Scary Books

And now, for this last week of October, we have a scary book. And it’s a good one, so pay attention.

Penpal by Dathan Auerbach

Plot: 10 Characterization: 9 Writing: 10

This book was just amazing. I actually didn’t first read it when it was a book but online when it was just a series of posts the author made. It was so popular that he had a Kickstarter and raised enough money to not only e-publish it but also to print physical copies of the book. And I’m not surprised because it’s really an excellent read.

The writing is good (that 10 was not given out lightly), very deep and easy to get lost in. The story is the narrator piecing together strange events from his childhood that he assumed were unrelated at the time, but looking back on it as an adult, he can only conclude that someone was stalking him. Their motives are unknown but as the book goes on, it’s obvious that whatever the stalker wants, it isn’t good.

The book isn’t very long, but thoroughly enjoyable. Everything about it feels realistic and natural, which of course enhances the terror. Unfortunately, it’s a bit limited by being in a first person-limited point of view. The characterizations of the other people could have been more fleshed out, like the narrator’s mother and a few other adults. It’s not really detrimental to the story as a whole or anything, just a minor issue. Overall, if you like non-paranormal horror, yes, get this now.

Going Postal, Part 1

Oh, ha ha, I just realized that today is my blogiversary and I can use this as an excuse to put up old posts under the guise of reminiscing when I really just don’t want to think up new posts! Awesome, right? Anyway, here’s the very first post I did, which I had to copy directly from my blog because apparently I don’t have a copy of it in Word. Man, I did not know what I was doing back then.

Day One [First posted 9/15/2010!]

I suppose I’m not quite sure what to say, perhaps because nothing I say hasn’t been said before. A thousand monkeys typing for a thousand years might reproduce the works of Shakespeare, but a single writer most definitely will. Not on purpose, not even consciously. But it does happen. Is that necessarily a bad thing? No. Not if the writer is good.

Back in high school, I was taught there were only five types of stories: man vs. man, man vs. himself (or woman versus herself…I’m a terrible sexist! and a bit lazy), man vs. society, man vs. the natural, and man vs. the supernatural. If I’ve forgotten one or more, forgive me. It doesn’t matter anyway as my point is that reducing stories to man vs. anything is a gross oversimplification. You can say The Scarlet Letter is a person versus society and miss the point entirely, because it isn’t about Hester bearing the punishment for adultery. It’s about Hester. It’s about morality. It’s about love. And it’s about a million other things.

There are other stories that are man/woman versus society. Are they The Scarlet Letter? No! Are they even in the same genre? Nope! Because the real story, the real writing, is in the details, not the one sentence summation. That’s the reason why John Steinbeck could write the story of Cain and Abel and have it come out a book completely different from the book of Genesis.

So, how was this for the first post? Maybe once I get some followers, it will be a bit more impressive. Maybe.

Well, I can answer that question now: it was dumb, but luckily no one saw it. I have no idea what even prompted this line of thought. And how weird that I actually used to post about books and writing. It’s almost like this used to be a writer’s blog or something.

Perfection

Rant Level: Medium

I’m not going to name names here or get too specific, but a while back I was reading a book where the main character, a teenage boy, wondering what made him so special to fight the forces of evil, and being told by another character just how good and kind and downright awesome he was, proven by the fact that even after someone being attacked, all he felt was pity for the person who tried to kill him. Annnnnnd I stopped reading.

Okay, I get it. He’s on the side of good. But does he really need to be the living embodiment of perfection, to the point where he’s so sickeningly sweet that I need insulin?

Perfect characters have always bugged me. I’m not talking about the ones that are super beautiful or super smart (although those kinds often overlap with this one). I mean the ones that are just so good and nice all the time and are never irrational or selfish or freaking human. Ever. They never hurt people or cause bad things to happen, except by accident, and of course if they did they would immediately jump to rectify the situation. And I hate them.

I see myself as impossibly imperfect. I do selfish things, on purpose, and I know they’re selfish, and I feel horribly guilty afterward, even if it’s nothing truly bad (like skipping a party because I’m feeling asocial). So, knowing all these imperfections I have, and realizing that, come on, at least most of the world is flawed like me, it bothers me to read about characters who are so. frigging. perfect. There’s nothing to relate to! I suppose they have “ideals” to aspire to, but that doesn’t make them a character. It makes them an unachievable dream.

