I also read, fairly recently, The Winter Sea, by Susanna Kearsley. It was okay. Super predictable, but lovely scenery (Scotland) and one of those fun, back-and-forths between the past (first decade of the 18th century) and "present." Plus, the main character - heroine, really - is a novelist, but a writer of historical fiction, so it's always fun to hear about someone doing research, even if it's just barely mentioned. And who doesn't love a good castle? Very light, rather fluffy, but totally absorbing - I basically read it in two nights, losing sleep, much to my shame, in the interests of getting to the first kiss - but sometimes a little cheese hits the spot. Wine would have gone nicely with this book too...
The writing wasn't anything really special, but it wasn't bad - better, I think, than probably many books in the historical romance-mystery genre, although maybe I'm just being a snob there. I'd read others by her, anyways, if they weren't apparently super popular at every library I have access to; I actually ended up with Winter Sea when i couldn't get my hands another book by Kearsley that I had heard about and that sounded fun.
Anyhow, don't really remember when I read it. Loaned it to T, so we'll see if she enjoys it...
Monday, March 25, 2013
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Randoms
Today I read, in its entirety, Rules of Civility by Amor Towles. It was fine. Mostly I just had to power through it because I remembered this morning that I had signed up for a book club on it tomorrow evening... The story, about a young woman in the late thirties in New York, was interesting, and the main character and her friend were engaging. Interestingly, the male characters, in this book written by a man, all come across as pretty two dimensional. It's clear the author has a real interest in the culture (literature, art, and music) of the time, and took an interest in working it into the book in a significant but not obtrusive way. He never really explains enough about the protagonist's background, though, to account for her knowledge of the same. At one point near the end of the book a character explicitly says what much of the rest of the tale has been saying, that the main character, a bright, thoughtful, intellectually curious and informed young woman, is unusual in not being a drudge or housewife but pursuing a career instead. It's true, but I'm not sure that the life the author has mapped out for her can come about just through force of character and personality - I wanted to know, at least a little, or even just have acknowledged, how the daughter of a singe, Russian immigrant father is so familiar with some of the cultural aspects she translates into a better life...
The writing was quite good, though; there were some fantastic lines, and overall it was a very clean, bright, sharp prose, if not particularly lean.
I also finished Susan Hill's The Betrayal of Trust, which I read over the weekend. I do love a good English mystery, and this was one; well-written, anyway, for sure, and a decent plot although I did start too feel like there were too many story lines that were twisting around one another but not actually tying together. The "who dunnit" part was also pretty obvious. I picked it up at the Overlook Press table at the AWP on the recommendation of the two guys that were working there, and they said it was their favorite in the series. I am wondering if maybe the author is really just writing a long series about one man, and the people around him, and he just happens to be a policeman who solves crimes...
Grabbed a bunch of books at their table, though, because the guys were friendly and helpful, and the books seemed interesting and for the most part I really liked the covers. This is the first one I've read, and while I do think there were some sad copy-editing mistakes (including one on the back cover - that must EAT at them), I have high hopes.
Speaking of expectations AND English policemen who solve mysteries in series just as much concerned with their personal lives, last weekend I read Elizabeth George's The Edge of Nowhere. Unlike her other books - and what I thought I was picking up from the library - this was not an Inspector Lynley mystery. It was, I guess, a mystery of sorts, but it's also a somewhat paranormal teen romance adventure story? The story is set in the Pacific Northwest, and George does a fantastic job of describing the setting, but she doesn't know how to replicate teenagers' words. I may still read the next ones in teh series whenever they come out, but I hope she gets back to Lynley - and Havers!
The writing was quite good, though; there were some fantastic lines, and overall it was a very clean, bright, sharp prose, if not particularly lean.
I also finished Susan Hill's The Betrayal of Trust, which I read over the weekend. I do love a good English mystery, and this was one; well-written, anyway, for sure, and a decent plot although I did start too feel like there were too many story lines that were twisting around one another but not actually tying together. The "who dunnit" part was also pretty obvious. I picked it up at the Overlook Press table at the AWP on the recommendation of the two guys that were working there, and they said it was their favorite in the series. I am wondering if maybe the author is really just writing a long series about one man, and the people around him, and he just happens to be a policeman who solves crimes...
