Thursday, July 4, 2013

The Blade Itself by Joe Abercrombie

The Blade Itself (The First Law, #1)The Blade Itself by Joe Abercrombie
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Format: Audio (from Audible)
Narrated By: Steven Pacey
Original Publication Year: 2007
Genre(s): Fantasy (Epic)
Series: The First Law (#1)

If I had to sum this book up in one sentence: A brutal, dark book employing multiple perspectives to tell a story of violence and political intrigue with a touch of fantasy that is surprisingly hilarious and often poignant. Of course that really tells you very little but it should evoke a superficial comparison with at least one very popular fantasy series being written (hopefully) today. It did remind me quite forcefully of Game of Thrones but it definitely has its own unique voice and spirit. And (view spoiler)[ all the main characters remain intact at the end of the book (hide spoiler)].

There are three main perspective characters: Logen Ninefingers a barbaric Northmen who has a reputation for brutal violence, Sandan Glokta a twisted, crippled agent of the inquisition who makes his living investigating (aka torturing) traitors of the Union, and Jezal dan Luthar a spoiled, arrogant young nobleman training for a contest of sword play. Both Logen and Sandan slowly reveal more depth and quickly become intriguing narrators and even Jezal occasionally surprises. There are also a few secondary narrators: Dog Man one of Logen’s former compatriots who keeps the reader informed of what is happening in the North, Major West, a common born soldier of the Union who has risen quite high and Ferro Maljinn who doesn’t appear until midway through and who appears to be a former slave who is obsessed with vengeance. All these characters are being caught up in a world crisis that is just being revealed at the end of this first book in the series. At the center of this crisis is the Arch Mage Bayaz. If this all seems a little confusing it is because a lot happens in the book and it is difficult to summarize succinctly. It is also, I think, most enjoyable to experience the twists and turns with as little warning as possible!

It took me a while to warm up to the book. It’s very masculine and starts off with a few far flung threads that hardly seem related and none of which are terribly enjoyable. Glokta is torturing his way through the merchants of the Union capital city of Adua, Logen is off in the North and goes in search of Bayaz after almost losing his life in a battle with “flatheads”, and Jezal is lazily training for a fencing match between daily bouts of drinking and carousing. There is little to connect them and the characters start off as less than engaging.

However, as the story slowly unfolds and the disparate threads start to become entangled the book became more and more engrossing so that by the end I was anxious to jump right into book two. This building of tension and interest is done really well and with few exceptions the characters become more and more fascinating. Jezal was the only character who didn’t improve upon further acquaintance but his day may be coming. I also really appreciated that though the tone of the book is quite dark it is balanced with a pervasive snarky humor. It remains throughout a very masculine book – there are only two women that feature in the story with any prominence and that prominence is very limited – but this stopped bothering me about a third of the way in as the narrative picks up speed and interest.

The only complaint I had worth mentioning is one that is a frequent problem with multiple perspective books focused on a spread out story. There are going to be certain storylines that just aren’t as interesting and therefore feel like getting through them is a bit of a slog. The time spent with Dog Man and the Northmen was less interesting storyline for me and the chapters spent with these folk, while rare, felt a little unnecessarily long.

The narrator Steven Pacey was also really great. In particular he gave a perfect voice to Glokta who is missing many teeth and who has a particularly sly humor. We also hear Glokta’s thoughts quite a bit, contradicting what he’s saying, and Pacey narrated this in such a way that it was never confusing.

Final verdict is that this is a surprisingly enjoyable book despite its darkness and I think I will be jumping right into book 2 Before They Are Hanged. 4.5 stars

This was my first Joe Abercrombie and I was duly impressed.  What authors have you been glad to newly discover lately?  If you are an established Joe Abercrombie reader what do you think is his best book?  Is it fair to characterize some books as being particularly masculine or feminine? 

