El Title De Blog

2009-07-02T16:57:00.000-07:00

Breathing

Author: Cheryl Renee Herbsman
Published Date: 2009
Letter Grade: F

I haven't updated here in quite some time, but this book was so bad, I can't help myself. And also, the Amazon reviews are leaving me utterly baffled.

The book is about Savannah, a girl with a severe case of asthma who falls for Jackson, an older boy who's in town visiting his relatives after his dad dies.

First complaint: The entire book is in a very pronounced southern dialect. Not only that, but every bloody character sounds exactly the same, and there's no escape, because it's first person narration. It's not charming, or scene-setting, or anything like that. It makes everyone sound like an ignorant fool (which is not a statement against people who really talk like that, but Lordy, Herbsman is lending absolutely no credibility to Savannah's statements about how smart she is. She talks and thinks exactly like everyone who's supposedly less intelligent than herself.)

Second complaint: It's a load of rubbish. I take it I'm supposed to get that the girl's some kind of clairvoyant. I've actually read books where authors pull this sort of thing off, but I tell you, by the time I got to the last page I was so fed up with this girl's "feelings" that when I saw there was yet another heap of dung in the last paragraph, I shut the book. They lent absolutely nothing to the book. Nothing.

Third complaint: Oi, the angst! This is teen fiction. Teens have enough of their own angst. Just because they can relate does not mean that's all they want to read about. Savannah comes off as nothing but a whiny little brat. Her friends are whiny brats. Her family is nothing but whiny, stubborn, ridiculously cliche brats. And Jackson. I've met dust bunnies with more personality. Stereotypical teenage hero. And that BS about his ex-girlfriend sounds exactly what Chris said to me when he cheated on me. And Savannah forgives him with barely an argument.

Fourth complaint: Dysfunctional. Relationship. The cover says he helps her breath, and when he leaves to go home, she has to learn how to breathe on her own. She doesn't. Her mood goes up and down every time the wind blows, she's got asthma attacks every few chapters, whether Jackson the Mighty is there or not, and furthermore, they do underhanded things in the name of "helping the other achieve their dreams." Seriously. They've been together 2 months. And everyone else seems to buy into their garbage.

Complaint 4A: He's achieving his dream of becoming an artist by painting houses? Really? What the hell do those two things have in common? How does one lead to the other?

The only good thing I can see from this book is that it's short. 262 pages of nonsense.

2007-10-16T15:37:00.000-07:00

The Book Thief

Author: Markus Zusak
Published Date: March 2006
Letter Grade: A+

This book has haunted me for some time now. I'd pick it up for a bit--at the bookstore, at home, after I'd bought it--and set it down again, only to have it follow me, silently plaguing me with its presence.

It took me quite a while to finally finish this book. Well over a month. I read the last 80 or so pages just now, and, upon putting the book down at last, couldn't stop shaking for several minutes.

It's an odd book.

Narrated by the most overused character in the history of the written word, Death himself, it's the story of Liesel Meminger, a young German girl who arrives in Molching, a little town of Munich, Germany, to live with her foster parents, Hans and Rosa Hubermann, in January 1939.

There's more, of course. To quote Death's words on the inside flap of the cover: "It's just a small story really, about, among other things: a girl, some words, an accordionist, some fanatical Germans, a Jewish fist fighter, and quite a lot of thievery..."

As a general rule, aside from the occasion foray, I stay away from books taking place during World War II. Inevitably, what happens is this: I get angry. I cry. I want to hit some long dead fellow with a Chaplinesque mustache. Or if not him, any number of others. In other words, the experience is more emotionally draining than any funeral I've ever been to.

S0, with this sense to trepidation, I sat down to begin The Book Thief, knowing that, on some level, I wouldn't be the same when I finished it.

It's a rare book that does that to you. I have read a great many books. Hundreds of them. I'd go so far as to say thousands, or at least a thousand. Very few have had such an effect on me.

My Life-Changing Novels:
1. The Andalite Chronicles by K.A. Applegate
2. The Book Thief by Markus Zusak
3. A tale about a cat and a mouse, whose title I have long since forgotten.

For the first, I'd attribute the cause for a period in my life which literally saved my life. For the third, well... the third was the first book on which I ever based a fanfic. Though, being only 6, I didn't know that's what it was, and at any rate, thirteen years later I'm still writing because of it.

As for the second, I'm not quite sure what the lasting effect will be. Certainly I couldn't see that ahead of time for either of the others. However, having experienced the earth-shaking effects of a life-changing book before, I know what it feels like.

The book itself goes on for a good 550 pages. We are handed the tale of Liesel and people of Himmel Street, Molching, secondhand through Death, who tells us of the book thief and the books she stole. And of a German Jesse Owens. And of an old woman and the spit-stained door she aims at. An accordian-playing promise-keeper. A Jewish fist-fighter who hides and writes and lives in a basement filled with painted words. A crazy Nazi shopkeeper. A lot of pigs (Saumensch. Saukerl. What terms of endearment)

And, of course, the Fuhrer. Yes, him, too.

Funny thing about the Fuhrer. For a man who so upheld this so called ideal of the "Aryan" race, he looked an awful lot like that which he was so keen to destroy.

How, I ask you, could no one see that?

2007-07-26T17:26:00.000-07:00

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Author: J.K. Rowling
Published Date: July 21, 2007
Letter Grade: Good Question.

Oh, all right. So I was a teensy bit off the mark. Some of you may recall this review from back in February, where I most vehemently argued against some of the speculations put out by MuggleNet.com.

Well. All right. So I was wrong. On most counts. I still dislike the chapter on Dumbledore, for the record.

Speaking of Alby, I have to say that I got the sneaking suspicion the entire time I read the book that JKR was having a bit of fun with we the readers. For instance, each and everytime someone pointed out that, yes, "Dumbledore is dead," I half expected it to be followed by "Despite what the folks at dumbledoreisnotdead.com say..."

Anyway. I really don't think I need to give a synopsis for this one. And if I do, you're probably not that interested in it, anyway.

So. My feelings about the book. Aside from being thwarted in my views at the very end, that is. (*spoiler warning!*I can take some comfort in the fact, though, that I was starting to waver ever so slightly in the Snape- good or evil? issue. You can imagine how frustrating that was.)

Basically, I loved the book. I hated putting it down. Absolutely abhorred it. Because, much to my annoyance, it kept me up at night when I most needed to sleep.

Strangely enough, I didn't cry at all in this book. I've cried in three out of the seven: Chamber of Secrets (when I thought Ginny was going to die,) Order of the Phoenix (at Sirius' death, of course), and Half-Blood Prince (at the long questioned death of Albus Dumbledore.)

Considering some of my most loved characters died in this book, as happened in the three mentioned above (or at least nearly died,) I'm a little surprised. I'm especially surprised at the characters whose deaths most affected me. That one I wasn't expecting. Though, it did take me a bit to realize why the character particularly wished for Harry to look at them at that moment. It seemed a tad out of character till... well, till I read the next chapter and thought it through.

I hate writing so as not to spoil. Considering how paranoid I was about having this book spoiled for me, you'd think I'd be especially sensitive to that.

I was a little disappointed with Wormtail, though. Not that this is surprising, mind you. There's little about Wormtail as a character that isn't disappointing/hateful/etc. I expected more. Maybe too much, considering the character, and considering Voldemort, but still.

I will say this though: Speculation is fun, but sometimes it's just ridiculous. The symbol on the spine of one of the UK editions of the book (I forget if it's the children's or adult) led to tons and tons of speculation by the hosts of MuggleCast. In the end, it was nothing anyone could figure out without having read the book. Imagine, all that energy spent on deciphering a tiny little symbol, only to have the entire endeavor be a waste of brain power.

And, all right, I'm still smarting a little from the rest that they were dead on about, but I found out about the symbol before anything else.

At any rate, I really don't know how to grade this book. It was unquestionably fantastic. It kept me up at night. I'm itching to reread it, though I know I won't. I only reread HBP and OOTP this past semester because I knew Deathly Hallows was coming. Aside from the first couple chapters of Sorcerer's Stone and Prisoner of Azkaban, I haven't reread anything else.

I am still, however, immensely curious about the things I could have sworn we were supposed to hear about in this final book:

-The Ford Anglia (though I did love the mention of the motorbike)
-Someone using magic late in life (eh?)
-The Department of Mysteries (while somewhat mentioned, only in passing.)

All so terribly interesting and yet I must be left in suspense. JKR has a way of doing that.

2007-07-17T17:02:00.000-07:00

Twilight, New Moon

Author: Stephenie Meyer
Published Date(s): September 2006 (T/paperback, NM/hardcover)
Letter Grade: A+

The varying reports on vampires as I've seen in fiction:

Amanda Ashley (Deeper than the Night, A Darker Dream, A Whisper of Eternity, etc.)

