She Who Wears Red Reads Books

Hi all, I'm new to the group and quietly adding my own little list to the bunch. I have never successfully kept track of how many books I've read throughout the year, so I don't really know how many to shoot for. But 75 seems as good a starting point as any!

Here are the books I've read so far. I'm going to keep editing this first message to add more to the list!

Edit: I got tired of having to fix the touchstones each time I added a new book, so I've taken out all the touchstones. The titles of the books will instead link to the corresponding message on this thread where I review it.

January
1. Druss the Legend, by David Gemmell
2. The Google Story, by David A. Vise
3. Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov (audio)
4. People of the Book, by Geraldine Brooks
5. Harvesting the Heart, by Jodi Picoult
6. House of Leaves, by Mark Z. Danielewski
7. Chocolat, by Joanne Harris

February
8. Keeping Faith, by Jodi Picoult
9. City of Ember, by Jeanne DuPrau
10. Magyk, by Angie Sage
11. Seeing Redd, by Frank Beddor
12. The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins
13. An Abundance of Katherines, by John Green
14. Year of Wonders, by Geraldine Brooks
15. The Giver, by Lois Lowry (re-read)
16. Predictably Irrational, by Dan Ariely (audio)
17. The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger (re-read)
18. The Lace Reader, by Brunonia Barry
19. Blindness, by José Saramago
20. Graceling, by Kristin Cashore
21. Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro
22. Feed, by M. T. Anderson
23. The Hour I First Believed, by Wally Lamb
24. My Little Red Book, by Rachel Kauder Nalebuff
25. Sabriel, by Garth Nix
26. Gathering Blue, by Lois Lowry
27. Lirael, by Garth Nix

March
28. Abhorsen, by Garth Nix
29. Ella Minnow Pea, by Mark Dunn
30. The Graveyard Book, by Neil Gaiman
31. Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Brontë
32. Coraline, by Neil Gaiman
33. Valiant, by Holly Black (audio)
34. A Wizard at Earthsea, by Ursula K. Le Guinn
35. First Test, by Tamora Pierce
36. The Other Boleyn Girl, by Philippa Gregory
37. Wicked, by Gregory Maguire

April
38. Handle with Care, by Jodi Picoult

August
39. Alanna: The First Adventure, by Tamora Pierce
40. In the Hand of the Goddess, by Tamora Pierce
41. Woman Who Rides Like a Man, by Tamora Pierce
42. Lioness Rampant, by Tamora Pierce
43. The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins
44. Graceling, by Kristin Cashore
45. Vampire Academy, by Richelle Mead
46. Frostbite, by Richelle Mead
47. Shadow Kiss, by Richelle Mead
48. Blood Promise, by Richelle Mead
49. Guilty Pleasures, by Laurell K. Hamilton
50. Trickster's Choice, by Tamora Pierce
51. Squire, by Tamora Pierce
52. Lady Knight, by Tamora Pierce

September
53. The Circle Reopens, by Tamora Pierce
54. The Adoration of Jenna Fox, by Mary E. Pearson
55. Catching Fire, by Suzanne Collins

Wow, you've made a great start to the year! Welcome!

Angela

Hi shewhowearsred! Welcome to the challenge :)

I'm also a fan of Jodi Picoult, Joanne Harris and Geraldine Brooks. And The Time Traveler's Wife was one of my favorites last year! I'll be keeping an eye on your thread!

Welcome to the group! Looks like you have made a great start on your reading year!

Welcome She Who Wears Red, I loved City of Ember, how did you like it?
I also plan on read Graceling and The Giver this year. I've heard good things about them.

Catey

Welcome! But you know you can't get by with just listing the books. I read a lot of science fiction and fantasy, so I want to know what you thought of the Gemmell book as well as Seeing Redd--I've read neither of these, although I have an earlier book by each author in the TBR pile. I have read City of Ember, The Giver, and Magyk, and much preferred the latter. I've liked that whole series. What did you think?

Welcome! Looks like you've read some great books already this year, and you're going at about the same pace as I am, which is awesome. What did you think of The Hunger Games?

Wow! I meant to come back and post a mini-review of all the books I've already read, but I thought I'd be able to do that before anyone noticed my thread. Guess I underestimated you guys!

1. Druss the Legend, by David Gemmell



This is not really the sort of thing I usually read. However, my partner's favorite author happens to be David Gemmell, and one of my gifts to him last Christmas was a hardback first edition of this book, which he loved. I read it because my partner is a HUGE fantasy fiction buff and as a rule only reads books with magic and dragons in them, which Druss the Legend doesn't-- and he loves it anyway! I am meant to be trying to persuade him to venture into other types of fiction, but he is very persuasive and after a lot of raving about this book, I crossed over to the dark side. I read a Gemmell book.

Surprisingly, I enjoyed it. The storyline was easy to follow, the author didn't make up some convoluted and complicated new world for me to try to understand; I was able to just dive right in. The book is about a simple axeman called Druss who eventually becomes a fighting legend. However, what I liked was that the book doesn't start off when he is already a legend. It chronicles the making of a hero: his past, his motivations, his love. While I wouldn't say I am wild about the book, I enjoyed it more than I expected to, and might even be persuaded to read another David Gemmell book.

2. The Google Story, by David A. Vise



This was a nonfiction book which I picked up because it was on sale for AU$5. I picked it up in passing and had paid for it before I actually really got a chance to think about why I need yet another book... I'm sure you all know how it goes. But anyway, I'm glad I bought it. I'm not a big nonfiction reader, but I am a huge fan of the Internet, and was one of Gmail's early adopters. This was enough to keep me interested throughout the book.

The book recounts the life of Google, a small upstart company ran by two eclectic and sometimes arrogant twenty-somethings who dared to demand that rules be changed for them. I especially liked reading about the creation of Google's famed laissez-faire company culture. Googlers (or Google employees) are apparently treated like they're VIPs at a hotel rather than mere lackeys:

"They were fed like family as well, with free meals, healthy juices, and snacks in abundance. Googlers also enjoyed a bevy of conveniences like on-site laundry, hair styling, dental and medical care, a car wash--and later, day care, fitness facilities with personal trainers, and a professional masseuse--which virtually eliminated the need to leave the office. Beach volleyball, foosball, roller hockey, scooter races, palm trees, bean bag chairs, even dogs-- it was all part of making work fun and fostering a creative, playful environment where Google's employees, most of them young and single, would want to spend their working hours. Google would even go on to charter buses with wireless Internet access so that Googlers who commuted the hour from San Francisco could be productive, putting their energy into their laptops instead of worrying about how they would get to work."

More than learning about Google's services, what I was really intrigued by was its philosophy. The company's motto is "Do not be evil", and reflects the eccentric nature of how the company is run and how it makes money. Google never spent money on advertising; its owners believed that creating a superior product would allow Google's name to be passed around by word of mouth. And they were right.

I thought this book was a fascinating read, and just quirky and funny enough for a layperson (i.e. not a technocrat) to be encouraged to read to the end.

I like your mini-reviews! The Google Story doesn't sound like something I'd usually like, but I might pick it up if I see it based on your comments.

3. Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov



I bought the audiobook version of this from Audible, and even though I realized halfway through that I already had the book, I ended up listening to it the whole way through. And boy, I'm glad I did.

If you've heard what I heard about the book before I read it, you know this isn't for the easily squicked. This is a story about a fully grown man in his forties having sexual thoughts, and later, relations, with a little girl (or, as he calls it, a "nymphet") of about fourteen. Despite the morally reprehensible subject matter, the writing is such that while reading it, I absolutely fell in love with the main character. I knew he was perverted and that what he wanted was wrong, but his description of his love and lust and longing, always longing, for Lolita was so marvelously eloquent that it was easy for me to sympathize with, though not condone, his actions.

The language of the book is very careful. It deals with matters of sex and sensuality quite frequently, as you can imagine, sometimes going on for pages describing a particular feature of Lolita's body, but it manages not to be coarse, or coquettish. The author does not fall into the trap of using euphemisms like "flower" and "manhood". I thought it was an excellent way to seamlessly describe what was happening without distracting the reader with such words.

And since this was an audiobook, let me just say: the reading, done by Jeremy Irons, was divine. His voice, accent, enunciation, and cadence was perfect for the book. It absolutely set the tone. I might read this book someday, but I have a feeling this is one of those books best listened to. Highly recommended, but not for the easily disturbed.

4. People of the Book, by Geraldine Brooks



This was my first read of Brooks', and what an introduction! The story revolves around an Australian book conservator who is called in to work on a recently discovered copy of a Jewish Haggadah, or prayer book. As she notes down the conditions that she received the book in, its binding, stains on its pages, etc., the story flips back and forth between her life and the lives of the people who contributed to the Haggadah's history. We meet the writer, the illustrator, people who went to great pains to protect the book at a time when Jews were not allowed to have images of their god, and the families that loved it. What would have been a simple job is transformed into a inter-generational mystery, complete with politics, romance, and danger. It's also about the love of books.

I loved this book so much that as soon as I had finished it, I went out and looked for Brooks' other fiction books. I was sad to have finished it, and it's one of my favorite books so far this year.

5. Harvesting the Heart, by Jodi Picoult



After I read My Sister's Keeper a few years ago, I was stricken with the immediate urge to buy more of Picoult's books. Picoult's writing style keeps improving over time, which I suppose is a good thing, but it also means that now that I'm reading her older works, the stories are getting less interesting. This was like that.

This is about a woman, Paige, whose mother abandoned her at a very young age. Paige has been carrying that around for decades, and when it is her time to have a child of her own, all those years of unexpressed emotion come rushing out of her. The book is about the struggle to escape the pattern perpetuated by parents and bursting free to find oneself. In many ways, although Paige is well into adulthood, it's a coming-of-age story. She is in the process of finding herself, but to do that, she's afraid she might have to lose herself, leaving the love of her life and their child in her wake.

This wasn't as memorable, controversial, or well-written as many other Picoult books I have read. Definitely not one of her best-- but still a damn good story.

6. House of Leaves, by Mark Z. Danielweski



This is, without a doubt, one of the weirdest book I've ever read. And before anyone starts listing weird books, let me give you an example of why I give it this title. For one part of the book I needed to use my compact mirror to read it. Other parts required me to read upside down, diagonally, or across two pages. The book itself is a lot heavier than it seems it should be, for its size.

The "main character" of the story is really the House... a house whose dimensions outside just don't seem to match its inside ones. When a family moves in, things get crazy. Doors move, walls recede, passageways appear, and the house changes constantly, as if it too is breathing. The book takes you into the house, while simultaneously distancing you from it by way of the quirky little footnotes written by the "editor", who slowly goes insane as he investigates what happened in the House of Leaves. The insanity, both of the editor and of the family living in the house, is so convincing that I had to put the book down several times, seriously disturbed. I started reading another, lighter book to read just before bed, because I was spooked. Then again, I'm a scaredy cat.

The author's approach to writing this book was interesting. Rather than just delving into the story, he presents a scholarly article, called the "Navidson Record", which is heavily (if incompetently) edited and is rife with fictitious references. So the story as it comes to you is not a firsthand or even second-hand account. The house is several people removed, which I found hard to get over at times. It was so much like an academic paper that I wonder if maybe the author was trying to poke fun at the academe. If he was, I think it's an odd place to preach such a message.

Some of the book's experimental elements, such as the way the word "house" always appears in blue ink (I had the full-color edition), the play of letter positioning, and the single sentences on a page, worked for me. In fact, these reinforced the story for me. For example, at the book's climax several pages have very few carefully chosen words in it, which succeeded in making me pay more attention to what was happening and feverishly flip to the next page in anticipation. Other elements, though, such as the footnotes (and the editor's entirely different storyline), the boxes of (what I thought were) random words, and references were over the top. I was distracted by all the different things going on in a single page. This is not a book you can read through from left to right, top to bottom. You have to stop and start and turn the book around and flip pages back and forth and read through a mirror. Sometimes this works, but as a general rule I felt the author went too far.

This book is frequently shelved under "Horror", but I personally think it would have been a lot more frightening if the author had cut down on his excitement to "do something different" with the format of a book. Danielewski is attempting a new way of writing in which the form, rather than just the content of words, contributes to the story. This is an interesting idea and certainly a commendable effort, but I feel that a lot of the flow of the story is sacrificed for the opportunity to do something "revolutionary".

I'm not sure whether or not I like this book. I would love to meet Danielewski, but probably more as a visionary and artist rather than an author. I like the story, but I don't like the the format. I have to say though, I don't regret reading it. And I won't be sending this off to BookMooch, either. Read if you're in the mood for something different.

You've obviously been reading books instead of threads! Great list! I'm across the ditch from you and think I've seen your posts on the Aussie LTers group.

I have Year of Wonders here - did you like it? Enough for me to bump it up? At the rate I'm going picking up recommendations from this group, it's going to slip to 2020.

7. Chocolat, by Joanne Harris



Okay, I'm probably going to irk quite a few of you here. Long story short, I was disappointed with this book.

I got so intrigued just reading from the cover. It's about a small, pious, conservative village into which a pagan mother and her child come to live. The mother, Vianne Rocher, starts a chocolaterie right across the only church in the village, and immediately angers the village's priest, who urges his congregation to abstain from her sinful chocolate for Lent. The summary at the back of the book casts the Vianne Rocher as the pagan temptress, seducing men and women into the sin and sensuality of chocolate, and the priest as the well-meaning but close-minded religious extremist.

If it truly had been as sensual a book as the cover promised, I would have loved it. Sadly, it was not. I thought the characterizations were weak. Vianne Rocher is not some adventurous libertine; she's just a normal Parisienne, with slight pagan inclinations. She's not seductive, not even sensual in any way. She's just sensible and down-to-earth. The priest was ridiculously rigid in his rules and portrayed as almost evil. I guess I was just so looking forward to experiencing some confusion as to whose "side" to choose. I wanted the wild, wanton, pagan woman who only wanted to live as her senses desired pitted against the prude but cautious priest who wanted the best for his parishioners. As it was, the priest is so egotistic and Vianne so sensible that there isn't really a choice, or a temptation. You're on Vianne's side from the beginning.

I haven't really been able to put my finger on why I was expecting something so different from what I got from this book, but I have an idea. I think it may have something to do with the fact that this book was recommended to me by a friend upon my telling him that I'd thoroughly enjoyed Perfume: the story of a murderer, which is one of my favorite books ever. My friend told me he'd read Perfume and that if I wanted something like it, I should try Chocolat. Well, I did, and for me, the two were nothing alike. In Chocolat, sin and salvation seems to be only a minor theme. In Perfume, it is the entire point upon which the plot revolves.

I might read the sequel, The Lollipop Shoes, but if I do I will read it like a chick flick, and try not to expect a commentary on man's sinfulness and the dangers of acting on one's desires vs. the satisfaction of having abstained.

8. Keeping Faith, by Jodi Picoult



I would rate this slightly higher than Harvesting the Heart (above), for the simple reason that this was a later work of Picoult's, and it shows. The writing is better, the themes more apparent and relevant, and that famous Picoult twist was present. This one was about a nonbeliever mother whose daughter, aptly named Faith, suddenly starts speaking passages of the Bible which she's never read, raising the dead, and suffering through stigmata... or so it seems. Faith's parents have just broken up, and Faith's "miracles" could just be a child acting out. Could it?

The book explores how much it takes for a nonbeliever to believe. Without trying to start a religious debate here, I will state that I am an agnostic. I don't think there's a god, but even if there were, I don't believe anyone could know for sure either way-- and further, I don't believe it matters. However, having grown up devoutly Catholic means I am extremely interested in matters of faith. As I was reading the book I flipped back and forth from believing Faith's "miracles" were real and believing in an alternative logical explanation for everything. I hate religious propaganda, but Picoult always manages to tackle these topics without weighing heavily on either side.

