And now, as per request, back to my original blogging style:
Genre: Children's Fantasy
Ratings:
Ease with which to read/enjoyable author style 4.0
Suitable ending 4.0
Personal favoritism 3.5
Poetic language 3.5
Memorable 4.0
Original, creative plot 4.0
Original, well-developed characters 3.0
Probability of recommendation 3.5
Ability to "move" emotionally 3.0
Literary value and/or educational value 4.0
Total: 37.5
Final Rating: 3 1/2 stars
4-sentence summary:
Coraline Jones' family has just moved to a new apartment, which is almost like any other apartment except that it has an extra door leading to mirrored world of her own. In this other world through the door, everything is the same: Coraline has the same house, the same parents, the same neighbors... except with eery differences leading her to suspect that this other world is not as wonderful as it seems. Soon, Coraline realizes that she must not only escape this other world and her "other mother", but save the people she loves the most.
Critique:
This is the second Neil Gaiman book I've read. The only other book I've read by him was The Graveyard Book, which is another children's book.
Coraline is listed on Amazon as being for children 8 and up, whereas Graveyard Book is listed as being ages 10 and up. It may seem small, but there is a lot of development happening between grades 3 and 5. Here's why I think this distinction is important: Coraline is creepy, while The Graveyard Book is scary. Creepy is something that makes your skin crawl, and it makes you uncomfortable, like seeing bugs on your wall or knowing that something is not quite right. But scary is when your family is being attacked by hellhounds and a demon is coming after you. Coraline is creepy; the mirrored world is peculiar, and her "other mother" is a good villain. There are ghosts, mists, secret doors, and people who have buttons for eyes. But none of them made me shiver or feel like I would have nightmares. But in the Graveyard Book, Nobody (the main character) travels to Hell and back, and sees some very terrifying things. In that way, Neil Gaiman has chosen two appropriate plots for two different age groups. In the younger book, Coraline, we are introduced to creepy. We feel our skin crawl, we feel a little nervous for our main character, and we see into the strange but compelling innerworkings of Gaiman's mind. But in Graveyard Book, Gaiman takes picks up speed and takes the reader to another level (both with vocabulary, length of the novel, and intensity).
That being said.... I think I like Coraline a bit better. The writing was fabulous, the story was very original and creepy in a very memorable way, and Coraline is a great young heroine for kids. (At some point, she comes to the very grown-up realization that although we want things, we don't necessarily need them). This is not a critique of the Graveyard Book; I also liked that book. But it was very convoluted and involved. Today, I was in the mood for a short, creepy story. And I found that perfectly within Coraline.
One other side note: I know that it was adapted into a movie a few years ago, and I vaguely remember being put off by the trailer. But after having read the book, I can say with absolute certainty that this is a story meant to be told with creepy animation in a movie. You could not do this with live action, nor should you. However, when I watched the trailer again, I saw that they added more fluff into the movie (they felt the need to add more fantasy and exaggerate the plot; this, however, is unnecessary). Perhaps I'll be disappointed by the movie... but I think I'll watch it anyway just to see how the villainous "other mother" is portrayed.
A likable heroine, a perfectly creepy villain, an interesting and unwilling sidekick, and a plot that ranks with the best. Overall, I'm a big fan of Coraline. I can't wait to recommend it to my students, and I can't wait to see the movie adaptation of it.
Sorry for rambling today, I'm all drugged up and my sentences become huge run-on sentences when I'm not watching :)
Friday, December 23, 2011
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
The Distant Hours by Kate Morton
I won't follow my previous method of reviewing books- it was too complicated. But I would still like to talk about the most recent book I've read, "The Distant Hours". I'd read Kate Morton's two previous books: "The Forgotten Garden" and "The House at Riverton" and was excited to read her most recent novel.
