Jessica
I'm really glad I didn't start with this Julia Quinn novel, because I can pretty much guarantee that I would never have read another. It starts out well enough. Simon is a bit of a cliche (brooding with daddy issues) but Daphne seems charming enough. But then they have to get married and well...
I was really upset with Daphne's treatment of Simon. Simon tells her he will not have children, which of course turns her into some sort of baby obsessed monster. There is a scene involving some really questionable consent. I was so not ok with this. Was it supposed to be cute? Romantic? A way to bring the couple together and solve everything with babies (bingo!) It was gross. Simon deserved better, and he certainly didn't need to apologize to her. Ruined the whole book for me.I cannot recommend this one. The later Bridgerton novels are cute and fun, but this one left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
When I read a romance novel I want to see believable characters falling in love. I want to sympathize with their plights and root for them to overcome their obstacles. I had a hard time with this novel. I could never understand why on earth Theo (who was caring and interesting) would fall in love with Martha (who was the worst kind of moralizer). I expected Martha to loosen up her prejudices about Theo, but what happened instead was that he tried to become the sort of man that she would want. Her inner dialogue doesn't help, as it does little to make her more sympathetic. I wouldn't like her much if I met her in real life, and I didn't like her here. Two stars for the interesting premise and the colorful supporting characters (and the pig! I loved the pig!)
Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children is a book built around a gimmick. Yes, old photographs are creepy and unsettling. It wasn't a bad idea to use them in the book, but the problem is that they feel forced at times - the protagonist will literally happen upon a photograph, describe it in great detail, and then show it to us. There is often very little relevance to the plot.
And what about the plot? It starts out interesting, with the suspicious death of the main character's grandfather. He ends up traveling to Wales in search of answers about his grandfather's mysterious past. When he gets those answers it's a bit anti-climactic, and the book turns into a standard sort of boarding school adventure. Comparisons to x-men are completely justified. Then the book tries to explain its mythology, and it just doesn't make very much sense. The main character is a drip who has no personality that I could find. His parents are terrible caricatures of bad parenting. The peculiar children were promising, but it was a lost opportunity. Spoiler: SpoilerIf the children are really eighty years old, I would have expected them to act like it. That would have been interesting. Instead we are treated to a creepy romance between the main character and his deceased grandpa's teenaged girlfriend.
In short, a lot of promise, but it didn't amount to much. It will probably make a good movie (I assume there is to be one, as it seems every YA novel these days is sold before being published!)
“Just like heaven” is the beginning of the Smythe-Smith Quartet, a spin off of Julia Quinn's popular Bridgerton series. I adore Julia Quinn, who proves that historical romance doesn't have to be dull and humorless. This book though? Eh, it's ok. I never got a clear sense of who Honoria really was - her personality feels a bit blank. The romance itself it pretty predictable, and there is very little conflict/plot to speak of. It feels like a novella. It's enjoyable, but I honestly enjoyed the second Smythe-Smith book much more (which seems to be the opposite of most Goodreads reviewers!)
I enjoyed the tale of Anne and Daniel. Did I think it a little unrealistic when he falls in love at first sight? Sure. But it's a nice little confection of a tale. Anne's back story is interesting, and the story doesn't throw so many roadblocks at them that I found it irritating. I do love Julia Quinn, and I'm happy that she has books about the Smithe-Smythe's, because their musicale was my favorite detail in the Bridgerton books!
3.5 stars. I've never read Lawson's blog, so I was new to her voice. And that voice? Is hilarious. Her stories are funny, but for the most part they don't become absurd. The reason why they are so hilarious is Lawson herself. She had an interesting childhood, living in a small town with her eccentric parents (her father was a taxidermist!) I loved the stories up until the last third, and then I lost interest for some reason. Maybe it's just that since I don't have children, I found those stories harder to relate to. At any rate, I had trouble getting through that part. I should also note that some chapters were more serious than I expected. If i had to criticize the book it would be this shift in tone. I wasn't entirely certain whether the book was meant to be a memoir or merely a humor title.
Having said that, I recommend this book. The first half is just one of the funniest things I've read. I will have to start following her blog!
