Reading roundup
The first couple of books are from a long while back, so getting sketchy, but:
Elizabeth Kerner, Redeeming the Lost -- this was part 3 of a trilogy where I skipped #2, and read #1 a long time ago, so I may have not gotten *everything* out of this one. It was OK... The premise of human/dragon transformation and relationship is one that's near and dear to my heart, and I think Kerner has some interesting ideas and handles them pretty well. The style I'm less enamoured of. The multiple first-person narrations didn't work for me -- the segments were mostly too short to be effective, the voices mostly not distinctive enough, and the overall effect jarring and/or confusing. I'm not sure what the point of it is, other than to have many different characters extoll the heroine without the author actually having to show (again) many of the things they praise her for. Also, the whole deal with trying to represent the thoughts of a mind being inhabited by two beings, or a person going insane or dying -- that's really, really hard to do well, without being ridiculous, and I don't think she succeeds. A number of scenes that were supposed to be moving just felt clunky to me (maybe in part because they involved characters introduced in the second book, whom I did not know as well), but there were two climactic scenes (both involving dragons) that I did feel moved by. And the ending... it's supposed to feel cathartic, but it felt like a cheat -- I don't think the final twist was set up well enough, and I would have actually preferred the book without it (though it would have had a very different feel).
Ellen Kushner, Thomas the Rhymer -- had never read Kushner before, and now really want to (especially Swordspoint). I really, really liked this book, but then, "Thomas the Rhymer" was always one of my favorite ballads. It was beautifully written, especially the little human touches (Meg talking about how Thomas doesn't want to be distracted from his "precious misery", E's wry description of her feelings during the fight with Thomas), and the Elf-Queen is very well done. I can't say the plot was particularly engrossing (or even particularly there), but it's got enough things going for it even without much plot. And there's that lovely bitter-sweet air that permeates the whole novel, from first line to last -- just right for a ballad.
Keith R.A. DeCepeda, Dragon Precinct -- well, this was a weird one. It's a fantasy/mystery thing -- basically, a police/detective novel in a fantasy setting. Which of course immediately made me think of PTerry's Watch novels, but it's nothing like that. For one, I think it may actually take itself seriously, in the wrong elements. I thought the murder mystery line was pretty weak, and the fantasy setting fairly unoriginal (though I like certain touches, like the way inter-racial tension was portrayed, and the Dwarves' nickname for the Elves, for instance). And the characters were basically police novel archetypes transported to the fantasy world, which didn't exactly open up any depths of meaning. It just kind of sat there, I guess, though it was a quick and lively enough read.
Gene Wolfe, The Knight -- I was thrilled when I picked up this book (first part of a duology). I keep hearing and reading that Gene Wolfe is the best sf/f writer alive today, etc., etc. -- and what I had read of him until this book (mostly short stories and novellas in anthologies, though I did make an attempt at, I believe, Book of the Short Sun) was...good... but not something that particularly resonated with me, which left me thinking, What's wrong with me? why don't I like this author, or even want to read him particularly? I guess I'd been trying the wrong genre till now, because when I picked up The Knight I loved it from the first sentence on. I guess it doesn't hurt that the setting is Norse-like, and that happens to be one of my favorite mythologies. The book really captures that episodic, timeless, immediate yet detached style/feel of myths os something like Njall's Saga (which it really made me want to re-read). And there are many bits of prose, pithy descriptions and punchy sentences, which are very memorable, though I was a bit disappointed that my favorite passage in the entire book occurred in the prologue:
"There they are, Ben. It has been easy for me to name them. What was hard was making you see them. Remember that the Osterlings had long teeth and starved faces, and the Angrborn stunk. Remember that Disiri was a shapechanger, and all her shapes were beautiful."