View all my reviews

Sunday, June 30, 2013

Covet by J.R. Ward

Covet (The Fallen Angels, #1)Covet by J.R. Ward
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Format: Audio (CDs)
Narrated By: Eric G. Dove
Original Publication Year: 2009
Genre(s): Paranormal Romance, Urban Fantasy
Series: Fallen Angels (#1)

I’m a bit bemused by this one and I will attempt to explain why. It is the first J.R. Ward book I’ve read, so perhaps I’m just late to the game but this book seemed to challenge, ever so slightly, some traditional romance conventions. This is not at all a bad thing and while in the end it did not work for me, others may find it a refreshing read.

And that was how I started out – refreshed and pleasantly surprised that the book didn’t jump right into the romance. It actually took some time to develop a story (gasp!) and do some world building and introduce a whole cast of characters. In the romance I’m used to plot is a somewhat vague frame for the romance to fill, so it was somewhat refreshing to jump into a story first and a story that will carry through all the books of this series.

Jim Heron, a construction worker with a shady past, gets drafted as a quarterback in the final conflict between heaven and hell. We are told that The Powers That Be have gotten bored with the never-ending struggle between good and evil and have decided to make it a best out of seven. There are 7 souls in the balance and whichever side gets to four first is the winner. Jim has been agreed upon by both sides to essentially be a wild card in the field of battle because he is sufficiently ambiguous in his nature that he could be playing for either team. Apparently Heaven won the coin toss so they get to have a little more influence with him and he has been directed that he must help seven people make the right decisions and therefore win the world for the good guys.

It’s an interesting set up with Jim being this potentially intriguingly conflicted character as a through line to a number of romantic pairings which have the added excitement of deciding the world’s fate. And there are demons and other angels also on the playing field. In this first book, Jim must help Vin DiPietro commit himself to the right woman. Interestingly Jim gets it all wrong at first and actually doesn’t seem to play much of a role until the end. Vin is an avaricious and cold man with a violent childhood. He’s pulled himself up and become very rich through mostly legitimate but morally bankrupt ways. He can also see visions of the future. When we meet Vin he is buying a $2 million ring for his beautiful girlfriend Davina. Throw in Marie Therese, a hooker with a heart of gold and a lot of secrets, her oddly humanitarian pimp who may be an angel and a mysterious guy who appears to be stalking Marie Therese and things begin to roll.

As you can see there is a lot going on and I definitely appreciated this. I also appreciated Ward’s attention to detail and the inclusion of an adorable dog that appears singlehandedly responsible for acquainting Jim with his heart again. ‘Cause that’s what dogs do!

But this is where the bemusement comes in. This is a seriously macho book. The book spends most of the time in the guy’s perspective, Jim, Vin, Marie Therese’s stalker. And these are some over-the top Macho guys – the type who drive Harleys, would sooner punch you as look at you and seem unable to utter a sentence without a swear word thrown for no good reason and use faux gangsta slang. I found this an interesting choice, since the majority of readers are likely to be female, to spend all this time in the male perspective. And not just any male’s perspective, but the uber males featured here, overflowing with testosterone to a seriously ridiculous degree. And that was the problem for me. I find guys like this ridiculous rather than sexy and I spent most of the book giggling at the silly or rolling my eyes. Obviously though this criticism is mostly to do with my taste so it may not apply to everyone. If the type of guy I describe above appeals to you, you may very well like this book very much.

However there were also some other problems. Despite a strong beginning plot wise, it kind of fizzles as the book goes on and the conclusion to one storyline (that of the stalker) was particularly anti-climactic. I found the female protagonist pretty colorless and bland for some reason (though I am glad that she was portrayed as being resistant to being rescued by anyone and felt very strongly about being self-sufficient). There is a bad case of the insta-love followed by an even worse case of insta-personality/temperament turn-around. The change in personality does have some legitimate explanation but it still felt silly.