Too often these days I’m seeing characters that fall into this trope—and worse, they seem to be popping up in YA as morality lessons for why you must always be good so good things will happen to you. I think those are really dangerous lessons to teach kids. One does not equal the other, the same way evil doesn’t always lead to bad things happening (just look at banks for a good example of this). And you know what? Sometimes you do have to be tough and mean or otherwise people will walk all over you, not instantly become your friend because you’re the paragon of niceness.

I know the satisfaction of reading books comes from seeing a world that has some sort of order to it, where evil is punished and the star-crossed lovers are happy and together forever. But there has to be struggle, there has to be sacrifice, there has to be growth. If a character doesn’t come out of a book different—not just traumatized by events, but actually and significantly changed—then the story was just a plot, the characters just tools. With a perfect character, there’s nowhere to go but down.

All right, maybe the rant level was more “high” than “medium”. Whatever. What do you think of perfect characters? What about flawed ones?

Quick Reviews

Okay, it’s been a while since I’ve don’t anything related to books, so I might as well talk about some of the books I’ve read recently.

S.

J.J. Abrams and Doug Dorst

Characterization: 9   Plot: 9  Writing: 10

I expected to like this book and I was honestly surprised how much I did so. In a sense, it’s a book, within a book, within a book, as two college students, Jennifer and Eric, write notes to each other back and forth in a book called Ship of Theseus by a mysterious European writer known as V.M. Straka. The books a mystery, a love story, an allegory, and really all around enrapturing. I don’t think a description can do it justice, just that it’s a fun read and impressively done.

Calling Me Home

Julie Kibler

Characterization: 3  Plot: 6  Writing: 4

I’m not sure where to begin with this book except to say, for a novel about interracial relationships, I’m really not sure the writer has met any black people. And seriously, what is with her idea that hair dressers have to turn to stripping to make ends meet and from that often fall into drug use? Is that a real thing? It doesn’t seem like a real thing. The main characters are Isabelle and Dorrie, an elderly white woman and a black woman in her thirties. Dorrie has some serious family problems going on, but don’t worry, everything’s wrapped up in a neat little package by the end without her doing anything. And Isabelle. She’s just a completely unsympathetic character. Every decision she makes is completely self-centered, and while there’s a lot of painful things in her life she can’t control, for the sake of her “soul mate” doesn’t justify it. I don’t know. Other people seemed to like this book. I really didn’t. If you like soapy romances, maybe you’ll enjoy it more than I did.

Labor Day

Joyce Maynard

Characterization: 6  Plot: 4  Writing: 7

I absolutely love To Die For, so I was eager to get a hold of this, and found myself sadly disappointed. Maybe because To Die For is so good and it clouded my reception of Labor Day, because I just didn’t think it was very strong. It’s about a thirteen year old named Henry, his mentally ill mother Adele, and an escaped convict named Frank that they bring home over Labor Day weekend. It…makes more sense in context? Kind of. I really didn’t get why Adele, who’s extremely social phobic, would give an injured hitchhiker named Frank a ride to her house. With her thirteen year old son. I mean, something like that (really, really stupid) could at least be explained if the characterization is strong enough, but it just isn’t. It does make sense (at least a little) why they start to trust Frank. It’s just hard to swallow that they get taken hostage by a violent offender and he’s the only nice guy in the penal system. Plus the whole hostage thing doesn’t scream “good guy”.

The Fault in Our Stars

John Green

Characterization: 4  Plot: 6  Writing 4

Yeah, I might get lynched for not loving this one, but I really didn’t find it all that impressive. It’s an interesting idea, two teenaged cancer patients falling in love, but…the characters just didn’t feel natural to me, either as teenagers or as cancer patients, and that’s kind of an issue. It doesn’t help that I didn’t find Green’s writing all that interesting. It was an easy read, though, so I’ll give it points for that.

Quick Reviews

Time to do some quick reviews again, because I haven’t done one since February (wow!) and how will you guys know what to read? There aren’t any book review sites anywhere on the internet!

