Reading roundup

[hamsterwoman]

48. N.K.Jemisin, The Fifth Season (The Broken Earth #1) -- So I read Jemisin's debut Hundred Thousand Kingdoms books, the first two, and was underwhelmed. People were praising them to the skies, but to me, the first book was a perfectly ordinary, middle-of-the-road high fantasy story, with the (important, I agree) distinction of a world that did

Comments

[hamsterwoman]

re: reading order -- I'm actually not sure which I would say is best to read first (for me) in retrospect. Reading Carry On first would've kept me unspoiled for Simon's origins (for a bit longer anyway), but I don't know if it would've helped divorce it from Hogwarts for me. (Besides, I knew how Carry On and Fangirl were related to each other, so I knew Carry On was the sorta-fic. I probably wouldn't have known it was so HP, but HP is the first fandom I think of when it comes to fic anyway, because it was the first fandom where I actively read fic, so... *shrug*). And I think reading Fangirl first was probably better for my enjoyment of Rowell overall -- I really liked Fangirl, and it left me with some positive cache towards the author, which I'm not sure Carry On would have done.

I agree on the Mage being joyless. I think that might be an intentional point, in terms of Dumbledore deconstruction -- because Dumbledore we meet first when he's twinkling and offering sweets and spouting delightful nonsense words, and only gradually learn about the greatest good stuff and raising Harry for martyrdom and stuff. This is "the greatest good" / "ruthless idealist" side with the twinkliness stripped away. I didn't LIKE the Mage, and I don't think I would enjoy reading his story (though the THEMES of it I do like), but I appreciate what it's trying to do, I think. Soggy Lucy was definitely soggy, though.

[ikel89]

Okay, I shall be resigned to sitting alone in my Carry On appreciation corner :P (Fangirl would have been appreciated by me so much better if I wasn't so annoyed with Cath... And for that reason I am not willing to check out her other works.)

I think that might be an intentional point, in terms of Dumbledore deconstruction
*nods* possible. also right, i guess, if the purpose was to de-romanticise stuff. It's just - I'd rather the book spent time building up other relationships.

[hamsterwoman]

*pats* It's OK. <3 (An I did like it, and I'm glad I read it (I would be just for Penny and Agatha, but there were lots of other things I liked, too).

For what it's worth, having also read Eleanor and Park and now also Landline, none of the other protagonists are as... helpless and neprisposoblennye as Cath. I think that Rowell is interested in writing protagonists who, as the therapist tells Simon, are trauma victims/survivors, and exploring the different ways they deal with that. Simon, Baz, Cath, Wren, Eleanor are all survivors, but their trauma is different, and their way of coping is different, and that's interesting for me to see.

I'd rather the book spent time building up other relationships

I agree with you there. The Mage didn't feel like a character, just a deconstruction, and I both think that Rowell is better at actual characters and I personally enjoy reading about characters more. I think that was some of the unevenness, lopsidedness I was feeling, where part of the narrative was doing something different than just telling the story.