|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1668037718
| 9781668037713
| 1668037718
| 4.29
| 38,359
| May 21, 2024
| May 21, 2024
|
really liked it
|
Preread note: I'll be doing the blurb attempt like I've done for the past few short story collections instead of a full, separate review for each like
Preread note: I'll be doing the blurb attempt like I've done for the past few short story collections instead of a full, separate review for each like I did for the first few. I say "attempt" because while I try to keep it to just a line or two, a paragraph at most, I'm not always successful, and sometimes a story will trigger a long winded story of my own which I may drop here. We'll see what happens. This one will not be "live" as I complete the stories like I did for the last collection, but dropped in one big lump when I'm done, so it won't be blowing up your update feed if you follow along. You're welcome. "Two Talented Bastids": ★★★★✰ (3.5 rounded up) An enjoyable read, but there wasn't a lot of substance in the end. The very last section was... satisfying? At least in a literary sense? It certainly wasn't a happy ending, but neither was it a terrible one. Bittersweet? That's not it either. It was one of those things that make you go "Awww, that's kind of sad," but nothing that sends you off weeping. It's on the level of seeing someone you want to win a race lose it instead. Is there a word for that? And I consider myself a writer. Where's my alien with some primal talent enhancer? [image] Oh, shut up. "The Fifth Step": ★★★★✰ (4.5 rounded down) AA is not a hotbed of mental health. (A fifth step is something in a 12-step program where you more or less confess your misdeeds and the nature of them.) I could fill up a lot of this space discussing it, but I'm afraid I must plead the fifth... and possibly plead the 11th as well... "Willie the Weirdo": ★★★✰✰ I'm afraid I saw where this was going but not until right before we got there. [image] Not original, but still enjoyable due to some old stories shared by the old man. Or rather, the idea behind the old stories; not the stories themselves. "Danny Coughlin's Bad Dream": ★★★★★ Firstly: An eight-year-old black boy in the post Covid era exclaiming "radical"... Cute, SK. Real cute. By the way, the eighties called. It wants its totally tubular, gnarly, bodacious slang back. [image] Anyway, at 150 pages, this is really a novella snuck in amongst short stories, but I loved it. Stephen King really seems to shine with this format. He's had bad short stories and bad novels, but I can't think of any bad novellas (though a couple of mediocre at best). This features a few of King's hallmarks, e.g. a touch of supernatural mumbo-jumbo, a cop willing to abuse his authority, crazy-ass townsfolk you just want to bitch slap, etc. There's no superfluous fluff like he loads up in some of his novels, and it works. However, this has a bonus. One of the characters (Investigator Jalbert) is loosely based on Inspector Javert who occasionally occupies the fourth spot on my Mount Rushmore of favorite literary characters. (Scarlett O'Hara, Roland Deschain, and Severus Snape always take the first three, though not necessarily in that order. Mowgli, Atticus Finch, Jean Valjean, Sara Crewe, Jim Hawkins, and a couple others rotate in and out of the fourth spot depending on the day.) Jalbert has no chance of getting on my favorite characters list, let alone Mount Rushmore, but I liked reading about him. He was a bit cray-cray and suffered from arithmomania which worsens throughout the story when things aren't going his way. He lived only to work and do an occasional jigsaw puzzle. Javert "had no vices. When he was pleased with himself, he permitted himself a pinch of snuff. Therein lay his connection with humanity." Jalbert masturbated once a week, and I suppose that was his link. But one major difference is that Javert strictly adhered to the law and duty, even offering to resign from the force once when he thought he had made a mistake. Jalbert wasn't above breaking the law to get his results and didn't want to leave the case at all even though it was clear he was fucking it up. Both were adamant that they were right and were ruthless in pursing their quarry, though, and both (view spoiler)[exited this world in similar ways though Javert just couldn't accept the fact that he let Valjean go and Jalbert couldn't accept the fact that Danny wasn't going to get the comeuppance he thought he deserved. (hide spoiler)] And speaking of Danny, I loved him as a narrator, and I guess he was kind of Valjeanish, at least with respect to humility and having once done some wrong and turned his life around. The Les Miserables connections are there, but like I said before, they're very loose. "Finn": ★★★✰✰ Finn and I seem to draw the same kind of bad luck, though his is much worse. After all, I've never been kidnapped and interrogated due to mistaken identity. (I don't consider that a spoiler since it happens within the first few pages.) But both of us seem to be the kind of people where if there're 10,000 lifetime yanks in a ceiling fan pull chain, we will be the one to come along and give it its 10,001st and thereby snap the cord off, and that's only if we're lucky enough to not pull the whole thing down on our head. Sometimes the god of ill luck is merciful. This had four star potential for a while, but I found the ending rather unsatisfying. Ambiguity is okay sometimes, but I must've been in the mood for a little more closure. Alas. "On Slide Inn Road": ★★★★✰ Another shortcut gone wrong dealio. Go gramps! "Red Screen": ★★✰✰✰ I don't get it. I reread the important parts, and I still don't get it. I looked it up, and I still don't get it because what confused me wasn't explained anywhere. What does the red screen mean? Perhaps I'm just too dense. (There's a possibility it refers to an iPhone feature, but since I still rock a flip phone, I wouldn't know anything about that.) Fortunately, I also don't care all that much. Then, through the course of my research, I discovered this was originally put out through some outfit, and all the proceeds went to benefit the ACLU, and now I reeeeeaaaally don't care, because, yeah, fuck that shit. (That's not why I give it two stars, though. It was just a kind of pointless and confusing story.) "The Turbulence Expert": ★★★✰✰ (2.5 rounded up) An interesting concept, but an "eh" story. But! I was reminded up this Far Side comic that was on the calendar just a few days ago, and I reckon I can share it here. [image] According to the rules, this train wouldn't need a trackulence expert since the conductor is prepared for it and the passengers can provide the needed mental/emotional juice to avoid a derailment... I guess. "Laurie": ★★★✰✰ A puppy story about how the dog and new owner need each other. Or maybe just how the new owner needs the dog and the dog connect with the owner. (view spoiler)[Then there's a bit of worry with an alligator but it all comes out okay in the end. Well, for the dog and owner, but someone else didn't fare too well. (hide spoiler)] Pretty good if you go in for such things, but I could take it or leave it. "Rattlesnakes": ★★★★★ The Cujo sequel! I wasn't a big Cujo fan when I first read it, but that was 20 years ago, and I should probably give it another go. Luckily I remembered it well enough that any references in this didn't trip me up. In fact, you can read this without ever having read Cujo and be just fine. Any past info you need is adequately explained as you go along. I must love ghost stories set at the beach. Duma Key is a fave, and it gets mentioned in this story a few times since what's left of it is right next to Rattlesnake Key. This was also fantastic. Some professional reviewer who does this kind of thing a lot better than I could ever hope to said it's like "Duma Key meets Bag of Bones if they strolled through Pet Sematary." I'd say that's pretty accurate, and since I love all three of those books, how could I not also love this story? This also shows that the man's still got it when it comes to horror. One scene is reminiscent of one of my own experiences. One night while the spooks are visiting Vic (the main character) and messing around in the bathroom, he tells them "boys, you're not wanted here. You're not welcome here." (They were creeping him out.) I've had a handful of ghost experiences myself, and one time while I was trying to sleep at my grandparents' house, someone in a WWII style uniform would sometimes stand by the bed I was in. (It might've been my uncle who died during that conflict, but I have no idea.) He unnerved me a little bit, and I wasn't really scared because I felt he didn't mean me any harm, but he made it damned difficult to sleep. One time when he came, I finally shouted out "Look! I have no idea what passes for etiquette in the ghost world, but in the physical world it's very impolite to stare at someone while he's trying to sleep, so could you please move on if you don't mind?" (Or something to that effect.) He moved around the corner to the hall, though I had a sense that he was just out of view. That was good enough to be getting on with, and I eventually got to sleep. Vic's ghosts acquiesced to his request as well, but they also left a calling card, and frankly, they were nowhere near as nice as my uncle. "The Dreamers": ★★★★✰ This was set in the 1970s, and so the characters were more believable. (King seems to have trouble the past decade or so with writing younger characters. They all feel like they walked out of the 20th century.) This is classic King as far as weirdness goes. If you stumble upon another universe, sometimes it's best to just leave well enough alone. That blackness under the floor in your dream? Just let it be blackness. You ain't gotta know what's under there. King said this is one of the few stories that actually creeped him out, and he couldn't think about it at night. If that ain't a hook, then I don't know what is. I didn't think this was the creepiest story in the collection. It presents some disturbing ideas, but he's explored those before in some other works. And if you've read Lovecraft, you've seen it there too. "The Answer Man": ★★★★✰ ("Dead dog warning" relates to this story, but it's not a bad dead dog scene. Old age. It happens to everyone.) Sometimes the answers are helpful. Sometimes they aren't. However, the answers from the Answer Man are always right. Make of them what you will. This was an enjoyable read, though kind of sad. King started it in 1977, but put it away. 40 years later his nephew found it asked him to finish it. He did, and here we are. As such you get a theme from classic King with modern King style, and it works really well. "Afterword": Nothing special about this one. Sometimes he talks about where he got his story ideas for each one, but not this time. He mentions a couple, then gives some thoughts on this and that, thanks a few people, and that's that. Postread notes: I guess I have to say it. I seem to like short stories now. It's taken several years, but I've finally come around. To be clear, I still prefer a good novel, but I don't have to grit my teeth and march into a short story collection now; I actually enjoy it (as long as the stories are good). Most of these are set in early 2020s in the immediate post-Covid era, but the characters feel like they came out of the late 20th century. This isn't exactly a criticism. These characters weren't glued to their phones and actually did stuff. E.G. 36-year-old Danny in Danny Coughlin's Bad Dream left his phone in the truck half the time and didn't mind if he didn't have it. Such is a rarity in today's world for one that age. And for people even younger... well, I've sung that song elsewhere and won't rehash it here. The last couple of stories were set in the 20th century, and I hate to say it, but King really ought to stick with writing stories set at that time. The characters seem more genuine or true to life. All of the characters, especially the younger ones, set in the modern era seem like anachronisms. He can pull off older characters in modern day because they would behave according to their life experiences which might cover 70 or 80 years. But teenagers (all of whom would've been born well into the new millennium at this point) making references to stuff that happened in the 1970s or 1980s? It's not impossible, but it is quite improbable. This is peppered with King's politics, but it's back to the "pepper" level which I can handle. He bludgeoned his readers with them in some of his more recent works, and I'm glad he's put away the sledgehammer, though I'm sure it's still within reach. Barring all that, this is a pretty fun collection. Like most it has its gems, a couple of near duds, and a few in between. Nothing flat-out sucked, so that's cool. Check it out. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jun 26, 2024
|
Jul 02, 2024
|
May 28, 2024
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
1721331379
| 9781721331376
| 1721331379
| 3.87
| 363
| Nov 21, 2007
| Aug 21, 2018
|
really liked it
|
My reviews to the individual books contained in this volume are linked below. The Night Stalker: ★★★★✰ The Night Strangler: ★★★★✰ This is a new experienc My reviews to the individual books contained in this volume are linked below. The Night Stalker: ★★★★✰ The Night Strangler: ★★★★✰ This is a new experience for me. I've never listened to an audiobook without having read it for real first. I can't multitask for shit. (I'm led to believe that most men can't and most of my women friends are definitely better at it than I am.) I have friends who could listen to a book while doing chemistry equations and tell you everything about both of them if you ask them about it later. I don't exactly trip while chewing gum and walking at the same time, but focusing on two cerebral matters at once is beyond me. So, the only time I listen to audiobooks is when I have a mundane task to perform at work (of which there are plenty at certain parts of the year) or when I'm driving sometimes. That way if I miss something because I have to actually use my brain to do something else for a few seconds, it's no big deal because I've already read it. However, these books are out of print and quite expensive. Luckily the audiobook was affordable, so here we are. I don't think I would've attempted a listen if I hadn't already seen the movies and knew that the books and the movies are quite similar. Johnny Heller read both of these, and he did a great job. He's not on the top tier for my favorite narrators, but he's pretty damn close, and I think he did a better job with the second book. Or maybe I was just used to him doing Kolchak by that time. I couldn't get Darren McGavin out of my head for the first book, and my brain kept trying to paste his voice over Heller's. For the second one I pictured McGavin, but was fine with Heller providing the voice. Check these out if you enjoyed the movies or the old show. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 30, 2023
|
Dec 18, 2023
|
Nov 29, 2023
|
MP3 CD
| |||||||||||||||
0671783432
| 9780671783433
| 0671783432
| 4.09
| 323
| 1973
| 1973
|
really liked it
|
I'm having trouble deciding on a couple of shelves for this book. Firstly, I'm not sure if this counts as a novelization and if I should consider it s
I'm having trouble deciding on a couple of shelves for this book. Firstly, I'm not sure if this counts as a novelization and if I should consider it such. I'm going to go with "no," but I could be wrong. The made-for-TV movie Kolchak: The Night Stalker was released first and the novel followed, but the novel was written before the movie was made. Rice was having trouble getting it published, but some agent read it, thought it'd make a great movie, and so they went that route. The novel wasn't published until after the sequel movie, Kolchak: The Night Strangler, was released because the powers that be wanted both books to be in the one and two spots for the publisher's list in 1974. The novel for Kolchak: The Night Strangler is definitely a novelization because Rice wrote it based on the screenplay for the movie, pretty much the reverse of this one. But this? I don't know. What are the rules for a movie that comes out based on an unpublished novel but the novel comes out later? Next is the "liked movie better" shelf. The story is the same in both the book and the movie with minimal changes, so I can't use my "they're a little too dissimilar" cop-out. The book is grittier, has a bit of profanity which is well placed and doesn't shy away from some seedier aspects of life in Las Vegas. Since the movie was a made-for-TV deal in the early '70's, it had to tone down a lot of that. However, Darren McGavin stars as Kolchak, and he makes that thing work, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. His interactions with his editor, the police, and just about anybody is a treat to watch. The character of Kolchak is great in the book, but if I had read it first, I don't think I would've seen the extra dimension McGavin brought to the role. As it is, I saw him playing out his part in my head in spite of the fact that the narrator didn't sound anything like him. This is a very tough call, but after looking at this paragraph, I think I'll say I liked the movie better... for now. The decision would be easier if the movie was just a bit grittier like the book. However, one shelf decision that's easy-peasy is the "dead dog warning" one. Said shelf exists because a friend who is a huge dog lover hates seeing dead or injured dogs in her books, so I do this for her benefit. I'm not sure why I continue since she hasn't been on this site for four years as of this month (12/23), but since the shelf is there I reckon I'll keep it updated. However, my friend should never, ever read this book. There are more dead dogs in this thing than any other book I've ever read if you're talking sheer numbers, and a couple of them die rather horribly. You have been warned. This story concerns a vampire in modern day... well, modern when it was written... Las Vegas. Kolchak is a newspaper reporter who is able to believe the unbelievable. This comes in handy when the unbelievable turns out to be true. In fact, Kolchak is the only person in this with a lick of common sense, and almost everyone else is infuriating. I don't believe that vampires exist myself, but if I saw a supposed 70-year-old man clean the clocks of the entire police force, take about 30 bullets without batting an eye, and escape cars and helicopters at a flat-out sprint without getting winded, it would behoove me to consider that maybe, just maybe, we're not dealing with a regular man here. So, why not try the anti-vampire techniques? You know, just give them a shot and see what happens since nothing else has worked so far. If they don't work either, what's been lost? The powers that be don't see it that way, and Kolchak has to deal with that knowing that he's been right the whole time. It really pisses me off, but being so tied up in it is the sign of a good story. And the ending enrages me to the point that I thought my head would explode, but I won't go into all that. I wonder what kind of vampire Skorzeny is. Father Callahan from Salem's Lot and the Dark Tower Series identifies three different types. Type ones are the big, bad dudes like Dracula who live for centuries, can do mind control, shape shift, are super strong, super intelligent, wily, etc. Type twos are strong, can make other vampires with a bite, but aren't all that bright, can't do the other supernatural shit, and don't tend to live very long. Type threes are mostly human, can move in sunlight, eat food, etc. They drink blood and can put their victims in a trance while they're sucking on them so the victim doesn't remember being bitten, but that's about it. They can also die from more ordinary means and aren't injured by crosses and holy water. Skorzeny must be something between a one and a two because he's strong, and has type one and two weaknesses, though I don't remember him making any new vampires in the book. However, he's much smarter than twos, but doesn't seem to have the mind control and shape shifting abilities of ones. Does that make him a 2.5? Or maybe a 1.5? How about a one minus or a two plus? I don't know. Does anyone really care? I don't know that either. Regardless, this was a great book. Finding an affordable physical copy is impossible, so I had to go with the audiobook. The narrator did a great job. He didn't sound anything like Darren McGavin, but that's fine. Check it out. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Nov 30, 2023