How to become one: Aside from descriptions of various myths (my personal favorite: being the seventh son of a seventh son,) the generally accepted method is another vampire has to drink a person's blood nearly to the point of death, and then "feed," if you will, it back to them.
Reversable?: Almost always no.
How?: Complicated (i.e. can't remember that well, it only successfully occurred once) but the general jist of it is that it requires another vampire who happens to be willing to help, and who can be trusted not to leave them out in the sun to burn up.
Sun Burns?: Yes
State of Soul: Probably gone.

Teresa Medeiros (After Midnight, The Vampire Who Loved Me)

How to become one: A vampire again has to drink the person's blood, and then at the last moment suck out their soul.
Reversable?: Yes
How?: They have to find the vampire who created them, or if that vampire is dead, the vampire who created them, and so on, and then kill them and take their soul back. It helps if you don't particularly care for them. And if you're brother doesn't kill the one who made you in an attempt to save the woman he loves. Very tricky.
Sun Burns?: Yes
State of Soul: Currently dwelling in someone else. You may, though, have someone else's.

Stephenie Meyer (Twilight, New Moon)
How to become one: A vampire just has to bite you. Apparently vampire fangs are venomous. Assuming they don't lose control and kill you, it takes three days for the venom to spread, eventually reaches the heart, and the heart stops.
Reversable?: No.
Sun Burns?: No, but it does give you a certain... quality that is best not seen by mortal eyes.
State of Soul: Depends on who you ask.

And then you get things like Laurell K Hamilton's Anita Blake: Vampire Hunter series, which doesn't deserve mentioning here. All in all, anyone who wanted to start their own book or series on vampires based on what anyone else has already come up with as "general rules" would be sorely confused.

So. I finally gave in and read these books after much pestering, and I finished the combined 1000+ pages in a record two and a half days.

The general synopsis, for those who have not yet given in: Bella Swan moves to Forks, Washington, probably the rainiest place in the pacific northwest, to live with her father after her mother remarries to a mediocre strictly-minor-league baseball player. On her first day, she encounters Edward Cullen and his "siblings," who happen to be vampires. The usual avoidance, non-avoidance, avoidance again bit that I'm now well familiar with ensues, with all the mumbling about how everyone smells. It's especially amusing, though, when you throw in the werewolves in New Moon.

Anyway, what you should gather from that ill-phrased paragraph is that Edward, despite all his misgivings and warnings that every vampire hero comes equipped with, is especially drawn to Bella and romance and danger and good fiction-y things like that ensue.

I don't think there was anything about these books that I disliked. You know it's a good book when I'm in love with half the male characters by midway through. For instance, because my copy of New Moon comes equipped with temporary tattoos, I was seriously considering where best to place "Edward" and "Jacob," even before I knew why Jacob would be remotely important, besides as Bella's father's friend's son. Personally, I would have gladly switched out "Bella" for "Jasper" if only because I feel uncomfortable tattooing a girl's name in any of the highly inappropriate places I was contemplating for her male counterparts.

Aside from that-they are fabulous. There was enough suspense and romance and various other important things to keep me reading till the wee hours of the morning. If I was ever impatient, it was probably during New Moon when I was waiting for Edward, or at least some Cullen to appear. I settled very easily for Alice, who currently holds a three-way tie with Jasper and Edward for my favorite.

Oh, hell. I'm not going to write a coherent review, I can already see that. This review should have merely ended with: Go. Read it. NOW!

2007-06-28T19:19:00.000-07:00

The Secret Diaries of Miranda Cheever
Author: Julia Quinn
Published Date: July 2007
Letter Grade: A-

You know you are a devoted fangirl when, having spotted the newsletter from your favorite author that, without fail, arrives on the last Tuesday of June every year for the past four years, appears in your e-mail inbox, you know you are giving up all plans for an early night to bed, ignoring your exhaustion after a long day at work, and hunting down that book at Borders even if you have to overturn every godforsaken bookshelf in the place.

And so is how I spent this past Tuesday evening.

Well, all right. I didn't overturn all the bookshelves in the evil Borders that I unfortunately now live near. I did have to work uncommonly hard to find Ms. Quinn (because this borders, for some reason, does not differentiate between "romance" and "erotica" when naming its sections. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever actually seen the erotica section labeled anywhere) and when I finally found her, I found all of her other lovely novels. But not this one.

I finally managed to track it down, as it was hiding in the most random of places (not unusual for this Borders) and because of this wonderful stroke of luck (and determination of a crazed fangirl) I am bringing to you my first JQ review.

I've been reading Julia Quinn novels for about five years now. My first, How to Marry a Marquis, was one of the very first romance novels I ever read. I've read every book that she's written, and all but one novella (only because I have a weird aversion to Scotland as a setting. Which does not make much sense to me at all, so don't ask me to explain it.)

I caught up with her somewhere in the midst of her Bridgerton family series (brilliant, by the way) and while I am still hard pressed to admit that it was a sound idea for her to not write a book for Edmund and Violet Bridgerton, I have to concede that this novel was worthy of following after such a fabulous series.

But only grudgingly. Because, well, she's Julia Quinn. And the book was good.

Anyway. Miranda Cheever (thank God I liked this girl, otherwise every mention of her last name would have sent me into the same peels of laughter that "Karen Sue Hankey" tends to illicit) has pretty much been head over heals for Turner (real name Nigel, "Turner" referring to his title- Viscount Turner), her best friend's older brother, since she was 10 years old. Somewhere between 10 and 19, he got married to the odious, heart-stomping-upon, witch of a woman, Leticia, and was blissfully (not to be insensitive, but the woman was a real bitch) widowed at the beginning of our tale.

Actually, the first chapter opens with her funeral, and Turner's ruminations on all the good things about him that his late wife mercilessly squashed. Repeatedly. Heros with unfaithful dead first wives tend to like to use the word "cuckold" an awful lot, I've noticed. This goes for heros of many authors. Well, by "awful lot" I mean more than once or twice. It's not as though they're the only ones who ever use it.

Anyway. Miranda and Olivia, aforementioned best friend, end up in London after the required mourning period (for Olivia, anyway. For Turner it's supposed to be a year. You can imagine how readily he tossed aside that notion) for their first season.

I love reading about the marriage mart. Don't ask me why. London in the 19th century, especially the nobility residing in London at the time, interests me more than I can understand.

I was a little annoyed with the way all the men at those balls and such ignored Miranda (or, well, you know, not quite ignored) in favor of Olivia. Why is it that there is such an insistance in romances for the heroine to be only attractive to the hero? It's hardly ever as often true in the reverse, where the hero is only attractive to the heroine. Honestly. I can't tell you how often I read the words "she wasn't classically beautiful." Once in awhile I'd like to read about a heroine who actually was. The heroines always seem to be the ones who are allowed physical "flaws." (I use that term extremely lightly.) A heroine can be fat, or at least be plumper than normal, she can be half-blind and need to wear spectacles constantly, she can have big feet, or a long face, or unfashionable hair ("unfashionable" would, by the way, describe the majority, since "unfashionable" brown hair tends to be a dominant trait. Unless the nobility happens to have a bit of Viking blood in them or something from their raping and pillaging days). The hero on the other hand, never seems to have any of these things.

I realize these books are geared towards women. But after roughly 200+ romance novels, it gets a little old.

Sorry. Ill-timed rant.

Anyyway. I read this book in a little over a day. Quinn needs to start writing longer books, not that I think it'd help very much. 373 pages might take a while for a mediocre book. But a Quinn? No chance in hell. I had to stop last night within the last 50 pages and couldn't stand to put the rest off till my lunch hour, so I read it on the way to work, diminishing the page count to around 20.

All right, there were things that annoyed me. Turner got on my nerves sometimes, but the rest of the time, mostly I wanted to hug him, and, well, other things. Damn his fictionality.

I did have to raise an eyebrow at the timing of it all though. Roughly four months after becoming a widower? Not that I think any sort of mourning period should have been observed, but I'm reasonably familiar enough with the thought process of the period that even I find that a little scandalous.

I'm not complaining, naturally. I like scandalous.

Anyway. The point of the matter is- I adored this book, as I do Julia Quinn books. She made me very happy with the mention of Alex, the hero of her first novel Splendid. Though, I would not have been at all disagreeable to the mention of my favorite person in the whole wide world of romance (that's saying something, she has to compete with the likes of Derek Craven and Peter Quick, formidable competition indeed), Lady Danbury. I haven't seen her in two whole books, I miss the old biddy.

Apparently this book was written in 1994, and Quinn has only now had a proper opportunity to publish it. Thank God. Or thank Avon. Or thank both.

Hmm. And it should be noted: Although there was no mention of Lady D, no Julia Quinn novel would be complete without an important mention: the dedication to Paul, her husband, which always either amuses me or makes me go "awww," every bloody time. (I was amused this time, in case you'd wondered.)

