eccentric Canadian 17 years her junior. This led to difficulties with her children. She had a long dispute with her daughter Judith over the estate of Judith's father Marcus; in 1979 Judith committed suicide.
Also in 1979, Caldwell suffered a stroke, which left her unable to speak, though she could still write. (She had been deaf since about 1965.) Her daughter Peggy accused Prestie of abusing and exploiting Caldwell, and there was a legal battle over her substantial assets.
She died of heart failure in Greenwich, Conn
Taylor Caldwell was born in Manchester, England. In 1907 she emigrated to the United States with her parents and younger brother. Her father died shortly after the move, and the family struggled. At the age of eight she started to write stories, and in fact wrote her first novel, The Romance of Atlantis, at the age of twelve (although it remained unpublished until 1975). Her father did not approve such activity for women, and sent her to work in a bindery. She continued to write prolifically, however, despite ill health. (In 1947, according to TIME magazine, she discarded and burned the manuscripts of 140 unpublished novels.)
In 1918-1919, she served in the United States Navy Reserve. In 1919 she married William F. Combs. In 1920, they had a daughter, Mary (known as "Peggy"). From 1923 to 1924 she was a court reporter in New York State Department of Labor in Buffalo, New York. In 1924, she went to work for the United States Department of Justice, as a member of the Board of Special Inquiry (an immigration tribunal) in Buffalo. In 1931 she graduated from SUNY Buffalo, and also was divorced from William Combs.
Caldwell then married her second husband, Marcus Reback, a fellow Justice employee. She had a second child with Reback, a daughter Judith, in 1932. They were married for 40 years, until his death in 1971.
In 1934, she began to work on the novel Dynasty of Death, which she and Reback completed in collaboration. It was published in 1938 and became a best-seller. "Taylor Caldwell" was presumed to be a man, and there was some public stir when the author was revealed to be a woman. Over the next 43 years, she published 42 more novels, many of them best-sellers. For instance, This Side of Innocence was the biggest fiction seller of 1946. Her works sold an estimated 30 million copies. She became wealthy, traveling to Europe and elsewhere, though she still lived near Buffalo.
Her books were big sellers right up to the end of her career. During her career as a writer, she received several awards.
She was an outspoken conservative and for a time wrote for the John Birch Society's monthly journal American Opinion and even associated with the anti-Semitic Liberty Lobby. Her memoir, On Growing Up Tough, appeared in 1971, consisting of many edited-down articles from American Opinion.
Around 1970, she became interested in reincarnation. She had become friends with well-known occultist author Jess Stearn, who suggested that the vivid detail in her many historical novels was actually subconscious recollection of previous lives. Supposedly, she agreed to be hypnotized and undergo "past-life regression" to disprove reincarnation. According to Stearn's book, The Search of a Soul - Taylor Caldwell's Psychic Lives, Caldwell instead began to recall her own past lives - eleven in all, including one on the "lost continent" of Lemuria.
In 1972, she married William Everett Stancell, a retired real estate developer, but divorced him in 1973. In 1978, she married William Robert Prestie, an eccentric Canadian 17 years her junior. This led to difficulties with her children. She had a long dispute with her daughter Judith over the estate of Judith's father Marcus; in 1979 Judith committed suicide.
Also in 1979, Caldwell suffered a stroke, which left her unable to speak, though she could still write. (She had been deaf since about 1965.) Her daughter Peggy accused Prestie of abusing and exploiting Caldwell, and there was a legal battle over her substantial assets.
She died of heart failure in Greenwich, Conn
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews
October 5, 2011
A big kudos to Taylor Caldwell for filling a book with characters that were despicable to me, yet possessing the skill to make the whole thing interesting.
The characters deal with problems that are still avidly debated today; for instance, in this book with a copyright of 1978 in its pages is a comment one of the characters makes to another:
It's not a lighthearted read. Caldwell's view was very bleak. According to Wikipedia, Caldwell was a strong conservative, even writing some articles for the John Birch Society's monthly journal. I'm sure she would have found today's Tea Party and political debates to be quite interesting.
