Book #1 in this duology was a heist. #2 is pure revenge plot.
We've got the same cast of characters trying to resolve the cliffhanger of the first booBook #1 in this duology was a heist. #2 is pure revenge plot.
We've got the same cast of characters trying to resolve the cliffhanger of the first book in about a week. The current moment they're living in is nonstop adventure. That breakneck pace is braked by a healthy dose of flashbacks.
I waffled between 3 and 4 stars for this book. I still like the characters and the story was still engaging, but Leigh Bardugo is worrying the same threads: Kaz and Inej are angry and damaged; Matthias and Nina are navigating their trauma while romantically circling one another; Wylan and Jesper are trying to find themselves; and the city underground continues to spin. The middle of the novel dragged a bit because of this. It was very much "yea, I get it, can we, like move forward already??" I'm also still not a big fan of how these characters are written. They're infallible. Literal children are running around, besting entire governments and crime rings. It's preposterous. They're always, always one step ahead. You never feel like the characters are really at risk. Even when Bardugo added some true sadness and danger to the book, it was predictable.
One thing I really hated was Jesper and his father. His father is kind and loving and Jesper is a POS for no reason. There's an attempt to be like "well, his father was worried about the whole Grisha thing" but that does nothing to forgive Jesper's actions and how he's destroying his father's entire life... or what's left of it. What's more, Bardugo writes the father as meek and deferential to this ragtag group of criminal children. It makes zero sense. Can we just age these kids up a bit?! C'mon!
Despite these complaints, this book gets 4 stars. Why? Because of the ending. I loved the ending so much; it actually brought tears to my eyes. Bardugo may have written a dubious band of too-talented babies, but they're lovable enough, and their stories end well enough, that even my grouchy ass couldn't help but give them 4 stars. ...more
We make no progress toward The Tower in this 5th installment of Stephen King's acclaimed series The Dark Tower. Instead, we linger in the ol' west towWe make no progress toward The Tower in this 5th installment of Stephen King's acclaimed series The Dark Tower. Instead, we linger in the ol' west town of Calla.
Wolves of the Calla was published in 2003, 21 years after we began this journey with the inaugural book The Gunslinger. In that time, King's writing style, and the world, changed dramatically. I appreciate the effort to drag Roland and his bedraggled troupe of misfit toys into the 21st century, and who doesn't like a story of vengeance inspired by Seven Samurai?
That said, the shape of Roland's universe became more murky for me through the course of this book. The scenes surrounding Calla and the coming of the wolves were good and engaging, if not a little long-winded. But the other scenes, the ones that tackled the gauzy partitions between worlds and realities, left this reader wanting. It got a little 4th-wallk-breaky and a bit too meta and left me going "wait, what? how? why?" which are not the questions you want your fantasy audience asking.
It's strange. I am objectively a Stephen King fan, but everything past The Gunslinger hasn't really sang for me. Meanwhile, the rest of the fandom ranks these as his best works. Over Misery? Over Carrie? What about The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon? Bish, please....more
I'm not surprised Conor Knighton's unnamed fiance left him. I want to leave him too.
Conor Knighton was planning a wedding when his future wife said "I'm not surprised Conor Knighton's unnamed fiance left him. I want to leave him too.
Conor Knighton was planning a wedding when his future wife said "JK lol I'm gonna date someone else this is over and I'm moving out." Bereft and adrift, Knighton, a freelance correspondent, decided to pitch an idea to the various networks that sporadically employ him. That idea was simple: 2016 was the 100th anniversary of the National Parks system; why not have someone visit all of the parks in a single calendar year ?
The networks were, understandably, tepid in their response. Hitting all of those parks in a single year? Why? He begged, telling them he'd do it and they only need pay him for the segments they liked. He got a grudging deal, and embarked on a poorly planned, quite frankly offense trip across the country again and again.
Knighton preaches conservation, but flew on countless planes and drove countless miles to get to parks which he doesn't even bother to really explore. He's a hypocrite.
For a book that claims to be about the parks, I see very little of them between these pages. Knighton spends most of the book talking about the people he met and not the places he saw.
He didn't plan this at all so he doesn't get to see a lot and often arrives in poor weather. He also isn't a hiker and doesn't understand basics like packing appropriate food or turning off your headlamp at night. He's an idiot. He's an acapella boy, though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
How do I know he's an acapella boy? Because Knighton won't shut up about himself. He moans about how his ex fiance probably threw out a stuffed animal he got her when they first started dating. He compares his broken heart to the petrified forest. He hits on girls just trying to hike, and tells us about his Tinder profile. He goes over his childhood and nauseum. Does Knighton think anyone except his mother cares about this ? I know I'm being harsh but this book billed itself to be about parks and I know almost nothing new about the parks but I know all about how he grew up in CT and lived in CA for 10 years. I shouldn't know anything about Knighton. A correspondent is supposed to observe and report, but I guess Knighton can't even do his primary job correctly.
A fantasy heist featuring a gaggle of deep, sad, loveable characters; I enjoyed this book more than I thought I would. Kaz Brekker has been offered thA fantasy heist featuring a gaggle of deep, sad, loveable characters; I enjoyed this book more than I thought I would. Kaz Brekker has been offered the job of a lifetime. He puts together a motley crew, each of whom have their own particular set of skills and their own reasons for wanting to see the heist succeed. Each chapter seemingly ends on a cliffhanger, leaving the reader thinking "oh how are they going to get out of THIS one?" Such a formula could grow tiring, but our 6 main characters are just so dang earnest, you can't help but fervently turn the page, rooting for them. They're also all in love with one another which is adorable. PLUS, they're all actually good deep down, which adds to a layer of complexity when some of them do pretty dasterdly deeds. They're unsuccessfully trying to kill the good in them to survive... But maybe the good is the only thing keeping them tethered to the world.