|
Dec 05, 2023
|
Nov 29, 2023
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
4.15
| 8,693
| Oct 1979
| Oct 1979
|
really liked it
|
HD Film Tributes music video: Halloween main theme by John Carpenter. I'm the only person I know who has the soundtrack to this movie on CD. My friend
HD Film Tributes music video: Halloween main theme by John Carpenter. I'm the only person I know who has the soundtrack to this movie on CD. My friends used to make fun of me over the fact, and well they should. Firstly, if you have a copy of this, hold on to that shit, and save it for some rough times! The cheapest one of these I could find was $250, which is well out of my price range. I mean, shit, that's like a car payment! Or at least it used to be. Fortunately some unscrupulous soul has done and put this up on the internet so that this unscrupulous soul could read it. You know, I took an ethics class in college. It must not have made much of an impression. Oh well. This was fantastic, at least for a novelization. The story in the book and the movie are pretty much the same, scene for scene except in the beginning. It gave some background information about Michael that let us know what the hell was the matter with the boy. I liked those scenes. However, it also gave us scenes from his point of view which let us know what he was thinking, and I wasn't all that keen on that. In the movie, Michael kills his sister and then shuts up for the rest of his life. When he gets stabbed or injured in any kind of way, he does it Timex style by taking the licking and keeping on ticking. (Well, after a brief fainting spell to reset himself, but nobody's perfect.) He also attacks everyone Charlie Chaplin style: silently. (Except for his breathing. Like I said; imperfect.) He's always there, and his victims have no intimation of his coming. I find the silence and mystery much more menacing than any noise and explanations. I always thought of him as a kind of Jaws who just stalks and kills. (Kind of like a landshark!) There isn't really much rhyme or reason behind it; it's just what he does. The book gives us his POV and thoughts from time to time, and that kind of lessens the terror you get in the movie. It humanizes him a bit, and one of his most terrifying traits was his complete disconnect from humanity. He also talks for the first few years in the institution, and he's usually grunting when physical exertion requires it. This is certainly terrifying since he is killing your ass, after all, but doing all that silently seems scarier to me. Also, we learn that Michael Myers often has a raging boner when he stalks his prey, and nowhere in this book does it mention that he takes care of it. I'm sure you know what this means. If the boy had just learned how to jack off, he could've gotten everything out of his system, and about 90 people would be alive today. (See comments section below). We won't count his sister Judith since he was only six then, and masturbation is a skill typically picked up during adolescence, but surely he should've learned how to wax the bishop sometime in the following 15 years. I was 12 myself when I stumbled upon this vital, life-saving skill, but I had some friends who started as young as 10 and two who claim they were 18 before they gave in to temptation. (One of them I actually believe.) But Michael was fucking 21 years old and must've had blue balls from hell. No wonder he was so pissed off! This is recommended just for die-hard fans of the movie who would like a little bit of extra background info. The book is quite good, but the movie is better. Appendix from the Damn Fool Archives: Back in the MySpace days... [image] Hi! Oh, look! It's my first social network friend, Tom, come to say how-do! Anyway, as I was saying, back in the MySpace days, I did three blog entries tallying up Michael Myers' kills, and I eventually copied them over to Facebook a few years later, and I saved all those notes when I got off Facebook about 10 years ago. Back in 2006, the internet didn't have this information, though it's since been added at some fan sites, and those counts differ from mine by a couple of deaths. They're probably right, and I'm not going to argue with them since I really don't care. I'm going to post my blogs in the comments section complete with spelling and grammatical errors (and possibly some bad math). They cover the original run of movies from Halloween (1978) through Resurrection. Making sense of the franchise since then has gotten confusing. There are 13 movies now, but not all of them relate to each other. You can watch the first series which has seven movies, (movies one and two and four through eight; part three is always ignored since Michael Myers isn't in it, but it still technically counts as a Halloween movie due to the title.) Or you can watch the second series which is movies nine and ten and counts as a reboot. (I don't recommend this.) Or you can watch the third series which covers movies one and 11 through 13. (Movies two through ten were kicked out of the band to make this work.) One can only hope that they are now done with this madness. Enjoy. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 15, 2023
|
Oct 18, 2023
|
Oct 04, 2023
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||||
B0CJ4FJHMX
| 4.41
| 32
| unknown
| Sep 16, 2023
|
really liked it
|
This is going to be two reviews, or perhaps a review with a followup. Sean has a blog entry where he shows how the sausage is made which I plan to rea
This is going to be two reviews, or perhaps a review with a followup. Sean has a blog entry where he shows how the sausage is made which I plan to read later. I don't always like knowing how a magic trick is done because it takes the thrill out of it, but it really depends on my mood, and I am interested in reading about the process behind getting this book out but not before giving my own, for lack of a better term, unbiased or uninformed review. The blog post may or may not explain a couple of things that confused or bothered me, but I'll find out later. Also, I received a delayed reader's copy, and the author did not require a review, honest or otherwise, (though he said I would "honor [him] with one"), but really, since when have I read a book and not reviewed it? (I think he knows that about me.) If you'd like to read it yourself (which I highly recommend), you can get a copy from Amazon here in paperback or on the Kindle. Ignorant review: For 16 days this book had a perfect five star rating from six raters, and here I come with my four to knock it cattywampus. [image] Now I feel like an asshole. Oh well. I always try to be honest with my ratings, and I honestly "really liked" this, which is what the fourth star stands for. This is Sean's first book, and I must say I'm quite impressed. I've read several books from novice authors that I thoroughly enjoyed, yet I often felt like they were stories turned in for a college creative writing course. There were always minor, rookie flaws peppered throughout, usually implausible solutions to problems such as a deus ex machina to get the author out of a corner he had accidentally put himself into. Sometimes research on a specific topic didn't go all the way (or worse, no research was done at all and the author was just making shit up). Then there are editing mistakes such as occasional typos. This doesn't suffer from any of that. This was like reading a real book from a real author put out by a real publisher. It's clear a lot of research was done, (this is confirmed in the acknowledgments), and though I can't say how accurate the findings are since I'm not an expert in the fields discussed, nothing stood out that made me cry "bullshit." Sean and I have had a correspondence going on for a few months about this, that, and the other, and I've always been impressed with his vocabulary and his writing ability. He uses that to great advantage with his prose as well. However, there were a couple of stylistic elements that grated on me right from the start, but it's really due to personal preference. He has a tendency to use sentence fragments instead of a complete sentence. I suspect this was done for emphasis or flow (I suck at English lit stuff, so I'm not sure what the right term is), but I'm afraid it drove me to distraction due to the frequency, especially for the first couple of chapters. Once in a while is fine, and such maneuvers work to a writer's advantage if it's used sparingly, but this was everywhere. After chapter two, though, I threw out a serenity prayer to the heavens, and plowed on. At that point he either stopped doing it (or at least didn't do it as often; I did see it again from time to time), or I just stopped noticing. Once I made a conscious effort to just appreciate the story and stop treating it like an English assignment I needed to grade, I enjoyed the ride. I'll give an example since I brought it up. Here's a sentence from page nine: "Squatted over the remains." That's the whole thing. There's no subject in that sentence, and my brain just has a syntax error over such syntax license. I knew what the subject was because it was mentioned two sentences prior. (Yes, the sentence before that one was also a fragment, although a much longer one.) It works, but it irks. I also got lost a couple of times when a long dialogue was playing out because he wouldn't always use "he said," and "she said," or something similar to indicate who was speaking, and I had to go back to figure it out. However, I confess that my reading comprehension skills are sometimes slightly below average, so this could be a personal problem. The other thing I noticed, though it didn't bother me as much, was a lack of articles and conjunctions. They were there sometimes, but they weren't always there. This is also personal preference stuff, so if that kind of thing doesn't bother you, then you won't have any trouble with it. This book is also progressive, but not hatefully so, just annoyingly so, at least to one with my right-wing sensibilities. (I hail from the basket of deplorables in MAGAland.) The story is set in the post-pandemic era when masks are no longer required, but life hasn't completely gotten back to normal, so there are mentions of it here and there, and opinions, etc., etc. I understand an author wanting to weave his views into his work, and I actually encourage that if it's done well, but that is sometimes a difficult trick to pull off. One of my favorite quotes from Stephen King's It occurs when Bill is in a writing course in college, and the class is talking about lofty English Lit matters and he finally says "I don't understand any of this. Why does a story have to be socio-anything? Politics... culture... history... aren't those natural ingredients in any story, if it's told well?... Can't you guys just let a story be a story?" I think Sean almost pulls that off; it's so close. He's certainly ahead of a couple of professional authors who really ought to be a lot better at this kind of thing. Yeah, I'm looking at you Stephen King (who used to be excellent at it, but has either lost that subtle skill or just doesn't give a shit anymore) and John Irving (whom I will never read again because the one book of his I did read left such a bad taste in my mouth due to this very issue though the book was rather decent otherwise.) The point is the author can express his own views on divisive matters without bludgeoning the reader to death with them, and I can't tell you how much I appreciate Sean doing it that way. His characters have a conversation about whatever topic (or we get an inner monologue), they air their grievances, then that's that. They move on, and it's back to the story. The character who did this the most was Jessie. I disagreed with almost all of her political, cultural, environmental, whateveral opinions, but I really liked her as a character. Did any of those conversations she had with whomever add anything to this story about a werewolf terrorizing a town? Not at all. However, they did add depth to her character. But is depth of character important in this kind of story which is a light, horror comedy? I don't know; you'll have to be the judge of that. Personally, I don't think so, but I could be wrong. (Update: This is explained in his blog post linked above. See below.) But that's enough nitpicking. This was an absolute joy to read, and I may even give it a reread one day because it was a lot of fun. It was quite humorous, and it's horror without excessive gore. Don't get me wrong; gore is just fine with me, but a lot of writers throw it in there gratuitously just for the sake of shock value, and that has never impressed me. (I've even been known to fall asleep during splatter films.) Sean doesn't do that. The gore here fits in just right. The plot was great for this kind of book and worked perfectly. The subtle nods to other franchises were great. (There were several, and I wish I had jotted them down, though I do remember a reference to Tombstone, and General Zod is the best name for a dog ever.) And it happens during Oktoberfest! I've always felt that was a holiday that doesn't get enough glory. (I love Oktoberfest music, and if I still drank and weren't an alcoholic, I'm sure I'd love the beer part of the holiday too, but that's just for people who can handle it responsibly, and if that's you, then roll out the barrel and have a barrel of fun.) For some reason Oktoberfest seems to be set during Halloween instead of late September in this, but writers are allowed a bit of license to make the story work. (You should see the holiday/full moon timeline abuse Stephen King does in Cycle of the Werewolf, and nobody complains about that.) To be fair, the name is a bit misleading. The holiday runs for a couple of weeks in September and usually ends the first Sunday in October. Then there were the characters. They were all believable, and I enjoyed reading about their complicated relationships with each other. Unless I miss my guess, I suspect they were based on people Sean knows personally, or at least has met in various walks of life. The most memorable of these is Waff. I'm sure we all know a fuckup who could screw up a wet dream and really isn't worth the buckshot needed to blow him to hell. You know; the kind of fellow who can be infuriating due to his irresponsibility, but we keep him around anyway for other redeeming qualities. Usually because these people tend to be a hoot. (And it looks like Sean isn't the only one who can drop a sentence fragment. Dammit, I hate it when I lose credibility.) I simultaneously loved and hated Waff, and (view spoiler)[I wasn't too upset when he died nor was I upset when it turned out he survived, all thanks to him being the fuckup that he is. (I suspected this would be the case since the death happened off screen, so to speak.) (hide spoiler)] To sum up: This was a load of fun though a couple of stylistic elements might be an acquired taste. Extra note apropos of nothing: I have a million homemade bookmarks from stuff like event tickets, wrapping paper, pictures, and movie tickets (such as they are now; you have to print the things out if you want a keepsake, and where's the fun in that)? Mama and I saw the 1989 Batman in the theater a couple years ago, and of course I saved that one for this purpose. Sean and I have discussed that movie a few times, and we both well remember the summer of Batmania with nostalgic fondness. Sean also sent me a card with the book that had Batman on the front. This seems like fate, or destiny, or kismet to me: use the Batman ticket bookmark. I actually just laminated this one a few weeks ago, and this was its maiden voyage. [image] (Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home is on the back waiting for its ride when I get to that novelization.) Thank you, and you're welcome. Now I'm off to read the blog post to see what I missed. Enlightened review: I really don't have much to add here. He discusses how the book came about, why it took 14 years, what was going on in his life during that time, how that worked its way into the story, etc. He used to be a screenwriter for Hollywood back in the day, and he was actually blackballed by them over this story. Personally, I would consider being blackballed by Hollywood a badge of honor since I consider L.A. one of the five cesspools of American rot. (Then the poor man moves right to one of the other four, NYC.) I appreciated getting the extra info. If you enjoy those documentary extra features on DVDs, then you should check it out too. He did answer one of my questions, though, the one about sociowhatever issues being interwoven into the story and whether or not they belong there. In short, his answer is the same is mine which if you recall is "I don't know." But let him tell you about it: Rather than being rendered irrelevant by the current events that coincided with its writing, The Dogcatcher actively engaged in real-time conversation with those sociopolitical happenings.And there you have it. For the record, this reader came to be entertained, and he was. The base of this is shock-schlock which is often the only thing some people want in this kind of work. However, the seasonings (his prosocial values, the characterizations, family dynamics, town dynamics, themes, etc.) add a depth I certainly appreciate and it raises the quality which is nice to see. This will never be one of the Great American Novels, but it's not trying to be. Recommended to all horror fans... Woops, there I go again. Damn sentence fragments... AAAARRRRGGGHHHH!!!! It must be contagious! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 2023
|
Oct 10, 2023
|
Sep 28, 2023
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
0380865610
| 9780380865611
| 0380865610
| 3.93
| 2,147
| Jan 01, 1984
| Jan 01, 1984
|
really liked it
|
Well, this was fantastic and such a breath of fresh air after the last two novelizations I read. I mean, this was like actual literature or something.
