Scan barcode
mediaevalmuse's reviews
1153 reviews
The Táin: From the Irish Epic Táin Bó Cúailnge by Louis le Brocquy
5.0
I'm probably biased. I'm a medievalist who studies Old English and Old Irish literature for a living. But seriously, how can I not review one of my favorite editions of one of my favorite pieces of literature of all time? Especially one that comes with some fancy ink paintings of Cu Chulainn's warp spasm.
But to be clear, rather than evaluate the story itself, I'm going to offer some notes on the translation and on this specific edition of The Tain.
Things I Liked
1. Translation: One of the things I really like about Kinsella’s translation is that it retains some of the syntax of the original language. Old Irish syntax is terrible in that it’s confusing, but once you get it, it’s actually kind of fun and adds a lot of quirkiness (for lack of a better word) to the text. Kinsella manages to keep some of the original qualities of the language while rendering it into a form that is easily understandable for the modern reader.
2. Illustrations: Holy crap the illustrations in this book are awesome. They’re some ink brush drawings that are somewhat minimalist, but I think they add to the story of The Tain by giving a visual element that enhances some of the indescribable feelings of the original epic. For example, Cu Chulainn’s warp spasm is very difficult to picture, but the ink drawing for it is brilliant and captures the essence of what the story is describing.
3. Inclusion of Essential Elements: The Tain isn’t just in one version in one manuscript - it’s in a couple. And it’s in pieces. Kinsella does a service to his audience by including some elements in his translation that I’ve found to be lacking in others (such as the entire “Pillow Talk” episode). By including so much, Kinsella gives readers the best possible text to read in modern English.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Lack of Elements: Inevitably, when a translator has to piece together a “best text” from two different versions, he or she is bound to leave some things out. Such is the case with Kinsella’s version, but a lot of what is missing can be found in others. Overall, I don't think it's dire.
2. Notes: The notes in this version are a little difficult to use because they are all in the back and they are not marked in the corresponding lines in the main text. This means a lot of flipping back and forth and not knowing which lines in the text have notes as you’re reading.
Recommendations: Read this book if you're at all a fan of medieval history, medieval literature, or ancient Ireland. Seriously, it's amazing.
But to be clear, rather than evaluate the story itself, I'm going to offer some notes on the translation and on this specific edition of The Tain.
Things I Liked
1. Translation: One of the things I really like about Kinsella’s translation is that it retains some of the syntax of the original language. Old Irish syntax is terrible in that it’s confusing, but once you get it, it’s actually kind of fun and adds a lot of quirkiness (for lack of a better word) to the text. Kinsella manages to keep some of the original qualities of the language while rendering it into a form that is easily understandable for the modern reader.
2. Illustrations: Holy crap the illustrations in this book are awesome. They’re some ink brush drawings that are somewhat minimalist, but I think they add to the story of The Tain by giving a visual element that enhances some of the indescribable feelings of the original epic. For example, Cu Chulainn’s warp spasm is very difficult to picture, but the ink drawing for it is brilliant and captures the essence of what the story is describing.
3. Inclusion of Essential Elements: The Tain isn’t just in one version in one manuscript - it’s in a couple. And it’s in pieces. Kinsella does a service to his audience by including some elements in his translation that I’ve found to be lacking in others (such as the entire “Pillow Talk” episode). By including so much, Kinsella gives readers the best possible text to read in modern English.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Lack of Elements: Inevitably, when a translator has to piece together a “best text” from two different versions, he or she is bound to leave some things out. Such is the case with Kinsella’s version, but a lot of what is missing can be found in others. Overall, I don't think it's dire.
2. Notes: The notes in this version are a little difficult to use because they are all in the back and they are not marked in the corresponding lines in the main text. This means a lot of flipping back and forth and not knowing which lines in the text have notes as you’re reading.
Recommendations: Read this book if you're at all a fan of medieval history, medieval literature, or ancient Ireland. Seriously, it's amazing.
A Burnable Book by Bruce Holsinger
4.0
A historical fiction novel written by a medievalist? Starring John Gower? Concerning a dangerous book? SIGN ME UP.
Things I Liked
1. Historicity: Because this book is written by a medievalist, a lot of the descriptions are well-researched and portrayed more accurately than someone without a background in medieval studies. This accuracy serves to ground the story in a historical past that is not romanticized (a refreshing change from typical fiction which views the middle ages as some heathen, magical time).
2. Eleanor/Edgar: I love this character! Edgar/Eleanor is a biologically male individual who works as a female prostitute and identifies as a female in a male body. Holsinger uses both pronouns (“he” and “she”) to describe this character, and moves this character throughout medieval England in a way that is not cliche or stereotyped, but instead, is given interesting motives not dependent on his/her gender. It’s a fantastic way to view the middle ages as way more complicated and less uptight (religiously?) than most people would have originally thought.
3. Multiple Storylines: Some people found the shifting perspective to be confusing, but I personally loved that readers aren’t stuck in one perspective for extended lengths of time. Also, the changing perspectives give readers to see all walks of life: rather than only seeing the aristocrats and court life, we get views of the streets, the law, etc. Such a broad range gives us a more panoramic view of the world in which the novel takes place.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Tone: Holsinger has a tendency to write in a matter than can be interpreted as over-dramatic or cheesy. While I think this type of writing can be useful and even appropriate for some works of fiction, in this novel, it only serves to detract from the action and render it less grave. Sometimes the tone is a bit fun in the book, but overall, I could have done with less drama.
