Synopsis: Lieutenant Bryan Hurd tries to pin a murder on an eccentric millionaire, who secretly likes to hunt people for sport.
This is my first Elmore Leonard book, and I liked it. The characters are all so well drawn and distinct. Even those characters who are basically stereotypes are so in a way that was fun and interesting to me.
It took a while for the plot to get moving. The first part I was a little bewildered trying to understand what the story was going to be. Then it got started, and the characters took over for me.
The plot became really strong near the end. Elmore added some strong twists and reversals that pumped up my suspense.
Based on this book, I would guess that the strength that makes Leonard one of the big names in his genre is that he has a knack for characters. He just made them come to life and made me care about them. For example: I think my connection to Lt. Hurd locked into place when he asked his lover to get the phone because he wasn't wearing any pants. It's a minor thing, but a quirk about answering the phone while naked makes him so much more real to me than if Leonard had made a point to say he gives sneakers to ghetto kids on Saturdays. It's that kind of care that people's Leonard's books with real, believable characters.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Book Review: Sourcery by Terry Pratchett
Synopsis: All wizards are eighth sons of eighth sons, but when a wizard has eight sons, a sourceror [sic] is born. And with the birth of a sourceror comes the end of the world.
It took me quite a while to get through this book. That's no slight against Mr. Pratchett. There are few writers who compare to him in pure enjoyability. I started reading Pratchett at the suggestion of my friend after I started writing a fantasy comedy.
Usually I read these books with a broad smile throughout the entire process, but rarely do I laugh out loud (again, not a slight). Most people speak of Pratchett's work as hilarious. That, to me, means lots of laughing. So I wonder if I'm really getting the jokes or what. I think the problem for me is that for me to laugh out loud, I need a strong punchline. I'm reserved like that.
That said (feels like a dark confession), I really enjoy these books. I'm actually somewhat torn on the character of Rincewind. I love his cowardice and incompetance, but the fleeing that naturally follows those always make his books seem more episodic than drawn into a tight plot. That's my biggest, and perhaps only, problem with this book and why it took me so long to read it.
I think it went more than a month unopened on my nightstand. I simply stopped one night at a place where the plot didn't require me to keep reading, and it took me quite a while to overcome my inertia.
It took me quite a while to get through this book. That's no slight against Mr. Pratchett. There are few writers who compare to him in pure enjoyability. I started reading Pratchett at the suggestion of my friend after I started writing a fantasy comedy.
Usually I read these books with a broad smile throughout the entire process, but rarely do I laugh out loud (again, not a slight). Most people speak of Pratchett's work as hilarious. That, to me, means lots of laughing. So I wonder if I'm really getting the jokes or what. I think the problem for me is that for me to laugh out loud, I need a strong punchline. I'm reserved like that.
That said (feels like a dark confession), I really enjoy these books. I'm actually somewhat torn on the character of Rincewind. I love his cowardice and incompetance, but the fleeing that naturally follows those always make his books seem more episodic than drawn into a tight plot. That's my biggest, and perhaps only, problem with this book and why it took me so long to read it.
I think it went more than a month unopened on my nightstand. I simply stopped one night at a place where the plot didn't require me to keep reading, and it took me quite a while to overcome my inertia.
Personal Taste
There's been a lot of talk in the blogosphere lately dealing with reading tastes. The meme is in the air. A few blogs I follow have had some really good posts on this topic. The ones that immediately come to mind are from agent Kristin Nelson and from Bookends Literary Agency:
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2008/05/lesson-to-be-learned-from-popular-books.html
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2008/05/millions-of-readers-are-not-wrong.html
http://bookendslitagency.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-do-bad-books-get-published.html
What these posts have in common is that there is no such thing as a bad popular book. A popular book is popular because people like it. If you don't like it, that's your taste. And writers panning popular books reek of sour grapes.
That is similar to what I said in my post about why I give bad reviews, and I feel somewhat vindicated. However, I also feel bad about the sheer number of bad reviews I've given. I still maintain that its my opinion, and that's what the blog is for, but I've resolved to do as Agent Kristin suggests and look for (and perhaps bring up in the review) what it is others like so much.
I like to think I haven't gone so far in my opinions that I question the sanity of the readership. Okay, so I did with The Golden Compass (I ammended my opinions in the reviews of the later books in His Dark Materials) and perhaps Crossover. I confess that some of my posts, especially the aforementioned and maybe some dealing with Dan Brown, were not precisely professional or even polite. I apologize for that and will try to do better in the future.
