Liz Rapp
I have mixed feelings about this book. I liked it better towards the end, so I'd recommend sticking with it. Lots of thoughts on feminism and women's diminished roles in the Victorian era. The female characters slowly revealed complexities as the book reaches it's climax is fascinating. Faith and Paul's mutually antagonistic friendship was a delight to read. Faith's interactions with her little brother Howard were also heartfelt and at times deeply sad. When she tells him that good boys write their scriptures right handed, and ghosts don't bother good boys, and then he reveals almost hysterically his pages showing his attempts - that scene was so sad.
Honestly what I dislike about the book is more to do with the Lie Tree itself, even suspending disbelief over it's general magical concept. There is no evidence that the plant is actually helpful in anyway, if anything, Faith should have read her father's journal and thought “My father ate hallucinogenic fruit that drove him mad, and ruined our family. The last thing I should do is also eat this fruit.” Her reaction to both believe the journal, and then follow through with cultivating and consuming it were bizarre to me.
Also - the row boat. I have no idea why the author's idea was to hide the plant in a sea cave only accessible by boat. This immediately threw me off, it's such a weird and random choice. For one, who owns the row boat? Why is it there? Why would someone just leave it on the beach? Has the author ever used a rowboat? They are heavy, and it takes a lot of arm strength to propel and steer it. It's not like being in a small plastic kayak. I do not believe for an instant a 14 year girl in the 1800s who is used to being bound up in corsets and not exercising much would have been able to propel that boat into the ocean against waves and current. It was easier to believe in the magic of the Lie Tree than to believe Faith would not have been washed out to sea.
Fun, fairly quick read. The dialog between Zacharias, Prunella and Damerell were probably the best parts of the book, with Damerell stealing any scene he was in. Zacharias is immensely likable. But as a whole I felt like too much was left unexplained.
The use and acquisition of familiars was both vague and horrifying. Zacharias describes their hatching from eggs as having the mind of an infant, for some unexplained reason a person from fairy deciding to reincarnate themselves in the mortal realm. Are they pets? Slaves? Friends? Are the sorcerers their slaves in turn? Apparently it's ok to marry one, as in the case of Midsomer and Lorelei, but they don't have any of them same rights and privileges of a human person, considering that Prunella feeds one of hers to another with no consequence but a few shed tears. This was murky and not adequately explained, I was honestly left wondering why anyone would want a familiar at all. For a moderate boost in power?
The main plot is about England running out of magic but it doesn't seem to impair the magic users in any way- the book is full of examples of Prunella and Zacharias casting spells with no difficulty.
It is apparently verboten for ladies to practice magic because they are too delicate - except for any occasion in which a lady feels like doing a bit of magic would be convenient.
Can almost everyone do magic? It is mentioned many times how useful maids, farmers, laborer etc find doing spells to aid their everyday work, so I was left with the idea that almost everyone in England must be able to do a bit of magic.
What does the Sorcerer Royal do? Zacharias mentions attending to his duties and being very busy, but doesn't say what he is doing. He can't flee Midsomer because he can't leave his duties, but I could not figure out why since he mainly seemed to be teaching Prunella and collapsing in pain at intervals. And much is made of the Sorcerer Royal's magical staff - but what does it do? I can't remember any instance of explanation of where it came from or what it actually does.
The characters are interesting, but could use more fleshing out. There's a lot of great stuff here, Dylan's descriptions of Babylon, Stella's thoughts on her body, but the book lacks any sort of momentum, and feels like an unfinished first draft. The moment you get the antagonist in the room with the rest of the characters the book ends. And I don't even know if I would call Stella's dad a real antagonist, except that Dylan and Stella don't like him. The extremely cold weather, which should overshadow the book with a sense of doom, feels more like a non-issue. The main characters don't seem to struggle with it any more than a normal winter. They drink gin and go sledding, with the occasional mention on the news about the Thames freezing and snow in Morocco.
Stella is the most interesting character, her feelings about her body and fears about puberty forcing her into an unfamiliar body were very moving.
“...The scar doesn't bother her. If anything, it takes his face out of the category of symmetrical and ordered things to which everybody else's face belongs. It's a face like the throw of a dice. She likes that arbitrariness, instinctively. It's something she's drawn to.
What she doesn't like is the cruelties in his past, and in hers, over which she'll have to crawl to get to him. She wishes she'd never told him that she was a murderer. She wishes that she was pristine, in his mind, so that touching him might feel like booting up a different version of herself. But that's not how you get reborn, if you ever can....” Chapter 68.
This reads like a long list of things that happen to Patricia. Patricia went to Oxford. Tricia met Mark. Pat met Bee. Tricia had four children. Pat wrote travel books about Italy. The background of her life is interesting, such as nuclear attacks on Miami and Kiev, an alternate assassination of Kennedy, but the overall style of the book becomes tedious. The parallel lives are an interesting concept, but are barely addressed, leading to a feeling of reading two plotlines simultaneously without a satisfying intersection. You might as well read two books at the same time to get a similar effect.