2. Overexplaining: To be fair, most readers know very little about the Middle Ages (especially the politics of the Middle Ages), and thus, a little explanation is needed. However, for me, I found these explanations to go beyond what was appropriate and border on tedium. There were many moments that Holsinger could have left implied or shown rather than told, such as Gower’s impressions of various figures. A little more leaving things unsaid would have pushed readers to draw their own conclusions and make the novel feel more mysterious.
3. Stakes: Ok, this might seem to be contradictory to my last point, but it seems like, despite all the overexplaining, Holsinger didn’t communicate enough the gravity of the situation with the book. Why is it so important to preserve the king’s life? (Duh, he’s the king… but modern readers don’t necessarily care because this is a trope used again and again with historical conspiracy plots.) Without giving too much away: Why hadn’t people been looking for the book longer? (The answer is in the novel, but if I were Gower, I would be wondering this from the start… why is this book business only blowing up now - at the 13th of 13 prophecies - and not before? Something fishy is happening.)
Recommendations: Definitely pick this book up if you're a fan of books set in the Middle Ages (post-Norman Conquest) or of books about books. You might also like this book if you liked Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose or, I would venture, Carlos Ruis Zafon's Shadow of the Wind.
Things I Liked
1. Historicity: Because this book is written by a medievalist, a lot of the descriptions are well-researched and portrayed more accurately than someone without a background in medieval studies. This accuracy serves to ground the story in a historical past that is not romanticized (a refreshing change from typical fiction which views the middle ages as some heathen, magical time).
2. Eleanor/Edgar: I love this character! Edgar/Eleanor is a biologically male individual who works as a female prostitute and identifies as a female in a male body. Holsinger uses both pronouns (“he” and “she”) to describe this character, and moves this character throughout medieval England in a way that is not cliche or stereotyped, but instead, is given interesting motives not dependent on his/her gender. It’s a fantastic way to view the middle ages as way more complicated and less uptight (religiously?) than most people would have originally thought.
3. Multiple Storylines: Some people found the shifting perspective to be confusing, but I personally loved that readers aren’t stuck in one perspective for extended lengths of time. Also, the changing perspectives give readers to see all walks of life: rather than only seeing the aristocrats and court life, we get views of the streets, the law, etc. Such a broad range gives us a more panoramic view of the world in which the novel takes place.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Tone: Holsinger has a tendency to write in a matter than can be interpreted as over-dramatic or cheesy. While I think this type of writing can be useful and even appropriate for some works of fiction, in this novel, it only serves to detract from the action and render it less grave. Sometimes the tone is a bit fun in the book, but overall, I could have done with less drama.
2. Overexplaining: To be fair, most readers know very little about the Middle Ages (especially the politics of the Middle Ages), and thus, a little explanation is needed. However, for me, I found these explanations to go beyond what was appropriate and border on tedium. There were many moments that Holsinger could have left implied or shown rather than told, such as Gower’s impressions of various figures. A little more leaving things unsaid would have pushed readers to draw their own conclusions and make the novel feel more mysterious.
3. Stakes: Ok, this might seem to be contradictory to my last point, but it seems like, despite all the overexplaining, Holsinger didn’t communicate enough the gravity of the situation with the book. Why is it so important to preserve the king’s life? (Duh, he’s the king… but modern readers don’t necessarily care because this is a trope used again and again with historical conspiracy plots.) Without giving too much away: Why hadn’t people been looking for the book longer? (The answer is in the novel, but if I were Gower, I would be wondering this from the start… why is this book business only blowing up now - at the 13th of 13 prophecies - and not before? Something fishy is happening.)
Recommendations: Definitely pick this book up if you're a fan of books set in the Middle Ages (post-Norman Conquest) or of books about books. You might also like this book if you liked Umberto Eco's The Name of the Rose or, I would venture, Carlos Ruis Zafon's Shadow of the Wind.
Red Rising by Pierce Brown
3.0
Maybe closer to 3.5 stars.
I actually red this book as a result of a recommendation from my former high school English teacher. Since this teacher had a profound impact on my literary tastes while I was a student, I decided to pick up this book during some down time. Overall, the premise was incredible and I really enjoyed Brown's narration. However, there did seem to be elements that relied on tropes I had seen before, so the read wasn't as captivating as I had hoped.
Things I Liked
1. Setting: This novel takes place on Mars in a very futuristic-feeling society that is made more familiar through the allusions to Roman mythology and history. I loved the fact that we get scenes of what I can only describe as highly scientific (almost fantastical) technologies alongside names of Roman emperors and philosophers. The juxtaposition is rather jarring, but in a way that drives home the notion of a world that is supposed to be at the forefront of civilization.
2. Prose: Brown’s writing itself sets the pace of the novel so that form matches function. When the action was happening, the sentences got shorter, so reading felt quicker. The resulting reading experience is very intense and there is a deliberate effort on the writer's part to craft a novel that involves the reader emotionally in the plot in ways other than description.
3. Darrow's Physical Transformation: Wow. This part was probably the most memorable part for me, and the writing was one of the best I've seen in a YA novel. I can think of a bunch of other characters who undergo bodily transformations and the authors/creators just kind of gloss over it, but with Red Rising, readers really feel the pain of the experience and get a sense of what’s happening on a micro level.