The book fell short of 5 stars for me for 2 reasons. Firstly, the slavers of this world play a Big Role in getting us to the story, yet they're so very confusing. They take from... Every nation ? How are they getting into landlocked Ravka? Who are they and what scruples do they have ? If you're going to introduce a world that is run off the back of a thriving slaving business, you gotta give us a little bit more.
My second gripe is the age of the characters. I know this is YA and so the characters reflect the age of the average reader, but how the heck am I supposed to believe that a ragtag group of 6 15 - 18yr olds is besting the fiercest and most powerful people of this fictional society. It's kind of ridiculous. I can suspend my disbelief as much as the next person, but the idea that they're all the best in their respective fields so young is a bit much. If I sound like a curmudgeonly old person it's because I am....more
Long review: this book is unhinged. We open on a busy London street. A blind Yearly book exchange 2024.
Short review: not for me.
Sam, don't read this.
Long review: this book is unhinged. We open on a busy London street. A blind chick is being led about town by her bodyguard. Two pages in 4 thugs attempt to kidnap her but Bodyguard shoots them in a crowded street then steals a kids horse to gallop them to safety.
There are 3 more kidnap attempts of Blind Girl in the book, 2 of which are briefly successful. Blind Girl is one of several Duke Daughters we meet in the book, but she's the only one who is getting repeatedly kidnapped.
Meanwhile, Bodyguard is 12yrs older than his charge (33 to her 21), but that doesn't mean he doesn't get a chub every time he looks at her boobs-I-mean face. Also, Bodyguard was crippled in battle. If you don't want your sister kidnapped, maybe don't employ a dude who needs a cane to walk ?!
The book is 3rd person omniscient with Bodyguard, Blind Girl, and this random character we hardly see named Eve so we immediately know she has something to do with the kidnapping.
One of the alleged kidnappers is also Irish so obviously the only Irish character is also going to be involved.
About the Irish character: I don't think he's a bad guy. He's funny and nice and age appropriate and bisexual. Sure, he's being blackmailed to try and marry Blind Girl, but that's not his fault !!! I don't know, guys, justice for Irish Dude.
Blind Girl keeps insisting she doesn't need protection, then the entire book is her being protected and rescued. This is toxic.
There are several Greek and Roman names in this book, and the book takes place in 1741. Historically inaccurate. Petty? Sure, but I don't care. Speaking of historically inaccurate the way people speak either skews Shakespearean (too dated) or modern (too futuristic). Pick a lane. The only historically accurate thing in this book is a racist term for a black man. Seriously ? That's where you hopped onto Wikipedia for ?????
Men who are repeatedly characterized by words like "growl" and "scowl" and other "owl" words are my least favorite. That's all Bodyguard is: a growl scowl caricature who claims his only motivation in life is to protect Blind Girl but then he has sex with her out of wedlock which could destroy her entire life. That's the thing I don't get about historical romance. Like, I'm anxious for them and they're having sex in public spaces ?!?!?! ALSO Bodyguard can hardly live with the shame of leaving his special needs sister, who he was charged to watch over, unattended. This resulted in her getting raped. And that was before he was crippled. Now he's going to be employed as a Bodyguard? He already failed at this once. He needs to pick a different job.
Okay, I think I'm done now. Sam, if you read this, I'm so sorry. I hope you find the humor in my takedown. I love you, but not this book....more
I'm not sure what I wanted this book to be but this wasn't it. I read the first 100 pages then skimmed the rest. The beginning was a bunch of history I'm not sure what I wanted this book to be but this wasn't it. I read the first 100 pages then skimmed the rest. The beginning was a bunch of history of the Canadian Oil Industry and then we turned to one fire in 2016. I guess I had anticipated an overarching look at our climate and atmosphere and the history of fires vs our present moment vs how fucked the future is. The book had some of that, but I found it plodding and dull which doesn't seem fair because this book seems important. Ah well, maybe my husband will read it and sparknote the golden nuggets I failed to see in my boredom....more
I didn't expect this collection to feel so dated, but it did. 2018 was 6 whole years ago. In that time we had COVID aWhat a weird little time capsule.
I didn't expect this collection to feel so dated, but it did. 2018 was 6 whole years ago. In that time we had COVID and an insurrection and #metoo came and went. The #blacklivesmatter movement of 2020 wasn't even a twinkle in our collective eye.
All of that is reflected in these stories. There's mention of the Trump presidency and some of the people who worked in The White House with him (remember Paul Ryan? I didn't). There's a slam of Mario Batali which, at the time, was revolutionary. There's exaltation of David Chang who was summarily canceled this year after he tried to **checks notes** own chili oil?!
Some selections dragged a bit (the soybean article and catfish article would have both benefited from better editors), but others absolutely sang. "Who Owns Uncle Ben" was fire, and little did the writer know what would happen a few short years later. "The Mad Cheese Scientist..." really pissed me off because WHY AM I PAYING SO MUCH FOR BUTTER WHEN THERE'S SUCH A GLUT OF DAIRY IN THIS COUNTRY. "The Teenager Whalers Story" was heartbreaking, and who doesn't want to read about how much the NBA loves PB&J.
It was also cool to read a plea for free lunches for children when our newly minted VP candidate is an advocate of just that. ...more
Like many a celebrity/public figure memoir, you can feel that the primary drive of this book deal was an easy paycheck. What's more, you get the vibe Like many a celebrity/public figure memoir, you can feel that the primary drive of this book deal was an easy paycheck. What's more, you get the vibe that Josh Peck feels he actually needs this paycheck. He hasn't landed where he thought he would in life. At times he was bitter about this. He's since pivoted.