True to Picoult style, the book leaves you with more questions than answers. A solid book, and an enjoyable read, but still not as good as My Sister's Keeper or Nineteen Minutes.

The rest of the reviews to come tomorrow!

I haven't read Chocolat yet but enjoyed the movie. I didn't love it though. I mooched Five Quarters of the Orange last year and haven't got to it yet.

I read Perfume several years ago for a book group and it's up there as one of the creepiest books I've read. I couldn't make it a favourite because I found the main guy (brain collapsing here...what was his name?) so repugnant!

Just a quick note, so people don't think I'm ignoring them. I'm not, I'm just taking longer than I thought reviewing the books!

Catey (and ronincats), I loved City of Ember too! I read it because I didn't want to watch the movie without first reading the book. I fell in love with it and really want to pick up the next few books in the series. Have you read People of Sparks? Catey, I am jealous that you haven't yet read The Giver. I read it in primary school and it's still one of my favorie books. It's so evocative, so meaningful. Graceling was a page-turner. I finished it in one sitting! You're lucky to have such great reads ahead of you!

ronincats, I just posted my take on Druss the Legend. I liked it, surprisingly, but I wasn't over-rapt. Seeing Redd was interesting and entertaining, but I preferred The Looking Glass Wars. I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong, but it wasn't particularly memorable. I have had Magyk for like a year, and I can't believe I waited so long to read it! I loved it, and am definitely on the lookout for the rest if that series! Are the succeeding books just as good?

allthesedarnbooks, my excuse is that I am waiting for my visa and am still not legally allowed to work or study. I've been reading every chance I get, while also trying to wrap my head around stepmothering 3 teenagers at 23. Long story. Anyway, what's your excuse? I LOVED The Hunger Games. I know it already has more hype than it needs, at least on LT, but it's without a doubt my favorite read so far. Did you enjoy it as much as I did?

cmt, I know what you mean about racking up recommendations. Since I joined LT I have had no trouble finding people to extoll the virtues of a particular book. My book buying has gone up exponentially, and I've only just scratched the surface. But what am I doing tonight on LT? Looking at other people's reading lists for more recommendations. Fortunately for your TBR list, I have to admit I didn't particularly like Year of Wonders. It wasn't the writing-- it just wasn't my type. I'm not keen on period pieces or historical fiction, and I get too depressed by books that focus on war or death. Since Year of Wonders is about the Plague, I guess I should have known I wouldn't like it! Your mileage may vary, though.

cmt, I would be interested to see what you think of Five Quarters of an Orange. It sounds interesting! As for disturbing books, I agree. Perfume fits the bill. The writing was gorgeous... in a creepy, unsettling way. Interestingly two of the books that I've already read this year (Blindness and Lolita) also definitely qualify as the most disturbing books I've ever read.

9. City of Ember, by Jeanne DuPrau



The City of Ember is a dystopic city set hundreds of years into the future, where, presumably, the human race has so effectively destroyed the earth that there was a need to build an underground, self-sufficient city. The reason for the exodus underground is unclear; the citizens of Ember know only that a group called The Builders created their world. What they don't know is that their city has a time limit: Ember's resources as quickly depleting, and the instructions that The Builders left for just this reason have been misplaced. As power outages grow more and more frequent and the fabric upon which Ember was built on begins to wear thin, a young girl and boy begin to dream of what is outside the city.

I am a fan of dystopic fiction, and City of Ember was no exception. The first part of the book is a very detailed description of the city and its workings, all of which I found fascinating and novel. The citizens of Ember believe there is nothing outside Ember, and so their religious beliefs and lifestyles are centered around their experience of life underground, where there is no natural light and nothing is wasted. The city, while representing the tragic end result of mankind's perennial neglect of the earth, also ironically represents a utopia of sorts-- a city which recycles nearly everything, efficiently allocates labor and goods to all citizens, and generates its own electricity from water. It is unfortunate that such a breakthrough required a catastrophe in order to be realized.

The latter part of the book explains the pressing need to venture out of Ember. As the story reaches its climax, however, I was disappointed to find that the author, seemingly exhausted with the long build-up of suspense, proceeds to rush through the denouement and to an ending that is less than conclusive. This was perhaps done in order to make room for sequels (of which there are already three, if I'm not mistaken), but even so, I would have liked to see things threshed out a little bit more with some of the fine attention to detail the author displayed in describing the City of Ember.

Despite this, I have to admit the ending reeled me in. This book was cleverly conceptualized, if unsatisfactorily written, and since this is a young adult book, I can forgive its flaws. I will be buying the rest of the series, and I recommend you do the same.

Hello and please add my welcome to those listed above.
You are off to a great start. And I look forward to following your thread.

For what it's worth, I really liked Five Quarters of the Orange. It started out fairly slow, but I love reading about Europe during WWII, and that's the setting for much of the book. I hope you (shewhowearsred and cmt) like it as well.

Also, I liked Chocolat a lot more than The Lollipop Shoes, but did enjoy that one as well. I guess I'm very easy to please :)

And thank you for your comments on Picoult's books. To me, they're very addictive... even though I don't always like the plot lines and the characters, for some reason I can't stop reading them. I believe that my favorite so far is Nineteen Minutes.

Welcome! Your comments on House of Leaves were spot on. What a weird book - experimental literature at it's best!

Several of us are in the middle of or about to start Blindness and it'd be interesting to hear your comments on that one...

I haven't read the Hunger Games yet, but am hoping to soon! My excuse... um, I don't know as I have one. I often choose to read for pleasure rather than doing my reading for class!

#14 I am glad you loved City of Ember, I haven't seen the movie yet but I hear its supposed to be pretty good. I have read The People of Sparks but it has been awhile.

My mom suggested I read The Giver since I had read Gathering Blue and I didn't even know it was part of a trilogy.

Graceling, I *borrowed* from my mom and have yet to have read it. I really should.. I saw the book trailer and everything, yet a whole bunch of other books jumped in my way. :) Oh Well, I will read them...eventually...

Catey

You write wonderful reviews, and I will be following your thread, eagerly awaiting more.

Welcome shewhowearsred! I'll be closely watching your thread, too.

10. Magyk, by Angie Sage



I had this book for a year before I remembered I had it and finally began to read it. On its back cover it is compared to Harry Potter-- inevitable, I guess, since both books feature a young magic-user. However, I think this actually does more harm that good. I began the book not expecting much at all, because a copycat is a copycat. Despite the similarities, though, I am pleased to say that the Septimus Heap series is a charming, engrossing read in its own right.

Septimus Heap was the seventh son of a seventh son, which in his world would have made him a powerful wizard-- except for the fact that he died when his mother gave birth to him. On the same night, his father, hurrying home to celebrate the birth of his seventh son, finds a baby girl lying abandoned on the street. He takes her home, and despite the family's grief over their little boy, they welcome her as a member of the family. This is the beginning of Magyk.

I expected to be inundated by cliches and long-established myths about magic-users and the magical world, but Angie Sage manages to create her own world. Magic is done not just by rhymes and wands; a wizard who creates a spell inscribes it on a Charm, which could be anything from a polished piece of marble or a slice of bread. Other wizards can then learn the spell by memorizing the words to it and saying the words out loud while holding the Charm. Creative little touches like this pepper the story all the way through the book.

One quibble I had with the book is the characterization of the villain, DomDaniel. Perhaps my view is colored by HP's Voldemort, who is the stereotypical Bad Guy. DomDaniel, by contrast, seems weak and incompetent. The Septimus Heap series does not seem to have the darkness that HP had. Aside from the lack of truly cold-blooded murder, Jenna, the adopted little Heap girl, grows up in a loving, if rambunctious, family of nine. While Harry spends his time at home getting verbally abused and being lonely, Jenna grows up happy, well-adjusted, and confident in her family's support. Magyk is certainly written for a younger audience, one that does not want to read of death and sadness. In my opinion, this is both its best selling point and greatest failing.

All in all, highly recommended. I've already got the rest of the series lined up for me to buy!

11. Seeing Redd, by Frank Beddor



This is the sequel to The Looking Glass Wars by the same author, which I loved. In this story, Alyss' evil aunt Redd comes back with a vengeance to try and reclaim the throne she was usurped from.

I liked this book less than the first one. The Looking Glass Wars presented a new world, where magic is Imagination and soldiers are cards and it is all so novel and exciting that the book was hard not to like. There was a lot of action, some drama, and a real conflict. Seeing Redd, by comparison, was a lot less remarkable. There was action, yes, but it almost seemed as if it were there just to fill up the pages. Nothing new was introduced in the book, not even a new villain. The conflict of the story was Redd's return to Wonderland, which just seems a bit cliche. Even the surprise "twist" involving Hatter Madigan was predictable from as far back as the first book, so I just didn't think there was much to go on. I read through the entire book really quickly, and was left feeling unsatisfied. The plot was way too simple, and very Disney.

I will still pick up Hatter M, but from how Seeing Redd went, it will probably go in my "fluff reading" pile. Seeing Redd was entertaining enough, but falls short of really being anything more than a filler book.

12. The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins



I heard SO much about this that I was afraid my expectations would be ridiculously high enough that the book would have to fall short. I was wrong.

Katniss (and no, that name doesn't get any less annoying) Everdeen lives in a nation which was conquered some time ago, and whose conquerors have devised a unique way to keep its subjects in line. Every year, the Hunger Games are held. Every district sends one boy and one girl between the ages of 12-18 to participate in the games. All these "tributes" are then shipped off to a wasteland arena, where aside from artificially created challenges, they have to protect themselves from each other-- because in order to win the Hunger Games, one of them must outlive the others.

As if that wasn't interesting enough, The Hunger Games are televised, like a reality show. Before the Games start, the "tributes" must be paraded like models wearing the latest clothes, go through several interviews, be judged according to physical ability, and generally do anything it takes for them to get "sponsors" who will help them once the Games begin.

This is, so far, the best book of the year. I realize it may be a little too early to call this, but I'll say it anyway: I'm pretty sure this will make my Top 5 this year. It just had so many different layers of meaning. It dealt with hunger and poverty, the importance of family, the effect on humanity when survival rather than comfort becomes sought after, the primal animal side of every human being (a la Lord of the Flies), the choice of love and dignity against life, the psychological torture by which a nation can be held captive, the process of desensitization... I could go on and on. This would be an excellent book for a group read, simply because there's just so much to discuss. Someone who reviewed this on LT said she'd cried and laughed before page 20, and I don't think she'll be the only one. Absolutely recommended-- not just for YA fans, but for anyone.

13. An Abundance of Katherines, by John Green



After having heard so much about John Green's brilliance, I must say I was a little disappointed with this book. I generally don't go for books that are so "realistic" that it involves large quantities swearing, sex, and booze. Perhaps I am old-fashioned, but I think you can write a good Young Adult book without resorting to foul language. But I think perhaps that's the point of reading John Green. I think realism is at the heart of most, if not all, of his books, according to reviews I've read.

I also thought the plot was unimaginative and predictable. I had high hopes after meeting the main character, Colin, who is (was) a child prodigy who yearns to make a difference, but he ended up being disappointingly mediocre as well. There were some attempts at growth from most of the characters, but overall their journey was just, as Colin's best friend Hassan would say, "Not interesting".

Despite the overly simple plot, I thought it was well-written. This is one of those instances in which I don't like the story, but I love the author. John Green's personality shines through in every paragraph, and it was enough to keep me reading. I didn't like WHAT the story was, but I did like HOW it was written. It was witty, quirky, and plain weird-- in the best way. I enjoyed the snarky little footnotes which somehow supported while making fun of Colin's academic bent, and I heartily enjoyed Colin's creation of a mathematic model which is supposed to explain and predict the duration of a romantic relationship. The best thing about it was the complete derivation in the Appendix, which was actually solid math. I loved the anagramming that went on. Most of all the concept-- a boy who falls in love again and again with girls named Katherine -- is fun and unique.

I would not call this book YA. The swearing and the sex aside, I think that too much of John Green's humor and mathematical quirks would pass right by most young readers, and that would be a shame. All in all, this was a good, light, entertaining book... if a little lacking in plot.

Great reviews, Nikki!

I can't remember if it is the second or third of the Septimus Heap books that drug a little for me, but the fourth book is the best yet, IMO. I agree totally with your review.

Haven't read The Looking Glass Wars yet--have had it on my TBR pile for months!

And I am definitely going to have to pick up The Hunger Games--everyone talking about it has whetted my appetite.

14. Year of Wonders by Geraldine Brooks



I bought this book almost immediately after I read People of the Book by the same author. I was skeptical about it after reading the summary. It is the story of a woman named Anna who lives at a time where the Plague strikes almost everyone she knows. While most people fled the instant anyone around them got the Plague, Anna's village, spurred on by its pastor, decides to make a sacrifice: they make an oath to quarantine themselves and not to leave the village, thus keeping the Plague from spreading anywhere else.

I didn't like it. The entire book was about people falling ill, going through great pain, and dying. I think, though, that maybe it's not just this book or the writing or the story-- I think it's just me. I don't tend to like long drawn-out stories about war or famine or poverty or the triumph of the human spirit. People of the Book was just so different: suspenseful and modern and mysterious and faster paced. That book is more in line with my interests and tastes than this one. I still liked Brooks' writing in this one, though, and there were several incidents in the book that were interesting, such as the sections on mob panic and mob mentality, and the accusations of witchery. I think a different kind of person would have liked it, and I can see why others do. Despite my complaints, I did finish it, after all, so I suppose that tells you something. I wouldn't say I enjoyed it, but perhaps you will.

15. The Giver, by Lois Lowry



I first read this when I was in primary school, and while I loved it, I missed a lot of what went on because of my age. Having just read it again, those things I missed the first time around only made it an even better read for me.

I suppose you could say Lois Lowry created a dystopia in this book, one I'd call Sameness. In the world where Jonas, the main character lives, everything is the same: everyone's habits are planned out, their "birthdays" made a communal celebration, and their jobs are assigned rather than chosen. Everything in his community is carefully designed and organized in order to prevent, presumably, the wars and famine and poverty of the world that came before. There are more ways in which this world differs from ours, but you'll have to read the book, as I don't want to give anything away.

Suffice it to say that the story is meaningful, the language is beautiful, and I was captivated by the description of their community. Jonas' choice at the end is so brave and so right, but also, so sad. This book is about innocence, and about its price. Highly recommended for anyone who escaped high school without reading it.

16. Predictably Irrational, by Dan Ariely



This was my second nonfiction book of the year, chosen because I'm a sucker for precisely this sort of economics-psychology cross. At university I did my undergrad thesis on a topic in Behavioral Economics, so a book like this is irresistible to me.

I happen to think, though, that a person without a background in economics could pick this book up and enjoy it. It's written wittily and without fanfare. There are no complicated equations or graphs or esoteric economic theories that are mentioned. Instead, Dan Ariely appeals to average, ordinary things which we all can relate to. Traditional economics assumes that every person makes decisions rationally, meaning we weigh all our options and choose what will logically be best for us. Dan Ariely's main point is that this assumption of rationality is completely bogus. He thinks people act irrationally all the time-- but predictably so.

For example, he outlines an experiment whose conclusion is a person who orders a meal after other people he is dining with have chosen theirs is more likely to be dissatisfied with his choice. Why? Because the orders of the people before him make him change his order, usually to his detriment. This behavior is completely illogical, but Dan Ariely says it can be observed time and time again. Other experiments of his involve whether the price of something can influence our enjoyment of it, why people cheat so much more when money is not directly involved than when it is, and how habits are formed.

I thought it was really easy to follow, and his conclusions are thought-provoking and down to earth. Overall, an interesting nonfiction read, if you like this sort of thing.

I read Predictably Irrational last year and liked it very much. I took a business degree, including a couple of economics courses, but anything beyond a layman's level would be over my head. You are absolutely right about anyone being able to grasp his concepts and understand his points. Excellent review.

