Saturday, April 5, 2014

Looking For Alaska by John Green


Title: Looking For Alaska
Author: John Green
Publisher: Penguin
Rating: WARTY!

Audio novel almost acceptably read by Jeff Woodman.

I wasn't impressed by John Green's debut novel and more than I was with his novel Paper Towns. It's living testimony to the fact that people who hand out book awards, hand them out from their ass, where their head is. But take my advice: if you want to write 'great literature' and win such awards, the secret is to include multiple quotes from dead people, preferably men, and you're almost half-way there. Make them foreign dead people and you are half-way there. Include some bone-headed words about nature conjoined with spiritualism, and you're three-quarters the way there. Don’t worry at all about your writing style. That's irrelevant in great (perhaps) literature.

And Green is quite obviously trying oh-so hard to write literature, isn’t he? Given that what’s classed as such is all-too-often anachronistic, irrelevant, tedious, pedantic, and boring, Green succeeds admirably. In this one, he sets up his template for all his novels (at least the two I've suffered through). You need a smug, spoiled, self-centered, clueless, uninteresting guy, a quirky side-kick, and a female bitch, and you're there. In this case the tedious male lead is Miles Halter tells his story in first person PoV which is all-too-typically horrible in any novel, and which seems to be the trope du jour in YA fiction these days. To be fair, in this novel it’s not completely cringe-worthy, just annoyingly smug.

Halter's life is so utterly devoid of anything of utility that he spends it memorizing the last words of the rich and famous. He's never actually read anything by those purported 'greats' of literature, just their biographies, and all he remembers of those are their dying words. With this more than ample qualification, he decides he's ready to launch himself upon life, and he goes off to boarding school at the age of 16. His parents evidently have no objection to this, not even financially, yet somehow he's classed not with the well-to-do students, but with the riff-raff.

On his first day there he meets all the riff-raff he will ever need to know. No new people need apply. His roommate, Chip(!), is known as "The Colonel". Because Halter is so skinny, he's named 'Pudge'. Oh how hilarious is the irony! Halter immediately falls head-in-ass in "love" with a girl. Alaska Young isn’t; that is to say she doesn’t come across as a sixteen-year-old, but as an idealized Mary Sue, wise way-beyond her years, so you know this is going to be tragic. It couldn’t possibly be 'literature' otherwise, now could it?

Seriously, Juliet and Romeo live happily ever after? Teens who don’t stupidly kill themselves but go on to make a real contribution to life and to their society? Who wants to read that trash? So you know it's going to be tragic, and since the narrator is named Halter, and his "love" interest is young, who’s going to die? Do the math. The give-away is in the last name, and it’s not a word that's related to 'stopping', it’s a word that's too often and all-too-sadly associated with 'die'.

The problem is that Halter's infatuation is never about who Alaska is as a person, it's entirely about how hot she looks on the surface. Adolescent love, superficial is thy name. Halter's view of her never improves, nor does her behavior. She's entirely unappealing. I don’t care how beautiful a woman is supposed to be; if she smokes like a chimney (not that chimneys smoke so much these days) then she's ugly, period. She's apparently trying to smoke herself to death, how wonderfully deep and literate. I'm impressed. Impressed by how self-destructive these losers are. But of course, if she didn’t chain-smoke, then how could she possibly be an artist, sculpting Halter's rough-hewn adolescent rock into a masterpiece worthy of some dusty corner of a museum. Shall we muse?

Halter doesn’t get how pointless young Alaska is. On the contrary, like a male spider to a potential mate, he enters her web with great, perhaps, abandon, completely embracing her lifestyle of shallow rebelliousness, cutting classes, smoking, drinking, and generally wasting his time. Yes, I get that the claim is that he wants to idiotically pursue the last dying words of Rabelais (the great perhaps), as though the delusional ranting of someone at death's door is magically philosophical, deep, and sacred (but only if they're famous). You definitely have to slap a medal on that or die trying - or try dying. Moreover, if the person is foreign, then his words (no female who dies is worth remembering apparently) are to be hallowed for eternity!

But here's the rub: if that's the case, then why does Halter go to school at all? Why not drop out completely and run away from home? Great Perhaps because that's where the lie lies in his life? Halter isn't actually interested in exploring any great perhaps; he's just interested in geek mishaps. He "explores" the unknown by doing the staid, tried-and-tested, and very-well known: going to school! Yet even then, he's paradoxically not getting an education in anything that's important. Instead, he's hanging with his peers, his attention drifting even in his favorite class. Great perhaps he's learning nothing at all? He sure doesn't appear to be.

On his first night there, he's bullied, but this is never reported, because 'ratting out' the bullies would be the wrong thing to do, don't you know? The fact that he could have been killed is completely irrelevant; it's much better to let them get away with their recklessness and cruelty so they're encouraged to do it again and again until someone does die; then everyone can adopt a pained expression and whine, "How could this happen here?" The joke here is that he fails to come up with anything interesting in the way of last words.

Despite my sarcasm, I guess I really don’t get how a novel larded with trope and cliché manages to even get considered for an award, let alone win one. The Printz Award? Really? Is there an out-of-Printz award? Probably not, but I made one up and awarded it my own Dire Virgins novel! Every main character, and there are really only three, let's face it, is a trope. Chip is the 'seasoned pro' - the one who knows every trick and angle, who becomes the mentor to the new guy. His one feature is that he knows the names of capitals. Honestly? Character Tukumi's only real feature is his name.

