What do you think?
Rate this book
Little Women #2
Little Men
With two sons of her own, and twelve rescued orphan boys filling the informal school at Plumfield, Jo March -- now Jo Bhaer -- couldn't be happier. But despite the warm and affectionate help of the whole March family, boys have a habit of getting into scrapes, and there are plenty of troubles and adventures in store.
329 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1871
About the author
Louisa May Alcott
3,380 books9,304 followersPeople best know American writer Louisa May Alcott for
Little Women
(1868), her largely autobiographical novel.
As A.M. Barnard:
Behind a Mask, or a Woman's Power (1866)
The Abbot's Ghost, or Maurice Treherne's Temptation (1867)
A Long Fatal Love Chase (1866 – first published 1995)
First published anonymously:
A Modern Mephistopheles (1877)
Philosopher-teacher Amos Bronson Alcott, educated his four daughters, Anna, Louisa, Elizabeth and May and Abigail May, wife of Amos, reared them on her practical Christianity.
Louisa spent her childhood in Boston and Concord, Massachusetts, where visits to library of Ralph Waldo Emerson, excursions into nature with Henry David Thoreau, and theatricals in the barn at Hillside (now "Wayside") of Nathaniel Hawthorne enlightened her days.
Like Jo March, her character in Little Women, young Louisa, a tomboy, claimed: "No boy could be my friend till I had beaten him in a race, ... and no girl if she refused to climb trees, leap fences...."
Louisa wrote early with a passion. She and her sisters often acted out her melodramatic stories of her rich imagination for friends. Louisa preferred to play the "lurid" parts in these plays, "the villains, ghosts, bandits, and disdainful queens."
At 15 years of age in 1847, the poverty that plagued her family troubled her, who vowed: "I will do something by and by. Don’t care what, teach, sew, act, write, anything to help the family; and I’ll be rich and famous and happy before I die, see if I won’t!"
Confronting a society that offered little opportunity to women, seeking employment, Louisa determined "...I will make a battering-ram of my head and make my way through this rough and tumble world." Whether as a teacher, seamstress, governess, or household servant, Louisa ably found work for many years.
Career of Louisa as an author began with poetry and short stories in popular magazines. In 1854, people published Flower Fables, her first book, at 22 years of age. From her post as a nurse in Washington, District of Columbia, during the Civil War, she wrote home letters that based Hospital Sketches (1863), a milestone along her literary path.
Thomas Niles, a publisher in Boston, asked 35-year-old Louisa in 1867 to write "a book for girls." She wrote Little Women at Orchard House from May to July 1868. Louisa and her sisters came of age in the novel, set in New England during Civil War. From her own individuality, Jo March, the first such American juvenile heroine, acted as a living, breathing person rather than the idealized stereotype that then prevailed in fiction of children.
Louisa published more than thirty books and collections of stories. Only two days after her father predeceased her, she died, and survivors buried her body in Sleepy Hollow cemetery in Concord.
As A.M. Barnard:
Behind a Mask, or a Woman's Power (1866)
The Abbot's Ghost, or Maurice Treherne's Temptation (1867)
A Long Fatal Love Chase (1866 – first published 1995)
First published anonymously:
A Modern Mephistopheles (1877)
Philosopher-teacher Amos Bronson Alcott, educated his four daughters, Anna, Louisa, Elizabeth and May and Abigail May, wife of Amos, reared them on her practical Christianity.
Louisa spent her childhood in Boston and Concord, Massachusetts, where visits to library of Ralph Waldo Emerson, excursions into nature with Henry David Thoreau, and theatricals in the barn at Hillside (now "Wayside") of Nathaniel Hawthorne enlightened her days.
Like Jo March, her character in Little Women, young Louisa, a tomboy, claimed: "No boy could be my friend till I had beaten him in a race, ... and no girl if she refused to climb trees, leap fences...."
Louisa wrote early with a passion. She and her sisters often acted out her melodramatic stories of her rich imagination for friends. Louisa preferred to play the "lurid" parts in these plays, "the villains, ghosts, bandits, and disdainful queens."
At 15 years of age in 1847, the poverty that plagued her family troubled her, who vowed: "I will do something by and by. Don’t care what, teach, sew, act, write, anything to help the family; and I’ll be rich and famous and happy before I die, see if I won’t!"
Confronting a society that offered little opportunity to women, seeking employment, Louisa determined "...I will make a battering-ram of my head and make my way through this rough and tumble world." Whether as a teacher, seamstress, governess, or household servant, Louisa ably found work for many years.
Career of Louisa as an author began with poetry and short stories in popular magazines. In 1854, people published Flower Fables, her first book, at 22 years of age. From her post as a nurse in Washington, District of Columbia, during the Civil War, she wrote home letters that based Hospital Sketches (1863), a milestone along her literary path.
Thomas Niles, a publisher in Boston, asked 35-year-old Louisa in 1867 to write "a book for girls." She wrote Little Women at Orchard House from May to July 1868. Louisa and her sisters came of age in the novel, set in New England during Civil War. From her own individuality, Jo March, the first such American juvenile heroine, acted as a living, breathing person rather than the idealized stereotype that then prevailed in fiction of children.
Louisa published more than thirty books and collections of stories. Only two days after her father predeceased her, she died, and survivors buried her body in Sleepy Hollow cemetery in Concord.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,841 reviews
September 1, 2020
Do yourself a favor, o learned reader of mine: if you love Jo from "Little Women" with as much fervor as her progenitor, Bronson Alcott's famed and very original daughter*, then do not read this sequel. Its like the "Go Set a Watchman" of its time. But worse! Uninspired drudge, it makes one compelling argument about why girls lead more substantial, prettier lives than nasty-ass booger-faced boys.
* She allows the little ladies-in-a-making cook for & entertain her little men at Plumfield. ENCOURAGES it, voices it. Yuck!!
PS: Happy 150th birthday, Little Women!
* She allows the little ladies-in-a-making cook for & entertain her little men at Plumfield. ENCOURAGES it, voices it. Yuck!!
PS: Happy 150th birthday, Little Women!
April 21, 2022
Little Men, or Life at Plumfield with Jo's Boys (Little Women #2), Louisa May Alcott
Louisa May Alcott (November 29, 1832, Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States - March 6, 1888, Boston, Massachusetts, United States) was an American novelist, short story writer and poet better known as the author of the novel Little Women and its sequels Little Men and Jo's Boys. Little Men, or Life at Plumfield with Jo's Boys, first published in 1871.
The novel reprises characters from Little Women and is considered by some the second book in an unofficial Little Women trilogy, which is completed with Alcott's 1886 novel Jo's Boys, and How They Turned Out: A Sequel to "Little Men". It tells the story of Jo Bhaer and the children at Plumfield Estate School. It was inspired by the death of Alcott's brother-in-law, which reveals itself in one of the last chapters, when a beloved character from Little Women passes away. It has been adapted to a 1934 film, a 1940 film, a television series, and a Japanese animated television series.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال1977میلادی
عنوان: مردان کوچک؛ نویسنده: لوئیزا ام آلکوت؛ مترجم شهیندخت رئیسزاده؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، سال1356، چاپ دیگر تهران، فردوس، جام، سال1376؛ در348ص؛ شابک9645509734؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، علمی فرهنگی، سال1384؛ در426ص؛ شابک9644456416؛ چاپ سوم سال1388؛ شابک9786001210525؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده19میلادی
عنوان: مردان کوچک؛ نویسنده: لوئیزا ام آلکوت؛ مترجمها: چیستا یثربی؛ فرشته موثق نژاد؛ تهران نامیرا، 1383؛ در 477ص؛
مردان کوچک دنباله ی داستان دختران خانواده «مارچ» و فرزندان آنهاست؛ کتاب «مردان کوچک» رمانی در حال و هوای «زنان کوچک» است، ولی داستانش به زنان کوچک ربطی ندارد، اما با همان کاراکترها نگاشته شده است؛ «جو» بزرگوار شده، با آقای «بائر» ازدواج کرده، و آنها دو پسر کوچک دارند؛ آنها مدرسه ای شبانه روزی، با چند پسر بچه ی کوچک را، که بیشترشان بی سرپرست، و نادار هستند را اداره میکنند؛ «جو» میکوشد با شیطنت پسرها کنار بیاید، و ...؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 05/03/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ 31/01/1401هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Louisa May Alcott (November 29, 1832, Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States - March 6, 1888, Boston, Massachusetts, United States) was an American novelist, short story writer and poet better known as the author of the novel Little Women and its sequels Little Men and Jo's Boys. Little Men, or Life at Plumfield with Jo's Boys, first published in 1871.