I also read People of the Book last year, my first exposure to Geraldine Brooks and LOVED it. I've got Year of Wonders on my wish list for this year, just because I liked the other one so much. Thanks for the heads up - I wouldn't have expected something so different. I may still read it this year, but at least I won't be expecting more of the same as PotB. Have you read her March? I think it is an account of the fictional March family (from Little Women) while the father is away during the civil war. That is another one that I'm considering for later this year.

I'm enjoying your reviews.

sjmccreary: Yes, I think part of the reason I didn't like Year of Wonders was that I was expecting it to be so much like People of the Book. It couldn't have been more different! If you do read it, let me know what you think! Who knows, you may love it! My copy of March just arrived from BookMooch yesterday, and it's on my TBR list. I've been eyeing it for a while at bookstores, but after my disastrous experience with YoW, I decided to just mooch it. I read Little Women as a kid (as well as Little Men and Jo's Boys) and loved it, so I have higher hopes for March. I think chronicling the absent father's story is an interesting concept. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for that one!

Many years ago I read her first book Foreign Correspondence, which is her nonfiction account of growing up in Australia, having penpals all around the world, and then tracking them down when she was an adult. It was a pretty good read.

I am one of the people who loved both Year of Wonders and People of the Book. I have not yet read March, but I have not read anything by Brooks yet that I have not liked, including the first book of hers I ever read, Foreign Correspondence, which abw mentioned. I actually discovered Brooks while reading one of her husband, Tony Horwitz's, books, and since then, have read both of their works.

Ooh, I've had Magyk sitting on my shelf for about 3 years now, and never got around to reading it. I always wondered if it was any good... so this is good to know! Up to the top of the reading pile it goes... :D

#34: Faith, I have read the entire series and it gets better as the books go along. I think you would like it if you give it a chance.

#32/33: arubabookwoman/alcottacre, Foreign Correspondence sounds interesting! I didn't realize she'd written anything nonfiction other than Nine Parts of Desire, about Muslim women. I've just moved to Australia and I'd love to know what it's like to grow up here. Everyone's so different!

#34: dk_phoenix, I agree with alcottacre. Don't let it collect dust for another year! Definitely thought it was a good read, and I'm happy to know alcottacre thinks the series gets even better!

17. The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger



If you don't already know, this is the story of Henry and Clare, who met when Henry was 31 and Clare was 6 and got married when Henry was 38 and Clare was 30 (or something like that). Henry is a time-traveler, but an unwilling one. He will be doing something perfectly mundane when he is popped out of the present and into another time, naked and left to fend for himself. He tends to pop into different times in his own life, or in those of the people he loves.

I read this some time ago and it was by turns funny, sad, bittersweet, arousing, and so, so hopeful. The writing is so clear and lyric, and so well-paced that I never found myself skimming through passages the way you do with some books when your attention wanders. Upon re-reading, it was even better.

The Time Traveler's Wife is, primarily, a love story, but there's an element of it that usually goes unmentioned. Because Henry is magnetically drawn to times and places that have something to do with himself or his loved ones, Henry frequently finds himself in a position to change history. For example, he time travels at 31 to meet Clare who is 6, at a time when his present self is 14 and obviously has no idea who Clare is, and won't for a few decades. In theory, it seems as if anything he tries to do with her should change the flow of history... but it doesn't. It is precisely because his 31-year-old self met Clare at 6 that she recognizes him in the future. Henry discovers that everything he does, seemingly out of his own free will, is actually what was supposed to happen, so that he can't change anything at all. Anything he wants to do has already happened. This theme of determinism runs through the entire book, echoing perhaps the author's fears regarding a lack of free will.

I'm sure you've heard plenty about this book, but in case you are in need of more convincing, here it is: READ THIS BOOK. If you have ever been the one to wait, or the one to leave, you will love it like I did.

I read The Time Traveler's Wife a few years ago when I was in Seattle Washington for a conference. I didn't want to put the book down and was tempted to miss some workshop sessions... It is a wonderful book!

18. The Lace Reader, by Brunonia Barry



This book starts out strong: "My name is Towner Whitney. No, that's not exactly true. My real first name is Sophya. Never believe me. I lie all the time." With this opening, Barry sets her main character up as an unreliable narrator. Her reason for doing so is obvious. Towner Whitney, who was depressed some time ago over a death in the family, willingly went through shock therapy. Unfortunately, the therapy had an unpleasant side effect: she lost some of her long-term memory. There are 'gaps' in her memories, ones that have to be filled and supplanted by relatives, friends, and her own conjectures. When her great-aunt Eva goes missing, Towner is forced to journey back to her hometown and confront her past.

In this book, Barry comes up with the idea of lace reading, the process by which one can see the future, or certain images, in the lace. This is interwoven throughout the story, frequently playing a major part but also just generally adding to the tone of the story. This languid, dreamy quality is welcome at first, but I found myself getting impatient. This was a book I put down several times before I really got into it-- not because the writing was terrible, but because the story was moving along too slowly. Maybe the point was to luxuriate in the book, but I just thought there was a lack of focus. For a good two-thirds of the book I wasn't even sure what the point was. Even the ending, which could have been surprising, was somewhat watered down due to the long build-up. I correctly guessed the ending, which ruined it for me, of course.

I wouldn't say The Lace Reader is a bad book. It was interesting enough for me to finish it, and I don't regret reading it. It's just one of those lazy-reading books which unfold slowly. Good for tone and theme, but not so much for plot.

19. Blindness, by José Saramago



When one man is suddenly and inexplicably stricken blind in the middle of traffic, his opthalmologist is mystified, but not worried. Everyone knows blindness isn't contagious. At least that's what he thinks... until he goes blind himself. The "white sickness" spreads quickly through the city like wildfire, and the government, fearing an epidemic, rounds up all the blind and all those exposed to the sickness and locks them up under quarantine regulations. Here, under deplorable conditions, the blind must discover a new way to live, love, and enforce justice.

This was very, very disturbing and very, very good. I read this for a group read, and meant to pace my reading so I wouldn't have to wait very long for the rest of the group to catch up. However, I just couldn't help myself. I sped through the book in one night with very little interruptions. The first part of the book, when everyone is going blind, creeped me out enough that I jumped when my partner tapped me on the shoulder. It wasn't scary, exactly, but I had gotten so engrossed that I barely registered I was reading a story rather than living it. Like I said, it was good. That wasn't the only thing that was disturbing.

The whole story asks the question: What would you do if you knew nobody would see you? The blind characters in the story, forced in a situation where identity is useless (and, indeed, Saramago doesn't name a single one of them), regress into something less than human. They lie, cheat, steal, satisfy their sexual desires wantonly, kill, and betray each other in order to survive in a community struggling to enforce a sense of order when they are each as blind as the next. Civilization is but a thin veneer in every human, and this blindness proves enough to peel it away. What are people really like, when they are allowed to do as they wish? What do people really want? The answers are terrifying, especially when Saramago posits that in the end, even we readers can all see but are blind.

Saramago has a unique writing style which I had to struggle to get used to. He uses commas where he should use full stops, does not put dialogue in quotation marks or italics, and does not clearly distinguish who says what. I disliked it at the beginning, but now I think that his "she said this, he said that, he touched her, she moved away" run-on style actually helped build suspense in some parts. However, I thought he went on like this a little too much at the end, describing everything in too much detail without much import to the story.

Overall, an extremely good book. One of the best so far, and definitely one of the most disturbing besides. Highly recommended.

I've picked up Time Travelers Wife and Lace Reader both in recent months, and put them both down again, unread. You hear so much about them, that I felt guilty not reading, but just couldn't summon the enthusiasm for either one. Based on your reviews, though, I think I might try TTW again, and move past LR. Shallow as it makes me seem, I really do like having lots of plot! Your 3rd book, Blindness, is one I've never heard of. Not sure if I'll give it a try, but a fascinating review.

I only learned about Blindness because I saw a trailer for it at the movie theater. Here's the trailer, although I saw a different one. I can't wait to see it!

Kiwidoc wrote an excellent review regarding Blindness and thus I put the book on my tbr pile.

Thanks for your great review as well.

> 29
I've been meaning to read Predictably Irrational for some time as Dan Ariely frequently comments on Marketplace on NPR. If you need another nonfiction book, I highly recommend How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer which approaches decision making from the neurobiology point of view without resorting to any charts or graphs either. So much better and more coherent than Malcolm Gladwell's absolute mess of contradictions and unsubstantiated conclusions in Outliers.

#43: Thanks, Whisper! I hope you enjoy Blindness as we did!

#44: kd9, I've never heard of How We Decide, but might have to pick that up now. I already have Outliers waiting for me on audiobook, unfortunately-- I hope it's bearable!

#45 let us know what you think of Outliers - it looks interesting, but I tried to read his Blink (which also sounded interesting, I thought) and didn't make it past chapter 2. I just couldn't tolerate his writing, so I've been intentionally avoided Outliers.

20. Graceling, by Kristin Cashore



In Katsa's world, some people are born with magical powers, called a Grace. Gracelings are marked by their different-coloured eyes, and as soon as Katsa's one blue eye and one green eye became apparent, she was avoided and feared, as all Gracelings are. This only worsened when, at eight years old, her Grace manifested itself in the most violent way possible: unarmed, untrained, she killed a fully grown adult man. Word spreads that Katsa's Grace is killing, and her uncle, the King, trains her to be his pet assassin. Eventually, Katsa, frustrated by the loneliness and guilt her Grace brings her, struggles to find redemption.

I ordered this book from TheBookDepository because of all the wonderful things I'd been hearing about it on LT, and I wasn't disappointed. On the surface it seems like any ordinary YA fantasy/adventure story, but there are so many things that make it different. For one thing, there is a strong feminist streak running through the book. Katsa is very female, referred to as "The Lady Katsa", and is also very small in stature, but her Grace makes her nearly invincible. She runs around the kingdom injuring or killing people at the king's wish, and spends all her free time fighting. She also, interestingly, is strongly opposed to marriage and having children, a very modern view I'm interested in reading more about when the next book comes out. This feminist theme, I believe, is the reason that this book has been compared so many times with Tamora Pierce's Alanna (from the Song of the Lioness quartet). Katsa's personality is very much like Alanna's-- a little too much, in my opinion. Even Alanna's stubbornness and tomboy nature is present in Katsa.

The book is well written, with lots of action guaranteed to keep the reader turning its pages. I finished this in a night and wished I hadn't. In fact, writing this review makes me want to re-read it. It had a good plot and an interesting enough array of characters and Graces.

One complaint, though: I felt that the story was just a bit rushed. Katsa is painted as the poor, lonely, dangerous little girl with no friends at the beginning. Before the middle of the book she's quite popular and willing to trust. By the middle of the book she is in love. The speed with which things change is dizzying, and I feel like this is a book that might have been better spread out over two books, and threshed out a bit more. As it was, there were developments that didn't quite make sense. For example, before the book even starts, Katsa has already secretly defied the king by creating her own Council to mete out true justice. However, she then spends the next dozen chapters getting her head around the idea that she doesn't have to do everything the king says, and realizing he has been manipulating her all this time... even though really she should have already figured that out. It doesn't really take much to guess that from the beginning. In this regard the comparison to the Song of the Lioness quartet, in which Alanna progresses at a more realistic pace over four books, goes against its favor.

I loved this book, sped through it, will probably read it again, and will definitely buy the next in the series. I do think, though, that this was a little bit over-hyped. Recommended for YA fantasy fans, but don't expect it will blow your mind.

>35 alcottacre:/36: Okay, ladies, you've convinced me! On the top of the pile it goes!

...and now I'll add Graceling to the TBR list too...!

I am thoroughly enjoying your reviews. You write with a rare openness.

>49 tiffin:: ditto. I found your thread on a tip from tiffin and I've now "starred" it so I can follow your reading!

#20 It's good to know that Graceling is a good read since it's on my TBR pile. Nice review.

What a joy to find your thread yesterday, and what a lot of reading and writing you've done! I haven't made it through all your reviews, but I've starred your thread and will come back as I have time to catch up. (Don't read anything else for about two weeks, OK?) Inevitably, I've added a couple books to my wishlist already from your favorites, and gratefully x'd out a couple more I don't have to waste my time on. Welcome to the group!

>52 laytonwoman3rd: I ditto everything laytonwoman just said, she just saved me a great number of keystrokes.
Welcome, I'll be checking back often.

Thanks all! I'm glad to have helped cut down your TBR list, and I'm sorry to have added to it! I know MY list is already too long to plow through in the next few years.

Unfortunately I've already read two more books since I last posted-- Never Let Me Go and Feed, whose reviews I'll have up soon -- but the good news is that I've just started The Hour I First Believed, which is a 700+-page novel which will surely keep me occupied for a while. I hope!

Edit: BEFORE you click on the touchstone, bear in mind that some of the tags on the linked page could possibly spoil the book for you. Personally I'd skip that section entirely.

21. Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro



This book is the hardest to review so far this year, not because I have mixed feelings about it but because discussing the central theme would mean spoiling the book for anyone who has yet to read it. I apologize in advance if I'm a little vague. I picked up this book not knowing anything about it other than that it was highly recommended by a friend (whose silence when I asked her what it was about now makes sense), and I think my ignorance was ideal for this kind of book.

The story starts off with a thirty-something carer named Kathy who reminisces about her childhood in a boarding school called Hailsham. At first, nothing seems remiss about her recollections: playground politics, popularity, bullying... but as she goes on, you start to get the feeling that something's... different.

What I like so much about this book was the way it was written. Kazuo Ishiguro is an almost new author for me. I picked up his Remains of the Day a few months ago and put it down because I wasn't in the mood. His writing is very languid, seemingly aimless, and I'm not always patient enough for that. In this book, though, I very much appreciated his style of writing. He is very, very subtle, and he takes his time to build both the suspense and the mystery. There were several times when I thought the narrator was merely rambling, but in fact Ishiguro was giving me clues-- just a slight hint every now and then, not enough to have me guess the whole picture but enough to intrigue me.

I admired the continuity between what was happening to the children in the story and what Ishiguro was telling me as a reader. The children at Hailsham were, as Ishiguro puts it, "told and not told" about the mystery. Nobody ever sat them down to explain everything; their teachers merely mentioned something odd every now and then as if it were completely normal, and the children always accepted it because they knew nothing else. With his superbly careful storytelling, Ishiguro is trying to recreate the same confusion in his readers. As I read it, I felt as if I were being "told and not told", too. And it works.

A minor theme in the book, I believe, is the phenomenon of desensitization. The mysteries of Hailsham weren't kept a secret from the children; if they had been, the children would have reacted very differently once they found out. It reminds me of the best way to cook a frog: it's not to just dump a frog in a boiling pan, because the frog would just panic and jump out; it's to put a frog in a pan with lukewarm water and slowly, every so slowly, increase the temperature. The frog sits there, ignorant, until it's too late.

If you're not averse to settling in for a story that builds up slowly and you're not too impatient for very subtle plots, I recommend this book heartily. I definitely enjoyed it and am now a lot more likely to pick up The Remains of the Day, if only to see if it was written as well as this one was.

For anyone who happens already to have found out what Never Let Me Go is about, I don't think it ruins the reading experience. I usually avoid spoilers like the plague, but I actually sought out this book after hearing the spoiler because it sounded like an interesting concept, and I ended up loving it. So even if you think you've been spoiled, I'd still recommend reading this.

edit: Oh, and welcome to the group, shewhowearsred! I'll definitely be following your reading.

Yes, I definitely agree-- I think anyone who already knows what it's about should still give the book a try. I'm glad you were still able to enjoy it despite knowing what it was about. I'm equally glad, though, that I knew nothing about it! I'm notoriously impatient, so I don't know if *I* would have been able to go through the book if there hadn't been something for me to wonder about and try to guess. But that's just me!

Nice to see you in this group too, Zoe! Thanks for the welcome!