In the end I’m not sure whether I will continue with the series or not. I didn’t love or even particularly like this one, mostly because the main characters just weren’t my type, but I am intrigued by the idea of a traveling Jim tackling a new case. I’m also interested in how Ward is going to keep the suspense going with the whole best of seven souls idea. Is Jim going to fail in some of the books? How will that work out and be satisfying? I also noticed on Goodreads that the subsequent four books in this series all get significantly higher ratings then this first one. So maybe some of the things that diminished my enjoyment here aren’t as prevalent in later volumes?

*******************************************

PS – After writing this review and saying how contemptuous I am of the uber-macho dude, I realized that there is at least one exception to this rule.  One of my most favorite guilty pleasures is Supernatural.  Maybe if I had just pictured Jim Heron as portrayed by Jensen Ackles I would have been a little more swayed? 
jensen ackles, 68


I do have to say however, that as much as I love Sam and Dean I sometimes really prefer Castiel :0)


View all my reviews

Friday, June 28, 2013

Much Ado About Joss Whedon

It will surprise no one that I think Joss Whedon is the bees knees.  Possibly better than rainbows and kittens rolled into one.  Firefly and Buffy the Vampire Slayer are two of my favorite TV shows of all time. I was pretty pleased that Cabin in The Woods and The Avengers have seemed to bring him to the level of universal adoration that he deserves.


So I was a little ashamed of myself that I JUST in the last week heard about his most recent project.  Joss Whedon AND Shakespeare?!  Together?!  Holy Shnikeys!  Has anything more perfect ever been proposed.  As I think about it Shakespeare was a bit like a 16th century, British Joss Whedon  with his snappy dialogue, clever wit and memorable characters.  Allright maybe I'm going too far.  It's probably more appropriate to say Joss Whedon is a modern day Shakespeare:)  Needless to say I was pretty excited. 

I immediately rushed to catch up with my favorite film podcast -  Kermode and Mayo Film Reviews (Hello to Jason Isaacs!).  They did an awesome interview with Joss Whedon and did a review of Much Ado About Nothing.  I needed no other convincing to make sure I got to the theater to see this before it went. 

It seems it was made at Joss Whedon's house during a two week break from editing The Avengers.  He just invited a bunch of his actor friends over and shot this in 12 days.  As such Whedon's fans will recognize a lot of the faces.  Alexis Denisof (Angel) and Amy Acker (Angel, Dollhouse) play the central couple Benedick and Beatrice.  Sean Maher (Firefly) takes a turn as the nefarious Don John and Nathan Fillion (Firefly) fills in as the ridiculous Dogberry. 

So what's the verdict?  Utterly delightful.  Shakespeare's original text is used in what is a somewhat vague modern setting.  It's black and white and it takes place almost entirely on Whedon's property which keeps it from being tied to a particular time or even a particular reality - it seems encapsulated in its own little world.  The actors do a good job of bringing Shakespeare's words to life and there are many laugh out loud moments.  This play is especially deft at swerving between the funny and the poignant and the cast does it full justice.  Nathan Fillion is particularly hilarious as Dogberry.   The costumes are simple but beautiful and the setting is used to great effect. It feels intimate but in no way does it look like a movie shot in 12 days on a bit of a whim. There is A LOT of booze.

A pairing of Joss Whedon and Shakespeare was going to be hard-pressed not to get a thumbs up from me but believe me when I say that if you like either or both of these witty playwrights, you will enjoy this movie. 

Anybody else had a chance to see this movie - what did you think?  What's you're favorite work by Joss Whedon?




Sunday, June 23, 2013

Dumb Witness by Agatha Christie

Dumb Witness (Hercule Poirot, #16)Dumb Witness by Agatha Christie
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Format: Audio (CDs)
Narrated By: Hugh Fraser (Captain Hastings!)
Original Publication Year: 1937
Genre(s): Mystery
Series: Hercule Poirot (#16)

If I learned one thing from reading Dumb Witness, it is that I suspect Agatha Christie of being a dog person. She is very, very good at writing a charming dog and reading his little doggie mind! Also, when looking up what number this particular book was in the series it became apparent that there are a lot more Poirot mysteries than I thought, which means I have a lot more to read. Considering that I enjoyed this one and all the others I’ve read featuring Poirot, that makes me a pretty happy reader!