2007-05-19T16:49:00.000-07:00

The Duke's Indiscretion

Author: Adele Ashworth
Published Date: May 2007
Letter Grade: D-

What, I ask you, became of my fabulous run of good books? Here I thought I was going soft, but now I have to wonder if I'm starting to be too hard. Maybe, but I hardly think so with this book.

Julia Quinn, for the first time ever, has failed me. Since she hasn't come out with a new book since I started this blog, I haven't been able to expound on my feelings for my favorite romance author's writing. But I have been a great fan of hers since my second or third romance read ever, her How To Marry A Marquis. Generally speaking, I have found great success with other books and authors that she has reccommended over the years, so when I came across Ashworth's novel on Avon Publishing's New Releases page last month, I remembered that Quinn had reccommended Ashworth about the time of the woman's first novel. Naturally, I thought this to be a promising sign. To reccomend it further, Lisa Kleypas, an author I enjoy to only a slightly lesser degree than Quinn, was quoted on the front cover, praising Ms. Ashworth.

And so, armed with the high praises of my two favorite authors, and having read an enjoyable sample chapter on Ashworth's homepage, I bought the book with every hope that it would be a wonderful read.

The book started somewhere at a "B-," then steadily delved into the "C's" as it became increasingly mediocre, and then dove into a sinkhole of badly executed plotline, boring characters, and implausible endings. Basically, it became utter crap.

Two things saved this book from an F:
1) The first three and a half chapters were interesting enough.
2) There was a good twenty pages, give or take, where I felt a certain lack of annoyance at the novel.

To give you the basics: Colin, the Duke of Newark, who works for the Crown, has been infatuated with the opera singer, Lottie English, for years, and manages to sneek in a meeting with her. Lady Charlotte Hughes, sister to a not-very-nice man who happens to be deeply in debt, has been moonlighting as Lottie English. What follows is Colin's superior making an excuse for him to really meet Lottie (that is, as Charlotte, not in full costume) and Charlotte, for some reason, propositioning Colin in a decidedly different way than he intended (i.e. as his wife, not his mistress.) Random mishaps and misunderstandings follow, plus a bit about something valuable that Charlotte owns and someone else seems to want (the "someone" is pretty much answered the minute you find out there's a valuable something at all, but this, as with many things, Ashworth seems to quickly forget.)

The whole thing, past the first three and a half chapters, alternates between frustrating and just plain boring. The "mystery" isn't much of a mystery, the bits where Colin reveals various things about himself weren't really that interesting at all, and Ashworth seems to have a knack for creating needless conflict between the characters just for conflict's sake.

Something that annoyed me very much was that, at the very beginning of the book, both characters say "...had been in love with...for three and a half years" but then, about halfway through the book, when the subject of love is brought up, they acted as though the idea had never crossed their minds. This is especially frustrating with Colin, when his obsession with Lottie English was so built up early on (by "so built up," of course, I'm speaking relatively. Nothing was built up well enough to be believable in this book.) That, and throughout the book, characters talk about what a rake Colin had been, but Ashworth hardly builds up this impression at all.

This book is chock full of inconsistencies. It's as though Ashworth wrote the first three and a half chapters, and then promptly forgot everything she wrote there, and carried on her merry way. From that point on, it was utter pointlessness followed by more utter pointlessness. Conversations that led nowhere interesting, sex scenes that usually made me yawn (though this may be an effect of having read too many. The only way to surprise me now is to write none in at all) and a resolution to the whole "mystery" that was just plain stupid.

And the ending. Lordy. Who cares? What did that really have to do with the plot as a whole?

And, why, oh why, did she have to harp on all the French in the book? I kid you not, it was as though she had posted a blinking, neon sign above certain characters that screamed "FRENCHWOMAN!!" I really don't care that they're French. It has no bearing on the plot whatsoever. Olivia's advice to Charlotte about the whole Charlotte vs. Lottie thing made. No. Sense.

My advice to anyone who wants to read this book: Read the first three and a half chapters, than make up the rest of the book as you see fit. You'll probably do a much better job than Ashworth did with this beyond sorry attempt.

2007-04-27T23:11:00.000-07:00

Have You Seen Her?

Author: Karen Rose
Published Date: February 2004
Letter Grade: C+

Karen Rose is one of those unfortunate authors who seems to be very confused about what genre they are actually writing for. You see this often enough--Stephanie Laurens, for instance, my least favorite writer, seems to be laboring under the impression that she is writing some sort of detective novel, but really, it's just awful smut in obscenely large quantities, even by romance standards.

Ms. Rose's issue, it appears, is a decided confusion between "mystery" and "romance." There is such a thing as Romantic Suspense, but at some point you cross the line into just plane "Suspense" with a little "romance" thrown in for good measure.

The story's about Special Agent Steven Thatcher, a widower with 3 sons, the oldest of whom has taken a pretty sudden turn in attitude, the youngest of whom was kidnapped 6 months earlier, returned physically unharmed, but emotionally scarred (I haven't read it, so I can't be certain, but I think I might have seen a synopsis for one of her other books that eluded to this event), and the middle kid just likes turkey a lot. Anyway, Thatcher's trying to solve a series of disappearances/murders of local teenage girls, which brings us to the primary "mystery" part of our tale- Whodunnit? Whydunnit? Who-didn't-but-seems-to-havedunnit? What's with the detective from Seattle who's got an apparently personal beef with this case?

Throw in for good measure Dr. Jenna Marshall, Son #1's concerned chemistry teacher who has a thing against passing a failing student just because he's QB and his dad is determined that his kid be seen by college scouts.

What you get is a bunch of horny thirty-somethings acting like teenagers, a murderer who is a teenager, but thinks he's smarter than everyone else (they usually do) and a mess of false leads and Thatcher turning into Sex-y McSexSex the Jealous Type and various other things.

It was... eh. The book had its moments. The end made me raise an eyebrow (a little random? Yes, I think so) and Son #1's sudden and complete turnaround was undeniably random and abrupt, the reasoning behind it... eh. Not enough there to make me believe that a previously fabulous student could suddenly turn into a sullen, failing student.

I was a bit surprised by Whodunnit. I was figuring it wasn't going to be who they thought. I've read one other book by Rose (I'm Watching You) and am well-versed in the it-isn't-who-you're-expecting solution.

The book wasn't bad per se. Like I said, it had its moments where I really enjoyed it. I learned many new things about drugs. Don't quite remember if they ever really explained the little symbol they kept harping on. That, and props for writing a book with a redheaded hero. You don't see much of that. Plenty of redheaded heroines, though. And plenty of violet eyed ones--no props on originality for that one.

It's a decent read. It's long (499 pages) but it goes by fairly quickly. Both readingwise and book time-wise. (This one lasts about a month. "I'm Watching You" was a whole week. She's upping it, I see.) Like I said, it has plenty of mystery in to be at least somewhat interesting. And it's only 4.99. Y'all know how I feel about book prices...

2007-04-01T14:36:00.000-07:00

Simply Love

Author: Mary Balogh
Publication Date: August 2006 (March 2007 in Paperback)
Letter Grade: B+

Oh, how long I have waited for this book.

It started with my first Balogh book, "A Summer to Remember" about Kit Butler and Lauren.. I can't remember her maiden name. lol. The book was fine, of course, but what really interested me was two other stories related to it. The first was that of Neville and Lily (whose book "One Night For Love" preceded it, and was pretty much amazing).

The second, and most anticipated, was the story of Sydnam Butler, Kit's younger brother.

She taunted me first with a whole series on the Bedwyns, a family close to Kit's, and who play a big role in Simply Love. Big family. Too many people.

Finally, finally, last summer I found this book. By that point, I rarely thought of A Summer to Remember or Mary Balogh in general, except for when I saw Sarah was reading another one, and Sydnam Butler had been pushed to the back of my mind. So, the reaction upon reading the book flap "Sydnam Butler.. that's so familiar... OH MY GOD!"

Anyway: Sydnam Butler is a Regency hero favorite type: he fought against Napolean, he came back from war not quite like he left for it. In this case in an extreme form. During the war, he was tortured, leading to the burning of the left side of his body so that he was permanently deformed, lost his right eye, and his left arm had to be amputated. Meanwhile, the left side his body... is pretty much as gorgeous as he previously was. Really too bad he wasn't left handed.

Our heroine, then, is Anne Jewell, a teacher at a girl's school, and also a single mother *scandalous gasp* Well, you know, it's scandalous in the time period.

So, anyway. Sydnam has been working as the Duke of Bewcastle's (see above bit about the Bedwyns) steward in Wales when the Bedwyns (and assorted family) make their way there for a month long visit. Coming with them happens to be Anne, since her son's father's first cousin, Joshua (I think I <3 him. haha. Which is bad, because I hate his wife, and am therefore leery of reading their book) is married to the former Lady Freyja Bedwyn, and they pretty much insisted on taking David (Anne's son) with, since they're his cousins of a sort, and Anne was sort of invited along.