22. Feed, by M. T. Anderson



In the future, the Internet has become so much a part of their lives that most people have taken the next step: chips have been implanted into their brains, allowing people a truly always-on connection to "The Feed". Titus, a young teenager, is no exception. He and his friends rely on the feed for nearly everything. The feed instantaneously supplies him with all the information he could ever want or need, shops around for the cheapest price of any product he wants, compiles a list of eerily accurate recommendations of things he might like from things he's looked up before, and allows inter-planetary chat with nearly anyone-- all from his head. The book explores the consequences of such a convergence.

I mooched this book because the premise intrigued me. I'm a technophile. Even when I'm away from my computer, I am constantly online via my mobile. When I come across a word or concept I don't know, I automatically look it up. I read reviews of movies while I'm in line at the cinema. I synchronize my mobile calendar to my online calendar regularly. I'm one of those people who had a mobile in primary school, so I've become pretty dependent on it and actually go into withdrawals when I'm forced to live without it. I read the summary of this book, and immediately knew it was something I needed to read.

I'm sorry to say I was really disappointed. First of all, the language is distracting. The entire book sounds like it was written by a valley girl. A valley girl with strangely technological-sounding slang, but a valley girl nonetheless. At first I stomached it because the main characters of the book were, after all, teenagers, but even the doctor's speech was peppered with "like" and "thing" and "... you know" and it all just got really frustrating. I believe Anderson did this on purpose. It is meant to illustrate how having a feed in your head constantly leads to a degeneration of language. When you have all the information in the world in your head to be pulled up the second you want it, what's the point of learning grammar and vocabulary yourself? I understand this, and even appreciate it, but I think Anderson went way past delivering a message and into irritating his readers.

Secondly, the main character, Titus, is extremely unlikeable. Early on in the book, he meets a girl, Violet, who is the only one of all the teenagers in the book to actually have retained her thinking capabilities. Violet tells him Titus is different from the rest -- repeatedly -- but personally I disagreed. Titus was just as self-absorbed, ignorant, and mindless as the rest of them. He doesn't change as the book goes on, either.

Which leads me to my next point... all the characters in the book, with the exception of Violet, are stagnant. They are mindless in the beginning, and they are mindless at the end. None of them, not even Titus, goes through any sort of realization. There's no growth, no change. At all. Even Violet's father, the source of Violet's rebellion against the feed, is ineffectual and passive.

There's no denying Anderson's idea for the book was a great one. He had a lot of really original and thought-provoking concepts incorporated into the story, like school being run by corporations, human culture devolving to the point where lesions which are side effects of the feed and which devour human flesh have become trendy, and consumerism being so rampant that even humans are treated as products to refine. I can see how Feed could spark intelligent discussions on a variety of subjects. The name itself is cleverly appropriate for the message of the book. However, there really wasn't enough in the book to justify its being a full novel. For the lack of plot, characterization, and interesting dialogue, I think this would have been better written as a vignette-- a snapshot of future conditions-- rather than pretending to be a story when it's really just a commentary on technology.

This book was definitely a case of the message overpowering all else, to the detriment of the story. Read for ideas, but do not expect to be entertained.

Thank you! I am so glad to see someone else who didn't like Feed. A strong message is not enough to make a good book.

23. The Hour I First Believed, by Wally Lamb



Caelum Quirk, an English professor at Columbine High, is in another state when the two teenage students open fire on their fellow students at school. His wife, Maureen, a school nurse, is caught in the crossfire. Both their lives are forever changed by the actions of two unhappy teenagers who believed violence was the only way out. This is not the story of Columbine; it's the story of everything that happened after that, to those who survived. It's the story of the different kinds of violence a person can do to another.

I bought this book because it was getting so much hype here on LT. I picked it up expecting something like Picoult's Nineteen Minutes, but this couldn't have been more different. Where Picoult's book was full of suspense, sadness, and horror, this book was about 5% suspense, and the rest was a build up to nothing in particular. At 700+ pages, I thought this book was extremely loosely edited.

The author tried to tackle so many different storylines. Columbine was a minor arc. Most of the book was about Caelum Quirk's family history-- and by that I don't mean his immediate family. The book went back to his great-grandparents' lives and dissected them in excruciating detail, tracing each family line down to the present. It was more than I cared to read. I was more interested in Caelum himself rather than something that happened literally a century before his time. Each generation was examined by way of letters and articles Caelum conveniently found in an old family farmhouse. It's so detailed that you're told that when Caelum's ancestor was on the train god knows how many decades ago, a man went around her car trying to sell pictures of nude women. She writes this all in a pages-long letter in which the train incident was the most exciting thing that she mentioned. How is this relevant to the story? It's not. At all. It's never mentioned again. This all was extremely interesting to Caelum, as it would have been if it had been MY family, but really, as a reader it was just all too tedious for me.

Caelum as a main character was also unlikeable. Although obviously erudite, he swears, has anger management issues even before Columbine, has trouble being faithful to his wife, and is constantly complaining. I didn't feel any sympathy for him and certainly didn't care enough about him to want to dig up his old family scandals. Lamb tries to use Caelum's English lit background to come up with a few metaphors for what's happening in Caelum's life, but he only succeeds in coming off as exceedingly pretentious and the comparisons seem forced and unrealistic. I SUPPOSE that the girl depicted in some painting of the Greek minotaur myth as holding a candle and reaching towards the minotaur could represent Caelum's surrogate daughter, and the candle she was holding could have represented her desire to be held and loved (which was exactly what the candle meant to Caelum and his wife, suggested to them by a therapist)... but, really? Lamb needed to invoke a Greek myth in order to get his point across? It just all seemed a bit too, "Look at me, aren't I clever for relating a perfectly ordinary situation to mythology!"

I really wanted to like this book. I'd read so many good things about it, it was on the "Popular This Month" list on the LT homepage, and the Columbine angle intrigued me. But I didn't like it. In fact, I hated it. And I hate myself for having ordered another Wally Lamb book without having finished this one first. If I hadn't been stuck in bed sick with nothing to do but read this book, I would NOT have finished it. This was just another of those "beautiful, moving, heartbreaking" bestsellers which I JUST. DIDN'T. GET.

#59: Zoe, it was just so disappointing! I'm glad I'm not the only one! I wanted to grab the author and shake him because I thought he was really onto something, but the execution was too horrible for the book to be saved. Ugh. I hate to see a good idea massacred like that.

I liked and agree with your review on Feed - I did not like it either

Same for me with Feed - a hyped book that delivered nothing for me - the concept really appealed and I especially loved the first sentence in the book but that was about it. Do try his non-scifi The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing - it is completely different and quite absorbing.

avatiakh: I've just put The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing on my BookMooch wishlist. I'm a bit skeptical, but will mooch it when it comes up. I hope Anderson can redeem himself!

I didn't like Feed very much, either. I haven't read The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing yet, but I loved The Game of Sunken Places and Thirsty, so think Feed might be the exception to the rule, for me at least.

So I've decided that I will use this thread to keep track of all the books I've brought home as well as those I've read. I'm hoping it guilts me into reading books right away instead of letting them fester in the TBR pile!

Today I got three books in the mail: My Little Red Book (no touchstone yet) by Rachel Kauder Nalebuff, which I bought, and Gathering Blue by Lois Lowry and She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb, both from BookMooch. I'm unsure what to do with the Lamb book after my disastrous first read of The Hour I First Believed. Maybe I'll give it a try, but I don't have high hopes.

I'm currently reading Sabriel, which I learned about from LT and which my partner already had. Our tastes in books rarely overlap, as he only reads books with dragons and magic in them-- YA fantasy seems to be about the only thing we'll BOTH read. I've also started reading My Little Red Book, which is a fascinating collection of short stories about first periods from women of all ages, races, and backgrounds.

I'm glad to hear that Octavian Nothing is better. The premise does sound good, but I've been reluctant to read it because the premise of Feed sounded good too. I'm still not going to rush out and buy it, but I'll consider it if I see it at a used book store.

>66 shewhowearsred:: that Little Red Book sounds very interesting - when you're done, I'd be particularly interested to hear your thoughts on how readable it might be by a YA audience (friend with daughter approaching adolescence may be interested).

My Little Red Book was very favorably reviewed in the science section of The New York Times today.

24. My Little Red Book, by Rachel Kauder Nalebuff



This is a charming little collection of nonfiction stories about an event shared by women all over the world: the onset of menstruation. After all, as the book says, everyone remembers her first time.

Menstruation, especially menarche, means different things to different people. It was amazing how much the reactions varied across the same generation of women. Some describe dreading it, while others write about waiting for it excitedly, to the point of pretending they'd already gotten it long before. Some lived in cultures and families who celebrated their entry into womanhood, but others were not so lucky-- they were raised to believe they were unclean and needed to be kept apart from their family members.

The stories are every bit as varied as the women who wrote them. There are stories that are pages long, poems that are short but meaningful, and there was even an IM conversation in the list. Most of them are ordinary stories of women getting their periods in school bathrooms or at home, but there are some that particularly stand out. What would you do if you got your first period just after the Nazis had asked everyone to strip? How would you react to the sight of your own blood after your sister's death? The stories are heartbreaking, nostalgia-enducing, bittersweet, and even hilarious in turn. At several times in the book I had to stop to read out a few passages to my (fortunately patient) partner, some because they were just too funny to keep to myself and others because they were too sad.

I have a twelve-year-old stepdaughter who has yet to get her period, so naturally she was at the forefront of my mind while I read this book. I am 23, barely out of my teenage years myself, and I have no idea what to say to her when she does get her period. I just know that I want her first time to be better than my own. When I first got my period, I was overwhelmed with shame-- because in my strictly Catholic-schooled mind, this was proof of my already burgeoning sexuality. Proof that I was different (or so I thought) from everyone else. And no one told me otherwise. When my stepdaughter gets her period, I want her to remember it as a joyful time. I definitely got a lot of tips from this book, including the idea of putting together a "first period kit" with different kinds of pads and tampons, maybe a book or two, and a pack of painkillers. I especially like the concept of menstruation not being an automatic entry into womanhood, but a step towards it-- womanhood as a journey, as a series of steps to be chosen and taken.

The book itself is something I think all preteens should read. There's just so much practical stuff in it: what it's like to put a tampon in, whether or not one is "devirginized" by the act, what belts are and why there are none of them being sold anymore, how to deal with cramps, whether it means you can still sit on your daddy's lap or not... If I do end up putting together a kit for my stepdaughter, this book, or a copy of it, will go in it. It just describes everything a lot more eloquently than I feel I will be able to. The stories are very YA-friendly, easy to read, and accessible.

Even as an adult, though, the book kept me interested to the very end. I've long gotten used to my period, but it was fascinating to hear stories from other cultures. It is mentioned in the book that in Africa, some girls have no choice but to stay home from school because of the lack of sanitary supplies-- education that they can never make up. Some Muslim women believe they should not pray while they are on their period, because they are unclean. The traditions of slapping a girl across her face or on her back to symbolize the simultaneous pain and joy of being a woman were interesting as well.

There are quite a smattering of famous contributors to this book. Some are standard fare for such a feminist book: Erica Jong and Gloria Steinem, for example. But some of them made me outright squeal (literally) when I read their names after a story. Jacquelyn Mitchard (Cage of Stars) and Tamora Pierce were particular notable ones for me. Tamora Pierce, in particular, was an author I loved growing up, and I remember reading about her character Alanna (from the Song of the Lioness quartet) growing breasts, getting her period, and having her first kiss at a time when I, too, was going through these changes. I got a real kick out of reading her first period story... embarrassingly so, I must admit.

The book was, naturally, very feminist. Gloria Steinem's thought-provoking essay on what the world would be like if it had been men who menstruated reinforces this theme. However, most of the stories are not of the "I am woman, watch me bleed" variety. Most of them are just ordinary stories by ordinary women who didn't know what was happening and didn't understand what it meant. I am usually wary of people who call themselves feminist (just because the word has so many meanings, some of which I don't condone), but this was my kind of feminism. The stories included in this anthology are not the best written, but they are just so down-to-earth, and so real, that it doesn't matter. They're all so different, but all the clamor of voices of all those women managed to shout out the same things. The pain of being a woman. The loss of childhood. The celebration of the power to give life. The realization that we're all the same, all of us bleeding, and all of us beautiful.

Highly recommended for all women, and maybe even some of the brave men too.

AMAZING review, thanks so much!

Wow, I've only just found your thread and can't believe I missed it before. Going to go back and read it all later, just starring it and posting in it before I forget or lose you again!!!

I was so curious about My Little Red Book (hmm, no touchstone) when it came up on the Early Reviewer's list... thank you so much for that review, it actually brought a little tear to my eye. I'll be reading this book for sure.

Glad you guys liked the review. I think I got a bit carried away, but I really did enjoy the book. I felt like I was part of a sisterhood. I think someone should make a book about that other milestone of firsts in a woman's life, though-- having sex. In a non-smutty, factual, truthful way. I think it's another taboo topic that teenagers lack information about.

25. Sabriel, by Garth Nix



Sabriel is an eighteen-year-old schoolgirl at the beginning of the book, happily concerning herself only with her classes and classmates. All that is changed when she discovers her father may be in grave danger. She leaves behind the only world she's ever known to go off alone in search for him, armed only with her father's sword and bells-- tools of a necromancer.

I am so taken with the concept of this book. Having a young female as the main character has become trendy in recent years, but Sabriel is not a stereotype. She's not a tomboy, she's not an orphan, and she doesn't shy away from darker magics, either. In most fantasy books, the hero (or especially the heroine), if a magic-user, uses white magic. Sabriel, however, was taught differently. She is a necromancer, which means she learns off a book called Book of the Dead and her strength is in going into Death to bring back souls and banishing the waking Dead from Life. No sunshine and beauty and love here-- just death, rot, decay, and graveyard dirt. It's an unusual choice of magic to give, and in this way Nix immediately distinguishes this series from other fantasy novels. Sabriel gets her hands dirty. Repeatedly.

I wouldn't say that I am a huge fantasy fiction fan. While I have read a lot of the more "adult" novels (probably due to having a brother who was 11 years older and had more books than I did growing up), I usually stick to the young adult end of the genre. That said, I haven't read anything like what Garth Nix has created here. I've never seen necromancy so fully threshed out, much less be on used by the heroine rather than the villain. His ideas of Charter Magic and Free Magic, the different sounds and functions of the bells that a necromancer needs, and the wards to keep a Dead creature at bay are all marvelously imagined and well executed in the book. His world is teeming with life and rich with detail, and it's hard to ignore.

I kept stopping in the middle of the story to digest all the information being doled out. It's a new world, a fresh kind of magic, but it might all be a little too new. While there's a lot Sabriel doesn't know and which you learn along with her as the story progresses, she comes into the book fully possessed of her necromantic magic and a lot of it is never explained. I couldn't shake the feeling that I was reading the second book in a series instead of the first. I've finished the book, and still have no idea how Sabriel's world works. For example, I don't know exactly what the Great Charters are, how they came to be that way, or how they are related to Charter Magic. The book explains some of it, but glancingly, almost as if reiterating something already explained in detail before. But it wasn't. Reading the book gives you a good grasp on the gist of things, but I guess I'm just one of those people who want to know exactly how things work, and in that regard I'm a little disappointed.

The story itself, though, is faultless (aside from my usual gripe about underdeveloped romances in YA novels). This was a solid first book and a great addition to the genre. I will definitely be reading the next in the series. Highly recommended.

shewho, you don't disappoint. I was telling someone about your book review for My Little Red Book over lunch today. Don't, whatever you do, stop reading and reviewing!

Great review! I love this series, for the same reasons you elaborate on above. Fresh, new, original, and well-done! While I am also keeping up with Nix's Keys of the Kingdom juvenile series, this one is by far my favorite of his. Have fun with Lirael--I think I like it even better.

My partner the fantasy fiction geek also has some of the Keys of the Kingdom books. Do you think they're worth reading?