The characters in this book are extreme. There are few grey areas. The people are either soft and feel entitled to government handouts or they work hard and never EVER ask for help. The women are either shrill and stupid (with children) or submissive and sensible (without children). The men are either Real Men who do as they see fit (everyone else be damned!), or they are emasculated servants of their children conned into daddyhood by their shrill wives. Communism equates to liberalism or any social policy, typical of a Cold War view. The softness of a "think of the children" attitude, idolizing children as "holy" and protecting them from the realities of the world is leading to a decadent, immoral and complete corruption of society.
Many of the characters, even the "best" ones in this book, are blatantly racist and sexist. But, I don't have to agree with them to realize that this book is honest: People really thought/think this way, talk/ed this way, feel/felt this way. It's a good snapshot of class struggles in the western world in the 20th century. It's not didactic, there's no big moral lesson except that a life is best lived not with money but doing what you have a real passion for.
Really fascinating and well-written. I'd give it 3.5 stars, but since that's not an option I'm rounding it up to 4 although I won't be telling anyone to run out and read it unless they are interested in historical fiction.
The characters deal with problems that are still avidly debated today; for instance, in this book with a copyright of 1978 in its pages is a comment one of the characters makes to another:
And where the hell is the spirit of American men now? Seems to me this country was founded by brave men who refused to pay taxes. They established a free nation. We need some more Boston Tea Parties... (417)
It's not a lighthearted read. Caldwell's view was very bleak. According to Wikipedia, Caldwell was a strong conservative, even writing some articles for the John Birch Society's monthly journal. I'm sure she would have found today's Tea Party and political debates to be quite interesting.
The characters in this book are extreme. There are few grey areas. The people are either soft and feel entitled to government handouts or they work hard and never EVER ask for help. The women are either shrill and stupid (with children) or submissive and sensible (without children). The men are either Real Men who do as they see fit (everyone else be damned!), or they are emasculated servants of their children conned into daddyhood by their shrill wives. Communism equates to liberalism or any social policy, typical of a Cold War view. The softness of a "think of the children" attitude, idolizing children as "holy" and protecting them from the realities of the world is leading to a decadent, immoral and complete corruption of society.
Many of the characters, even the "best" ones in this book, are blatantly racist and sexist. But, I don't have to agree with them to realize that this book is honest: People really thought/think this way, talk/ed this way, feel/felt this way. It's a good snapshot of class struggles in the western world in the 20th century. It's not didactic, there's no big moral lesson except that a life is best lived not with money but doing what you have a real passion for.
Really fascinating and well-written. I'd give it 3.5 stars, but since that's not an option I'm rounding it up to 4 although I won't be telling anyone to run out and read it unless they are interested in historical fiction.
May 6, 2014
You know, this has been one of those books I go back to every decade to re-read. It made a big impression on me the first time I read it, and it continues to evoke an emotional response from me every time I read it. It's kind of heavy in places, and kind of pedantic and sermony, but it is a finely crafted tale about one man's moral delimma between duty and desire. Why does a man who has achieved the American dream have a midlife breakdown? In analyzing his past, Guy Jerald discovers that his own long held perceptions of success and family and social obligation were perhaps ill conceived, and perhaps what was once important is no longer, and what wasn't...is.
April 19, 2018
One of my all time favourites - timeless.
August 18, 2017
This book might raise some hackles among feminists and female readers in general. Through her characters, the author expresses some very anachronistic views on gender stereotypes and the roles of men and women in society. Had I not known otherwise, I would have sworn this book was written by a man. A woman’s place, according to the narrator, is in the home, comforting and supporting her man, regardless of how cowardly or despicable that man might be. In one very telling scene, a female character is verbally abused and physically assaulted by her lover, after which she “forgives” him and takes him back to continue the love affair. In my world, this fellow would have spent the night in jail, but in author Caldwell’s world the woman’s forgiveness of her lover’s abuse is treated as an admirable trait!
As often happens in patriarchal literature (even when written by women), female characters are described mostly in terms of their physical attributes, as in the following example from Bright Flows the River:
Mrs. Lippincott … was breastless, but at least, thank God, she did not wear a man’s shirt and trousers, though the black skirt had a hard time restraining the full thighs. She was what is described as “petite”, and she apparently thought this was cuddlesome. Her brown hair was “casually” drawn into a ponytail and swished about her shoulders like a horse’s extremity. Her chest clanked with a series of gold chains, and her neck was scrawny. The blue blouse languished on her front, for there was nothing underneath, except brown ridges. Her legs were full of tendons and huge, and brown also. James suspected she played a lot of tennis and golf, and, no doubt, he thought sourly, she diets and lifts weights. Her forehead was like an arid desert, and he suspected her body was that way also.