Well, this was fantastic and such a breath of fresh air after the last two novelizations I read. I mean, this was like actual literature or something. However, it's not perfect and still not as good as the movie, but what is? After all, that has the best scene in cinematic history. (The book says Mrs. Deagle's chair was going 200 miles per hour and she was found an entire tenth of a mile from her home. I guess the Gremlins didn't appreciate it when she told them to kiss her grits.) The movie is perfect as it is. It doesn't take itself too seriously nor is it so ridiculous that it's inane. It finds its sweet spot and stays firmly in it. The book gives background information that would've just muddied the waters in the movie and made it a groaner. The book also includes several deleted scenes that were filmed for the movie but were kept out, and the movie is better for their deletion. Most of them involve a subplot where Mrs. Deagle and the bankers were trying to foreclose on a lot of properties so they could sell the land. It was merely a vessel to make viewers hate Mrs. Deagle more, but the couple of scenes she was in makes her hateful enough (I mean, if you don't already hate her after she suggests killing Billy's dog by putting it in her spin dryer on high heat, then you never will), and the subplot was superfluous. However, it worked well in the book even if it didn't go anywhere in the end. My reaction while reading the first chapter was "what the fuck is this shit," but I'm glad I stuck it out. We immediately find out Gizmo is actually an intelligent, 500-year-old, genetically-engineered alien, possibly even from another galaxy, but there are flaws in him such as not being able to communicate with other species though he can understand them. He's a minority Mogwai which basically means "morally good," and 99.9% of his children will be majority Mogwai who are basically agents of chaos and destruction. The majority Mogwai can only live so long even if they don't get killed due to their wanton recklessness, but minority Mogwai can live just about forever if they don't get killed by their children, sunlight, or anything else. Neato, eh? Still, that info doesn't belong in the movie, and I'm glad it was omitted. Most of the movie Gremlins are purely destructive, but in the book they're more methodical. For example, they put up detour signs which cause people to get completely lost and create huge traffic jams. The phones in the town are rewired so a call to the weather station goes to a sub shop, calls to the sub shop go to Gambler's Anonymous, calls to that go elsewhere, etc. On one dark road several cinder blocks were placed upright along the street for a block so anyone turning the corner would run into them. People get trapped in phone booths. At the mall, electric doors slam on people, the escalators suddenly take off at 70 miles per hour, and the muzak starts to play at an ear-splitting decibel level. Manhole covers are left open all over town for people to fall through, and that reminds me of the time I... actually, I don't guess that memory belongs here; I'm sorry I brought it up. This kind of activity is more in line with what a traditional gremlin is supposed to do. However, there's still plenty of straight-up destruction. The cops are still pretty bad in the book, but they're not the worst cops in the history of the world like they are in the movie. While they're making fun of Billy's story, they actually ask several questions that have always been on my mind concerning the whole feeding after midnight thing. What about the time zones? If a Mogwai is chewing on some cud in Eastern Nashville, TN at 11:55 PM, then heads east and steps across the line, is it Gremlin time? Is the chewing or the digesting the determining factor? How much food? One mouthful or a meal? What if something is stuck in his teeth at 10:00 and falls out after midnight? Is it calories? If so, do drinks count? If so, what about Coke zero? And when is the midnight thing over? Sunup? And now that I know that the Mogwai are aliens, how does this work on other planets? What happens on Venus where one day lasts 5,832 hours (or 243 Earth days) and is actually longer than a Venusian year? 61 Earth days is a long time to go without eating something, but I guess you could just walk over to the next time zone for a snack. None of these questions are answered, of course, but it's nice to see someone posing them in the story. Anyway, I enjoyed this book which has restored my faith in novelizations... such as it was. I highly recommend this if you want some extra depth to the story and some slight variances. The rest of this is personal stuff related to Gremlins, though not really about the movie or the book. First off, look at what I got for Christmas this year! [image] Yes, it's the Hallmark Caroling Gremlin ornament. I believe it was the last one in Richmond, and mama was able to get the display model as they had just started selling those the very day she went to the store. They were sold out of them when I had been there a week or so earlier, and so were all the other Hallmark stores in town as well. That's right. Be jealous. Do you remember when happy meals were awesome? In 1984, a Hardees happy meal and another $0.89 got you a Gremlins storybook with a record. [image] There were five to collect. My sister had part three, and I had part four, and we'd sit and listen to them on my Fisher Price record player. You could read along in the storybook and a ding would let the reading-impaired know when to turn the page. Of course these were condensed and some of the violence was toned down since it was a kid's product (the movie was one of two responsible for PG-13 being added to the rating system, after all), but they were great fun and an excellent reading aid. And while I'm on the subject of fast food restaurants, do you remember when they sold collectible glasses with characters on them? I don't think there were any Gremlins ones (though there were some Gremlins plastic cups), but Godfather Pizza had Goonies glasses, and Burger King had some for Star Wars. I actually have one of those for Return of the Jedi. Things were cooler in the eighties. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 15, 2022
|
Dec 26, 2022
|
Nov 14, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0425222861
| 9780425222867
| 0425222861
| 4.10
| 1,368
| Jan 01, 2008
| Jul 18, 2008
|
liked it
|
I'm assuming a hard deadline crept up on Dennis O'Neil, because you can tell this one was rushed to the printing press. It didn't end abruptly like Gh
I'm assuming a hard deadline crept up on Dennis O'Neil, because you can tell this one was rushed to the printing press. It didn't end abruptly like Ghostbusters II, but the ending could've been fleshed out just a little bit more. Actually, a lot in the second half could've been fleshed out more. There was a lot of extra info in the first half, and it worked well, but then that stopped. I think if Dennis had had a couple more months and been able to do a couple rounds of editing, stuff from the first half might've ended up on the cutting room floor, and there would've been more added in the second half. There are a couple of chapters with the Scarecrow that could've been left out completely. The only reason he's in there is to introduce another character (The Chechen) and to show that there are Batman copycats running around. However, we get his whole backstory which really belonged in Batman Begins. We also get some backstory for The Chechen and Harvey Dent, but it felt like one part in Harvey's was left open with the intention to close it up later, but it never was. The Joker does one scene pretty early in the book, but then doesn't show up again until page 125, nearly 100 pages later and almost at the halfway point. After that, things clip along faster, and it becomes a strict screenplay to page deal. I'm guessing Dennis ran out of time to make this more literary. Also, there were a few typos ("warm" instead of "warn," "willl," etc. Sloppy errors. The part where the Joker is trying to get Harvey Dent in the armored car and Batman is wrecking his Tumbler... I'm sorry, that whole section is just a mess. I don't think an editor even looked at it. The Batmobile is wrecked at one part and he's on his pod (the motorcycle thing) and guards are grabbing at his forearms. Then all of a sudden he's rolling again in the Batmobile which I assume rejuvenated itself like Christine. [image] Then the car is wrecked again and he whips out the pod. After that, he does some fancy shit with a harpooned steel line which is impossible (he wraps it around a light pole several times which he couldn't do without snagging it with his own vehicle. Thankfully the movie corrected that). Furthermore, the timing is way off with a lot of events. Something will happen, then several days will pass, then all of a sudden you're back to the day the first event happened. Sometimes Batman or the Joker or Gordon would be at one place, then two minutes later they're somewhere else with no explanation on how they teleported from point A to point B. And Bruce/Batman must be one hell of a quick-change artist. It took him approximately 1.5 seconds to get out of his tux and into the Batsuit during his party for Harvey Dent. [image] (Maybe he had an instant costume change Batpole like Adam West.) The Joker already had a razor to Rachel's mouth when Bruce was just going into his "panic room," then three seconds later he's behind the Joker, ready to fight, so either the Joker just stood there with the blade for several minutes, or Batman apparated into the room. And how Rachel got from the room where Bruce knocked out Harvey and back into the main room for the party wasn't explained either. Also, Gordon seemed to be eight places at once a couple of times. [image] (Maybe he was a spy from Marvel.) It was very difficult to keep up with it all. Aside from the impossible shit I mentioned above, so much of this story is implausible, but anyone who's seen the movie would know that already. Does nobody notice a bus backed into the front of the bank for several minutes? Wouldn't it be blocking traffic? Does nobody on the ferries notice the bombs in the engine room? It must've taken hours to rig up the explosives in the hospital, did nobody see anything? And that's all just for starters! The Joker's plans are so convoluted that there's no way he could pull all of them off. One small hiccup in any of them, and the whole thing would fall apart. He must be one hell of a clairvoyant. Unlike Batman Begins, this story isn't great when you take it away from the cinema. The pacing, action, and actors make the film work, and let's be honest here: Heath Ledger's performance made that movie. The Joker in the book is still fun, but HL's acting put it over the top. I'm not just saying that because he died while making it (16 years ago today coincidentally [1/22/24]); it really is a stellar performance. Also, every change in dialogue and action from the book/screenplay to the movie was an improvement, so just watch that instead. I enjoyed reading the book, but I don't think everyone would because it's a bit of a mess. It's a shame Dennis wasn't able to polish it up before turning it in. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 18, 2024
|
Jan 21, 2024
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1881089479
| 9781881089476
| 1881089479
| 4.09
| 1,852
| Jan 1830
| Jul 01, 1999
|
really liked it
|
Part of my read-everything-I-was-supposed-to-read-in-school-but-didn't project. This is a gem. I'm sorry I waited so long to get around to it, and not Part of my read-everything-I-was-supposed-to-read-in-school-but-didn't project. This is a gem. I'm sorry I waited so long to get around to it, and not just because I'm sure I got a pretty bad grade on the related exam. This is the only account of a regular continental soldier for the Revolutionary War. However, this was written about 50 years after the war was over, and while Martin's memory is quite good, he flubs a couple of details (normally dates). Luckily, the editor was able to fix those. Martin is a fantastic storyteller with a dry wit, though apparently an awful writer due to lack of knowledge about the most basic rules of grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. The editor of this version "silently corrected" all of that. Since this is a memoir of Martin's experiences, he glosses over the bigger picture, and the editor adds commentary for context in the footnotes. Martin's style reminds me of the way my grandfather and some other relatives tell their stories, and like those relatives, it's possible some of the tales are embellished for the sake of making the story a bit better, though I don't think any facts or truth get lost in the elaborations. I can easily see Martin just sitting on the porch, rocking away in a rocking chair and sharing these anecdotes with anybody who happened to be around to listen. Here's an example: Being pinched with hunger, I one day strolled to a place where sometime before some cattle had been slaughtered. Here I had the good luck (or rather bad luck, as it turned out in the end) to find an ox’s milt [spleen], which had escaped the hogs and dogs. With this prize I steered off to my tent, threw it upon the fire and broiled it, and then sat down to eat it without either bread or salt. I had not had it long in my stomach before it began to make strong remonstrances and to manifest a great inclination to be set at liberty again. I was very willing to listen to its requests, and with eyes overflowing with tears at parting with what I had thought to be a friend, I gave it a discharge. But the very thoughts of it would for some time after almost make me think that I had another milt in my stomach.This thing is filled with stories told in this droll manner which makes it a delight to read, and I suspect he told them so often over the course of 50 years that his delivery was also perfected, complete with winks, nods, and eye twinkles. 21st century people may wonder why Martin saw fit to eat a spleen that dogs and hogs had seen fit to leave behind. It was because he, just like everyone else in the continental army, was starving. Constantly. For the entire war. There were actually a couple of near mutinies over the matter: The men were now exasperated beyond endurance; they could not stand it any longer; they saw no other alternative but to starve to death, or break up the army, give all up, and go home. This was a hard matter for the soldiers to think upon. They were truly patriotic; they loved their country, and they had already suffered everything short of death in its cause; and now, after such extreme hardships to give up all was too much, but to starve to death was too much also. What was to be done? Here was the army starved and naked, and there their country sitting still and expecting the army to do notable things while fainting from sheer starvation.He mentioned the army was also "naked," and that isn't exactly an exaggeration. Almost every one has heard of the soldiers of the Revolution being tracked by the blood of their feet on the frozen ground. This is literally true; and the thousandth part of their sufferings has not, nor ever will be told... I think the country... showed but little modesty at the time alluded to, for she appeared to think her soldiers had no private parts; for on our march from the Valley Forge, through the Jerseys, and at the boasted Battle of Monmouth, a fourth part of the troops had not a scrip of anything but their ragged shirt flaps to cover their nakedness, and were obliged to remain so long after.I never really thought of the Revolutionary War soldiers as having to deal with the same kind of hardships that the Confederates had to deal with during the Civil War. I had learned about the starvation and ragged clothes, but I guess it had never sunk in, perhaps because I had been told about it instead of shown it. Martin does a good job of showing such things. Photography wasn't around in the 18th century, and any paintings show the soldiers decently clad and not looking completely emaciated. [image] I guess it's easy to believe this misconception when all you've seen are pictures and movies with everyone in pristine uniforms, but times were certainly tough. About 6,800 Americans died in combat. 