I picked this book up based off rave reviews that I had seen for it lately. However, for me, it did not live up to the hype. I thought it kind of dragged at parts. I also found the descriptions of computer programming, using metaphors like ‘building a tower covered in jasmine,' to be an interesting idea...but one that did not make a lot of sense for me. I'm familiar with how programming works, and I just did not feel that the metaphors fit the art and science of computers. It's an interesting challenge, trying to write an exciting book where large paragraphs of the plot take place with the main character changing the world through coding, but the author's lyrical solution was off putting to me.
I also had trouble liking the protagonist, Alif, at all. He is terribly sexist. He point blank says to his companion, Dina, after she outsmarts him, “I almost forgot you were a girl for a moment!” I get that the author is trying to show that he grows up as the story progresses. However I just could not get over that he keeps a blood stained sheet, from taking the virginity of the girl he is infatuated with, and then when she breaks it off with him, he send her the sheet with a note saying “You might need this.” That was an unredeemable introduction to his character, and that poisoned the rest of his story. I don't really feel like he changes or becomes a better person, despite meeting djinn, being imprisoned, and accidentally becoming the figurehead for a revolution. He just wants to go home so he can date and marry his neighbor, and continue their conservative lifestyle.
His neighbor, Dina, however, is an amazing, intelligent, passionate and steadfast character. I only wish she had found a better partner than Alif. In fact, all of the peripheral characters are much more interesting and engaging than Alif.
Clearly a lot of people like this book, so give it a try. It definitely covers some interesting ideas, and I think that computers, programming, and technology in general should be woven through narratives in interesting ways more often. I just wasn't crazy about the way the author did it here.
This is a fun read, but it's not very good. If you're going on vacation, this is a good choice to keep you entertained on the beach. I doubt you will remember many of the details in a few months. The overall premise is very interesting, a town completely enclosed by a force field, unable to leave, unable to receive anything from the outside. It also has Stephen King's somewhat iconic level of violence and bizarre profane slang, by which I mean phrases like “cotton picking,” and genetalia refered to as his “love machine” and her “breeding farm,” generally used to highlight the flaws in the antagonists, and thankfully these are terms I do not hear often, if ever. People in Maine must have quite colorful language, if Stephen King's writing is any indication. (Really though, are there people who talk like that?)
There are some minor and major problems to this novel. The characters are very one dimensional. The antagonists, namely Rennie and the other local politicians, start out as merely arrogantly unlikable. But then, in what feels like a really bizarre turn, it turns out that they have been going to church by day, cooking meth by night.
Another minor flaw in the plot, the government almost immediately shuts down cell reception to the town, as a sort of media black out. However, they allow the much bigger threat, the internet. People can make phone calls using their computers, using Google, Skype, or other services. So this distinction, which is mentioned repeatedly, between cell phones and the internet is weird. I personally would much rather have the internet than my phone, I can get a lot more information and connect with a lot of people. I can share pictures, I can write articles, I can call my grandmother or Wolf Blitzer. In an age where the lines between cell phones and computers is increasingly blurred, for King to make such a big deal about the government shutting one down but allowing the other is really nonsensical.
Another thing that I thought was weird-Barbie advises people to stock up on perishable meat. “Everything, but especially meat. Meat, meat, meat. ... “ When they run out of gas for their generators there won't be any way to keep that fresh. Isn't that a really weird choice? How about grains? Rice, oats, beans, peanut butter, canned goods. Shelf stable, long lasting, hearty and filling.
So overall not a bad read, but not a great one either. If you're a Stephen King fan you will probably find something to like about it.
Could not finish it. The main character is very annoying. He keeps stopping and asking himself banal questions, and by the time he finally figures out whatever quandary of emotion or plot he is trying to unravel I am banging my head on the desk, since the author makes it quite obvious to the reader what is happening in the plot. I'm not a fan of this style of exposition where the character's thoughts are things like-“Wow, the weather here sure does change fast!” And “Hmmm I wonder how I missed all of these footprints on the path earlier. I'm sure that means absolutely nothing.” I exaggerate, but you really are left with the feeling that the story is being told through the point of view of someone who is quite dim-witted.
It's a shame, it started off so well, and I really enjoyed the creepy feel of a ghost story. About half way through I am starting to lose patience with it though. I find it incredibly bizarre that the author chose a new passion for ornithology as Jacob's dad's excuse for them taking that trip. It seems like she could have come up with just about anything else. Maybe Jacob is 18 and tells his parents he is going to backpack around Europe with friends or something. Maybe his dad is an anthropologist and wants to interview isolated island people. Maybe he just likes British beer. There's a scene after Jacob and his dad arrive on the island, where they go for a hike and stumble upon the nesting grounds of some sort of supposedly rare seagull. Jacob's dad immediately becomes entranced and wants to spend hours staring at them, conveniently leaving his mentally unstable son free to wander around by himself. Really? Doesn't it seem weird that he suddenly develops an overwhelming passion for birds?