Poirot receives a letter in the mail that intrigues him. It is from Emily Arundell, and very vague, almost incomprehensible, and it is two months late in arriving. What’s clear is that Ms. Arundell was worried about something nad that something had something to do with the dog’s ball. Poirot is intrigued enough to investigate and finds that Ms. Arundell has been dead for over a month and that there is some hullabaloo over her will which left her substantial fortune to her companion of only a year rather than her family. Despite the apparent naturalness of her death, Poirot proceeds to investigate on behalf of the deceased.

To be honest, not a lot happens in the book. There are a couple initial chapters that introduce Emily Arundell and her family and household: her nephew Charles Arundell, a corrupt roguish charmer, his sister Theresa a vain, pleasure seeking beauty, another niece Arabella Tanios, weak and cowed by her charming but seemingly overbearing Greek husband, and finally her silly, foolish companion Ms. Lawson. Once Poirot and Hastings enter the story, the action becomes centered on a series of interviews that slowly reveal the clues to what happened to Emily Arundell and her will. Despite the lack of action, I was still pretty interested in the mystery. This is likely most explained by the unique talent that is Agatha Christie. I believe she could make the phone book interesting reading for me so I don’t really require narrative fireworks to keep me reading.  The other interesting thing about this particular volume is the emphasis it places on how big a liar Poirot is.  I do love characters who are essentially quite honorable but who also don't sweat the small stuff.   

A note on the narration which is excellent. Hugh Fraser plays the role of Captain Hasting on the Poirot Mystery! Series and he does this well. His narration as Hastings is spot on and he also does a pretty impressive Poirot.

Do you prefer Christie's Poirot or Marple series or perhaps her one-offs?

View all my reviews

Friday, June 21, 2013

Character Assasination

Image from tvtropes.org

I've realized recently that I have a problem.  Here's the confession:  I am extremely judgmental of fictional characters.  It's a tough admission to make but it has recently become obvious to me that not everyone reacts as negatively as I do to the foibles of the characters inhabiting their favorite entertainment, whether it be books, TV or movies. A too perfect or dull character can quite quickly ruin a story for me even if there are many other aspects about it to like.  I become shrewish and overly critical and I don't like it.

It goes without saying that for me characters are the heart and soul of any piece of fiction.  Obviously there are many other elements that are important but if I do not like or can't at least relate in some way to a character, I will not like it.  On the flip side, having a good character or two while everything else sucks will not save a book or TV show.


And I don't have to love a character or even entirely like them, but they have to be well-developed in a realistic way - I need to see something recognizable in them.  Some recently read books that I liked very much despite their less then loveable characters are House of Mirth and Gone Girl.

I also have noticed that I am much harsher on female characters than male which, being female, makes some sense.  To paraphrase Darcy in Pride and Prejudice I tend to be very severe upon my own sex. And for much the same reason Elizabeth is coincidentally - these so called accomplished ladies are hard to believe.

So what kind of characters or character traits make me gnash my teeth?