I came to this audiobook for the same reason I turn on most memoir audiobooks - it was about a person I've seen on screen a lot, and I needed something in my ears to which I didn't need to pay total attention. Nursing severe jet lag and a couple of Big Life complications that cropped up while I was across the globe, ear candy was exactly what I needed.
Unlike a lot of celebrity memoirs, Josh Peck isn't going to shy away from the messy chapters of his life. You know this right at the start. He opens his book telling us he was conceived during a fleeting affair between a woman who thought she was too old to have children and an adulterous married man. That married man never had anything to do with his son, and the woman had to take that man to court to get any money at all, which wasn't a lot. Josh and his mother struggled through periods of poverty, and at a young age Josh resolved to get rich to save his mother.
It's heavy shit, and shit he's clearly been working on with a therapist.
From these beginnings we follow Josh to his breakout role in the Nickelodeon movie Snow Day (age 14), which ultimately led to his having his own TV show, Drake & Josh. Josh is honest about the money, namely that child stars get screwed. For all his work, he was pulling in ~$90K/yr while he was on Drake & Josh. It's a tidy sum, but pretty paltry when you think about what adults on TV make.
Like many child/teen stars, Josh found himself in the world of drugs for a spell, and lays bare the struggle to get sober, as well as the struggle to accept the overweight kid he was and the no-longer-overweight adult he became. He has a third struggle: getting more acting work. He's honest about the fact that maybe he was never a good actor, but landed a few roles where he was being himself, and that maybe he needs to let go of the internal image of his being a Big Deal Actor. Josh pivots to Vine, then YouTube, and is still a so-called Influencer today. He closes the book stating he's walking away from acting. That said, he's since been in films such as Oppenheimer so I don't know how honest he was being with himself there.
Look, this book isn't going to knock your socks off. That said, if you're curious about what happened to the kid from Drake & Josh, he's going to tell you everything. What I will say is that the close of this book has a very good message. Josh Peck looks at his audience and reminds them that life is chaos. Nobody in life takes the exact path they had envisioned for themselves, and all lives have periods of darkness. The trick is to work hard, to acknowledge the happiness you do achieve in your life, and to see that, most likely, you'll get the broad strokes of what you wanted (stability, love, etc.) if only you persevere and remain flexible. It's a fantastic message. Bravo to him, and bravo to his therapist....more
To tell someone I've read the bulk of Stephen King's catalog but never read Different Seasons just made me feel silly. There's only 4 stories in this To tell someone I've read the bulk of Stephen King's catalog but never read Different Seasons just made me feel silly. There's only 4 stories in this collection, and two of them were made into blockbuster, run-away-hit movies. What was I waiting for?
I'm not sure, but I'm glad I'm no longer waiting.
The first story is Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption. Even if you're not a Stephen King person, chances are you're familiar with this story. The movie was running on cable TV every day from 1999 - 2011. It was a weird experience to read the story for the first time, knowing the plot so well thanks to the adaptation. That said, the knowledge didn't take away from my enjoyment of the tale. 5 stars.
Apt Pupil goes on for too long. The story is about a sociopath of a child who blackmails a Nazi hiding his identity. The dream sequences were trippy, but the descent into violence and madness and the drawn out conversations about grades and how stupid the child's parents was tiresome. It doesn't help I read this story deeply jetlagged in a Tokyo hotel. 2.75 stars (the review reflects the absurdity, no regrets).
The Body is a classic. King perfectly captures the urgency and awe of being a child. To fold that into the very adult violence and tragedy these 4 best friends encounter on their quick adventure together... I mean. This is one of his strongest stories for sure. I need to re-watch Stand By Me. 5 stars.
I wanted a different focus for The Breathing Method. I wanted to know about the house, about Stevens, about how these men found themselves in this storytelling club, and why the narrator's boss chose to invite him in the first place. I wasn't that invested in the story of Sandra Stansfield, though I did appreciate King's blunt and unforgiving assessment about how deeply women get fucked by society. Also: WHO IS THE MAN AT THE END IS HE ANOTHER CHARACTER WE KNOW?!?! 3.5 stars.
I'll end this review with how King ends his afterword: Okay. Gotta split. Until we see each other again, keep your head together, read some good books, be useful, be happy....more
I liked this book, but I have to say Patti Smith was a "rely on the kindness of strangers" type of person to an alarming degree. Just Kids tells the sI liked this book, but I have to say Patti Smith was a "rely on the kindness of strangers" type of person to an alarming degree. Just Kids tells the story of Patti Smith's early life, her arrival in NYC, and the lover/friendship she had with Maplethorpe. The two of them coasted through life, living in a shoestring, hoping other people would take care of them. And others did. I don't want to say they were bad people, but they were definitely leeches and, to my eye, quite unlikeable.
Yet this book gets 4 stars. For the poetic quality of writing. For Smith's frankness. For the clarity with which she paints NYC in the 60s and 70s with all its grit and hope and possibilities. I do wish she had given us a bit more between her moving out of NYC and Maplethorpe's death, but I do understand that this book was primarily an ode to their friendship and to the city; she took a hiatus from both for almost 20 years. Required reading for anyone wanting to understand the artist movement of the 1960s and 70s....more
I read my first Stephen King book when I was probably too young. It was 2001, and I was going to Disney World with my OmLet's get personal for minute.
I read my first Stephen King book when I was probably too young. It was 2001, and I was going to Disney World with my Oma. We went into the airport bookstore, and she offered to buy me The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon. A book about a girl about my age who gets lost in the woods? Written by Oma's favorite author? Well, I certainly wasn't going to say no to a free book, and it seemed like a special thing Oma and I could share together.
I ripped through that book, and an obsession was born. All these years later, there are only a few SK books I haven't yet read (I can't bring myself to read Gerald's Game). For at least 15 years, I've bought Oma every single Stephen King book that's come out.