If at any point you think my opinion is too harsh, let me know. As you might be able to see, I'm not above dining on a steaming plate of crow.
I won't go back and remove my more pejorative reviews. There's too much revisionist history on the internet. So if you think I'm a prick, that's your opinion, but hopefully as I progress and grow into this whole blogging thing, my real personality will come out more.
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2008/05/lesson-to-be-learned-from-popular-books.html
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2008/05/millions-of-readers-are-not-wrong.html
http://bookendslitagency.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-do-bad-books-get-published.html
What these posts have in common is that there is no such thing as a bad popular book. A popular book is popular because people like it. If you don't like it, that's your taste. And writers panning popular books reek of sour grapes.
That is similar to what I said in my post about why I give bad reviews, and I feel somewhat vindicated. However, I also feel bad about the sheer number of bad reviews I've given. I still maintain that its my opinion, and that's what the blog is for, but I've resolved to do as Agent Kristin suggests and look for (and perhaps bring up in the review) what it is others like so much.
I like to think I haven't gone so far in my opinions that I question the sanity of the readership. Okay, so I did with The Golden Compass (I ammended my opinions in the reviews of the later books in His Dark Materials) and perhaps Crossover. I confess that some of my posts, especially the aforementioned and maybe some dealing with Dan Brown, were not precisely professional or even polite. I apologize for that and will try to do better in the future.
If at any point you think my opinion is too harsh, let me know. As you might be able to see, I'm not above dining on a steaming plate of crow.
I won't go back and remove my more pejorative reviews. There's too much revisionist history on the internet. So if you think I'm a prick, that's your opinion, but hopefully as I progress and grow into this whole blogging thing, my real personality will come out more.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Book Review: Artemis Fowl: The Eternity Code by Eoin Colfer
Synopsis: After Butler is fatally shot, Artemis Fowl enlists fairy help to make things right, get revenge, and make one last score before going straight.
Of the three AF books I've read to this point, this is second best. It's miles better than The Arctic Incident but just barely short of Artemis Fowl. In this one, you have Artemis once more taking the role of hero, but this time, he's not completely incompetent doing it. He still had his try/fail cycles, but this time they didn't make him seem stupid. It may be because John Spiro is a more worthy adversary. It could be that Artemis was simply smarter in this book.
I have to say I wish the mob had a bigger role. It seemed like that part of the plot just petered out. And while the fairies making a guy who knows too much disappear was funny, it solved the problem too thoroughly too quickly.
Regardless, the book was worth the read, and the ending makes me look forward to the next one.
Of the three AF books I've read to this point, this is second best. It's miles better than The Arctic Incident but just barely short of Artemis Fowl. In this one, you have Artemis once more taking the role of hero, but this time, he's not completely incompetent doing it. He still had his try/fail cycles, but this time they didn't make him seem stupid. It may be because John Spiro is a more worthy adversary. It could be that Artemis was simply smarter in this book.
I have to say I wish the mob had a bigger role. It seemed like that part of the plot just petered out. And while the fairies making a guy who knows too much disappear was funny, it solved the problem too thoroughly too quickly.
Regardless, the book was worth the read, and the ending makes me look forward to the next one.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Book Review: The Mauritius Command by Patrick O'Brian
Synopsis: Jack Aubrey gets back to sea. This time he is sent to the southern Indian Ocean as Commodore of a small fleet.
The quality of Master and Commander returns in this one. Perhaps that's because Jack Aubrey spends much of this book at sea. This book also spends quite a deal of time following Dr. Maturin when he's apart from Aubrey. And that's rather entertaining in itself.
One of the best parts of this for me was reading the Île de la Passe battle with Google Earth open and zoomed in on the locale. Seeing the actual locations of the reefs and imagining sailing anything around there made the scene so much more vivid. And with O'Brian's narrative voice, it was already powerful.
I think the parts of this book (and series) that are most educational for me are the nautical parts (of course) and the handling of political bureaucracy. The nautical parts need no explanation. The politcis are so educational to me because I tend to be pretty straightforward. I have always had a hard time understanding undercurrents and intrigue. I guess I'm somewhat guileless. Reading this series, I have become acquainted with the techniques of advancement by standing on the backs of others.
Of course, I still think them the actions of a scrub.
The best parts of this one are Dr. Maturin's covert ops, the interaction between Aubrey and Clonfert, and Aubrey's reaction to the final reversal. Then there's the great "Flog Bonden?!" scene.
The quality of Master and Commander returns in this one. Perhaps that's because Jack Aubrey spends much of this book at sea. This book also spends quite a deal of time following Dr. Maturin when he's apart from Aubrey. And that's rather entertaining in itself.