17,000 died of disease or starvation, 8,000-12,000 of those as prisoners of war. (The British were shitheads about that. Being sent to one of their prison ships was practically a death sentence. In all fairness, we weren't great about it either, but we were certainly a lot better than they.) The British were also pretty cruel and committed atrocities that are considered flat out war crimes today. About half of the population of the colonies were loyalists to the crown, and they were mixed in every community, but sometimes the British would burn whole towns to the ground indiscriminately, kill the cattle and leave it to rot, destroy crops, etc. This was done to civilians who weren't even supporting the patriots' war effort. As you know, we came out ahead in the end, but not everyone appreciated the effort the regular army made and feel like the minutemen and militias could've done it just fine without them. Martin naturally disagrees with this assessment, and it was apparently quite a polarizing issue, much like a few issues going on today (2022). In the closing pages of his narrative, Martin takes the critics to woodshed: "Those men whom they wish to die on a dunghill, men who if they had not ventured their lives in battle and faced poverty, disease, and death for their country to gain and maintain that Independence and liberty, in the sunny beams of which they, like reptiles, are basking, they would, many or the most of them, be this moment in as much need of help and succor as ever the most indigent soldier was before he experienced his country’s beneficence." The "beneficence" to which he refers is him finally getting paid for his service 35 years after the war was over. $8.00 a month, and he could get that only if he could prove he was currently poor, which he was. Truly, no good deed goes unpunished. He also had to endure comparisons to the militias who didn't see the big deal about the regular army's circumstances. Minutemen never had to travel far, had homes to go to when the action was done (unless they lost the engagement and the British burned it down), fireplaces to sit beside, clothes to wear, blankets to sleep under, food to eat, and ammunition for their guns and artillery pieces. The army often had none of these things. I'm sure you all know a few asshats who have to turn everything into a cock-measuring contest, especially when they know they're going to come up short, and that's pretty much what was going on there. [image] As for the ammunition thing, there was one instance where they had ...a 32-pound cannon in the fort, but had not a single shot for it. The British also had one in their battery upon the Hospital Point, which, as I said before, raked the fort, or rather it was so fixed as to rake the parade in front of the barracks, the only place we could pass up and down the fort. The artillery officers offered a gill of rum for each shot fired from that piece, which the soldiers would procure. I have seen from 20 to 50 men standing on the parade waiting with impatience the coming of the shot, which would often be seized before its motion had fully ceased and conveyed off to our gun to be sent back again to its former owners. When the lucky fellow who had caught it had swallowed his rum, he would return to wait for another, exulting that he had been more lucky or more dexterous than his fellows.You must remember these were just boys (Martin was only 15 years old when he started his service and retired at the ripe old age of 22), and they behaved as boys do even when death was on the line. Besides, what else are you going to do? If retrieving a cannon ball and firing it back, and getting a couple shots of liquor is the only amusement available, wouldn't you take advantage of it? Still, I couldn't help but think of the soldiers waiting on the side lines like ball boys at Wimbledon, and dashing off to retrieve the shot the second it landed, maybe even fighting over it. If the Continental and British armies had had better aim, they could've been in the same class as Yosemite Sam and Bugs Bunny in "Bunker Hill Bunny": [image] Martin was with Washington's army some of the time, but obviously didn't see him much. However, there was one incident towards the end of the war where Martin was working with the engineers doing something one night not far from the enemy lines when the commanders ...ordered us to desist and remain where we were, and be sure not to straggle a foot from the spot while they were absent from us. In a few minutes after their departure, there came a man alone to us having on a surtout [long overcoat], as we conjectured (it being exceeding dark), and inquired for the engineers. We now began to be a little jealous for our safety, being alone and without arms, and within 40 rods of the British trenches. The stranger inquired what troops we were, talked familiarly with us a few minutes, when being informed which way the officers had gone, he went off in the same direction, after strictly charging us, in case we should be taken prisoners, not to discover [reveal] to the enemy what troops we were. We were obliged to him for his kind advice, but we considered ourselves as standing in no great need of it; for we knew as well as he did that Sappers and Miners were allowed no quarters, at least are entitled to none by the laws of warfare, and of course should take care, if taken and the enemy did not find us out, not to betray our own secret. In a short time the engineers returned and the afore-mentioned stranger with them. They discoursed together some time when, by the officers often calling him “Your Excellency,” we discovered that it was General Washington. Had we dared, we might have cautioned him for exposing himself too carelessly to danger at such a time, and doubtless he would have taken it in good part if we had. But nothing ill happened to either him or ourselves.Martin enlisted for only six or so months for his first tour and was allowed to go home on December 25th, 1776. (He reenlisted for the duration of the war the following spring). This means he missed the Trenton campaign and Washington crossing the Delaware by just one day, but at least he got to witness this about five years later: [image] (I assume this was the return trip since he went to meet the engineers alone.) I recommend this to anybody interested in learning how the common soldier saw the American Revolution and how the day to day activities were handled and perceived. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 04, 2022
|
Jul 10, 2022
|
Jul 04, 2022
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1501131427
| 9781501131424
| 1501131427
| 4.29
| 70,209
| Jun 01, 1987
| Jul 26, 2016
|
it was amazing
|
I guess technically this is 4.6532741238952462 stars rounded up to five. Well, I don't round up at 4.5, but I wanted this to show five stars in the ra
I guess technically this is 4.6532741238952462 stars rounded up to five. Well, I don't round up at 4.5, but I wanted this to show five stars in the rating even if it isn't perfect, so I had to be more specific. Sue me. It's a complete coincidence that I chose to read this now. I'd been holding onto it for months to make it this year's Spooktober read. It involves a nuclear holocaust where the US and USSR blow the ever living hell out of each other (not to mention the rest of the world doing the same) and what the survivors have to deal with. Then all of a sudden right when I start reading this (October, 2022), the real world returns to Cold War levels concerning the nuclear option with Putin and the Ukraine. Some think we're currently at the Cuban Missile Crisis level. I don't know if we're quiiiite there, but it's damn close. Closer than it's been in decades, and it's a conversation many higher-ups are having even if any media reports you see about it are buried in the side bar on pages seven or eight of the newspaper. As a result, I read this looking through a different lens than I otherwise would have a couple of months ago. I'm not concerned about the Earth, though. The Earth is going to be just fine, though I expect humanity will suffer if it manages to survive such a thing. Nuclear winter sets in for at least seven years in this, and the sun or stars aren't seen for that entire time. I don't know if that would actually happen should we have a nuclear apocalypse; I think it would clear up a lot sooner, probably within a year. I base that on absolutely nothing, but I have just as much chance of being right as the experts. After all, that kind of prediction is based on computer models and those are never right. According to said experts (any jackass with a briefcase 100 miles from home), the world was actually supposed to end a dozen times over the last 60 years due to man's detrimental influence, but not only has it not happened yet, we haven't even gotten close. Another coincidence, apropos of nothing at all, is that this is the second Robert McCammon book I've read. I just happened to read most of the first while I was house/dog sitting for some people for the first time three years ago. I just happened to be reading this, my second McCammon, when I went to dog sit for them for them the second time. (They don't travel very much). I wonder what it all means... [image] Well, maybe. We get just a couple of details about why all the countries are so upset with each other they want to destroy everything, but it's really not important. All economies are in shambles, and things are tense and falling apart everywhere. Smaller countries are nuking each other with smaller, second-rate, shoddy bombs. People are getting as prepared as they can for the US and USSR to finish the job, fleeing cities and seeking bomb shelters. The preparations are all for naught, however, and suddenly everybody everywhere is burning, doing the Neutron Dance. [image] They apparently hadn't developed the more civilized bombs that just kill all the people but leave the buildings erect. (Personally, I think they ought to make something that destroys the buildings and leaves all the people erect, but nobody asks me about these things.) We get several points of view for the big blast including one in New York... [image] ...but my favorite, and perhaps the most memorable scene in the book for me, was the one with people standing at a gas station in Kansas when the missiles erupt out of the silos in the fields all around them. I don't know why, but that scene stuck with me more than any other. This was written in 1987 but takes place on the "eve of the 21st century" (I'm assuming very late nineties), and that provides a few amusing anachronisms (if that's the right word). First off is that the USSR is still around when it had been gone for almost a decade. Cell phones are never mentioned. Boomboxes are still popular, and the National Anthem is still played at the end of the TV broadcast day on the networks. (For you whipper snappers out there, the networks didn't run programing 24 hours a day once upon a time. It went off the air between midnight and 2AM depending on where you lived, and they would play the National Anthem at that time before leaving you to look at this screen... [image] ...until the programming day started again around five or six the next morning.) Circa 1999 you could apparently get popcorn and a coke at a movie theater in New York City for $3... HAH! Get real, McCammon. And there were mainframe computers with data tapes. I could be wrong, but I think data tapes in this context went the way of the dodo long before the late nineties. These things didn't affect me enjoying the book, but I chuckled when I came across them. Such is the danger of setting a book just a decade or so in the future... Or even 30 years ahead. Remember, part of Back to the Future II was set in 2015. I'm still waiting for the flying cars, and wondering why anyone used a fax machine in 2015, especially one with a dot matrix printer. This was written at a time when nuclear power and war was a major topic. A lot of the fiction in the mid-80s, both written and visual, addressed it. The "Neutron Dance" I referred to above came out in 1983. It was a plot point in Stephen King's The Tommyknockers which also came out in 1987, and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home had a plot point concerning nuclear "wessels" when the crew traveled back to 1986. Dr. McCoy even commented on the newspaper headline "Nuclear Arms Talks Stalled." [image] Well, according to this book, they didn't and apparently got tackled on the one-yard line. This was even after Superman got rid of all the Earth's nuclear missiles by flinging them into the sun in 1987. [image] I guess everyone must've rearmed. After the big blow up, people wander here and there in the new wasteland that was once mother Earth while this theme played in my head. Then a bunch of plot stuff happens, but instead of rehashing it all here I'll suggest you just read the book or check out some of the other Goodreads reviews which provide those details. Well, except one thing. (view spoiler)[There's a character named God who has the ability to completely destroy humanity and probably all animal life on Earth as we know it. This reminded me of one of my 500 favorite songs. Enjoy. (hide spoiler)] Goodreads Terms of Service agreement dictates that one must compare this to Stephen King's The Stand if one has read both of them and plans to post a review of either (see appendix G, section 24, subsection three, paragraph 13, bullet point seven, sub-bullet point 22), and I reckon I better fulfill that contractual obligation lest I be booted off the site. If you've read both, it's impossible not to draw parallels, but don't worry: they're two completely different stories. I'm going to go on record as saying that Swan Song is the better book but King is the better writer. This does not mean that McCammon is a bad writer or that The Stand is a bad book; both of them are actually quite good. This is 900+ pages. It starts off with a bang and clips right along all the way through to the end. The Stand starts off with a bang as well. In fact, I think the first third of that book where the plague is running rampant is some of King's best writing in his entire bibliography, and I'm afraid nothing in Swan Song can even touch that part as far as quality goes. But after that it gets bogged down in minutia which is still interesting but slows the story to a crawl until we get to a lackluster climax followed by a drawn-out conclusion. Where King spends entire chapters rebuilding civilization, McCammon sums it up in a few pages, takes us to the next crisis, and it works great. However, I cared more about King's characters, and they were more believable than some of McCammon's. This is not a criticism. Characterization is probably King's strongest skill and the bar is set really high. I still cared about what happened to characters in Swan Song, but I was less upset when bad things happened to the good guys. Also, McCammon's dialog could get a tad awkward and unbelievable at times. A couple of times it was downright silly (usually when romance was involved), and I don't recall that happening in The Stand. One thing I want to point out is that McCammon is excellent at seamlessly switching a point of view from one character to the next, sometimes from paragraph to paragraph. It takes real skill to pull that off, and a lot of authors have trouble with it. (Yeah, I'm talking about you, John Grisham.) I never once got lost when McCammon did it. I don't know if King can do it as well, but I can't think of ever seeing him try that trick. Since I opened with a couple of coincidences, I suppose I'll close with another, this one regarding King/McCammon comparisons. Swan Song won the Bram Stoker award for 1987, though it was a tie. Of course you can guess with whom he split the honor: none other than Stephen King (Misery). This book was excellent, I never wanted to put it down, it kept me up past my bedtime several evenings, and I can't give it a strong enough recommendation if you enjoy post-apocalyptic horror. The terror would probably be increased if you're prone to flights of fancy and read it right now (October 2022) since we're currently wondering if Putin is going to use a nuke on Ukraine which could set off a chain reaction that would lead us to the scenario in this story. [image] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Sep 29, 2022
|
Oct 12, 2022
|
May 25, 2022
|
Mass Market Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1470319861
| 9781470319861
| 4.31
| 1,233,456
| Jun 30, 1936
| Jun 01, 2012
|
it was amazing
|
Yeah, it's 2022, and I'm still giving this full marks, racism and lost cause notwithstanding, you wanna make something of it? Normally when I listen to Yeah, it's 2022, and I'm still giving this full marks, racism and lost cause notwithstanding, you wanna make something of it? Normally when I listen to the audiobook of a book I've already read, I just add a blurb to my original review of that book. However, that review is so long that not only can I not add anything to it, Goodreads is encouraging me to delete part of it. Once upon a time you were allowed 20,000 characters in a review, then they backed that down to something around 15,000, then upped it back to maybe 18,000? Regardless, I can't fit my blurb there since I was knocking on 20,000. Most of what I have to say about this book can be found in that review, (as well as several family anecdotes related to the book and the Civil War and some of my thoughts on the war itself), so just click the link above if you give a rip. However, I will add a couple of things here. The audiobook narrated by Linda Stephens was fantastic. She did a phenomenal job. As a bonus, she has tremendous singing voice which she used to great effect when song snippets came along. I think I'm also going to make it official and state that Scarlett O'Hara is one of my favorite characters in all literature. She's definitely on the Mt. Rushmore with Roland Deschain and Severus Snape. The fourth spot changes depending on my mood, but contenders are Mowgli, Atticus Finch, Jean Valjean, Inspector Javert, and Sara Crewe. Honorable mentions include Jim Hawkins, and Ms. Havisham. One last thing. "God's nightgown!" is now part of my list of exclamations, though I don't know that it will ever replace "Hell's bells" or "great googly-moogly" which seem to come so naturally to me in moments of crisis or incredulity. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 19, 2022
|