Dr. Sleep

By Stephen King

Characters: 2 Writing 7 Story 1

Yeah, Stephen King came out with a new book. I was very excited for this since it’s about Danny Torrence after the events of THE SHINING (which will forever in my home be known as The Shinning), but that excitement was tempered. His recent works have been hit or miss, and mostly miss at that. On one hand you have FULL DARK, NO STARS, filled with one incredibly good novella and three very decent ones, and then there’s 11/22/63 which wasn’t very memorable. In regards to Dr. Sleep, surprisingly enough for a book that’s over eight hundred pages long, there’s not a lot going on with it. The writing is as rich and absorbing as ever, but the plot takes FOREVER for anything to happen and the characters, even Dan, are bland as white bread. Honestly, the character thing could probably be forgiven (see the next section for why) but again, the plot is just non-existent. The first half of the book is nothing but the main characters, Dan and a similarly gifted girl named Alba, doing stuff. Literally all it does is set up for the second half of the book where there’s actually stuff going on. But it’s Stephen King, so people will still buy it.

Joyland

Characters 4 Writing 7 Story 7

Another one by Stephen King. I got this one last Christmas (I think) and yes, I’m only just getting around to reviewing it. Oh well. I don’t think it hurt him any. Anyway, I think this was a much stronger effort than the above Dr. Sleep, and not only because it’s like half the length. The story is tight, surprisingly not horror, and with only a trace of supernatural in the supposed haunting of the above named Joyland, an amusement park. It’s really along the lines of a mystery with a touch of thriller, and I have to admit it surprised me in places (in a good way, too). The only downfall is the main character, who is flatter than the screen you’re reading this on. It doesn’t detract terribly from the story, which is interesting and most enjoyable, but it is rather disappointing considering that the other characters have more oomph to them. He’s our POV guy and he just seems like a lovestruck teenager there to witness what’s going on. Kind of a shame, but definitely a better read than Dr. Sleep.

Orphan Train

Characters 2 Writing 4 Story 5

By Christina Baker Kline

In a nutshell, this book is about two orphans, one from the thirties (who was on the eponymous orphan train) and the other from two years ago and stuck in foster care. It wasn’t a terrible book, but the fact that it’s very short probably helps things. Both the characters and the writing are weak, and the overall story is just average. The modern day orphan, Molly, dresses as and says she’s a goth, but the author obviously has no idea what goths are (at best, she’s emo). And because she’s caught trying to steal a book from a library, she gets threatened with juvie instead of just being kicked out, because that’s realistic. It does mean she has to do community service at a crotchety old lady’s house, whose past on the orphan train (an actual thing, scarily enough) makes up the other POV. It’s the alternating POV that probably saves this book. Neimh/Dorothy/Vivian in the past is a far more interesting and likable character. People also don’t always automatically hate her when they meet her, like they do with Molly for some reason. Seriously, everyone hates this girl except her foster father and her boyfriend, the latter of whom is kind of a jerk and I have no idea why they’re together because all they do is fight.

I Know This Much is True

Characters 10 Writing 9 Story 7

By Wally Lamb

Finally, something I can recommend. Be warned: this book is eight hundred and fifty pages long and is character driven, meaning there isn’t much plot. However, don’t take it as similar to Dr. Sleep. This book is one hundred percent about who Dominick Birdsey and his schizophrenic twin Thomas are. It also happens to be one of the more realistic uses of schizophrenia in literature, showing Thomas as an oversensitive child, paranoid teenager, and crumbling (although not incapable) adult. Dominick, an angry, depressed man who struggles to take care of his brother, also gets his hands on his grandfather’s autobiography about a “great man from humble beginnings”. Seriously, the man writes about himself like that. Anyway, if you like character driven stories or literary fiction (and don’t mind the word count), pick it up.

Tag!

Yes, after all this time I finally got tagged, and since it means I don’t have to think up an idea for a post, why not? The rules seem to be just to answer the questions and tag three more people, and that’s so easy it’s like not blogging at all.

Now everyone go see Kate Larkindale and give her a virtual hug.

The Questions

What are you working on right now?

Several things. An adult horror project (more than one, really), a YA apocalyptic that’s getting so close to being queryable I can almost taste it, and a YA paranormal/apocalyptic.

How does it differ from other works in its genre?

Well, the horror projects aren’t exactly a book (it’s…complicated). The first YA is about the beginning of total societal collapse through the eyes of a (formerly) sheltered teenager. The third one, which is still pretty fresh, is both paranormal and apocalyptic. I haven’t seen that much.