One of the best parts of this for me was reading the Île de la Passe battle with Google Earth open and zoomed in on the locale. Seeing the actual locations of the reefs and imagining sailing anything around there made the scene so much more vivid. And with O'Brian's narrative voice, it was already powerful.
I think the parts of this book (and series) that are most educational for me are the nautical parts (of course) and the handling of political bureaucracy. The nautical parts need no explanation. The politcis are so educational to me because I tend to be pretty straightforward. I have always had a hard time understanding undercurrents and intrigue. I guess I'm somewhat guileless. Reading this series, I have become acquainted with the techniques of advancement by standing on the backs of others.
Of course, I still think them the actions of a scrub.
The best parts of this one are Dr. Maturin's covert ops, the interaction between Aubrey and Clonfert, and Aubrey's reaction to the final reversal. Then there's the great "Flog Bonden?!" scene.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Book Review: Night of the Soul Stealer by Joseph Delaney
Synopsis: Tom Ward follows the Spook to his winter home where they encounter a failed apprentice, now a powerful necromancer, who plans to summon an ancient god.
A lot of this book had the same charm as the previous two books of The Last Apprentice. However, this is the weakest of the three. It just doesn't have the constant sense of menace that made the first two of the series so great. I don't think as much happens, and that's a little sad.
It also has the weakest ending. Basically, it ends without input from any of the good guys. If they did nothing, it would have ended exactly the same. That said, it uses a similar trick as used in the Bartimaeus Trilogy. I won't give it away, but it's just one of my favorite ways to fight a summoner.
Another thing I liked was having a necromancer who is evil, but puts aside his overt evil to go John Edward for local farm folk. Yeah, it's still pretty dark and depressing, but it shows how when one has a skill, one uses it to pay the bills.
So this book isn't as good as its predecessors, but it's still worth reading. And I can't see a book by Delaney in this world being a bad read.
A lot of this book had the same charm as the previous two books of The Last Apprentice. However, this is the weakest of the three. It just doesn't have the constant sense of menace that made the first two of the series so great. I don't think as much happens, and that's a little sad.
It also has the weakest ending. Basically, it ends without input from any of the good guys. If they did nothing, it would have ended exactly the same. That said, it uses a similar trick as used in the Bartimaeus Trilogy. I won't give it away, but it's just one of my favorite ways to fight a summoner.
Another thing I liked was having a necromancer who is evil, but puts aside his overt evil to go John Edward for local farm folk. Yeah, it's still pretty dark and depressing, but it shows how when one has a skill, one uses it to pay the bills.
So this book isn't as good as its predecessors, but it's still worth reading. And I can't see a book by Delaney in this world being a bad read.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Book Review: Curse of the Bane by Joseph Delaney
Synopsis: Spook apprentice Tom Ward helps his master fight an ancient evil that's corrupting the countryside.
The second book of The Last Apprentice is possibly better than the first. It still has minor writing issues, but they are so small it's hardly worth mentioning (except that I'm a schmuck). The biggest issue I had was that the back cover copy revealed the Act II twist.
One thing I rather liked in this story was the portrayal of evil clergy. What was great about the clergy was that we know the clergy hate Spooks (they consider them servants of evil). The clergy hates witches too. Basically, the evil clergy are Cotton Mather and his ilk (I am a direct descendant of Robert Calef, so it rang well with me). Most clergy are basically good and treat others (even Spooks who aren't obviously malevalent) well. The worst are under the influence of an ancient evil (not a spoiler since it's the title and something we learn in the first few chapters).
Basically, it gave us some villains to generate a feeling of injustice without making a vast group of people purely evil. Yes, evil was behind it, but it wasn't the pure evil of flat, unimaginative villains.
The second book of The Last Apprentice is possibly better than the first. It still has minor writing issues, but they are so small it's hardly worth mentioning (except that I'm a schmuck). The biggest issue I had was that the back cover copy revealed the Act II twist.
One thing I rather liked in this story was the portrayal of evil clergy. What was great about the clergy was that we know the clergy hate Spooks (they consider them servants of evil). The clergy hates witches too. Basically, the evil clergy are Cotton Mather and his ilk (I am a direct descendant of Robert Calef, so it rang well with me). Most clergy are basically good and treat others (even Spooks who aren't obviously malevalent) well. The worst are under the influence of an ancient evil (not a spoiler since it's the title and something we learn in the first few chapters).