And male characters are described in terms of character attributes:
A man. The kind this country needs. We’re short of such men. Entrepreneurs. Men willing to take great chances. Men with a will and determination to succeed, and the devil with ‘security’. I thought he was taking too much of a gamble, a lot of the time. But he knew what he was doing, and what looked like imminent ruin and bankruptcy turned into rousing success. I though he was--- uncouth---too, but there was a splendid mind behind that ruthlessness and drive. (Bright Flows the River)
Granted, both these passages are masterfully written and very entertaining, but they do reveal a certain gender bias in the way the author views the roles of men and women in our society. On man-woman relationships, the author has this to say:
No matter what happened, a strong man always put money, territory, and power ahead of any woman---that is, if he was a man. The new philosophy of the man-woman relationship degraded a man, emasculated him, corrupted his intrinsic nature, destroyed his natural place as a man among men. The area where he met women should not be confused with the mighty place where he met his peers.
Believe it or not, this was written in 1978, which is hardly the Dark Ages, at a time when both men and women were reexamining the typecasting that kept both sexes locked into stereotypical gender roles for much of recorded history.
Sadly, this novel could have been a 4 or 5-star read based solely on the quality of the writing and the author’s skillful use of the rural Pennsylvania setting to enhance the story. However, as a woman, I am unable to ignore the author’s misogynistic portrayals of her female characters, and therefore I am awarding only three stars for this novel.
As often happens in patriarchal literature (even when written by women), female characters are described mostly in terms of their physical attributes, as in the following example from Bright Flows the River:
Mrs. Lippincott … was breastless, but at least, thank God, she did not wear a man’s shirt and trousers, though the black skirt had a hard time restraining the full thighs. She was what is described as “petite”, and she apparently thought this was cuddlesome. Her brown hair was “casually” drawn into a ponytail and swished about her shoulders like a horse’s extremity. Her chest clanked with a series of gold chains, and her neck was scrawny. The blue blouse languished on her front, for there was nothing underneath, except brown ridges. Her legs were full of tendons and huge, and brown also. James suspected she played a lot of tennis and golf, and, no doubt, he thought sourly, she diets and lifts weights. Her forehead was like an arid desert, and he suspected her body was that way also.
And male characters are described in terms of character attributes:
A man. The kind this country needs. We’re short of such men. Entrepreneurs. Men willing to take great chances. Men with a will and determination to succeed, and the devil with ‘security’. I thought he was taking too much of a gamble, a lot of the time. But he knew what he was doing, and what looked like imminent ruin and bankruptcy turned into rousing success. I though he was--- uncouth---too, but there was a splendid mind behind that ruthlessness and drive. (Bright Flows the River)
Granted, both these passages are masterfully written and very entertaining, but they do reveal a certain gender bias in the way the author views the roles of men and women in our society. On man-woman relationships, the author has this to say:
No matter what happened, a strong man always put money, territory, and power ahead of any woman---that is, if he was a man. The new philosophy of the man-woman relationship degraded a man, emasculated him, corrupted his intrinsic nature, destroyed his natural place as a man among men. The area where he met women should not be confused with the mighty place where he met his peers.
Believe it or not, this was written in 1978, which is hardly the Dark Ages, at a time when both men and women were reexamining the typecasting that kept both sexes locked into stereotypical gender roles for much of recorded history.
Sadly, this novel could have been a 4 or 5-star read based solely on the quality of the writing and the author’s skillful use of the rural Pennsylvania setting to enhance the story. However, as a woman, I am unable to ignore the author’s misogynistic portrayals of her female characters, and therefore I am awarding only three stars for this novel.
January 19, 2018
This book is well written, but in my opinion she goes overboard using her characters to preach her politics and philosophy. Reminds me of Ayn Rand, but not quite as bad.