We already met Halter, arguably the most trope-ish since he's the tediously stereotypical skinny geek - like geek and physique are inalienably alien bed-fellows, oh, and did I mention that he knows the last words of some dead dudes? Presage much, Green? Next thing you know he'll be writing a novel where he has a count-down to the tragedy to make sure that we don't miss it. Oh, wait a minute, he did count down to the tragedy in this novel!

Oh, and Halter failed to halt her. How awful for him. Boy! You gotta carry that weight, carry that weight a long time…. Maybe if Halter had actually learned about life instead of philosophically jerking-off to the 'great perhaps' he might have learned enough to see what was coming and been prepared to do something to prevent it, but from an awards PoV, it's a far, far better thing that he doesn’t than he ever did, and it’s a far, far better ending that he goes through than he's ever gone….

Even I saw that ending coming, and that was at the same moment that I saw the cover and read the title of this novel. A candle gone out? Seriously? I'll bet the cover artist got whiplash trying to pat their self on the back after that one. The Sylvia Plath Award for most tragically tragic tragedy goes, of course, to Alaska, a teenager who was in an ice-cold state even before she died.

But what really died here was a chance at a readable and entertaining novel. I rate this novel warty, but do take form it a timeless moral: never, ever read a novel with a person's name in the title - unless it's a children's novel. They don't seem to suffer from the acute lethargy and lack of inventiveness which is the stone from which John Green is hewn..

I Have to add that I can't help but wonder why Green insists upon making his female characters jerks. I've read two of his novels (all I am ever going to read, rest assured) and in both the female is a loser and a jerk. Is he a misogynist that he does this? Or is it simply that he doesn't know any better? Actually, the question which interests me more is why John Green went out of his way to call me a liar? Indeed, he called every one of us self-publishing/indie authors liars. In a speech which he made to the Association of American Booksellers in 2013 (of which I was unaware until very recently), he stated:

We must strike down the insidious lie that a book is the creation of an individual soul laboring in isolation. We must strike it down because it threatens the overall quality and breadth of American literature...without an editor my first novel, Looking for Alaska, would have been unreadably self-indulgent.
From Brit newspaper The Guardian

In short, John Green thinks we're liars if we say we did it all ourselves (not that your typical indie author ever does this in my experience). Guess what, Green behind the ears? I did it all myself and I know other people did too, and no, I am not lying. The question is why are you so insecure that you need an entourage to write your books? And yes, Looking for Alaska was self-indulgent so you failed. Deal with it.


Friday, April 4, 2014

Nine Words Max by Dan Bar-el





Title: Nine Words Max
Author: Dan Bar-el
Publisher: Random House
Rating: WORTHY!

Illustrator: David Huyck

Note that I read this book in Adobe reader, where it was perfect. I also looked at it in my old Kindle and it was horrible. If you're going the ebook route, you'll need an iPad or a Nook HD, or a Kindle Fire or something like that. Just saying!

Nine Words Max is one of the most hilarious books I've ever read. It's very short, and it's really for children, but since I'm an honorary child and way beyond embarrassment, I don't really care! Prince Maximilian cannot stop himself from rambling endlessly on in a mesmerizing free-assocation of trivia and bizarre out-of-left-field observations. Max’s brothers, Kurt, Tripp, and Wilt, are so sick of hearing him that when their parents, the king and queen (of course), pop-off for a bit of a holiday, already dressed for the beach,

the brothers see this as a golden opportunity to enlist the aid of the court magician in muzzling poor Max. The wizard restricts him to saying only nine words on a topic, and since Max isn't able to edit himself, this results in endless unfinished sentences with which he fails to convey anything. The only problem here, is that when Queen Spark from next door unexpectedly arrives with her army in tow, no one knows how to meet the stringent royal protocols she demands; no one except Max, that is - who is unable to explain anything! What are three princes to do? Well, nothing but stand around, open-mouthed, like the rest of the populace!

I laughed out loud at this one, and I recommend it not just for kids, but for anyone who has a bent for the bizarre and an eye for the eccentric! Some of my favorite max quotes:

  • "Squirrels are never to be trusted."
  • "If all the world's a stage, then we should be wearing more make-up"
  • "I was speaking with Matilda, the wool merchant, who believes that yawning is caused by sheep."

Come one! You have to admit there's a certain logic to these pronouncements!


Thursday, April 3, 2014

Marcus Mender by DD Roy






Title: Marcus Mender
Author: DD Roy
Publisher: Casey Shay press
Rating: worthy


DISCLOSURE: Unlike the majority of reviews in this blog, I've neither bought this book nor borrowed it from the library. This is a "galley" copy ebook, supplied by Net Galley. I'm not receiving (nor will I expect to receive or accept) remuneration for this review.

Please note that this review is going to have a few more spoilers than I like to post in a Net Galley review, because there are some issues I need to address with this novel!

This is Book 2 of the Troubled Tweens series (aka the Magic Mayhem series, in what so far is a trilogy: Jinnie Wishmaker, Marcus Mender, Elektra Chaos), but note that this is the first I have read, so this review may be skewed for better or for worse by my not having that history. DD Roy is a fellow Austinite, so I have to give her a good review or she'll hunt me down and do some heavy Loki magic on me!

Seriously, I have to confess to mixed feelings about this novel. I started out liking it, and then started having issues with it, but then I'm stuck with the problem that I'm not the intended age range for this series. So who am I reviewing it for - me, or my kids? If you hate a novel then there's no problem. If you fall in love with it, the same: no problem; you know exactly how your review will turn out, and it doesn't matter what age range it's aimed at. The problem is that huge area in the middle! So let me play out the review for you and then I'll tell you my evil plan!