Patricia Briggs, Raven's Shadow -- Don't rightly know how I feel about this one. It was an engaging enough read, but didn't stick with me particularly. The strength is in the characters -- the hero is very likable, and a number of more minor characters are also very well done, though some are little more than sketches, and there is interesting treatment of a character that could be problematic if not handled deftly -- and it worked for me. I guess what I liked least was the premise of the Ordered magic that forms a foundation for the entire magical plot -- it felt simply too formulaic for me, and... not really that interesting, I guess. And there is definitely a plausible reason within the setting for it to *be* formulaic and artificial -- it just didn't *feel* right. I would definitely continue reading in the series, for the characters much more so than for the plot or the world-building in this one.
Sherlock Holmes: The Hidden Years, edited by Michael Kurland -- This anthology consists of stories that fill in the "missing years" in Sherlock Holmes's life -- the 3 or so years during which he was supposed to be dead. There weren't any stories that particularly stood out to me. None had particularly fascinating mysteries. A number were much more interested in the setting (Siam, the Arctic, New Orleans, San Francisco) than in the characters or the story. One was a "there and back again" AU which veered too far into the supernatural to be true to the spirit of Holmes. One was basically just a drawn-out shaggy dog story (featuring Freud and an amnesiac Holmes, which sounds like an interesting idea but really wasn't that great). And the last story in the anthology -- really, I don't even know what to make of it, other than that it was the only one I didn't finish reading. There were really only two stories that I truly enjoyed, and neither of them for Holmes in particular -- one was Michael Kurland's (told from Moriarty's POV -- and an entertaining POV it is; also -- very slashy), and Peter Beagle's (!) story, because it has something that Beagle does exceptionally well, I think -- a well-drawn, memorable, and engaging narrator. Not thrilled with the anthology overall, but I might look up some of Kurland's other Moriarty stuff, as he has a pleasant style. shaggy dog story.
John C. Wright, The Last Guardian of Everness -- One of the things I do when selecting a fantasy book to read is look at the blurbs on the back cover and see who they're from. I've discovered that I'm likely to enjoy just about anything blurbed by Gaiman, Robin Hobb, or George R.R.Martin, so I keep my eyes open for those. Sometimes there are only blurbs from magazines, not authors, and I often wonder what that means. In the case of this book, there was only one "peer" blurb (for the author's previous sci-fi stuff, I presume), but it also had something I'd never seen before -- a blurb by the *author* wherein he appears to imply comparison to Gaiman and Zelazny. Which is, hm...
Having read it, I have no idea what to make of this book. I'm not sure the author did, either. The genre appears to skip from high epic (rather purple but well executed, with pretensions of Milton, I think -- what with the erudite name dropping, new grammatical word formations, and occasional stretches of (unformatted) blank verse) to urban action fantasy to comedy (of the fish-out-of-water type) to (probably unintentionally) pure Monty Python and the Holy Grail. And the ending, which I guess is supposed to be a cliff-hanger, is just a mess. There are some interesting bits -- the dream-world setting gives for some leeway in suspension of disbelief (i.e. continuity glitches that actually just work to remind you this is all happening in a dream -- not sure if intentional, but it was kind of neat). The selkies are over the top, but nicely presented. And the character of Raven (Var Varovitch) has its charm -- I even appreciate the somewhat misguided attempt to reproduce his improper English, though I doubt very much a Georgian would speak English with a Russian accent, and Wright makes the common mistake of believing non-native speakers drop articles, whereas what they actually do, in my experience,when their native language does not have articles (and I'm not sure whether Georgian does or not) is stick them in where they're not required or mix up "a/an" and "the".
I do want to know how this thing turns out, and will look up the sequels when they come out, but I do hope by then he figures out what kind of story he is trying to tell here...
Oh, also, not reading, but -- we saw In Good Company last week -- that was a good movie! Topher Grace is just great at these kinds of roles, apparently, and I really liked the script. I admire the direction the ending took -- it would have been very easy to wrap everything up in a tidy little package, and the fact that the movie didn't do that was refreshing. It was funny and poignant, and the corporate bullshit it makes fun of sounds scarily familiar. Really liked it, and so did B and my parents.