I listened to the audiobook. There are two narrators, and they switch back and forth whe the point of view changes. So... this book. It was ok. The premise was really interesting - it's a mish mash of western, steampunk, and zombies. Unfortunately, the characters themselves are pretty dull, and they fail to live up to the promise of the backstory.
I made it halfway through before realizing that I didn't have a clear sense of the characters (and what sense I had was likely due to the narrators - the female narrator in particular was excellent.) I didn't feel an attachment to the characters, so when my audiobook came due at the library I returned it without finishing.
Still, it wasn't bad exactly - just rather ordinary. And the zombies? Yeah, that didn't work for me at all. I will continue my search for a steampunk novel that doesn't seem gimmicky.
Not quite as compulsively readable as the first, but the second book of a long series is generally a lot of setup. I appreciated how some of the less developed characters in the first book began to have defined personalities of their own.
My favorite thing about these books is the way they are written - I love how each chapter is a different viewpoint. Unfortunately, that means there are some characters you won't find as compelling (Catelyn for me). I also managed to go the entire book without remembering who Ser Davos was (a new character in this book.) I find Daenerys' thread to be the least compelling overall - it's so separate from the rest, and I find her a frustrating character. She literally does nothing in this book but wander around and think about finding ships.
I don't mean to sound like I'm complaining - I really enjoyed this book! In particular, Tyrion continues to be a total delight. I'm also enjoying Sansa's tale. I can see where she could be annoyingly naieve, but I'm enjoying the subtle changes to her character. The character of the Hound was also nicely fleshed out as he related to her thread.
I've already started the third book!
I like Michael Moore; he reminds me of my Dad for some reason. I generally agree with his politics, and even when I don't I think he has a refreshing sort of sincerity about him. I listened to the audio book, which he read himself. He has a pleasing speaking voice, and I enjoyed the stories of his life. This isn't all political - it's mostly a memoir, describing various scenes from his life. There were a few I didn't think worked, but mostly it was interesting to get a glimpse of what it's like to be as hated as he was a few years ago.
I was really excited about this book - I love science fiction, the 80s, and all thing geek. I left disappointed though. I listened to the audiobook read by Wil Wheaton, and I have no quibbles with his performance. He was perfect for the project, and his voice worked for me as the narrator. The book itself though? I don't know. I'd describe it as “nostalgia porn.” It's like being trapped in a room with the one friend you have who seems to speak only in movie quotations. There are long lists of movies, video games, and books from the 80s, often without any seeming point other than namechecking.
The premise of the story is really interesting, but I never felt that the story lived up to its premise. I was bored, often wishing that something would happen already (especially true in the first quarter of the book.) I didn't need quite so much explanation of how the Oasis worked - I wanted a more satisfying story, with characters who felt a little more three dimensional.
Three stars for the audiobook version (Wil Wheaton)! Really, the perfect match of reader and book. Probably two stars for the book itself, although if you were a bit older than me you would probably get more out of the references - I was a child in the 80s, so my memories aren't clear enough to catch them all. And having said that? I agree that this will make a fantastic movie, and I will certainly go see it!
I should have known better with this one - fractured fairy tales are not my thing (I might still be scarred from reading “Wicked” in college.) I like Jim Hines though, so I wanted to give it a chance.
I did enjoy the fact that the fairy tales in the book are more of the traditional type than Disney. Cinderella's stepsisters, for instance, walk with a limp on account of having cut parts of their feet off to fit in the glass slipper. Other than some interesting back story, the characters didn't feel particularly real. Is this book young adult? If that's the case, I can forgive the lack of depth and realize that I'm just not the target audience here. The book was well written, with some nice humor, but it dragged. I was never invested in the storyline (or in finding the prince, who we see only through Danielle's eyes for most of the story, and he seems like a bit of a drip.)
2.5 stars, but I'm rounding up because I don't think I'm a good judge in this case.
I've read John Scalzi's blog for years, but I must confess that this is the first of his novels I've actually picked up. I knew the moment I saw the title that I would be reading this book - I'm an enormous Star Trek fan (as well as a huge fan of sci-fi television in general).