4. Seeing People as Complex: From the get-go of this novel, readers are led to view the Golds (people in power) as all vain, shallow, power-hungry oppressors. Some of them are like that, certainly, but this book shows readers that not all of them are terrible people. Such a multi-valenced view thus leads readers to hate the social structure that is the main problem of the book and not the individuals themselves.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Women: There is a definite lack of females in this book. But while some may be quick to point out that there are Golds who are named and have active roles in the plot, aside from one named Mustang, they don’t seem as well developed as the male characters. Additionally, a number of things made me uncomfortable in regards to the female characters: 1.) The main character’s wife, Eo, dies at the beginning of the book, and though she technically isn’t fridged (she kind of chooses her death), her death serves as the impetus for the main character’s storyline. He does what he does in memory of her, and throughout the book, we are constantly reminded of her death by means of his flashbacks, pining, and grieving. 2.) In the Red society, there are male and female jobs based on typical male and female gender roles. 3.) In the Institute, the threat of rape and the actual committing of rape is rampant. While I recognize that historically yes, rape does happen in war, I was disappointed that it had to be all over the book during the Institute’s war game. 4.) There is definitely an imbalance of gender in this book. Most of the main characters are male. The only exception is Mustang. There are other females, yes, but we see so little of them, comparatively. I would have liked to see one of the other characters as a different gender so the war game didn’t seem so much like a testosterone fest.
2. Chosen One Trope: Darrow, the main character, is a low-born person disguised (sort of) as a high-born person in order to infiltrate and take down the oppressive society on Mars. The thing is, Darrow is made to be almost perfect. He’s chosen for seemingly no real reason other than he has a kind of passion (he doesn’t, really. Eo had more potential and drive than he does) that the rebel band likes. He consumes some sort of intelligence booster that makes him smarter, so no problem there. They change his body so it is perfect. Great. He cannot really fail. He succeeds at everything. He is the Chosen One. After a time, I was wishing that Eo had been the one to ascend and infiltrate the Golds as opposed to Darrow.
Recommendations: Pick up this novel if you're a fan of science fiction and the colonization of Mars, and also if you're a fan of war games or Roman/Greek mythology. You might also like this book if you liked The Red Queen, The Hunger Games, or Ender's Game.
I actually red this book as a result of a recommendation from my former high school English teacher. Since this teacher had a profound impact on my literary tastes while I was a student, I decided to pick up this book during some down time. Overall, the premise was incredible and I really enjoyed Brown's narration. However, there did seem to be elements that relied on tropes I had seen before, so the read wasn't as captivating as I had hoped.
Things I Liked
1. Setting: This novel takes place on Mars in a very futuristic-feeling society that is made more familiar through the allusions to Roman mythology and history. I loved the fact that we get scenes of what I can only describe as highly scientific (almost fantastical) technologies alongside names of Roman emperors and philosophers. The juxtaposition is rather jarring, but in a way that drives home the notion of a world that is supposed to be at the forefront of civilization.
2. Prose: Brown’s writing itself sets the pace of the novel so that form matches function. When the action was happening, the sentences got shorter, so reading felt quicker. The resulting reading experience is very intense and there is a deliberate effort on the writer's part to craft a novel that involves the reader emotionally in the plot in ways other than description.
3. Darrow's Physical Transformation: Wow. This part was probably the most memorable part for me, and the writing was one of the best I've seen in a YA novel. I can think of a bunch of other characters who undergo bodily transformations and the authors/creators just kind of gloss over it, but with Red Rising, readers really feel the pain of the experience and get a sense of what’s happening on a micro level.
4. Seeing People as Complex: From the get-go of this novel, readers are led to view the Golds (people in power) as all vain, shallow, power-hungry oppressors. Some of them are like that, certainly, but this book shows readers that not all of them are terrible people. Such a multi-valenced view thus leads readers to hate the social structure that is the main problem of the book and not the individuals themselves.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Women: There is a definite lack of females in this book. But while some may be quick to point out that there are Golds who are named and have active roles in the plot, aside from one named Mustang, they don’t seem as well developed as the male characters. Additionally, a number of things made me uncomfortable in regards to the female characters: 1.) The main character’s wife, Eo, dies at the beginning of the book, and though she technically isn’t fridged (she kind of chooses her death), her death serves as the impetus for the main character’s storyline. He does what he does in memory of her, and throughout the book, we are constantly reminded of her death by means of his flashbacks, pining, and grieving. 2.) In the Red society, there are male and female jobs based on typical male and female gender roles. 3.) In the Institute, the threat of rape and the actual committing of rape is rampant. While I recognize that historically yes, rape does happen in war, I was disappointed that it had to be all over the book during the Institute’s war game. 4.) There is definitely an imbalance of gender in this book. Most of the main characters are male. The only exception is Mustang. There are other females, yes, but we see so little of them, comparatively. I would have liked to see one of the other characters as a different gender so the war game didn’t seem so much like a testosterone fest.
2. Chosen One Trope: Darrow, the main character, is a low-born person disguised (sort of) as a high-born person in order to infiltrate and take down the oppressive society on Mars. The thing is, Darrow is made to be almost perfect. He’s chosen for seemingly no real reason other than he has a kind of passion (he doesn’t, really. Eo had more potential and drive than he does) that the rebel band likes. He consumes some sort of intelligence booster that makes him smarter, so no problem there. They change his body so it is perfect. Great. He cannot really fail. He succeeds at everything. He is the Chosen One. After a time, I was wishing that Eo had been the one to ascend and infiltrate the Golds as opposed to Darrow.
Recommendations: Pick up this novel if you're a fan of science fiction and the colonization of Mars, and also if you're a fan of war games or Roman/Greek mythology. You might also like this book if you liked The Red Queen, The Hunger Games, or Ender's Game.