You Like it Darker was slated to come out right after Mother's Day. I put it on pre-order way back in January, excited to surprise her so soon after receiving Holly for Christmas.
Then she got sick.
By the time my order of You Like it Darker was ready for me, Oma had been gone for 2.5 weeks, and I had completely forgotten about it. I picked it up and had a good cry. Then I got a notification from the library. Apparently, I'd put You Like it Darker on hold so we could read it "together." I was first in line, type-A lil planner that I am.
So I brought the brand new library copy + Oma's copy up to her cabin in Maine. I scattered her ashes in a place nestled essentially where SK's fictional Castle Rock sits, then settled down to read his newest stories "together."
You Like it Darker consists of 12 tales. The first is about a man reconciling the success of his recently deceased father... who died at 90 after a fall. Okay, trying to not read too much into the fact that my 90yr old Oma just passed after complications from a fall. My Oma, who was more a parent to me than either my mother or my father. I pushed through the first installation, enjoying it, but feeling a twist in my chest as I did.
Little did I know, most of this collection deals with heavy topics: death, old age, the opportunities we take vs. the opportunities we let pass us by, and how we live these brief lives we have. To have such a strong collection from an author who has been falling short for me of late, and for him to be writing about the very questions with which I've recently been wrestling... I guess what I'm trying to say is I might be quite biased. I loved this collection.
Okay, enough about me. What about the rest of these stories?
The second, "The Fifth Step," was brutal in both its subject and its brevity. #3, "Willie the Weirdo," focuses on a peculiar young boy's obsession with his dying grandfather. It fell a bit short for me on character development, but I still enjoyed the familiar concepts within.
"Danny Coughlin's Bad Dream" was great. When faced with a dilemma that could ruin your life, do you do the right thing? Or do you feign ignorance? What are the consequences? Fantastic.
The 5th and 6th stories were decent; questioning of reality vs. a "how do you react in crisis" scenarios.
7 & 8, "Red Screen"and "The Turbulence Expert," respectively, were very clever and ended perfectly. Is this man a murderer, or are malevolent aliens infecting humans? And, what if flying isn't quite as safe as we think?
"Laurie" was probably the weakest story in the collection, at least for me. But it was another story that dealt in grief and shaking yourself back awake to your life after falling into its pit.
"Rattlesnakes" was the scariest story of the bunch, and the most Easter egg-y. There are several nods to past stories in this one. Also: creepy dream sequences, a powerful baddie, and, again, grappling with grief. Real SK stuff here, but folded into the theme of the collection.
"The Dreamers," felt like a bit like SK just saw The Fourth Kind and was like "but what if a scientist was trying to get to somewhere specific?" That said, I like The Fourth Kind, and I like mad scientists, so I was on board.
That leaves the final story, and my favorite of the collection. "The Answer Man" follows a lawyer named Phil throughout his life. We open on a young Phil struggling with a life-changing choice. On the road one day he sees a placard advertising The Answer Man. Two miles to The Answer Man! He'll answer all your questions! Intrigued, Phil pulls over for a conversation with this self-proclaimed Answer Man.
Phil meets with the Answer Man two more times in his life.
I don't want to spoil it, because it's truly one of the best things I've read. In this compact story, SK tackles what life is. Does that make sense? The ups and downs. The victories and failures. The ecstasy and grief and rage and determination. The grit and joy. Mostly importantly, he tackles the only thing that really matters: that we live our lives as best we can. That we hold fast to our sunburst moments so we can make it out of the darkness. At the end, he assures us, all that matters is that we've lived, and, hopefully, in that living we've been kind and tried to leave things a bit better than we found them. I cried reading it. I'm tearing up writing this. The Answer Man might actually be the best thing SK has ever written.
In his Afterword, SK states that his nephew found "The Answer Man" partly finished in a mess of discarded story ideas. I'm so happy it was brought into the light. I needed it now, in a moment of darkness. It helped me remember those sunbursts, and that I'll find them again....more
One small piece of Massachusetts woods, followed from the 1600s deep into the future. Each chapter represents someone new coming to the spot, with smaOne small piece of Massachusetts woods, followed from the 1600s deep into the future. Each chapter represents someone new coming to the spot, with smaller vignettes cleverly inserted to mark the passage of time, through song or real estate listing.
Author Daniel Mason has managed to write a book that is both deeply human and deeply terrestrial. Though we meet each character for only a little while, Mason etches out a depth of character that some can't achieve over hundreds of pages. Concurrently, he weaves loving and thoughtful descriptions of the land and the plants and the creatures living around the drama of the humans. One feels equal kinship to the trees as they do to the people who walk among them.
I didn't know what to expect when I picked this book up, but I got more than I would have hoped. I got love and loss and wonder and hope and desperation and fury and contented solitude and awe. I got ambition and failure and fear and adoration. All of this, so effortlessly and devastatingly acute. I wish I could read it for the first time all over again. ...more
Our traveling-pants-sister-gossip-girl-millennial-queen Blake Lively is the only reason I'm reading this. If she's gonna be in a movie adaptation, immOur traveling-pants-sister-gossip-girl-millennial-queen Blake Lively is the only reason I'm reading this. If she's gonna be in a movie adaptation, imma read the book.
I'm going to spoil the hell outta this book. You've been warned.
I thought this was going to be a light-hearted romance because, again, I only picked it up because of Blake Lively. Well, trigger warning, this book is about abusive relationships.
We open up on our protagonist, Lily Blossom Bloom (omg seriously) as she sorts through the events earlier that day. Namely, her father's funeral. A dude comes up, kicks a chair to death like a psycho, then starts hitting on her and asks her to sleep with him AFTER he finds out she's actively mourning a man with whom she had a tortured relationship.