Why do you write what you do?

I write what I like and I like stories of fear and desperation where there might not be any way out. No, I’m not depressed.

How does your writing process work?

First draft is easy. I sit down, crank up some music, and write. Then comes editing, where I have to fill in the gaps, make notes of what works and what doesn’t, what needs more and what needs less, then I fix all the mistakes I’ve made. At that point it just might be ready to be critiqued by other people, and when I get it back, I start from the beginning of the revision line. Whee.

All right, so who am I tagging?

Melissa Maygrove

Crystal Collier

And MJ Fifield

Just so you guys know I’m thinking of you and if you like, you have a possible blog post mostly written. My gift to you.

Review: HER BONES ARE IN THE BADLANDS

Here I am reviewing a book today because it’s fun and it’s for Roland after all. Yes, he really does have another book coming out, which honestly makes me wonder if he’s some sort of cyborg designed for typing, but it also means there’s a new story to read so yay. It’s called, if you somehow missed the title of this page, HER BONES ARE IN THE BADLANDS and it’s another entry in his Samuel McCord series.

HER BONES ARE IN THE BADLANDS

The description, as per Amazon: “Something has awakened in the Badlands. Undying hunger and hatred for Man seethe in the darkness. While below the brooding pinnacles, the first talking Western is being filmed.”

Cons:

While atmospheric, the first four chapters seemed very much to only exist to introduce figures in the story.

A bit repetitive with words and phrases at time.

There were times that I thought the conversations went on too long, especially in tense situations.

Pros:

That title is very striking. Seriously, it’s evocative and absolutely perfect for the story.

The beginning felt a bit like telling, but it was also quite good at creating atmosphere for what I was reading. Roland really does a good job of setting the scene and immersing the reader.

Very good voice. It was very easy to imagine McCord simply by the way he speaks in the story. That’s how you know you’ve got a strong voice.

It’s a supernatural story with a western flavor and I would say it’s very worth your time to read. McCord is the ultimate self-sacrificing hero, to the point where I wished the guy would cut himself a break. But he won’t because when the nasties are out there, he won’t let anyone else put themselves in danger. And believe me, there are unpleasant things lurking in the badlands.

My ranking: four out of five skulls (Halloween is approaching, after all).

The Z is for Zombie

Well, I finally got around to watching World War Z last weekend, so spoilers ahoy if you haven’t seen it yet but still want to. It has already been reviewed by more articulate people than I (who also saw the movie when it actually came out, thus making the reviews actually useful), so I’m not going to go into much depth about it. Suffice to say it was a very standard action film with characters that weren’t realized enough to be compelling and despite being a zombie movie, wasn’t really scary. Honestly, reading the news about its troubled production was way more entertaining than the resulting film.

The real point I want to get into is how it was a very poor adaptation of the book, like adaptation in name only. The book is about societal collapse and eventually, its reconstruction. It’s accepted that the zombie plague can’t be cured, can’t be prevented, and is always fatal. Conventional methods of warfare are ineffective. Ruthless, amoral methods end up being the only way to survive, from cannibalism to using humans as zombie bait.

The movie shows none of that, except maybe the plague being incurable. Zombies are unstoppable excepting headshots, like in the book, but there is never any modification of tactics beyond that “infect yourself with a curable disease and then the zombies won’t want you” thing. Even though I would think that the rotting undead wouldn’t be that picky. Seeing as they’re dead.

But that’s beside the point. The movie is weak. The societal upheaval is replaced with a man searching for clues about the disease so he can reunite with his family. Granted, the original framing of WORLD WAR Z had no main character (except maybe the guy conducting the interviews), but still. They could have come up with something better than the weaksauce every-action-movie-ever plot they had. They didn’t try to make a WORLD WAR Z movie (or they tried and failed…miserably). They made a zombie movie with World War Z as its title.

Finally, I would like to point out that just because this movie of a book was bad doesn’t mean all book-movies are bad, even the ones that are bad adaptations. The original version of Blade Runner is hardly the adaptation of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? but most consider it a good movie in its own right. So if you’re not going to make a good adaptation, at least try to make a good movie.

Remakes

Remakes are a funny thing. You take a movie/television show that’s already been made and attempt to update it and recapture that old magic. Occasionally, it even works.