Horns by Joe Hill
4.0
Honestly, I was skeptical about this novel when I first picked it up, but boy, I'm so glad I gave it a go anyway. Joe Hill's Horns is extremely funny, thoughtful, and an all-around good time for fans of horror, murder mystery, and dark humor.
Things I Liked
1. Storytelling: The story of Horns takes a commonplace plot line (a murder, crime of passion, etc) and puts a supernatural spin on it. It made the murder/mystery plot over all feel more unique (even though the supernatural+crime isn't exactly scarce nowadays), and as a result, I felt more connected to the characters than I have in any other novel with this kind of plot.
2. Dark Humor: What can I say? I loved it.
3. Magical Realism: Readers never get a clear explanation of how exactly Ig came by the horns. We never get an exploration of the mythology or how things like this work. But that's ok, since I never found myself absolutely needing to know these things, and I just took the events of the plot at face value. Ig grows horns? Ok, cool. Ig is turning into a demon? Sure, ok. Overall, it really helped to focus on the murder and Ig’s process of seeking revenge, rather than getting too caught up on magic or folklore or whatever else informed this transformation.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Queer Characters/Homophobic Characters: Ok, so I need to explain what I mean. I am not saying writers shouldn’t include homophobic characters. They can, and they can use it well in a plot. What I didn’t like in Horns, however, was that homophobia seemed to be used a tool for something else. Let me explain further: there are two cops in the novel, both male, and one has hidden romantic feelings for the other but the other cop tells Ig that if any man were to do anything homoerotic to him, he’d shove his baton up his ass. So Ig, with his demon powers, convinces the gay cop to just surprise the other by just going down on him. Ig then thinks about how great that will be to turn them against each other. But the thing is, it would be the gay cop who gets beaten, effectively punishing him for having romantic feelings for the other. Although it turns out okay later and the two cops actually do start a romantic relationship, the attitude that Ig takes towards them didn’t sit right with me. I’m not saying that Hill himself is homophobic, just that this particular part of the book seemed problematic.
2.Big Themes: Ok, this is just a personal thing, I think, but I wish Hill had been a tad more heavy-handed with the big themes. Like people’s hypocrisy, people blaming Ig for Merrin’s death, etc. Lay on more stuff that really gets to those things instead of pushing them to the background.
3.Secrets: So, the horns cause people to reveal their dark secrets to Ig, but it seems like a lot of the secrets are sexual in nature (especially depraved sexuality). I think a little more diversity would have made this story a bit more enjoyable.
Recommendations: Definitely pick this book up if you're a fan of mythological demons, murder-mystery, or dark humor.
Things I Liked
1. Storytelling: The story of Horns takes a commonplace plot line (a murder, crime of passion, etc) and puts a supernatural spin on it. It made the murder/mystery plot over all feel more unique (even though the supernatural+crime isn't exactly scarce nowadays), and as a result, I felt more connected to the characters than I have in any other novel with this kind of plot.
2. Dark Humor: What can I say? I loved it.
3. Magical Realism: Readers never get a clear explanation of how exactly Ig came by the horns. We never get an exploration of the mythology or how things like this work. But that's ok, since I never found myself absolutely needing to know these things, and I just took the events of the plot at face value. Ig grows horns? Ok, cool. Ig is turning into a demon? Sure, ok. Overall, it really helped to focus on the murder and Ig’s process of seeking revenge, rather than getting too caught up on magic or folklore or whatever else informed this transformation.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Queer Characters/Homophobic Characters: Ok, so I need to explain what I mean. I am not saying writers shouldn’t include homophobic characters. They can, and they can use it well in a plot. What I didn’t like in Horns, however, was that homophobia seemed to be used a tool for something else. Let me explain further: there are two cops in the novel, both male, and one has hidden romantic feelings for the other but the other cop tells Ig that if any man were to do anything homoerotic to him, he’d shove his baton up his ass. So Ig, with his demon powers, convinces the gay cop to just surprise the other by just going down on him. Ig then thinks about how great that will be to turn them against each other. But the thing is, it would be the gay cop who gets beaten, effectively punishing him for having romantic feelings for the other. Although it turns out okay later and the two cops actually do start a romantic relationship, the attitude that Ig takes towards them didn’t sit right with me. I’m not saying that Hill himself is homophobic, just that this particular part of the book seemed problematic.
2.Big Themes: Ok, this is just a personal thing, I think, but I wish Hill had been a tad more heavy-handed with the big themes. Like people’s hypocrisy, people blaming Ig for Merrin’s death, etc. Lay on more stuff that really gets to those things instead of pushing them to the background.
3.Secrets: So, the horns cause people to reveal their dark secrets to Ig, but it seems like a lot of the secrets are sexual in nature (especially depraved sexuality). I think a little more diversity would have made this story a bit more enjoyable.
Recommendations: Definitely pick this book up if you're a fan of mythological demons, murder-mystery, or dark humor.
Little Brother by Cory Doctorow
3.0
I don't remember why I picked up this book, but I remember feeling encouraged when I read a blurb from Neil Gaiman praising it. While the premise is interesting and it is indeed a fun hacker-against-the-government story, there were some aspects that left me disappointed, especially in terms of narrative.
