The Loving Dead: Really bad.

    Maybe I just don’t get the whole “zombie” thing. Don’t get me wrong, like the next 20s something I have a zombie-pocalpyse escape plan, have watched enough zombie films to know zombies are “cool,” and am forwarded by I. relevant zombie-in-the-news stories. But I don’t get the appeal enough to enjoy (or even want to read) Amelia Beamer’s The Loving Dead. No wait, I think it’s Beamer’s fault for writing a boring, predictable, boring, and boring book, because I liked Wide Sargasso Sea (zombies) and The Forest of Hands Teeth (more zombies). So I take it back. I don’t blame zombies for the terrible book I just suffered through: I blame the lack of plot, character, setting, theme and ability to narrate without the use of clumsy descriptions.

I guess the thing that’s supposed to make the book appealing is that zombification takes place by way of sex, and that zombies can be controlled through sadistic whip lashings. As if somehow by describing lesbian sex and sadism I’m going to forget the narrative is TERRIBLE.

Leave a comment

Filed under 100 Books of 2011, Worst Books

The Sunday Philosophy Club: Meh.

                              So my office has a shelf of donated books that we exchange with one another, and last week I found myself – unusually and unexpectedly – without a book in my bag, so I picked up Alexander McCall Smith’s The Sunday Philosophy Club, having heard good things about The No 1 Ladies Detective Agency and being keen to work on my “spies and detectives” category. Let this be a lesson in choosing books: do not choose out of expediency and do not choose out of the vague remembrance that someone once said the author was “okay.” Let it also be a lesson to always have an emergency-back-up-just-in-case-the-bus-breaks-down-or-your-meeting-is-cancelled book.

The Sunday Philosophy Club suffers from boring characters and so an unengaging – and it’s a mystery! – plot. I struggled to care whether Isobel was murdered in the night, was profoundly indifferent to whether the murder was solved because I didn’t get to know the victim and didn’t believe Isobel was all that interested in being a detective in the first place, and was annoyed by Isobel’s niece, Cat, in no small part because she’s named Cat, but more precisely because she “pops round for tea”: I distrust characters who show up without invitation.

It’s true I didn’t care about the mystery because Isobel is boring and her investigatory skills are suspect, but it’s also true that I didn’t care because Isobel doesn’t seem to care. Every chapter she vacillates between absolute commitment (a moral imperative, she thinks) to investigate the crime and a willingness to drop it altogether because it makes people uncomfortable. What made me uncomfortable was her apparent willingness to do all this investigating as if she had license to do so. Rogue detective!

Other point of annoyance:the so-called “philosophical” basis of the novel are Isobel’s occasional musings on the ethics of particular situations. She considers the ethical principles of lying and seems surprised when she receives articles for her journal about lying: is this a coincidence she wonders? Well of course it isn’t. McCall Smith must think we’re thematic dopes for this, and other, heavy handed displays of the moral and thematic questions. Hint for the the thematically uninitiated: the book is about deception!

Finally, I don’t like that the red herring woman is named Minty. I don’t know why. I just don’t.

Leave a comment

Filed under 100 Books of 2011, Book I'll Forget I Read, Mystery

What is Left the Daughter: Undecided.

                     So if we’ve spent any time together you’ll know that I (occasionally) refer to the book I’m currently reading as “the best book ever.” I recognize I have a problem with hyperbole; I’m conscious of my excesses (most of the time). And so it happens once again that of late I’ve been talking up a novel as perfect and exquisite, in this case, Howard Norman’s What is Left the Daughter. But then! Circumstances conspired such that I boarded a bus, finished the last three pages of the novel, and had an entire hour and a half WITHOUT A BOOK with nothing to do but stare out the window and contemplate the book. And the more I sat and thought about What is Left the Daughter the less satisfied I became, the more contrived the ending, the more affected the tone, the more moralistic the plot (as if morals were, in their own right, dissatisfying).

