I read yesterday morning that March had won the Pulitzer, looked it up on my library's website, and put in a request before anyone else could nab it. I have it in my possession right now and can't wait to start it. Of course, I have a few other library books that have to be read first. I can never get caught up on my reading.

Kath first mentioned this book several months ago, because, I think, it was available in Australia before it was here. The premise of March would seem right up my alley, and in some ways I did like it. But I sure have some quibbles, too! For that reason, I think it would be a good book for discussion. I bet it will show up on lots of book discussion lists in the next few months, since discussion groups are great bandwagon jumpers, anyway -- not that there's anything wrong with that.

I have this on my list of books to read, having read a review of it some time ago. Thought it was funny that March was up against The March by E. L. Doctorow, also set in the Civil War era.

I met the author of March (and her husband) in Waterford, VA, a beautiful historic village where they were autographing their books. I loved his Confederates in the Attic, and enjoyed his more recent book, Blue Latitudes.

I was a bit surprised to hear this had won the Pulitzer Prize, as I thought that might have been for more 'meaningful' literature, but it was a book I enjoyed. Geraldine came into our shop not long after I read the book, and I had a quick chat to her - she was really delightful.

Mary, I am interested that you are surprised she read 'Little Women' here in Australia - why is that? It was one of my favourites when I was a girl, and although at that stage I probably didn't understand the significance of the Civil War, I certainly understood the concept of the father being away.

I have just recently finished March and really enjoyed it, even though I have never read Little Women - just seen the movie.

I enjoyed the book and thought she did a good job. But then she is good at historical fiction. She did a wonderful job at "Year of Wonders"...

I was dumbfounded to hear that she got this prestigious award. What in the world? Little Women was one of my favorite rereads as a child, and the idea of telling the story through the father's eyes was very interesting to me, so I had high expectations. They were soon dashed. The premise was good, but the character she drew was so different from what I imagined him to be, that the rest of the story didn't fit. I couldn't imagine Marmee being in love with him. Plus the writing was clunky - her Years of Wonder, despite the iffy ending, was a much better piece of work

Then I saw what book she competed against - one was The March by E.J. Doctorow. What!!!??? Her book beat out his? That book was absolutely amazing - anyone with an interest in the Civil War, or anyone who ever read Gone with the Wind and wanted to know what the burning of Atlanta was all about could not do much better than to read this novel. He should have gotten this award. But its all subjective, I guess

I did read her nonfiction book, Foreign Correspondents, about her journey to look up her penpals from childhood. That was most excellent, and you can see her journalism training coming through.

BTW, her husband is one of my favorite travel writers. Kay, if you liked Blue Latitudes, you should check out his other books. Baghdad Without a Map was written early in his journalism career, about his work in the Middle East. Lots of fun, plus interesting look at the region post Iran revolution. He also talks about working and traveling with Geri a lot - guess who!?

My book discussion group has this on our list to read later this year. First we plan to read (re-read for most of us) Little Women and then the following month we'll read March. We read "Year of Wonders" by Brooks a couple of years ago.

Regarding Pulitzer Prize winners: We've already read three this year (just a coincidence) and I haven't been crazy about any of them. First we read The Known World (which I thought was choppy); then we read Breathing Lessons (not my favorite Tyler book); and just tonight we discussed The Stone Diaries, which most of us thought was just okay. The question actually came up: How exactly do they choose the winners of the Pulitzer?

What surprised me was, not that Brooks won the Pulitzer (as the Pulitzer is a prize in decline), but that she is now an American citizen and thus eligible for the prize.

Adam

Adam, unlike a certain media magnate from our home town, I believe Geraldine has dual citizenship and hasn't abandoned us.
Kath

I'm reading it right now. It's not as good as "Year of Wonders" but I like her writing style. It was predicted that the winner of the Pulitzer this year would draw a lot of criticism.

I'm on a quest to read every book on the Pulitzer Prize list for fiction. I've read several of the others but I'd like to read all of them.

Thanks for posting this, it wasn't on my radar and I've liked the other Brook's books I've read. I confess that when I read Little Women repeatedly as a child, I was always confused about where Father was. I did not connect it at all to the Civil War.

I took MARCH with me on a trip and enjoyed it very much indeed. I liked the way she fit everything about Mr. March from LITTLE WOMEN in. I also liked the way Marmee was more fully developed. In LITTLE WOMEN she is of course viewed only through the eyes of the daughters, and as a result she comes off as rather strait-laced and prosy. Finally, in MARCH, we meet a Marmee who I would like to actually meet, maybe have a cup of tea with. Brooks expanded on all the stuff that -had- to be in the Mr./Mrs. March relationship, but that naturally the daughters saw nothing of -- things like how the family lost all their money, or their marital relationship.

Brenda