The novel reprises characters from Little Women and is considered by some the second book in an unofficial Little Women trilogy, which is completed with Alcott's 1886 novel Jo's Boys, and How They Turned Out: A Sequel to "Little Men". It tells the story of Jo Bhaer and the children at Plumfield Estate School. It was inspired by the death of Alcott's brother-in-law, which reveals itself in one of the last chapters, when a beloved character from Little Women passes away. It has been adapted to a 1934 film, a 1940 film, a television series, and a Japanese animated television series.
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: سال1977میلادی
عنوان: مردان کوچک؛ نویسنده: لوئیزا ام آلکوت؛ مترجم شهیندخت رئیسزاده؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، سال1356، چاپ دیگر تهران، فردوس، جام، سال1376؛ در348ص؛ شابک9645509734؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، علمی فرهنگی، سال1384؛ در426ص؛ شابک9644456416؛ چاپ سوم سال1388؛ شابک9786001210525؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده19میلادی
عنوان: مردان کوچک؛ نویسنده: لوئیزا ام آلکوت؛ مترجمها: چیستا یثربی؛ فرشته موثق نژاد؛ تهران نامیرا، 1383؛ در 477ص؛
مردان کوچک دنباله ی داستان دختران خانواده «مارچ» و فرزندان آنهاست؛ کتاب «مردان کوچک» رمانی در حال و هوای «زنان کوچک» است، ولی داستانش به زنان کوچک ربطی ندارد، اما با همان کاراکترها نگاشته شده است؛ «جو» بزرگوار شده، با آقای «بائر» ازدواج کرده، و آنها دو پسر کوچک دارند؛ آنها مدرسه ای شبانه روزی، با چند پسر بچه ی کوچک را، که بیشترشان بی سرپرست، و نادار هستند را اداره میکنند؛ «جو» میکوشد با شیطنت پسرها کنار بیاید، و ...؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 05/03/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ 31/01/1401هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
July 16, 2015
There is not another book in all of literature that I hold as dear as this one; I never expect to find another that gives me half as much pleasure. It would be impossible to count how many times I've read it over the years (it has to be dozens and dozens by now), and it remains a locale of constant pilgrimage, as I still return to it at least once a year. I'm always a bit nervous whenever I take it up again that my education of postmodern "isms" will have made me suddenly immune to its charms (and if that day ever does come, it will honestly make me seriously reconsider a possible future in higher education). Thankfully, from the very first pages, where poor, bereft little Nat Blake arrives at Plumfield and is taken in with open arms by "jolly Mrs. Jo" and ushered into her and her husband's experimental school for boys, it never fails to win me over as quickly and completely as the warm hospitality does the sensitive little homeless boy.
At this point I know all the tales—because that's all the book is, really—by heart, and as each chapter presents itself I can't help but smile with pleasure and recognition at the story I know is about to unfold. This time around it particularly struck me how much the stories have become an integral part of me—they're as much my memories as if I had actually experienced them "in the flesh," and if I'm honest I probably treasure them more than I do many many of the "legitimate" memories of my past. And every time I revisit it is striking how much it tells me about who I've become and who I am today—it's easy to comprehend now why the lonely little boy I was was so receptive to its vision of a utopian child society where shy and bookish boys have a place just as legitimate as the others; I can understand my complete identification with the character of Nat, because, that was me at that age.
Needless to say, I can't help but chuckle now over Mr. and Mrs. Bhaer's asides to each other about Nat behind closed doors--whether intentionally or not (and I'd probably lean towards the latter), Alcott was implying an awful lot when writing that Mr. Bhaer considered Nat "his 'daughter,'" finding him "as docile and affectionate as a girl." Inevitably, I can't help but wonder if some facets of my own personality are rooted in this initial identification with Nat, if my attraction now to extroverted boys has some basis in Nat's relationship with the exuberant Tommy Bangs; it's kind of odd observing now how the symbiotic Nat/Dan relationship play out through the book, as it so eerily parallels a friendship I had in high school (and my own intense emotional attachment to it).
Stepping outside myself for a moment, I will make clear that I don't at all make any great claims for this book—it's no undiscovered masterpiece, or even comes within striking distance of such a characterization. It takes the basic formula of Little Women and, for better or worse, amplifies it in some ways, particularly the moralizing stance it often takes. After the first several chapters where Nat is introduced into Plumfield (serving as a narrative device to introduce the reader to its many characters and establishes the locale), the rest of the book is more or less a ramshackle collection of mostly unrelated anecdotes with a genial "don't kids say/do the darndest things?" tone, with Jo assuming Marmee's place in locating a moral or truth in every turn of events.
And that's not at all a knock at all towards Alcott or her literary abilities—as I wrote in my review of Little Women, which I read for the first time last year, reading Alcott's work does make me ponder over the loss of what I called "the unsentimental Postmodern dumping of didactic literature." For my money, the "Damon and Pythias" chapter of the book is about as stellar an example of mixing a moral lesson with suspense as I've ever encountered—even though I know exactly how it all turns out, I still read it with my heart at the back of my throat.
What can I say? I love this book completely, unreservedly, and perhaps a bit too nonjudgmentally. So it goes. I will continue to treasure the "Illustrated Junior Library" edition I have always had and read, and with each read its corners grow ever more worn, as much from love as from use. If I am remembering correctly I found this book in an abandoned house on a piece of property my family bought when I was a child, lending my discovery of it a bit of an aura of fate; I had also failed to notice until this time around that this is the 1984 reprint edition, making us exactly the same age. I'm not exactly sure what I think about the idea of fate, but if there is such a thing, then yes, this qualifies just as much as anything possibly could. I'm already looking forward to my next rereading.
At this point I know all the tales—because that's all the book is, really—by heart, and as each chapter presents itself I can't help but smile with pleasure and recognition at the story I know is about to unfold. This time around it particularly struck me how much the stories have become an integral part of me—they're as much my memories as if I had actually experienced them "in the flesh," and if I'm honest I probably treasure them more than I do many many of the "legitimate" memories of my past. And every time I revisit it is striking how much it tells me about who I've become and who I am today—it's easy to comprehend now why the lonely little boy I was was so receptive to its vision of a utopian child society where shy and bookish boys have a place just as legitimate as the others; I can understand my complete identification with the character of Nat, because, that was me at that age.
Needless to say, I can't help but chuckle now over Mr. and Mrs. Bhaer's asides to each other about Nat behind closed doors--whether intentionally or not (and I'd probably lean towards the latter), Alcott was implying an awful lot when writing that Mr. Bhaer considered Nat "his 'daughter,'" finding him "as docile and affectionate as a girl." Inevitably, I can't help but wonder if some facets of my own personality are rooted in this initial identification with Nat, if my attraction now to extroverted boys has some basis in Nat's relationship with the exuberant Tommy Bangs; it's kind of odd observing now how the symbiotic Nat/Dan relationship play out through the book, as it so eerily parallels a friendship I had in high school (and my own intense emotional attachment to it).
Stepping outside myself for a moment, I will make clear that I don't at all make any great claims for this book—it's no undiscovered masterpiece, or even comes within striking distance of such a characterization. It takes the basic formula of Little Women and, for better or worse, amplifies it in some ways, particularly the moralizing stance it often takes. After the first several chapters where Nat is introduced into Plumfield (serving as a narrative device to introduce the reader to its many characters and establishes the locale), the rest of the book is more or less a ramshackle collection of mostly unrelated anecdotes with a genial "don't kids say/do the darndest things?" tone, with Jo assuming Marmee's place in locating a moral or truth in every turn of events.
And that's not at all a knock at all towards Alcott or her literary abilities—as I wrote in my review of Little Women, which I read for the first time last year, reading Alcott's work does make me ponder over the loss of what I called "the unsentimental Postmodern dumping of didactic literature." For my money, the "Damon and Pythias" chapter of the book is about as stellar an example of mixing a moral lesson with suspense as I've ever encountered—even though I know exactly how it all turns out, I still read it with my heart at the back of my throat.