1) The Mary Sue: The link will take you to a more detailed description of this trope but to quote the general gist:
  "...original female character...who obviously serves as an idealized version of the author mainly for the purpose of Wish Fulfillment. She's exotically beautiful, often having an unusual hair or eye color, and has a similarly cool and exotic name. She's exceptionally talented in an implausibly wide variety of areas, and may possess skills that are rare or nonexistent in the canon setting. She also lacks any realistic, or at least story-relevant, character flaws — either that or her "flaws" are obviously meant to be endearing."
Particularly in certain genres (romance, young adult, fantasy), I think one of the hardest jobs an author must do is create a realistically likeable character who doesn't irritate or annoy but who also doesn't fall into the Mary Sue trap.   The fact of the matter is, these type of characters are boring and by virtue of being a Mary Sue, can have no real depth.  I'd rather read the story from the misunderstood wicked stepsister's perspective than Cinderella's.  One annoying way authors frequently try to create sympathy for Mary Sue type characters is by giving them "the tragic past" but since they have no resulting flaws in their character, it has virtually no meaning and imparts no depth.  But I seem to be in the minority, because there are several popular books or books series out there that have a serious case of the Mary Sues.  Or perhaps folks that are generally annoyed by these types of characters, avoid reading the genres where they seem to proliferate.  Sigh... but I LIKE a good romance and young adult adventure, dammit.  The real answer, I think, is that most folks are more tolerant than I.

Example of popular books/Series and the Mary Sues that ruin them for me: Sookie - Sookie Stackhouse Series by Charlaine Harris, Daughter of Shadow and Bone by Laini Taylor, and to be fair and throw a Gary Sue in there Atticus  - The Iron Druid Chronicles by Kevin Hearne...and also Granauile from the same

Romance/Yong Adult books that could have but didn't: Seraphina by Rachel Hartman, The Native Star by M.K. Hobson, Lucy  - The Drake Chronicles by Alyxandra Harvey

2)Women who are Irrisistible to Men (and a little bit vice versa):  These women inspire deep, passionate love in all men that encounter them and often have multiple love interests. Lots of overlap with the above.  Some examples where it bothered me:

Evie - The Diviners by Libba Bray, Sookie - Sookie Stackhouse Series by Charlaine Harris, Anita Blake  - Anita Blake Series by Laurell K. Hamilton (this one is especially egregious because Anita is a great character in the first 3-5 books of the series and then turns into a guy magnet), Karou in Daughter of Shadow and Bone by Laini Taylor, Katniss  - The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins, Tris  - Divergent by Veronica Roth

3) Elitist Bourgeosie Intelligentsia:  I don't have too many examples of this and it often won't ruin a book for me.  I feel like a lot of them take place in New York City.  And I may not like them because they make me feel dumb and yokely.  Maybe. I.E. my motivations on this one are likely unfair and 100% my own damn problem.  Where it bothers is when the characters are quite smarmy, full of themselves and also super whiny.  This would have been why, despite a great story line I wasn't a big fan of The Magicians by Lev Grossman.  Other places where I noticed it and it occasionally annoyed but didn't impact my feelings for the book too much:  The Time-Travelers Wife by Audrey Niffenegger, The Flavia deLuce series by Alan Bradley (Flavia knows shit she just really shouldn't know - it's like she has seen and remembered every movie ever made up to the fifties, heard every piece of music, read every book etc... - however I love this series!), Beginner's Greek by James Collins.

And here's where I argue with myself.  There are some characters who I very much like which I think some might say fit into one of the above categories.  What makes them different - why do they not annoy me?  I'm not entirely sure but I'll take a stab at it.  A few characters that have been mentioned to me as falling into the same group as above:  Maisie Dobbs in the Maisie Dobbs series by Jacqueline Winspear, Seraphina in Seraphina by Rachel Hartman, Rose Tyler from Doctor Who.  I can see where Maisie Dobbs can be seen as a Mary Sue especially in book 1 where we meet her.  I think she sheds most of those characteristics in subsequent books and is quite clearly emotionally closed off and unable to really connect with others in any meaningful way.  And I think both her and Serphina are both more palatable to me for one simple fact - they are both quite clearly introverts so they speak to me in a way their extroverted brethren don't.  For Rose Tyler I would argue she's not a Mary Sue.  She is most certainly not perfect and she is singularly untalented.  She's often immature and while clever is not intellectual in any way.  She's young and has heart and compassion which is what the Doctor needs and which is why part of him becomes smitten by her.  When she does amazing things it's because she's been possessed by a spaceship.  Not a Mary Sue.