Immediately I'm going, wait, am I supposed to root for this guy? He's disgusting and violent.
Eventually they start dating. I'm asking this honestly: were the sex scenes in the beginning intended to be... good? I've said this before, but sex scenes where men are throwing women against walls are terrifying. Are these authors familiar with sex?
Due to these characterizations of Asshole Dude, who is named Ryle (god the names in this book), it was not at all surprising when he started to physically abuse Lily-the-protagonist.
I understand that it's important to have abuse narratives out there, so that women can see their own situations reflected and perhaps even become inspired to leave their abusers. I understand that every abuse situation is different, so even though this book doesn't ring true to me and my experiences doesn't negate the potential truth of this narrative, despite the fact that the author isn't pulling from first hand experience.
That said, I have some serious issues with how this abuse narrative plays out.
1. Lily's mother was abused, Lily watched it, Lily intervened and was herself assaulted by her father. That she tells Asshole Dude she'll leave him if there's ever a repeat of abuse incident #1, then doesn't even consider it the second time, was dumbfounding. 2. The timeline is insane to me. The first time he attacks her it's... like... a month into the relationship??? That's pretty early on in the thing to be so invested that you explain away getting smashed to the floor and ground into a bunch of shattered glass. 3. That's the other thing. There's no slow build. We get the rough, controlling sex which is definitely a sign. But we don't get the negging or the lighter shoves and slaps that usually lead up to, again, getting smashed to the floor and ground into glass. An abuser will generally test their limits before YOU ALMOST NEED STITCHES. This doesn't happen yet Lily is still all too willing to make excuses for a man she just met who is insanely violent and oh yea SHE GREW UP IN A VIOLENT HOME. Again, I'm not saying this doesn't reflect someone's personal journey, but Colleen Hoover should have at least given us a bit more internal dialogue around this since the book is written in the first person. 4. They get married after knowing one another for 6 months. She's... 24 years old? It's 2016? And he's shoving her down flights of stairs? What? 5. When he attacks her to the point she has to go to the hospital, a mere 7 months after she even started dating this clown, she finds out she's pregnant. She's a 24yr old college educated woman in 2016 living in Boston and the word abortion never makes an appearance. I'm fully aware that abortion isn't an option by any stretch for some people. But it would have flitted across her mind since she's actively getting stitches and she could give birth to a girl who Asshole Dude could abuse as well. Can we normalize abortion as a legitimate option for crying out loud.
For all these reasons, the book gets 2 stars. Hoover should have had beta readers who know what it's like to suffer under an abusive partner. I know in the end she said she had her mother's experience, and that the scene with the casserole pulled directly from her mother's life. But the pace of the relationship and the abuse situation is befuddling and infuriating to this abuse survivor.
A couple of other things about this book:
Cackling that Hoover decided to have this inane thing where all of Lily's journal entries are letters to Ellen DeGeneres. Well, that aged poorly. Also, what??????
If, like me, you came to this book because of movie previews, you might be thinking "wait, isn't this a love triangle thing?" Well, there is a second man, but I'd hardly call this book a love triangle. When Lily was a teenager, she fell in love with a boy named Atlas (has Hoover ever met a man in person? Is that why she can't come up with man names? We could have had a Mike or something JFC). Atlas reappears in Lily's life shortly after she starts dating Asshole Dude but then isn't really around until the end. He's just a two dimensional nothing waiting in the wings to be Lily's white knight. Which sucks for a few reasons (oohhh she's making another list): 1. Hoover could have actually written a sensitive, healthy man, but instead left Atlas as a bare sketch of a human. 2. When Lily eventually leaves Asshole Dude she requires another MAN to save her. What a fucking waste. 3. His name is dumb. Okay, that has nothing to do with anything but honestly does Colleen Hoover live in the Capitol or something where the fuck did Ryle and Atlas come from???
I almost want to amend my rating to one star because now I'm all riled (omg is that what she did? I hate it) up. But this book deserves two because, again, we need abuse narratives out there to support people who are trapped in life threatening situations. Who need to see that it isn't normal, they deserve more, and there is a way out. Those people just deserve more than this....more
Bob Spitz is very good at his job. It's clear he worked tirelessly to gather information, fact check, and spin all those details into a compelling narBob Spitz is very good at his job. It's clear he worked tirelessly to gather information, fact check, and spin all those details into a compelling narrative. Brava.
What's there to say? Led Zeppelin is what it purports to be: the definitive biography of one of the best rock bands in history. The story begins with Jimmy Page's childhood, his work as a session musician, his attachment to Jeff Beck (with a long interlude exploring Jeff Beck, huge influence that he was), and his ultimate creation of the band Led Zeppelin. We get much briefer backgrounds on Robert Plant, John Paul Jones, and John Bonham, then its into the music and the mayhem.
Spitz is unflinching about the shortcomings of the band: their tendency to rip music from other artists without proper recognition/credit, their excesses, Jimmy Page's disgusting habit of going after underage girls, and the violence that rippled out from their entourage, and from John Bonham.
The only thing I could potentially say against this book is that it ends very abruptly. After Bonham's death, we gallop to the close. I suppose that makes sense; this is a book about Led Zeppelin, and the band essentially ended once Bonham was gone. That said, I would have really liked a coda to the Coda. That is, a bit more on what Page, Plant, and Jones have been up to for the past 44 years. That's a long time to go essentially unaccounted.
I remember the first time I heard Dazed and Confused and how it shook me to my absolute core. It remains one of the best songs I've ever heard. They say don't meet your heroes, but not much of what's in this book was a secret. The Led Zeppelin guys, save for John Paul Jones, were pure bacchanalian excess. I appreciate that Spitz leans fully into this. No one wanted a white washing of their sins.