November 10, 2016
Deep insight into human life. Caldwell is a female who enters into the minds and hearts of middle aged men in crisis. Is it accurate? Two out of the three main male characters have betrayed their marriage vows. The author goes deeply into why. The book is a caution to those entering marriage unwisely. It also reflects what can happen to relationship over time and especially at the time when men begin questioning their worth and their life's accomplishments. Also, the author explores the upbringing of children and the effect of parental influence on a child's life. A very interesting read.
July 31, 2017
There isn't a single character I liked in this book. All characters are simple stereotypes of the days norms with no depth. All beautiful women are stupid, all men who work hard get rich, etc. There are many lectures about taxation, social order, and class. At least the prose was good...
February 1, 2009
I have read several of Ms. Caldwell's novel! This one is especially thought-provoking!
June 22, 2022
One of my favorite of Taylor Caldwell's books. Read it the first time in my 20's and have read it several times since. The older I get the more I seem to relate to it.
May 23, 2013
Read it over and over. Not only well written but has messages on many levels to take to heart. What a wonderful writer Caldwell was. Her work lives after her.
December 29, 2023
Another Caldwell book rich with psychological characterizations, family relationships and the issues that come from them, and societal commentary complete with warnings to her own generation and every generation after. One of America's greatest literary writers who should be far more recognized than she is.
September 4, 2017
missed this during my binge of taylor caldwell. love her characters. she understood the "human condition"
October 17, 2023
I listened to this book, and I’m not sure why I finished it. There were no likable characters in the novel. The descriptions were overwrought. The characters were stereotypes. Women were denigrated at every turn.
August 21, 2018
This was an interesting read, but the plot gets overwhelmed by the back stories of the characters. Their personal histories are revealed as the reasons why they have made both good and bad choices in life, but the religious, ethical, political and sociological views get too many pages and detract from the descriptions of the life crises they are facing. The story ends almost "happily ever after" despite the rigor of the characters' struggles.
January 31, 2016
Whew! Another Taylor Caldwell book under the belt. Her writing involves long essays on topics that are very detailed. Getting through one of her books is an accomplishment. Do I like them? Yes, they include excellent and well composed prose on current subjects of her time. I would recommend reading Ms. Calwell if you enjoy indepth writing.
October 27, 2018
Page after page of sexist garbage. Disappointing especially as it was written by a woman.
Read
October 30, 2020Taylor Caldwell has always been enigmatic to me even though I like her writing. I gave her four stars for this book because of her writing style and descriptions. Her characters are always so complicated and you can always tell if you stick with reading the story that the characters grow and change. This is a big deal lately in the school of thought for creating novels. It shows the most in my experience with Taylor Caldwel novels either that or I just pay attention or I am used to her style. Having said that, I don’t usually read two of her novels in a row because they are very complex. I don’t know where she got all the energy to write them.
Having said that again I will say that I did not understand when James‘s father came to him in the dream what his work was that he needed to do. After all of that time he spent with Guy and then hearing and reading the backstory of his own experiences I cannot figure out what where it was that he needed to do unless it was to stem the tide of communism. Taylor Collville has a big thing with communism. Communism was a big thing of course when she was writing. That’s another reason why I don’t read two of her books in a row. They all seem to be about the same thing or at least run along the same lines.
About the book oh I thought it made the most sense though I thought in some cases I found the storyline, the dialogue, to be a bit dramatic. I think she could have left out the whole last chapter. After she mentioned which he was going to do about his family she could’ve left the rest T our imagination. Of course by the time I was tired of the finding end of the lachrymose behavior for Louise and Lucy. There were some parts of the book when I was so annoyed with the characters that I put in my own responses. For example, when guy spoke to Beth the last time before he tries to kill himself and strikes her I thought as I was reading “I would have killed him.“ I suppose that means I was caught up in the story. Having experience with Taylor Caldwell novels I knew she was going to end it on a somewhat positive note. I don’t know that her endings are ever completely happy or sad. We could have figured out what guy was going to do. By the time we reach the end I was finished with Louise and Lucy and didn’t really want to hear from them again so maybe that’s my reason for thinking she could’ve left out that chapter. She does an excellent job of making one feel pity or dislike for characters. Perhaps this is her best quality as a writer and why I keep coming back for more even though I don’t always agree with her Primusse for each story. She does tell a story well and she does add lots of descriptions about days and land in storms. I thought there were entirely too many storms in this book. The storms were always convenient they only lasted as long as she needed to make them last. At least when there was a storm there was something going on that move the story forward. Having experienced storms I said I was reading this book now that storm would not have lasted that long. “Who knows.