I like them, but with the child part of my personality, while the adult in me appreciates the Abhorsen Trilogy. They are a good quality children's series, like Charley Bone and Artemis Fowl, with a Through the Looking Glass feel to them. I refuse to buy them in hardback so am waiting for the 6th to be issued in paperback, and I think the final one is due out soon in hardback.

Great review of My Little Red Book! It doesn't sound like something I would normally pick up, but I will def keep an eye out for it after reading your fabulous review. I actually have a copy floating around of a book called Virgin Territory, which is similar, except it has all kinds of firsts, supposedly: first boyfriend, first bra, etc. I haven't read it yet, so I don't know if it's any good.

That's it... I'm going to find Sabriel today, clearly I have no choice! Thanks a lot... LOL.

I just found your thread, and I'm glad I did. You have some really great reviews here!

Somehow I seem to have posted on your thread without having read it properly... just been back and read (and appreciated) your excellent reviews of books that I've read and ones that I've put on my TBR list. Shall be back here again... thank you!

#79 ronincats: I might give them a try after I've gotten through the Abhorsen trilogy. By the way, why is it called a trilogy if there is a fourth book, Across the Wall, in the series?

#80 allthesedarnbooks: I put Virgin Territory on my BookMooch wishlist, because it will probably take a while for it to show up. Let me know if you ever do get around to reading it! I also found a few titles that came up as recommendations for Virgin Territory and thought they were interesting. Thanks!

#81 dk_phoenix: Yes, clearly it wasn't your doing! And of course it won't be your fault if Sabriel attaches itself to your hand and begs to be bought... it never is, with us bibliophiles, is it? :)

Across the Wall came AFTER the trilogy, and is a book of short stories rather than a full length novel in the style of the others.

26. Gathering Blue, by Lois Lowry



Kira is a girl with a twisted leg unfortunately born in a community which casts out babies born with physical defects by leaving them in the fields to die. Kira was lucky in that her mother stood up for her, supported by her grandfather, who was powerful enough to spare Kira's life. When Kira's mother dies, though, leaving her an orphan, her life is again called into question by the Council of Guardians that rules her community. The only thing that she can provide in her defense is her extraordinary skill at weaving and sewing. She is sure she will be sentenced to certain death, but she soon realizes that the Guardians have plans of their own.

This was listed as a sequel to The Giver, which I loved, so I was surprised to find that this could really have been a standalone book. Kira's story has nothing to do with Jonas' story, except for the fact that they both happen to live in dystopias. Because I read The Giver first and have since re-read it several times, I thought Gathering Blue paled in comparison. Whereas Jonas' community had all sorts of interesting rules and routines and systems for managing conflict, Kira's community seemed simple, almost crude. I think maybe Lowry meant to emphasize two different extremes towards which a world could go (Jonas' symbolizing absolute control and technological progress and Kira's symbolizing regression), but the descriptions of Kira's community itself seemed lacking in that creative spark that Lowry possessed in abundance when writing The Giver.

I was surprised by how quickly the novel ended. I read this in one sitting, and it was not enough. This was a book I would have like to see go on for a little longer. Unlike Jonas, whose unique job assignment gives him the opportunity to figure out very early on what is wrong with his world, Lowry takes a different course with Gathering Blue and presents it as a mystery. The pieces don't fall into place for Kira until the very end of the book, at which point she makes a decision... and the story ends there. Lowry left The Giver open-ended, too, but this was less than open-ended. The story takes the entire book to build up, peaks, then plummets to below sea level, and it was just too abrupt and jarring for me. Then again, I have heard there is a third book, The Messenger. Maybe some loose ends are tied up there?

Despite the lack of denouement, I still enjoyed Gathering Blue. Lois Lowry is a wonderful writer and I enjoyed the little details she made up for Kira's world, such as the idea of a person's life being quantified by the number of syllables his name has. The longer the name, the longer the life. The story was written in such a way that it engaged me and kept me turning the page, wanting to figure out the mystery before Kira did. Because of the way it ended, I wouldn't say it was a fantastic book... but it was a solid one, and a suitable, if inferior, companion to The Giver.

#85: Thanks, ronin. I'm not sure how good Garth Nix would be writing short stories, but I'll give it a try!

I've heard that Messenger is even worse than Gathering Blue, but I haven't read it myself.

I actually remember very little about Gathering Blue, but I think at the time one of the reasons I liked it less was because it didn't raise the same interesting dystopia questions that The Giver did. Kira's world just seemed brutal and bad, whereas Jonas' world had paid a high price for certain gains. Regression to me just isn't particularly interesting, but making sacrifices to gain a stable society is.

>84 shewhowearsred:, I'll let you know if I ever do get around to it, lol! I think I actually picked it up off after browsing Bookmooch one day.

Exactly, Zoe! You phrased it a lot better than I could have. The Giver just sparked a lot of discussion and thought about whether the decisions their elders made was the right ones, whether our society could possibly get to the same point of peace and order that Jonas' did without the consequences, the importance of the annual rituals and the routines enforced... there was just so much more packed into such a short story. Gathering Blue was interesting enough, but I felt like Lowry had just been getting started when it ended, so I felt cheated. I was sure she was going to say something more, something provoking in some way. But she didn't. I'm still going to read Messenger, but only because I want to finish the trilogy.

Just a note to say I edited the first post in this thread. It was getting really annoying to have to fix the touchstones every time I read and added a new book to the list, so I took the touchstones out entirely. From now on, each book on the list will link to the corresponding message on this thread where I review it.

>91 shewhowearsred:, Ok, Nikki, I've been wanting to do that with my own thread for a while, but I couldn't figure out how to find the links for the specific messages. Where did you find them?

Okay, I'm not sure how much HTML you know and I'm not sure I can explain it very clearly. This might sound a little technical, but really it's a very straightforward process.

There's a simple HTML tag for linking to specific parts of pages. You put on the part of the page you want to link to, replacing x with whatever you want to call it. Then go to where you want to put the link and type link where link is the word (or in this case, the title of the book) that you want people to be able to click in order to go to another message in the thread.

That's the basis of it. The difference is in what name (whatever you put instead of x) you use.

1) Library Things actually already assigns each message a "name", except that since it's automatically generated, it's a number. You can find this by hovering your mouse over the bottom right hand corner of the message where it says "flag abuse". Do not click it, just hover long enough to see what comes up on the status bar (the bottom of the browser). You should see something like: "javascript:showflagmessage(1108852, 58058)" . The first number in the parentheses is what you're looking for. In this case, your post (message #92) has a "name" of 1108852.

Now that you know the name, all you have to do is type link (without the spaces). You should come up with something like this.

2) I chose to do it another way because I didn't like the thought of having to copy and paste or remember an unwieldy number like 1108852. To skip that, I edited every message that had a review and, at the very beginning, I typed . I decided to just name the review for the first book on my list as 1, the second as 2, and so on. Easy to remember.

Then I did the same thing as above-- I went to my first message and typed title. Typed without the spaces, it becomes something like this.

Does that make any sense at all?

>93 shewhowearsred:: Nikki, you're a genius. I've been using the built-in anchors for a while to link to posts, but hadn't realised you could get them from the 'flag abuse' marker - I've been wading through the source each time to find them!! And adding your own anchors is inspired. wow. I take my hat off to you, in a very emphatic and extravagant manner.

@93 *sticks head in* That is an awesome idea. And thanks for the html info. I knew there had to be a way to link to individual posts in a thread, but wasn't clever enough to sort it out on my own. Brilliant.

Glad to have helped! Rachael, another reason I decided to add my own anchors is that the built-in anchors only work for linking to posts within a thread, whereas adding anchors means you can link to a specific part of a post within a thread as well. This is useful because I have reviewed more than one book in a single message before, and wanted a direct link to the second and third books. The built-in anchors only link to the top of the message. This way, you don't have to scroll down.

The price of being pedantic. Heh.

Awesome, Nikki! Thank you so much! Now, do I reorganize my thread now or go to sleep and do it tomorrow? Choices, choices, choices...

awesome, thanks so much! I hope you know you've generated a wave of copycats :P

My wave will just be one from the rocker on my porch, gunderg, as I look at you young whippersnappers and admire the ease with which you dance through this computer stuff. ;)

>93 shewhowearsred: Holy cow, Red! Where have you been all my LT life???? That is wonderful information! I've printed it and pasted it over my monitor (well, figuratively speaking...it's really in a little folder of nifty tips and things on my desk). Thank you.

@ 100. Huh. I memorized it. *cackles. runs away*

> 101 BRAT!

>78 shewhowearsred:: Nix's Keys books are enjoyable but not in the same league as the Abhorsen books, imo. The first is the weakest so, if you like that one, it will be better as you go.

I'd recommend that you wait for #7 to come out before reading #6. The first five are complete stories in-and-of themselves within the larger story framework. The sixth book is only half of a story and ends in a literal cliff-hanger.

He wrote one other book, Shade's Children, which I really don't recommend.

Hi - just found your thread and had a quick browse (thought you wrote great reviews of Never Let Me Go (which I have read) and Feed (which I haven't) incidently).

Shall be back to read more when it's not a Friday evening, but just had a quick question - I know how to link a page, but how is it that you link particular messages? I've always been quite irritated because I thought it wasn't possible to do that...

Thanks!

oops - ignore my last - i've just spied you've already described this only a few messages above - sorry!!

>103 TadAD: Nix also wrote The Ragwitch which is quite okay but definitely a children's fantasy.

Congrats, Nikki, on hitting the Hot Reviews today with your Sabriel review!!

You're all welcome for the html stuff-- I'm glad I mentioned it, as I didn't realize anyone else wanted to know. I thought I was the only one it bugged!

Tiffin, your young whippersnappers remark sounds so much like something my mother would say. Except my mother regularly has trouble just finding the power key of her laptop to turn it on.

>103 TadAD:: TadAD, thanks for the warning about the sixth book! I have a love/hate relationship with cliffhangers and will definitely wait for the seventh to come out first. That shouldn't be a problem, as I am only halfway into Lirael (which I am loving, by the way. Ronin, you were right! I'm enjoying it a lot more than I did Sabriel).

>104 flissp:/105 flissp: Glad you found the message! Let me know if you have any trouble with it, as I'm not sure I explained it accurately enough.

>107 ronincats:: Ronin, what are the Hot Reviews? I've heard mention of it, but is there some page hidden away on LT for it or something? Thanks for the congratulations-- I didn't even realize!

If you go to the Home page, there is a lot of information on it, and if you go down the page, on the left side, there is a section where they post 3 or 4 "Hot Reviews" that they lift from the reviews done recently, for everyone to see! Check it out! You are HOT, girl!

LOL. Thanks, Ronin. I think I must have taken that part off my home page when I customized it, because I had to activate it to see what you were talking about. I think I'll keep it on the home page now.

Incidentally, I found a rave review of Pillars of the Earth on Hot Reviews. I've heard about it and its sequel, World Without End, but I've always stayed away because Oprah's book club selections usually end up being books I hate. Anyone read it? Thoughts?

>110 shewhowearsred:: I've read Pillars of the Earth and enjoyed it quite a bit. It is, however, a monumental undertaking.

It gives an interesting picture of the 12th century, though Follett has the characters seem rather 20th century in their speech and thought patterns. Despite that flaw, the characters are quite colorful and the tensions between them surrounding the building of the cathedral kept me immersed through all 1000ish pages.

My wife has a copy of World Without End that I may or may not get around to at some point as the mood strikes me.

#110: I read Pillars of the Earth last year. I liked the first part of the book and hated the last part of the book. I am not even bothering with World Without End. Just my 2 cents.

I loved both Pillars of the Earth and World Without End. Pillars of the Earth was better in my opinion but they were both very very good. Don't expect the way the people behave to be historically accurate (although the building process was) but I found it so enjoyable.

I guess I'm just worried about Pillars of the Earth turning out the way The Hour I First Believed did, at least for me. So many people raved about it, but I hated it. I don't mind the length, but I'm wary of historical fiction as I'm not exactly a fan. Maybe I'll find an excuse to go into Borders and read the first few chapters of it, just to see...

27. Lirael, by Garth Nix



The book picks up several years after Sabriel leaves off, veering away from Sabriel's story and instead introducing two new characters. Lirael, the title character, is a daughter of the Clayr-- but sometimes she feels the kinship is only nominal. With her dark hair and dark eyes, she looks nothing like the rest of the Clayr, who were all born with blonde hair and blue eyes. Aside from this obvious physical difference, she is marked as an outsider by another more important characteristic: she alone has remained without the Sight, the legendary Clayr ability to See the future upon maturity. As she struggles to belong and nurses feelings of loneliness, Lirael wanders aimlessly among the hidden nooks of her home, and accidentally stumbles across a mystery which compels her to leave the Clayr.

Meanwhile, Sabriel and Touchstone's son, Sameth, is both prince and Abhorsen-in-Waiting. He is expected to succeed Sabriel and take up the necromancer's bells and sword to fight the Dead... but there's one problem. Sameth is terrified of Death and necromancy. As both Lirael and Sameth strive to force themselves into roles chosen for them both at their birth, they start to think that maybe they were meant to walk a different path... one that might lead them to save the kingdom.

If I felt like Sabriel was the second book in the trilogy rather than the first, I felt like Lirael was the first book. As good as Sabriel was, Lirael was a much better introduction to their world and its magic, perhaps because both Lirael and Sameth were as ignorant as I was about how everything worked, as opposed to Sabriel. In this book, Garth Nix finally explains all those niggling loose ends that Sabriel left unresolved, and suddenly it becomes clear that he purposely left us in the dark during the first book in order to better build up the conflict that will surely arise in the third book, Abhorsen. Although I still think Sabriel would have benefited from just a little more information than was given, the way it was worked into the story of Lirael was masterful. The information came at just the right time and just when the reader can make sense of it.

Although Lirael could be read first and understood without the benefit of the backstory provided in Sabriel, it cannot be read as a standalone book. The story takes its time developing the two major arcs, Lirael's and Sameth's, so much so that after their intersection the story begins to fizzle out, the climax obviously being saved for the third and final book in the trilogy. While I understand the need for build up, I was glad I already had the next book waiting to be read! I would recommend holding off from reading Lirael until Abhorsen is also at hand. Lirael is not a complete story, even though it is an entertaining one.

One advantage of this book over the first is that both Lirael and Sameth have not fully come into their own yet, unlike Sabriel, who was already comfortable with her mastery of magic before the beginning of the first book. This made for a much more interesting story, as Lirael saw its main characters change and grow throughout the book, and their process painstakingly described by Nix. There is a downside, though: typical of coming-of-age stories, there is a stage in each character's life in which he/she, drowning in teenage angst, is insufferably self-absorbed. Both contemplate suicide-- briefly, but still long enough to be irritating. Both spend considerably portions of the book engrossed in self-pity, so much so that Sameth actually comes across as a coward. Fortunately Lirael manages to redeem herself somewhat.

While I feel the characters in Lirael were a lot less likeable than those in Sabriel, the story picked up considerably, which makes up for it. Lirael introduces the world and culture of the Clayr, who make only a fleeting appearance in the first book, and Nix does a good job of immersing his readers in Lirael's unfortunate Sightlessness. I enjoyed the alternation between Lirael's story and Sameth's, which served to underscore the similarities of the two. Elements in both stories parallel each other, and the book's themes of destiny, choice, and individuality are echoed nicely. The plot is a lot more complex than that of Sabriel, and engrossing besides, as Nix very effectively involves the reader by allowing him to guess at the major antagonist and the true identities of other minor characters before Lirael and Sameth do.

When the first book of a series introduces a world and a concept as refreshing and imaginative as Nix did in Sabriel, very often the succeeding books run out of steam, the author having already used up his creative juices brewing the first book. The Abhorsen Trilogy definitely defies that trend. If anything, Lirael upped the ante. Better storylines, a more intricate plot, more realistic (if annoyingly so) characters, a more suspenseful conflict, and richer settings catapult it to greater heights than Sabriel reached. Highly recommended, another feather in Nix's cap-- as long as the third book is at hand!