'Most magical kids get their power by the end of fifth grade," at St. Martin's Academy (so we're advised), and Marcus, the main focus of this novel, squeaked in with a week to go. He's not the only kid to have such powers. His close friends Jinnie (who can grant wishes), and the twins: Maddy (who makes people angry) and Grace (who apparently has the opposite power to Maddy's and also seems to be able to block the use of magic by others) are also empowered, but for some reason none of these kids are telling their parents anything. I'm not sure how wise it is to portray kids as purposefully keeping momentous secrets from their folks, but all kids do keep secrets, of course.

Marcus discovers that he can't turn off his power, which is that of fixing things. Everything he touches reverts to its original unblemished state. I loved the way, once home that Friday afternoon, he experimented to discover what the limitations of his power were. You usually don’t get the scientific approach in a novel of this nature. He found that everything he touched reverted to a pristine state - his shirt looked new and clean, a draw with a broken-off handle reverted to a clear, smooth stretch of unblemished wood without even a screw hole in it. The drill he picked up to re-drill the hole reverted to new!

Marcus has a dietary problem he evidently discovered (or gained) during volume 1, when his friend Jinnie got her wish-granting power (she can only grant one wish per person apparently). Marcus can't eat dairy or gluten. Neither can he "fix" himself with his power, but he can fix others. You might be surprised at how common this lactose intolerance is. The ability to digest dairy products isn’t the norm amongst humans; humans are 'supposed' to lose their ability to consume milk as we age, because this is how we evolved. We mammals are supposed to grow up and lose dependency on mother's milk, but many in the western world have retained the ability, and evolution supported this because it enabled us to take advantage of domesticated cows, sheep, and goats.

There are two kinds of kids in this magical world, the Loki who are led by coach Snicker (no kidding), and who are "evil", and the Vor (lead by a teacher named Kent), who are "good". Marcus and his friends are, of course, Vor, and they're supposed to help keep the balance in the world between good and evil. There's no explanation as to why there has to be a balance, and this was one of my problems with the writing: there's really no explanation for anything! We don't get to learn where these powers ultimately come from or how a certain kid gets a certain power (or fails to get a power), nor do we learn how these children are able to wield their power at no cost to anyone.

This flies in the face of everything else I've learned in this novel! If good has to balance evil, then what balances the use of a magical power? Who pays the cost for its use? Apparently it's free energy, and for me this undermines everything in the novel where someone speaks about balance and misuse of power. Once again, please note that I'm speaking only for this volume, as I said. If some explanation was offered in volume 1, then that might resolve these issues. Perhaps, for example, the cost of a positive use of the power is the negative use of power by someone else. This is suggested, but never follow-through in volume 2, and it's hard to see how that could work in practice, but at least it prevents the problem of getting something for nothing!

Each team has a bird for some reason. Team Loki has a Grackle which spies on the Vor. No word on exactly what species of Grackle it is (there are eleven, at least two of which are common in Austin. The Common Grackle is gorgeous. The Great-Tailed is seriously noisy). As much as I love Grackles, I have to say that the tired cliché of a black bird siding with evil needs to be slaughtered mercilessly! It's way overdone. Team Vor, of course, has a Cardinal (which is of the same order of birds as are the Grackles,so not a unbridgeable deal of difference there!). The Cardinal is female and can apparently talk in one way or another.

The Loki recruits are developing magical powers in tandem with the Vor. One of Team Loki, named Silver, stole a wish from Jinnie in volume 1, apparently. In relating this, Roy appears to miss out a key word: "…Silver Wiggins, had used the bird to help her steal a wish from Jinnie, one that Silver could grant for herself without Jinnie's help." That's ambiguous enough that I couldn't be sure if it was to be taken as is, or if the word "not" had been missed from between 'could' and 'grant'. It could work either way and it was a bit annoying not to know, but given that the text seems to be technically well-written in general, I'll give Roy the benefit of the doubt here!

There were only a couple of minor such issues that I noticed in this novel, such as the one where "...he glanced down a the gauze..." (I suspect he glanced at the gauze), and where "Mr. Santos topped spinning" (I suspect he stopped spinning). These were both on the same page about two-thirds the way through. And one more: "I'm back" says Jax, at one point, but he wasn’t actually away immediately before he said that, so I did have a few issues in figuring out the dialog here and there.

Clearly this novel is intended for a juvenile audience because it seems to have a few too many plot issues for a mature or discerning reader to countenance without frowning. For example, this Grackle is a spy and a nuisance, but nowhere do we see Jinnie wishing it away, or failing that, anyone trying to capture or kill it. They seem completely unable to cope with it, which is really sad. This is a problem with coming into a series without having had the benefit of the introductory novel(s). Maybe they tried this in Volume 1, and for some reason it wasn't possible.

The Loki consist of Bruscilla (who apparently has no power), Silver, Elektra (who can scramble thoughts), and Jax (as in 'jumping Jax' because he can jump instantly to another location. Sheesh.), so I guess it’s not hard to discern one's enemies in this world: if they have a weird or evil-sounding name, they're Loki, whereas those with a normal name are Vor!

I can see how this could be a fun series for younger people, but I have my doubts as to how well it will appeal to people who are the same age group as the kids featured in the story, and it’s unlikely to appeal to very many more mature readers, because the story is just too loosely-wrapped. For example, on page thirty-seven there's a declaration which makes little sense. Maddy and Marcus are trying to figure out how to control his run-away magic until they can speak to the temporarily unavailable Mr Kent. They decide to cut class and they sit in a darkened space, hiding and talking.