You see it often in movies and television (Hollywood prefers things that come with built-in audiences), but not as much with books. However, we do have a good one with the updates of the classic fairytales Cinderella and Little Red Riding Hood that take the form of CINDER and SCARLET by Marissa Meyer. Although the original stories aren’t novels by a long shot, the result is in the same spirit of the greatest remakes: fresh, its own creature, full of echoes of the original.

Another “remade” book is WICKED, done by Gregory Maguire to show the other side of the Wizard of Oz by L. Frank Baum (he’s also got MIRROR, MIRROR, a retelling of Snow white). Yes, fairy tales do seem to be popular stories to remake.

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE AND ZOMBIES by Seth Grahme-Smith is a good book, but I’m not sure it qualifies as a true remake. It’s a parody, a rewrite with a specific idea in mind to change the original, rather than a reworking of the original material. There’s also the I-can’t-decide-if-they-really-suck-or-are-actually-okay Frankenstein “sequels” by Dean Koontz. They aren’t true remakes since they take place after the original book is supposed to, but a great deal of the original story was changed to fit what he wanted. However, it doesn’t have much spirit of Mary Shelley’s novel. I don’t think they count. It doesn’t help that I’m leaning towards “they suck” right now.

I think the success of CINDER and WICKED means book remakes will only become more popular. Whether they’ll be good, though, remains to be seen.

Do you guys know of any book remakes? What do you think of them, yay or nay?

Life in the Electronic Age

E-books are a wonderful idea. It’s easy for anyone to get published…which also means it’s easy for anyone to get published, even people who have no idea what they’re doing, but that’s not what I’m here to complaintalk about. This time. No. Rather, the wonderfulness of being able to carry around a thousand books in a e-reader, often (but not always, yet another digression) purchased more cheaply than a print edition, is offset by the fact that you’re buying that copy of the book only for that particular e-reader. Legally, you can’t transfer it to another tablet/computer. Ever. Even if your old one is woefully out of date, you can’t download your purchased e-copies to your new model.

It’s called DRM—Digital Rights Management. It’s designed to protect media producers, whether they be writers or musicians or whatever, making it illegal for you to purchase something and then email it to all your friends so they have copies they didn’t pay the artist money for. In theory, it’s a good idea. Having an e-copy isn’t like purchasing a book in the store. If you loan that out, the person probably isn’t going to spend six hours at a copier to make their own book they didn’t have to pay for. Until DRM came along to lock it out, copying an e-book was just as easy as hitting Ctrl-V.

The only thing is, now you can’t even transfer it among your devices, or give your copy away. I get that piracy is a bad thing and is difficult to deal with, but in an age where computers and game systems last maybe five years before the new model is announced, it’s unfair to consumers to have to trash all their previous purchases if they want a new device. It’s especially sucky when Apple has been accused of price gouging with e-books and the new Xbox One won’t be backwards compatible.

Sadly, this isn’t going to change anytime soon, and things will probably grow more restrictive. Say goodbye to copying songs from your laptop to your desktop to your new laptop. If you break your e-reader, you break however many books you bought with it. Oh, and in the United States it’s illegal to try and get around a DRM scheme (seriously, that’s what they’re called). So have fun with that.

Genres

A conversation with Andrew brought something to light for me: dystopian and post-apocalyptic are separate genres. Previously I took post-apocalyptic as a sub-genre of dystopian since if you look it up in the dictionary, it’s defined as “a society characterized by human misery, as squalor, oppression, disease, and overcrowding”. Post-apocalyptic societies, at least the ones I’m familiar with, generally fit the bill.

But! The literary definition of dystopian is different from the definition of the word. A literary dystopia is a place where a governing body enforces a warped idea of perfection. YA Highway had a really good post about the difference between the two.

So while I thought it was this…

It’s really more like this…

With examples! All YA of course.

I think THE HUNGER GAMES really is both—after an apocalyptic event, a dystopian society rose up. Although they don’t enforce perfection as much as they do obedience, I think it fits.

Anyway, post-apocalyptic does not equal dystopian, although I think it would make sense if it did. That is all.

Quick Reviews

Here’s some more quick reviews. I included movies this time because I’ve been watching a lot of them lately, and why not? A good movie is just as valuable as a good book. And just as hard to come by ; ).