Key takeaways: - poor John Paul Jones - drugs bad, mmk - what is it with rock 'n roll boys and young girls?! - they really were a force, weren't they - stop destroying hotel rooms!!! - I'm so glad we no longer tolerate bands going on stage too fucked up to play - hmm, I gotta go back and listen to their whole discography ...more
I know I don't like Kristin Hannah outside of her fluke of The Nightingale. However, my mother-in-law (hereafter referred to as MIL) loves her. She'llI know I don't like Kristin Hannah outside of her fluke of The Nightingale. However, my mother-in-law (hereafter referred to as MIL) loves her. She'll read a Hannah book and then give it to me so we can talk about it together. Because I adore my MIL, I limped through Firefly Lane AND The Great Alone, despite their childish prose, worn cliches, and unsatisfying plots.
I couldn't make it through The Women. Why? Because the first couple of pages were unreadable. She couldn't even pull me in at the jump, so I resolved not to waste my time, skimmed it for the sake of conversation with a beloved family member, and then gently put the book aside because my MIL loves this book so much she wants it back.
The book's opening is jarring. Frances is at a party her well-to-do parents are throwing for her brother before he leaves for Vietnam. It's 1966, and Frances is a 21yr old college educated woman. Protests have been going on for a year (this is historical fact, not something Hannah mentions in her book). Yet Frances is just derping along, all "oh my brother everyone loves him even though he's a bit of a fuck up. We're a military family so he's doing us proud by joining the Navy to fight in this war." Basically, she's an idiot. She slips into her father's office and is followed by her brother's hot BFF. The BFF is all "why are there only pics of men in here?" and Frances is all "bc this is to honor war folk and only men are war folk." The BFF goes "women can be heroes too." Those 5 words result in Frances GOING TO ENLIST THE VERY NEXT DAY. Despite coming off as completely clueless and passive in the opening, Frances goes to the Navy, who rejects her, then the Airforce, who rejects her. She finally stoops to the Army and they're like "sweet. we need nurses. you ship out next week."
I hate this with every fiber of my being. First, that Frances, who, again, is college educated has no understanding of women assisting in WWII? What? Then, the fact that a cute boy says 5 words to her and she completely nukes her life to become a combat nurse in Vietnam. Hannah took no time to flesh Frances out before this happens, so the whole plot feels vapid and chintzy and like a woman will only do something with her life if a MAN tells her (my brain immediately flits to Gilmore Girls: WHY did you DROP out of YALE).
So Frances goes to Vietnam (after her parents are all: uuhhh, only boys do that). There, she meets a veritable parade of cliched characters who are exhausting. It was at this moment I realized I didn't have to subject myself to such a stinker of a novel. I skimmed it, and then read some reviews so I can converse with my MIL without offending her. From reading those reviews, I've gleaned that the intent of this book was to illustrate how the hard work and trauma and loss of the women of the Vietnam war have been utterly ignored and wiped from history. With this book, Hannah wanted to bring some of those voices to life. But to create a character like Frances, who is utterly unlikable and naive and seemingly uneducated despite being rich and, again, graduating from college in 1966 as a woman was an insult to her readers. You could have given us a strong woman?? Why are you punishing us for reading your book?
Another gripe: this book didn't need romance, and didn't need a revolving door of boy hotties for Frances to stare at all goo-goo-eyed. She's a goddamn combat nurse! This just further stunted Hannah's already deeply flawed protagonist.
I also just cannot stand how ham-handed Hannah is with the nostalgia drops. She crams contemporary song lyrics and snack foods and soft drinks and Aquanet and whateverthefuckelse into her narrative. I know she's doing it to give a nod to the time, but it's so clumsy that it really only serves to infuriate me.
At the end of the day, Kristin Hannah is just another author writing for people who don't normally read. With them, she can get away with half-baked characters and tired tropes. Not so with me.
Read by Picard himself, Making It So is an unflinching memoir. 83yrs old when the book was published, Making It So is essentially Patrick Stewart's ofRead by Picard himself, Making It So is an unflinching memoir. 83yrs old when the book was published, Making It So is essentially Patrick Stewart's official autobiography. Rolling Stone reported that Stewart didn't employ a ghostwriter, choosing to pen the entire book himself. He also read the book to me on my long runs as I find myself in the peak build phase of marathon training.
Stewart begins at the beginning, as it were. He tells the story of his parents, how his father impregnated his mother then left her, unmarried, to join the military. Thus, his eldest brother grew up a bastard in the home of their maternal grandparents. Several years later, the pair finally married. Stewart was the youngest of their 3 children, all sons.
From this tumultuous, humble origin, Stewart expected to live an unremarkable life. It took a teacher assigning The Merchant of Venice to his class, with Stewart in the role of Shylock, to unlock a future beyond his wildest dreams.
That same teacher stewarded Stewart to a career in the theater. This kindness and passion for the success of a student catapulted Stewart to become a professional stage actor, and, ultimately, took Stewart to Hollywood. Stewart didn't break into international acclaim until he was almost 50yrs old, which surely contributes to the humble, grateful, and awestruck tenor of this book. Stewart still can't quite believe he's lived the life he has, and he is still anxious to live life to its highest potential.
The one big bummer of this book is Stewart's skirting around the fact that he cheated on two of his three wives. He admits to guilt, and admits that it negatively impacted his relationship with his two children, especially his daughter (who was 16 when she and her mother visited Stewart in LA and it was revealed Stewart was, clichely enough, cheating with the much younger love interest from Star Trek). That said, he doesn't really unpack what a POS he was in these instances. Cheating on TWO wives with MUCH younger women and then being like "the marriage was already deteriorating." Like, bro, work on/end the marriage first before jumping in bed with someone else. His current wife is 45 to his 83. His children are in their 50s. I Googled it and apparently he doesn't have any relationship with his kids anymore. He mentions this VERY briefly at the close of the book, but he isn't head-on with the fact that he was a bad husband and a bad father.