The plot is as follows: Thirty-something Edith is a publisher living in London who begins to delve into her mother's secretive past. She discovers that her mother had been evacuated from London during the air raids in 1941 and had stayed at an old castle in the countryside. The inhabitants of the castle were the old Raymond, a former brilliant author who has gone mad; Percy, a twin whose love for the castle outshines anything else; Saffy, who longs to leave the castle for London but cannot leave her twin behind; and Juniper, the youngest sister by 20 years, a brilliant but crazed author who has terrible secrets to hide. As Edith digs deeper into the past, she uncovers all the long-hidden secrets of Milderhurst Castle.
Unfortunately, this book could not even begin to compare to the first two books by Kate Morton. There are a few simple reasons for this.
The author has my writing style. That is to say, she writes overly long, complicated sentences in a free-flowing thought-like way. It's not all that pleasant to read. I don't recall her having this issue in her other books. It almost feels like she wrote this book as a diary and then slapped it on the shelves to sell. It just feels sloppily written.
It is unimaginative! The first two books relied heavily on plot twists to make their narratives worthwhile. Perhaps the problem was that I was expecting the plot twist in this one and so I began to guess early on what had happened. And I guessed right. And then there were 300 pages yet to read. To be fair, the actual plot twist wasn't even as daring and grandiose and the author wanted it to be. It was actually a little disappointing.
The book is too long. You could shorten it by about 200 pages and it would be a much better read. There was too much unimportant information for the book to hold my attention. Indeed, this book has been sitting on my nightstand for months now.
Now for the redeeming quality of the novel: Simply that I have a penchant for historical fiction... I enjoy the settings that this author portrays- and she does have a fabulous imagination. (Though the characters in this book also had weak and single-minded, somewhat unbelievable motivations as well.)
All in all, I did LIKE the book, but I certainly didn't love it. Would I recommend it to my mother or my friends? Eh, probably not. I would much rather recommend "The Forgotten Garden" or a dozen other books I've read and enjoyed recently. This one wasn't terrible- but it just doesn't warrant my attention for any longer than it takes me to finish this blog post.
Onward and upward!
The plot is as follows: Thirty-something Edith is a publisher living in London who begins to delve into her mother's secretive past. She discovers that her mother had been evacuated from London during the air raids in 1941 and had stayed at an old castle in the countryside. The inhabitants of the castle were the old Raymond, a former brilliant author who has gone mad; Percy, a twin whose love for the castle outshines anything else; Saffy, who longs to leave the castle for London but cannot leave her twin behind; and Juniper, the youngest sister by 20 years, a brilliant but crazed author who has terrible secrets to hide. As Edith digs deeper into the past, she uncovers all the long-hidden secrets of Milderhurst Castle.
Unfortunately, this book could not even begin to compare to the first two books by Kate Morton. There are a few simple reasons for this.
The author has my writing style. That is to say, she writes overly long, complicated sentences in a free-flowing thought-like way. It's not all that pleasant to read. I don't recall her having this issue in her other books. It almost feels like she wrote this book as a diary and then slapped it on the shelves to sell. It just feels sloppily written.
It is unimaginative! The first two books relied heavily on plot twists to make their narratives worthwhile. Perhaps the problem was that I was expecting the plot twist in this one and so I began to guess early on what had happened. And I guessed right. And then there were 300 pages yet to read. To be fair, the actual plot twist wasn't even as daring and grandiose and the author wanted it to be. It was actually a little disappointing.
The book is too long. You could shorten it by about 200 pages and it would be a much better read. There was too much unimportant information for the book to hold my attention. Indeed, this book has been sitting on my nightstand for months now.
Now for the redeeming quality of the novel: Simply that I have a penchant for historical fiction... I enjoy the settings that this author portrays- and she does have a fabulous imagination. (Though the characters in this book also had weak and single-minded, somewhat unbelievable motivations as well.)
All in all, I did LIKE the book, but I certainly didn't love it. Would I recommend it to my mother or my friends? Eh, probably not. I would much rather recommend "The Forgotten Garden" or a dozen other books I've read and enjoyed recently. This one wasn't terrible- but it just doesn't warrant my attention for any longer than it takes me to finish this blog post.
Onward and upward!