Aug 04, 2022
|
May 19, 2022
|
Audiobook
| ||||||||||||||||
0312550677
| 9780312550677
| 0312550677
| 4.04
| 26,659
| Feb 13, 1991
| Jul 05, 2011
|
really liked it
|
Favorite new book read in 2021 4.5 stars rounded down to four. Recipe for Summer of Night. Start with the following base: [image] Mix in: [image] Favorite new book read in 2021 4.5 stars rounded down to four. Recipe for Summer of Night. Start with the following base: [image] Mix in: [image] [image] [image] Add a dash of: [image] [image] Stir gently a few times (batter will be lumpy), add a few original spices, sprinkle with holy water, and voila: Summer of Night. Actually, that's not really fair. That makes it sound like this was a rip off of several stories, and that's not the case; this is an original tale as near as I can tell, but I couldn't help but notice the similarities between this and the stories mentioned above, though a couple of them came out after this book was written. The similarities between this and It, however, are numerous (minor spoilers ahead). A monster is terrorizing the town. It comes out of the ground. It uses humans to do some of its dirty work. Said humans are killed and discarded when they can no longer be of any use. Kids are aware of the monster(s), but the adults, not so much. Kids are disappearing. Adults kind of go to la-la land when a major murderous event occurs. They deny being a part of said event, or even being present when it happened. A kid breaks his arm. There's a rock fight. They spend time at the dump. They play in the woods. They play baseball. They have a well-hidden fort. They deal with bullies which are completely psycho. One of the kids is fat. One of them wants to be a writer, and this character has a kid brother who is important to the plot. One of the kids is a hell of a trash talker. There's only one girl involved. At the end, the beast is likened to a spider. A relative is captured and held in its lair to lure the others in before they were ready. A major storm breaks during the showdown. Phosphorescent (dead) lights. The monster is confused to find itself challenged by a group of kids. It offers a truce, but lies. The list goes on and on. The number of similarities is what's holding this back from five stars for me, which I know isn't really fair, but there it is. I couldn't help but think about them every time we got to another one, and that pulled me out of the story. It's my fault for being so familiar with It which is my second favorite book, and I've read/listened to it six times. If I had hit this one first, I'm pretty sure I could easily bestow the fifth star, but I'm afraid when comparing the two, It still comes out the winner. If you aren't as familiar with It as I am, you won't have this hang up. But like I mentioned, this is not a rip off of It. It's like comparing Coraline to The Thief of Always; the similarities are noticeable to anyone who has read both, but each is still its own tale. The story was great, but I'm not going to go into too much more of that. Where this really shines is with the nostalgia factor. I was not an 11-year-old in 1960. In fact, I was negative 18 at the time, but I could relate to what the kids were doing because I was able to do a lot of it myself being a child of the 80's. My version of the book was reprinted in 2011, and it includes an introduction which shouldn't be missed, though you really ought to read it after reading the book because it would be easier to follow (and there were a couple of minor spoilers, though he tried to make them as unspoilery as possible). The intro mostly discusses the difference between being a child in the 1960's and in the first decade of the 21st century, though it includes data from the 1920s through the early 2000s. In the 1920s, and even the 1960s, a kid on summer vacation could leave his house on his bike in the morning, stay gone until suppertime, and everyone was cool with it. I could do that as well, though I had to check-in at lunch, even if it was just a phone call from a friend's house or the local pool. I was usually okay as long as my parents knew when to expect me home. Allow that today and the parents are apt to be brought before a judge for neglect and abuse. The long and short of it was that kids back then had more meaningful childhoods. [image] This is a song I've been singing for a long time, and though I didn't have as much freedom as the kids in this book, I sure had a hell of a lot more than kids do today. The freedom has slowly eroded from the 1920s onward, and now many kids are nothing but brainless zombies with their heads up their apps, swiping away on their phones, bringing up Netflix or YouTube videos to keep them occupied. (As a result of this, they have also lost any innocence kids from earlier generations got to enjoy.) They have no appreciation for riding their bikes to the video store on Friday when the new releases came out, and spending a half hour trying to decide which ones to get. (I can hear the 60s kids in here now. "You wasted a bike trip to the video store?! Lame!" And from the kids of today: "You had to ride your bike to the video store to watch a movie you wanted to see at home?! That sucks.") My video store trip was only once every week or two. The rest of the time I was riding around the neighborhood, through other neighborhoods, to various woods I knew about to build a fort, or a tree house, or climb trees, or wade through a creek, or do whatever with friends, or even do things alone. Many kids today that get to ride bikes at all must do so with helmets and pads, and can't venture further than a block or two. Some aren't allowed to climb trees. They can't play in the woods. Any sports they play are no longer pickup games they manage all by themselves, but are league deals run by grown-ups. [image] There are pros and cons to both schools of thought, but I personally find it all rather sad... I seem to be hopping on a soap box here, and I don't need to go into all of that. Suffice it to say watching the kids in this book live their lives made me appreciate what I had when I was younger even if I didn't have quite as much as they did (paradoxically because I had more than they did materially), and that accounts for much of my rating. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 03, 2021
|
Oct 17, 2021
|
Oct 03, 2021
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
1904633684
| 9781904633686
| 1904633684
| 4.13
| 28,030
| Jun 16, 1927
| 2004
|
liked it
|
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enou
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enough clues to solve the mystery himself before the big reveal. Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson show up in a deleted scene at the end of the movie.** This is definitely the weakest of the collections, and you could tell that at this point Doyle was just phoning it in for a paycheck. That doesn't mean they were bad, but we're ending on a low note here. Sad day. Still, even though the quality of the mysteries or stories had diminished, the quality of the writing is still top notch, so there's that. As with the other collections, I'll leave just a blurb about each story which might not even be a review; just stuff that was on my mind as I went through the tale. However, there is one bonus where I tell a personal story, but don't get too excited; I promise it's not worth the wait. I just wanted to talk about me. (I know. Novelty night, right?) There are a few spoilers in this review, but I'm not putting them under spoiler tags because I feel like being lazy about that in this instance. The Adventure of the Illustrious Client: ★★★✰✰ No real mystery here. Holmes tries to find a way to break up an engagement that will end up as a really bad marriage. And we get the origin of Two-Face! Well, if Two-Face had started out as a bad guy before his mishap. Dent didn't deserve his disfigurement. The dude in here definitely had it coming. The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier: ★★★✰✰ This story is one of two narrated by Holmes instead of Watson. He complains about Watson's style, but I'm afraid Watson does it better. He also mentions he keeps Watson around because Watson is stupid. (That's actually laying it on a little thick, but that's what it amounted to.) As for the case, Holmes solves it rather quickly. It reminded me of part of a John Valby song sung to the tune of the Beatles' "Yesterday." Sing it with me. Leprosy.Thank you, I'll be here all night. The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone: ★★★✰✰ (2.5 rounded up to three) Another story told in third person, and those just aren't as fun as the ones Watson narrates. Holmes ups his insufferableness in this one, and he's about as irritating as Poirot. And though he solved the case, I don't think he should be congratulating himself too much because he was up against the 1920s equivalent of these guys: [image] Seriously, the crooks in this story are pretty stupid. They may have been good at getting the diamond, but to fall for Holmes' ruse, and just... Never mind. The Adventure of the Three Gables: ★★★★✰ Three gables? Big deal. Nathaniel Hawthorne had seven. Holmes seems to have a chip on his shoulder in this because he's snarky as hell with everyone, but that's what makes this entertaining. There isn't much to the case itself compared to the others, so the characters, especially Holmes, have to carry the story. However, his barbs at the black man are particularly cutting, especially by today's standards. Actually, he'd be doxed, canceled, and whatever else people do nowadays for even the slightest bit of racism, and believe you me, there was nothing slight about it in this. I will confess that I laughed at them because, mean as they were, the retorts were rather witty. I was also laughing at the idea of trying to get this stuff past a publisher today... Not a snowball's chance in hell. The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire: ★★★✰✰ Holmes figures this out before he even leaves his house, but goes anyway just to collect the evidence to prove it. No real vampires here, just a bad, bad boy who needs a spanking, and maybe to be incarcerated for a few years. Also, this whole thing would've been no mystery at all if the wife had just said what was going on, but the silly woman wouldn't say anything so as to spare her husband's feelings? Never mind that his baby could die as a result of it; that wouldn't hurt his feelings at all. Twit. The Adventure of the Three Garridebs: ★★★✰✰ I'm starting to feel like I'm watching Hogan's Heroes where they pull one of their half dozen plots out of a hat, then make an episode around it. This is another "get this dude out of the way so I can burgle his house while he's gone" dealio. However, Watson also gets shot, and we see concern from Holmes which almost makes him human. Fear not, though; twas merely a flesh wound. The Problem of Thor Bridge: ★★★★✰ This was refreshing, but I don't know if it was refreshing because it was actually good, or if it was because Doyle was getting back to form. A real mystery. An investigation. Clues to follow-up. A case with something that hasn't been done before in the stories. I'm claiming this was actually good. Not that the others in this particular collection were bad, but some were definitely stale. The Adventure of the Creeping Man: ★★★✰✰ This would've been a four star story, but the ending dropped it. I think that's the first time that's happened for a Holmes tale. Sometimes they start off a little weak, but the ending kicks it up a notch. Normally my rating is steady throughout the story. But this went the other way, mostly because it steps out from being Holmesian and strays towards sci-fi... Mad scientist turns man into lame Thudercats villain from Plun-Darr? [image] OO-OO-AAA-AAA-AAA! PLEASE! The Adventure of the Lion's Mane: ★★★★★ This story isn't worth five stars. In fact, it's kind of lame, and I should give it two or three stars were I inclined to be objective, but I'm not. My rating is personal because it reminds me of a personal experience I'll explain momentarily. It wasn't a good experience; in fact it still ranks as one of the top five worst experiences of my life, but I like the story, and there we are. A man at the beach is found with certain injuries at the beginning of this tale, and they leave everyone confused except me because I had those same injuries once, and so did a couple of friends of mine. There are red herrings galore, but they didn't fool me due to said experience. For dog lovers: this is the story that gets this collection onto my "dead dog warning" shelf. And I must wonder what it is about people in these stories and their dying words. If you're bit by a snake, just say so. Don't cry out "It was the speckled band!" Don't nobody know what the hell you're talking about when you spit that shit out. If you're hit by a jellyfish, don't hobble up the road and gasp out "The Lion's Mane!" before keeling over dead. Help a brother out, and tell them you got stung by a jellyfish so everybody doesn't go galloping off to try to find a murderer. Are poorly chosen last words a British thing? And, yes, this one-ups the "butler did it" trope because the jellyfish did it. Anyway, bonus story time. [image] It is required of every 12-year-old boy that he should make a public spectacle of himself by having a sobbing jag in front of a crowd at least once in his life. If he chooses not to do so on the little league field by not playing little league at all, then he is condemned to do so at another time of God's choosing. Such was my hapless destiny. Picture it: Myrtle beach, August, 1991. I'm just chilling in the ocean with my friends, waiting to catch a wave with my boogie board. We knew there had been jellyfish about because one of my friends had gotten stung earlier that morning, though it was just a small spot on his arm that didn't bother him too much anymore. A wave not quite worthy of a ride slaps into me, and I suddenly light up in pain from my chest down to my ankles. I give a howl, then treat my bewildered friends to a sight they had never seen before, and likely haven't seen since, when I pop straight up out of the ocean, do the Scooby-Doo shuffle on top of the water for a full five seconds without gaining any traction, then suddenly zip to the shore with my boogie board trailing behind me like a kite. If any spectator had blinked, he could be excused for believing I had simply transported myself from one place to the other without bothering with the intervening space. Jesus may have walked on the water, but I ran on it, jack! A friend's mother was sunbathing on the beach when this occurred, and using deductive powers worthy of Sherlock Holmes, she inferred something was amiss. She ran over to see what was the matter, saw the weals already starting to form on the front of my body (not to mention a broken off tentacle that was stuck to my calf), and deduced a jellyfish had gotten me. She used the boogie board strap to get the tentacle off my leg (I had a scar there for years), and told me to rub sand on the wounds which would help the sting. This remedy, of course, is bullshit, but it does keep the patient occupied and can help dislodge any stingers that might still be stuck in the skin, and that's a step in the right direction. Everyone within earshot of my howling and yowling turned to look or even meandered over to see what all the ruckus was about. Some were disappointed that I hadn't been bitten in half by a shark which they were expecting based on all the fuss I was making, but they were ignorant of the pain associated with such a sting. Others who had experienced it themselves seemed more understanding and began offering suggestions. One was to get back in the water because salt water can help also... Get back in the water with those murderous monsters? As if! My friends momentarily joined us, for while any one of them could beat me in a foot race at any other time, I would've flat-footed past Carl Lewis on that day, and it took a while for them to catch up. One of them ran for the lifeguard to see if he had any meat tenderizer. He didn't. I was walked back to our motel across Ocean Boulevard, blubbering all the while, and I kept right on blubbering for several minutes which attracted the attention of my family, and all the dozens of other families we saw there every year. Daddy eventually snapped at me to hush that fuss because it couldn't possibly be that bad, but he saw how much attention I was getting from the girls, and figured I must've known what I was doing. Such was my father's priorities. I can assure you attention from anybody was the furthest thing from my mind, and I secretly wished I were dead because I was in agony. Later I wished I were dead because I had shown myself to be such a wimp, but nobody gave me a hard time over it. I mean, a full body massage from a jellyfish ain't nothing to sneeze at. I'd like to see how much equanimity you'd display in that situation! I spent the rest of that day at the motel in the pool or Jacuzzi (hot water actually seemed to help), and was back in the ocean the next morning. Most of us would get minor stings here and there in the ensuing years, and while mine was the worst case in our group for a while (this eventually became a point of pride), a couple years later I discovered that I had actually got off kind of easy. The marks on my body faded