The book really is an enormous love letter to the genre. The plotline? Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense. This is ok, as most everything in the book is of dubious scientific value by design (tv shows don't have to make sense!) The book is funny. Not, perhaps, laugh out loud funny, but a type of humor that really appeals to me (and I can't think when the last time I read a good humorous sci-fi novel might have been.)
Four stars for entertaining plot and clever use of language. One star off because the characters ran together for me (their personalities were not very well defined.) In addition, the codas at the end weren't necessary for me - the actual story ends with a perfect line, and I would have been happy to leave it there. The codas weren't bad, it's just that I was done with the story by that point.
Highly recommended for anyone who loves trek, as well as fans of humorous science fiction.
I'll be honest; I only made it halfway through this book. I thought the backstory and setting were interesting and promising - it was certainly a different spin on Steampunk. Unfortunately, I cannot overlook the behavior of the Iron Duke. I don't care what kind of awful backstory he has - it made me uncomfortable reading his interactions with Mina. I am so tired of reading stories where a male character chases after a female to the point of creepiness. I'm tired of the male characters forcing their attentions on the women after repeated rejections. And I'm tired of those same women then changing their minds partway through the book. It sends a bad message.
I also found the author's way of describing the more...ahem... intimate moments to be pretty cringe inducing (and I've read plenty of romance.) I had to stop reading, because I realized it was turning into a hate read, and I don't need any more of those! Two stars for the world building.
P.S. That cover is awful and embarrassing, And I would think the Iron Duke would have more hair... just saying.
I will tell you all the truth: I do not like fantasy. Truly. I don't know if I'm still scarred by the summer I forced my way through all of Tolkien, but I do know that the barest mention of elves or knights or fair maidens will send me scurrying away. In addition, I'm not a fan of political intrigue, nor of really long books that start really long series. So why did I try this one?
I don't like the feeling of dismissing an entire genre based on a few bad apples, so I was looking for some good fantasy. I knew about Game of Thrones from the tv show (which I haven't seen) so I clicked on the page. I read the first few reviews and noted a few others like me - not fans of fantasy - who had liked the book. I took it with me out of town and gave it a try (this may or may not have led to me reading at 3 am in a hotel bathroom so I wouldn't wake my husband... I'm not saying!)
Simply put, this is a great book. It isn't without flaws, but none of those flaws bothered me in the least while I was reading. I loved all the characters, even the ones who seemed unloveable at first(Sansa!) The female characters were well drawn - not just for a fantasy, but in general. Martin chooses to tell the story POV style, with each chapter a different character. I loved that because it allowed the characters to feel real.
The plotline is interesting - political intrigue with some light fantasy (there is magic and fantastic creatures, but they aren't the focus of the story, nor do they solve all the problems/cause all the wars.) The politics did not bore me, though I confess by the end I was forgetting who belonged to which house (there are too many names that begin with T!)
My favorite character, without a doubt, was the dwarf Tyrion. He was wonderfully grey (neither evil nor good) and his dialogue felt more real than any of the other characters (they were not bad, but occasionally trended towards the overly formal language often used in these novels.)
I'm looking forward to the next in the series - and I'm thinking of trying some other fantasy novels soon!
I listened to the audio version. I don't know how the experience would be otherwise, but I loved listening to her read the stories. I love Tina Fey in general - I think she's smart, and she she says a lot of things that had me (as an assertive-type lady in her thirties) nodding in agreement. My husband loved the book too, but well - it's possible he might have a type. Highly recommended!
I read the Connie Willis novel [b:To Say Nothing of the Dog 77773 To Say Nothing of the Dog Connie Willis http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327943222s/77773.jpg 696]. The novel references “Three men in a Boat” extensively, and I was (to say the least) confused. I've heard great things about the book, and it was free for my Kindle, so I gave it a try!This book suffers a bit from a split personality - it vacillates between hilarious descriptions and scenes and the most ridiculously flowery travel passages you can imagine. I'll be honest, at a certain point I started skipping them (see the last paragraph for my suggestion!) It is striking how modern the humor in this book feels. It's not a great travel book, but if you've ever been on an ill fated trip with friends you will be able to relate to the tale!I have both read this book and listened to the (abridged) version read by Hugh Laurie. I highly recommend the audio version - not only is Laurie delightful, it manages to get rid of much of the silly purple prose in the travel sections.