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
The House at Riverton by Kate Morton
Genre: Historical Fiction (WWI)
Ratings:
Ease with which to read/enjoyable author style 4.0
Suitable ending 3.5
Personal favoritism 4.75
Poetic language 3.5
Memorable 4.0
Original, creative plot 4.0
Original, well-developed characters 3.5
Probability of recommendation 4.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 3.5
Literary value and/or educational value 3.0
Total: 37.75
Final Rating: 3 1/2 stars
4-sentence summary:
Grace is sent to Riverton when she is 14 years old to become a housemaid for the prestigious Hartford family. Her life becomes intertwined with the three Hartford children: David, Hannah, and Emmeline, though Grace always remains an outsider. Grace, Hannah, and Emmeline are the only witnesses to a horrible crime, and Grace keeps the secret of that night (as well as a host of other secrets) for the next 80 years.
Critique:
Well, I couldn't resist reading another Kate Morton book, since The Forgotten Garden was so good. This novel is set in London a few years before the first World War and the narrative spans decades. It never feels rushed and the pace of the novel is quite pleasant.
Truly, I looked this up on wikipedia after I finished the book, because I had figured there was already a movie in the works. This seems set in the same style and tone as Atonement and I could all too easily picture lead actresses playing these roles. In fact, I was quite disappointed to see that there is no movie planned (yet!). The grandeur of the setting in the novel, as well as the haunting story, would make an incredible film.
As far as the book is concerned, I have very little to critique about it. Perhaps I'm getting soft and becoming far too lenient in my reviews, but this was truly an enjoyable read. The only downside to the novel was that the main plotline was a tad too predictable (unlike The Forgotten Garden, which constantly offered surprises)... not in an unlikeable way. But the story uses a lot of foreshadowing. It's the sort of novel to say "But little did I know that this event would lead to our deaths" or somesuch. A little disappointing as a narrative tool, but not something that takes away from the storyline; just the surprise. It does, however, give the reader the same feeling that Grace has, as she is 98 and laying in her bed, looking back on her life: it's a feeling of overwhelming regret in hindsight.
I highly recommend Kate Morton; I am excited to read more of her novels as she continues to write them.
Ratings:
Ease with which to read/enjoyable author style 4.0
Suitable ending 3.5
Personal favoritism 4.75
Poetic language 3.5
Memorable 4.0
Original, creative plot 4.0
Original, well-developed characters 3.5
Probability of recommendation 4.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 3.5
Literary value and/or educational value 3.0
Total: 37.75
Final Rating: 3 1/2 stars
4-sentence summary:
Grace is sent to Riverton when she is 14 years old to become a housemaid for the prestigious Hartford family. Her life becomes intertwined with the three Hartford children: David, Hannah, and Emmeline, though Grace always remains an outsider. Grace, Hannah, and Emmeline are the only witnesses to a horrible crime, and Grace keeps the secret of that night (as well as a host of other secrets) for the next 80 years.
Critique:
Well, I couldn't resist reading another Kate Morton book, since The Forgotten Garden was so good. This novel is set in London a few years before the first World War and the narrative spans decades. It never feels rushed and the pace of the novel is quite pleasant.
Truly, I looked this up on wikipedia after I finished the book, because I had figured there was already a movie in the works. This seems set in the same style and tone as Atonement and I could all too easily picture lead actresses playing these roles. In fact, I was quite disappointed to see that there is no movie planned (yet!). The grandeur of the setting in the novel, as well as the haunting story, would make an incredible film.
As far as the book is concerned, I have very little to critique about it. Perhaps I'm getting soft and becoming far too lenient in my reviews, but this was truly an enjoyable read. The only downside to the novel was that the main plotline was a tad too predictable (unlike The Forgotten Garden, which constantly offered surprises)... not in an unlikeable way. But the story uses a lot of foreshadowing. It's the sort of novel to say "But little did I know that this event would lead to our deaths" or somesuch. A little disappointing as a narrative tool, but not something that takes away from the storyline; just the surprise. It does, however, give the reader the same feeling that Grace has, as she is 98 and laying in her bed, looking back on her life: it's a feeling of overwhelming regret in hindsight.