Things I Liked
1.Real-World Issues: Little Brother does a great job of getting people fired up about privacy laws, human rights, terrorism, and the concept of freedom. Since the book is marketed towards young adults, younger readers can get involved with these larger issues that are hot topics today. It’s great to get them involved, too, because the medium of fiction is a safe space to explore these things that will (hopefully) develop readers into great thinkers.
2. Education: Doctorow does this cool thing where, at specific moments in the novel, he takes the opportunity to explain computers/technology in a way that is accessible to a non-tech audience. While these parts are not necessarily the most exciting in terms of plot, understanding the mechanisms of a WiFi network or whatever really helps readers appreciate what’s happening in the main storyline.
3. Tone: I liked Marcus’ attitude throughout the book. It was witty, sharp, and completely relatable.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Time: While the pace of the novel itself was good, I had a hard time suspending my disbelief enough to follow some of the events. It seems as though things that would happen over months took days in the novel, such as the sudden appearance of security cameras all over the city.
2. Characters: Maybe it was just me, but I didn’t feel like the characters developed over the course of the novel. They seemed to be the same at the beginning and the end, despite the things that had happened to them. Furthermore, there was no depth of emotion. Marcus tells the reader that he’s scared, but I couldn’t quite feel it.
3.Loose Storytelling: I couldn’t quite believe that that government would illegally arrest a bunch of teenagers and subject them to torture with so little a premise as there was at the begining of the novel. All they did was wave for help - how is that suspicious? If Doctorow had leaned on something else (Marcus’ past actions of breaching security measures at school, for example), I might have bought into the whole thing. Also - why would the government let someone they had been holding illegally go? That’s way too big of a risk, and not one I understood.
4.Under-Use of Characters: How does a refugee family from North Korea deal with the events of the novel? How do people with dark skin react? We’ll never know, because as soon as things go down, Doctorow gets rid of characters with these traits, claiming they are “too scared” to get involved. Personally, I would have loved to see what they were experiencing, but instead, too much focus is devoted to Marcus. This would also have been a great opportunity to explore racism in connection to terrorism and surveillance, but we don’t get that.
Recommendations: Overall, a fun read for anyone interested in dystopic societies or stories about computer hackers and technology. You may also enjoy this novel if you liked Farenheit 451 or 1984
Things I Liked
1.Real-World Issues: Little Brother does a great job of getting people fired up about privacy laws, human rights, terrorism, and the concept of freedom. Since the book is marketed towards young adults, younger readers can get involved with these larger issues that are hot topics today. It’s great to get them involved, too, because the medium of fiction is a safe space to explore these things that will (hopefully) develop readers into great thinkers.
2. Education: Doctorow does this cool thing where, at specific moments in the novel, he takes the opportunity to explain computers/technology in a way that is accessible to a non-tech audience. While these parts are not necessarily the most exciting in terms of plot, understanding the mechanisms of a WiFi network or whatever really helps readers appreciate what’s happening in the main storyline.
3. Tone: I liked Marcus’ attitude throughout the book. It was witty, sharp, and completely relatable.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Time: While the pace of the novel itself was good, I had a hard time suspending my disbelief enough to follow some of the events. It seems as though things that would happen over months took days in the novel, such as the sudden appearance of security cameras all over the city.
2. Characters: Maybe it was just me, but I didn’t feel like the characters developed over the course of the novel. They seemed to be the same at the beginning and the end, despite the things that had happened to them. Furthermore, there was no depth of emotion. Marcus tells the reader that he’s scared, but I couldn’t quite feel it.
3.Loose Storytelling: I couldn’t quite believe that that government would illegally arrest a bunch of teenagers and subject them to torture with so little a premise as there was at the begining of the novel. All they did was wave for help - how is that suspicious? If Doctorow had leaned on something else (Marcus’ past actions of breaching security measures at school, for example), I might have bought into the whole thing. Also - why would the government let someone they had been holding illegally go? That’s way too big of a risk, and not one I understood.
4.Under-Use of Characters: How does a refugee family from North Korea deal with the events of the novel? How do people with dark skin react? We’ll never know, because as soon as things go down, Doctorow gets rid of characters with these traits, claiming they are “too scared” to get involved. Personally, I would have loved to see what they were experiencing, but instead, too much focus is devoted to Marcus. This would also have been a great opportunity to explore racism in connection to terrorism and surveillance, but we don’t get that.
Recommendations: Overall, a fun read for anyone interested in dystopic societies or stories about computer hackers and technology. You may also enjoy this novel if you liked Farenheit 451 or 1984
The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch
3.0
Maybe closer to 3.5.
I picked up this novel after a stellar review from Patrick Rothfuss and after hearing a lot of my friends gush about it (at least those who are interested in fantasy novels). Overall, it's a very fun read with a lot of action, beautiful imagery, and swearing that seems like an art form. It's a rather swashbuckly tale, though it's not about piracy, and lovers of rogues, thieves, and the like will love this novel and its sequels.
Things I Liked
1. World Building: Scott Lynch’s novel is, as George RR Martin says, “gorgeously realized.” Camorr is so built up that readers lose the sensation of it being a fantasy and instead, it feels like one is reading about a historical time and place. Everything detail is so convincing and, on top of that, the aesthetic aspects draw the reader in. Camorr has sort of a medieval/early modern Venetian feel to it, which is a refreshing break from the typical “medieval England” basis for a large number of fantasy novels.
2.Pace: Lynch is very good at crafting his prose with vivid imagery, but he is also very conscious of moving the plot along so there is no “lag time.” Despite this novel being over 700 pages, readers don’t feel it because there is seemingly no “fluff” or unnecessary filler.