V other thing about this novel that was a little bit confusing was the river. What was the river? Love, God? Work? I could never come up with any satisfactory conclusion about what it could be, though at the end it says bright flows the river of God in the telegram that James writes concerning the death of Emma. I will need to do research because I’m sure she got it from philosophy.
Would I recommend this book? I don’t know. There were elements of the story that or interesting but also may be a bit outdated. Maybe that’s why novels become classics.
Having said that again I will say that I did not understand when James‘s father came to him in the dream what his work was that he needed to do. After all of that time he spent with Guy and then hearing and reading the backstory of his own experiences I cannot figure out what where it was that he needed to do unless it was to stem the tide of communism. Taylor Collville has a big thing with communism. Communism was a big thing of course when she was writing. That’s another reason why I don’t read two of her books in a row. They all seem to be about the same thing or at least run along the same lines.
About the book oh I thought it made the most sense though I thought in some cases I found the storyline, the dialogue, to be a bit dramatic. I think she could have left out the whole last chapter. After she mentioned which he was going to do about his family she could’ve left the rest T our imagination. Of course by the time I was tired of the finding end of the lachrymose behavior for Louise and Lucy. There were some parts of the book when I was so annoyed with the characters that I put in my own responses. For example, when guy spoke to Beth the last time before he tries to kill himself and strikes her I thought as I was reading “I would have killed him.“ I suppose that means I was caught up in the story. Having experience with Taylor Caldwell novels I knew she was going to end it on a somewhat positive note. I don’t know that her endings are ever completely happy or sad. We could have figured out what guy was going to do. By the time we reach the end I was finished with Louise and Lucy and didn’t really want to hear from them again so maybe that’s my reason for thinking she could’ve left out that chapter. She does an excellent job of making one feel pity or dislike for characters. Perhaps this is her best quality as a writer and why I keep coming back for more even though I don’t always agree with her Primusse for each story. She does tell a story well and she does add lots of descriptions about days and land in storms. I thought there were entirely too many storms in this book. The storms were always convenient they only lasted as long as she needed to make them last. At least when there was a storm there was something going on that move the story forward. Having experienced storms I said I was reading this book now that storm would not have lasted that long. “Who knows.
V other thing about this novel that was a little bit confusing was the river. What was the river? Love, God? Work? I could never come up with any satisfactory conclusion about what it could be, though at the end it says bright flows the river of God in the telegram that James writes concerning the death of Emma. I will need to do research because I’m sure she got it from philosophy.
Would I recommend this book? I don’t know. There were elements of the story that or interesting but also may be a bit outdated. Maybe that’s why novels become classics.
April 12, 2025
Suspended disbelief. That is key to reading so many of the historical fiction tomes of the last century. Otherwise: a reader is bogged down in the mindset 'no way would a man think/operate like that' or 'this would be 100% unlikely hyperbole'. This is a thinker's book. This is a very character-driven read. Four stars because the book endures far too long; it would not suffer were it were 200 pages less. And yes, if you seek action, thrill...look elsewhere.
The time setting jumps across time: Pennsylvania in the late 1930's, a leap to the 50's and some juxtaposition to the 1970's. It all swirls together and apart because Guy/"Jerry" Jerald is in crisis. He basically 'cracks up' (suicide attempt) and lands in a mental institution. By turns, he is catatonic and reflective. Meanwhile he's under the intense scrutiny of two psychiatrists, one a WWII buddy with whom he both served and saved, Dr James Meyer. Now it's Meyer's turn to try to 'save' Guy.
How does a mind heal itself? Do you need 'helpers'? Who helped shape who you've become? Which characteristics are healthy? Which can be catastrophic? How are one's attitudes toward family, money, the opposite sex born and lived in one's lifetime? Page upon pages plumb these concepts: The psychiatrists Meyer and Grassman analyze themselves almost as much as they attempt to fathom Guy Jerald. We readers get a dose of Taylor Caldwell's attitude toward government, communism (remember it's the Cold War) and remember the 1970's credo "I'm checking to see what condition my condition was in".