I highly recommend Kate Morton; I am excited to read more of her novels as she continues to write them.
Skeletons at the Feast by Chris Bohjalian
Genre: Historical Fiction (WWII)
Ratings:
Ease with which to read/enjoyable author style 4.0
Suitable ending 3.5
Personal favoritism 3.0
Poetic language 3.0
Memorable 4.0
Original, creative plot 4.0
Original, well-developed characters 3.5
Probability of recommendation 3.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 3.5
Literary value and/or educational value 4.0
Total: 35.5
Final Rating: 3 1/2 stars
4-sentence summary:
The Emmerich family is a Prussian Jewish family who, until 1945, followed Hitler as their leader despite being Jewish. But then, both the onslaught of the Russian army from one side and the anti-Semitic German army from the other, led this family on a trek across Prussia and Germany to seek safety. On the way, they encounter a Scottish POW and a German SS who is not what he seems.
Critique:
Until reading this book I had a very elementary knowledge of Prussia at all, let alone Prussia during World War II. I must say, I am still a little foggy on events leading to those in this book, or the state of things now. But this author has convinced me that I must indeed do my homework, because this is a fascinating, if slightly overlooked, time in history.
The family consists of Rolf (the father), Mutti (the mother), Helmut (Anna's twin), Anna (the main narrator), and Theo (their ten-year-old brother). They are, even coming from a world to which I am a stranger, very realistic and believable characters.
The plot is neither too fast nor too slow. The only downside to the plot is the addition of Cecile; an additional non-related character (who only meets the other characters in the last chapter). She is added, of course, to show the perspective of someone from inside a concentration camp. But by and large, she is an unnecessary character. Readers understand and probably already know the grotesque things that happened in the camps; the real jewel of the novel is the side of the story that is less talked about: thousands of families trapped by armies on both sides, trying to escape several enemies. There have been countless books about the camps, but none that I've heard of about the Prussian predicament except for this one.
I've never read Midwives, Chris Bohjalian's most famous novel, but I am definitely curious enough now to give it a shot. If you want a dark, haunting tale of WWII from a new perspective, I highly recommend this book.
Ratings:
Ease with which to read/enjoyable author style 4.0
Suitable ending 3.5
Personal favoritism 3.0
Poetic language 3.0
Memorable 4.0
Original, creative plot 4.0
Original, well-developed characters 3.5
Probability of recommendation 3.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 3.5
Literary value and/or educational value 4.0
Total: 35.5
Final Rating: 3 1/2 stars
4-sentence summary:
The Emmerich family is a Prussian Jewish family who, until 1945, followed Hitler as their leader despite being Jewish. But then, both the onslaught of the Russian army from one side and the anti-Semitic German army from the other, led this family on a trek across Prussia and Germany to seek safety. On the way, they encounter a Scottish POW and a German SS who is not what he seems.
Critique:
Until reading this book I had a very elementary knowledge of Prussia at all, let alone Prussia during World War II. I must say, I am still a little foggy on events leading to those in this book, or the state of things now. But this author has convinced me that I must indeed do my homework, because this is a fascinating, if slightly overlooked, time in history.
The family consists of Rolf (the father), Mutti (the mother), Helmut (Anna's twin), Anna (the main narrator), and Theo (their ten-year-old brother). They are, even coming from a world to which I am a stranger, very realistic and believable characters.
The plot is neither too fast nor too slow. The only downside to the plot is the addition of Cecile; an additional non-related character (who only meets the other characters in the last chapter). She is added, of course, to show the perspective of someone from inside a concentration camp. But by and large, she is an unnecessary character. Readers understand and probably already know the grotesque things that happened in the camps; the real jewel of the novel is the side of the story that is less talked about: thousands of families trapped by armies on both sides, trying to escape several enemies. There have been countless books about the camps, but none that I've heard of about the Prussian predicament except for this one.
