Negative Positive
Title: A novel for die-hard Hardy fans and academics
Review: Ethelberta is not a book I would recommend to most people, and certainly not to someone who has never read Hardy. The novel is tediously written and lacks the depth pervasive in other works set in the country. Only in the last hundred or so pages did the story become engrossing. Why then did I continue reading? Deriving some measure of enjoyment from this book requires that the reader look at it as an example of Hardy's development as an author. The scholarly introduction and notes provide explanations that help with this analysis and make the novel more interesting.
Is the review positive or negative? 