What can I say? I love this book completely, unreservedly, and perhaps a bit too nonjudgmentally. So it goes. I will continue to treasure the "Illustrated Junior Library" edition I have always had and read, and with each read its corners grow ever more worn, as much from love as from use. If I am remembering correctly I found this book in an abandoned house on a piece of property my family bought when I was a child, lending my discovery of it a bit of an aura of fate; I had also failed to notice until this time around that this is the 1984 reprint edition, making us exactly the same age. I'm not exactly sure what I think about the idea of fate, but if there is such a thing, then yes, this qualifies just as much as anything possibly could. I'm already looking forward to my next rereading.
August 25, 2023
The small hopes and plans and pleasures of children should be tenderly respected by grown-up people, and never rudely thwarted or ridiculed.
Little Men ~~ Louisa May Alcott
As part of my BIG BOOKS GOAL for 2021 I decided to read all four of the books that comprise Louisa May Alcott's LITTLE WOMEN SERIES. In fact, I kicked off the year, & this goal with this series. The third in the series is Little Men ~~ the greatly underrated, overlooked sequel to the beloved Little Women (Good Wives). Honestly, I loved Little Men more than Little Women, & that's saying a lot since I think Little Women is a magnificent book.
Little Men focuses on Jo and Professor's Baehr's adult life with small children & a boarding school filled with young boys as well as two young women, Nan & Daisey. The focus of Little Men is more on the children raised by Jo & Fritz than Jo & Fritz themselves ~~ or any of the other March family members for that matter. At the close of Little Women, Aunt March left Plumfield to Jo, so Jo & Fritz open Plumfield as a boarding school for children whose families cannot afford to send them to the more expensive schools. The students are chosen carefully & many times come with emotional needs as well as educational.
All of the children have their own distinctive personalities & more times than not a character flaw. These flaws are usually brought to the surface & mended by Jo & Fritz with the help of the other children. The children's antics are described in detail ~~ fighting the squirrels to harvest nuts for the winter, gardening in their own little plots, their daily routines & chores, & the evolution of their thriving personalities nurtured by a loving environment.
Not only are the children provided with everything they need, but they are also expected to pull their own weight, taking responsibility for the family, making it in a sense a true family, something many of the children have never known.
Alcott's books are tremendously heartwarming. Little Men is no exception. Little Men is the sort of book a person turns to when the world has overwhelmed them; while reading Little Men, we know life can be full of beauty, compassion, and unconditional love.
In the first chapter, we are introduced to Nat Blake ~~ or rather, Nat Blake is introduced to Plumfield, the boarding school for boys, some of whom are orphaned, homeless, or challenged. The charitable, kindly Bhaers are beacons of wisdom & goodness, & their philosophical experiments for running the school are both unfailingly unorthodox and incredibly clever. Pillow fights are happily allowed, the young men tend gardens to encourage gentlemanly compassion, moral & character building experiences are deemed every bit as important to education as school lessons ~~ which by-the-way include both Greek & Latin, and there's a defined sense of shared respect between boy & Bhaer alike.
While each student comes to Plumfield under very different circumstances & for very different reasons, their reception is essentially always the same: they are welcome, their souls are attended to, their minds are trained, and the Plumfield family strives to correct their flaws.
While Nat takes center stage for the earlier sections of the book, it's the arrival of his street urchin friend, Dan, that rattles the rest of the story. I'm hard put to choose if I liked Nat or Dan better. Poor Dan ~~ dirty, ill-mannered, and a trouble maker ~~Dan sets Plumfield afire ~~ seriously, on fire ~~ with no end of pranks & bullying. Dan is given chance after chance by the forgiving Bhaers ~~ particularly Jo ~~ who is determined to find & nurture the good in him.
Sadly, the mischief proves too much, & Dan's last chance is up. He's sent away & disappears from the pages of Little Men. Dan's unexpected return to Plumfield is beautifully written; when Jo finds him outside at night, hurt & exhausted; thru the pain of being broken, Dan gasps, Mother Bhaer, I've come home. This scene will send a shiver thru you.
What Louisa May Alcott does so well here is create likable & complex characters that are far from perfect. In Little Men we get to follow up with some of our favorite characters from Little Women, but they do not take center stage here. Little Men is about their children & those of that generation. It takes us through important moments of the lives of Jo, Professor Behr, & the boys at Plumfield. Each character has their flaws, but they are learning & growing. Everyone of the boys were just genuine, relatable, & interesting.
At its core, Little Men is about love. Not romantic love, but philadelphia, or brotherly love & friendship. The trust, love, & devotion the characters learn for one another is incredibly heartwarming. Despite numerous obstacles & reasons that could keep them from that friendship they still have nothing but devotion for each other at Plumfield.
I absolutely love Little Men ~~ it stayed true to the previous story & expanded on its themes. When I was finished reading I wanted to stay at Plumfield with the Bhaers & the students & learn of their further adventures & exploits. Little Men is the type of story that helps young hearts & minds to grow & develop, encourages gentleness, & manliness & goodness, & teaches values that will last a lifetime. Highly recommended.
Little Men ~~ Louisa May Alcott
As part of my BIG BOOKS GOAL for 2021 I decided to read all four of the books that comprise Louisa May Alcott's LITTLE WOMEN SERIES. In fact, I kicked off the year, & this goal with this series. The third in the series is Little Men ~~ the greatly underrated, overlooked sequel to the beloved Little Women (Good Wives). Honestly, I loved Little Men more than Little Women, & that's saying a lot since I think Little Women is a magnificent book.
Little Men focuses on Jo and Professor's Baehr's adult life with small children & a boarding school filled with young boys as well as two young women, Nan & Daisey. The focus of Little Men is more on the children raised by Jo & Fritz than Jo & Fritz themselves ~~ or any of the other March family members for that matter. At the close of Little Women, Aunt March left Plumfield to Jo, so Jo & Fritz open Plumfield as a boarding school for children whose families cannot afford to send them to the more expensive schools. The students are chosen carefully & many times come with emotional needs as well as educational.
All of the children have their own distinctive personalities & more times than not a character flaw. These flaws are usually brought to the surface & mended by Jo & Fritz with the help of the other children. The children's antics are described in detail ~~ fighting the squirrels to harvest nuts for the winter, gardening in their own little plots, their daily routines & chores, & the evolution of their thriving personalities nurtured by a loving environment.
Not only are the children provided with everything they need, but they are also expected to pull their own weight, taking responsibility for the family, making it in a sense a true family, something many of the children have never known.
Alcott's books are tremendously heartwarming. Little Men is no exception. Little Men is the sort of book a person turns to when the world has overwhelmed them; while reading Little Men, we know life can be full of beauty, compassion, and unconditional love.
In the first chapter, we are introduced to Nat Blake ~~ or rather, Nat Blake is introduced to Plumfield, the boarding school for boys, some of whom are orphaned, homeless, or challenged. The charitable, kindly Bhaers are beacons of wisdom & goodness, & their philosophical experiments for running the school are both unfailingly unorthodox and incredibly clever. Pillow fights are happily allowed, the young men tend gardens to encourage gentlemanly compassion, moral & character building experiences are deemed every bit as important to education as school lessons ~~ which by-the-way include both Greek & Latin, and there's a defined sense of shared respect between boy & Bhaer alike.
While each student comes to Plumfield under very different circumstances & for very different reasons, their reception is essentially always the same: they are welcome, their souls are attended to, their minds are trained, and the Plumfield family strives to correct their flaws.
While Nat takes center stage for the earlier sections of the book, it's the arrival of his street urchin friend, Dan, that rattles the rest of the story. I'm hard put to choose if I liked Nat or Dan better. Poor Dan ~~ dirty, ill-mannered, and a trouble maker ~~Dan sets Plumfield afire ~~ seriously, on fire ~~ with no end of pranks & bullying. Dan is given chance after chance by the forgiving Bhaers ~~ particularly Jo ~~ who is determined to find & nurture the good in him.
Sadly, the mischief proves too much, & Dan's last chance is up. He's sent away & disappears from the pages of Little Men. Dan's unexpected return to Plumfield is beautifully written; when Jo finds him outside at night, hurt & exhausted; thru the pain of being broken, Dan gasps, Mother Bhaer, I've come home. This scene will send a shiver thru you.