Elizabeth Kerner, Redeeming the Lost -- this was part 3 of a trilogy where I skipped #2, and read #1 a long time ago, so I may have not gotten *everything* out of this one. It was OK... The premise of human/dragon transformation and relationship is one that's near and dear to my heart, and I think Kerner has some interesting ideas and handles them pretty well. The style I'm less enamoured of. The multiple first-person narrations didn't work for me -- the segments were mostly too short to be effective, the voices mostly not distinctive enough, and the overall effect jarring and/or confusing. I'm not sure what the point of it is, other than to have many different characters extoll the heroine without the author actually having to show (again) many of the things they praise her for. Also, the whole deal with trying to represent the thoughts of a mind being inhabited by two beings, or a person going insane or dying -- that's really, really hard to do well, without being ridiculous, and I don't think she succeeds. A number of scenes that were supposed to be moving just felt clunky to me (maybe in part because they involved characters introduced in the second book, whom I did not know as well), but there were two climactic scenes (both involving dragons) that I did feel moved by. And the ending... it's supposed to feel cathartic, but it felt like a cheat -- I don't think the final twist was set up well enough, and I would have actually preferred the book without it (though it would have had a very different feel).
Ellen Kushner, Thomas the Rhymer -- had never read Kushner before, and now really want to (especially Swordspoint). I really, really liked this book, but then, "Thomas the Rhymer" was always one of my favorite ballads. It was beautifully written, especially the little human touches (Meg talking about how Thomas doesn't want to be distracted from his "precious misery", E's wry description of her feelings during the fight with Thomas), and the Elf-Queen is very well done. I can't say the plot was particularly engrossing (or even particularly there), but it's got enough things going for it even without much plot. And there's that lovely bitter-sweet air that permeates the whole novel, from first line to last -- just right for a ballad.
Keith R.A. DeCepeda, Dragon Precinct -- well, this was a weird one. It's a fantasy/mystery thing -- basically, a police/detective novel in a fantasy setting. Which of course immediately made me think of PTerry's Watch novels, but it's nothing like that. For one, I think it may actually take itself seriously, in the wrong elements. I thought the murder mystery line was pretty weak, and the fantasy setting fairly unoriginal (though I like certain touches, like the way inter-racial tension was portrayed, and the Dwarves' nickname for the Elves, for instance). And the characters were basically police novel archetypes transported to the fantasy world, which didn't exactly open up any depths of meaning. It just kind of sat there, I guess, though it was a quick and lively enough read.
Gene Wolfe, The Knight -- I was thrilled when I picked up this book (first part of a duology). I keep hearing and reading that Gene Wolfe is the best sf/f writer alive today, etc., etc. -- and what I had read of him until this book (mostly short stories and novellas in anthologies, though I did make an attempt at, I believe, Book of the Short Sun) was...good... but not something that particularly resonated with me, which left me thinking, What's wrong with me? why don't I like this author, or even want to read him particularly? I guess I'd been trying the wrong genre till now, because when I picked up The Knight I loved it from the first sentence on. I guess it doesn't hurt that the setting is Norse-like, and that happens to be one of my favorite mythologies. The book really captures that episodic, timeless, immediate yet detached style/feel of myths os something like Njall's Saga (which it really made me want to re-read). And there are many bits of prose, pithy descriptions and punchy sentences, which are very memorable, though I was a bit disappointed that my favorite passage in the entire book occurred in the prologue:
"There they are, Ben. It has been easy for me to name them. What was hard was making you see them. Remember that the Osterlings had long teeth and starved faces, and the Angrborn stunk. Remember that Disiri was a shapechanger, and all her shapes were beautiful."