over the course of several days except that one spot on my leg, but another friend who got stung a couple of years later looked like someone had laid a cat 'o nine tails across her thigh, and those marks didn't disappear until years later. She was a blubbering mess too, and even though the lifeguard was able to find tenderizer for her (it's amazing what one can find when the person in trouble is an attractive woman), she still needed to take a trip to the doc in the box. At least it wasn't the hospital which is where a couple of people on the beach ended up that day. The point of all this? Even though that experience is three decades in my rearview mirror, I'm unlikely to forget what a jellyfish sting looks like even when it's described in a story, and I know the really nasty ones can kill people. I'm surprised Holmes didn't also know that. The Adventure of the Veiled Lodger: ★★★✰✰ What was this? It wasn't really a Holmes story. Holmes pretty much hears a confession, and doesn't do any detecting at all. It's a good story; it's just not Holmesian. Reminder: if your plan for murder involves a lion, be prepared for things to go drastically wrong. Hell, if your plans involve a lion at all, be prepared for things to go drastically wrong. Just ask Siegfried and Roy! (I know that was a tiger, but it comes to the same thing.) The Adventure of Shoscombe Old Place: ★★★✰✰ Ooh, a crypt case. I suppose it was fun, but still nothing to write home about when pit against the rest of the canon. You can tell he's just getting tired of these, and I'm afraid the reader is too. Still, there was an amusing line due to how the meaning of words has altered over time. Watson describes Norberton as being "so far down Queer Street that he may never find his way back again." (This supposedly meant that he owed some creditors a lot of money back in the day.) Then Norberton's employee tells us "Well, sir, when a man does one queer thing, or two queer things, there may be a meaning to it, but when everything he does is queer, then you begin to wonder." One does wonder indeed, especially when you consider he lives with his sister and has never married. Oh, the fun you can have with words and definitions. The Adventure of the Retired Colourman: ★★★✰✰ Some of the most intelligent criminals are also the dumbest. Seriously, this guy would've gotten away with murdering his wife and her lover if he'd just done the deed and left it at that. But no, he was so impressed with himself that he hired Sherlock Holmes to look into the matter. Dude, if you're doing such for the sake of appearances, engage the services of Inspector Clouseau or something, not the greatest detective of your era. Sheesh! Are these fair? Once again, some might be, but most aren't, and the question is non-applicable for a couple of them. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 02, 2021
|
Dec 10, 2021
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
0192123173
| 9780192123176
| 0192123173
| 4.28
| 66,338
| 1905
| Oct 28, 1993
|
really liked it
|
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enou
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enough clues to solve the mystery himself before the big reveal. Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson show up in a deleted scene at the end of the movie.** This verse, same as the first. A short blurb per story is the intention, but no promises. "The Adventure of the Empty House": ★★★✰✰ This is mostly a story about how Holmes survived his encounter at Reichenbach Falls in "The Final Problem" and tied up the loose ends so he could come back for more stories. A murder/mystery involving the loose end was tacked on to officially make this a Holmes tale, and now Doyle is free to resume where he left off. I think this might be the weakest story mysterywise in the canon so far, save for the aformentioned "Final Problem." Read this just to resolve the cliffhanger. Also, half a sentence in this let's us know Dr. Watson is now a widower, but this is Victorian/Edwardian England, so the details about... uhhh, what's her name's death isn't important. "The Adventure of the Norwood Builder": ★★★★✰ Holmes had to work for this one. He often has everything figured out from the git-go, and he felt he was right in this instance. All the evidence was working against him, but he was able to pull it off in the 11th hour. It's good to see him have a little bit of trouble, and the interactions with Lestrade were pretty fun. "The Adventure of the Dancing Men": ★★★★✰ [image] Nah, it wasn't quite that cool. The "dancing men" refers to a cipher. I don't consider that a spoiler since it's patently obvious, and it's also discovered early on. Here's a great quote: “What one man can invent another can discover.” Stephen King expresses the same sentiment in Mr. Mercedes when one character says "Any system created by the mind of man can be hacked by the mind of man," and that's always stuck with me. It reminds me that nothing, absolutely nothing, is foolproof. "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist": ★★★✰✰ Nothing too exciting here. The best part was Holmes sending Watson away to collect evidence which he thinks he did very well only to have Holmes rake him across the coals for botching it when he gets home. Then Holmes goes himself but doesn't fare much better. One character tells Holmes to "put that in (his) pipe and smoke it," and I thought we'd found the origin of a popular phrase, but it turns out that had been in use for several decades by the time Doyle put it here. "The Adventure of the Priory School": ★★★★★ This has the best first paragraph of all the stories. It's also a fun mystery, though not all that solvable by the reader. The story as a whole is great as well, and it's Doyle's tenth favorite. "The Adventure of Black Peter": ★★★★✰ Ah, the good old days when death by hand-thrown harpoon was actually plausible. And poor Hopkins. So proud of his theory only to have Holmes poke a myriad of holes in it in an instant and leave him standing there with his teeth hanging out. "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton": ★★★★★ Holmes and Watson try their hand at crime... at least in the eyes of the law. But will that eye ever observe them? Milverton is a blackmailer at the top of his profession, and here's how Holmes feels about him: "Do you feel a creeping, shrinking sensation, Watson, when you stand before the serpents in the Zoo, and see the slithery, gliding, venomous creatures, with their deadly eyes and wicked, flattened faces? Well, that’s how Milverton impresses me. I’ve had to do with fifty murderers in my career, but the worst of them never gave me the repulsion which I have for this fellow." This is one of the rare cases where Holmes has an emotional reaction to, well, anybody, and heaven help the person at whom he's upset. "The Adventure of the Six Napoleons": ★★★★✰ (3.5 rounded up to four) I'm afraid I saw this coming from the onset even though half the characters were barking up the wrong tree. It shares a twist found in "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle," though I probably would've guessed the solution anyway. Fun quote: After letting a reporter know about a "wrong clue," and seeing something in the paper about it later (which suits Holmes endgame), Holmes observes "The Press, Watson, is a most valuable institution, if you only know how to use it." Anything that leaves the Press with egg on their face is A-OK with me, buncha lying... well, I don't need to go into that here. "The Adventure of the Three Students": ★★★★✰ Not all of Holmes' cases involve murder, theft, blackmail, etc. Some are about a simple matter of cheating on an exam, such as this one. Three stars for the story itself. A bonus star for reminding me that I haven't seen School Ties in a long time and need to watch it again, because... well, aside from being a good movie, the cast is easy on the eyes. "The Adventure of the Golden Pince-Nez": ★★★✰✰ Thought I had guessed this one (and a guess is exactly what it was), but I was wrong. I want a bookcase that swings open to reveal a hidden room or passageway. Everyone ought to have one. At one point when Holmes is inspecting the floor rather closely, I kept seeing Ace Venture in my head. [image] My sincerest apologies to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for making such an association. "The Adventure of the Missing Three-Quarter": ★★★✰✰ Not a lot of payoff on this one; I think Doyle was just phoning it in. We find that Holmes knows almost nothing of the professional/amateur sporting world. ESPN? What's that? This actually increases rather than detracts my respect for him. In the very first Holmes story he explains that he doesn't clutter his mind with anything that would impede his ability to solve a mystery. Here's the proof of it. But there's still a missing player to find, and find him he does. "The Adventure of the Abbey Grange": ★★★★✰ This one starts with Holmes griping about Watson's sensational treatment of his cases, and Watson finally snaps "Why do you not write them yourself?" Always a great way to begin. We also get the line "The game is afoot," which actually doesn't originate with Doyle, but with Shakespeare's King Henry IV Part I. (I've never read that; I just looked it up.) Sounds like everything starts with Shakespeare. As for the story, it was great, but not quite top tier. Murder, cover-up, crime of passion, justified vengeance, etc. "The Adventure of the Second Stain": ★★★★✰ Occasionally these stories will involve a coincidence instead of a crime, but this is a case where a crime and a coincidence merge, and it was enjoyable. The second stain was the linchpin that hooked them together. Before then, Holmes was at a loss because he didn't want to consider the coincidence as being coincidental. Are these fair? A couple of them are, but mostly no. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 27, 2021
|
Nov 08, 2021
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
Hardcover
| |||||||||||||||
4.30
| 310,167
| 1892
| Oct 22, 1998
|
really liked it
|
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enou
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enough clues to solve the mystery himself before the big reveal. Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson show up in a deleted scene at the end of the movie.** I made a resolution to not review every story in the Holmes canon because that would be madness, and I have a day job, and several other things I need to take care of, but I will throw a couple of random thoughts in here for each as I go through them. The plan is to keep them to just a couple of sentences at most. We'll see how this plays out. "A Scandal in Bohemia": The one that gets it all started... and Holmes' adversary gets the better of him even if he does figure everything out. "The Red-Headed League": First Holmes story I ever read. Sixth grade reading class. And am I the only one who thought about Short Circuit 2 and the Three Stooges short "Cash and Carry" after reading this? Probably. "A Case of Identity": An elementary case for Holmes, but sometimes life just isn't fair. (view spoiler)[Man disguises himself, woos his near-sighted stepdaughter as another man, extracts a promise from her that she'll wait for him no matter what, then jilts her so she'll keep living at home and he'll have use of her stipend. (hide spoiler)] And the asshat can't even be charged with anything since he technically committed no crime. "The Boscombe Valley Mystery": A touch of Down Under Romeo and Juliet in reverse with a twist? I don't know. It was a good story, though. I like how Holmes (view spoiler)[let the murderer off since he felt it was a justifiable homicide (hide spoiler)]. "The Five Orange Pips": This concerns the KKK. It was written just 20 or so years after the first one formed and expired and before the second KKK showed up. It's weird that the KKK wasn't as well known then as it is today, even in Britain, and it's strange seeing it treated as a done deal. This also has one of my favorite scenes so far. Dude tells Holmes about some people harassing him, and Holmes tells him how to placate them. He sets out to do it immediately, yet (view spoiler)[is murdered on the way home when said harassers ambush him. (hide spoiler)] After seeing the news in the paper the next morning, Holmes states "Watson, this hurts my pride!" "The Man with the Twisted Lip": It's okay. Ricky Ricardo couldn't recognize his wife in a fake mustache either. "The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle": To hell with the goose that lays the golden egg, I want this one! "The Adventure of the Speckled Band": If I'm ever (view spoiler)[bitten by a spotted snake (hide spoiler)], I'm sure I would call it a speckled band too, and leave everyone confused as to what it was that killed me. Twit. This wouldn't have been a mystery at all if she had just said (view spoiler)["a snake got me!" (hide spoiler)] "The Adventure of the Engineer's Thumb": I sure hope he didn't rely on hitchhiking to get around town. Maybe Pee Wee could help him out. [image] "The Adventure of the Noble Bachelor": I wonder if Doyle was himself jilted, for this is the second story in here concerning such. "The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet": I hope the coronet in this story looked better than this ugly thing. And I don't mean Prince Charles, (though I hope it looked better than him too). [image] I mean, it's topped with a gold plated ping-pong ball for Christ's sake. Trust me, beryls are better. "The Adventure of the Copper Beeches": [image] That cartoon really doesn't have much to do with the story, but it still didn't stop me from thinking about it. Are these fair? Not a chance. I did figure some of them out before the reveal, but that's only because I've seen similar plots in other stories, TV shows, movies, etc. These are over a hundred years old, after all. If I came to them fresh, innocent, and inexperienced, there's no way I could've found out what was going on before Holmes spelled it out for us. He's busy finding clues, and we know he's found some things, but the reader doesn't see what Holmes sees; just that he's seen something. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Sep 17, 2021
Apr 14, 2011
|
Sep 29, 2021
Apr 30, 2011
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||||
4.13
| 356,566
| Mar 25, 1902
| Jul 01, 2001
|
it was amazing
|
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enou
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enough clues to solve the mystery himself before the big reveal. Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson show up in a deleted scene at the end of the movie.** This is a great story even if it does have a couple of holes in it. It was published serially, and Doyle had to clean up a minor matter in the last segment, but he did it well. As much as I like it, I'm still not sure why it is considered the measuring mark for all Holmes tales. I personally preferred The Valley of Fear over this one when I first read all of them 10 years ago; I'll find out if it still holds up soon. There were also a couple of short stories I thought were better, but this is still great, worth a read, and worth the reread. Doyle likes to slip a bit of history in some of his tales, and he gives us a bit here about neolithic man and the ruins they left behind. It's just a few sentences mentioned in passing while Watson is touring the moor, but it helps bring the scenery to life in the readers mind. It's those small touches that make me appreciate Doyle's writing all the more. Holmes is absent for a good portion of this, but Watson is up to the task of carrying the story, and I appreciate Holmes' appearance even more when he finally does show up; he's easily the most entertaining character in all of these stories since he can be such a cockwagon. He's not too insufferable in this one, but still amusing. I'm not sure what it is, but I've always had a soft spot for England's moorlands and stories set there. I've never seen them, and have never been to England, but if I ever get over there I'm going to make a point to check them out. Matters explored in The Literary Detective by John Sutherland: Wanted: deaf-and-dumb dog feeder Is this fair? Nope, I don't think so. There were clues, but a crucial piece is withheld until the last moment, and when Holmes discovers it, everything else falls in place. Then it becomes more of a howcatchem than a whodunnit, and will they get it done in time? Early on, I ventured a guess that one character that was briefly mentioned early in the story was going to be the culprit, but I was wrong. However, it was one of that character's relatives, so I'd like a minor kudos. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
3
|
Oct 21, 2021
Jul 2011
Feb 1993
|
Oct 22, 2021
Jul 07, 2011
Feb 07, 1993
|
Aug 30, 2021
|
Mass Market Paperback
| ||||||||||||||||||
1420925539
| 9781420925531
| 1420925539
| 4.14
| 458,833
| 1887
| Jan 01, 2005
|
really liked it
|
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enou