Phew. Long sentence.

My general opinion of the book: I loved it. Well, you know, most of it.

The book for the most part was very good, very well written. The relationship between Sydnam and Anne made enough sense to me, though I thought Sydnam's insecurities, especially involving the sex, were wrapped up a bit too nicely. It seemed too simple to me, the way that whole scene happened.

I wasn't fond of the interaction with Anne's family. I spent most of the time thinking how I'd dearly love for someone to just yell or something. Lordy. Or there were several things I think we should've seen brought up but weren't. Maybe I'm just less forgiving than Anne is.

I did like that it was set in Wales for the most part, though. I've read hardly any books that did, except maybe Kinsale's "Flowers from the Storm," though my first romance hero was Welsh (Medieval, though, not so much Victorian/Regency. I'm not even sure Wales was apart of Britain then.) I liked the scene in the Welsh church, it pretty much makes me want to hear that sort of thing. :)

It was a worthy book for finally giving one to Sydnam. It's been a long time. Though, I suppose several things would have had to be different if the Bedwyn series hadn't happened. Come to think of it, Anne wouldn't have been there at all without the connecting force of Joshua.

I do want to know, though, if Viscount Whitleaf, Lauren's cousin, is the hero of the next book. I didn't read the excerpt at the back, though I did skim and found his name there, but that doesn't tell me much. I remember a random part at the end of A Summer to Remember where Kit, I think it is, makes some inner comment about Whitleaf's chances of finding a lady for himself. And then he dances with Susana Osbourne at the end of Simply Love, and Susana's the heroine of the next book. Hmm?

I also want to know what ever happened to Neville's widowed sister. My original guess would have been for her to end up with Sydnam, but apparently not. I've seen no mention of her, but of course, you see the big gap in my reading.

This is the trouble with great secondary characters: you can't get good closure with a book until you know how they end up. :-P

Anyway. Overall: Read the book. The annoying parts are few and far between, well worth it.

2007-03-22T18:16:00.000-07:00

A Matter of Temptation

Author: Lorraine Heath
Published Date: October 2005
Letter Grade: C

This is one of the only books by Lorraine Heath that I would have, had it been by ANYONE else, been willing to give an A grade to. It was well-written, it had a good plot, the romance was sweet and believable, the characters were likeable.

The problem is, though, that it IS by Lorraine Heath, much as I wish it were by someone, anyone, else.

Let me explain to you my long, arduous journey through Heathland:

First, there was An Invitation to Seduction. The book was all right, I liked it well enough, the hero was a tad annoying, but let's face it, I've read worse. Overall, I probably would've given it a B.

Then, there was To Marry An Heiress (there seem to be a lot of "To ___ An Heiress" books. I've found and read at least three, though I'd actually reccomend the other two). Lordy. This book was just fine until the hero cruely and deliberately murdered it. He started the trend, for me, of hugely frustrating heroes who ruin perfectly wonderful books with their pigheaded-ness.

Most cruelly of all, there was Never Love A Cowboy (picked up because it's about the birthmother of An Invitation's heroine) Brilliant. I adored it. It sucked me in (oh dear, "sucked" is a bad word to use in a review of a romance novel, isn't it?) and held me enthralled. Until, inevitably, that moment came, about 3/4s of the way through when the hero, Harrison, showed his true, frustrating nature. I wanted to murder him. You should have seen me when I realized what she'd done. It was GOOD. Why did she have to throw in a needless conflict, right there toward the end? WHY?

What followed was the "Steph likes to shoot herself in the foot over and over again" period. I read As An Earl Desires which was the opposite of Heath's usual- perfectly fine hero, frustrating heroine.

And then that leaves us here. At A Matter of Temptation.

Don't ask me why I bought it. I'd see it in Borders for the longest time, and it would call to me. I'd pick it up, read the synopsis, debate with myself then put it back and hurry away before I could be tempted. Until one day I finally could take it no more.

The book's about Robert Hawthorne, the Duke of Killingsworth. Eight years before, he'd been kidnapped and tossed into jail by his twin brother who then posed as him. Robert finally escapes prison and finds his brother, and they basically switch places again (unwillingly on his brother's part, of course). Happy with his new-found freedom, not so happy with trying to figure out how to fix things, Robert discovers rather quickly that his brother was kind of busy while Robert was rotting in prison. Robert, as luck would have it, seems to have escaped the night before his wedding to Victoria Lambert. Which, you know, would be all fine and good if this were your normal Regency marriage of convenience. Trouble is, she seems to actually be fond of him/his brother. Of course.

So yes, the book pretty much goes like that. It did get a tad frustrating in one part, when Robert goes to see his friend the Duke of Weddington. Now, see, I know perfectly well who the Duke of Weddington is. He was the hero of my very first Heath novel. I referred to him as "Weeds" because I could. His apparent appearence in this book confused the hell out of me. Until I realized one very simple fact: the Duke of Weddington is Temptation is my Weeds' father, not Weeds himself. Although he DOES appear. Except he's a little boy.

As I've said. It was an A-worthy book. I liked the characters. It was well-written. It had a good plot. Here's the problem:

I couldn't bring myself to enjoy it.

You know what my experience with Heath has been like. Painful is the best word to describe it. I read this book just WAITING for the moment when it would all come crashing down, when something awful and frustratingly Heath-like would occur. I thought the Weeds thing would be it, but it was a false alarm.

It didn't happen. I got to the end of the book in shock, because it. had. not. happened. This should have been a good thing. Technically speaking, it was. But the entire book was ruined for me by the knowledge of what Heath's books are normally like.

Now I understand what it must've been like in British society around when this book takes place. It's like Robert comes from a whole family of drunkards, gamblers, harlots and whatever else was counted as scandalous behavior in those days (like his sister ran off with the footman or whatever) and he's the only good one of the bunch, but he's still shunned because of his family's behavior.

All in all, I think Heath's writing in the wrong genre. Personally, I think she should switch to Horror so she can just kill off all the characters that are annoying and frustrating.

2007-02-23T14:14:00.000-08:00

MuggleNet.Com's What Will Happen In Harry Potter 7?

Authors: Ben Shoen, Emerson Spartz, Andy Gordon, Gretchen Stull, & Jamie Lawrence (with Laura Thompson)
Published Date: 2006
Letter Grade: D+

Disclaimer: The opinions stated here do not reflect my feelings toward Harry Potter, MuggleNet.com, MuggleCast, or the authors in general.

That having been said (thought it should be included, since I am sending this to MuggleNet):

I've been a Harry Potter fan for some time now. Judy bought gave me Chamber of Secrets (COS) one Christmas, but I didn't actually read the series until summer 2000 when Goblet of Fire (GOF) was released, and pretty much had a Harry Potter filled summer.

I'm not sure when/how exactly I came across MuggleNet, except that I was already an occasional visitor by the time Half-Blood Prince (HBP) came out, and Spartz got to interview JK Rowling. (I am, of course, envious. Though, I'd have much rather interviewed KA Applegate.. but I'm usually alone in that sentiment when compared to JKR. Fair enough.) That, and I enjoyed the fanfiction section. Or at least, I enjoyed it more than I enjoyed fanfiction.net's Harry Potter section. Some of those were just ridiculous. More recently, I've been listening to the podcasts (MuggleCast), which is how I heard about the book at all. I don't spend terribly much time in the Children's section these days, sadly. (Children's lit is grossly underestimated by some people, I think.)

To stay on topic:

I went to the Borders back home, found the book (it took a bit of searching. I wasn't sure what "Shelf H" was meant to signify. At any rate, there seemed to be more than 8 shelves) and was none too pleased to see that it cost $13.95. For a paperback in the Children's section. That's ridiculous. I bought Candice Hern's latest, which is 98 pages longer (I'm not counting the About the Authors page in WHIHP7) and it cost me only $6.99. Granted, I know what I can expect from Hern.

The price is a petty reason to give a book a bad grade. I take comfort in knowing that I'm helping to support a wonderful website, as I really do respect Spartz's work on it, and the work that the others have done on it as well. And of course, if I liked the book, it should be worth the price, right?

Right. The problem is, I didn't like the book.

I understand that the book is merely speculation, obviously. I bought it with that knowledge. Buuuut...

Okay, let me give you an example of something that drove me nuts:

The whole chapter on Dumbledore. This wouldn't be an issue if the book were written/published before JKR shot down the "Dumbledore's not dead" theory. I even hung on to the hope for all of ten seconds when Sarah mentioned it to me after my rant about people on neopets.com's NeoBoards spoiling HBP for me (and therefore strengthening my resolve to closet myself away for a week after Book 7 is released).

But she DID shoot it down. And the authors make reference to this. So why then is the issue even brought up? With all of the so-called "evidence" that backs it up? It goes on for seven freaking pages.