That yuckiness doesn't take away from my enjoyment of this memoir. That said, even Patrick Stewart is a lecherous man....more
I walk up to the podium. The audience hushes in anticipation. They must wonder: what will I say? How did I feel about this prequel to my beloved book I walk up to the podium. The audience hushes in anticipation. They must wonder: what will I say? How did I feel about this prequel to my beloved book series? I lean into the microphone, my thumb hovering in front of me. With a jerk I plunge my thumb down to the floor with a loud PPPTTTTTTHHHHHHHH
We didn't need this.
Let me count the ways.
Of all the characters to get a book In the original trilogy, Suzanne Collins introduced a menagerie of interesting characters. Characters for whom we had sympathy, characters whose histories we wondered after. President Snow was never one of those characters. Sometimes the bad guy is just the bad guy. To give him a backstory? Why? I mean, the book doesn't do a lot to garner sympathy for the monster he becomes, so I guess there's that, but even still, I entered this book thinking what is the why of this story and it wrapped with that question unanswered.
A Haymitch or Mags or Joanna or Coin or Finnick book would have been lightyears more interesting. Hell, the book could have even delved into the 25th games or gone somewhere entirely new. To give us the 10th Hunger Games through the eyes of a villain that is neither entertaining nor likeable? What a waste. We didn't even get a richer view of the world or the war, so the book doesn't even serve as world building lore. It's just... ugh.
I hate what this does to the timeline & characters When we met President Snow in The Hunger Games, it's the 74th games and he's been President for quite some time. We don't know his age, though we do know that Caesar Flickerman has been an announcer for a long time, and never seems to look older. Sure, there's ways to keep folks looking young and keep their clocks ticking, but sending us to the 10th hunger games for this prequel? It means that, for the 74th games, President Snow is 82yrs old. Blech. Worse, it makes Tigris a whooping 85, still alive, still running a shop. What?? This book ruined what Tigris could have been. Make it the 16th hunger games, JFC. Also, the mechanisms that have/haven't been built around the games in 10yrs is nonsensical. Also also, Snow being the one to introduce betting on and assistance in the arena? I get the message that the adults are even using the Capitol children, to do their jobs for them, but it honestly felt lazy. Like the introduction of the katniss roots to the story. Like dropping the phrase "catching fire." Collins was raising her eyebrows so hard at her readers, I think she might have pulled a muscle.
It's boring This book is from the perspective of Coriolanus Snow. Like the trilogy that came before it, Ballad... is trapped within the confines of the main character's head. The narrative is influenced by his interpretations of the world moving around him. Unlike the original trilogy, this method fails with Snow as a vehicle. We hardly see the games; we're mostly sitting in a chair listening to Snow think about the games philosophically, and judging his fellow students around him. Even though we were trapped in Katniss' head, we still understood who Peeta and Haymitch and Plutarch were. We don't get any richness to the characters flitting around Snow, we just get his put-out brush-offs. I didn't care about the games, I didn't care about the Snow family, I didn't care about the other students, the Peacekeepers, Lucy Gray Baird... I cared a little bit about Sejanus Plinth. A lot of good that did me.
It lacks the character building of its predecessors Katniss Everdeen was a firey character who was curious and angry about the world. Coriolanus Snow doesn't really care what's going on around him, as long as he lands on top. It could have been interesting if Collins had leaned into her character's sociopathy, but she didn't. She seemed torn between humanizing him and allowing him to be a pure, black-hat villain. That indecision sent us spiraling even deeper into a poorly constructed main character, a poorly constructed story, and flat secondary/tertiary cast members.
The songs. My god, the songs There were so many, and the audiobook version has the narrator speaking them plainly. FUCKING SING, BRO! This was pretty awful.
That last one is a petty complaint, but it leads me to my final thought on the book and hey this is the only spoiler don't look if you don't want to be spoiled I said don't look okay you've been warned: I despise that Lucy wrote The Hanging Tree.
So many celebrities get fat, juicy book deals. They promise tell-alls, they insist they have unique and interesting stories to tell. Then, check deposSo many celebrities get fat, juicy book deals. They promise tell-alls, they insist they have unique and interesting stories to tell. Then, check deposited, they sit down and write a bunch of fluffy nonsense that wastes my time and makes me angry (see Conan O'Brien's assistant's unreadable garbage and Amy Poehler writing a whole chapter about how she doesn't want to write the book so she's going to have friends write essays about nothing within her book).
Britney Spears didn't do that.
Britney Spears said "you paid me money because you wanted to hear the full story. Well here it is. All of it."
It's brave, it's unflinching, it's heartbreaking. Yet it's simultaneously somehow patient and hopeful and kind. Britney Spears' parents turned her into a cash cow in the most awful sense of the idiom, then used and abused her and ultimately took over her life and institutionalized her so that they could take her money. As Spears recalls her father saying: "I'm Britney Spears now."
And how awful were we? That is, society and the public? Judging her, following her escapades on the front of tabloids and Perez Hilton. I was only 18yrs old in 2007, but it still sucks that I was caught up in the nonsense; how Britney Spears was recast as a villain simply because she couldn't be perfect, something not one of us is capable of being.
Honestly this book really only got 4 stars instead of 5 because of the god stuff at the end. I know that her faith is something that is helping her move past her trauma, but I could do without it, sorry. #atheist4lyfe.