What Louisa May Alcott does so well here is create likable & complex characters that are far from perfect. In Little Men we get to follow up with some of our favorite characters from Little Women, but they do not take center stage here. Little Men is about their children & those of that generation. It takes us through important moments of the lives of Jo, Professor Behr, & the boys at Plumfield. Each character has their flaws, but they are learning & growing. Everyone of the boys were just genuine, relatable, & interesting.
At its core, Little Men is about love. Not romantic love, but philadelphia, or brotherly love & friendship. The trust, love, & devotion the characters learn for one another is incredibly heartwarming. Despite numerous obstacles & reasons that could keep them from that friendship they still have nothing but devotion for each other at Plumfield.
I absolutely love Little Men ~~ it stayed true to the previous story & expanded on its themes. When I was finished reading I wanted to stay at Plumfield with the Bhaers & the students & learn of their further adventures & exploits. Little Men is the type of story that helps young hearts & minds to grow & develop, encourages gentleness, & manliness & goodness, & teaches values that will last a lifetime. Highly recommended.
November 8, 2016
I probably judge Little Men unfairly because, well, it's just not Little Women. I think I was expecting to much of it. I was also upset by, and this is silly, the fact that Jo turned down Teddy's proposal which then led me to view Jo's and the professor's relationship negatively. So it had a big strike against it to start with for me. Let's be honest, it's hard to top something as good as Little Women. I gave it 3 stars, it probably deserved four.
November 24, 2023
Sometimes you just need to read a simple “feel good” kind of book. I especially crave one around the end of the year during the holidays. It’s become a tradition of mine since reading Little Women for the first time last November.
Well, Little Men meets the criteria of a “feel good” story. It’s the official sequel to Little Women. Though it strives to capture the magical and charming essence of Little Women, it does fall a bit short. That being said, it’s still very cozy, heartwarming, and full of holiday cheer and spirit. 4 stars!
Mrs. Jo Bhaer and Professor Bhaer are married with two sons and running Plumfield school of rescued orphan boys. You follow the mischievous boys through all their adventures and trouble making. It’s full of funny moments and playfulness. It was nice to return to the world of the March family even though the focus was now on Mrs. Jo. But that wasn’t disappointing at all to me because Jo was always my favorite character in Little Women! It still pains me though that she didn’t choose a different life path. Anyway, she did name one of her sons Teddy (Ha!) But I’ll shut up LOL. She’s still playful and adventurous at heart and a tough cookie when it comes to keeping the boys in line. I plan on finishing out the series next November with Jo’s Boys. And I’ve never seen the Little Men movie adaptation so off to do that now!
Well, Little Men meets the criteria of a “feel good” story. It’s the official sequel to Little Women. Though it strives to capture the magical and charming essence of Little Women, it does fall a bit short. That being said, it’s still very cozy, heartwarming, and full of holiday cheer and spirit. 4 stars!
Mrs. Jo Bhaer and Professor Bhaer are married with two sons and running Plumfield school of rescued orphan boys. You follow the mischievous boys through all their adventures and trouble making. It’s full of funny moments and playfulness. It was nice to return to the world of the March family even though the focus was now on Mrs. Jo. But that wasn’t disappointing at all to me because Jo was always my favorite character in Little Women! It still pains me though that she didn’t choose a different life path. Anyway, she did name one of her sons Teddy (Ha!) But I’ll shut up LOL. She’s still playful and adventurous at heart and a tough cookie when it comes to keeping the boys in line. I plan on finishing out the series next November with Jo’s Boys. And I’ve never seen the Little Men movie adaptation so off to do that now!
February 17, 2019
I adore the book 'Little Women'. I read that when I was much younger. I have read much more widely since then and I have become accustomed to the modern pacing. My point is, I think I would have enjoyed this a little bit more when I was younger.
As a modern reader, pacing and stories have changed. This is a fairly outdated story. It was wonderful characters and lovely language, but it comes off, now, as a bit preachy and slow. The author at one point admits that their isn't a whole lot of plot in this story. It was strange. It's just a book about the funny things children do.
I did like the story, but it was slow and not a whole lot happens. I also get tired of all the sermons about being wicked and acting good. It isn't that those things are bad, it's just, we get it. Do we have to hear it again, but it was the style of the day. I still adore 'Little Women', even if it's slower paced. This book is OK, but the original is much more fun.
Laurie does show up in the story, but I believe that is the only other character besides Jo in the story. Jo is good for the boys and loves them dearly. I'm glad I read this and this wasn't my favorite.
I am beginning to think that storytelling has changed so much that these old classics might not be able to survive the new readers, unless people love the words that authors used back then. Still, even for classics, I don't think this is as good. I might go on with this story and I might be done. I don't know. It sure is a long slow book for kids. It's a lot to hang in for.
As a modern reader, pacing and stories have changed. This is a fairly outdated story. It was wonderful characters and lovely language, but it comes off, now, as a bit preachy and slow. The author at one point admits that their isn't a whole lot of plot in this story. It was strange. It's just a book about the funny things children do.
I did like the story, but it was slow and not a whole lot happens. I also get tired of all the sermons about being wicked and acting good. It isn't that those things are bad, it's just, we get it. Do we have to hear it again, but it was the style of the day. I still adore 'Little Women', even if it's slower paced. This book is OK, but the original is much more fun.
Laurie does show up in the story, but I believe that is the only other character besides Jo in the story. Jo is good for the boys and loves them dearly. I'm glad I read this and this wasn't my favorite.
I am beginning to think that storytelling has changed so much that these old classics might not be able to survive the new readers, unless people love the words that authors used back then. Still, even for classics, I don't think this is as good. I might go on with this story and I might be done. I don't know. It sure is a long slow book for kids. It's a lot to hang in for.
January 2, 2023
While this doesn't quite have the same magical quality of its predecessor, I did find a lot to love in Little Men. I have to admit I wouldn't have minded a bit more time with the March sisters (who of course are no longer March's), I soon found myself swept up in the antics of Jo's pupils. This was a peaceful book to read, and I found it a nice thing to start the day with. The overall tone of the book is pleasant and warm, and proved to be lovely way to wake up my brain.
Of the new characters, Nat and Dan were my favourites. Nat is so sweet and his love of music endeared him completely to me. And Dan grew on me over the course of the book and won me over quicker than I would have expected.
The chapter John Brooke was touching and poignant. I was confused slightly when, after Demi had announced he was to be called John Brooke now, which I found a beautiful moment, he continued to be called Demi for the two remaining chapters.
I will start Jo's Boys soon, and look forward to finding out how the series concludes.
Of the new characters, Nat and Dan were my favourites. Nat is so sweet and his love of music endeared him completely to me. And Dan grew on me over the course of the book and won me over quicker than I would have expected.
The chapter John Brooke was touching and poignant. I was confused slightly when, after Demi had announced he was to be called John Brooke now, which I found a beautiful moment, he continued to be called Demi for the two remaining chapters.
I will start Jo's Boys soon, and look forward to finding out how the series concludes.
July 27, 2019
Note, July 26, 2019: I've just edited this review to correct a chronological error --thanks for pointing it out, Shannen!
Although this is the second novel of Alcott's Little Women trilogy (Part 2 of Little Women, the first novel, was first published separately as Good Wives, but after that, the two were published as a unit), I read it first, and at about the age of eight; it was one of the earliest books I read by myself that I can actually remember. (As I sometimes say, I "cut my teeth" as a reader on Victorian and Edwardian-era classics.) This review has no spoilers for this book, but the situation it describes inevitably involves some "spoilers" in relation to the preceding book.
At the conclusion of the previous tale, Jo March and her German-born suitor, Professor Bhaer, are engaged, and planning to turn Plumfield, the country estate outside of Boston that Jo has inherited from her now-deceased Aunt March, into a boarding school for boys. I don't have Little Women in front of me; and don't perfectly recall the conclusion, but at that time they were planning to marry the following year. The second book simply recounts about six months, from spring to Thanksgiving, in the life of the school --an eventful period that introduces several new pupils-- beginning when their oldest natural son is a bit younger than his twin cousins, who are 10. (That sets up an interesting chronological situation; the internal chronology of the first book, which was published in 1868-69, means that the Bhaers couldn't have married before 1870. This would date the events of Little Men no earlier than 1878, when the cousins, born in 1868, would be about 10; but it was published in 1871. So Alcott was projecting the events, from her own perspective, several years into the future. However, the real-life material and social culture didn't change markedly from 1871 to 1878, so the text as we have it fits pretty well into that chronological setting.)