And then there's the chapter on Snape. Maybe I'm just thick, which is certainly possible, but I really don't get the whole "Snape's good" theory. I really don't get it. It just doesn't make sense to me. To take into consideration: Him killing Dumbledore. As Bellatrix said (and I don't have the exact quote, as OOTP is buried under a lot of other books enroute to Dad's new house at the moment) in order to cast an Unforgiveable Curse you have to really mean it. You can't just throw out a half-assed Avada Kedavra and expect it to work. It doesn't work like that.

Since I do actually have HBP with me: "Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in harsh lines of his face.
"Severus... please..."
Snape raised his wand and pointed it directly at Dumbledore. "Avada Kedavra!" (HBP, 595-696).

To be fair, I only read half of the chapter on Snape, I became so frustrated with it. Seeing as how I spent a whopping $13.95 on the book, I felt the least I could do was actually finish the book. Or, anyway, get to the end of it, having read and/or skimmed most of it.

I think I enjoyed all of two chapters of this book. The chapter on Love, and the chapter on R.A.B. That's about it. I did find it interesting that Spartz and Cassidy apparently go to the same university, if you count things that fall under the category of "Oh, isn't that a coincidence?"

That's about it. I spent $13.95 for two chapters and an About the Authors page. And I guess there wasn't anything wrong with the Foreword, either.

Also wasn't a fan of the theory that Snape loved Lily. The quote used as "proof" didn't prove anything in my opinion.

I won't get into how I feel about the "Harry's a Horcrux" thing. That's better left out of this review, if for no other reason than that things that make me want to bang my head against the wall I usually cannot express in a nice enough fashion. (See Disclaimer.)

Bottom line: With the exception of two chapters, the foreword, and the about the authors page, the book drove me out of my mind, saved from the garbage can by the horrific amount of money I had to spend on it.

Folks, I beseech you, the next time you want to write a book, go right on ahead, but if there's even the slightest mention of price going above $10... rethink it. Honestly. It's a PAPERBACK IN THE CHILDREN'S SECTION. And it's only 214 pages long, excluding the about the authors page, despite it's redeeming qualities.

Ah, another thing: there's a connection to King Arthur and Camelot (p. 184). I think it should be pointed out that Guinevere cheated on Arthur with Sir Lancelot. Not the greatest of comparisons to be making if you want to assert the idea that Ginny and Harry will make it (not arguing that they shouldn't, but it's a bad connection to make if you want to support the idea.) Suggested reading: Le Mort D'Arthur by Sir Thomas Malory.

I did like one thing besides the aforementioned chapters, to be fair. In the chapter "What About Everyone Else?" under Voldemort: "What do you think is going to happen to Voldemort?" (p. 181)

That made me laugh. Bonus points for making me at least crack a smile at a point when I'd pretty much given up all hope.

2007-02-19T16:23:00.000-08:00

The Silent Boy

Author: Lois Lowry
Published: 2003
Letter Grade: A+

Y'all know by now that every book worth reading in my opinion has a story behind it.

So, about seven years ago now, Steve told me about this book that I just had to read, called The Giver. It should be pointed out that, back then, if Steve had told me that spinach tasted like candy I would've believed him and ate it. (My mother's been overlooking a great method of persuasion for YEARS.)

But yeah. I read The Giver, loved it, still count it as one of my favorite books. Didn't touch Lowry again. I have the tendency to do that when the first book I read by an author is an instant hit with me. Though, there is a method to this madness, if I was late in finding it.

Anyway. I'd contemplated a few of Lowry's books over the years, never buying them. For some reason I decided to pick up this one, though. Found it at Borders recently, and decided, why not?

It's been years since I read anything by Lowry at all. My memory of The Giver has become limited to the basic plot, and Gabe waving "bye bye" which, if memory serves, was my preferred method of saying goodbye to Steve when one of us logged off for awhile afterward. That, and general fond memories of stuff happening around that time put it in a better light.

So I get to The Silent Boy, not all too sure of what to expect.

The basic synopsis: It's about Katy Thatcher, a little girl living during those last few years
before the first World War. A girl named Peggy Stoltz comes to work for Katy's family so that she (Peggy) can send money back to her own family, back on the farm. Her sister, Nell, works next door for the Bishop family. The "Silent Boy" in the title is Peggy's younger brother, Jacob, who, as the title suggests, never talks or really respond to anything anyone says to him, but has a wonderful gift with animals, and Katy forms a friendship of sorts with him when comes to their barn during his "roamings" to visit the Thatchers' horses.

It's a sweet story in a lot of ways. Just the interactions between the characters, and the everyday extraordinary events. There are bits and pieces that seem like they would be unimportant, but turn out incredibly important to the ending. Lowry manages to weave it all together expertly, even for such a short book. I've read enough short books that were too rushed, with storylines better suited for a longer book, but Lowry actually knows what she's doing.

It doesn't take much guess as to why this book got the grade it got. There wasn't a thing to dislike. Though, is it bad that I wasn't unhappy to read what became of Paul Bishop at the end?

Since he's a fictional character, I'll just assume yes.

2007-01-16T14:44:00.000-08:00

Forever in Blue: The Fourth Summer of the Sisterhood

Author: Ann Brashares
Published Date: January 2007
Letter Grade: A-

As you know is my habit, I was wandering through Barnes and Noble last week. As I was wandering through the Teen Fiction section, I spotted it.

I don't keep up on these things. I don't know when certain books are due to come out, at least not when it doesn't necessarily come in any set pattern (like Julia Quinn's books come out every June.) I read the first three books right after each other, and didn't expect to see another one for awhile.

Well, all right, I didn't see one for awhile. I read the first three books during those two weeks at Writing and Thinking Workshop. Well, those and... let's not discuss how many other books I read in those two weeks.

But yes. That was a year and a half ago. When I saw this book, it was an attack of nostalgia.

So, anyway the book:

The series, in case you haven't seen the movie (which, admittedly, got me to read the books) is about four friends, Bridget, Lena, Tibby and Carmen, who have pretty much been together since their prenatal days when their mothers were in some pregnant ladies' aerobics class. The first books starts out their sixteenth summer, the first time they'll all be separated from each other for the summer. The find this pair of pants, The Traveling Pants, if you will, which seems to magically fit all of their different body types.

Another two books insue, following the respective summers, and following different but connected plot lines for each girl.

The fourth book, then, takes place the summer after their first year away at college (the poor Pants, which cannot be washed, have been worn by each girl in turn for the entire year, not to mention the three summers prior. Poor Pants.)

It was nice to get back some old friends. Their "lives" are familiar, their loves and losses are familiar. I remember Lena and Kostos' romance. I remember the bit of the shock of how it ended in the second two books.

So, yes. I enjoyed this book overall. There wasn't anything that really bugged me, though I wish the ending didn't need to be the way it was, it made sense. It was a good way to end the series. I can't really complain, because I'm not sure I would have been satisfied with the end if it had been different.

I can see myself picking favorites. It would be nice to say that I love all the characters equally, that I enjoyed reading each one the same. Which is partly true. There were points during each of their narrations that I wanted to continue when it switched to someone else. "No! keep going! Oh, fine. Just don't take too long, okay?"

At any rate: I think I like Lena best. This might very well be because she's Greek. But I'll be honest: this counts for a lot. I read things that happen to her from another Greek girl's perspective. I love how she uses "I'm Greek" as a reason for things (not wanting to pose naked, loving garlic). Me: "Exactly. That's really all there is to it."

That, and I kind of like the reappearing Kostos. There are times in the series when I know I shouldn't, but let's face it: Greek men are sexy. Don't tell my mother I said so.

Carmen, on the other hand, has to be my least favorite. She makes me want to shake her sometimes. At one point for being too stubborn, at another (this book) for not asserting herself nearly enough. At the end I usually like her fine and think "Okay, now STAY that way, please? Ya got it just right."

As for Bee and Tibby... hmm. They have their ups and downs. I don't have a preference between the two. So, yes, I love them equally. :)

I think I like my bad reviews so much better.

Bottom lin: Read the book. Ignore that this is a bad good review. Just read it. I suggest getting it from Wal-Mart, it's cheaper. Or so my roommate told me.

2007-01-11T15:14:00.000-08:00

Sun Kissed

Author: Catherine Anderson
Published Date: January 2007
Letter Grade: B

I came to an unfortunate conclusion about Catherine Anderson while reading this book: All her books are the same.

That isn't to say they aren't good, of course. They're wonderful. But... after the first couple, it starts to seem like you've read 'em all. With maybe one or two acceptions.

They follow a very basic theme: Battered woman meets sexy, sweet cowboy and they fall in love and he helps her overcome.

I will tell you the truth: I love the sexy sweet cowboy thing. Makes me wish I didn't live in Chicago.