Another fantastically written review!

Ah, if you're not a historical fan then maybe its not for you. I wouldn't have described it as really a crossover book that fans of other genres would appreciate it.

Have you read Doomsday Book by Connie Willis. It is an absolutely brilliant cross of science fiction/near future earth/historical fiction that I think you might like, given how many other similarities we have with our reading tastes. It might also give you an 'in' into the historical fiction genre.

Thanks, Ronin!

I've heard of Doomsday Book, but only as another plague book (I was talking about Year of Wonders at the time). I didn't like YoW, so didn't look into Doomsday Book. I didn't realize it was sci-fi and involves time travel. Hmmm. Sounds like an interesting cross-genre book. Added to my list, thanks!

Hi Nikki, while Doomsday Book is a good sci-fi involving time travel and I second whatever lunacat already mentioned, but it IS a book with PLAGUE as the central theme, still don't let that put you off from trying this book.

And yeah, awesome reviews!

I'm really enjoying your reviews, too! I especially liked your review of My Little Red Book. I have two teenage daughters who have both experienced this rite of passage, and I think they'd enjoy this book. I went over to Amazon and used the "look inside" feature to read an excerpt and it does, indeed, look wonderful. Thanks for making me aware of it.

#119: Piyush, I was going to wait until a copy of Doomsday Book came up on BookMooch, but I think I'm going to have to buy it off The Book Depository. Now that I've looked into it, it really does sound like something I'd like. Hopefully the science fiction and time travel aspect of it will keep me from being completely bored during the Plague bits.

#120: I'm glad I did. It is a wonderful book, and so good for teenage girls in particular. I hope yours like it the way I did!

Oops, deleted because of a double-post.

28. Abhorsen, by Garth Nix



This book is an immediate continuation of Lirael, the second book in the trilogy, which makes it impossible to include a comprehensive summary here without mentioning any spoilers. Suffice it to say that Abhorsen finds the main characters coming together to, well, save the world. It sounds like a corny, stereotypical ending, but it's not.

Lirael and Sameth, whom we met in Lirael, really come into their own in this book. Where they were previously whiny, angsty teenagers unsure of their place in the world, in this book they have accepted their respective destinies and bravely taken up the mantle of the parts they are meant to play. I really appreciated the work Nix had put into developing these two characters in particular throughout the second and third books. Their progress was slow, but realistic, and when they make the adult choices that they do in the end, it makes perfect sense. Lirael and Sameth have grown up, and it was a pleasure to watch them do so.

When I read Sabriel, I remember complaining about how little information Nix gave about the Old Kingdom and its magic. Lirael addressed the dearth of background adequately. However, Abhorsen so completely explains everything that I was left stunned at the end, overwhelmed by that instant of absolutely everything falling into place. What I dismissed at the beginning as Nix's inability to explain coherently the world his characters live in without interrupting the story was revealed as a clever technique to suck a reader in while simultaneously not spoiling the ending of the trilogy. Now that I've finished the series, I can see that all three books were very well-planned. Nix wrote the first while already keeping the third in mind, as is made strikingly obvious in hindsight. He leaves little clues and hints long before the reader will be aware of them. The way he wrapped up all the loose ends is rare for any series that is so rife with mysteries from the beginning, and this final book only leaves me more in awe of his storytelling ability than I was before.

If anything, I actually now wish that Nix had kept certain aspects of the ending a little closer to his chest-- by the end of Lirael I had guessed vital elements of the plot, which were confirmed in Abhorsen. I think it diminished the ending a little bit, as I wasn't surprised when I should have been. Still, the story was so action-packed (more so than the previous two) and fast-paced that it managed to still be an enjoyable ride. I sped through this in one night, and now I'm sorry to see it's over.

All in all, a brilliant ending to a fresh series. The Old Kingdom Trilogy, all three books of it, really blew me away. All the recognition Garth Nix received for these books was, in my mind, undoubtedly well-deserved. I can't recommend this trilogy enough for lovers of fantasy.

Aaaah, welcome to the sister/brotherhood of Abhorsen appreciators! Another one hits the books. Happiness is achieved.

I got Ella Minnow Pea yesterday from BookMooch. It was a quick read, so the review will be up soon. This morning was dull, dreary, and rainy-- but the two books left on my front door bright and early made me happy! I got The Graveyard Book from The Book Depository and a compilation of Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights from BookMooch. No, I've never read either Brontë. Or Jane Austen, for that matter.

I've read Wuthering Heights and enjoyed it quite a bit...but, like you, I haven't read Jane Eyre nor anything by Jane Austen. I do however plan to read my first Austen this month.
Hope you enjoy Wuthering Heights!

shewho, I am envious of you: I would so love to be reading Austen again for the first time. Wonders to come!

I read Ella Minnow Pea in one sitting on Saturday. I'm looking forward to your thoughts on that, and The Graveyard Book, too! Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre are ones I have to reread someday; I'm probably due for a rereading of Austen, too. My favorite Austen is Mansfield Park, but I'm in the minority on that one.

29. Ella Minnow Pea, by Mark Dunn



Ella Minnow Pea is an eighteen-year-old girl who lives in a country called Nollop. Nollopians are a strange, quirky bunch, and pride themselves on living within the guidelines set by man their country is named after, the late Nevin Nollop, who created the pangram "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog". They write to each other in lieu of telephoning or emailing, and their speech is peppered with formal-sounding big words. Their worship of Nollop is severely tested when the tiles of individual letters comprising Nollop's famous sentence as it is tacked onto his monument start falling off. The High Council interprets this as a sign from Nollop and makes it illegal to speak or write the fallen letters. As more and more letters fall off and it becomes harder and harder to come up with creative ways to speak without using one of the forbidden letters, it seems like it's all up to Ella Minnow Pea and her friends to stop the madness.

This book had such a charming concept that I couldn't help but get myself a copy when I heard about it. The entire book is in the form of notes exchanged by the Nollopians, and I loved how well-written they all were. Mark Dunn, the author, obviously has a witty, slightly snarky sense of humor, and it definitely shows through. He successfully used high-falluting words to great comic effect, somehow managing to make it seem mocking rather than haughty. The entire story is written in the same satirical tone, and it's one of the things I loved best about it.

This is a book for language lovers. No, not just lovers-- pedants. People who will obsessively count and re-count the number of letters in a sentence and read paragraphs twice in order to catch possible use of any forbidden letters and enjoy the words the characters choose in order to circuitously convey their intent without using certain letters. Dunn wields language like a weapon, and some of the ways he finds to circumvent the letter bans were endlessly interesting to me.

At some point, though, there are too many letters that are banned that even Dunn's mastery of the language fails, and he resorts to phonetical spellings of words. I understood why he was doing it, and couldn't come up with a better way to do it, but it put me off a little from the story. Another minor niggle is that the plot is obviously that of a YA book. The search for another pangram that is shorter than Nollop's takes up a good part of the book, but several suggested ones that were rejected as too long could have easily been made to fit the required length. Obviously Dunn expects less of his audience than to figure one out for themselves.

I know the book has been touted as being a satire of totalitarianism or censorship, but I actually think the book more directly attacks religion. In particular, the elevation of Nollop's status to god-level, the High Council's ludicrous interpretation of the tiles falling as a sign from Nollop from beyond, most Nollopians' obedience, the harshness of punishments for breaking the letter bans, and the extent to which it was all allowed to go on all seemed to me like a clever commentary on blind faith. I wouldn't be surprised to find out Dunn does not belong to any organized religion.

The overly simple plot and limited characterization prevents me from being too wildly captivated by this book, but the writing was clever, the tone entertaining, and the message strong enough to be received but subtle enough not to overpower the rest of the book. A very easy, quirky read that has you thinking about the importance of individual letters and of language itself.

he resorts to phonetical spellings of words. I understood why he was doing it, and couldn't come up with a better way to do it, but it put me off a little from the story.

The search for another pangram that is shorter than Nollop's takes up a good part of the book, but several suggested ones that were rejected as too long could have easily been made to fit the required length.

I was bothered by these things too, and I'm glad to see that someone else objects to them. I found the second one especially surprising, since you would think that in a story like this the author would pay particular attention to details like that. This is a book that should really have benefited from close reading, but it actually got worse.

I still thought it was a good book overall, but it was disappointing because it had the potential to be great.

30. The Graveyard Book, by Neil Gaiman



"There was a hand in the darkness, and it held a knife."

When a toddler, wanders out of his house in the middle of the night, he doesn't realize his restlessness has just saved his life. A man named Jack callously murders his parents and sister at the exact moment that the little boy makes his serendipitous escape. The boy wanders into a graveyard, where he is adopted and raised by a dead couple who christen him "Nobody Owens". Nobody, or Bod, grows up in the graveyard, lovingly taken care of by his ghost parents and Silas, his guardian, who is not quite dead but not quite alive, either. Eventually, Bod is told of his grisly past, and the dangers still lurking for him beyond the graveyard. Bod soon discovers there is more to life than death.

My biggest complaint about this book is the plot. Gaiman does such a good job building up the background, setting up the places and characters-- and then there's an abrupt change. In the book, Bod stumbles upon a whole other world within the graveyard, one with completely different rules and creatures. The effect was jarring. I didn't see why that other world was necessary, especially when Bod didn't stay there very long and it wasn't really essential to the plot. In fact, if anything, it detracted from the main storyline. I felt Gaiman had already slowly but masterfully established a new world (that of the graveyard and ghosts), and his quick and hurried introduction of yet another world, and his equally hasty exit out of it, seemed incomprehensible.

I thought that certain other aspects of the book were rushed as well. While the book starts out with the murder of Bod's family, it is never actually explained why his family was murdered. They just were. Silas' nature is unclear, as is the purpose of the Honor Guard (which was mentioned only twice). In the latter part of the book a prophecy comes out regarding Bod, and that isn't explained either, making it seem like a last-minute attempt to tie all the loose threads together. Gaiman's writing style is solid, but the content just made me think I was listening to a story made up by an imaginative little boy with a short attention span. So many interesting things are brought up, then promptly forgotten.

Despite these failings, what Gaiman excels at is the writing itself, the setting, and the themes. It's marketed as a YA book, but it starts with a murder and most of the story takes place in a graveyard. Somehow, Gaiman manages to make what would have been a morbid story into one that is creepy but endearingly humorous at the same time. I enjoyed the complete reversal of what we know of ghosts: in this book, the ghosts are the good guys, and it's the living that you have to be wary of. Gaiman does this all with writing so finely honed I got shivers of delight at particularly clever turns of phrases. Sometimes there's such an obvious rhythm to his writing that I wonder if this wasn't meant for audio. The graveyard is so richly imagined and the concept so original that I couldn't help but be charmed by the book.

In the end, the book is a good coming-of-age story, which makes it perfectly suited to younger readers, who would probably also be able to overlook without comment the sharp detours Gaiman takes with the story. Bod is so well-loved by everyone at the graveyard, and he is so happy there that you can't help but hope along with him that things never change. But they have to. There is a Peter Pan-esque bittersweetness to the story, that feeling of not wanting to grow up and wondering if you have a choice.

I wasn't wild about this book, and I think it was slightly over-hyped, but I was still solidly entertained and moved. Gaiman's writing genius is undeniable, and the creative choice of setting makes this book a must-read.

Watch/listen to Neil Gaiman read The Graveyard Book here. Wow, he's a really good reader!

Just received Coraline in the mail from The Book Depository. I've just started Jane Eyre, but I may take a break because I'm itching to read Coraline!

Coraline is a fun, spooky read! *shudders*

One of my stepdaughters brought home a book from the school library which she promptly finished and then passed on to me, saying I just had to read it. It's called Vampire Academy by Richelle Mead. I've heard about it, but am a little dubious about getting into another teenage vampire series. Still, though, I'll give it a try.

>135 shewhowearsred:, I read Vampire Academy and was not that impressed. It was very similar to P.C. Cast's House of Night books (starting with Marked, which I read shortly before Vampire Academy) which I liked better, although I've fallen behind on the series. I would recommend Richelle Mead's adult urban fantasy series featuring Georgina Kincaid, however, which starts with Succubus Blues. It's got really fun theology and characterizations in it.

Marcia, that's disappointing! Just tell me-- is it as obsessive, whiny, and lovey-dovey as Twilight? There wasn't a love story mentioned on the back cover, which was encouraging.

No, it was definitely better than Twilight! Mead can really write, and it's way more interesting of a take on the vampire mythos than the Twilight books, IMO. Plus there's not that whole creepy anti-feminist subtext... I would recommend it if you like vampire books of any stripe; I would just recommend the House of Night books more highly, and their both set in similar vampire boarding school settings. One great thing about this conversation is that I was looking at my library because I was reminded to read the rest of the House of Night series and I discovered that I had actually read Chosen, the second book, last year and left it out of my count, which bumped my 2008 list up to 100, which is a much nicer, round number than 99!

Oh, thank god! I feel guilty enough for introducing my stepdaughters to Twilight. At the time, I was just happy they were reading, but I'd feel horrible if I'd somehow started them on a lifelong career of reading books that promote that kind of obsessive, stalkerish love. This stepparenting thing is hard.

I've added both Marked and Succubus Blues to my wishlist! I hope you're happy! :)

I am happy! Succubus Blues is awesome, and Marked is pretty darn good.

If I remember correctly about Vampire Academy it was a very complex fantasy world that I had a hard time keeping straight. And there was something weird about an attraction between a student and a teacher? But I could be making this up. In any case, there's no Edward, which is a great relief for any novel.

#139: just talk about the books with them and show them how to be critical, observant readers. It's ok to read dreck now and then (and even guiltily enjoy it) as long as you have a critical sense at work. We can't dictate another's taste but we can help them to sharpen their powers of observation.

Superb advice, tiffin.

>141 tiffin:: well said, that's excellent.

#141: tiffin, I read Twilight, thought it was dreck, but still enjoyed it as a guilty pleasure. I wouldn't begrudge any other adult the same joy. However, my stepdaughters are 12 and 14. I've talked to them at length about how the romance in the books is unhealthy and obsessive and pointed out how utterly passive and empty-headed Bella is... but I can't help but wonder how much is actually sinking in. I can't make any judgments about other teenagers and their ability to digest Twilight, but I think these teenagers might have been a bit too young and naive and impetuous. I wouldn't have forbidden them from reading Twilight, but I regret that I encouraged them.

Ah well, at some point, you just have to shake your head, sigh, and chalk it up to experience.

Message 130
SHWR, I'm on a quest to read Newberry Medal award winners. As you may know, this book won the 2009 award. Stasia (Alcottacre) as well as many others here on LT highly recommend this book. I hope to read it in the next few weeks. Thanks for your excellent review!

Also in reference to message 130, Nikki (It's the weekend--I have time to catch up, not on the reading of messages, but responding to them) Taking nothing away from Gaiman's originality and whimsy and writing ability, he owes a huge debt, which he acknowledges, to Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Books. If all you know is Disney's version...wipe it out of your memory. I highly recommend reading a complete version of The Jungle Books at any age, but I read them over and over again as a child (along with Kim and Puck of Pook's Hill). The format of The Graveyard Book is modeled explicitly upon Kipling's format of separate but connected episode throughout Mowgli's years in the jungle, and chapters 3 and 4, including the one you had concerns about, are modeled directly on episodes in The Jungle Books, in this case where a tribe of monkeys kidnap Mowgli and take him to old abandoned ruins, putting him in very dire danger, and Kaa is instrumental in rescuing him, although Baloo and Bagheera also help. The whole tone, and the ending, are even better appreciated by seeing the original in Kipling's work. I can't recommend it highly enough!