Finally, take with a grain of salt the excessive labeling of women -- lazy, stupid are labels repeatedly pinned on Guy's wife Lucy. It made me quite angry. How could a female author be so cruel against the majority of the novel's women characters? Again the need for suspended disbelief.
Most of the characters are quite selfish. Fewer of the characters are even likeable. Guy's future "plan" is selfish and unrealistic. Woe to any present or future wife! I found the one thing I really liked was the ending had clear resolution vs vagaries or imagined thinking. But, I wonder were Taylor Caldwell still alive in today's time and social thinking, how she would view the 1970's tale she takes her readers to.
The time setting jumps across time: Pennsylvania in the late 1930's, a leap to the 50's and some juxtaposition to the 1970's. It all swirls together and apart because Guy/"Jerry" Jerald is in crisis. He basically 'cracks up' (suicide attempt) and lands in a mental institution. By turns, he is catatonic and reflective. Meanwhile he's under the intense scrutiny of two psychiatrists, one a WWII buddy with whom he both served and saved, Dr James Meyer. Now it's Meyer's turn to try to 'save' Guy.
How does a mind heal itself? Do you need 'helpers'? Who helped shape who you've become? Which characteristics are healthy? Which can be catastrophic? How are one's attitudes toward family, money, the opposite sex born and lived in one's lifetime? Page upon pages plumb these concepts: The psychiatrists Meyer and Grassman analyze themselves almost as much as they attempt to fathom Guy Jerald. We readers get a dose of Taylor Caldwell's attitude toward government, communism (remember it's the Cold War) and remember the 1970's credo "I'm checking to see what condition my condition was in".
Finally, take with a grain of salt the excessive labeling of women -- lazy, stupid are labels repeatedly pinned on Guy's wife Lucy. It made me quite angry. How could a female author be so cruel against the majority of the novel's women characters? Again the need for suspended disbelief.
Most of the characters are quite selfish. Fewer of the characters are even likeable. Guy's future "plan" is selfish and unrealistic. Woe to any present or future wife! I found the one thing I really liked was the ending had clear resolution vs vagaries or imagined thinking. But, I wonder were Taylor Caldwell still alive in today's time and social thinking, how she would view the 1970's tale she takes her readers to.
December 29, 2019
Superb. Loved this book - an old classic and so worthwhile reading. Not only because it's set in the midst of winter and concerns the steady recovery of a patient - or shall I rather say conversion of an old sinner. Of course its not just one patient, just as its never just about one sinner, but in the end you learn a lot about people - English, American and even a Kraushaare mixed in for good measure. It's a story of boys becoming men, wise, strong and fulfilled in their earthly calling to love and live and be thankful for every day and blessings of our good God. It's quite a religious book - even if the proponents don't get married in churches and don't get buried in its cemeteries either. A good book for just after Christmas and as one ends ones professional life - count your blessings and its never too late to live your life: Just do it! (Nike)
August 7, 2023
This book changed the course of my life. I should go back and reread it to see if I feel as strongly about it today as I did when I first read it in the 80s. I don't remember many of the details, but I recall one of the main characters (if not "the" main character) in a coma examining the life he'd led. I also remember him pondering whether he'd led the life he wanted or just gone along with the river that was his life ... going wherever it took him. It had me thinking similar thoughts. My life wasn't bad. In fact, most would say I had a great life. If I were to die at that point in time, would I have felt I'd just settled for the things that came my way? This book made me realize I had definitely settled. I jumped into the unknown void, got divorced, and took my life in a totally new direction. My rating today is based on my memory of the book and how much impact it had in my life.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 24, 2018
I come back to this book once every few years or so for sentimental reasons (it was sent to me as a sort of Final Statement by a former love), but there's a thick vein of hilariously apocalyptic Bircher-style anti-Communism running through the whole thing, so my wistful dream state is often interrupted by hearty belly laughs. One of the characters is a pompous British psychiatrist who spends pages railing against the threat of Fascistic Communism, and who -- one point -- says (I'm paraphrasing a bit) that "while every generation naively thinks they're facing the end times, this time it's actually true," without a hint of irony or self-awareness. I recommend it to anyone who appreciates jarring tonal dissonance in their love stories.