Patricia Briggs, Raven's Shadow -- Don't rightly know how I feel about this one. It was an engaging enough read, but didn't stick with me particularly. The strength is in the characters -- the hero is very likable, and a number of more minor characters are also very well done, though some are little more than sketches, and there is interesting treatment of a character that could be problematic if not handled deftly -- and it worked for me. I guess what I liked least was the premise of the Ordered magic that forms a foundation for the entire magical plot -- it felt simply too formulaic for me, and... not really that interesting, I guess. And there is definitely a plausible reason within the setting for it to *be* formulaic and artificial -- it just didn't *feel* right. I would definitely continue reading in the series, for the characters much more so than for the plot or the world-building in this one.
Sherlock Holmes: The Hidden Years, edited by Michael Kurland -- This anthology consists of stories that fill in the "missing years" in Sherlock Holmes's life -- the 3 or so years during which he was supposed to be dead. There weren't any stories that particularly stood out to me. None had particularly fascinating mysteries. A number were much more interested in the setting (Siam, the Arctic, New Orleans, San Francisco) than in the characters or the story. One was a "there and back again" AU which veered too far into the supernatural to be true to the spirit of Holmes. One was basically just a drawn-out shaggy dog story (featuring Freud and an amnesiac Holmes, which sounds like an interesting idea but really wasn't that great). And the last story in the anthology -- really, I don't even know what to make of it, other than that it was the only one I didn't finish reading. There were really only two stories that I truly enjoyed, and neither of them for Holmes in particular -- one was Michael Kurland's (told from Moriarty's POV -- and an entertaining POV it is; also -- very slashy), and Peter Beagle's (!) story, because it has something that Beagle does exceptionally well, I think -- a well-drawn, memorable, and engaging narrator. Not thrilled with the anthology overall, but I might look up some of Kurland's other Moriarty stuff, as he has a pleasant style. shaggy dog story.
John C. Wright, The Last Guardian of Everness -- One of the things I do when selecting a fantasy book to read is look at the blurbs on the back cover and see who they're from. I've discovered that I'm likely to enjoy just about anything blurbed by Gaiman, Robin Hobb, or George R.R.Martin, so I keep my eyes open for those. Sometimes there are only blurbs from magazines, not authors, and I often wonder what that means. In the case of this book, there was only one "peer" blurb (for the author's previous sci-fi stuff, I presume), but it also had something I'd never seen before -- a blurb by the *author* wherein he appears to imply comparison to Gaiman and Zelazny. Which is, hm...
Having read it, I have no idea what to make of this book. I'm not sure the author did, either. The genre appears to skip from high epic (rather purple but well executed, with pretensions of Milton, I think -- what with the erudite name dropping, new grammatical word formations, and occasional stretches of (unformatted) blank verse) to urban action fantasy to comedy (of the fish-out-of-water type) to (probably unintentionally) pure Monty Python and the Holy Grail. And the ending, which I guess is supposed to be a cliff-hanger, is just a mess. There are some interesting bits -- the dream-world setting gives for some leeway in suspension of disbelief (i.e. continuity glitches that actually just work to remind you this is all happening in a dream -- not sure if intentional, but it was kind of neat). The selkies are over the top, but nicely presented. And the character of Raven (Var Varovitch) has its charm -- I even appreciate the somewhat misguided attempt to reproduce his improper English, though I doubt very much a Georgian would speak English with a Russian accent, and Wright makes the common mistake of believing non-native speakers drop articles, whereas what they actually do, in my experience,when their native language does not have articles (and I'm not sure whether Georgian does or not) is stick them in where they're not required or mix up "a/an" and "the".
I do want to know how this thing turns out, and will look up the sequels when they come out, but I do hope by then he figures out what kind of story he is trying to tell here...
Oh, also, not reading, but -- we saw In Good Company last week -- that was a good movie! Topher Grace is just great at these kinds of roles, apparently, and I really liked the script. I admire the direction the ending took -- it would have been very easy to wrap everything up in a tidy little package, and the fact that the movie didn't do that was refreshing. It was funny and poignant, and the corporate bullshit it makes fun of sounds scarily familiar. Really liked it, and so did B and my parents.