Basically, it gave us some villains to generate a feeling of injustice without making a vast group of people purely evil. Yes, evil was behind it, but it wasn't the pure evil of flat, unimaginative villains.
Book Review: Revenge of the Witch by Joseph Delaney
Synopsis: Young Tom Ward takes up an apprenticeship to the county Spook, a kind of monster hunter.
This is the first of The Last Apprentice series. It's a middle-grade horror story. And it is good.
The world that Delaney creates has a ring of truth to it. It seems so vast and complicated without overdoing it. Delaney uses a fairly standard mythos, based largely on celtic lore, but he has his own take on it. There are some moments where Delaney's writing isn't as tight as it should be (nothing anyone but a jerk would notice), but otherwise it's nigh on perfect.
I particularly admire how Delaney structures his conflict. In almost any novel (especially those for a young audience or running the Hero's Journey), the hero has a mentor who is fully capable of solving the problem without the hero. The traditional (and annoying) way of handling this is to have the mentor say something enigmatic (such as, "This isn't my fight.") and then stand by doing nothing. The way Delaney keeps the Spook out of the fights is simple, but it works.
The interesting thing about this book is that it's obvious Delaney has studied the craft. Most of the time when I'm reading or watching TV or movies, as the plot develops I come up with a few predictions of what's coming. The first is always the Hollywood/hackneyed path, and it's right most of the time. The other predictions are based on the theory of plot, and they're "unexpected" results. Delaney actually used a few of my deeper predictions, and a few times even defied my "plot-dar."
I should say that although I predicted some of Delaney's twists, I don't consider the book predictable because I don't think most people would have seen them coming.
This is the first of The Last Apprentice series. It's a middle-grade horror story. And it is good.
The world that Delaney creates has a ring of truth to it. It seems so vast and complicated without overdoing it. Delaney uses a fairly standard mythos, based largely on celtic lore, but he has his own take on it. There are some moments where Delaney's writing isn't as tight as it should be (nothing anyone but a jerk would notice), but otherwise it's nigh on perfect.
I particularly admire how Delaney structures his conflict. In almost any novel (especially those for a young audience or running the Hero's Journey), the hero has a mentor who is fully capable of solving the problem without the hero. The traditional (and annoying) way of handling this is to have the mentor say something enigmatic (such as, "This isn't my fight.") and then stand by doing nothing. The way Delaney keeps the Spook out of the fights is simple, but it works.
The interesting thing about this book is that it's obvious Delaney has studied the craft. Most of the time when I'm reading or watching TV or movies, as the plot develops I come up with a few predictions of what's coming. The first is always the Hollywood/hackneyed path, and it's right most of the time. The other predictions are based on the theory of plot, and they're "unexpected" results. Delaney actually used a few of my deeper predictions, and a few times even defied my "plot-dar."
I should say that although I predicted some of Delaney's twists, I don't consider the book predictable because I don't think most people would have seen them coming.
Book Review: Artemis Fowl: The Arctic Incident by Eoin Colfer
Synopsis: Artemis Fowl returns. This time he helps the fairies fight a goblin revolution in exchange for help recovering his kidnapped father.
This is an enjoyable book. It's not as good as the first book of the series. In fact, a lot of its enjoyability may come from the afterglow of book 1.
I think the major flaw this book has is placing Artemis Fowl into a heroic role. He's great as an evil genius, but as a hero he's required to fail regularly. That just makes him clumsy and sad albeit still a genius.
That's not say it's not worth reading. It has much of the same charm and some great moments, but it doesn't hold up as well as the first.
Oh, and on the previous subject of environmentalism and fairies...they have an interesting view of radiation.
This is an enjoyable book. It's not as good as the first book of the series. In fact, a lot of its enjoyability may come from the afterglow of book 1.
I think the major flaw this book has is placing Artemis Fowl into a heroic role. He's great as an evil genius, but as a hero he's required to fail regularly. That just makes him clumsy and sad albeit still a genius.
That's not say it's not worth reading. It has much of the same charm and some great moments, but it doesn't hold up as well as the first.
Oh, and on the previous subject of environmentalism and fairies...they have an interesting view of radiation.
I guess I'm not the only one...
Just an update on my jerk post. Nathan Bransford had an interesting post on the internet and rabid personal opinion. You can read it here.
I don't think I'm that rabid... Okay maybe once or twice I probably crossed a line somewhere. I'll try to be a bit more balanced in the future.
I don't think I'm that rabid... Okay maybe once or twice I probably crossed a line somewhere. I'll try to be a bit more balanced in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