Maddy informs Marcus that there has to be a balance in the universe, such that if a Loki does a bad thing, then a Vor must a good thing. This actually means that, in effect, the Vor are very effectively under the control of the Loki! So whence the balance?! As Maddy rambles on, what she's saying sounds more ridiculous. She expresses a fear that there's no telling what Marcus is doing to the universe with his magic not being under control. Again this implies that there's no law of balance, which flatly contradicts what she's just said is a rule! Worse than this, she then calls into play one of Newton's laws of motion, specifically the one relating to inertia. Maddy quite evidently doesn’t understand the first thing about inertia.

In popular parlance, inertia tends to suggest idleness on someone's part: that they can neither be moved nor enjoined to move of their own volition. In science inertia means unchanging: that something which is moving will continue to move at a constant speed, and that something which is at rest (not that anything actually is at rest in this universe!) will remain at rest, until and unless either situation is acted upon by a force. Maddy claims that things must move forwards, although how this works when she's already declared that the Vor and the Loki quite effectively negate each other is another unexplained mystery. You can't have perfect balance and forward motion at the same time. For example, when a human walks, they are effectively out of balance the entire time. If they were balanced, they wouldn't be moving, which is quite the opposite of the proposition Maddy is nattering on about.

I'm very much rooted in science, but that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy a good fantasy, or a supernatural or magical story as long as it's told well, but even in the most fantastical of worlds, there have to be rules, otherwise the story risks degenerating into the completely nonsensical. I have yet to discern any logical rules at all in this world. Everything we’re told seems to be completely arbitrary, made-up by the author on the spot for no discernible reason. This made this novel a frustrating read for me.

Clearly a writer has no compulsion to write a children's novel and make it appeal to an adult, but I do think writers have, or at least ought to have, a compulsion not to talk down to children, and not to dumb-down stories just because they're writing for a younger audience. Even a magical story requires a sound framework within which to relate it, and if you don't have that in place, then literally anything becomes possible and your plotting goes down the drain.

On this topic there's a major issue I had with the main plot point, which I admit is an intriguing reversal of intent. I don’t want to give too much away, but something happens that initiates the Vor behaving like Loki and vice-versa. This is a cool idea, but the cause of this ultimately makes no sense. The Vor group go haring off to South America to prevent the Loki from hauling an object southwards. The very act of doing this grants them increased power, thereby rendering the whole system off-balance, which is why it must be stopped. So far so good; however, given that Jinnie can grant any wish (even if only once per person), I honestly don’t get why any of this took place at all. She could simply have had someone wish that everything was back to the way it was before the trigger-event occurred, thereby preventing team Loki from achieving their aim. There was no need at all for the trip to South America, much less the shenanigans which take place in the Atacama desert there! That wasn't the only plotting problem with this scenario, but I'll leave it at that.

There was nothing to stop the author from writing these scenes if they'd been prefaced by some logical explanation as to why this whole thing had to go down the way it did, but there was nothing offered, so it all seemed pointless to me and made the whole Vor team seem stupid. I'm sure that wasn't the author's intention! Maybe the majority of those in the intended age range for this novel won't notice things like this, but my kids actually are in that age range, and I know that they would definitely have questioned this kind of "logic"!

So here's my dirty little secret: I have to confess that the more I read of this volume 2, the more I wanted to read the original, Jinnie Wishmaker (I keep wanting to call it 'Wishbringer' for some reason!). That initial volume does sounds like it might appeal to me more than this one did. I also became rather enamored of Elektra, so I am now tempted to go get the third volume in the series, Elektra Chaos! So how am I to deal with that? I can't rate the middle one badly, and then go out and buy other two volumes to read: I'll be a hypocrite! Curse my fondness for kick-A female characters! So here's my deal: I'll rate this one a cautious (and slightly cantankerous) 'worthy' and then Roy had better come through on the other two novels and make them seriously good, otherwise I'll have to visit some Loki magic on her!


Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Angel on the Ropes by Jill Shultz






Title: Angel on the Ropes
Author: Jill Shultz
Publisher: warty!


DISCLOSURE: Unlike the majority of reviews in this blog, I've neither bought this book nor borrowed it from the library. This is a "galley" copy ebook, supplied by Net Galley. I'm not receiving (nor will I expect to receive or accept) remuneration for this review.

This novel started out well, but in the end lost my favor and never regained it. I found myself skipping page after page in the last 30 - 50% because it just wasn't interesting. Let me get one minor pet peeve out of the way before i begin. On page 93, I read: "She slid her hand up his bicep..." It's 'biceps', and the weird thing is that unlike all-too-many YA authors I've been reading lately, this author gets it elsewhere in the novel. Why it didn't trigger an alarm here, I don't know.

On a positive note, I loved the title: it was was highly appropriate! Through I normally don't say a word about covers since the author usually has nothing to do with them, on this occasion I have to say that this cover is amazing, and it was the reason why I took a closer look at this novel.

The main character, Amandine Sand is an acrobat. She's also a 'leopard'. I have no idea what that really means, because she's actually human, and in the first third of this novel, which bore rather too many confusing pages for my taste, I was not at all kept well-informed by the author. I skipped pretty much a whole chapter that went 'off topic' into a new set of characters because the entire chapter made very little sense to me, and I was certainly not interested in wasting my time reading and re-reading just to try and decipher what it was the author thought she was telling me.