There are many more examples I could come up with (ahem...Twilight...ahem) but these are some of the most recent and/or egregious for me. So how do most readers accept and even embrace characters like this?  Is it perhaps a different way of wanting to relate to the characters?  Without a doubt I can say that I would not want to be any of the characters mentioned above, I can't imagine them as anything other than, well, other.  Maybe most people don't have this problem relating?  And then there are the folks who recognize that the character(s) is annoying but it does not impact their enjoyment of the rest of the fine elements of the story.  How do they do this?!

So does anybody have the same problems as I do and let characters have the power to ruin their fiction? What are your thoughts on this? Is there a way to read differently so that one rotten egg doesn't spoil the whole barrel?   And most importantly, which characters do you loathe and why? 

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Garden Update - June 18th, 2013

The garden isn't looking half bad considering it's been almost non-stop rain in these parts for the last month.  The worst sufferers have been the peppers which don't link they've grown an inch since planting and leaves are somewhat jaundiced and curled.  The second most worrisome are 3 Gold Medal tomato plants planted in the 2X12 foot bed - they have grown very little since planting and are a rather pale green.  Meanwhile their Beam's Pear counterparts have fully grown though not ripe fruit.  Hmmmm...  This week looks relatively free and clear of rain and pretty good temps so hopefully that helps.

What's been harvested or is ready for harvest:
Spinach - harvested and done, it bolted early
Kale - Ready for harvest
Salad Greens - Had a big salad with them tonight, Yum!
Garlic Scapes - I always struggle with what to most effectively do with them
Sugar Snap Peas
Bunching Onions

Photographic Essay:

Carrots are starting to look robust

Sugar Snap Peas

Sugar Snap Peas getting tall!

Lettuce, Kale and anemic Gold Medal tomatoes

Cukes and rather pathetic chiogga beets


Green Beans on left, Sad little peppers on right

Potatoes, Bunching onions, more sad peppers planted with parsley, Lemon tree, Blueberry bush

Up front is the one gold medal tomato I put in a pot, looking much more robust than those in the bed. Wonder why?

Garlic (and Shallots) looking large and disheveled.  Three different varieties (Thai Purple, Music, Morado gigante). Should be ready for harvest in the next 2-3 weeks.

The Beam's pear fruit - just needs enough heat to ripen.


Sunday, June 16, 2013

Ella Enchanted by Gail Carson Levine

Ella EnchantedElla Enchanted by Gail Carson Levine
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Format: Paper (bought at used book store)
Narrated By: NA
Original Publication Year: 1997
Genre(s): Fantasy, Middle Grade
Series: NA

I’m a little embarrassed to admit that I really love the Ella Enchanted movie. What can I say, I like Anne Hathaway and Hugh Dancy and Queen songs. Come to think of it I also have a somewhat inexplicable love for the Drew Barrymore film Ever After so maybe I have a hitherto unrecognized fascination with the Cinderella tale? If this is true, it is especially strange that it has taken me so long to read this much lauded retelling of the Cinderella story. I wish I hadn’t waited so long but I do have to say it might be a blessing because now I can love both the book AND the movie. I have a feeling if I’d read the book first the movie would have just made me angry.

Why angry? Because the book has so much more spirit and heart then the movie. And it celebrates more elements from the fairy tales we know, blending it into a more realistic story while still managing not to lose any of the magic. The spine of this tale is of a girl finding her strength to be her own person and do the right thing.  At birth Ella is given the "gift" of perfect obedience by clueless fairy Lucinda.  It is kept a secret but when the wrong people find out they turn Ella's life into a misery and show what a danger this curse is, to herself and those she loves.  I LOVED that Ella ends up breaking the curse of unquestioning obedience on her own - her freedom must come from within. The romance with the prince is also done really well being built on friendship and respect.

It’s a great book for any girl to read and makes me wish I had nieces!

What books would you mostly highly recommend for young girl readers both for the enjoyment and the message?

View all my reviews