At one point in this book, Alcott writes "...there is no particular plan to this story, except to describe a few scenes in the life at Plumfield for the amusement of certain little persons...." As this suggests, it was written for younger readers; and I think it has a slightly less "grown-up" tone, and deals with somewhat less (or deals somewhat less with) serious and deep themes than the first book. (That may be simply my impression from reading it myself at a very young age, but I don't think so.) It also correctly suggests that there's no very intricate plot here; though the story-line is eventful, the book is somewhat episodic, and more a study of characters than a plot-driven work. It's also an illustration, by rosy example, of the "progressive" educational theories of Alcott's own father, Bronson Alcott, who served as the model for Professor Bhaer; because Plumfield is an unconventional school in a number of ways. Personally, I think a lot of the ideas used here really do have merit. But I'm very skeptical (and already was as a kid) of his rather pacifist approach to discipline --rather than him using the ruler on the hands of offenders, for instance, they have to strike him with the ruler. (Alcott's father actually used that technique.) IMO, it works a lot better here than it probably did in actual practice, and Plumfield is a more successful school than any of Bronson Alcott's real-life educational ventures really were. Unlike Jo, Alcott herself didn't have any actual experience with running a school, and tends to view the kids in the book with somewhat rose-colored spectacles; they don't generally present many serious behavioral issues. (Though to be fair, there are some of these, especially surrounding one of the boys.)
All of that said, there's a lot of realistic incident here, and very good development of character; the dozen or so boys at the school, and a couple of girls --Jo's niece Daisy attends Plumfield with her twin brother, John Brooke Jr. (hence "Demijohn," or "Demi" for short), and tomboy Nan winds up here as well-- are all developed as distinct individuals, and drawn as vividly as the adults. (Two of the newcomers, musically-talented Nat and rough-edged Dan, have the most of an actual story arc associated with them, and Dan is the most dynamic character, in the sense of growing and developing in the course of the book). I liked most of the boys, and both of the girls, but Nan was far-and-away my favorite of the latter (I guess I had a thing for tough tomboy types even then, and she earned my admiration early :-) ). Childhood friendship, good life lessons for growing up, adventures, mischief, puppy love --it's all here, and Alcott tells it well. The diction isn't hard to understand, even for kids (at least, motivated kids who like reading), but the story and story-telling isn't so "kiddish" that adults couldn't enjoy it. In fact, I've decided that this would make a good book for Barb and I to read together sometime! (I'd normally recommend that one read Little Women first; but in her case, she saw and liked the movie adaptation of the latter.)
Although this is the second novel of Alcott's Little Women trilogy (Part 2 of Little Women, the first novel, was first published separately as Good Wives, but after that, the two were published as a unit), I read it first, and at about the age of eight; it was one of the earliest books I read by myself that I can actually remember. (As I sometimes say, I "cut my teeth" as a reader on Victorian and Edwardian-era classics.) This review has no spoilers for this book, but the situation it describes inevitably involves some "spoilers" in relation to the preceding book.
At the conclusion of the previous tale, Jo March and her German-born suitor, Professor Bhaer, are engaged, and planning to turn Plumfield, the country estate outside of Boston that Jo has inherited from her now-deceased Aunt March, into a boarding school for boys. I don't have Little Women in front of me; and don't perfectly recall the conclusion, but at that time they were planning to marry the following year. The second book simply recounts about six months, from spring to Thanksgiving, in the life of the school --an eventful period that introduces several new pupils-- beginning when their oldest natural son is a bit younger than his twin cousins, who are 10. (That sets up an interesting chronological situation; the internal chronology of the first book, which was published in 1868-69, means that the Bhaers couldn't have married before 1870. This would date the events of Little Men no earlier than 1878, when the cousins, born in 1868, would be about 10; but it was published in 1871. So Alcott was projecting the events, from her own perspective, several years into the future. However, the real-life material and social culture didn't change markedly from 1871 to 1878, so the text as we have it fits pretty well into that chronological setting.)
At one point in this book, Alcott writes "...there is no particular plan to this story, except to describe a few scenes in the life at Plumfield for the amusement of certain little persons...." As this suggests, it was written for younger readers; and I think it has a slightly less "grown-up" tone, and deals with somewhat less (or deals somewhat less with) serious and deep themes than the first book. (That may be simply my impression from reading it myself at a very young age, but I don't think so.) It also correctly suggests that there's no very intricate plot here; though the story-line is eventful, the book is somewhat episodic, and more a study of characters than a plot-driven work. It's also an illustration, by rosy example, of the "progressive" educational theories of Alcott's own father, Bronson Alcott, who served as the model for Professor Bhaer; because Plumfield is an unconventional school in a number of ways. Personally, I think a lot of the ideas used here really do have merit. But I'm very skeptical (and already was as a kid) of his rather pacifist approach to discipline --rather than him using the ruler on the hands of offenders, for instance, they have to strike him with the ruler. (Alcott's father actually used that technique.) IMO, it works a lot better here than it probably did in actual practice, and Plumfield is a more successful school than any of Bronson Alcott's real-life educational ventures really were. Unlike Jo, Alcott herself didn't have any actual experience with running a school, and tends to view the kids in the book with somewhat rose-colored spectacles; they don't generally present many serious behavioral issues. (Though to be fair, there are some of these, especially surrounding one of the boys.)
All of that said, there's a lot of realistic incident here, and very good development of character; the dozen or so boys at the school, and a couple of girls --Jo's niece Daisy attends Plumfield with her twin brother, John Brooke Jr. (hence "Demijohn," or "Demi" for short), and tomboy Nan winds up here as well-- are all developed as distinct individuals, and drawn as vividly as the adults. (Two of the newcomers, musically-talented Nat and rough-edged Dan, have the most of an actual story arc associated with them, and Dan is the most dynamic character, in the sense of growing and developing in the course of the book). I liked most of the boys, and both of the girls, but Nan was far-and-away my favorite of the latter (I guess I had a thing for tough tomboy types even then, and she earned my admiration early :-) ). Childhood friendship, good life lessons for growing up, adventures, mischief, puppy love --it's all here, and Alcott tells it well. The diction isn't hard to understand, even for kids (at least, motivated kids who like reading), but the story and story-telling isn't so "kiddish" that adults couldn't enjoy it. In fact, I've decided that this would make a good book for Barb and I to read together sometime! (I'd normally recommend that one read Little Women first; but in her case, she saw and liked the movie adaptation of the latter.)
September 2, 2021
Although I have definitely for the most part rather enjoyed Louisa May Alcott's Little Men and do therefore also consider it both a successful sequel to Little Women and also what I would consider an interesting and delightful late 19th century American boarding school story (and yes, a school story that really does descriptively and with much textual pleasure demonstrate how at Jo and Professor Bhaer's Plumfield, not only book learning and lessons are important and cherished, but also how the students are equally and intensely instructed and expected to be physically active, to engage in sports, gardening and the like), I also (and indeed frustratingly) have found that occasionally whilst reading Little Men, I was definitely feeling a just trifle impatient, that I really was wishing Louisa May Alcott would get to the point and move away from being so preachy.
For while the majority of the often rather episodic chapters of Little Men certainly are entertaining and engaging enough (even though I sometimes have found Dan's escapades and even his entire story to be a trifle too one-sided and even a bit artificial in scope), there is (at least in my opinion) occasionally just too many doses of morality and how to successfully live and prosper with honour and integrity lessons and messages being presented, and yes indeed, that especially Jo seems in Little Men to have totally morphed into simply being Professor Bhaer's wife and a mother-like figure to and for her students, her so-called little men (and with a few female students being thrown in for good measure, although I do very much appreciate in Little Men that Nan is being actively encouraged to follow her dreams of perhaps later becoming a doctor, even if Daisy is still generally being depicted as a standard and like her mother Meg entirely housewifely individual).
Combined with the fact that in Little Men I have also rather missed reading more about Amy/Laurie and Meg/John and that I do rather find it annoying that the only information about John Brooke in Little Men is the chapter concerning his untimely death (realistic perhaps, as John Pratt, the model for John Brooke, did in fact die very young and unexpectedly, but why could Louisa May Alcott not have devoted a bit of her Little Men narrative to Meg and John before the latter's death), while I most definitely have found Little Men engaging and readable, it also does not and never will have the same kind of reading magic appeal to and for me as Little Women does (and no, I will thus also not likely all that often be considering rereading Little Men, whereas for Little Women rereading it is both totally a pleasure and something that I continuously and happily do engage in).
For while the majority of the often rather episodic chapters of Little Men certainly are entertaining and engaging enough (even though I sometimes have found Dan's escapades and even his entire story to be a trifle too one-sided and even a bit artificial in scope), there is (at least in my opinion) occasionally just too many doses of morality and how to successfully live and prosper with honour and integrity lessons and messages being presented, and yes indeed, that especially Jo seems in Little Men to have totally morphed into simply being Professor Bhaer's wife and a mother-like figure to and for her students, her so-called little men (and with a few female students being thrown in for good measure, although I do very much appreciate in Little Men that Nan is being actively encouraged to follow her dreams of perhaps later becoming a doctor, even if Daisy is still generally being depicted as a standard and like her mother Meg entirely housewifely individual).
Combined with the fact that in Little Men I have also rather missed reading more about Amy/Laurie and Meg/John and that I do rather find it annoying that the only information about John Brooke in Little Men is the chapter concerning his untimely death (realistic perhaps, as John Pratt, the model for John Brooke, did in fact die very young and unexpectedly, but why could Louisa May Alcott not have devoted a bit of her Little Men narrative to Meg and John before the latter's death), while I most definitely have found Little Men engaging and readable, it also does not and never will have the same kind of reading magic appeal to and for me as Little Women does (and no, I will thus also not likely all that often be considering rereading Little Men, whereas for Little Women rereading it is both totally a pleasure and something that I continuously and happily do engage in).
January 6, 2015
This was...boring. You can tell Alcott's heart just wasn't into writing this the way it was with Little Women. It's episodic, which doesn't bother me, except that the 'episodes' don't make you feel any closer to any of the characters. The only ones I felt close to were carry-overs from Little Women--Jo, Laurie, Fritz, etc. The kids all sort of blended together after a while, and I wasn't really invested in any of them. Spoiler in this sentence-->The death of John Brooke felt like it was thrown in to try to lend the novel some gravitas, but since the sudden illness and death was sprung on us, rather than built up to, and since we are merely informed that it changes Demi, rather than shown, and since John doesn't actually appear in the novel to show us his relationships with each of the characters, it only ends up coming off as a cheap bid for tears. As always, obvious attempts to make me cry just make me mad rather than make me cry, so I merely ended up scowling at that part, rather than being moved the way I was with Beth's death in Little Women.
All in all, I would say you could read this if you really can't bear not to satisfy your curiosity, but it just isn't worth the time or effort otherwise, and it may be a case of curiosity killing the cat anyway.
All in all, I would say you could read this if you really can't bear not to satisfy your curiosity, but it just isn't worth the time or effort otherwise, and it may be a case of curiosity killing the cat anyway.
June 7, 2012
When I was in the 5th grade, my mother gave me this book. Granted, it was an abridged version for children, but it was a CHAPTER BOOK, and was REALLY LONG, and was the first - absolute first - classic story that I'd ever read. I spent the next two years reading this book over and over again.
I remember having a Snoopy sticker - the nicest sticker I'd ever seen of Snoopy - and stuck it to the front cover of my book to mark it as my own.
30 years later, I read Little Women. Which I loved. And a week later, when I was describing Little Women to my mother-in-law (who works in a book store) she linked the two together for me. I was telling her how much I loved Jo, and she said Little Men was the story of the house/school for boys at the end of Little Women.
WHAT?!? So, I read these out of order, and NOW I want to re-read Little Men with my newfound background knowledge.
I remember having a Snoopy sticker - the nicest sticker I'd ever seen of Snoopy - and stuck it to the front cover of my book to mark it as my own.
30 years later, I read Little Women. Which I loved. And a week later, when I was describing Little Women to my mother-in-law (who works in a book store) she linked the two together for me. I was telling her how much I loved Jo, and she said Little Men was the story of the house/school for boys at the end of Little Women.
WHAT?!? So, I read these out of order, and NOW I want to re-read Little Men with my newfound background knowledge.
February 20, 2022
August 2016 - re-listened with the kids
For the last 20 years this book has been one of the greatest influences over my life. The moral lessons, as are commonplace in Alcott's writing, are tender and sweet. The storytelling is so enjoyable. The characters are lovable and easy to invest in. Taken together, however, the effect is downright inspiring. LMA has proven that she knows and loves boys and their pranks as much as she loves girls and their many complexities. I am a better mother, a better teacher and a more tender wife because of Jo March and Marmee. I am a better scholar and thinker because of Professor's Bhaer's love for knowledge. My review is not profound but it is with genuine admiration that rank this as being among my most favorite novels.
For the last 20 years this book has been one of the greatest influences over my life. The moral lessons, as are commonplace in Alcott's writing, are tender and sweet. The storytelling is so enjoyable. The characters are lovable and easy to invest in. Taken together, however, the effect is downright inspiring. LMA has proven that she knows and loves boys and their pranks as much as she loves girls and their many complexities. I am a better mother, a better teacher and a more tender wife because of Jo March and Marmee. I am a better scholar and thinker because of Professor's Bhaer's love for knowledge. My review is not profound but it is with genuine admiration that rank this as being among my most favorite novels.
June 17, 2021
La novela Hombrecitos me trasporta a mi infancia, ya que fue uno de mis libros favoritos. Es la continuación de Mujercitas, pero siempre tengo la duda con Aquellas Mujercitas, porque al parecer algunas editoriales la imprimen como libro aparte (en cuyo caso Hombrecitos sería la tercera parte) y otras juntan ambos libros. Relata la historia del colegio de Jo, en casa de tía March. Es una forma de educación diferente, lo que se entiende al leer la biografía de Louise May Alcott, hija de un innovador educador. A diferencia de Mujercitas, una innegable novela juvenil, esta otra es más bien infantil. Los valores que traspasa la primera y segunda serían similares, pero sus aventuras no. Disfruté Mujercitas porque me identificaba con lo que les sucedía (team Jo, como buena escritora), no fue así con Hombrecitos. Sus tiernas aventuras escritas como cuentos independientes con una línea de continuidad, simples e infantiles, son más adecuadas para niños pequeños. Los personajes son los gemelos hijos de Meg, los hijos pequeños de Jo, la hijita de Amy y Laurie, y un grupo variado de estudiantes que pagan y un par becados. Catorce en total. Esta traducción no me gustó tanto, por ejemplo, habla de una tarta de moras, que yo recordaba como grosellas. No se imaginan cuánto me quebré la cabeza adivinando qué diablos era eso!!!! El libro se lee en un rato, es corto y su narrativa es super dinámica. Una reflexión quiero transmitir, asombra la diferencia de épocas. Eran tiempos en que (al menos en el círculo de Alcott) la educación era mucho más que traspasar conocimientos. Era una formación integral donde los valores eran centrales. Niños cultivando su personalidad como si fuera un jardín, es una analogía preciosa. Los padres y en este caso, cuidadores, se preocupaban de pulir a los niños para que limaran sus asperezas para funcionar en el mundo, pero más que todo para ser lo mejor que pueden llegar a ser. Un concepto hermoso!!! #hombrecitos #louisemayalcott #louisemalcott
April 10, 2010
I found this book to be even more entertaining and heart-warming than Little Women (and I loved, loved, loved that book!). Little Women, of course, is a pre-requisite to Little Men. However, my 10 year old boy read Little Men first and still absolutely fell in love with the book and all the characters. Now, he is inspired to read Little Women (something he felt sure boys would not read)
My 13 year old girl read Jo's boys (sequel to Little Men)---loved it as well!
Here is my Little Men review I posted on PaperbackSwap.com:
Loved this book even more than Little Women! More importantly, my 10 year old boy loved this book. In this book you will learn what happens to Jo and her family after Little Women. Jo and her husband run a boarding school for boys. Some of the boys' families pay tuition. While others are orphans who are taken in and given a beautiful new chance at life. The book is full of boyish adventures and the reader is both entertained and inspired by Jo and her parenting style. I highly recommend this book!
My 13 year old girl read Jo's boys (sequel to Little Men)---loved it as well!