#144: shewho, the young woman on the elliptical next to me at the gym yesterday was reading Twilight (I don't know how they read and do that at the same time). Keeping this very conversation here in mind, I asked her what she thought of it. She thought it was wonderful.

I said that I had heard certain criticisms of the way the young girl in the story gave over all of her decision making to whatshisname and let him take over her life entirely - did she think this was an accurate assessment? Well, she hadn't thought of it that way. Did she think that he was almost creepy the way he stalked the girl - that was another criticism I had heard. She said she hadn't thought of any of those things, that she was just reading it as a fantastic romance and "anyway, there aren't really vampires, so it's not like it's ever going to really happen". Made me laugh.

#144: Maybe the best advice would be to give them some awesome books to offset the message in Twilight? Maybe give them the "good" Anita Blakes (the first 8, perhaps) from LKH. You can say, "there are some sexy vampires and shapeshifters in this series!" Then stop them at The Killing Dance. Haha.

Or maybe the In Death series by J.D. Robb/Nora Roberts. No one would doubt Roarke's sexiness and the books are great when they deal with self-identity, independence and compromise in marriage. Eve is definitely not passive or empty-headed!

BTW, what I really wanted to post here was a "Thanks!" for the HTML tutorial in post#93... I put it to good use in my thread.

#145: Whisper, you can call me Nikki if you want-- SWWR is a mouthful! I've already starred your Newberry thread and I look forward to reading what you think of The Graveyard Book. I enjoyed it and hope you do too!

#146: Ronin, I know you said that it was modeled after The Jungle Book, but I didn't realize Gaiman had borrowed quite that much! It does explain that seemingly abrupt foray into a new world. I've already put The Jungle Book on my wishlist, but maybe I'll just buy it outright. I think you're right, I will have to read it to better appreciate The Graveyard Book.

#147: Tiffin, I got pretty much the same reaction from my stepdaughters. They didn't see Bella's unhealthy dependence on a boy at all-- they just thought it was a great love story and swooned over Edward. And when I said I hoped they didn't think that was how love really should be like, they looked at me like I was stupid and said, "Well, of course not-- vampires don't exist!" I didn't know whether to laugh or sigh. By the way, I have no idea how people can read while exercising, either. The most I can do is put on an audiobook.

#148: That's a good idea. I've never read Anita Blake, but I've heard good things about Laurell K. Hamilton. J.D. Robb's stuff is good fluff, too. Oh, and you're welcome for the HTML stuff! Glad you were able to use it!

#149: They was just recommendations off the top of my head... I just think that you can't tell teenage girls anything(!)... but you might be able to direct them from fluff to better written fluff. They like sexy vampires... give them sexy vampires! Even Anne Rice's stuff could work.

Ummm... but I will warn...for Anita Blake... after Obsidian Butterfly, that's when Laurell K. Hamilton got on the crazy train and turned the series into pure erotica and kills (figuratively) her characterr.

Personally, I think it happened a book before that. I'd stop no later than Blue Moon.

31. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte



Jane Eyre is a parentless child who is thrust upon her reluctant aunt and her cousins when she is very young. Tolerated only because her uncle asked his wife to take care of her upon his deathbed, Jane grows up miserable, emotionally starved, and lonely. When presented an opportunity to be sent away to boarding school, she seizes it. With the help of a solid education, Jane forgets the misery of her childhood and eventually makes a career of teaching. Something still seems amiss, though, and Jane takes a governess position in hopes of finding it. Jane Eyre is the story of her search for meaning in the midst of seemingly chronic solitude.

This is one of those books that people are constantly referring to and touting as a classic, so I thought I'd put off reading it for long enough. I was severely disappointed. For one thing, the book is sorely in need of an editor. The characters frequently speak of themselves in the third person, and Bronte seems to have no idea how to use quotation marks. She often writes things like "Did I have a good night's rest?" he asked when she really meant to write "Did you have a good night's rest?" he asked or just Did I have a good night's rest? to describe a character's question without quoting him directly. I don't know if it was just my edition, a mark of the era it was written in, or author error, but it was really distracting.

The main character, Jane, was unlikeable. She seemed to be so rational at first, but then makes a string of rash decisions that show her to be emotional at best and downright stupid at worst. She was sensible enough to see through a man's empty promises and deplorable character and spurns him, but falls in love with him and later changes her mind anyway. She refuses to be loved if love means to be owned and changed to suit the owner's whim, but is unable to resist for long. Her intelligence is mentioned several times by several characters in the story, yet she turns out to be utterly ruled by emotions. When Jane refuses to be in a relationship in which she would have been taken care of financially and been rendered unable to pursue her own career, I applauded her. But somehow she ends up with someone who needs and depends on her absolutely. I guess Bronte thinks it's okay for a man to be dependent on a woman, but not for a woman to be dependent on a man. This bothered me.

Mr. Rochester, too, is a scoundrel. He is supposed to be the love of Jane's life, but without giving too much away, he is exactly the sort of man one would expect Jane Eyre, soundly educated and purportedly sensible, to stay away from. Yet Jane falls head over heels in love with him, submitting to and serving him despite his dismissal of her in a disturbingly misogynistic way.

I can't even say anything good about the plot. It is simple, predictable, and too neatly resolved. Bronte's method of tying up all the loose ends involves too much sheer luck to be at all realistic, although sadly even these seemingly coincidental turns of plot can be foreseen long before they should be.

Amateurish plot, poor characterization, confusing and contradicting thematic expression-- I hated this book, and only finished it because I couldn't believe such an awful book could be hailed a classic. I'm glad I read it, if only to finally and decisively cross it off my TBR list and to know never to read it again.

32. Coraline by Neil Gaiman



Coraline is an adventurous little girl who feels her parents don't spend enough time with her. Her thirst to explore leads her to stumble into a parallel world where her parents are attentive... a little too attentive. In fact, her mother wants her to stay for ever and ever, and despite the overwhelming amounts of toys and good food, Coraline can't help but think something is very, very wrong.

This was a very quick, very easy read. The solid narrative is interspersed with Gaiman's trademark creepy, slightly dark but still whimsical tone, and the story is better for it. The story moved along a little too fast for my liking, but it's clearly marketed as a children's book and its brevity dictates the pace. As a children's book it's entertaining, a little scary, and definitely a worthwhile read.

I read the first half of the story in the graphic novel version, and the second half in a normal novel format. I can heartily recommend reading the graphic novel version as I enjoyed it a lot more. It drew out the story a little more, slowed the pace, and built more suspense. It was considerably more disturbing as a graphic novel than it was as a novel.

I enjoyed this story in one gulp and don't regret reading it, but I think it's overhyped. It was a good story, but for adult readers, it really can't expect to be more than a little bit of fluff on the side to break up the monotony of regular reads.

33. Valiant: A Modern Tale of Faerie, by Holly Black (audio)



Valerie is a regular teenager who tolerates her mother and loves her boyfriend-- until something happens that causes her to run away into the streets of New York City. She meets Dave and Lolly, two similarly situated teenagers who live on the streets. While Val struggles to cope with recent events, they introduce her to a whole new world she never thought existed. Fairies exist, but they're not all the bright-colored, winged kind. Some of them are dangerous, and one of them is killing of scores of them one by one. Suddenly Val finds herself right in the middle of a murder mystery, and her ordinary teenager problems don't seem so important after all.

This book had a lot of very original elements to it that I really appreciated. I loved the portrayal of fairies not as beautiful, ethereal winged people but as mischievous and capricious monsters with little regard for humanity. I loved the concept of nevermore, a drug given to fairies to enhance their glamour (illusions used to maintain a normal appearance) which produces peculiar side effects when ingested by humans. I loved the meeting of the fantastical world of fairies with the grimy, gritty streets of New York. For as much as I liked about the book, though, there was more not to love.

I'm not a fan of "urban realism". In hindsight, I should have known, given that, that this book wasn't for me. The swearing was pretty much constant throughout the book. Drugs play a major part in the plot, and pretty specific instructions are given as to their preparation and ingestion, although no real drug is mentioned. Val and her friends spend most of the book living in the streets, supporting themselves by going through dumpsters, eating leftovers off other people's tables, washing themselves off in public bathrooms, and squatting. The sex is frequent and casual, and characters use deception to get into each other's pants. There's even a token lesbian. And what the hell, why not throw in an inter-species romance. I'm not a prude, but it just felt like Holly Black took a bunch of elements that she knew would be disgusting and repulsive and threw them into her story solely to shock people, without any regard for their connection to the story.

Perhaps others can navigate through this confusing meeting of fantasy (complete with swords and magic and traditional villains) and what is supposed to be reality (drugs and gangs and kids doing what they can to survive). I couldn't. I felt like the actual story had taken a backseat to all the gore that Holly Black wanted to include. This is my first read of Black's work, and I won't be coming back for more. Read at your own risk!

Cauterize, Tad: Thanks for the recommendations. Laurell K. Hamilton's stuff has been mentioned to me by several friends as something they think I'd like. My understanding is that her books are good for fluff reading. Is that right, or are they more than fluff? How erotic are they?

>155 shewhowearsred:: The first bunch are reasonably well-written supernatural, kick-butt, thriller stories. Through about the first eight I was enjoying them whenever I was in the mood for something where I didn't have to think...just go along for the ride and enjoy the action. They're enjoyable—depending upon what your definition of fluff is, they could be enjoyable fluff.

The books are sexy from the start. Then, they get fairly erotic. Then, they move to borderline porn.

My favorite line about one of the later books was found in a review over on Amazon:

It's unfair to say Incubus Dreams is just one sex scene after another. They don't start until page 89 and then they pause on page 377 to let a little bit of mystery to show.

It's literally not an exaggeration. Even before you get to that book (Incubus Dreams is #12), you go page after page of blow-by-blow (no pun intended) description of sex. Too bad; it killed the series. I'm not particularly prudish, but there was just no plot in these later books. The mysteries in the first ones just give away to Anita sleeping with pretty much everything male in the book. She was a great character when they were thrillers; she's boring as an actress in an adult movie. The nice thing is that you can simply stop reading before that point as there aren't really cliffhanger endings.

ETA: She started another series, the Meredith Gentry books. They start as erotica from the beginning.

I thought Tithe was ok, a little overrated, even though I like urban fantasy. I thought it was cool that she included even a token lesbian; queer teenage girls are not very well represented in fantasy lit, or most lit in general. That was actually one of the things that made me think about picking up Valiant if it becomes available on BookMooch or if I see it a the library.

Also, Black's Spiderwick Chronicles, written with Tony DiTerlizzi, are TOTALLY different, and wonderful kid lit. I'd highly recommend them if you haven't read them yet, they're way better than the movie. Speaking of which, sorry you didn't like Coraline more!

I've never tried the Anita Blake books. Knowing that the series gets so bad later on isn't very inspiring for me to start it!

>152 shewhowearsred: my boyfriend recently read Jane Eyre and told me the exact same things...to say away from it, that it's misogynistic and simplistic and other "istics". I haven't read it but I do wonder why it's hailed, not only as a classic, but also as a work that's supposed to be quite forward in its thinking about women's roles. So much about that. We studied Aurora Leigh during my Victorian Poetry class, and that one has stolen LOTS of plotlines from Jane Eyre (well, it's more or less a re-telling of the story) and the conclusion in it is the same. While Aurora at first spurns the man who doesn't believe women can be intelligent/talented (she's a poet) and doesn't want to depend on him, in the end she goes back to him. BUT only after he is blind. And then she has to support him. Which basically means that a man has to have a great physical deficiency in order to balance all other "deficiencies" that women have, and only THAT way can they be equal. What nonsense.

>154 shewhowearsred:: I read Tithe and didn't like it for the very reasons you stated about Valiant. I wondered if maybe it was just the one book that was full of swearing, drugs, and random sex, but... evidently not. It was awkwardly placed in the story, and I too felt almost like Black was trying too hard.

#156: Tad, like Marcia (allthesedarnbooks) I'm a little hesitant to start a series that finishes that badly, but hey, I figure if I can read Laura Antoniou's The Marketplace series and Anne Rice's Beauty books, I can stomach this! We'll see...

#157: Marcia, the lesbian isn't a major character in the book. She isn't instrumental to the plot in the slightest. There's no message of openness or acceptance, or anything, really-- that's why I said I thought Holly Black had included one just for the sake of having one. I think if you're going to have sex or drugs or homosexuality in a story, there better be a good reason for it, like if you want to make some sort of commentary.

#158: I'm so glad it's not just me! I was starting to think I was just a heathen, unable to appreciate great classical works or literature. I just didn't get Jane Eyre at all. I don't understand how anyone could love it. It wasn't romantic, it wasn't feminist, it wasn't exciting, it wasn't particularly well-written... ugh.

SPOILERS START

I didn't want to mention it in the review because I didn't want to put spoilers in it, but I HATED Mr. Rochester. He treats her like a servant for months, then professes undying love and asks her to marry him. It's only when they're at the altar that it comes out that he was actually already married to someone else whom he's hiding in his house. It never occurred to him to tell Jane he was still married?! What a loser. When Jane goes back to him in the end, I was so disgusted with her. He lied to her, played mind games with her (when he let her believe he wanted to marry Blanche just to make her jealous), patronized her, but because he became blind and oh so pitiful, it was okay for her to go back to him? Talk about not having spine enough to walk away!

SPOILERS END

#159: I'm glad you didn't like it either! I didn't even know about Tithe, but it sounds like I would have had just as bad a time with it as I did about Valiant. Disappointing. Some of it had potential, too.

I got Mister Monday in the mail today! I thought my partner had the whole series, but apparently he lost the first book. Thank god for BookMooch!

>160 shewhowearsred:: I can understand that sentiment. If I had heard this kind of stuff before I read them, I might not have started them either. I'm glad I read the first ones, though; they were pretty good examples of that particular supernatural action genre.

I've never read the Antoniou books. I have read the Beauty books and it's kind of a different thing. Anne Rice just decided to write three erotica books...she makes no bones about it. Laurell Hamilton is trying to disguise hers as something else. Not only is this a bit disingenuous of her, it also ends up a weaker work because she can't really embrace (hmmm, definitely a pun there somewhere...) the conventions because she's nominally targeting a different audience.

#160

Hear hear on Jane Eyre. I had to study it for 3 different classes during my school career and hated it every time. All my friends loved it and would read it again and again and talk about it and not hear any criticism etc. I will NOT be reading it again.

I got The Chronicles of Chrestomanci, Volume 1 by Diana Wynne Jones last Friday. I haven't been reading as much as usual, though-- I'm still plodding away at The Wizard of Earthsea, and while I'm enjoying it, I just seem to keep getting distracted. It doesn't help that it's been an... eventful weekend with family stuff, either.

I hope the "eventful weekend of family stuff" is behind you and that you can relax this week.

And you've got some great books to relax with--Ged and Chrestomanci!

Ooh, Chrestomanci! I'm jealous of you reading them for the first time. Also, I loved Mister Monday... that reminds me I need to pick up on that series! I think I'm on Sir Thursday.

#155 & 157: It's hard to say when I don't know what you think is fluff... What made Anita so compelling is that she was tough, badass, stubborn and angry. She was very, very pragmatic. A very modern woman without an iota of girlie. She does the saving and never gets saved. The books were written in a formula that some mysterious murders/magic would happen and because of her specialties (being a necromancer and a vampire executioner) she has to solve it or kill it. The funny thing is, there is almost no sex at all until Killing Dance She's attracted to both a vampire and a shapeshifter, but she's oddly old-fashioned and not willing to give her body unless there's a long-term commitment. The sexual tension in the love triangle is great. And if you read the books, they're well written and you'll see why this series is the basis every paranormal book since (for better and for worse).

Post-Killing Dance... for everything I said above reverse it. I'm not kidding you. Anita doesn't even solve any murders anymore she just consolidates her power. LKH destroys everything and turns her series into almost hardcore erotica and Anita sleeps around for no reason at all and turns into a complete Mary Sue. There is speculation this is because LKH got a divorce and she had modeled the shapeshifter after her husband (the shapeshifter turns into the biggest prick ever). Haha, there's more gossip if you want to know it! Anyways, there was such a fan uproar, that she did an Anne Rice and told her readers "don't buy it if you don't like it". So I did.