I read novels for relaxation, not to have to rack my brain to figure out what, exactly is going on and what it means! It’s the author's job to lay that out for me competently, and while I don’t mind doing some work, there's a world of difference between envisioning a sculpture, and mindlessly hammering at a lump of rock in the hope that shape and form will appear. From a writing perspective, this is a real problem with sci-fi. Too many authors try to invent futuristic or alien worlds which are so far outside of our experience that they make no sense. The author then has to try and interpret their own story to we poor readers, so we can enjoy it. I see no point in that, and I've never been a fan of obfuscation for the sake of obfuscation. The other side of that coin is that the author's invented world differs from our own in such negligible ways that we look in askance, wondering why it's even billed as sci-fi, or 'futuristic'. I readily admit that it's a fine line to walk, but unfortunately I had problems with both sides of that coin with this novel.

I don't mind novels that go out on a limb, but when you're led so far out that the limb breaks under the weight of what’s being heaped upon it, then what’s the point?! How are you, in any meaningful sense telling me a story when I don’t understand a word you're saying, or if I'm struggling so much in trying to follow you, that I'm not even sure if what I'm getting was what you thought you were purveying, much less actually relaxing into a good story and enjoying it? After that one chapter which I skipped (which introduced another main character named Nikos), things improved, but when Nikos came back into the story, it was, I'm sorry to say, all downhill from there.

This novel is set in the future (in the early 2390's) when some humans have apparently developed some sort of genetic mutation which marks their skin in a manner evidently reminiscent of a leopard pelt. At the same time as this occurred, there arose a deadly plague. Because people, generally speaking, are so scientifically backward and consequently superstitious, the plague was associated with the leopard skin, and so the leopards became pariahs. Note that this is in the future, with advanced science in place, and yet somehow this bone-headed idea not only becomes powerful, it becomes an obsession, indeed a religion. I have to ask: if this is sci-fi, whence the science? This zealous bigotry, with nothing offered to balance it seemed a bit too much to swallow to me.

This takes place in a Dyson sphere named Penance, obviously not in our solar system. It was created by aliens, but abandoned for some reason. We're told nothing of the sphere - indeed, it's really irrelevant to the story (to say nothing of it being physically impossible to build - depending upon how you define a Dyson sphere, of course). Humans moved in (we don't get to know any of that history), but they apparently lost all their humanity in the process. Now 'leopards' are hunted and killed summarily by a religious group (why isn't that a surprise?!).

Amandine's dream is to work full time in the circus. She achieves this at an early age, and we're suddenly catapulted 17 years into the future where she's now a full-time performer trying to master the quintuple somersault, although for some illogical reason, she considers giving herself more height to accomplish this feat constitutes cheating. That served only to convince me that Amandine isn't so smart, but it was worse than that because the novel's own logic broke down here. Where's the sense in refusing to "cheat" by doing the quintuple somersault from a greater height, yet using maglev belts as part of the act?! This made zero sense to me.

There's further supportive evidence for Amandine's lack of gray matter (either that or a backbone!) in her actions. For one, Amandine is 'romantically' involved with a woman called Malaga, who makes no apology for her own at best thoughtless, and at worst callous - even cruel, treatment of Amandine. Malaga has many lovers, and apparently does not hold the same view as Amandine does about what constitutes a special encounter between them. She holds none of their interactions in the same reverence in which Amandine holds them, even commercializing some of them, selling the experience in her store.

Amandine puts up with all of this for reasons unknown, rooted in her blind infatuation with (a possibly older) woman no doubt, but this relationship terminates so quickly that I'm not even sure why it was included, unless we’re to learn from it that Amandine is a screw-up. Here endeth the LGBTQ+ portion of the lesson, because Amandine from this point onwards, is all hetero all the time. It's for this reason that I don't think that this novel ought to have been classified as 'Gay & Lesbian'.

Amandine is also involved in rescuing other leopards (since she herself was rescued at an early age), and in this she works with a woman called Sarah, who seems to have as little respect for Amandine's needs as Malaga does. Sarah interrupts Amandine's meeting with Malaga begging for help in running a rescue of some leopards, and Amandine caves-in, even though it will screw up her well-planned, but tightly-scheduled day. The rescue takes far longer than planned, further hog-tying Amandine. This made for a frustration- and anger-invoking start to the novel from my perspective! I was hoping, having been given this much, that we would get to see a really kick-ass Amandine turn up, but she never did. On the contrary, she went the opposite way.

By that, I mean that it was fine until Nikos came onto the scene full-time; then it went all to hell so quickly I almost got whiplash. Insta-love materialized out of nowhere, as it’s wont to do in these things. Amandine started behaving as though her emotional age was thirteen. The most transparently manipulated scenes began appearing one after another. - to get Nikos partially undressed, to get Amandine cold so he could hug her to warm her up. It became so bad that I could not stand to read it any more and, as I've said, skimmed the rest of it. I did not choose to read this for a rather cheesy romance; I had thought I was getting an adventurous sci-fi story. It wasn't.

One thing I really appreciated in this novel was the religious pogrom. That's exactly the kind of evil which organized religion perpetrates because it’s divisive by its very nature, artificially setting up one side ("us") as pure and chosen, and insisting upon a confrontational relationship with all others ("them"). That's why I say "Thank God"(!) that religious affiliation is dying and will likely become a minority position over the next forty years.

The biggest problem, to me, was that the story had nothing to do with the any of its setting, which begged the question: why? I have to ask why is this novel was set in the year 2392 (going into 2393) on a Dyson sphere? There is no reason for it. The same story could have been told in any year, past or present, so why set it almost half a millennium hence when neither the advancing of the calendar, nor the Dyson sphere contributed a single thing to the plot? (I have one question: how does the interior of a Dyson sphere experience a winter?!)