March 5, 2020
Going on my crap list. I kept checking the publication date which is 1978. I was working in psychiatric hospital by then and one just can’t admit someone to sulk. This book is a tirade against the role of women in society and the right of man to focus on only his job and to ignore his family and any other responsibility: “No Matter what happened, a strong man always put money, territory, and power ahead of any woman— that is, if he was a man. The new philosophy of a man-woman relationship degraded a man, emasculated him, corrupted his intrinsic nature, destroyed his natural place of a man among men.”
This was written by a successful working woman. Oh, yeah, she also wrote for the John Birch Society.
This was written by a successful working woman. Oh, yeah, she also wrote for the John Birch Society.
March 5, 2023
This gets points deducted for the horrible characterizations of women and marriage. The only valued women were all mistresses. Wives and other women not in adulterous relationships are all described as vapid shrews or insipid idiots. Some of that is written off as individual male character's points of view, but, really, to have four main female characters, all in relationships outside marriage, and all described with various descriptions of big bosoms, as the only positive female image was ridiculous.
If you can look past that, which at times I found difficult, there is good philosophical discussion about life directions and decisions. But there were at least three points I almost gave up on the book and didn't finish it.
If you can look past that, which at times I found difficult, there is good philosophical discussion about life directions and decisions. But there were at least three points I almost gave up on the book and didn't finish it.
September 11, 2021
Poderoso relato acerca de los problemas del matrimonio cuando la decisión de unirse a una persona es tomada a la ligera. Sobretodo cuando la Unión se basa en cuestiones superficiales.
En esta novela un hombre forjado a si mismo, conquistador del sueño americano, se ve reducido a escombros cuando a la mitad de su vida se da cuenta que ha vivido bajo las expectativas e ideales de una sociedad que atesora el dinero más que la felicidad.
Aunque Taylor Caldwell puede ser catalogada como una de las escritoras más machista, sus relatos siempre reflejan una gran capacidad para conocer la psicóloga de un hombre, sus deseos y anhelos más profundos.
En esta novela un hombre forjado a si mismo, conquistador del sueño americano, se ve reducido a escombros cuando a la mitad de su vida se da cuenta que ha vivido bajo las expectativas e ideales de una sociedad que atesora el dinero más que la felicidad.
Aunque Taylor Caldwell puede ser catalogada como una de las escritoras más machista, sus relatos siempre reflejan una gran capacidad para conocer la psicóloga de un hombre, sus deseos y anhelos más profundos.
July 31, 2019
Fabulous read by Taylor Caldwell again. Guy Jerald is a successful businessman, married with children, so why does he drive his car off the road in an attempt to kill himself? He is not successful with his attempt and is put into a mental health facility by his family. James Meyer comes to the U.S. from England and goes to visit Guy. They had been friends in the service, had kept in touch through letters. James tries to get through to Guy, who will not speak. Very well written, makes you think about your own life. Highly recommend.
May 17, 2022
I did not enjoy this book. It is an old book, written in the late 1970's, and its ideas of male and female relationships, especially including the expected roles of husbands and wives, is really archaic. I was around in the late 1970's, and things were definitely changing then!! I kept reading, all 500 pages, because I thought perhaps the characters would have epiphanies. They never did.
November 22, 2023
I have read captains and the kings and absolutely loved it. Taylor Caldwell is one of the finest authors around!
This is my second novel and she’s blown me away once more. She is such a refined writer that pulls you in to each character and plotline, but also keeps her stories very real and grounded. If you ever want to read a great novel, I suggest this author.
This is my second novel and she’s blown me away once more. She is such a refined writer that pulls you in to each character and plotline, but also keeps her stories very real and grounded. If you ever want to read a great novel, I suggest this author.
May 25, 2018
I haven’t read Taylor Caldwell for a while but have loved every other book of hers that read. This didn’t disappoint. And amazingly very current even tho it was written years ago. Very relative to what’s going on in today’s world.
December 4, 2020
I love Taylor Caldwell. This book is very condescending to women. It was written from several male chauvinists' perspectives and from a different age than the one we enjoy. The story is quite well done though.
May 16, 2021
This book was very long and at first I wasn’t sure I was going to like it. It turned out to be very good with lots of interesting characters. If you enjoy delving into the psychological recesses of the mind, you will enjoy it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews