I wanted to wait until I finished the fourth book of the Old Man's War trilogy (haha, yes, just like Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide) before I wroteI wanted to wait until I finished the fourth book of the Old Man's War trilogy (haha, yes, just like Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide) before I wrote another review about the series. And now that I finished Zoe's tale, which is essentially a rehash of what, to me, was the best book of the series, The Last Colony, I can honestly say that I'm ready to leave this world behind.
I have this to say for John Scalzi: while I may not care very much for his writing style, I do appreciate his world-building skills. He puts a ridiculous amount of thought and effort into creating his universes and as a reader, I can tell that he not only loves the worlds he's created, but he loves the characters, and every single nuance about them, too.
Scalzi takes time to develop his stories: he tells you about every single little bit of minutiae that you may or may not care about, and he makes sure that's he's clear about how he's built these worlds, what's in them, and who's in them. He periodically goes off on tangents (but there's usually a reason) and he can go into interminable amounts of detail about the most inconsequential things. Sometimes, I found it tiresome. It takes awhile for him to make his point (or even get to it), but once he makes his way there, it's hard to fault the guy for very carefully honing and crafting this little microcosm into something tangible, into something believable.
While I may not always buy the science in Scalzi's Old Man's War universe, I do appreciate how much detail he's built into it to create a very 3-dimensional alt-universe (or, in his case, when explaining his skip technology, multiple alt-verses). Sometimes, I compared his work to that of the guy who created the Taj Mahal using toothpicks - the detail is amazing, and the amount of work is awe-inspiring, but at the end of the day, it's still a bunch of toothpicks. If someone bumped into it a little too hard, I'd be afraid of it falling to pieces....more
The Age of Miracles was both beautiful and extremely frustrating. Beautiful because the writing was exquisite; Karen Thompson Walker writes simply butThe Age of Miracles was both beautiful and extremely frustrating. Beautiful because the writing was exquisite; Karen Thompson Walker writes simply but succinctly. She's very expressive and knows her way around the written word. While I don't think it was as beautifully written as The Art of Fielding, her writing was sophisticated, evocative and nuanced; without trying too hard, her words successfully evoked the images and emotions needed to further her narrative, something which many other writers try and fail to do. It almost reminded me of the beauty behind Colson Whitehead's Zone One, another book that I thought was both beautifully written but extremely frustrating.
So here are my reasons for loving this book: - this was a true coming-of-age novel - Thompson Walker did not shy away from themes of loneliness and ostracization that oftentimes comes with growing up - the death of the human race mimicked the death of the earth, which was also an analogy for that tumultuous period between the end of childhood and the start of adulthood
It was a good story...if it had focused on the coming-of-age portion of the story, it probably would've been more successful. However, when taken in with the sci-fi aspects of the story (the earth's rotation is slowing down, causing longer days and longer nights, which leads to the eventual dying of the earth), it fails miserably.
The science is weak. I had to stop nearly a dozen times in disbelief. While Thompson Walker does not go into details, specifically so that she wouldn't have to deal with the science, what did end up in the book irked me to the point of distraction. I finally had to tell myself to really suspend disbelief...to the point where I found myself glossing over some of the "earth dying" parts.
It's a good thing -- a really good thing -- that I enjoyed Julia's story. The heartbreaking end of her friendship with Hanna evoked painful memories of lost friendships in grade school; similarly, her growing friendship and initial romance with Seth reminded me of early crushes and never quite knowing how to behave around boys. Her reaction to the decline of her parents' relationship was real, as were her feelings of not belonging anywhere or to anyone (I, too, remember lunchtimes in the library, in grade school!).
I think this book is worth reading, but I must warn other science geeks out there: don't concentrate on the science! Don't try to think too much or too deeply. Just enjoy the story for what it is: a story of a young girl getting ready to leave her childhood behind....more
I wanted to wait until I'd read both Incarceron and Sapphique before I wrote my review. While each book stands on its own, I had to see where the storI wanted to wait until I'd read both Incarceron and Sapphique before I wrote my review. While each book stands on its own, I had to see where the story went (after finishing Incarceron) and how I felt about it.
Let me preface this by saying I didn't not like the book. If Goodreads allowed half stars for rating, I would've rated both as 2.5s. Personally, I thought Catherine Fisher was quite innovative in creating a Matrix-steam-punk-YA mash-up: in some future time, because of all the wars and rebellions (and maybe the destruction of the moon??), the leader of The Realm decides that the only way to stop dissension and chaos is to stop time. He gathers up all his enemies and creates a prison for them. Incarceron is meant to house the rebels and dissidents but it's also designed to be a paradise, where the prisoners won't want for anything and will eventually create a culture/civilization of their own separate from those in outside world.
For himself and his people, he decrees that they should live in a world of Protocol, set in Regency Era times. When living within the confines of Protocol, people live their lives without the benefits of technology and modern day science or medicine. Nothing new can be created and no tech can be used. Records of technological advances are sparse and are available only to a select few, such as the ruling class and the Sapienti, who have partial access to some old records. But the records aren't complete, so they can't reconstruct any technology. In this manner, time stops. Still, while the poor live in misery and suffer the same fate as people in the 18th and 19th centuries did, the rich are allowed to have tech, as long as they hide it and act "in Era" when around others (i.e., they can have actual bathrooms and washing machines, scanners, computers and communication devices, provided they remain hidden at all times).
Near the beginning of Sapphique, I actually started to wonder if The Realm was actually the prison, and the prison was reality. When Incarceron starts creating a human form for itself, draining power reserves both in the prison and out in the realm, it seems that Incarceron and the realm are nothing more than one gigantic holodeck. The question of what was real and what wasn't, of whether there was a way out of Incarceron, of the growing sentience of a prison -- these were fascinating concepts and really made me enjoy both works.
However...
...and here's my list of howevers:
• There was a lot of hostility in both books. Most of Fisher’s main characters (with the exception of Jared) were almost always annoyed, raging, fuming, seething, untrusting, wary and/or cross. Almost no one trusted any other character; there was always someone who was willing to question another person’s motives or was quick to antagonize someone else. Her characters were quick to judge and provoke others and no one ever apologized or tried to understand where anyone was coming from. But I get it: if I were imprisoned (whether literally, in Incarceron, or metaphorically, “Outside” in The Realm) I wouldn’t be in a good mood, either. At some point however, you need to learn to trust someone. While everyone’s definitely in “survival of the fittest” mode, I found it odd that even when characters had the same goals and were “helping” each other out, they were still bitter, insolent and untrusting.
• This general aggression and animosity made it very difficult for me to like any of the characters. For me, this took away from the experience. While the creation of a sentient prison and the exploration of reality vs. illusion was great, I felt that the characterization – and character building in particular – was two-dimensional. I wish the characters had grown. I wish they’d learned from their mistakes and from their interactions with others.
• The writing. I always come back to this because there is something to be said about a beautifully written narrative. It can take you away; it can make you not want to put your book down; it can make you fall in love with the characters and make worlds and people come alive. Fisher isn’t a very sophisticated writer. The fact that she came up with a fantastic concept shows that she’s got real promise. However, there’s a difference between the creativity and the mechanics. For me, she succeeded in coming up with an engrossing premise, but the mechanics needed work. She tries. She really does and every now and then, she comes up with something really well-written. Her pacing was surprisingly good (I cannot stress how important pacing is!) -- there really weren't any dead spots. I felt that she handled switching the characters' POVs quite well. But she’s not subtle. There were no sublime moments. There were rarely any passages that just whisked me away or drew me in. I wondered if this was why the characters felt a little stiff and two-dimensional to me.
Nevertheless, this series is worth a read, if only for the speculative aspects of both novels. A lot of people love this series and I have heard that some fans have even created Claudia-and-Jared fanfic. I wish it struck the same chord in me, but it sort of fell short.
I was quite surprised by this book -- and very pleasantly surprised at that. While the writing isn't sophisticated, the story itself was entertaining.I was quite surprised by this book -- and very pleasantly surprised at that. While the writing isn't sophisticated, the story itself was entertaining. It kept me hooked and I found myself really touched by Jackson's very different relationships with Holly, Adam, his dad and his sister. More impressively, I found myself a little excited whenever I found myself with some extra time to read it, because I actually wanted to know what was going to happen next. I didn't expect that, since I had originally thought this was going to be another throw-away book.
Sometimes I think writing YA fiction can be very challenging: you don't want to dumb it down too much for the adults reading your work and you want to maintain relevance so that the young adult audience you're targeting stays both interested and invested. Cross certainly succeeded because her narrative remained engrossing and her main characters developed quite nicely. Time travel novels themselves can be tricky; some authors get bogged down by the "how" and get lost trying to explain the physics of it, which can be detrimental if a) you get it wrong and b) you ostracize your readers with too much science. Cross took the suspension-of-disbelief approach: it just happens in her world; her protagonist can do it and other people can do it too, and while she tries to have the teens figure out the "hows" and the "whys", she doesn't actually get into either too much. It just is.
While she spent a good amount of time developing the characters of her core group (Jackson, Holly, Adam and Jackson's dad), some of her peripheral characters (e.g., the EOT agents, some of the CIA personnel) were a bit stereotypical and two-dimensional. At times, I was expecting any one of the bad guys to throw their heads back and break out into an evil laugh, but I think Cross's writing and characterization will get better with her future novels.
All in a all, not bad for a first time effort. I'll be watching out for the second book since I'm invested enough in the story....more
Egads...if I were kidnapped by a guy that I knew was a murderer, and that his main goal was to kill me again, I don't think I'd be having dinner with Egads...if I were kidnapped by a guy that I knew was a murderer, and that his main goal was to kill me again, I don't think I'd be having dinner with him (while I am his captive) or having polite nightly tête-à-têtes. Or having discussions with him about how he's developing romantic feelings about me.
There was absolutely no sense of urgency in this book. No sense of "I must escape now! I must get away from these psychos while I can, at any cost." While our intrepid little heroine, Abby, does manage to escape twice, I (as the reader) didn't really feel like a) she was going to get very far and b) didn't really feel that she really wanted to leave. If I were in her shoes, I would spend every waking moment thinking of ways to escape, of how to make contact with the outside world. I certainly wouldn't spend my time learning how to make risotto, watch hours upon hours of TV, play video games, etc. A little rain won't deter me. And I would most certainly not be quite as civil as she was with my kidnapper. Every ounce of hatred and fear and loathing I had for him would be oozing from me. He would know, unequivocally, that there was no way in hell I would ever consider having any kind of relationship with him, romantic or otherwise. He would know that I abhorred him.
Don't get me wrong. This wasn't Stockholm syndrome light. Not once did Abby identify with her kidnappers or justify what they were doing. But she empathized with him towards the end. While he wanted Abby to be part of their plans and accept her role in it (even accept her torture sessions openly), I was glad when Sinclair didn't actually go there, because she could've. Abby was such a passive kidnapping victim that it was so odd that she never railed against her captors or seemed psychologically traumatized by her experience. It all seemed so...derived. That's it --- it was very contrived and derivative. And ultimately frustrating.
Oh...and what happened to the tracker in her arm? Hmmm...will Book 4 be The Mystery of the Mysterious Missing Tracker?
*sigh*
Still, I read the whole thing. Cover to cover. And I will do so with the fourth book, whenever it comes out. I'm too far in it now not to finish the series. I just hope it ends soon....more
Shall we make a new rule of life...always try to be a little kinder than is necessary?
In that one sentence is wrapped the premise of Wonder: to be kin
Shall we make a new rule of life...always try to be a little kinder than is necessary?
In that one sentence is wrapped the premise of Wonder: to be kinder than is necessary. That it's not enough to be kind but that one should be kinder than needed. That the decision to be kind is a choice each and every single one of us faces, but that not every one chooses to do so, because, let's face it, it's hard.
I don't really want to say too much about this book, only that it is simultaneously beautiful and ugly and all too real. I think each person has to discover it for themselves and take whatever meaning they want to from it, because each person is different. Each person is flawed, and those flaws -- whether real or perceived, regardless of whether they are physical, emotional or psychological -- almost always affects how we behave and are perceived by others.
This is an adult book that I think children should read. Many will say this was written for young adults (and I think that's probably true as well) but I believe adults would benefit from reading this anyway. It's very easy to lose sight of things when people, regardless of age, are caught up in the drudgery of their own quotidian existence. It's easy to lose sight of how lonely life can be even when you're surrounded by so many people, or how uplifting it can be when someone notices you.
There's much to be learned by everyone from this novel, least of which is this: we all have a choice about how we are with others -- and everyone, to a degree, is imperfect, flawed, damaged -- and that being kind or nice is not easy, even if you love someone very much. Sometimes it's easier to be cruel or mean or even neutral. That sometimes, in the need to want to belong to a group, in the desire to be accepted, it's easier to do something atrocious and demeaning just so you're not alone or ostracized. And sometimes, part of growing up is making the hard choices and not conforming, that we all need to accept and love our flaws.
Everyone in the world should get a standing ovation at least once in their life because we all overcometh the world. -- Auggie
I could've finished this book in one sitting, but I didn't. I wanted it to last. I re-read a few chapters again and again, because it touched me so much....more
Kids are tough,that much is true. Last year, when I read The Hunger Games, I kept thinking that only a twisted individual would create a world, somewhKids are tough,that much is true. Last year, when I read The Hunger Games, I kept thinking that only a twisted individual would create a world, somewhere in our distant future, wherein kids would battle to the death in order to garner their colony and family a year's worth of supplies, supplies which the government withheld in order to control its people.
Pretty twisted.
Flashback, then, to two decades before Hunger Games was even created, and you have Ender's Game, another dystopian world wherein each kid is tested to see if they have what it takes to become xenocidal maniacs. Where kids are tested at age three, and if they're lucky enough to pass muster as a potential soldier, they're taken away from their parents and families and sent to a hopped up military school in space, where they live and breathe The Game. Where they learn tactics and command. Where they learn to kill.
Brutal.
In both books, kids are put through a sort of mental, physical and psychological torture, but because of the resilient nature of children, the adults don't seem to think about the lasting damage these exercises have on the kids. While the kids were expected to kill each other in The Hunger Games, kids killing kids were considered collateral damage and for the good of all, in Ender's Game.
Pretty twisted.
And brutal.
I guess at the center of both narratives, it was Katniss' urge to survive and Ender's struggles to maintain his humanity that made both these books so compelling to millions of readers. This is what struck a chord for most: Katniss' and Ender's sense of isolation, that only they could do what was asked of them and they had no one else really, that they could turn to, and certainly not any adults. It was their feelings of desolation, that they had to do this to save the ones they loved (for Katniss, it was to save her sister Prim, and for Ender, it was to save his sister Valentine). It was the emptiness of loss, as the realities of the price and consequences of their successes weighed on them. Too much blood, all at the hands of kids. Heavy stuff; most adults wouldn't be able to handle dealing with such things. And what about kids? They're resilient. They have the rest of their lives to recover from whatever damage this has done to their psyche.