I've never read Midwives, Chris Bohjalian's most famous novel, but I am definitely curious enough now to give it a shot. If you want a dark, haunting tale of WWII from a new perspective, I highly recommend this book.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Forever – is composed of Nows – (690)
BY EMILY DICKINSON
Forever – is composed of Nows –
‘Tis not a different time –
Except for Infiniteness –
And Latitude of Home –
From this – experienced Here –
Remove the Dates – to These –
Let Months dissolve in further Months –
And Years – exhale in Years –
Without Debate – or Pause –
Or Celebrated Days –
No different Our Years would be
From Anno Dominies –
"Maybe it's more like you said before, all of us being cracked open. Like, each of us starts out as a watertight vessel. And these things happen- these people leave us, or don't love us, or don't get us, or we don't get them, and we lose and fail and hurt one another. And the vessel starts to crack open in places. And I mean, yeah, once the vessel cracks open, the end becomes inevitable. Once it starts to rain inside the Osprey, it will never be remodeled. But there is all this time between when the cracks start to open up and when we finally fall apart. And it's only in that time that we can see one another, because we see out of ourselves through our cracks and into others through theirs. When did we see each other face-to-face? Not until you saw into my cracks and I saw into yours. Before that, we were just looking at ideas of each other, like looking at your window shade but never seeing inside. But once the vessel cracks, the light can get in. The light can get out". - Paper Towns, John Green (p302)
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Dracula by Bram Stoker
Genre: Classic Literature/Fiction
Ratings (for the whole series):
Ease with which to read/enjoyable narration style 2.5
Suitable ending 2.5
Personal favoritism 2.5
Poetic language 2.0
Memorable 4.5
Original, creative plot 4.5
Original, well-developed characters 3.0
Probability of recommendation 3.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 1.5
Literary value and/or educational value 5.0
Total: 31.00
Final Rating: 3 stars
4-sentence summary:
Jonathan Harker is a young English solicitor who visits the eery Transylvania to aid a new client in his transition to his newly acquired London property. The client in question is Count Dracula, an unsettling older gentleman whose strange tendencies become clear to Jonathan throughout his stay in Transylvania. Count Dracula is in fact a vampire, and he begins to wreak havoc on London and on those whom Jonathan, and his fiance Mina, know and love.
Critique:
(I finished this book with an assortment of various media: Kindle for iPad, Kindle for Mac, and listened to an audiobook)
So many things to discuss! First of all, I had never read Dracula before a few weeks ago, and had never seen a movie about it. Everything I knew about Dracula was hearsay and common knowledge.
I couldn't help but compare it to Frankenstein as I went along. Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" is so incredibly different from the green Frankenstein with bolts in his neck as shown in popular media. Dracula stays more true to his form, even in popular media. But it's impossible not to compare him to the 'modern day vampire', and my curiosity was piqued.
Bram Stoker created (or altered) many of the myths of vampire that we know today (no reflection in a mirror, no shadow, craving blood, association with vampire bat, sleeps in a coffin, aversion to both garlic and crucifix) but many of those myths have been misconstrued. For instance, Stoker's Dracula does not burst into flame in sunlight (or, I might add, sparkle). His vampires can even walk around during the day; they are just weaker and more vulnerable. In the book, they also have the ability to command "lesser" animals such as rodents and wolves (which I found especially interesting, given the recent werewolf vs. vampire fascination). It's believed that Stoker took some of these "vampire traits" from old mythology about vampires, but created a large portion of it himself. (Research into vampire mythology is actually quite fascinating, albeit disturbing. Stories such as this are particularly troubling).
Now on to the plot! ... I don't have much to say. Aside from creating one of the most captivating villains of all time, I don't think Bram Stoker was a very talented author. The plot is sluggish and almost unbearable at points. For such a fascinating plot, you'd think it would never lag. However, I think the story would be more fitting for a novel half the size of this one.
An interesting aspect of the plot (as I've also researched into the novel to some depth) are the themes within. My favorite, of course, being the theme of Victorian female sexuality. The book does a wonderful job of linking loose women with Hellish monsters. Another aspect of the book I loved is the historical background for the novel; it's believed that Stoker loosely based Dracula upon Vlad the Impaler. It's no wonder this book has been subject to endless speculation and research. It's also full of imagery and metaphors that are perfect for a high school English class.