3. Wit: The characters (as well as the writing) are incredibly witty. This aspect serves to push the plot by giving street thugs the smarts and intelligence to take on their world. It’s a great way to show how characters from a lower social class can operate in other social circles.
4. Interludes: In between every chapter is an interlude that gives the back story for the Gentleman Bastards (mostly their childhood and training). I very much appreciated this method as opposed to a giant information-dump at the outset of the novel, and the breaks these interludes created served to enhance some areas of the plot, making them “heavier” and more likely to stand out to the reader.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Attachment to Characters: Although I thoroughly enjoyed the plot, I never found myself attached to any particular character. Part of this may be due to the fact that Lynch’s prose doesn’t offer us insight into the characters’ thoughts and feelings. I never knew what Locke’s fears were, what he liked or didn’t like, or anything about his personality other than what related to thieving. They all had to be inferred, which is a fine way of doing things, but not when it's difficult to do so.
2. Female Characters: Don’t get me wrong, there are ladies in this book. However, it doesn’t negate the fact that all females largely play supporting roles and receive little character depth or “screen time.” This made the novel feel a bit like a “boy’s club.” I am not suggesting that Lynch should have made the book about a female character, but if we take a tally of all the named women in the book, most of them are victims Granted, Dona Sofia does get to be a bit of a badass by taking charge at the end of the book, and there is an elderly female woman who is the head of a secret police force, but they are seen so little and I wish we had gotten to follow them around longer.
3. Unnecessary Scenes: Despite the exciting pace of the novel, there were many scenes that were not necessarily contributing to the overall plot. While they were by no means “boring,” they did, however, detract from the main action. For example, the first ~200 pages of the novel are essentially the heist with very little attention to the movements of the Gray King or the political turmoil of the criminal network. We also get an extended look (50 pages? More?) of Locke trying to steal some clothes so he can impersonate Lukas Fehrwight to acquire more money. While fun to read, I don’t think these episodes needed to be as extended as they were because they made readers forget the main drive of the novel: working against the Gray King.
Recommendations: Definitely read this book if you're a fan of thieves, rogues, pirates, etc. and stories related to heists and gang conflict.
I picked up this novel after a stellar review from Patrick Rothfuss and after hearing a lot of my friends gush about it (at least those who are interested in fantasy novels). Overall, it's a very fun read with a lot of action, beautiful imagery, and swearing that seems like an art form. It's a rather swashbuckly tale, though it's not about piracy, and lovers of rogues, thieves, and the like will love this novel and its sequels.
Things I Liked
1. World Building: Scott Lynch’s novel is, as George RR Martin says, “gorgeously realized.” Camorr is so built up that readers lose the sensation of it being a fantasy and instead, it feels like one is reading about a historical time and place. Everything detail is so convincing and, on top of that, the aesthetic aspects draw the reader in. Camorr has sort of a medieval/early modern Venetian feel to it, which is a refreshing break from the typical “medieval England” basis for a large number of fantasy novels.
2.Pace: Lynch is very good at crafting his prose with vivid imagery, but he is also very conscious of moving the plot along so there is no “lag time.” Despite this novel being over 700 pages, readers don’t feel it because there is seemingly no “fluff” or unnecessary filler.
3. Wit: The characters (as well as the writing) are incredibly witty. This aspect serves to push the plot by giving street thugs the smarts and intelligence to take on their world. It’s a great way to show how characters from a lower social class can operate in other social circles.
4. Interludes: In between every chapter is an interlude that gives the back story for the Gentleman Bastards (mostly their childhood and training). I very much appreciated this method as opposed to a giant information-dump at the outset of the novel, and the breaks these interludes created served to enhance some areas of the plot, making them “heavier” and more likely to stand out to the reader.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Attachment to Characters: Although I thoroughly enjoyed the plot, I never found myself attached to any particular character. Part of this may be due to the fact that Lynch’s prose doesn’t offer us insight into the characters’ thoughts and feelings. I never knew what Locke’s fears were, what he liked or didn’t like, or anything about his personality other than what related to thieving. They all had to be inferred, which is a fine way of doing things, but not when it's difficult to do so.
2. Female Characters: Don’t get me wrong, there are ladies in this book. However, it doesn’t negate the fact that all females largely play supporting roles and receive little character depth or “screen time.” This made the novel feel a bit like a “boy’s club.” I am not suggesting that Lynch should have made the book about a female character, but if we take a tally of all the named women in the book, most of them are victims
Spoiler
(SPOILERS: Nazca is killed to further the Gray King’s plan, Sofia is the victim of a heist, the Berangias sisters are basically henchmen and get killed, Sabetha is literally only mentioned - we never see her, etc.) or minor characters that serve to help the “main” characters with something and are quickly forgotten (such as Felice the prostitute, Jessaline and Janellaine d'Aubart, etc.)3. Unnecessary Scenes: Despite the exciting pace of the novel, there were many scenes that were not necessarily contributing to the overall plot. While they were by no means “boring,” they did, however, detract from the main action. For example, the first ~200 pages of the novel are essentially the heist with very little attention to the movements of the Gray King or the political turmoil of the criminal network. We also get an extended look (50 pages? More?) of Locke trying to steal some clothes so he can impersonate Lukas Fehrwight to acquire more money. While fun to read, I don’t think these episodes needed to be as extended as they were because they made readers forget the main drive of the novel: working against the Gray King.
Recommendations: Definitely read this book if you're a fan of thieves, rogues, pirates, etc. and stories related to heists and gang conflict.