This series was recommended as similar to the Narnia books. But you know what? I love this book and don't care for CS Lewis. The book tells the story of some bored children on holiday who find a secret map. Could it lead to King Arthur's grail?
This book falls on the younger side and it's a quick read. The language is rich but not overly complicated, and I enjoyed the characters (especially Uncle Merry!) If I have one complaint it's that the book telegraphs too quickly which characters are the bad guys - I wasn't a bit surprised when they turned out that way. In general the good/evil divide is a bit too sharp, and motivations for the evildoers is a bit vague (and they are a bit too evil, with no shades.) Of course, this is a young book, so I can forgive this tendency. I hope it gets a bit more fleshed out in the later books.
Highly recommended for fans of children's fantasy. It's a bit slow to start, and the book feels like a prequel, but it's a good start to a series!
Allow me to damn this book with faint praise: it is far less offensive than any of the other Austen related fictions I have read. Mind you, I thought they were all, without exception, dreadful, so make of that what you will.
The concept of including Jane herself as a main character is interesting, and it avoids the obvious traps of continuing one of her stories. She is a bit of a blank slate (we know so little about her, due to a sister burning most of her correspondence) that it's easy enough to include her in a book. And solving mysteries? Why not?
Apparently this is a series, but I have only read this book. I chose it at random off the library shelves based on the title (I'm always interested in Byron.) I thought it would be awful, but really it wasn't. The mystery itself seemed rather less than central to the story, but I was interested in Brighton itself and all the historical persons included in the novel. Jane is a bit frustrating at times, as she seems rather concerned with doing what is correct all the time, but that's ok. At the very least, this is one of the few books of this time period I have read that didn't attempt to shove in a romance, and that makes me like it more.
I don't know if I would seek more of this series out - I lost interest and had to make myself finish, but I was reading slowly. I recommend the series to fans of Austen, just don't expect anything up to her level!
I'd really like to give this book three and half stars, but the system doesn't allow half ratings! I picked this book up because I like all the genres being mashed together - steampunk, historical romance, paranormal (ok, I don't really love paranormal.) I was struck by the main character immediately - her voice was distinctive and I loved the style of writing.
It seemed to have a bit of self-awareness and didn't mind poking fun at the genres. Or at least that's what I assumed, as the first appearance of a pair of goggles came right away, with dirigibles soon to follow. As I read on though I was less sure. There wasn't really much in the way of steampunk except for the aforementioned items and an occasional steam powered tea kettle. And that's ok, but I wish it hadn't been replaced with extra romance and a helping of vampire/werewolf political intrigue.
I know it's a personal pet peeve, but I really don't like how every book about supernatural beings has to spend so much time on the political structures involved. It's tedious, and I really don't find myself caring about them. As for the romance, well... it felt a bit forced. I read plenty of romance, and I didn't buy this one. I disliked how Alexia was constantly in need of saving by her “Alpha” (hate that term.) It robbed the character of the spunk and independence I saw in the beginning. I found the intimate scenes to be a bit dry and almost embarrassing to read. I did not find the hero to be especially appealing.
The resolution to the story was rushed. It all made sense, and I don't have a problem with the idea, but it seemed to come all of a sudden. I did like some of the supporting characters, in particular Lord Akeldama. Having said that, I was troubled a few times by how often the author went to the well of stereotypes to paint him as a homosexual. At one point I he says: It was such a glorious time to be alive, when men finally and truly got to wear sparkly things... That instance really stuck out to me as a bit over the top. To be fair, Lord Akeldama does get to have a bit more depth later on, and in the end was one of the best understood characters.
So I guess what I'm saying is that I'm conflicted - the first half was 4.5 stars, and the last half barely three. I still liked it enough to continue in the series, and I hope to get to those soon!
As an aside, I read the Kindle version, which was fairly riddled with typos. Not enough to be distracting, mostly a few missing spaces between words etc.
I'm going to echo a common refrain on this book. The first half was really wonderful - Lucy and Jeremy were both well drawn and fun characters and I believed in their romance. I enjoyed the supporting characters, especially Toby's fiance and Lucy's absent minded brother Henry. It was a fun little comedy of manners... right up until the point when the hero and heroine get married.