**Part of my Murder by Death project (but just barely) explained here where I try to determine whether or not a book is fair by giving the reader enough clues to solve the mystery himself before the big reveal. Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson show up in a deleted scene at the end of the movie.** 3.5 stars rounded up to four. This is the story that introduces us to Holmes and Watson, and it's actually that part that I enjoy the most; the mystery was secondary. Doyle created two great characters here, and it's a treat to see how they meet and become friends. I imagine it would be hard to be friends with Holmes since he's an arrogant jerk, yet he isn't insufferable like Poirot. I laugh at Holmes and cheer him on when he's jacking everyone up, but I sometimes want to kick Poirot for doing the same thing. It's a very fine line. As for the mystery, it was fine. This sets the formula I believe Doyle uses in most of his short stories. A crime is described, Holmes solves it, then explains how he got there. You see some of the action play out, but most of it is spelled out later after Holmes has pronounced "here's your man," and turned him over, leaving everyone around him (not to mention the reader) going "wait, what?" This particular book has a long section in the middle where we leave Holmes and Watson and we get a backstory on the murderer, and what drove him to do it. I was fine with that part, but a lot of people have a problem with it. I understand why since it is a rather jarring and unexpected shift. I doubt readers in 1887 would've had as big a problem with it since it was the first Holmes story and they didn't have anything to compare it to. However, this story and the one following it didn't sell but so well. Sherlock Holmes didn't become SHERLOCK-FREAKING-HOLMES in the eyes of the masses until the short stories that followed the first two books. But let's not judge Doyle too harshly here. He was only 27 years old when he wrote this, and he did the whole thing in just three weeks! Taking all that into consideration, I'd say this is fantastic. I dare you to do better. The Mormons get raked across the coals in this, but that was the fashion at the time. I'm sure Doyle would've changed his tune if he had ever heard them sing. (They do "All Creatures of our God and King" even better than Mr. Bean!) Plus, I believe his description of the American desert was Tolkien's inspiration for Mordor. I mean, consider this: Mordor? Mormons? Need I go on? It's all elementary if you just pay attention. Why are you looking at me like that? [image] Well, I never... Though, I don't reckon I can really argue with that. Oh well. Is this fair? Hell no, but I don't think Doyle meant for it to be. It's more of a story to show us how ingenious Holmes is rather than one we're supposed to figure out for ourselves. I understand fans were so frustrated with that aspect of Doyle's stories that the solvable mystery came about as a result of them. This must be true because I read it somewhere on the internet. However, I coulda swore I figured some of them out before the reveal when I read all of these 10 years ago. More research seems to be required. The game is afoot! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Aug 31, 2021
Feb 15, 2011
|
Sep 12, 2021
Feb 20, 2011
|
Aug 30, 2021
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0140437010
| 9780140437010
| 0140437010
| 4.11
| 9,424
| Jan 01, 1885
| Jun 24, 1999
|
really liked it
|
3.5 stars rounded up to four. Sometimes it's good to see things from the enemy's point of view [1], so I decided to give this a whirl. It took a long t 3.5 stars rounded up to four. Sometimes it's good to see things from the enemy's point of view [1], so I decided to give this a whirl. It took a long time to read, but not because it was boring. Firstly I enjoy fiction more than nonfiction, so even starting this was an accomplishment. Secondly, it's rather weighty, and I soon found it couldn't be used as the bedtime book if I wished to retain any information gleaned from it, so I devoted that reading time to lighter fare such as my Superman comic book project. I commenced reading this in August, but also had to deal with my monthly James Bond reading project. Then the new Stephen King book came out, and being rather pertinacious in hitting those immediately upon release, I dove right into it though I kinda wish I had stuck with the Grant book and delayed Holly instead because it kinda sucked, but you can't win them all. Then we were up to Spooktober which has its own reading rules. Ditto December. Then it was the new year, and I just wasn't in the mood for Grant, and I had to contend with my 2024 monthly Harry Potter project, then it was tax season, and reading this was demanding too much of a tired brain, so I went with a few novelizations which is pretty much literary junk food. Besides, the section I was in (about the third quarter of the book) had become tedious, and I had no impetus to step back into it, but I found out later there was a good reason for that which I'll go into shortly. I finally made a big push at the end of April because I wanted to be done with it, and amazingly the writing improved, so it was no problem to finish[2], and here we are. I say all that mostly because I'm more interested in my motivations than you are, though that doesn't stop me from sharing them anyway, but also to point out that none of those excuses would've stopped Grant from reading something he had committed himself to. The man wrote this 640 page, small-print book in about nine months while he was on his death bed. (It took me that long to read it, which is pathetic.) Such an accomplishment would be impressive even if he were perfectly healthy and hale, but to do it while dying from throat cancer is nothing short of amazing. Plus, the writing was great with the exception of that one section I mentioned earlier. James McPherson, the dude who wrote the introduction, explains it better than I can, so I'll let him do it. In April 1885, when Grant had written a bit more than half the narrative... he suffered a hemorrhage that appeared to leave him at death's door. But by an act of will, and with the help of cocaine for the pain, he recovered and returned to work... (This section was) written during periods of intense suffering and sleepless nights... The narrative bogs down in details; digressions and repetition creep into the text... Grant's narrative (faltered) in these chapters.This explains so much. That third section is filled to the brim with discussion of tactics during Civil War battles, and I'm afraid tactics bore me unless I'm on the battlefield and can visualize them myself. I like reading about strategy, but tactics are only useful to me if I'm involved in a fight. That's why this book loses an entire star. It's a shame most of that section concerns the battles that took place in my stomping grounds. Rumors persisted for years that Mark Twain wrote, or helped to write, or heavily edited the book. The two were friends, after all. However, this is a myth. The original manuscript still exists and is entirely in Grant's hand. (Besides, Twain would never have written that section I've already bitched about twice.) Some passages are Twainesque, though, and that probably fuels the rumor. For example, when Grant is discussing dueling, he states "I do not believe I ever would have the courage to fight a duel. If any man should wrong me to the extent of my being willing to kill him, I would not be willing to give him the choice of weapons with which it should be done, and of the time, place and distance separating us, when I executed him." I could easily hear Twain putting it just that way. Grant's memoirs cover his early life for about 40 pages, the Mexican war for another 50 or so, followed by 30 pages of this and that between that war and the next. The remaining 520 pages are dedicated to the Civil War, or what he calls The Rebellion. I think he refers to his presidency in one sentence in the conclusion, and he simply states "when I was president, I" something, something, something, and even that referred to something that went on during the war. It would be nice to have his thoughts on what happened in the ensuing 20 years, but it's kind of hard to keep writing when you're dead. (He croaked about a week after he finished this.) I bet this could've been a five star book if he'd had a chance to go back and clean up a few things. He got a few facts wrong, though these are corrected by the editor. The gist is right, but sometimes numbers and names (or the spelling) is incorrect. I'm sure all of that could've been polished if he'd had more time. The problem with taking so long to read something is that I have now forgotten why I made a note of certain page numbers and quotes for this review. Obviously something interested me. Let's see if I still find them interesting. "P. 168 - Buckner command:" Grant has just taken Fort Donelson from Generals Floyd and Pillow who were in command when it fell. They escaped, and General Buckner was suddenly the commanding officer tasked with duty of officially surrendering the fort. Grant and Buckner had known each other rather well before the war. "In the course of our conversation, which was very friendly, he said to me that if he had been in command I would not have got up to Donelson as easily as I did. I told him that if he had been in command I should not have tried it the way I did." Being able to accurately size up his opponents and adjust his strategy is one of the many qualities that made Grant a fantastic general. (Being descended from Confederate stock, it pains me to praise the man, but I must give credit where credit is due. He was a beast of a General, one of the best not only in American history but in world history as well.) "P. 193 - bottom 'the press.'" Ah. This shows that nothing has changed with the fourth estate in over 150 years. After the war, he traveled a lot and met many people, all of whom had opinions on the war. "Correspondents of the press were ever on hand to hear every word dropped, and were not always disposed to report correctly what did not confirm their preconceived notions, either about the conduct of the war or the individuals concerned in it... On one occasion a correspondent put in my mouth the very charge I had so often refuted..." (He was defending General Buell's loyalty to the Union, but nobody wanted to hear that.) "P. 207 - E.G. of Monday morning quarterbacking of Halleck (well deserved):" For those who don't know, General Halleck was the top dog for a long time during the war; the most important man you've never heard of. He was a genius in some areas but completely feckless in others, and most of his officers simply ignored him. (McClellan called him "helplessly stupid," and that sums it up pretty well.) Since he was Grant's superior for a while, Grant had to deal with him, but it rarely went well. On a couple of occasions, Halleck left his comfy desk in DC and assumed command in the field. It's like when the CEO of a company comes down to look at the day-to-day operations. He makes suggestions, and while it's painfully obvious to everyone else that the man doesn't have a fucking clue how things work in the bowels of the organization, they have to play along while he's there, then fix it later after he's gone. Halleck took over field commands around Cornith, and Grant feels that had things been done differently, a lot of very bloody battles could've been avoided including Stone's River, Chickamauga, Knoxville, Chattanooga, and possibly Atlanta and Vicksburg. In short, the war might've ended much sooner. Grant criticizes, but he does so diplomatically. And let's not be too harsh. They did manage to capture an important railroad junction with hardly any bloodshed at all. The fact that the entire Confederate army in the western theater got away, well, I'm sure that could've happened to anybody. "P. 238 - can admit when he was wrong:" "I was at first disposed to disapprove of this move as an unnecessary side movement having no especial bearing upon the work before us; but when the result was understood I regarded it as very important. Five thousand Confederate troops left in the rear might have cause us much trouble and loss of property while navigating the Mississippi." I suppose I marked this to show an example of Grant's humility. He didn't make very many mistakes, but he admitted them when he did. "P. 265 - 12-year-old son Frederick:" I found this rather amusing. Grant's son periodically joined him throughout the war until Vicksburg where he was shot in the leg, got an infection, and typhoid, and everything, though he made a full recovery and didn't have to have his limb amputated (which was SOP back then), probably because of his dad's rank and influence. During the Port Gibson campaign: My son accompanied me throughout the campaign and the siege, and caused no anxiety either to me or to his mother, who was at home. He looked out for himself and was in every battle of the campaign. His age, then not quite thirteen, enabled him to take in all he saw, and to retain a recollection of it that would not be possible in more mature years.I've heard of take-your-kids-to-work day, but this is ridiculous. One time Grant sneaked away while Frederick was still asleep, but once the boy woke up and heard a battle raging down the road, he followed him there. Grant didn't have any food or a horse for him, but that didn't matter; Frederick foraged around for vittles and found an ancient horse to use for a while. "Caused me no anxiety." Puh-LEASE! This brings up something else. Grant was not always right about things. He sometimes exaggerated the North's successes and South's bad leadership, but the victors get to write the histories. And while I said he admitted mistakes, he sometimes also downplayed them and tried to shift blame. For example, the Battle of the Crater was an unmitigated disaster for the Yankees. He was in full command at that point and signed off on the maneuver even if it wasn't his idea and he wasn't 100% keen on it, but the buck stops with him on that one, just like it did with Lee for Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg. Grant lays a lot of the blame with Burnside and Ledlie (and they certainly deserve the lion's share), but it couldn't have been done without Grant's okay. That part is bad enough, but there's one part that's worse. Grant's assessment of Sherman's march to the sea is so full of shit that this book ought to be sold with a septic tank. "Strict injunctions were issued against pillaging, or otherwise unnecessarily annoying the people; but everything in shape of food for man and forage for beast was taken." Grant used adjectives sparingly, but as you can see, when he did decide to toss one in he used the wrong one. "Strict." Bah. Those may have been included in the official orders, but Sherman did nothing to stop this war crime. "I do not believe there was much unwarrantable pillaging considering that we were in the enemy's territory and without any supplies except such as the country afforded." ... !!! What planet is this guy living on? Maybe he wrote that part right after he swabbed his throat with cocaine. The people at the South became so frantic at this time at the successful invasion of Georgia that they... even liberated the State convicts under promise from them that they would serve in the army. I have but little doubt that the worst acts that were attributed to Sherman's army were committed by these convicts, and by other Southern people who ought to have been under sentence -- such people as could be found in every community, North and South -- who took advantage of their country being invaded to commit crime. They were in but little danger of detection, or of arrest even if detected.Now, I've no doubt that freed convicts were involved in the chaos, but to lay it all at their feet and to suggest that the Yankees were mostly blameless... Wow. And they say Goebbels was good at dissembling. Another particular: Sheridan was a great general and a valuable asset to Grant and the Union. They were frequently in contact, but there is not one mention of his, shall we say, disputatious nature. Shit, let's call it what it is. The man was so thoroughly loathed by everybody, even on his own side, that nobody would have anything to do with him. It's possible that if he had been at the Grand Review of the Armies after the war that some other generals wouldn't have shown up or they might've started another Civil War. Grant took care of this by giving Sheridan some busy work and sending him west to track down General Smith who surrendered before Sheridan got there, but I don't recall Grant mentioning that. This just shows, once again, that Grant is a bit of a class act in his own way. And yet another particular: The American Civil war was... well, I don't want to go into all of it or I'll be here forever. There's a reason it's one of the most studied wars in history, but it was very strange. Take this scene in Appomattox just after Lee and Grant have taken care of the surrender. I was accompanied by my staff and other officers, some of whom seemed to have a great desire to go inside the Confederate lines. They finally asked permission of Lee to do so for the purpose of seeing some of their old army friends, and the permission was granted. They went over, had a very pleasant time with their old friends, and brought some of them back with them when they returned.In what other war does this kind of thing happen? It can't possibly be unique to ours, but damned if I can recall another. There was the Christmas Truce during WWI, but that was early in the war and they sure didn't feel that way