The Maze Runner

Story: 8 Characterization: 6 Writing: 7

Very good book. The premise is interesting. A bunch of 12-18 year olds trapped in the center of a maze full of monsters, no memory of how they got there, desperate to find a way out. I have to admit, though, I didn’t feel much connection to the main character. I actually thought others were better defined and they weren’t even POV characters. Thomas was a bit too good at everything for my taste. No, he wasn’t always right but he was always close enough that it was a little annoying.

Kill Alex Cross

Story: 2 Characterization: 1 Writing: 1

You know what? Don’t tease people like this, James Patterson. I started reading this book in hopes that my greatest fantasy was at long last coming true, but for some reason Alex Cross is still in the damn book. SPOILER ALERT: he’s not even dead. Frigging waste of time.

A Good Day to Die Hard

Story/Writing: 2 Characterization: 2

Is there a word for something that’s both terrible and awesome at the same time? Because this is it (seriously, we should start calling it a Die Hard). The dialogue and story were atrocious, like the writer hammered it out in two hours after a weekend of binge drinking. But the action scenes were frigging amazing. There was a car chase that lasted twenty minutes—no hyperbole there. Twenty minutes of smashing cars, explosions, and a freaking missile being fired. I hope they release a version where all the talky bits are edited out and we can just watch a solid hour of explosions.

Mama

Story/Writing: 10 Characterization: 10

Very good. It’s not often you see a scary movie that, when things aren’t being scary, they’re dealing with real problems. Unlike the above mentioned Die Hard, Mama is well-crafted, with actual characters, yet it manages to be its core genre at the same time. If you like scary movies or well-written movies (and don’t mind jump scenes), try it out.

Review: REACHED

I know I don’t do reviews often but when I win a contest I feel compelled. Lydia Kang held a contest for a [insert fancy, flourishing script here] signed copy of REACHED by Ally Condie. The very first day I got it, I sat down in my room with it wondering if I should read it now or wait until I finished my current book. I figured I’d try the first page and then it was two days later and I was done. So, yeah. It was pretty good.

The Review (Note: no major spoilers are here...if you didn't know there was a love triangle, you haven’t read any YA fiction in the last ten years)

Characterization: 8

Mostly good. I liked that Cassia was not either an action girl or simply waiting for her boyfriend to come back. She had her own goals and motivations and while sometimes it was being with Ky, most of the time it was not. Xander was even stronger. He loved Cassia but that was rarely his primary motivation for doing anything. Ky on the other hand…he makes it clear in his narration that he does things because he thinks it’s what Cassia wants. His only real motivation seemed to be her, as well as being the unlucky member of the group, something he and the other characters all recognize.

Writing: 7

Ally Condie is a good writer, but I felt the three POVs weren’t all that distinct from each other, kind of an issue in a novel like this. Cassia’s was a bit more lyrical than the boys, but without the heading on each chapter reminding me who was the speaker, I might not have noticed the change. Also, there was quite a bit of telling going on throughout the book (most prevalent in the early chapters). It wasn’t quite as jarring as, say, MOCKINGJAY’s, but it did pull me out of the story once or twice.

Story: 10

Absolutely first rate. I started on one page and felt pained when I had to put it down until I finally closed the back cover. The Rising happens quickly, most of it between parts of the book, but it isn’t the most interesting part. The characters are. I’m not a huge fan of love-triangles, but this one really caught me. It goes to show that you don’t need a character juggling between her two boyfriends to have a captivating story. She can pick one quite clearly and it doesn’t end the tension, the what-will-happen, the sorrow of being apart from the one you love. Probably the only negative thing I have to say about the story is that the climax is somewhat weak. It wasn’t a bit disappointing, though, so don’t worry about it.

Overall: 8.3

Yeah, I’d buy it. Even if you haven’t read the first two novels in the series, you’ll enjoy it.

She MEANS Library

I'm posting more than a day early so you should be able to tell that this is good.

A few of you may have heard of a little book called ACROSS THE UNIVERSE by Beth Revis. Apparently Ms. Revis is the generous sort because she is giving away, in her words, a library: fifty signed books to one lucky winner.

That's right. Fifty. 50. Twice twenty five and half of one hundred.