Grabbed a bunch of books at their table, though, because the guys were friendly and helpful, and the books seemed interesting and for the most part I really liked the covers. This is the first one I've read, and while I do think there were some sad copy-editing mistakes (including one on the back cover - that must EAT at them), I have high hopes.
Speaking of expectations AND English policemen who solve mysteries in series just as much concerned with their personal lives, last weekend I read Elizabeth George's The Edge of Nowhere. Unlike her other books - and what I thought I was picking up from the library - this was not an Inspector Lynley mystery. It was, I guess, a mystery of sorts, but it's also a somewhat paranormal teen romance adventure story? The story is set in the Pacific Northwest, and George does a fantastic job of describing the setting, but she doesn't know how to replicate teenagers' words. I may still read the next ones in teh series whenever they come out, but I hope she gets back to Lynley - and Havers!
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Not sure how I feel about this...
On one hand, I totally want to go wander around in this bookstore and find random, awesome stuff. But at the same time, there's something that makes me slightly uneasy about the way the article, at least, makes it seem like the books here really are just stuff - cool to look at and think about, but in the same way that, say, old postcards (or those vernacular photographs from the Ransom Riggs book!), or any kind of collectible - especially offbeat ones - might be. I mean, I absolutely agree that with some books, part of their value is as an object: not necessarily what they're worth, but the way they look/feel/smell/make you feel or make you think of something. Books aren't just the stories inside them. But those matter too... Dunno. I also don't really think I buy, at least as it's laid out here, the Times' editorializing that this kind of place/model "may just be publishing's great new hope."
A tiny shop in Toronto, specializing in the arcane and the absurd, may just be publishing's great new hope.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Each of these things is not like the other...
Friday night (I think?) I finished Miss Me When I'm Gone, by Emily Arsenault (2011). I'm not sure why I grabbed this particular book from the BPL, but I think it was probably because the author bio on the back says that she lives in Shelburne Falls. And I feel like maybe she has some connection to UMass Amherst or possibly to Harvard Extension. But the more I think about it, the more I think that even if I didn't specifically go looking for this book at the library whenever I got it (late February?), I've had it on my radar for a while.
Anyhow, it was okay. Very predictable, and the writing wasn't anything special, but the story was fine and the main characters - one alive, one dead - were strong. Basically, a young pregnant woman is asked to assemble, evaluate, and possibly edit her recently deceased friend's notes for a planned book. The late friend had recently published a post-divorce memoir structured around her travels through the land of country music, and the songs of female stars, and this new book was supposed to take off from the work of male country stars. Except it becomes clear to the pregnant, remaining friend that her late friend was getting into some shady territory while looking into the murder of the latter's mother and who her father AND who the killer might have been. It's clearer in the book, don't worry. It was...yeah, okay.
And indirectly it made me more interested in learning about early country (women) stars. And reminded me to actually go and download songs from the show "Nashville" instead of always meaning to and then forgetting. Excited to listen to those on my ipod on the way in to work tomorrow!
Finished it Friday night, I think, after a grand evening catching up with C (this blog's first and possibly only reader - hi!!!). Then Saturday I was off to the AWP Bookfair (at the Association of Writers & Writing Programs annual conference). Saw C again (yay!) and got lots of hopefully-good books (yay!). Then last night I started Amada Coplin's The Orchardist (2012).
Wait, totally wrong. Finished Miss Me When I'm Gone on Thursday, because I brought it with me on Friday when I met up with C in Back Bay, thinking I'd return it to the library, but didn't. And then Saturday I didn't even bother since I didn't want any extra weight in my bag, or to waste any space I could use for new books. So I must have started The Orchardist on Friday night, after dinner/drinks...yeah, that makes more sense. Because I remember reading the first few pages in bed and thinking I wished I had read them before I saw C because we could have talked about the style issues.