Here is my Little Men review I posted on PaperbackSwap.com:
Loved this book even more than Little Women! More importantly, my 10 year old boy loved this book. In this book you will learn what happens to Jo and her family after Little Women. Jo and her husband run a boarding school for boys. Some of the boys' families pay tuition. While others are orphans who are taken in and given a beautiful new chance at life. The book is full of boyish adventures and the reader is both entertained and inspired by Jo and her parenting style. I highly recommend this book!
Want to read
May 4, 2018I didn’t know this existed asdfghkklv
but at the same time, super worried to read this bc I’ll likely not like it :/
but at the same time, super worried to read this bc I’ll likely not like it :/
December 19, 2021
Enjoyed it 😋 but little bit lesser than Little Women
September 30, 2009
I have always enjoyed these classic books. They were originally written for older children and the easy language and innocent themes reflect this. This is the 3rd in the Little Women series and follows the lives of grown-up Jo, her husband and the 12 boys and 2 girls that she teaches in her boarding school. It is full of traditional morals and is highly didactic. It is essentially a collection of short stories. As a mother, these books remind me of some of the traditional values that I want to teach my children and about the importance of love and acceptance for families. Many people may find these books boring or childish compared with current literary fashions but I will always have a soft spot for Louisa May Alcott and look forward to the next instalment of the March family.
August 10, 2018
I should have known from the title that this book will not be about my precious girls but about the little boys in Jo's school.
The main characters of little women were scarcely mentioned.
still, I enjoyed this cute book about these goodhearted boys. I enjoyed reading about a jo as a loving mother and wife.
I love how Louisa may Alcott always manages to make her characters this loveable
The main characters of little women were scarcely mentioned.
still, I enjoyed this cute book about these goodhearted boys. I enjoyed reading about a jo as a loving mother and wife.
I love how Louisa may Alcott always manages to make her characters this loveable
July 3, 2017
Reading this book felt so right! There are not lots of books out there that you can say this about.
I could totally feel those old feelings that I used to get when I was first reading Little Women. The atmosphere was so familiar and fortunately, this fact didn't make it a boring read.
My only problem with it was (SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!) (I'm gonna give you some space so that you don't accidentally read it) ...
.
.
.
.
.
John Brooke's death. I mean, why?!?!???!
I could totally feel those old feelings that I used to get when I was first reading Little Women. The atmosphere was so familiar and fortunately, this fact didn't make it a boring read.
My only problem with it was (SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!) (I'm gonna give you some space so that you don't accidentally read it) ...
.
.
.
.
.
John Brooke's death. I mean, why?!?!???!
May 23, 2023
Although this 5-star rating is a point or two below the 5-star rating I would give to Little Women, it is truly an amazing book and one I am both sorry I waited so long to read as well as one I hate to leave. After the last words echoed from the last page, I felt a true sorrow that the story was over, that I would not get to spend another day with the boys, or Little Men, at Plumfield.
In the beginning I did have a little trouble keeping them all straight. I attribute that as much to listening to the book as to my own poor memory. It is much easier to go back and double check names when you are reading a text; with an audio version you just press on.
So far as the text itself, I have one criticism and one observation. The former first. Ms. Alcott misquotes 1 Timothy 6:10, which actually reads: 'For the love of money is the root of all evil...' as, 'MONEY is the root of all evil.' There is a huge difference between these two sentences and untold harm, confusion and problems result from blaming an inanimate object for human weakness and worse.
The observation is that both Louisa and her father, Amos Bronson Alcott, were idealists. His idealism had adverse effects on his family; hers was more practical and she was able to turn it to good use with stories both entertaining and educational. However, it is good to recall her core beliefs. She believed so much in all humanity and thought them all very good, which is actually contrary to Sacred Scripture. I cannot help wondering how she reconciled her beliefs with her own life as well as verses such as, "the heart of man is deceitful and wicked". I loved this book and would also love to believe that real children could be so good as she created them to be. Do you wonder that I did not want to leave Plumfield?
In the beginning I did have a little trouble keeping them all straight. I attribute that as much to listening to the book as to my own poor memory. It is much easier to go back and double check names when you are reading a text; with an audio version you just press on.
So far as the text itself, I have one criticism and one observation. The former first. Ms. Alcott misquotes 1 Timothy 6:10, which actually reads: 'For the love of money is the root of all evil...' as, 'MONEY is the root of all evil.' There is a huge difference between these two sentences and untold harm, confusion and problems result from blaming an inanimate object for human weakness and worse.
The observation is that both Louisa and her father, Amos Bronson Alcott, were idealists. His idealism had adverse effects on his family; hers was more practical and she was able to turn it to good use with stories both entertaining and educational. However, it is good to recall her core beliefs. She believed so much in all humanity and thought them all very good, which is actually contrary to Sacred Scripture. I cannot help wondering how she reconciled her beliefs with her own life as well as verses such as, "the heart of man is deceitful and wicked". I loved this book and would also love to believe that real children could be so good as she created them to be. Do you wonder that I did not want to leave Plumfield?
November 28, 2020
Presenting Louisa May Alcott’s ‘Little Men’ in which very little happens for four hundred-or-so pages. It’s a perfectly pleasant lazy day read for all that.
January 11, 2023
I found this story to be pretty slow and casual. It was fun to hear of Jo and her boys. To catch up with the March girls and see where they are now.
March 30, 2022
Los clásicos siempre han sido mi punto débil, pero este 2022 me he propuesto leer algunos así que os traigo una pequeña reseña de uno de los primeros que he leído este año.
Antes de leer Hombrecitos, decir que sería recomendable leer Mujercitas para después adentrarse en este libro.
En esta obra de la autora nos encontramos con un compilado de historias muy fáciles de leer sobre la amistad, lealtad, humildad, honradez, etc. Una lectura que podría estar indicada para los más jóvenes, pero que perfectamente puede leer cualquier adulto.
El hecho de que sean historias cortas no permite que se profundice en ningún personaje y es algo que se echa en falta.
¿Mujercitas u Hombrecitos? Ambos son dos clásicos absolutos de la literatura, creo que, puestos a leer, mejor leer los dos.
Antes de leer Hombrecitos, decir que sería recomendable leer Mujercitas para después adentrarse en este libro.
En esta obra de la autora nos encontramos con un compilado de historias muy fáciles de leer sobre la amistad, lealtad, humildad, honradez, etc. Una lectura que podría estar indicada para los más jóvenes, pero que perfectamente puede leer cualquier adulto.
El hecho de que sean historias cortas no permite que se profundice en ningún personaje y es algo que se echa en falta.
¿Mujercitas u Hombrecitos? Ambos son dos clásicos absolutos de la literatura, creo que, puestos a leer, mejor leer los dos.
May 3, 2011
Little Men is, technically, the sequel to Little Women and picks up a good numbers of years later, after Jo March and her husband, Professor Bhaer, as they start their school at Plumfield, the house that originally was owned by Jo’s Aunt March. The novel opens when Nat, a street-bound boy with an amazing ability to play the violin beautifully, shows up on Jo’s doorstep, and from then on out the story features a stable but large group of kids and their kind and guiding adult influences. The Bhaer’s host about ten boys in their school and two girls, and I have to say that, despite the fact that this book should be everything I hate, I can’t help but be in love with it!
First of all, there are a number of things about this book that I SHOULDN’T like: It’s highly, HIGHLY moralizing (as in, every time a small speech is made or a story is told, you can be damn sure that there is a moral behind it), it’s saccharin sweet, only a few of the main children are fully developed, and the writing style has the wonderfully early 19th-century aspect where, if you don’t catch the subject and verb right away, you’re going to be lost by the end of a VERY long sentence! But, even with all of these things, I LOVE this book!
Perhaps it’s because it’s a sequel to one of my top five favorite books of all time, and, even more than that, follows my favorite character out of said book (what tom-boyish, bookish little girl wouldn’t find a heroine in Jo March), or perhaps it’s because I liked so many of the morals that were being jammed down my throat on almost every page – morals on things like trusting yourself, believing in love, investing in the goodness of people, continuing to believe, having faith – all things that I find extremely important in addition to extremely true! It also has to be said that the morals are taught in some very interesting ways, through some really involved metaphors, that made it fun to learn the lesson, whether the learner by nine or ten (as the ones within the book) or much, much older than that (as the reader was, this particular time).