PS. Michelle Williams did a bang up job reading this book. She truly sounded like Britney Spears....more
This book is a perfect example of how marketing makes the book. This book didn't have a strong marketing team. I'd never heard of it. My husband stumbThis book is a perfect example of how marketing makes the book. This book didn't have a strong marketing team. I'd never heard of it. My husband stumbled on an article mentioning the book. I asked after it when he brought it home from the library, and it sounded fascinating.
Wavewalker is what it appears to be: absolutely fascinating.
At 7yrs old, Suzanne Heywood's parents made an announcement: the 3 of them and Suzanne's 6yr old brother would hop into a giant sailboat and follow Captain James Cook's 3rd voyage, which would take ~3.5yrs. 10yrs after they set sail from England, Suzanne escaped her abusive and neglectful family to find a life on solid ground.
I really don't want to say much more. Heywood's life was lonely and cruel. She survived a life threatening injury and abandonment. She survived a childhood and adolescence of solitude and sadness. And all of this was navigating aboard a sailboat, full of her narcissistic, alcoholic parents, her ambivalent brother, and a constantly rotating menagerie of amateur adventurers, sailors, and youths looking for cheap transportation.
Heywood deserved the type of marketing that Tara Westover received when she wrote Educated. She was robbed. This book is better than Educated. Everyone should read this book. ...more
I rarely find myself at a loss for words. How did I find this book? Did I enjoy it? Was it scary? Is the hype justified?
I... I don't know.
Here's what I rarely find myself at a loss for words. How did I find this book? Did I enjoy it? Was it scary? Is the hype justified?
I... I don't know.
Here's what I do know.
House of Leaves is a wild concept. A found fiction work of massive proportions, which came out on the heels of "The Blair Witch Project" and years before the likes of "Paranormal Activity." The premise, roughly, goes as follows:
Johnny is a grubby guy in his early 20s working at a tattoo parlor and bumbling around in the 90s world of LA clubs and drugs. He walks into the apartment of a dead guy, and is drawn to a chest full of papers. Turns out the dead guy (who was found dead in a puddle of blood with claw marks on the wood floor) had been laboring to create a comprehensive & academic analysis of a movie. This movie may or may not actually exist in Johnny's world. It has a cult following, but some folks disclaim its existence. "The Navidson Record" is a documentary (is it?) created by Will Navidson chronicling his family (him, a wife, a son, a daughter, a dog, a cat) as they embark on next chapter of their lives into a home in Virginia. Thing is, the house is bigger on the inside. And that extra space might be malevolent.
House of Leaves is wildly fractured. It's partly the dead guy's academic musings, partly a collection of prior academic texts on the film and its subjects, partly a retelling of what one actually views when watching the film, partly Johnny's scribblings as he works through all this writing, and partly inserts by the person who receives the final product from Johnny.
Confused yet?
I like fractured narratives, but this was something else. Author Mark Danielewski has given us hundreds of footnotes. Some of them refer to fake articles that were purportedly written about this fake movie. Others are very real philosophical texts / news articles / etc. Some of the interviews and academic texts that refer to the movie in this book treat it like a documentary. Others treat it like a work of fiction. Johnny is unsure whether this movie ever existed at all. Also, Johnny is slowly losing his mind.
The retelling of the film is fascinating. Will, his family, and his friends' attempt to explore the yawning hallway that has appeared in his house is fun and fraught. Johnny, on the other hand, is awful. He's a sexist piece of shit, and, quite frankly, I feel like Danielewski is also quite sexist. The way the few women in this 550+ book are portrayed is repugnant. This book has hardly any women, and those that appear are characterized as sex objects, nags, or insane. Not a good look, and a big factor in my 3-star rating. It's very, very telling that the glowing reviews of House of Leaves come from men, and the skeptical, eye-rolling reviews come from women. I especially love Emily Barton, coming to us from The Village Voice in 2000: "Danielewski’s bloated and bollixed first novel certainly attempts to pass itself off as an ambitious work; the question for each reader is if the payoff makes the effort of slogging through its endless posturing worthwhile."
Ha!
In an attempt to create real academic discourse in House of Leaves, Danielewski goes down wild philosophical rabbit holes. I enjoyed his discussion of The Minotaur, of the nature of echoes, of labyrinths. I also liked that, in pulling fake quotes from real people such as Stanley Kubrick and Stephen King, he believably captured their unique voices. That said, parts of this book are very bloated and feel embarrassingly earnest. Danielewski wants so badly for us to think he's clever, and it's laid bare in some very awkward passages (the biblical sections, woof).
The book delves into the spatial tools usually used by poets. When characters are walking down The Hallway, the text becomes squished into the middle. When the ceiling presses down, the text only appears on the bottom of the page. Some of it was clever, but a lot of it was exhausting (why do I have to flip the book upside down and all around and read backwards? This is just stupid).
There was a part of the book where Johnny is like "some of these pages were set on fire. I kept in what was left and didn't try to fill in the holes on the page made by the fire." And then, like, a single letter is missing. That's not how fire on paper works?! I know that's petty but it was exhausting to read this section with all the "[ ]" indicating burned away letters and words. For it to not even make sense made me throw up my hands.
I'm going back to Emily Barton for the TL;DR: "It is frustrating that House of Leaves is such a mess, because when Navidson’s story glints through the murky waters of Danielewski’s prose, it grabs hold and won’t let go... The horrors that ensue keep the pages turning even when one’s patience for the writing wears thin."
I couldn't agree more. I really enjoyed the parts of the book that were focused on Navidson’s story. I also enjoyed the dead dude's philosophies. That said, Johnny detracted from enjoyment of the book, and much of the physical elements of the book fell flat.
Would I recommend this book to you? I mean, maybe. If you like open-ended, unanswered academic horror, sure, try it on. But this book always has been and always will be quite polarizing. ...more
Loading...