It was like the author didn’t really know what kind of a story she wanted to tell, and ended-up becoming entangled in several, without harmonizing the individual parts. Was this novel intended as a romance? It failed on that score because it was entirely unrealistic. Was it supposed to be sci-fi? it failed there, because sci-fi played no part in it, even though there was ambient sci-fi (if I can put it that way). Was it about racism or bigotry? This was the closest guess I could make, but even there it was flat and uninspiring. There is no reason, of course, why you could not feature all of these in the same story, but the more you try to pack in, the more top-heavy you risk it becoming, and this cramming-in of assorted themes is especially unwise if none of the parts hang together at all well.

The timing of the novel was also an issue for me. I mean, why set this novel four hundred years into the future when the time during which it took place played no part in the story, except in a negative way? It could have been set in any era, and would have been better set in the past IMO, so why set it some four hundred years hence? By 'in a negative way', I mean that although people have shown themselves to be racist and bigoted throughout history (and prehistory!), the dominating factors in our society today are technology and science. I found the premise that these were of no utility in this story to be quite simply impossible to swallow. This again begs the question: why sci-fi?! This story would have been better set in the past and not portrayed as sci-fi. For me it would have made more sense in that way, than it did in the setting we're offered.

While the author mentions that there were efforts to create a good vaccine, she would also have us believe that all of this advanced technology and science had not only failed to refute the bigoted claims of the religious nut-jobs, but that no one was even thinking of refuting the blind claim that there was a connection between the "leopards" and the plague. It was as though this baseless assumption was bought into by everyone, and I found that lack of dissent to be too big of a stretch. I couldn't believe that no one was pursuing this as a line of refutation.

The story is billed as 'Gay & Lesbian, Sci Fi & Fantasy', and I have to ask: where's the gay? Yes, Amandine was in a lesbian relationship when the story began, but that's given such short shrift as to be irrelevant. We see essentially none of it; instead what we’re asked to focus on is a rather clichéd YA hetero romance born of insta-love! As if that isn't bad enough, we're asked to read hackneyed lines like: "I want you Nikos. I want all of you." (p193)

This "romance" wasn't realistic. Yes, we can get insta-lust quite easily, but lust isn't love, not even close, and it’s as depressing as it is tiresome to see writers consistently and persistently conflating the two. Do so many writers actually not understand love or do they simply not care? Have they never actually been in love? Why do they feel the need to cheapen something so special, and so wonderful by so thoughtlessly tossing it into such a bland mix? Amandine and Nikos have known each other for what, a couple of weeks or so, and they have spent very little time together. She's just come out of a relationship with a girl with whom she claimed she was deeply in love. Vacillate much, Amandine?! The two of them (A & N) have done nothing momentous, and yet they're now magically in love? As if that wasn't bad enough, he's calling her "my love". It was quite simply unrealistic and far too sugary for me to swallow.

In connection with this, I have to say a word about the speech that's written in parenthesis in this novel. Like much in the novel, we never get an explanation for it, or if we do, whatever was offered went right over my head. I had to assume it was some sort of hand-signal, since there was no mention of ESP in play here. I was guessing that it was some kind of universal 'street' language, but it often made little sense, and it made less sense when we discover Amandine and Nikos doing this while actually having sex (I refuse to call it making love)!

Are we honestly expected to believe that in the course of this very carnal lust, Amandine abruptly breaks-off whatever it is she's doing with her hands, maybe in the middle of offering an intimate and passionate caress, to sign "I'm yours" to Nikos? I don’t really think so! And are we to then also accept that he immediately ceases whatever his hands are pursuing, merely to sign likewise?! I'm sorry, but this fairly reeked of a writing agenda getting in the way of realistic story-telling, and it threw me right out of suspension of disbelief. We have vocal chords so we can be vocal, not so we can keep our mouths shut in deference to sign language when it's unnatural (for those of us blessed with speech) to do so.

In the end I cannot recommend this because of all these issues I had with it. I honestly felt that I was 'lured' into reading it by implicit promises that I felt were not kept, and even when I resigned myself to accepting that, I was still felt cheated out of the story which this had the potential to become.


Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Ender's Game Graphic by Orson Scott Card





Title: Ender's Game (graphic novel)
Author: Orson Scott Card
Publisher: Marvel
Rating: WARTY!

Script: Christopher Yost
Art: Pascal Ferry
Color Art Frank D'Armata
Lettering VC's Cory Petit

Note that this graphic novel comes with parental advisory

For a review of the movie, see here.

Let's get this out of the way, about the author. According to wikipedia. Orson Scott Card, who is a Mormon by faith, has come out stridently against homosexuality in the past. Wikipedia reports:

In a 2008 essay opposing same-sex marriage, Card stated that he regarded any government that would attempt to recognize same-sex marriage as a "mortal enemy" that he would act to destroy. In 2009 he joined the board of directors of the National Organization for Marriage, a group that campaigns against same-sex marriage. Card resigned from the board in mid-2013

Good for him if Card has indeed thrown in his, er, cards, since it’s none of his business anyway, but I have to say I'm doubtful about such a sudden conversion, if that's what it was. I mention this because this comic book, unlike the movie, depicts the game-changing fight in the bathroom taking place between two naked boys, reminiscent of ancient Greek wrestling! I can’t help but wonder what Card was thinking about when he approved that, given his history! His original novel depicts a lot of male nudity so I've heard, but I'll see for myself when I review that this month. Or more accurately, I'll read for myself! I've already seen it in this version....

Card won the Hugo and the Nebula award for best novel in consecutive years, and to my knowledge, is the only writer to achieve this, so he's respected amongst his peers; however, from what I've read of his out-of-left-field political views (which is hilarious since he's right-wing!), and his homophobia, he seems like a truly misguided human being at best.