I can't believe it either. So go enter now because even if a million people enter, you could still win and wouldn't it be a great one. Powerball's ads say "Where else can you buy a dream for a dollar?" and I say no where, but you can get one for free by entering the giveaway.



YA has always been more of an audience than a simple genre. Not only open and honest, it describes the awkward, often painful experience of being in between child and adult. Some times it's focused through a different lens--dystopian, paranormal, contemporary--but the core is the same: growing beyond boundaries. Maybe into a hero. Maybe into a villain. Maybe a lover. Maybe a friend. With YA, the possibilities are endless. I'm thankful to be able to work with such a rich fabric.

Later, gators! If I don't win, I hope it's you!

Quick Reviews

There are a lot of factors that make a book “good”. Well-crafted writing, fleshed out, complex characters, good plot, and an engrossing story to name a few. Because I’m bored and being judgmental is always fun, here’s a sliding scale of good with some quick reviews.

10: Read to the end, keep to reread at least once a year

            Example: House of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski. The shear effort alone is inspiring, and shows what ten years of effort can create. Hint: a diamond that mesmerizes people into obsessively combing your book for hidden messages.

            Plot: 10 Characterization: 10 Writing: 10

9: Read to the end, keep to reread when I have the time

            Example: IT by Stephen King. One of my favorites. Good story, good characters, threatening villain, and masterful writing.

            Plot: 9 Characterization: 9 Writing: 10

8: Read to the end, keep to reread sometime in a couple of years

            Example: The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins. A great book that I enjoy and am in awe of. I might not need to reread it fifty times, but it’s still fun.

            Plot: 9 Characterization: 6 Writing: 8

7: Read to the end, keep to reread although probably not for three or four years, if that

            Example: Moonlight Mile by Dennis Lehane. Actually, any of his books would go here or above. He’s got some of the best characterization around, although this book was weaker than the others. Good, but not a rabid-reread.

            Plot: 6 Characterization: 4 Writing: 10

6: Read to the end, keep because although I didn’t like it a lot, I might conceivably want to reread it again in the far distant future

            Example: The Thirteenth Warrior by Michael Crichton. It was interesting, but not something I’d read over and over again. I might take a peek at it because the style and story are worth noting.

            Plot: 5 Characterization: 6 Writing: 6

5: Read to the end, throw somewhere and probably forget about it

            Example: The Help, by Kathryn Stockett. Honestly, it wasn’t a bad book. I wasn’t a huge fan of the “White people solve racism” thing, but it was well written and had okay characters.

            Plot: 3 Characterization: 5 Writing: 6

4: Read to the end, throw somewhere if I can’t give it away

            Example: The Hellbound Heart by Clive Barker. It was interesting enough to read once and I know I still have it around here somewhere, but I doubt I’ll ever read it again. The characters were very weak and the rest was only marginal.

            Plot: 5 Characterization: 2 Writing: 4

3: Read to the end only if I have to

            Example: A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving. It would be less painful if the author threw the book at my head. Nothing happening isn’t an issue if there’s still substance to the overall work, but there’s none of that here. Good writing, yes, but nothing but page after page of symbolism and talking about symbolism. Maybe it’s just me, but the characters don’t seem realistic, and that’s kind of an issue when it’s a character driven novel.

            Plot: 1 Characterization: 1 Writing: 6

2: Forget this. I don’t care.

            Example: Hannibal by Thomas Harris. He’s not a bad writer at all, but it’s like it took everything that was good about The Silence of the Lambs and crapped all over it. He took strong, interesting characters and made them weak. The plot was solid in the sense that an igloo in Florida during the summer is solid for a while.

            Plot: 1 Characterization: 1 Writing: 4

1: Burn every trace of the book from the Earth.

            Example: The Perfect Husband by Lisa Gardner. The story was filled with tension and conflict. It just wasn’t focused, believable or interesting. And the characters…they were just words on a page, not “real” people.

            Plot: 1 Characterization: 0 Writing: 1

0: I hope I never have to find out. I might have to nuke the site from orbit, just to be safe.

If you don’t get that reference, you need to watch more movies.

Lessons I Learned From…

THE INVISIBLE MAN

The great thing about the internet is that if something’s in the public domain, it’s at your fingertips for free. Also things that aren’t in the public domain, but you’re not supposed to do that.