The Knife of Never Letting Go by Patrick Ness
4.0
One of my colleagues recommended that I read this book, and since I trust her judgment, I decided to give it a whirl in between a streak of assignments and grading. The Knife of Never Letting Go is a young adult book, but don't let that deter any of you; it has some big themes and complicated morality that left me scratching my head.
Things I Liked
1. Writing Style: This book is set in a time/place where everyone can read each other’s thoughts, and Ness brilliantly captures that by writing the entire novel in first person using some stream of consciousness techniques. The book also uses different fonts to set apart Noise (the thoughts) from speech, and that visual difference on the page really makes an impact in the minds of the reader. Lastly, Ness uses incorrect grammar and spelling to reflect the narrator’s (Todd) lack of education - it was a good stylistic technique that made the connection between reader and character feel more unmediated.
2.Manchee: My love for the talking dog knows no bounds. I’ll leave it at that.
3. Themes/Symbolism: If you take this book at face value, I think it’s a lot less interesting than if you read the inspiration behind it. My copy of the book says that Ness got the idea for a world of Noise from our present world being full of technology (information being everywhere and always accessible via smartphones, etc.). While this book doesn’t read as anti-technology, I think that keeping inspiration in the back of your mind while reading makes for a more thought-provoking experience. Even when readers find out what’s really going on, this background info puts a new spin on the plot that isn’t otherwise apparent.
4.Relationships: I really liked that the relationship between the novel’s two main characters, Todd and Viola, wasn’t romantic and it wasn’t too friendly (they only know each other for a few days, I think), but it did develop and grow and turned into something heartwarming and emotional by the end of the book. If you're not into YA that contains a romance plot underneath a dystopian or science fiction narrative, this book will be a blissful relief from that.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Do People Not Really Die? There’s one character specifically who gets knocked around quite a bit and is seriously injured so many times that it’s a wonder he didn’t die the first time. I wasn’t really a fan, since it seemed almost comical that someone could just NOT DIE.
2. Endless Pursuit Plot: I’m not a huge fan of plots that revolve around being constantly pursued and require the characters to always be on the run. It gets tiring after a while, and though the tiring feeling may be the point, I wish there were other things going on than just running from a bad guy.
3. Symbolic Destruction: Ok, so this is a tiny spoiler.
4. Withholding Information: Maybe it was Ness’s intention to withhold a lot of information from the reader in order to make us feel more like Todd feels, but in a world where information is always available, this move felt frustrating (especially when Todd knows something that the reader doesn’t).
Recommendations: Definitely pick up this book if you're a fan of YA science fiction or dystopic fiction, particularly if you're interests are in mind-reading/telepathy. You might also like this book if you're interested in books involving religious extremism and space colonization, though don't expect there to be huge battles between aliens and humans.
Things I Liked
1. Writing Style: This book is set in a time/place where everyone can read each other’s thoughts, and Ness brilliantly captures that by writing the entire novel in first person using some stream of consciousness techniques. The book also uses different fonts to set apart Noise (the thoughts) from speech, and that visual difference on the page really makes an impact in the minds of the reader. Lastly, Ness uses incorrect grammar and spelling to reflect the narrator’s (Todd) lack of education - it was a good stylistic technique that made the connection between reader and character feel more unmediated.
2.Manchee: My love for the talking dog knows no bounds. I’ll leave it at that.
3. Themes/Symbolism: If you take this book at face value, I think it’s a lot less interesting than if you read the inspiration behind it. My copy of the book says that Ness got the idea for a world of Noise from our present world being full of technology (information being everywhere and always accessible via smartphones, etc.). While this book doesn’t read as anti-technology, I think that keeping inspiration in the back of your mind while reading makes for a more thought-provoking experience. Even when readers find out what’s really going on, this background info puts a new spin on the plot that isn’t otherwise apparent.
4.Relationships: I really liked that the relationship between the novel’s two main characters, Todd and Viola, wasn’t romantic and it wasn’t too friendly (they only know each other for a few days, I think), but it did develop and grow and turned into something heartwarming and emotional by the end of the book. If you're not into YA that contains a romance plot underneath a dystopian or science fiction narrative, this book will be a blissful relief from that.
Things I Didn't Like
1. Do People Not Really Die? There’s one character specifically who gets knocked around quite a bit and is seriously injured so many times that it’s a wonder he didn’t die the first time. I wasn’t really a fan, since it seemed almost comical that someone could just NOT DIE.
2. Endless Pursuit Plot: I’m not a huge fan of plots that revolve around being constantly pursued and require the characters to always be on the run. It gets tiring after a while, and though the tiring feeling may be the point, I wish there were other things going on than just running from a bad guy.
3. Symbolic Destruction: Ok, so this is a tiny spoiler.
Spoiler
Todd is being pursued because his downfall would mean the elevation of another person - symbolically. Without giving too much away, I want to say that I don’t like these blatant, in-your-face symbolic goals. For me, suspension of disbelief is harder when the villain is just pursuing a protagonist to destroy him/her just to make a symbolic point (as opposed to actually working to eliminate a threat).4. Withholding Information: Maybe it was Ness’s intention to withhold a lot of information from the reader in order to make us feel more like Todd feels, but in a world where information is always available, this move felt frustrating (especially when Todd knows something that the reader doesn’t).
Recommendations: Definitely pick up this book if you're a fan of YA science fiction or dystopic fiction, particularly if you're interests are in mind-reading/telepathy. You might also like this book if you're interested in books involving religious extremism and space colonization, though don't expect there to be huge battles between aliens and humans.