So here's the question: what does this have to do with reviewing his novels? I've read several reviews on this novel, both good and bad, and all-too-many of the negative reviews are reviewing him as a person, not the novel as a work of fiction. This is entirely inappropriate. Yes, he may be obnoxious; yes you may detest everything he stands for, but this has nothing to do with how well he's written his novel. Are we to assume that such reviewers boycott movies because an actor or a director in the movie is a homophobe? Do they boycott music because a musician has totally whack political views? I suspect they do not because most people tend to go for the easy target.

This review is about the graphic novel, not Orson Scott Card, and it will be brief, because I plan on reading the original novel this month and I'll do a much more in-depth review of that. So, review the writing, not the writer? That's not always as easy as it sounds because the two are inextricably linked in so many ways! If the writer fails, however, in his execution, in his plotting, in his characterization, in his world-building or in whatever; then he's fair game IMO.

So let's get on with it. To begin with, I'm a bit tired of military tales which show that the best way to form an effective team is to brutalize everyone. It's bad enough in the actual military, but it’s taken to ridiculous extremes in fiction, and this one is worse, because it’s a graphic novel. You definitely don’t want any young children having access to this.

Sample pages:

I did not like this graphic novel. There were multiple problems with it, and the most annoying of these was that any descriptive text in a cell was given a shaded background, thereby making it hard to read the first line (or the last line dependent upon in which direction it was shaded). I saw no point in that. In terms of dialog, it was sparse. There were rather bizarre interludes with a black background and white text which featured anonymous conversations that for me, contributed nothing. There were were many frames with no dialog at all, which contributed nothing from my PoV. The artwork was really good except that it was far too dark for my taste. Yeah, I know it's a dark novel, but I'd still like to see the images! Do we have to predictably and pedantically make every frame dark to ram it home to us how black things look for Ender? I don't think so!

Many cells had zero dialog or description, and a lot of this made the action rather unintelligible. I don't expect writing in very cell and conversation flooding everything: it's graphic novel for goodness sakes, but this misguided attempt at minimalism fell short, as far as I'm concerned, especially when the illustrations failed to illustrate.

I rate this graphic novel warty, but worth a glance for some of the artwork if you're interested in that. I'll hang my overall review of this on the actual novel, which was the primary medium, after all. That will be interesting for me, at least, to go that route since I've pretty much gone in reverse order in this: seeing the movie first, then the graphic novel, and finally, the actual novel.


Monday, March 31, 2014

Magic's Child by Justine Larbalestier





Title: Magic's Child
Author: Justine Larbalestier
Publisher: Razor Bill
Rating: Worthy!

What better way to finish out a magical, record-setting month than by closing out the Magic or Madness trilogy?! 31 reviews in 31 days, one review per day, every single day! Take that, Bembridge scholars!

So, this novel continues and completes the Magic or Madness trilogy. Magic Or Madness is reviewed here, and Magic Lessons is reviewed here. The series follows Reason Cansino after she has 'super magic' donated to her by her ancestor Jésus Cansino. This new magic begins transforming her as it transformed him - to the point where he became effectively inhuman - not so much in his mentality or behavior, but in his very substance. Reason can now close her eyes and see the world depicted in magical form, where 'muggles' appear as black spaces and all magic appears in glorious Technicolor™, making the real world seem gray by comparison.

As if this isn't enough for a fifteen-year-old to handle, Reason is now pregnant from the one time she had sex with Danny, Jay-Tee's 18-year-old brother. Yes, he's guilty of statutory rape and no, having sex for the first time does not grant you immunity from contraception. If you are both fertile, a pregnancy can result from any sex you have, even if the guy can manage the so-called withdrawal 'method'. Trust me, there's no withdrawal that doesn’t also involve a deposit.

Given Danny's apparent womanizing, having unprotected sex was appallingly irresponsible. Reason knew no better given how naïve she is, but Danny is an irresponsible jerk, especially since he subsequently pushes Reason away (she hasn't told him he's a daddy at that point). He insists that having sex was a mistake; that this should go no further, and that they should just be friends, but that's a bit too little, and a lot too late. He evidently has no taste whatsoever in women, too boot, if he's rejecting Reason (there's a double-meaning in that!).

Talking of reason, I have to give a warm nod to Larbalestier in her putting a stress on science in this series, but she doesn’t know much about DNA, it would appear. When Reason 'fixes' Jay-Tee (as evil Jason prophesied she would), by removing her magic and thereby saving her life, she achieves this resurrection through repairing Jay-Tee's genome. It’s apparently been 'fraying', which makes no sense. All of our genomes are 'fraying' in one sense: in that the telomeres which define genes are ever shortening throughout our life, but this is normal and natural. Some scientists think that this is how we age and die, so that part made sense, but as Microsoft often claims: it’s not a defect; it's a feature. If our DNA were really fraying in the sense which Larbalestier appears to mean, we’d be pretty much dead - not just dying - or at the very least, we'd be really sick.

Larbalestier describes Jay-Tee's DNA as being based on multiples of four. Well, guess what? Everyone's DNA is based on multiples of four! Your DNA is built of, and functions via four bases: adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T), so this claim of Larbalestier's makes no sense. I think it's best, when writing about stuff which you try to tie to the genome, to say as little as possible about exactly how it's supposed to work! Unless you really know your topic, that is. Also: make sure you don’t claim that these powers with which you invest your characters are blossoming from a single a magic gene. One gene rarely does big things by itself.