And so I find myself at something of a loss writing this review.

Norman does tremendous, really tremendous, work grafting small, quotidian moments together to form rich, idiosyncratic yet utterly believable characters. Tiny scenes, like that of eating lunch on a bus, paradoxically distill and explode character in ways typically reserved for the best short stories.

On the other hand the setting of small town – Middle Economy – Nova Scotia during WWII reads as a cliche of every small town you’ve ever read (think of a blend of Richard Russo, Alistair MacLeod and Anne Tyler), complete with tiny diner and eccentric neighbours (so much so, in fact, that for the first 30 pages I wondered – truthfully – whether I’d read the book before).

The plot, too, balances the brilliant with the bland. I won’t spoil the climax – as it is – but I was left gasping, shocked, and yet, convinced that it should happen that way (and so brilliant). But then the ending falls short. Another case of an author unwilling to do what is necessary in order to be truthful to the plot that’s preceded and to the created characters. And with that said, the last two sentences are thematic perfection.

And Norman’s book raises all kinds of interesting questions about a national literature: is it setting that determines national lit? author’s nationality? duration of an author’s visit? thematic preoccupations? what’s the point of national literature anyway? I’ll not answer any of those questions, because I don’t have to anymore. 

So without being able to articulate a decisive reaction to the text I’ll ask instead ‘when do we stop reading?’ as I have a suspicion the characters of What is Left the Daughter and their decisions will continue to populate my waking thoughts for days to come – and maybe that means I’m still reading? And so I can hold out hope that I’ll make up my mind about the text sooner or later – except not wanting to actually have to decide. Maybe this is what we readers owe the brilliant (or the almost-brilliant in this case) books in our lives: that we take them around with us after, never wanting them to feel wholly settled, but rather perched just this side of comfortable.

1 Comment

Filed under 100 Books of 2011, Book I'll Forget I Read

Leviathan: WW1 caused by Germans

       Steampunk! It’s a genre distinction I’d never heard named before, or if I had, I’d never connected it with those novels that imagine the past and the future melded together, or imagined the past as if the future had already happened, a future the present doesn’t know about yet. A sort of past-future? Maybe because “steampunk” doesn’t really describe or evoke those webbed chronologies? Whatever. The name for the genre far less exciting than the genre itself, which is, to put it simply, terrific. Terrific for me anyway, one who adores all things historical (all of it, you understand? if it happened in the past, I adore it.) but who also admires, appreciates, nay, celebrates, those bastardized histories that don’t feel any more allegiance to “fact” than necessary to be historical (okay, a tautology if there ever was one – stuff it). And so I get really excited when I read a history that is historical in all the ways that matter, but includes – get this! – battles between aircrafts made of whales and other organic business and cyborgesque monster machines made of metal.

Leviathan is the first in Scott Westerfeld’s trilogy narrating some of the events of WW1, particularly those that pertain to the (fictional) son, Alex, of the assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his team of allies, whom include a cross-dressing fourteen year old girl-pilot who you just *know* is going to end up madly in love with Alex, because it wouldn’t be a fun story if she didn’t (how/when will he discover she’s really a woman? When will she recognize the tingles she feels when he’s near as hormonal reactions and not a rash?). Add in stellar descriptions of battles between organic and metal, headstrong and meddling adults, and descriptions of journeys that require eating over fires (!) and you have yourself a winner of YAF.

Also a winner in the category “wars of the 20th century,” if you ask me. Of those books I’ve read in the category, this one does (by far) the most entertaining and soothing job of introducing senseless destruction and death. It also does a fine job drawing out the sometimes opaque causes of World War One, and concludes, as do so many eighth grade history teachers, that while no one can be blamed, the Germans can probably be blamed. So let’s blame the Germans! and keep reading this terrifically entertaining, smart, and well paced series. In January.

Leave a comment

Filed under 100 Books of 2011, Young Adult Fiction