I was listening to the audiobook, which is also part of the problem. He speaks too slowly and overly enunciates. He is also very bad at accents, it is quite distracting when he attempts to do Welsh and other British accents.
I am frankly startled to see so many good reviews of this book. I am a fan of Jasper Fforde's brand of humorous fantasy fiction, full of puns and delightful world building. I really enjoyed “Shades of Grey” and the Thursday Next novels. While it was a pleasant and easy read, with Fforde's characteristic wit, I just could not get over the plot holes in this narrative. Most of the things driving the plot felt very artificial and overly convenient.
Spoilers—–
...The central plot element of the novel is a premonition that reveals that the last dragon will die at the end of the week. Jennifer's reaction to that news is to decide quite out of the blue that she should go talk to the dragon. Never mind that there is a force field that will vaporizes anyone except for the Official Dragonslayer (and their apprentice, conveniently) surrounding that dragon land. Why does Jennifer think that she needs to go talk to the dragon? It would be like if I saw a White House press conference and then decided that the correct course of action would be to go personally and talk to the president. And then it is revealed that Jennifer is next in line to be the dragon slayer. The previous dragonslayer magically uploads all of the knowledge that she will need into her head in a minute, and then dies. Then she meets Gordon, a complete stranger, who shows up to apply to be the dragonslayer apprentice, telling Jennifer that he placed an ad in the paper for the job without her knowledge. Despite the fact that is is obviously some kind of scam, she without any thought whatsoever, in complete, blind trust, hires him. Surprise, it is later revealed that he is a bad guy, bent on claiming as much of the dragon lands as he can for a corporation. Why doesn't she pick her new friend Tiger? Why does she need anyone? After all, if she is the "last" dragonslayer, what does she need an apprentice for? One of the book's antagonists, Lady Mawgon, spends the first half of the book being a royal pain in the butt to Jennifer, and even succeeds in getting her effectively fired from Kazam. But she ends up being crucial in hiding Jennifer when she is in danger of being arrested (and possibly murdered) by the King's men. Lady Mawgon's character has shown absolutely no sympathy towards Jennifer during the entire book, that action is wildly out of character. It seemed much more likely that she would do something like that if she felt she could gain some kind of leverage over Jennifer, not out of the goodness of her heart. Also, Jennifer comes across as kind of pretentious. For example, why is she so turned off by the idea of endorsements? Do all of the athletes on Wheaties boxes and wearing Nike apparel, deserve our scorn for their endorsements as well?Finally, after saying over and over and over that no one can go into the dragon lands except the dragonslayer, and her apprentice...she brings her pet quark with her. Who then gets shot and killed. I found myself constantly rolling my eyes while reading this book. The plot just does not work.
While this was undeniably fun to read, it had some serious flaws. Most notably, the complete lack of believability of the way that the dystopian society is structured. I kept asking myself why the “factionless” just meekly go off to live on the fringes of society, doing menial work for the rest of their lives. Why don't they rise up and form their own faction? And what happens to their children, are also factionless through no fault of their own? The book is plagued by inconsistencies like these.
I am a huge fan of The Partly Cloudy Patriot and Assassination Vacation (as well as The Incredibles), but I found Vowell's latest book to be plodding and bland. While listening to the audio book I just kept wondering why she chose this subject. As an atheist, a history of 19th century missionaries traveling to and living in Hawaii seems a wildly bizarre choice of topic for Vowell. I don't know much about Hawaii, and I did find parts of her book interesting, such as learning that it was once forbidden for Hawaiian women to eat bananas. I was also somewhat fascinated to learn that Vowell was able to unearth so many facts from historical archives and museums about obscure figures long dead, it is a shame that the objects of her study will probably be of interest to a very narrow population of Hawaiian natives or those interested in American Protestant history.
I was not terribly impressed by this story. It was well written with wonderful character development of the narrator, Cassandra, however the overall plot was dull. I think what really threw me was the very beginning of the novel, when Cassandra and her family describe their overwhelming poverty, and then they all come to the conclusion that not a single person in the house can go out and work to make money. Why not? What are they doing with their time? Cassandra day dreams and writes in her journal, I have no idea what Rose is up to, Thomas goes to school, Topaz keeps house, the father does crosswords and mopes all day about not being able to write, and the only person who does go out to make money is the orphan serving boy who shouldn't even be giving the family money in the first place.
Instead of self sufficient pluck to get the family out of poverty, the plot revolves around her sister Rose snaring a rich man, which in turn leads to the family's fortunes turning around (and a lot of other stuff happens).
It reminded me a lot of “A tree Grows in Brooklyn,” but what made that such a wonderful read was the tenacity of the family, never giving up to pull themselves out of poverty through hard work and determination and not waiting around for things to be handed to them.