Specifically, the way things were really over-wrought at first. Sort of like Swamplandia, the beginning of The Orchardist felt a lot like you had a really good, and really into descriptions writer, but one who wasn't disciplined enough to weed out. Even if everything is good, you can't use everything, and in the opening pages of the book Coplin just had too much. But she got over it quickly, and I really liked the rest of the book. It was kind of lyrical, although I hate to use that term, but there were just some lovely, lovely lines. At first she beat you over the head with lovely line after lovely line - showing off, maybe, or just too attached to each "moment" to cut it out/ - but once she hit her stride she balanced regular prose with the more complex passages, and added in an interesting story and really strong characters to boot.
Set in turn-of-the-century Washington state, the story follows a fairly reclusive man who lives in a secluded orchard where one fall some pregnant teens appear, emotionally if not actually half feral and on the run from...well, I guess I shouldn't say exactly who, but a bad man. Although, obviously. That's a terrible summary, but it's an interesting story, really well told, with characters who are at once familiar and original, and some breathtaking descriptions of the natural world (and DAMN, is the Pacific Northwest in those days some scenery to work with).
I could probably say a lot more about it - I really liked it, I think, in the end - but I am very tired.
Anyhow, it was okay. Very predictable, and the writing wasn't anything special, but the story was fine and the main characters - one alive, one dead - were strong. Basically, a young pregnant woman is asked to assemble, evaluate, and possibly edit her recently deceased friend's notes for a planned book. The late friend had recently published a post-divorce memoir structured around her travels through the land of country music, and the songs of female stars, and this new book was supposed to take off from the work of male country stars. Except it becomes clear to the pregnant, remaining friend that her late friend was getting into some shady territory while looking into the murder of the latter's mother and who her father AND who the killer might have been. It's clearer in the book, don't worry. It was...yeah, okay.
And indirectly it made me more interested in learning about early country (women) stars. And reminded me to actually go and download songs from the show "Nashville" instead of always meaning to and then forgetting. Excited to listen to those on my ipod on the way in to work tomorrow!
Finished it Friday night, I think, after a grand evening catching up with C (this blog's first and possibly only reader - hi!!!). Then Saturday I was off to the AWP Bookfair (at the Association of Writers & Writing Programs annual conference). Saw C again (yay!) and got lots of hopefully-good books (yay!). Then last night I started Amada Coplin's The Orchardist (2012).
Wait, totally wrong. Finished Miss Me When I'm Gone on Thursday, because I brought it with me on Friday when I met up with C in Back Bay, thinking I'd return it to the library, but didn't. And then Saturday I didn't even bother since I didn't want any extra weight in my bag, or to waste any space I could use for new books. So I must have started The Orchardist on Friday night, after dinner/drinks...yeah, that makes more sense. Because I remember reading the first few pages in bed and thinking I wished I had read them before I saw C because we could have talked about the style issues.
Specifically, the way things were really over-wrought at first. Sort of like Swamplandia, the beginning of The Orchardist felt a lot like you had a really good, and really into descriptions writer, but one who wasn't disciplined enough to weed out. Even if everything is good, you can't use everything, and in the opening pages of the book Coplin just had too much. But she got over it quickly, and I really liked the rest of the book. It was kind of lyrical, although I hate to use that term, but there were just some lovely, lovely lines. At first she beat you over the head with lovely line after lovely line - showing off, maybe, or just too attached to each "moment" to cut it out/ - but once she hit her stride she balanced regular prose with the more complex passages, and added in an interesting story and really strong characters to boot.
Set in turn-of-the-century Washington state, the story follows a fairly reclusive man who lives in a secluded orchard where one fall some pregnant teens appear, emotionally if not actually half feral and on the run from...well, I guess I shouldn't say exactly who, but a bad man. Although, obviously. That's a terrible summary, but it's an interesting story, really well told, with characters who are at once familiar and original, and some breathtaking descriptions of the natural world (and DAMN, is the Pacific Northwest in those days some scenery to work with).
I could probably say a lot more about it - I really liked it, I think, in the end - but I am very tired.