Anyway. As for Sun Kissed specifically, it's the last of the Coulter family series (or at least, of the Coulters specifically. There's a spin off type thing dealing with the Keegan-Paxtons, who we met in "Keegan's Lady" back in the day (excellent book, though it does follow the aforementioned pattern) and Anderson plans to write more books about the heroine of Sun Kissed's family), a series about a family of five brothers and a sister (who was the heroine of my first Anderson book "Phantom Waltz," which actually diverged a little from the pattern). This one's about Tucker Coulter, the last of the Coutlers to get hitched (the one before him being his twin, Isaiah. What is it with authors when they do family series, making twins get married right after each other? Especially in this series, where they're all born freakishly close (poor Mary Coulter) together, so there's no huge age gap between oldest and youngest. I mean, between Jake (oldest) and Bethany (youngest) there's only a five year difference.)

Another thing about Anderson: all her heroines seem to have vulnerable-sounding names. This one: Samantha. (Shortened to Sammy sometimes, which brought to mind the little girl in Forever After).

But, I have to give Coulter kudos for this: when police/detective work needs to be done in a book (such as this one, dealing with some rather vicious poisionings of Samantha's horses), she does it very well. You see attempts to do this in books by, say, Stephanie Laurens (*gag*) to little effect (little effect for Laurens because, well, it's used more as filler between the hero and heroine humping like bunnies every other page.) Though, she seems to switch off every other book, at least with her contemporaries, as far as I can tell, doing the police/detective thing. Not sure if the pattern holds for her historicals (unless you count Summer Breeze, written in between Tucker and Isaiah's books, which kept the pattern going, actually) but they were already out when I started reading her, so I don't really pay attention to which came first.

Speaking of Summer Breeze, I was a little disappointed to discover that there wasn't much follow-up. The whole book starts with Tucker finding the diary of Rachel Hollister (the sister-in-law of his great grandmother) while looking through his parents' attic, and he and Mary sit and read all about what happened to Rachel and Joseph Paxton. Loved the book, but at the end, after they finish reading, Tucker thinks that maybe he should take a trip back to No Name, Colorado, where his family originated (can't believe the place STILL isn't named, even in contemporary times. OI!) to see if he'd have any better luck finding love there. So, I was, of course, thinking "Oh, yey! A trip to contemporary No Name!" But...

Apparently not. Sun Kissed is set back in Crystal Falls, Oregon, like the rest of the Coulter series, (and most of Anderson's other books are in Oregon, too), and, while Tucker DID go to No Name, there's only the briefest mention of it.

To give her credit, the way the plot went, it did make more sense to have it Crystal Falls, if only because Tucker and Samantha would have so many more resources to draw on, especially from already formed, and very familiar to the likes of me who have been following the books since Phantom Waltz and Baby Love (not Coulter, per se, but about Bethany's brother-in-law and his wife, and the Coulter series sort of rose out of that. And it's excellent,) characters.

One bit of nit-picking:

I'm all for characters being religious. It doesn't bother me one way or the other, though I like the dynamic of seeing the characters interact spiritually, but...

I should precede this with the fact that I have nothing at all against Catholicism. It's just that all the bits about it in the book seemed a bit too... much. Like "Okay, I GET that it's important to her. But please stop that fact over my head. I get it."

I've read books where the heroine was very religious. One of my favorite romances of all time is Flowers From The Storm, by Laura Kinsale, and the heroine Maddie is Quaker. If it's done well (and I think Kinsale pretty much does everything well, writing-wise), the effect can be amazing, and it can make the character seem more real. Even make you question stereotypes you didn't realize you were aware of.

Sun Kissed didn't do that for me. While some parts were great, made me smile, made me go "Awwww" and whatever else, the parts about Samantha's Catholicism fell... flat. Especially at the ending.

It is getting a "B" because a) I enjoyed it overall, b) Anderson obviously did her research about things like horse breeding, and vet. medicine, and Lordy, you wouldn't believe how many people wouldn't have bothered, and c) I really am a sucker for her heros. And she made me like Tucker, which is saying something, because I didn't like him very much at the end of My Sunshine (Isaiah's book). I figured she'd find a way to do that, anyway. ;)

Now to wait for more Paxtons. Or possibly Harrigans (Samantha's brothers, who have potential as heros, naturally). Whichever comes first. And come to think of it, Patrick O'Shanessy, the brother of the heroine in Keegan's Lady. I think she mentioned something about him for some point... hmmm...

Predictable, Anderson is. But it's a good predictability.

2007-01-06T22:59:00.000-08:00

Missing You

Author: Meg Cabot
Published: January 2007
Letter Grade: B-

Finally, a non-A worthy book. I've been starting to think I'm getting too easy.

Granted, a "B-" isn't exactly a failing grade, but still.

Anyway. This is the last book in Cabot's 1800 Where Are You? series, which she started under the penname Jenny Carroll. (Now all her books are under Meg Cabot, though I have the first four before this one in the old publication.)

It's been awhile since I read the book before this, since it's been a few years (Cabot having only written it because we the fans demanded it :)) so I had to refamiliarize myself a bit with who non-main characters were. I had quite a lot of "Oh, yeah, I remember him/her!" moments.

The series is about Jess Mastriani, a girl who got struck by lightning on her way home from school one day, and it gave her psychic powers, so she could find missing people (in her sleep, don't you know.) It sounds much more corny then it is when I try to explain it, I'm afraid.

At any rate, Jess also has a boyfriend, Rob, who has been rather leery of their, as Jess puts it, "Whatever we were," because he's eighteen, on parole for an unspecified crime, and Jess is still underage. Or is for the first four books of the series, anyway.

By the time "Missing You" rolls around, though, Jess has come of age, gone to Afghanistan to put her powers to use finding terrorists there during the war, lost her powers from being overworked, come home to find Rob smooching a girl with boobs as big as Jess's head, and they take a... break from "whatever we were." And then Jess discovers she's been accepted to Julliard, and it's off to NYC with best bud Ruth (Columbia bound) for music-ing and night terror-ing, and... well, not much else from what I understand.

It really does remind me of a fanfic in places. This from the author who likes to discourage that sort of thing. (mini-rant: Like no one can tell the difference between a fan writer and the real author. Puh-lease. Give us some credit, Meg.)

So, yes. A year passes, and Rob arrives on Jess's doorstep, asking her to find his new-found half-sister who has gone missing. Trips home ensue, along with the discovery of an amateur teenage porno ring type deal.

All right, my synopsis doesn't make it sound too exciting, but I'll put it this way: it kept me entertained, it was nice to a character I've known for so long grow up a little bit, and while most of it was pretty predictable (Hello? The whole thing with Douglas and the school? Yeah, picked that one up right away, thanks) there were a couple things here and there that surprised me. Like the near-ending with Rob and Jess got an "Oh, my God" reaction from me.

But... all right, here's my beef:

Everything moved too quickly. It was like Cabot was trying to tie up one thing before moving on to the next, because God forbid there be two subplots happening at the same time. She found the sister to quickly. She got the whole porno thing out of the way too quickly. I got through it and went "What the hell are they going to do for the next 70 pages?" The romance part was all right. A bit strange, and in my opinion, out of character, like maybe Cabot had been away from her characters for too long and was starting to forget what they should act like, but it was good enough to pass. The conflict with Jess's mother could've gone somewhere, but she just sort of let it die, with a few half-assed moments.

And then, Lord Almighty, the ending.

What the devil was that?

Obligatory cheesy last lines aside. The whole thing with Dr. Krantz. WTF? He came all the way from Washington, D.C., to say all THAT? I would've just called. Save myself some air fare. Call on Saturday or something and avoid the cell phone charges. Not worth it to go all that way just for a cheesy-ass conversation.

And don't get me started on Karen Sue Hankey. First, I'm dying to make fun of the name, but will restrain myself. I don't care how happy Jess was at the end, who would want to spend any time at all with KAREN SUE HANKEY? Especially if the person's name is Jess Mastriani.

And the return of Boobs-as-big-as-my-head-Girl (Yes, she's called that, but that isn't unusual. Just funny) was not exactly what we'd call surprising.

Now you should be wondering why the book got a B-. It started as a B+. But... well. There's no denying I did, to some extent, enjoy the book. Cheesy pointlessness aside.

That, and I still think the stuff Cabot started as "Jenny Carroll" is far better than say... The Princess Diaries. And this deserves some acknowledgement.

2006-12-31T13:15:00.000-08:00

This is All: The Pillow Book of Cordelia Kenn

Author: Aidan Chambers
Published Date: 2006
Letter Grade: A++++

This book was too good for a mere A+. That's really all there is to it.

Another find that led to sitting in Borders (and Barnes & Noble) and reading it before buying it. I read the first 99 pages this way before finally buying it. This still left the majority of the book, of course. It's 808 pages long.

The Daily Telegraph called it "A huge book in every sense" and quite frankly, I have to agree with their assessment.