I think I understand why this book is so popular. It's written very casually, like you're listening to someone--a close friend, maybe--tell you a storI think I understand why this book is so popular. It's written very casually, like you're listening to someone--a close friend, maybe--tell you a story instead of reading it. Sinclair's prose isn't lyrical or even close to literary - instead, it's very mainstream, very much of the now: like her heroine, Abby, she lives in Bend, OR; she drops locale names and places left and right; she name drops and infuses her narrative with pop culture (Adele, Josh Ritter, Florence and the Machine, Kate Spade, iPad, Barcelona vs. Real Madrid...these are all very real props in Abby's world, just like they are for many readers) so that the reader has a point of reference. They are comfortable with Abby because they are comfortable in her world, with the things in her world, in spite of the unnatural things that are occurring within that world. Just as Abby enjoys having coffee at her favorite cafe, casually shooting the breeze with her sister or friends, the reader is drawn into Sinclair's world just as cozily as they "listen" to Abby tell her story, maybe with a cup of coffee or tea, as they sit curled up on the couch with a blanket tucked around their legs.
I understand this is a young adult novel and would likely appeal to many teenagers (and a number of adults, as well). It's popularity and consistent 4-star rating is a testament to that. However, from my point of view, while many bizarre things are happening to our intrepid heroine, there's never quite any real sense of distress, never really any real quickening of the senses, never any immediacy that she is in imminent danger, right now (or even around the corner). Yes, she sees ghosts. Yes, ghosts want something from her. Ooh, she's potentially being threatened by a ghost. And let's not forget that overarching black cloud from the first book. All of that is there, ever present. All of that is always hanging over Abby. But the whole time I read both books, there was never really any sense of "Abby could be in real danger. Abby could die. Abby has to run. Away. Now." Again, it's all very casual, like Abby is sitting right across from me and is sheepishly telling me this weird story of what happened to her last month, all the while tempering everything that's happening to her so that I don't get too needlessly freaked out and worried.
Also (and again, I'm going to fall back on the whole "this is a young adult novel geared towards young women" thing), at some point, I started thinking, "Gosh, Abby is starting to sound very much like Bella!" But instead of "Where's Edward?" from Stephenie Meyers' New Moon, it's now "Where's Jesse?" Granted, Abby did not turn into a danger-seeking lovelorn girl so that her ghost boyfriend Jesse would appear to her and warn her that her actions were going to get her into trouble. Nope. She turned into an adventure-seeking lovelorn girl because at heart, she's a jock through and through, and that's just who she is, but she did run around Bend looking for Jesse, whispering "Come back to me, Jesse...show yourself to me, Jesse...I miss you, Jesse...I love you, Jesse. I'm nothing without you, Jesse," all the while hoping against hope that he'd be by the swings or at the park, feeding the ducks, or playing basketball, maybe hiding behind a bush or under a rock...you get my drift.
There were other things that bothered me, such as how does a teenager support herself with minimum wage jobs? Where's her health insurance coming from? How will she pay for the mortgage and all that other stuff while trying to figure out what she wants to do with her life. There's an easy answer for now, of course, in the form of her older sister Kate, but then what? While I'm very glad that Sinclair chose to have two very strong females be at the center of the story, it just worries me when her main heroine sees a bright future as a river-shoe wearing, white-water-rafting-in-the-summer, barista-in-the-winter, night-soccer-player. I'm glad that she's put it out there that women don't have to settle for a corporate life, that they don't need to stay where they are, and that they should do what makes them happy. But I just kept going back to "what message is she sending out to the teens out there?"
Well, at any rate, as with the first book, this was a really quick read. Entertaining enough. I'm probably going to read the third one when it comes out. I'm not expecting an earth-shattering new chapter in Abby's life. I don't really know how Sinclair will end this whole cycle, but for now, I'm hooked enough to continue on. There are worse books out there, that's for sure. ...more
Well, not bad for a free book on Amazon. The writing was not great (far from it), but the story was entertaining enough and kept me hooked. While the Well, not bad for a free book on Amazon. The writing was not great (far from it), but the story was entertaining enough and kept me hooked. While the themes were more mature, this was definitely geared towards a younger audience. And...while I didn't think Jools Sinclair was a very good writer, she was significantly better than Stephenie Meyer! Larger vocabulary, better pacing, less cringe-inducing dialogue...if the characters were more developed and the mystery not so obvious, I probably would've given this 3 stars....more