The minute the wedding ceremony goes off they seem to get personality transplants. Jeremy, who has shown no signs of being the typical controlling regency hero, suddenly begins ordering Lucy about and controlling her movements. Lucy, who has been pretty free with telling Jeremy all of her thoughts, suddenly starts hiding things from him and behaving as the typical regency heroine. I was so disappointed that I skimmed to the end. I can't bear novels where the problems would be solved if only the main characters actually spoke to one another!
I think the book should have ended with the wedding. I think the first half could have been expanded to make an excellent book, and I wouldn't have these complaints. As it stands, I can't really recommend this one. However, I think the author shows a lot of promise, and I will definitely be reading some of her other novels. My rating: first half 4 and a half stars, second half one star.
It's true - Heyer's mysteries are never quite as mysterious as they should be. I was fairly certain who had committed the crime by the second chapter, and my conclusion proved correct.
But never mind - I wasn't in for the mystery. The key is to not see it as anything other than a charming 1930s comedy of errors. I love Georgette Heyer because of her ability to write charming characters. I have read a fair number of regencies and mystery novels where the characters are flat stereotypes of the genre. Her characters, on the other hand, have a rare depth for the genres - they change, and our view of them changes along with the story. The main characters in “Behold, Here's Poison” are universally unlikable when they are first introduced, but over time I grew quite fond of them (in particular Randall, presented as a mean-spirited foppish sort at first, over the course of the novel he was revealed to have unexpected depths... still rather witty at the expense of others, but I appreciate that in a character.)
The romance did come a bit out of nowhere. I think this is the second of Heyer's novels I have read with cousin marrying as a plot point, which is perhaps a bit strange to modern eyes. This isn't her strongest work (none of the mysteries are really - read “The Grand Sophy” if that's what you're looking for. Sophie is one of the greatest characters in a genre populated by stereotypes.) It's enjoyable, and recommended for fans of the 1930s mysteries.
“The Great Was and Modern Memory” examines world war I through its literature. It's an interesting topic, and I've recently become interested in the first world war. This not a light read. It's also not something to pick up if you aren't already familiar with the literary works of the era. I'm familiar with the poets and have read most of the post war novels, but I confess at times I seemed to spend more time looking up works for reference than actually reading! This isn't a bad thing, but it's something to be aware of. You should also have a working knowledge of the events of the war, as the book tends to leap from topic to topic. Regarding my rating: while I think the research is well done and the conclusions interesting, I did not think the book was arranged in a sensible way. Some of the topics seemed to be stretched a bit thin. And in its discussion of homosexuality during the war it seems a bit dated, though no doubt it was fresh when the book was originally published. I give the book a solid four stars, with the caveat that it should not be your introduction to the subject.
I loved this book. I wasn't expecting much going in, to be honest... sure, I loved the books growing up, but I wasn't certain about the topic. As it turns out, over and over again I had the experience of thinking “Goodness, that sounds exactly like me!” If you loved the books (not the show, which is barely mentioned,) then I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
I had a hard time deciding between two and three stars for this book. I decided to go with three, mostly because I did really like Peeta, and the idea behind the story was interesting.
I asked for book recommendations from my friends, and several of them highly recommended this one. In fact, they loved it so much that I feel a little bad that I didn't. My number one issue with the book was the main character. Katniss is frustrating - she's very blank, and in spite of the fact that the book is written from her point of view, I feel like we never get a clear picture of her personality. I would agree with some of the other views - this would have been a more interesting book if it weren't written in the first person. So much action takes place off screen, and Katniss isn't interesting enough for me to want to follow her all the time.
I also feel that the political ideas aren't very well developed. I understand that there is more of this in the later books, so I've already requested the second from the library (never let it be said that I don't give things a chance!)
I felt like Katniss' interest in Gale came out of nowhere, and I can see I will be in for a lot of love triangle angst in the future, which I am not looking forward to. I thought it was pretty obvious early on that Peeta was in love with Katniss, and her refusal to see that felt like a plot device.
This will probably make a good movie - it reads like it was written for the screen, with lots of action and very little internal dialogue.
So in conclusion? Meh. It's not awful, but I felt like there wasn't much there there.