Anyway, sometimes it’s fun to read old books. You know, the classics that helped shape pretty much every writer since then. A few weeks ago I figured I’d finally read THE INVISIBLE MAN the kids these days have been talking so much about. And while reading it, I had a few thoughts about how writing styles have changed since the book was written. So fair warning, spoilers ahead. I mean, this is just a one hundred and fifteen year old book we’re talking about…

One interesting thing is that the hero of the story, and by that I mean the one who stops the Invisible Man, isn’t introduced until the third act of the book. Partly this is because the protagonist is Griffin, the Invisible Man, and it’s his story we’re following. But there isn’t even a hint about Kemp until the actual scene where he’s introduced as an old acquaintance of Griffin.

I couldn’t believe Wells got away with that. Honestly, it felt forced with a smattering of deux ex machina thrown in to taste. However, each part of the book is mostly structured as coming from a POV opposingGriffin’s. The first is the Halls, his landlords at the inn who find him more than a little off. Then Thomas Marvel, who Griffin comes across after fleeing apprehension and becomes an unwitting ally. Then we get Kemp, who ends up saving the day.

So not only do we get an anti-hero protagonist, he remains mostly out of our, um, sight. We don’t get to hear his thoughts except during a several chapter long monologue (another thing no one could get away with today), we don’t get to understand his feelings, background and motivations. He is an Unknown and ultimately Unknowable.

On one hand, this is appropriate. On the other, it’s hard to connect to. Of course, this would have been far more acceptable in the nineteenth century, where such distance from characters is common (for example, in another Wells book, WAR OF THE WORLDS, the narrator isn’t even named).

Interesting how characterization has changed. Also the understanding that invisible eyeballs would be blind since they need light to reflect off them to see.

Have you read any of Wells’s books? What do you think about nineteenth century literature in general? And on another note, do you agree that characters have become much more important in order to tell a story?

Like It Or Lump It

A while ago I did a post where I talked about the books I read in high school and which ones I did and didn’t like. It was popular enough that I said to myself “I should do this every week!” And then I promptly realize I didn’t have enough ideas to do that. So a year later I finally have more ideas to put in there, although in this case it’s pretty much just books that I can remember reading in the past ten years, whether for school or not.

THE HELP

This is the most recent entry on the list and the only one I read at the urging of others and not for fun/for school. And I have to say, I’m not a fan. It wasn’t poorly written and it tried to be sensitive towards the subject of racism. But to be honest, I thought it was shallow, even stereotypical, especially towards men. Aibileen’s husband ran off on her. Minny’s was a drunk who beat her (as was her father). The father of Constantine’s daughter ran off on them. Although several white men are portrayed less than favorably, there are at least some good examples.

THE CATCHER IN THE RYE

This is one of those books that people believe is either the epitome of teenage writing or whiny teenage bullcrap. Except me. I didn’t like it, but I didn’t hate it either. Really, I feel nothing towards it. A little boring maybe, but somewhat entertaining. I probably wouldn’t read it again since it just isn’t interesting enough.

FRANKENSTEIN

As the originator of sci-fi, it should be required reading for us sci-fi/fantasy writers. I enjoyed it, although it’s another one of the books that can be so exposition heavy that it’s hard to get through. I was in eleventh grade when I read this, so while my attention span was greater than a flea’s, it still required sheer determination. I might read it again, although it would be hard to put down a more action-oriented book. Overall, I’d call the plot much better than all the film adaptations. Except maybe for Young Frankenstein.

ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SOLITUDE

I read this book the summer before my senior year of high school. It was thick and complex, usually a combination that makes for some boring reading. But it wasn’t. It was funny, outright bizarre. It meandered from the crux of the story, yet was amusing enough for me not to care. I’d read it again (I think I have a copy around here somewhere) but Gabriel Garcia Marquez isn’t for everyone.

ANIMAL FARM

I always enjoy Orwell and this book was a lot of fun. It really isn’t subtle about the political allegory, but that isn’t a bad thing. It was a quick read, had talking animals, and most importantly for a high schooler was easy to write a paper about. Unfortunately my copy is quite old and threatening to fall apart in my hands. Too bad because I’d love reading it again.

So what are your thoughts, on these books and others? Is there any book you’d like to see stricken from curricula? Any you glad they made you read?