Fall of Giants Trilogy

[Maral1487]

Fall of Giants is the first in a 3 part series by Ken Follett. I begins right before WWI and travels all the way to the Kennedy assassination by the 3rd book, War of Worlds. When I was first introduced to this series, I was a little wary. I was worried about the whole history aspect being a little boring for me. Boy, was I wrong. It's one of the best stories I've had the pleasure of reading. The best part is the intertwining of all the characters. You follow the original crew up until their great grandchildren lives come into play. Highly recommend for anyone who is a history buff or simply enjoys a long connection of families through the generations.

[pratap_km]

I have gone gone through the first two books of the trilogy("Fall of Giants" and "Winter of the World"). I have the third one ("Edge of Eternity) which I will start reading soon. The series was a good read so far. The way Mr. Follet had connected the four families from different countries along with the historical events is too good. The narrative a very simple continuous flow and easy to follow without taxing your brains. But if some one has read Mr. Follet's earlier books which are based out of UK and Russia (e.g The Place called Freedom , The man from St. Pittsburg etc..) part of the subjects could be repetitive. Also I am not sure the kind of picture he painted on the Russian society is closer to the truth or purely imaginative.

Nevertheless a good serios which gives insights to the politics of Europe and US during last century.

[BarryEM]

I've read a few books that took place in Russia bofore, during and after the revolution and Follet's descriptions fit pretty well with them. A really good example is Boris Pasternak's "Dr. Zhivago". It's mostly about life in Russia during the first half of the 20th century. It's every bit as grim as "Fall of Giants". If you enjoyed Follet's book you'll love "Dr. Zhivago".

I read "Fall of Giants" because I liked "Pillars of the Earth" and it's sequel so much. In an interview he seemed to be saying he was trying to do something like the same thing in a modern context. I think he failed to do that if it's really what he intended. It was a good book but it didn't make me want to read the second in the series when it came out.

I read a lot of Follett's spy stories decades ago when I was interested in spy stories and the one I always thought was his best book was "The Man from St. Petersburg". It was probably his most literary book. Then I read a couple that were caper novels, which I never cared for and stopped reading him, with the exception of "Pillars of the Earth", which I still re-read every few years.

Follett wrote some really fine stuff but I always thought he was uneven, writing some pretty mediocre books from time to time as well. That's okay. His good ones more than make up for it.

Barry