The book is about Cordelia Kenn, obviously, a nineteen year old mother-to-be, compiling things she had written down in her "pillow book" ("A pillow book is a notebook or collection of notebooks kept in some accessible but relatively private place, and in which the author would from time to time record impressions, daily events, poems, letters, stories, ideas, descriptions of people, etc."-Ivan Morris, notes to The Pillow Book of Sei Shonagan, as quoted on the back cover) and the sorts of pearls of wisdom one can only receive from hindsight.

The book can be summed up in this word: Brilliant. Or, because it takes place in England, Bloody Brilliant.

It's separated into six "pillow boxes": Red, Green, Orange, Black, Yellow, and Blue. Each one's as different stylistically as could be. (The Green one's a little confusing, because it's as if she (Cordelia) is telling two stories at once, connected but at the same time not at all connected. You get the hang of it, and then, when you get to the Orange Pillow Box, you have to get used to it being normal again.)

It's difficult at times to separate the older Cordelia from the younger, but sometimes it doesn't really matter. The only thing that annoyed me (aside from the initial reaction to realizing the way the Green Pillow Box was set up), really, was in the Black Pillow Box, when the break in the action (also frequent in the others) came at points when I would have much preferred to continue. But it was a small annoyance at best.

At any rate, in this book, it seems that nothing is sacred--all is open to debate. From poetry (and blatant Shakespeare-loving, you can imagine how I felt about this) to breasts to sex. And especially, a description of Ms. Kenn's first time, though I don't know how much a kid is going to want to know about his/her mother's sex life. Personally, I prefer to believe what Annie believed in "Annie's Song": Fairies bring the babies. No intercourse required.

Or, at least, as far as my parents are concerned.

Anyway. I can't seem to escape the wonders of Shakespeare, even when not trying to seek him out. If anything, the book has just made me want to read him more. Which takes a lot of time, because, although I adore Willy Shakes, I am not that quick to understand what he means. I have that deplorable poetry reader's habit that Mrs. Mills always hated Freshman year: liking a poem because it sounds nice. An unforgivable crime, I'm told. For an honors student, anyway.

So, yes, the mention of Shakes (and I'm happy to tell you that Ms. Kenn refers to him thusly as well) helped my opinion of the book in no small measure. But it would have been brilliant on its own anyway. Just maybe with 2 +'s and not 4 after the A.

Still a worthy grade, to be sure.

It does go on about religion a bit, though I don't agree with most of what was said. This, however, is not essential to me loving a book.

The Pillow Book, in short, was one of those books that has stuck with me, even after I finished it. It has joined the ranks of such noteworthy books in my esteem as The Andalite Chronicles and the Kissed by an Angel trilogy. A worthy addition, to be sure.

2006-12-13T19:54:00.000-08:00

Ophelia

Author: Lisa Klein
Published Date: 2006
Letter Grade: A

Several years ago, my dad and stepmom redid our computer room, turning it into a library of sorts, and filling it with various books on everything from Chess to Fibromylgia (or however it's spelled.)

One of these books was entitled "Reviving Ophelia." I asked Vicky once why Ophelia needed to be reformed, and she told me about the character from Shakespeare's play "Hamlet."

I watched the movie (Mel Gibson version) for English Lit senior year, and read some of the play, and I still couldn't see why she needed reviving. Therapy, certainly, but I've needed therapy, too. You don't see Vicky writing "Reviving Stephanie," now do you?

Anyway. A few days ago I was in Barnes & Noble (where all great discoveries are made. It was, after all, where I bought my first Animorphs book) and I discovered this book. At last, our dear heroine was about to get her due.

Let me tell you: I adored this book. I adored the story of Ophelia and Hamlet before Hamlet went loco. I adored Horatio. By half way through, I wanted to shake Ophelia and make her see how Horatio felt about her.

But yes. It was interesting. It was a bit thrilling, and there were points I could not foresee. The story, of course, was familiar, but it gave new insight into what might have happened beyond what you can see in the play.

Bits confused me. Edmund, Ophelia's tormentor, popping up at random confused me. I didn't understand the point of that. Also, the end seemed a bit sudden. On Ophelia's part, at any rate, not Horatio's. Perhaps if the epilogue had been longer?

Overall, I thought the book was rather fantastic. And I think it is fairly safe to say that dear Ophelia is fully revived, and we must stop trying to revive her further. Please, the girl has had quite enough. She was the heroine of a Shakespearean tragedy, after all.

2006-12-08T11:30:00.000-08:00

Duchess: A Novel Of Sarah Churchill

Author: Susan Holloway Scott
Publish Date: August 2006
Letter Grade: A

I have a huge soft spot for the Brits, let's just get that out right now. Ever since that book on Elizabeth I, I've been a goner. Though, admittedly, my Brit tastes fall more to Tudor and Regency England, not so much Restoration England.

This could have something to do with reading too much about the English and their feelings about the Scots, which leads to my general dislike of having to read anything taking place in Scotland (save Gretna Green, naturally.) Though, Yoda's wife WAS queen of Scotland.

But she's half Norwegian. And I have no beef with Norway.

Well, none with Scotland, either, but I'm rambling.

Anyway. The point being, the Stuarts were originally the Scottish royal family, not the English one. Which bugged me a bit when reading a part where the buttheads are telling Anne that she's ENTIRELY English.

Hell, no, she wasn't. Her great-grandfather was definitely James VI of Scotland long before he was James I of England. They might be descended from Margaret Tudor (Henry VIII's sister) but for pete's sake, how many English princesses were married north? She's Scottish. Or at least as Scottish as she is English.

This is more a beef with the characters than the author. But still.

At any rate, I enjoyed reading this book. My knowledge of the Stuarts hasn't extended much farther than Mary, Queen of Scots (1542-1587) and what I've read in 365: Your Date With History. The latter is also most of what I've known of John Churchill.

Sarah Churchill, nee Jennings, I knew from reading about Anne and Mary II in "British Kings and Queens," though I never made the connection to the Duke of Marlborough.

I'll say this: It was the first time I'd ever read about two women doing it. Two happily married women, no less. Though, I did find it a tad ironic that Sarah refused to sleep her way to power with men (having refused Churchill for years before he finally asked her to marry him) but did so with women, or at least with the then Princess of Denmark (Anne).

It's easy to forget that little excerpt in BKaQ about Anne under "Monachs that may have been homosexual" in the context of Sarah and John's happy, loving marriage. And Anne and Prince George's happy marriage.

The one thing I always managed to remeber about Anne was the fact that she had 17 pregnancies, of which 3 (according to the book, BKaQ isn't as helpful) managed to live past the first few hours/days, and none of whom lived to adulthood, though William, Duke of Gloucester, lived to the ripe ol' age of 11, and didn't even see his mother become queen.

The Stuarts were a sad bunch, I've decided. At least 3 of them were gay, which probably didn't help there procreating (see Mary II's barren-ness), only James VI/I and Charles I managed to have any sons at all that outlived them. Well, not including Charles II's children by his mistresses, but then you get ones like Monmouth who only got himself killed.

Reread that bit in 365 before it came up in the book, and I could have done without the prior knowledge.

Also prior knowledge made certain things a bit more sad: knowing that the Duchy of Marlborough kept on through Henrietta Churchill (thanks to genealogy sites on British Nobility) and NOT through Jack Churchill, or even Charles Churchill. Considering Sarah's opinion of her daughters, that is especially sad, in view of the family.

At any rate, I enjoyed the book. All the parts that annoyed me I knew were historically accurate, which is even MORE annoying, because there's no way to sugar-coat it. Queen Anne was a bitch to the woman who had been her closest friend since she was 8 years old, and to the greatest British general of all time (rivaling even Wellington, which in my book is high praise indeed. Though Nelson will always be my favorite one-armed admiral.) Foolish, foolish woman. And she put her trust and affections into a woman who, according to Scott's Afterword, looted the royal quarters and then disappeared.

Granted, this may or may not be true, we should keep in mind the source of such information (Sarah), but to my way of thinking, it seems to go with her character.

I also would have dearly loved to point out to the holier-than-thou Anglicans that their church was only formed because Henry VIII wanted to divorce his devoted wife for a strumpet (a strumpet of noble birth, but still a strumpet). And point out the shear hypocrisy of talking about freedom of religion while Catholic churches were being burned, and this being several decades after the Puritans left for the Americas in search of religious freedom. Religious freedom my ass.

Why this book gets an A: It's historically accurate, right down to the pure hypocrisy and stupidity of a long stream of powerful individuals, though it HAS given me a higher opinion of Charles II (though, I still feel bad for his wife, and didn't realize that she was there at his death, thanks to "Women Who Ruled" not giving that bit, only their last correspondence, which endeared him at least a little bit) and the love story between John and Sarah was sweet. And has made me consider reading the book on his many loves.

In the meantime, I'm going back to Shakespeare, having found "Ophelia." Maybe this will be the final push for me to finish Hamlet. ;) And then to Cold War America for "The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank" at last.