four years later when it was over. At the 50th anniversary of Gettysburg (or maybe the 25th; I disremember which), Yankees and Rebels both went. People who had been involved in Pickett's Charge somewhat reenacted it. The Yankees stood at their line while the Rebels walked the mile to the high water mark. When they met, they embraced, joked around, etc. etc. etc. If the actual combatants can get over it, why are we trying to restart the war 160 years later? You may recall that I mentioned he spelled a few things wrong, and he did so in that last quote. The editor corrected these the first time it happened with a parenthetical insert or a foot note if further explanation was needed, but he left the rest as Grant wrote them. That nearly drove me crazy when it happened in a place with which I'm familiar. He mentioned "Burkesville Junction," but it's actually Burkeville without an "s". This is just outside of Richmond, so I'm quite familiar with it, and he mentioned it a lot in the couple of chapters when he was chasing Lee to Appomattox. I shouldn't be so hard on him, though. He wasn't a native, and for someone who was all over the place for a few years, he's bound to make a few mistakes with local geographic nomenclature. I'd hold him to higher standards if he didn't die as soon as he finished the book, but that being the case, I think I'll give him a pass. This is a must read for anyone interested in the War Between the States. The first hand account from someone who was more responsible to winning that war than anyone else is invaluable. It's not perfect, and you can argue with his conclusions, but he called it like he saw it. [1]: Before you take me to task for identifying with the Confederates, please see my Gone with the Wind review which clarifies things a bit; there's no need to put the same information on here twice (and there wouldn't be enough room for it anyway even if I did feel so compelled). It probably won't change your opinion, but at least you won't be attacking me ignorantly; you'll be informed. Also, read it only if you're feeling brave, for it's quite long. [2]: I did start another book during this time, but that's only because I met a friend for supper in Farmville which is just next to Appomattox. It's my custom to take a book with me to read when I'm waiting for someone, and it seemed imprudent to be seen reading a book with Grant's face on the cover in the very place where he had conducted some of his meanness and emerged the victor without great difficulty to effectively bring the war to a close (not to mention a place where some people still refer to it as "The War of Northern Aggression.") Final thought: Granddaddy had a copy of this book. I've no doubt that he read it, and I'd like to know how he felt about it, especially since we both sympathize more with the southern side due to family history. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 07, 2023
|
May 2024
|
May 09, 2021
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
156389100X
| 9781563891007
| 156389100X
| 3.49
| 1,399
| Jan 1993
| Aug 01, 1993
|
really liked it
|
Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from Batman: Venom. Between that (mid 1991) and Azrael (early 1993), I have six comic books with Part of my Batman comic book reread project. Continued from Batman: Venom. Between that (mid 1991) and Azrael (early 1993), I have six comic books with random villains, none of the biggies. I think I got them because they relate to ongoing soap stuff. Batman takes on Harold as his IT man in the batcave. Tim Drake's father gets better, which means Tim has to join him. Luckily the mansion next to Wayne manor is for sale, and the Drakes buy it, which is incredibly convenient for Robin. Batman also acquires Ace (his dog) somewhere in this time frame, but I don't have that issue. Then comes this story, which I officially give 4.5 stars, rounded down to four. I tried to rate it as a standalone story, but I can't seem to do it. This introduces us to Jean-Paul Valley, aka Azrael. I know what's in store for him during the Knightfall/Knightquest/Knightsend story line, and the anticipation makes me quite excited, so I may be giving this higher marks that it deserves. This is an origin story for Azrael, and the editors and writers knew where he was going when they started. That makes the story so much better than most origin tales as there are no continuity errors that need to be creatively explained or glossed-over later on which always seems to happen when you make an origin story after the fact. This often slipped into second-person narration which always annoys me, and that's the main thing that kept the fifth start at bay. The writers weren't addressing the reader, but one character was addressing another off-page for a couple of pages, and... ugh. It's just a personal preference thing. But the artwork was superb, the story was exciting, interesting, and it's a perfect set-up for things to come in the next couple of years. I don't have that year's worth of books between this and the first Knightfall trade paperback, so here's a summary as I understand it. (1/4/21 update: There's a trade paperback with a lot of those issues in it which I got for Christmas! The review for that is linked at the end of this review.) Batman takes Azrael under his wing and he and Robin try to train him as an assistant and deprogram him of his more murderous tendencies. Both Batman and Azrael seek justice, but Azrael goes straight to final jeopardy whereas Batman never does. Meanwhile, a noob named Bane starts a master plan intended to bring down the dark knight which starts by simply monitoring him. Batman begins to be overworked due to Bane arranging matters behind the scenes which keeps him hopping. He dwells more and more on Jason Todd's death, can't concentrate, and refuses to get enough rest. Batman fails to catch a couple of bad guys which makes him doubt his efficacy, and Bane tests his limits by giving a couple of his adversaries "venom," a drug that makes them incredibly strong. After a year of this, Batman is just plumb wore out. Then Bane... well, that's really the start of the Knightfall tale, so I'll hold off until that review. Fun ads from the handful of books mentioned at the start of this review: [image] Remember once upon a time when you could rent video games from the video store? I bugged the hell out of Master Video when the first Sonic came out, checking to see if other people had brought it back yet, and it took several days for me to get a copy. It was totally worth the wait, and eventually I was able to save enough money to buy it... I can't believe that was almost 30 years ago... Wow. But you know what wasn't worth the wait? [image] Thank God I didn't go see this in the theater. The commercials made it look kind of cool. I mean, I was 13 years old, still liked cartoon/real people mixed movies, and all that jazz. I caught a little bit of it on TV eventually, and wow, does it suck. Actually, I don't remember a thing about it other than I thought it was terrible, and that's enough to keep me from checking it out again. But you know what isn't terrible? [image] It was odd seeing this ad since I know this came out in 1984, because I coulda swore I saw it before it was released on VHS in 1992. Anyway, it's with us now, and I think it should be required viewing for everybody. In fact, check it out here. And ignore the 2012 remake because that sucks a Pygmy's rectum. Next checkpoint: Prelude to Knightfall ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Oct 10, 2020
|
Oct 11, 2020
|
Oct 03, 2020
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0345351959
| 9780345351951
| 0345351959
| 4.05
| 2,826
| Feb 1988
| Jun 1988
|
really liked it
|
Four stars, but does it deserve them? No, probably not. My love for this is personal and rooted in nostalgia. This is a novelization of the original sc Four stars, but does it deserve them? No, probably not. My love for this is personal and rooted in nostalgia. This is a novelization of the original screenplay and not the finished movie, but the changes were general and it's basically the same story. As always, novelizations are subpar to real books since they're just telling the story you see on the screen and not high quality literary works, but I love this movie and it was a load of fun to read it. If I had no prior acquaintance with the film, and were treating it as just a novel, then this would be two stars at best. There are several dorky moments, dialogue that's a bit stilted, scenes and decisions that don't make a lot of sense, etc. But it's fantasy, and that's kind of the way it's supposed to be. And since I know the movie, my mind made up for all of the shortcomings by correcting them. Being blessed with an active imagination, my brain played out all the scenes in visually stunning, full technicolor, and I loved every bit of it. After all, the models are fantastic. Take General Kael for instance. [image] I mean, even if he was a complete tard or something (which he isn't), this is what a villain should look like in a fantasy tale. That face mask! And even though he's an evil dick, we shouldn't judge him too harshly; he had no choice but to be bad. I mean, really, how well do you think you would've turned out if you'd been named after the foulest cabbage on God's green Earth, and then had to suffer the indignity of it being misspelled? Not very good at all, I'd wager. And speaking of names, if I ever have a daughter, I'm going to name her Bavmorda. [image] Yeah, she's a vicious bitch, but she still has the coolest name in all fiction. The biggest change in characterization for major characters came with Madmartigan, but I understand Val Kilmer was responsible for that. [image] Book Madmartigan is pretty awesome, but the movie version is FROCKING AWESOME -SOME-some. So, the movie is the way to go if you're new to this story. Also, it has a kickass theme which has actually been stuck in my head on and off for the past couple of weeks, but I didn't mind... too much. I could sing this movie's praises all day, and the story's as well. It truly is what fantasy should be: good, dorky fun that doesn't take itself too damn seriously. Recommended only for fantasy lovers who aren't wantonly cynical. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 10, 2020
|
Aug 19, 2020
|
Aug 08, 2020
|
Mass Market Paperback
| |||||||||||||||
0751525677
| 9780751525670
| 0751525677
| 3.92
| 37,070
| Aug 27, 1982
| 1983
|
it was amazing
|
Favorite new book read in 2020 Five stars, but it teeters between 4.5 and five. Stephen King, who is known for bloat in his works, nailed this one pret Favorite new book read in 2020 Five stars, but it teeters between 4.5 and five. Stephen King, who is known for bloat in his works, nailed this one pretty good. It was 200 pages, and maybe 10 or 15 at most could've been excised, but even those extra pages were still enjoyable, so another slam dunk for the Different Seasons novella collection. I haven't seen the movie for this one, and after reading the synopsis a few minutes ago, I think I'll keep it that way even if it does have Brad Renfro and Ian McKellan. It seems to be more in line with how most SK adaptations go: great book, shit movie. And really, with source material like this, the only direction any alteration can go is down. It looks like the book is much, much darker, and the darkness is really what makes this story shine... heh heh heh. Anyway, I also must confess I'm an idiot. I kept thinking Johnny Depp (around age 40) was in this movie, and I assumed he must be Todd, the 13-17 year-old, blond-haired, blue-eyed main character, and I occasionally wondered what bonehead made that casting call and if they still had a job. But Johnny Depp wasn't in this. He was in Secret Window, another Stephen King story I haven't read or watched, and I was just confused. There isn't really any hero in this book. There are a couple of minor characters who help to bring the baddies down, but this story focuses on the villains. You can't even call them anti-heroes; they're both just evil fucks who are eventually at odds with each other yet have to work together for the sake of self-preservation because their relationship has gotten rather convoluted. It's a great story, but if you're looking for a good versus evil thing, you're apt to be disappointed because the good is conspicuously absent. This touches on a subject that has become extremely sensitive the past few years: guns and mass shootings. It's not the focus, but it goes into the thoughts and desires behind it a couple of times. SK has gladly let Rage go out of print, though Cain Rose Up is still around, and so is this. This also hit pretty close to home for me because I too had a preternatural interest in Nazis when I was in middle and high school. Not neo-Nazis... [image] ...but the real ones from WWII. But unlike Todd, my interest was historical and academic. They were terrible but also amazing. Germany was a completely destroyed country, ground under the heel of its enemies. Then Hitler and these guys come along, turn it into a superpower and proceed to stand the entire world on its head for several years. Therein lies my fascination, and the concentration camp atrocities were tied up in that. Any defense I make of those statements will never be good enough for most people, but luckily someone else has already explained it. Take it away Dr. McCoy, Scotty, Mr. Spock, and Captain Kirk. (Dialogue from the Star Trek episode "Space Seed" used without permission.) [image] Captain James T. Kirk: Name: Khan Noonien Singh. Mr. Spock: From 1992 through 1996, absolute ruler of more than a quarter of your world, from Asia through the Middle East. Dr. McCoy: The last of the tyrants to be overthrown. Scotty: I must confess, gentlemen. I've always held a sneaking admiration for this one. Captain James T. Kirk: He was the best of the tyrants and the most dangerous. They were supermen in a sense. Stronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring. Mr. Spock: Gentlemen, this romanticism about a ruthless dictator is... Captain James T. Kirk: Mr. Spock, we humans have a streak of barbarism in us. Appalling, but there, nevertheless. Scotty: There were no massacres under his rule. Mr. Spock: And as little freedom. Dr. McCoy: No wars until he was attacked. Mr. Spock: Gentlemen! Captain James T. Kirk: Mr. Spock, you misunderstand us. We can be against him and admire him all at the same time. Mr. Spock: Illogical. Captain James T. Kirk: Totally. I put the important parts in bold, and yeah, I'm afraid it's like that. I remember one picture in my eighth grade sketchbook that rather concerned my art teacher because it depicted a concentration camp with a crematory and bones and what not, and a swastika on the ground, and all sorts of fun stuff. He cautiously asked about it, but once I explained that it was the Nazis getting cooked after the camp had been overrun by the allies, he looked rather relieved, at least for a moment because it was still people getting broiled, after all. I guess I can understand his confusion now. And hell, I think Vega from Street Fighter II was pushing a wheelbarrow of smoking bones, and while he was a good guy in my drawing, he doesn't exactly look like an ally. [image] "It's the claw, isn't it?" SF II characters showed up in my drawings all year long if I recall, because I am nothing if not single-minded once I get fixated on something. And M. Bison actually kind of looks like a Nazi, so it was easy to put them together from time to time. [image] "It's the hat, isn't it?" Totally. What the hell does any of this have to do with Apt Pupil? I seem to have strayed again. Well, at least I talked about the novella at the beginning of this review. Check it out if you can handle some pretty heavy subject matter. (Torture, rape, murder, sadism, etc. for humans and animals alike. All the biggies.) ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 26, 2020
|
May 30, 2020
|
May 26, 2020
|
Paperback
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4.29
|
really liked it
|
Jul 02, 2024
|
May 28, 2024
|
||||||
3.87
|
really liked it
|
Dec 18, 2023
|
Nov 29, 2023
|
||||||
4.09
|
really liked it
|
Dec 05, 2023
|
Nov 29, 2023
|
||||||
4.15
|
really liked it
|
Oct 18, 2023
|
Oct 04, 2023
|
||||||
4.41
|
really liked it
|
Oct 10, 2023
|
Sep 28, 2023
|
||||||
3.93
|
really liked it
|
Dec 26, 2022
|
Nov 14, 2022
|
||||||
4.10
|
liked it
|
Jan 21, 2024
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
||||||
4.09
|
really liked it
|
Jul 10, 2022
|
Jul 04, 2022
|
||||||
4.29
|
it was amazing
|
Oct 12, 2022
|
May 25, 2022
|
||||||
4.31
|
it was amazing
|
Aug 04, 2022
|
May 19, 2022
|
||||||
4.04
|
really liked it
|
Oct 17, 2021
|
Oct 03, 2021
|
||||||
4.13
|
liked it
|
Dec 10, 2021
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
||||||
4.28
|
really liked it
|
Nov 08, 2021
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
||||||
4.30
|
really liked it
|
Sep 29, 2021
Apr 30, 2011
|
Sep 21, 2021
|
||||||
4.13
|
it was amazing
|
Oct 22, 2021
Jul 07, 2011
Feb 07, 1993
|
Aug 30, 2021
|
||||||
4.14
|
really liked it
|
Sep 12, 2021
Feb 20, 2011
|
Aug 30, 2021
|
||||||
4.11
|
really liked it
|
May 2024
|
May 09, 2021
|
||||||
3.49
|
really liked it
|
Oct 11, 2020
|
Oct 03, 2020
|
||||||
4.05
|
really liked it
|
Aug 19, 2020
|
Aug 08, 2020
|
||||||
3.92
|
it was amazing
|
May 30, 2020
|
May 26, 2020
|