(no subject)
today, i am feeling sort of bleh. it's cold and grey, i slept way later than i intended to and i'm full of the crampy. those are my excuses if i am snide and snarky in any of the following comments, although glancing over the list of books here, i don't think i should be excessively so. we'll see, however. once again, the list is dominated by dame christie. thanks e-bay! as much as i've enjoyed working my way through her collection, as i mentioned to my boyfriend the other day, i'm awfully glad that the new year will mean reading lots of books not written by her.
anyway, let's just get those out of the way first, shall we? lord edgware dies, murder with mirrors, elephants can remember, mrs. mcginty's dead, n or m?, murder on the links, postern of fate and towards zero. of these, i'd definitely say that n or m? was my favorite. it's tommy and tuppence at work during world war ii, and as such is more of a spy story - discovering who the nefarious undercover agent is - than a traditional mystery. maybe i ought to explore the genre of spy stories, because i read a fair number of them this year and quite enjoyed them. here, i pretty much figured out who the agent was way before tommy and tuppence, but that didn't prevent enjoyment. postern of fate is tommy and tuppence as well, although i wouldn't rate it nearly as highly. of the poirots and the marples on the list, my vote goes to elephants can remember, which gets points not only for mrs. oliver, but also for bohemians and drug addiction.
the invention of hugo cabret by brian selznick is maybe the most talked about children's book of the year, a status the stems in large part from the fact that it's unlike anything you've ever seen before. a weighty tome, it's descirbed by selznick as "not exactly a novel, not quite a picture book, not really a graphic novel, or a flip book or a movie, but a combination of all these things." which, really, is pretty ambitious and you've got to admire the experiment for experiment's sake. i'm always a fan of pushing the proverbial envelope and boundaries. so why do i feel so underwhelmed by the whole thing? i was tempted to chalk it up to one of those instances where you hear so much about a thing in advance that there's no way that there's virtually no way the actual book can live up to your expectations, but then i remembered that i actually started to read the invention of hugo cabret at the bookstore right after it came out and before i'd read all the laudatory comments. and, i put it down without regret fifty or so pages in.
simply put, i just wasn't feeling it. and even after going back to the book with all the hype in mind and a determination to understand the fuss, i still wasn't feeling it. it's fine; certainly not bad. but the most pleasure i got from it was tied to my interest in film history and the real-life work and story of georges melies, who's a character in the book. but even though i know a lot of smart kids, i don't know any of them who are jazzed about the early history of motion pictures. sitting here, trying to sum up my reaction to the book, i keep deleting what i've written in an effort to come up with something more intelligent than, "i was bored by the story and don't think the characters are developed enough to sustain it," but i can't. i was bored. the characters aren't develped enough. by the way the book is constructed, you can't divorce the words from the text, but if you did i don't think that either one of them would be strong enough to stand on their own. i concede though that i could be wrong. so many people like it so, so much and despite the thickness of, it's circulated a lot at my library. i'm glad it exists and if it compels people to ask questions about how we define and talk about books - or certain types of books - i'm glad. but at the end of the day, my initial, "not feeling it" take remains and i'm just left shrugging my shoulders.
now then, concluding with the category of "children's books i probably should have read before now," i offer you sammy keyes and the hotel thief by wendelin van draanen, the adventures of captain underpants and captain underpants and the attack of the talking toilets by dav pilkey and the wolves of willoughby chase by joan aiken. the first is the initial book in the sammy keyes detective series and it was enjoyable enough that i'm looking forward to reading the others. the captain underpants books are super fun and did, in fact, make me laugh out loud, so i'll totally read the rest of these as well and go to bat for whenever anyone denounces them. and the wolves of willoughby chase i really wish that i had read as a kid (how did i not read it when i was a kid?), instead of as an adult. i still really liked it, but i suspect if i had experienced it as eight things like the complete ineptitude of the parents wouldn't have bothered me. again though, i look forward to reading the related books.
anyway, that's it. sorry i'm not up to offering better-thought out commentary. i suppose it really is one of those days.
anyway, let's just get those out of the way first, shall we? lord edgware dies, murder with mirrors, elephants can remember, mrs. mcginty's dead, n or m?, murder on the links, postern of fate and towards zero. of these, i'd definitely say that n or m? was my favorite. it's tommy and tuppence at work during world war ii, and as such is more of a spy story - discovering who the nefarious undercover agent is - than a traditional mystery. maybe i ought to explore the genre of spy stories, because i read a fair number of them this year and quite enjoyed them. here, i pretty much figured out who the agent was way before tommy and tuppence, but that didn't prevent enjoyment. postern of fate is tommy and tuppence as well, although i wouldn't rate it nearly as highly. of the poirots and the marples on the list, my vote goes to elephants can remember, which gets points not only for mrs. oliver, but also for bohemians and drug addiction.
the invention of hugo cabret by brian selznick is maybe the most talked about children's book of the year, a status the stems in large part from the fact that it's unlike anything you've ever seen before. a weighty tome, it's descirbed by selznick as "not exactly a novel, not quite a picture book, not really a graphic novel, or a flip book or a movie, but a combination of all these things." which, really, is pretty ambitious and you've got to admire the experiment for experiment's sake. i'm always a fan of pushing the proverbial envelope and boundaries. so why do i feel so underwhelmed by the whole thing? i was tempted to chalk it up to one of those instances where you hear so much about a thing in advance that there's no way that there's virtually no way the actual book can live up to your expectations, but then i remembered that i actually started to read the invention of hugo cabret at the bookstore right after it came out and before i'd read all the laudatory comments. and, i put it down without regret fifty or so pages in.
simply put, i just wasn't feeling it. and even after going back to the book with all the hype in mind and a determination to understand the fuss, i still wasn't feeling it. it's fine; certainly not bad. but the most pleasure i got from it was tied to my interest in film history and the real-life work and story of georges melies, who's a character in the book. but even though i know a lot of smart kids, i don't know any of them who are jazzed about the early history of motion pictures. sitting here, trying to sum up my reaction to the book, i keep deleting what i've written in an effort to come up with something more intelligent than, "i was bored by the story and don't think the characters are developed enough to sustain it," but i can't. i was bored. the characters aren't develped enough. by the way the book is constructed, you can't divorce the words from the text, but if you did i don't think that either one of them would be strong enough to stand on their own. i concede though that i could be wrong. so many people like it so, so much and despite the thickness of, it's circulated a lot at my library. i'm glad it exists and if it compels people to ask questions about how we define and talk about books - or certain types of books - i'm glad. but at the end of the day, my initial, "not feeling it" take remains and i'm just left shrugging my shoulders.
now then, concluding with the category of "children's books i probably should have read before now," i offer you sammy keyes and the hotel thief by wendelin van draanen, the adventures of captain underpants and captain underpants and the attack of the talking toilets by dav pilkey and the wolves of willoughby chase by joan aiken. the first is the initial book in the sammy keyes detective series and it was enjoyable enough that i'm looking forward to reading the others. the captain underpants books are super fun and did, in fact, make me laugh out loud, so i'll totally read the rest of these as well and go to bat for whenever anyone denounces them. and the wolves of willoughby chase i really wish that i had read as a kid (how did i not read it when i was a kid?), instead of as an adult. i still really liked it, but i suspect if i had experienced it as eight things like the complete ineptitude of the parents wouldn't have bothered me. again though, i look forward to reading the related books.
anyway, that's it. sorry i'm not up to offering better-thought out commentary. i suppose it really is one of those days.