Reading roundup of catching up

[hamsterwoman]

I haven't done a reading roundup in so long, and I think it's because I hit a patch where I don't want to talk about books at proper length, with quotes and stuff -- this happens to me occasionally. So, an abridged version, but I'm happy to talk about any of these with you in more detail -- more than happy!

35. D.M.Cornish, Factotum -- This is

Comments

[hamsterwoman]

So you've read Graceling? I've heard rather polar opinions on the series, so I'm hesitant to start it. Do you think it's worth the reading time at all?

I have, and also Fire, which is set in the same universe, but is chronologically earlier though published later, and only a loose prequel, if that.

People seem to like Graceling a lot more than I do, so I'm not sure I'm the right person to ask. I thought it was worth a read because there are a few things it does that I respect (though I think there are other books, even in YA, that do some of it better). I like the -- to keep spoilers out of it, I'll say -- romantic resolution, and I like that certain things are irreversible despite a happy ending. I will say that the things I dislike outweigh the good for me. I try not to use the term very often, but I honestly did feel that Katsa was a Mary-Sue, in that way where other characters felt drawn to her without me being able to discern any reason for it other than the author wanted them to, and she had a combination of traits that the author wanted her to have that didn't make much sense to me (like, capable of orchestrating and carrying out complicated covert missions with political raminfications and yet totally clueless/oblivious -- and not in that way that Katniss can be oblivious, because Katniss's blindspots always made a lot of sense to me). The worldbuilding was kind of embarrassing, outside of the one central concept of "grace", and even that, I thought, was not particularly well explored, as the Evil Plot hangs on the villain having some abilities that I didn't think fit within the parameters of the grace system. And the writing was... not very good. There's foreshadowing that I'm not sure would even be subtle for a kid of L's age, but was embarrassingly anvilicious for my taste. Just, very much a first book, and, yeah.

That said, I really, really liked Fire. Part of it was lowered expectations from Graceling (which, I read Graceling on a wave of hype, since everybody was raving about it, so my impression of it probably suffered from the opposite effect). Part of it was a more interesting central magical gimmick, but mostly it's serious things the book does really well. It presents several really complicated interpersonal relationships really well, and it delves into some very tricky issues with a grace that surprised me. And I cared about the protagonist a hell of a lot more than in Graceling, because she felt much more like a real person to me, even though she's a "monster".

The book still has flaws -- there's foray into political shades of gray that felt out of place and was rather quickly abandoned. The hero is improbably good, and the only reason I didn't care is because he pushed all my buttons. The worldbuilding is still very sparse and not particularly well thought out. And the prequel connection to Graceling was actually the weakest part of the book for me, and I wish she'd just let it go and not tried to tether the two together.

But in my mind, Fire >>> Graceling, though both a probably worth a gander, because I think I just have "anitpatiya" towards Graceling, based on how other people don't seem to dislike it nearly as much (or, rather, those who do, that I've seen, criticize it for very shallow reasons that I don't agree with).