The Eyre Affair by Jasper Fforde
3.0
Probably closer to 3.5 stars.
I received this novel from a friend as a gift, her rationale being it's one of her favorites and we have similar literary tastes (especially our love for Jane Eyre). As a whole, I enjoyed it. The premise is clever and it's a fun sort of detective-story for literary enthusiasts. There are some pitfalls that rubbed me the wrong way, but it's a light read and the shortcomings don't completely overwhelm the reading experience.
Things I Liked
1. It's a Book About Books: I love books about books. They’re some of my favorite things, and Fforde’s novel is definitely in that category. The world he builds is one in which people love literature - it’s every English major’s dream, really, that people are so passionate about reading. Not to mention that the author also explores the thin lines between fiction and reality in ways that make me want to jump into books myself.
2. Humor: Fforde’s novel is delightfully funny with punny character names and clever ways of twisting literary events so that they fall in line with his own story. It was so much fun to follow a crime story while also laughing at some of the plays on words and Baconians going door-to-door to argue about who was the real author of Shakespeare’s plays.
3. Premise: While I initially had my doubts about the whole jumping-into-literature stuff, I found that actually, Fforde managed to pull it off quite well and creating high stakes that was more than just “the book might change.” Imagine weaponizing a device that could allow you to jump into books and bring things back to your world - pretty scary, yeah?
Things I Didn't Like
1. Pace: As fun as this book was, the pace was way too quick. There were some moments I wished had been more fully explored or given weight for their seriousness/effect on the plot or characters. Instead, I felt like I was moving too fast and had a hard time rooting myself in the world Fforde had built. Furthermore, when we do get to the Jane Eyre stuff, it comes at 100 pages from the end of the novel (not enough time, I think). There’s a lot of sitting around at this point - Thursday waits weeks while she’s in the book to nab the villain.
2.Character Depth: Thursday is a delightful character, but I didn’t feel connected to her in any way. Despite the first-person narration, readers can't always identify with her emotions because they came up too quickly and then went away. There's little interiority. For example, readers don’t know if she’s mad or upset until she has an outburst at someone else.
3. Excess Stuff: I’m not sure how else to describe this. Fforde built up a really interesting alternate world, but he also seemed to delve too much into these aspects instead of developing his plot. There’s time travel, vampire hunting, near-immortal villains, werewolves, and cloning - but these things seemed to get in the way of the main events of the plot. Yes, the time traveling father was fun and I actually kind of liked him, but he served very little purpose in the book (as did the vampire hunting, the pet dodo, etc.)
Recommendations: Read this book if you're a literature enthusiast, English major, or all-around fan of science fiction, fantasy, crime, or Jane Eyre. You may also enjoy this novel if you liked Cornelia Funke's Inkheart.
I received this novel from a friend as a gift, her rationale being it's one of her favorites and we have similar literary tastes (especially our love for Jane Eyre). As a whole, I enjoyed it. The premise is clever and it's a fun sort of detective-story for literary enthusiasts. There are some pitfalls that rubbed me the wrong way, but it's a light read and the shortcomings don't completely overwhelm the reading experience.
Things I Liked
1. It's a Book About Books: I love books about books. They’re some of my favorite things, and Fforde’s novel is definitely in that category. The world he builds is one in which people love literature - it’s every English major’s dream, really, that people are so passionate about reading. Not to mention that the author also explores the thin lines between fiction and reality in ways that make me want to jump into books myself.
2. Humor: Fforde’s novel is delightfully funny with punny character names and clever ways of twisting literary events so that they fall in line with his own story. It was so much fun to follow a crime story while also laughing at some of the plays on words and Baconians going door-to-door to argue about who was the real author of Shakespeare’s plays.
3. Premise: While I initially had my doubts about the whole jumping-into-literature stuff, I found that actually, Fforde managed to pull it off quite well and creating high stakes that was more than just “the book might change.” Imagine weaponizing a device that could allow you to jump into books and bring things back to your world - pretty scary, yeah?
Things I Didn't Like
1. Pace: As fun as this book was, the pace was way too quick. There were some moments I wished had been more fully explored or given weight for their seriousness/effect on the plot or characters. Instead, I felt like I was moving too fast and had a hard time rooting myself in the world Fforde had built. Furthermore, when we do get to the Jane Eyre stuff, it comes at 100 pages from the end of the novel (not enough time, I think). There’s a lot of sitting around at this point - Thursday waits weeks while she’s in the book to nab the villain.
2.Character Depth: Thursday is a delightful character, but I didn’t feel connected to her in any way. Despite the first-person narration, readers can't always identify with her emotions because they came up too quickly and then went away. There's little interiority. For example, readers don’t know if she’s mad or upset until she has an outburst at someone else.
3. Excess Stuff: I’m not sure how else to describe this. Fforde built up a really interesting alternate world, but he also seemed to delve too much into these aspects instead of developing his plot. There’s time travel, vampire hunting, near-immortal villains, werewolves, and cloning - but these things seemed to get in the way of the main events of the plot. Yes, the time traveling father was fun and I actually kind of liked him, but he served very little purpose in the book (as did the vampire hunting, the pet dodo, etc.)
Recommendations: Read this book if you're a literature enthusiast, English major, or all-around fan of science fiction, fantasy, crime, or Jane Eyre. You may also enjoy this novel if you liked Cornelia Funke's Inkheart.