2006-10-11T23:23:00.000-07:00

Loving Will Shakespeare

Author: Carolyn Meyer
Published Date: 2006
Letter Grade: A-

So, I picked this book up last week at Barnes and Noble while randomly looking through. Read the back. Read the flap. Then read the prologue.

Quite frankly, I was lost from that point on.

I've got a soft spot for Willy Shakes (that's what my english teacher last year called him), it's true. And Tudor England especially, since it was a book on Elizabeth I that got me hooked on British History, anyway.

The book's basically about Anne Hathaway, Shakespeare's wife. Just about nothing is known about Anne (whose real name I guess was Agnes?) except that she was about 7 1/2-8 years older than Shakes, and that they got married at 18 and 26 (when she was several months pregnant). Likewise, next to nothing is known about Shakespeare's early life, even his birthday's a guess, because the first written mention of him is the record of his christening, and christening's GENERALLY happened three days after the birth. Unless the day was "unlucky." Or there was something else preventing it.

Anyway. So basically, this book really is pure fiction, considering how little there is to be known.

But damn, it's hard to remember sometimes that the people in books you read about real people are really made up.

Like Anne's evil stepmother. I swear she puts the one in Cinderella to shame. Joan Hathaway is a bitch, plain and simple. And though Anne doesn't have any stepsiblings (any living ones, anyway, except for Joan's son who died in the Plague in 1564), she's got an evil half-sister.

I liked this book. It was good. I liked reading about how life was back then. Though it made me feel bad for baby goats everywhere. Reading Regency romances, I read about kid gloves often. But you don't actually read anything about them BEFORE they were gloves.

Still. I enjoyed reading about the budding romance/friendship between Will and Anne. It was sweet, it was believable, made me think that if I were in the same position, I'd fall madly in love with him, too.

I also kind of liked the other leading men in Anne's life. Well. Not Hob, Joan's nephew. He was gross. And reminds me vaguely of Robert Williams. 'Cept even Robert had more class than that, and I can't really see Hob as much of a lady's man. So really, the only similarity is the drinking. But the rest I kind of liked. Not enough for them to take Shakes' place, mind you, but still.

It's also made me think I need to look up what the heck the "sweating sickness" is. I haven't read about it since that book on Elizabeth I.

The only thing I didn't like about the book was that there wasn't much on their marriage. Granted, Shakespeare was away in London for most of it. Which is terribly unfortunate, but since it's one of those things that actually happened, there's not much to dispute on the issue. But still. I would've liked to see more of him actually in Stratford-upon-Avon, more of things happening there.

Overall, I enjoyed the book. I read the first 119 pages in B&N due to lack of funds, but bought it eventually. Ironically, while reading this book there, a bunch of high schoolers were practicing "King Leer." I found it amusing.

2006-09-29T21:26:00.000-07:00

The Lord Next Door

Author: Gayle Callen
Published: December 2005
Letter Grade: C

I'm rather reluctant to give this book either a lower or a higher grade. I picked it up because I had read two other books by Callen, and I'd enjoyed them a lot, and I liked the epistolery nature of the prologue. I'm a sucker for letters in books.

Basically, the hero and heroine, David and Victoria, get together because David's having serious trouble finding a wife due to his father's old mistress having wild orgy-like parties at their house, and because Victoria's father's death left her family totally destitute. This being Victorian England, what is the solution? Marriage!

I'm not trying to say anything bad about the plotline mind you--it's a well-loved plot devise employed by a lot romance authors. I've used it myself in my story ideas. "Marriage of Convenience" is almost as widely used as the "Reformed Rake" cliche. Almost. Nothing is quite as widely used as that.

So, really, what I'm trying to say is this: once you've read a couple hundred romance novels, you've read almost every plot devise known to man (well, woman. Except Leigh Greenwood. But we won't get into that) and a few only known to the animal kingdom. (See While You Slept by Wendy Burge. Ugh.)

But yeah. The book was all right. It entertained me. I enjoyed it. I'm getting a bit tired of how authors use "not having sex right away, even when characters are married" as a way to build sexual tension. It's really truly annoying. There are other ways to do it, without beating the poor, dead horse.

I liked the prologue, about how David and Victoria wrote to each other as children, though she thought he was a servant named Tom, or whatever. That was kind of weird. And I didn't like how it was resolved. Actually, it didn't feel resolved at all. She kept wanting him to read their childhood journal, but he doesn't until the very end, and only the part that's supposed to tie up the last of the conflicts.

That part bugged me, too. What could have been a really sweet, caring moment just came out... mediocre. Like "Oh. That's pretty shitty. Can we have sex now, please?" Well, maybe not THAT bad. But it felt like after all this build up to this moment, and it just felt flat. Like how I wrote my most hated chapter of "Lost": like Callen was just trying to get it over and done with.

I liked the characters themselves. They were fairly believable. I wasn't too fond of how their relationship issues got tied up so neatly, especially David and his father. It seemed like there should be a lot more emotion in it, considering their interactions to this point.

I should really review before I give a grade, because this book just got knocked down two grades. Was a B- when I started...

I bought the second book in this series, too, when I bought The Lord Next Door. Hopefully this one will prove better. The other two books I read by Callen were wonderful, I loved them. But this one... meh.

Ah, yes. The Blog

2006-09-28T22:15:00.000-07:00

Hmm. I'm not quite sure what it is with me and my fascination with blogs, and journals in general.

For instance. I have been keeping a diary since Cecile gave me "Toby" in the 5th grade. I think it's rather telling of my Animorphs obsession that I named my diary after the Hork-Bajir seer. And that I named my cat after Tobias.

Which reminds me, I should stop by Mom's this weekend during my attempts to (1) take yiyia Vicky to the grocery store, (2) see Komal while she's in town, (3) hopefully bring Kyra down to TIU so she can see it and (4) go to VCG on Sunday.

To see Mom and Don, of course, because I haven't seen them in awhile. Since Labor Day, actually. Which is weird, because I keep seeing Dad and Cecile. And of course, I see yiyia Vicky at least twice a month, because I can hardly let Dad take her to the grocery store. I hardly ever deviate from my normal routine--if I pick yiyia up after noon, it's hideously late for me.

I've also discovered that being away from home sort of reminds me of those early days after the divorce, when I only saw Dad on Thursdays and every other weekend. When I was busy doing other things (getting settled into a new place, and a new school and what not) it was easy not to think too much about it all, but when he'd come over on Thursday nights when Mom had to work late, I realized how bloody much I missed him. Now, I'm pretty much in the same position as I was back then ('cept I have two more parents to miss when I'm away) and now it's sort of like that when I see any of them.

I don't get homesick. At least, I'm not aware of it. 'Course, that first weekend after orientation/classes, when I was all alone in the dorm 'cause Chendre had gone home and I was having one of my depressed moods, I went out to my car to get my CDs, and just sat in there for a few minutes. Didn't think my car could make feel/relieve my homesickness. Granted, it WAS Dad's car. I can pretty much imagine him in the passenger's seat whenever I do something stupid while driving, after all the times I had to drive with him, especially that last summer before getting my license. That, and Mom has the same exact car. The license plate number even starts with the same letter.

I'm not like Komal. I don't need to call home every day. I'm okay with not talking to my family every day. Hell, I don't talk to Rachel at all. Whether that's a product of our knock-down-drag-out fight in Pittsburgh or just because we never have very much to say to each other, I'm not sure. My phone conversations with her usually only ever happened when she'd call Mom's and I would pick up, or when I'd call her on her birthday.

But yeah. 'Course, it helps that I'm used to seeing them all sporadically. It's not like I saw them everyday when I was at home, thanks to our back-and-forth set-up. And I didn't talk to them everyday, depending on where I was. And, of course, whenever the shit hit the fan at Mom's, to Dad's I would go.

Back to my original topic: I've been writing in diaries and on blogs for seven, almost eight years, come January 31. Gah, I feel old. Almost as old as Kat made me feel when she told me she was engaged. I've known Kat almost as long as I've been writing in these things. There's a four and half month difference between when Steve first IMed me and when I started Toby.

It's odd how much of my life can be traced back to 1999. The IFs. Steve. All the people I met through Steve. There isn't a single person I know online that I can't trace back to Steve. Or Chris. But even Chris is linked to Steve, 'cause I introduced them. And Steve called him a gaywad. Which was oddly more fitting than we knew at the time.

Sort of glad Steve grew out of his homophobia. But can't entirely discount certain remarks he made when he was 13, anyway. ;) Even if he called Chris that at the time because he (Chris) was asking me out before he'd broken up with his girlfriend.

Ah, the early years of my love life. They were... embarrassing, to say the least.

Now that I've gone off on my... what? third tangent? I really need to finish my journals.

One of these days, I'm going to finish them BEFORE the morning that they're due.