Sunday, March 3, 2013
I swear, I haven't given up on reading
It's just that I'm part-way through a whole bunch of books, so actually finishing one isn't happening very quickly.
I did finally finish one last night, though - Mary Malloy's Devil on the Deep Blue Sea: the Notorious Career of Captain Samuel Hill of Boston (2006). I read this one because a while ago I read and enjoyed a semi-historical mystery novel that she had written. And this one, a non-fiction book about a ship captain whose career spanned the first quarter of the nineteenth century, was really good. At least, it was interesting, and written in an extremely accessible and readable way. But, my GOD, Malloy was poorly served by her publishers. Or maybe it was her fault, but the book was terribly edited. One of the msot egregious problems was that clearly her original manuscript was written in an old version of Word or something, and lots of words at the end of lines were broken off. Then when the text was typeset, you had lines like "and then someone did a lazy job of ed-iting and didn't catch huge, glar-ing mistakes." Okay, in fairness, I think there was ever only one word break in a line, but still. How did nobody catch that and fix it? It happened all throughout the book. There were a lot of random grammar and spelling mistakes that just frustrated me so much, because the book deserved better.
And since I'm mostly writing this because I'm procrastinating working on the big homework assignment I have do, I am just going to copy the book description:
"Had he not been a madman, Captain Samuel Hill would likely be remembered as one of the great maritime adventurers of the early nineteenth century. He was the first American to live in Japan, and was in the Columbia River basin at the same time as Lewis & Clark. He rescued men held captive by Indians and pirates, met King Kamehameha of Hawaii and the missionaries who arrived soon after the King's death, was captured as a privateer during the War of 1812, witnessed firsthand the events of the Chilean Revolution, and wrote about all this persuasively. He was also a rapist and murderer. In all his contradictions and complexities, Samuel Hill represented the fledgling United States during its first wave of expansion. At home he appeared civilized and sensible, but as he sailed into the Pacific Ocean the mask slipped away to reveal the recklessness, ambition, and violence that propelled the United States from coast to coast and around the world."
I mean, SOUNDS interesting, right? It was good. I just think it could have been better.
I did finally finish one last night, though - Mary Malloy's Devil on the Deep Blue Sea: the Notorious Career of Captain Samuel Hill of Boston (2006). I read this one because a while ago I read and enjoyed a semi-historical mystery novel that she had written. And this one, a non-fiction book about a ship captain whose career spanned the first quarter of the nineteenth century, was really good. At least, it was interesting, and written in an extremely accessible and readable way. But, my GOD, Malloy was poorly served by her publishers. Or maybe it was her fault, but the book was terribly edited. One of the msot egregious problems was that clearly her original manuscript was written in an old version of Word or something, and lots of words at the end of lines were broken off. Then when the text was typeset, you had lines like "and then someone did a lazy job of ed-iting and didn't catch huge, glar-ing mistakes." Okay, in fairness, I think there was ever only one word break in a line, but still. How did nobody catch that and fix it? It happened all throughout the book. There were a lot of random grammar and spelling mistakes that just frustrated me so much, because the book deserved better.
And since I'm mostly writing this because I'm procrastinating working on the big homework assignment I have do, I am just going to copy the book description:
"Had he not been a madman, Captain Samuel Hill would likely be remembered as one of the great maritime adventurers of the early nineteenth century. He was the first American to live in Japan, and was in the Columbia River basin at the same time as Lewis & Clark. He rescued men held captive by Indians and pirates, met King Kamehameha of Hawaii and the missionaries who arrived soon after the King's death, was captured as a privateer during the War of 1812, witnessed firsthand the events of the Chilean Revolution, and wrote about all this persuasively. He was also a rapist and murderer. In all his contradictions and complexities, Samuel Hill represented the fledgling United States during its first wave of expansion. At home he appeared civilized and sensible, but as he sailed into the Pacific Ocean the mask slipped away to reveal the recklessness, ambition, and violence that propelled the United States from coast to coast and around the world."
I mean, SOUNDS interesting, right? It was good. I just think it could have been better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)