Despite the fun history behind the novel (and also despite the terrible movie adaptations of it) I found I could not fully enjoy the novel. From a literary standpoint, it's a brilliant novel with lots to offer. But from an average reader's standpoint, it remains pretty sluggish and sometimes even predictable. ("She has bites on her neck. Let's spend 30 pages wondering what that could mean!") I would recommend it if you have a desire to "read the classics" or are curious about the mythology of the vampire... but aside from that, I probably wouldn't recommend it.
Ratings (for the whole series):
Ease with which to read/enjoyable narration style 2.5
Suitable ending 2.5
Personal favoritism 2.5
Poetic language 2.0
Memorable 4.5
Original, creative plot 4.5
Original, well-developed characters 3.0
Probability of recommendation 3.0
Ability to "move" emotionally 1.5
Literary value and/or educational value 5.0
Total: 31.00
Final Rating: 3 stars
4-sentence summary:
Jonathan Harker is a young English solicitor who visits the eery Transylvania to aid a new client in his transition to his newly acquired London property. The client in question is Count Dracula, an unsettling older gentleman whose strange tendencies become clear to Jonathan throughout his stay in Transylvania. Count Dracula is in fact a vampire, and he begins to wreak havoc on London and on those whom Jonathan, and his fiance Mina, know and love.
Critique:
(I finished this book with an assortment of various media: Kindle for iPad, Kindle for Mac, and listened to an audiobook)
So many things to discuss! First of all, I had never read Dracula before a few weeks ago, and had never seen a movie about it. Everything I knew about Dracula was hearsay and common knowledge.
I couldn't help but compare it to Frankenstein as I went along. Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" is so incredibly different from the green Frankenstein with bolts in his neck as shown in popular media. Dracula stays more true to his form, even in popular media. But it's impossible not to compare him to the 'modern day vampire', and my curiosity was piqued.
Bram Stoker created (or altered) many of the myths of vampire that we know today (no reflection in a mirror, no shadow, craving blood, association with vampire bat, sleeps in a coffin, aversion to both garlic and crucifix) but many of those myths have been misconstrued. For instance, Stoker's Dracula does not burst into flame in sunlight (or, I might add, sparkle). His vampires can even walk around during the day; they are just weaker and more vulnerable. In the book, they also have the ability to command "lesser" animals such as rodents and wolves (which I found especially interesting, given the recent werewolf vs. vampire fascination). It's believed that Stoker took some of these "vampire traits" from old mythology about vampires, but created a large portion of it himself. (Research into vampire mythology is actually quite fascinating, albeit disturbing. Stories such as this are particularly troubling).
Now on to the plot! ... I don't have much to say. Aside from creating one of the most captivating villains of all time, I don't think Bram Stoker was a very talented author. The plot is sluggish and almost unbearable at points. For such a fascinating plot, you'd think it would never lag. However, I think the story would be more fitting for a novel half the size of this one.
An interesting aspect of the plot (as I've also researched into the novel to some depth) are the themes within. My favorite, of course, being the theme of Victorian female sexuality. The book does a wonderful job of linking loose women with Hellish monsters. Another aspect of the book I loved is the historical background for the novel; it's believed that Stoker loosely based Dracula upon Vlad the Impaler. It's no wonder this book has been subject to endless speculation and research. It's also full of imagery and metaphors that are perfect for a high school English class.
Despite the fun history behind the novel (and also despite the terrible movie adaptations of it) I found I could not fully enjoy the novel. From a literary standpoint, it's a brilliant novel with lots to offer. But from an average reader's standpoint, it remains pretty sluggish and sometimes even predictable. ("She has bites on her neck. Let's spend 30 pages wondering what that could mean!") I would recommend it if you have a desire to "read the classics" or are curious about the mythology of the vampire... but aside from that, I probably wouldn't recommend it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)