#152 & 158: It's been awhile since I read Jane Eyre, but I didn't think it was all that bad and I'm all for kickass women. I did think Mr. Rochester wasn't my sort of guy with his lying (about what is making those noises upstairs!) and his semi-sadism by forcing to Jane spend time with the aristocratic women who snub her, etc. So yes, I didn't think Jane should have fell in love with him. However, it was my interpretation that he had to be humbled by the end by losing his sight, his house and almost burning to a crisp before his ego was deflated enough for Jane would be with him. That he had to learn that she could (and did!) leave him and his money and still be Jane and it was up to her to choose to come back.

I'm not an ardent support of the book... I would put it as "slightly better than okay" for the books I've read from this period. What I liked were the scenes of Jane's spunky spirit at the beginning in the orphanage and the general creepiness of "what the f!uk is going on upstairs??" at the Rochester home. I had way more trouble getting through Wuthering Heights.

Thanks, Whisper! One of my partner's daughters got into a big row with... well, everyone in the house, basically, and decided she wanted to go and live with her mother. I'm happy she did, because she was making everyone miserable. Still, there's been a lot of adjusting we've all had to do. Things have settled down somewhat, though.

Ronin and Marcia: I just finished The Wizard of Earthsea, which is a book on its own, but it was so short I think I'll read the rest of the series first before passing judgment or reviewing it. I really love the concept of magic as knowing a thing's true name, but it was just way too short for my liking! Luckily my partner has the four-in-one version.

Cauterize/Tad: After what you both have said about the Anita Blake books, I now definitely want to buy them! Any series that causes such an outrage among fans about how the story turned out has got to be worth getting into!

Cauterize, I didn't think of it that way-- that Mr. Rochester had to be humbled in order for her to tolerate him. That's a good point. Still, though, I disliked his character so much I didn't care. Have you been able to finish Wuthering Heights? It's on my TBR list for the sake of 'educating' myself in the classics, but your comment doesn't bode well for it, either!

On an entirely different note, I picked up The Other Boleyn Girl at a secondhand shop for A$15. I've read rave reviews about it, but it didn't sound like something I'd like. What do you know, when faced with the shiny, glossy, trade paperback version I was unable to resist it. Sigh.

hhmm I'll respectfully disagree with Cauterize here.
Wuthering Heights was actually one of the few "older" classics (besides Dickens) that I had no trouble reading at all, and enjoyed it very very much, in fact. I'm just butting in because you're wronging a book if you start reading it thinking it's gonna be bad :)

Agree with gug here, Wuthering Heights is a very good book and its not difficult at all to get into, me being a Classics fan might have something to do with it, but then I didn't like Northanger Abbey!

Nikki
I read the first three parts of Earthsea trilogy last year, now that I am reminded of this series, I guess will read Tehanu some time next month...

re #31: shewho, I hope you don't think I'm rude for suggesting this, but if I could suggest reading Kate Camp's review of "Jane Eyre" in her Kate's Klassics? Her very funny and completely accessible take on ten literary classics includes Jane. I think it might shed light on some of the darker corners of the book for you and perhaps allow you to forgive Jane more for being who she is - and Brontë for writing her as she did. Camp gives the book its due within its own time: what the characters of Jane and Rochester would have represented to a 19th C. reader. She also touches on the parallels of the characters of Jane and Bertha, of their psychological representations (a fond theme in Jane Eyre analyses).

Sometimes when we come to a book from another era we judge it in the lights of our own time and it seems wanting. I think that it is helpful to step outside of our own framework, to try to understand what it would have meant to its own era but also to see (I hate this term) the bigger picture. Sometimes we need that overview to better understand what is really going on. The book has lasted for a reason...my personal feeling is that there is much in Jane Eyre that speaks to women (and men, no doubt) across those ages. Perhaps Camp can help with this in her non-pedantic and very approachable style?

Many aeons ago, when I was teaching Jane Eyre to first year English students, a young woman felt exactly as you do about the book. We didn't have much time to spend on it in a survey course, but after our few sessions with it, she confessed that she now understood better what the author was getting at. "But I still hate it," she said adamantly, "I just feel I hate it now for the right reasons."

ETA a forgotten word

Re #168: I'm not saying that I didn't hate Mr. Rochester too... he's a total dink. A 'rubber band' where he acts all nice to Jane and then when she reciprocates he snaps away from her. I just wanted to say I read the end differently why Jane would go back to be with him and that I liked other significant parts of the book.

For Wuthering Heights, I didn't say it was bad, per se. I just wanted to give a relevant example of my reading taste. Nothing closer than a book written by a sister in the same time :). I just find it hard to read plots of interconnecting marriages and madness. Heathcliff wasn't my sort of dude, either. I'm not sure if I just dislike gothic-esque books; I found Frankenstein didn't float my boat, as well.

I am another one to jump on the Wuthering Heights bandwagon - I love it. In fact, it is definitely in my top 5 books of all time list. But then, Heathcliff is my kind of guy - my friends and I have this joke that Mr. Darcy from Pride and Prejudice would be the perject husband, but Heathcliff would be the perfect man to have an affair with!

#174 I agree! Darcy's aloofness and sense of duty or Heathcliff's smoldering passion...Hmmm...

Here's a quotation from Kate's Klassics by Kate Camp, from her "Wuthering Heights" review:

"Heathcliff is a rapist, a bully, a kidnapper, a wife-beater and quite possibly the world's worst father. He is also, despite my best efforts to grow out of him, irresistably sexy. I still want to marry Mr. Darcy, and Middlemarch's Will Ladislaw looks great in a long maroon coat, but I'd give them all up to be tearing Heathcliff's hair out on one dark and stormy night."

I think I really, REALLY, need to read Kate's Klassics - she sounds like my kind of girl!

#172: tiffin, I appreciate the suggestion, but my experience of Jane Eyre did not just have "dark corners". The entire thing was awful, in my opinion. I understand that you have a different perspective, but seriously, there wasn't anything I liked in the book-- certainly not enough to spend any more time on it. Despite what the story may have meant in its own era, I read it in the 21st century not to understand the psyche of the past generations, but in an attempt to get something out of it. I was not attempting to study it or teach it and after taking from it what I have, I really have no desire to do either. If Jane Eyre lived today, I'd say she was a stupid, foolish woman-- worthy of pity, maybe, but absolutely no praise. I highly doubt that opinion is likely to change.

I will probably still read Wuthering Heights eventually. There's too much that's been said about it and I want to give Emily Bronte the benefit of the doubt before I lump her in the same category as her sister and tell everyone I know never to read their books. I have to say, though, what people have said in this thread doesn't sound promising. I doubt I could find a rapist, bully, and wife-beater sexy. Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't strike me as healthy at all! Still... I'll give it a shot.

#178: I understand completely. Nothing on earth will ever make me like Moby Dick.

Nothing on earth will ever make me like Wuthering Heights or The Great Gatsby, either, Tiffin, which just goes to show - not every book is for every body - including the 'classics'.

Well, nothing on earth will make me like Moby Dick, Wuthering Heights or The Great Gatsby! But I must confess I did enjoy Jane Eyre (several times!).

#181: I am a Jane Eyre fan as well, Lorie.

LOL, there seems to be two camps! Is anybody a fan of both Jane Eyre AND Wuthering Heights?

I like Jane Eyre too (in fact, I might do a reread of it, prompted by this discussion).

Liked Wuthering Heights, haven't read Jane Eyre yet.

LOVE Wuthering Heights, have attempted and failed to read Jane Eyre three times!

*pokes heads in*
Not to be a nosy git or anything who runs into other people's discussions but I am very impressed by SheWho's reviews having just read through this entire thread and i'm intrigued by The Old Kingdom trilogy, which i may have to hunt up from somewhere.
I'm also a smidge bit scared by the Jane Eyre review since i borrowed it from the library this very afternoon and i'm now wondering if I should hedge my bets and leave it alone. Help anyone?
I will most likely be watching this thread for future reviews (and possible book suggestions) :D

I'm in the camp that dislikes Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights intensely. Does that put me in a group of my own?

luna, I suspect it might put you squarely with shewho but we have to wait for her to read WH to see for sure.

#187: you just have to try it to see if you are an aye or a nay. Aren't SWWR's reviews excellent?

>189 tiffin: I spose i will just have to try it and see .
Her reviews are indeed excellent - i shall be very interested to see if she reviews any books i've yet to read that are on my list of Want-to-Read *note to self - make such a list cos i believe its only in your head currently*

I think at some point i may have to try and read Wuthering Heights as well to see if i can actually stomach it . Eep i may have some seriously heavy reading to do this summer.

#189 tiffin

Lol, at least I won't get too lonely. SWWR's reading tastes are excellent and very similar to mine so I'm sure we will have plenty to talk about in our group of 2!

I'm in the camp that loves Jane Eyre. It is one of my three favorite books of all time. But, I really am not enamored with Wuthering Heights.

I'm in the camp that loves Wuthering Heights but am not so fond of Jane Eyre. I haven't read either of them in a long time, tho!

I love both Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights.

I have to say, I've never read either of them... and to be quite honest, I don't have any current plans to... heehee. I have a feeling they won't be my thing...

I'm in the Jane Eyre was so-so camp - I neither love it or hate it (to be honest, I probably would have enjoyed it more if it had just stopped at her childhood)... I've also started, but not finished Wuthering Heights a couple of times now - it's on my list to finish this year, so we'll see. I think that my biggest gripe with both was just how completely OTT, almost gushing, they are.

The conversations regarding Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights are beginning to be an excercise in probability in statistics.

N= those who like Jane Eyre
Probability that X will like Wuthering Heights

and then the outcome of those who will like neither...

I love Jane Eyre but I haven't read Wuthering Heights yet...

I love Jane Eyre and thought Wuthering Heights was so-so! Since we're collecting data for a probability formula, I thought I'd add my thoughts... :D

Angela

According to my tabulations, (LOL):

3 of us like both Jane Eyre (JE) and Wuthering Heights (WH)

5 of us like JE, and are so-so/dislike WH

1 person is so-so/dislikes JE, but likes WH

1 person is so-so/dislikes JE and WH

1 person likes JE and has never read WH

2 people are so-so/dislike JE and have never read WH

3 people like WH and have never read JE

ETA Kiwidoc's vote!

Geek Talk Disclaimer:
There are far too many variable and too few data point, we will never be able to run a successful statistical test :(

LOL Well then we Geeks will just have to poll every single member of LT :P

#187 Lady Violet: Glad you like the reviews! Please do give Jane Eyre a shot, though-- apparently people have very divided opinions on it and I'd hate to dissuade you from reading a book you might end up loving. And the Old Kingdom Trilogy is certainly worth getting into!

Lunacat: I already have my copy of Wuthering Heights, but haven't read it yet. I know this may be weird, but I don't want to read that copy. I think I need to go out and buy another version of it because I can't stand the typeface and the paper seems too yellow. Am I the only one who gets distracted by such things? I also had a hard time getting into Sabriel because my copy, which belongs to my partner, had a creased cover and dog-ears. Ugh.

All this talk of statistics reminds me of the time I was bored and created an econometric model where y=happiness and the parameters included amount of time spent watching Grey's Anatomy, sex, how high my grades were, the size of my mobile phone bill, number of arguments had with my mother, and number of books read. Ahhh, college stress.

By the way, this SWWR is a mouthful! Please, feel free to call me by my real name, Nikki. Don't worry, I won't take offense if you don't remember it, though. :D

So looking at Cait's polling... *puts on her geeky glasses*... out of the 9 people have read both books, the probabilities are coming out as:

67% chance you'll only like/love one of the books. And a 22% chance you'll like both.

Innnnnnteresting..... I never thought that readers of the Brontes could be that divided.

Nikki, you should read WH so we can get the poll to the nice, round number of 10!

Hi Nikki,
I know what you mean about being discouraged from reading a book that is not pleasing aesthetically. I just ordered a used copy of A Wizard of Earthsea and I didn't like it once it arrived because the pages are very yellow and they feel dry and brittle. I think part of the pleasure of reading is the feel of the paper and also the weight or feel of the book in your hand, at least for me. But maybe I'm just kind of quirky!

Putting in my vote!!

I loved reading Jane Eyre - I did not have to love the characters to love the book. I also gobbled up Wuthering Heights although the Gothic nature of the book did not make it an absolute favourite. But I will put my vote as positive for both.

I would suggest that everyone should read Jane Eyre - even if just to have an opinion. I also loved Moby Dick - sorry to follow you everywhere with this comment, Tiffin!!!!

I absolutely agree about being able to read the books or not depending on their looks. I recently mooched a very old copy of Three Men in a Boat which is lovely to own but when I tried to start reading it I couldn't...........pages too dry and brittle and it just felt wrong.

I am now going to keep that copy but borrow my mum's copy to read.

With so many "geeks" here, how come no one else watches The Big Bang Theory!

I am not a devoted BBT watcher, but I do catch it from time to time. Did you ever see the episode when Sheldon learns to drive? Hilarious!

Plus, Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock is THE coolest game ever :P

I am a devoted fan and I have watched all episodes, including the latest one (S02E18). Sheldon's driving attempt was one of the better ones and Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock was amazingly awesome :P

#203 - I'm with you Nikki. I pick up a lot of books from the library booksales but I appreciate and love a book more when I've just brought it home from the bookstore. Mmmmmmm, the delicious smell of the new pages almost .........oh nevermind.........silly me.

Hey Nikki, just popping in to say thanks for the HTML stuff on linking to messages - I just fixed my own thread!

Lorie, Luna, and Carmenere-- I'm glad I'm not the only one! I told my partner I couldn't enjoy a story because of the condition of the book, and he said I was weird. But then I also spent a few minutes smelling the pages of The Graveyard Book because I love that English hardback smell, so maybe he's right.

#208: Piyush, what's the story behind The Big Bang Theory? Is it a documentary? Or a fictional series? I've never heard of it. I don't think we have it in Australia.

I currently have to write reviews for the following books I've finished: A Wizard of Earthsea, First Test, and The Other Boleyn Girl. I'm stalling because I don't really know how to feel about A Wizard of Earthsea, and also because my partner and I just bought tickets to see Wicked the musical this Wednesday and I'm only just reading the book (which I've had for years) now and trying to finish it in time to see the musical!

Nikki - I'm excited to hear what you think of Wicked - both the book and the musical. I read the book first, and then saw the musical on Broadway a couple of years later. I love both, but they are quite different. I've also read the two sequels, Son of a Witch and A Lion Among Men. Both were good, but not as good as Wicked.

Enjoy!

I saw Wicked twice! It is marvelous. I'll be very curious to hear your impressions. Amy is right, the book and the show are different!

Have a great time!

Hello. I've been off LT most of the past fortnight so am very behind. Just chipping in to say I loved Jane Eyre, hated Wuthering Heights. Although I read Jane Eyre when I was about 11 and remember identifying strongly enough with the school scenes that it carried me through the rest of the book... I guess I might feel differently about it if I re-read it now. I'm really intending to read more Brontes this year so a re-read would be justified (no way am I going over WH again though. yeuch.)

LOL-haven't "heard" such lively discussions of Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights since high school. I'm fond of both, but because the reading of both (several times over the years) is somewhat muddled with some excellent film/video versions of the first--and please--Laurence Olivier as Heathcliff--just the best even if the story is truncated. I have to find Kate's Klassics though to round it all out. I'm also a huge fan of all of Richard Armour's snarky versions of classics (include in the mix American Lit Relit and Twisted Tales from Shakespeare) in the "rounding out" department. Thanks for a great thread read!

Am I missing something? do you have a new thread? why haven't you posted anything in a month? :(