All in all, it has to be said that the book is worth reading, especially if you at all enjoyed Little Women (if you didn’t like Little Women, please, PLEASE don’t ever tell me that. We won’t be able to be friends anymore. I can deal with a lot, but not that). It wasn’t necessarily the best book I’ve ever read, but I didn’t end feeling at all disappointed, and in fact am rather looking forward to reading the last book in the ‘Little Women series’, Jo’s Boys, which follows the children of Little Men into their adult lives. It was a wonderful little book to bring me in to 2010, and be prepared – if you can get through this book without shedding a tear, you’re a far more stony person than I am
First of all, there are a number of things about this book that I SHOULDN’T like: It’s highly, HIGHLY moralizing (as in, every time a small speech is made or a story is told, you can be damn sure that there is a moral behind it), it’s saccharin sweet, only a few of the main children are fully developed, and the writing style has the wonderfully early 19th-century aspect where, if you don’t catch the subject and verb right away, you’re going to be lost by the end of a VERY long sentence! But, even with all of these things, I LOVE this book!
Perhaps it’s because it’s a sequel to one of my top five favorite books of all time, and, even more than that, follows my favorite character out of said book (what tom-boyish, bookish little girl wouldn’t find a heroine in Jo March), or perhaps it’s because I liked so many of the morals that were being jammed down my throat on almost every page – morals on things like trusting yourself, believing in love, investing in the goodness of people, continuing to believe, having faith – all things that I find extremely important in addition to extremely true! It also has to be said that the morals are taught in some very interesting ways, through some really involved metaphors, that made it fun to learn the lesson, whether the learner by nine or ten (as the ones within the book) or much, much older than that (as the reader was, this particular time).
All in all, it has to be said that the book is worth reading, especially if you at all enjoyed Little Women (if you didn’t like Little Women, please, PLEASE don’t ever tell me that. We won’t be able to be friends anymore. I can deal with a lot, but not that). It wasn’t necessarily the best book I’ve ever read, but I didn’t end feeling at all disappointed, and in fact am rather looking forward to reading the last book in the ‘Little Women series’, Jo’s Boys, which follows the children of Little Men into their adult lives. It was a wonderful little book to bring me in to 2010, and be prepared – if you can get through this book without shedding a tear, you’re a far more stony person than I am
May 8, 2022
2,5☆
Nie da się ukryć, że „Mali mężczyźni” nie dorównali w moich oczach „Dobrym żonom” czy „Małym kobietkom”. Usilny dydaktyzm, niepozostawiający czytelnikowi miejsca na refleksje i możliwość samodzielnego wyciagnięcia wniosków oraz, przede wszystkim, skupienie autorki jedynie na dziejach Jo i jej podopiecznych z pominięciem Amy czy Meg, rozczarowały mnie. Jednak książka ma również swoje zalety: nieprzytłaczającą obrazowość, ciepło i aurę rodzinności. Z przyjemnością przeniosę się w ten świat jeszcze raz, czytając „Chłopców Jo”, ale wątpię, by ostatnia część zdołała zauroczyć mnie bardziej niż dwa pierwszej tomy tetralogii.
Nie da się ukryć, że „Mali mężczyźni” nie dorównali w moich oczach „Dobrym żonom” czy „Małym kobietkom”. Usilny dydaktyzm, niepozostawiający czytelnikowi miejsca na refleksje i możliwość samodzielnego wyciagnięcia wniosków oraz, przede wszystkim, skupienie autorki jedynie na dziejach Jo i jej podopiecznych z pominięciem Amy czy Meg, rozczarowały mnie. Jednak książka ma również swoje zalety: nieprzytłaczającą obrazowość, ciepło i aurę rodzinności. Z przyjemnością przeniosę się w ten świat jeszcze raz, czytając „Chłopców Jo”, ale wątpię, by ostatnia część zdołała zauroczyć mnie bardziej niż dwa pierwszej tomy tetralogii.
June 4, 2010
I mostly remember almost crying through this entire book, because I was so upset that Jo was still married to the old German dude and not Laurie. It was fun to see the March sisters' childen, and the stories about the school were interesting. But there will always be that little part of me that wants Jo and her Teddy to be together . . .
June 14, 2022
I almost love this more than Little Women...almost...
They might tie together.....
They might tie together.....
April 28, 2020
“Dear me, if men and women would only trust, understand, and help one another as my children do, what a capital place the world would be!”
This was de-lightful.
Alcott takes us through a year at the Bhaer’s school in Aunt March’s old estate, where Fritz is teacher and Jo is mother and moral instructor to an assortment of lost boys. Meg and John’s twins attend the school and Laurie and Amy’s little princess of a daughter makes appearances.
It’s like fan fiction—some of us just want the story of our beloved characters’ lives to continue, and with Little Men, Alcott gives us a very satisfying continuation.
Not that there weren’t problems. She lays on the moralizing and stereotypes quite thick here. (And talk about fat-shaming, what she does with the character “Stuffy,” giving him only one personality trait and beating it to death, is more than annoying.)
And I don’t think it was on par with Little Women. Rather than that organic wonderfulness, it really seemed to be written to the demand of her fans.
“As there is no particular plan to this story, except to describe a few scenes in the life at Plumfield for the amusement of certain little persons, we will gently ramble along …”
Still, there is something about Alcott’s engaging writing that really holds up. She has created all of these interesting little dramas, and her characters are so distinctive and full of fun and charm that I enjoyed every page.
Next, I’m on to Jo's Boys, my favorite when I last read these as a young girl.
This was de-lightful.
Alcott takes us through a year at the Bhaer’s school in Aunt March’s old estate, where Fritz is teacher and Jo is mother and moral instructor to an assortment of lost boys. Meg and John’s twins attend the school and Laurie and Amy’s little princess of a daughter makes appearances.
It’s like fan fiction—some of us just want the story of our beloved characters’ lives to continue, and with Little Men, Alcott gives us a very satisfying continuation.
Not that there weren’t problems. She lays on the moralizing and stereotypes quite thick here. (And talk about fat-shaming, what she does with the character “Stuffy,” giving him only one personality trait and beating it to death, is more than annoying.)
And I don’t think it was on par with Little Women. Rather than that organic wonderfulness, it really seemed to be written to the demand of her fans.
“As there is no particular plan to this story, except to describe a few scenes in the life at Plumfield for the amusement of certain little persons, we will gently ramble along …”
Still, there is something about Alcott’s engaging writing that really holds up. She has created all of these interesting little dramas, and her characters are so distinctive and full of fun and charm that I enjoyed every page.
Next, I’m on to Jo's Boys, my favorite when I last read these as a young girl.
July 24, 2012
I re-read Little Women, which resonated with me at age 24 going on 25 in a way that it never did when I was younger, and then since I knew nothing would satisfy me but more Alcott, I decided to keep going, since I'd never read the sequels.
Little Men is utterly charming, and you can tell that Alcott just went to town creating the school of her dreams. I told my mom about it and she said, "It sounds like homeschooling!" Each boy has his education tailored to his interests and abilities, when they can't get the kids to focus on their studies, they find something else useful and educational for them to do, and "Mrs. Jo" loves all of them like they were her own. It doesn't cover as much ground as Little Women, obviously, so it does tend to be a series of episodes of "kids do the darndest things," but it packs a special emotional punch of its own, when you're least expecting it. I also really liked that Alcott managed to keep Jo the same person she was in Little Women--obviously older and mellowed by marriage, motherhood and fulfillment of some of her dreams, but still mischievous and fun-loving.
Looking forward to Jo's Boys. Will Dan go to South America? Will Tommy marry Nan? Will Nat become a professional musician? What on earth is Demi going to be when he grows up? Burning questions, my friends.
Little Men is utterly charming, and you can tell that Alcott just went to town creating the school of her dreams. I told my mom about it and she said, "It sounds like homeschooling!" Each boy has his education tailored to his interests and abilities, when they can't get the kids to focus on their studies, they find something else useful and educational for them to do, and "Mrs. Jo" loves all of them like they were her own. It doesn't cover as much ground as Little Women, obviously, so it does tend to be a series of episodes of "kids do the darndest things," but it packs a special emotional punch of its own, when you're least expecting it. I also really liked that Alcott managed to keep Jo the same person she was in Little Women--obviously older and mellowed by marriage, motherhood and fulfillment of some of her dreams, but still mischievous and fun-loving.
Looking forward to Jo's Boys. Will Dan go to South America? Will Tommy marry Nan? Will Nat become a professional musician? What on earth is Demi going to be when he grows up? Burning questions, my friends.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,841 reviews