Having said that, I really liked this novel and felt that Larbalestier has done a good job, overall, for the series. I'm not a fan of trilogies, and I admit to having some issues with this one, but sometimes an author can make them work, and make them worth pursuing, and this is such a case. Larbalestier takes full advantage of her trans-Pacific marital relationship and bounces back and forth between Sydney, Australia and New York City USA once again in this volume. This time she makes it personal as evil Jason flies to Sydney and spirits away Reason's mentally-challenged (from refusing to use her magic) mom. Why Reason, with her enhanced powers, failed to see this coming is more of a problem than figuring out how magic-empowered Jason managed to get Sarafina away from a health-care facility, but once again, the game is afoot, and Mere and Reason travel by kitchen door to NYC.

Of course, we know how this ends - happily, but it takes some interesting twists and turns to get there. I recommend this trilogy. It's not perfect by any means, but it approaches closer to perfect than far too many trilogies these days.


Sunday, March 30, 2014

The Call of the Wild by Jack London






Title: The Call of the Wild
Author: Jack London
Publisher: Amazon Audio CD (isn't everything?!)
Rating: WARTY!

This audio CD was read appallingly by Frank Muller. Muller begins every sentence in sharp, ringing tones, and then drains away to an incoherent mumble at the end of the sentence. I am not kidding. The novel was bad enough as it was, but Muller's manic reading style rendered it all but unendurable.

This novel does not deserve the reputation it has. So how did it even get that reputation? I have a theory that lousy novels can become 'great' if they meet a need that nothing much more worthy has yet come along to meet. Back in 1903, this need, whatever it was, had not been met, and London was the first writer to even think he could get close, so despite his novel being tedious, unrealistic, and empty, it got its fifteen minutes of fame regardless.

London was known for claiming he wrote this because other writers, in anthropomorphizing animals, had been too sugary. He wanted to write a more realistic one. He failed. His portrayal of the dogs is no different from anyone else's portrayal of dogs or any other animal. He simply turns them into savage humans and that's the extent of his artistry. It would have been just as realistic had he depicted them as chatting to each other as they pulled along the sled.

The main character is Buck, a mix of Saint Bernard and Scotch Collie who is living in California until he's stolen by a guy who evidently has gambling debts. Buck is sold to people who take him to Alaska to be used as a sled dog, because you know those Alaskan sled dog scouts always tour the US during the season, looking for team players amongst doggie athletes. Go Huskies! London inexplicably portrays Buck as turning from a mild-mannered dog (let's call him Bark Kent) into a savage beast in the course of one train trip (let's call him by his alter-ego, Superhound), which then has to be brutally beaten by a man with a club until he turns into mild-mannered Bark Kent again. Really?! I mean seriously, this juvenile portrayal is somehow a classic? London may have lived in Alaska, but he knows nothing about dogs.

Buck ends up in the ownership of a pair of French-Canadian delivery boys and is trained to pull a sled along with a team of huskies and other, mixed-breed, dogs. Buck meets his mortal enemy in the form of Spitz, the team lead dog. Spitz is the Quaritch of the sled-dog world, and has the scars to prove it. After several savage encounters, and more beatings o' the club of course, Buck takes down Spitz, who is set upon by the rest of the pack and killed. Buck thereby maintains his heroic status and becomes pack leader.

After a brutal trip to deliver mail (yes, brutal is the key word here - this novel was probably far more of an inspiration for Divergent than ever The Hunger Games was!), Buck and his team are exhausted, and he's sold off to three clowns who are clueless about traveling in the Great White North. How these people even survived thus far is unexplained. Now London would have us believe that despite the just-completed brutal journey over the bitterly frozen wasteland, it’s suddenly spring and the ice is melting, making travel dangerous! This, he would have us swallow, adequately accounts for how the three clowns all drown when the river ice breaks under their sled, taking the entire dog team with them. Fortunately for Superhound, he's been stolen away from the clowns by an heroic guy who bullies them into giving Buck to him, upon pain of death. That's how nice this guy is.

This savage, wild dog then suddenly becomes mild-mannered Bark Kent again, all fluffy and loving because Thornton (or whatever his name was) saved his life. Honestly? I'm about barfing by this time in the novel, to say nothing of barking mad. But unfortunately, it doesn’t end there - no, London pushes on with dogged determination, no doubt grinning wolfishly. Thornton is slaughtered by the local natives, and Buck goes on a revenge trip, savaging them in return. Really? Finally, he heeds 'the call of the wild' and joins a pack of wolves?

Call of the wild? London would have us think that all dogs are really wolves under a dangerously thin veneer of domestication. Forget ten thousand years of evolution! Deep down these wild beasts have ancestral memory of those early, sylvan times when dogs would skip and play in the sweet outdoors, and they all, to a dog, long to return to the wild. I have two words for london: the first refers to a popular species of the genus Equus, and the second relates to what comes out of its rear-end after a large meal.

If London had written a fictional account of his own interesting adventures in Alaska, that might have been a good novel (assuming it wasn't narrated by Muller), but this novel? This novel is warty!


Saturday, March 29, 2014

The Lewton Experiment by Rachel Sa






Title: The Lewton Experiment
Author: Rachel Sa
Publisher: Tradewind Books
Rating: WARTY!

I don’t agree with publishers that reporters are the best people from whom to accept book proposals. Yeah, if it’s a non-fiction book, maybe you're onto something, maybe, but if it’s fiction, nope, you’re on something. A reporter is no better qualified to write fiction than is a janitor, a sports personality, an actor, a machinist, or a trash collector; that is to say that every one of them might be able to tell a story, but none of them has a built-in advantage over any of the others.

In this case, Sa pretty much telegraphs her entire plot on page 14 like this is a newspaper story. The only thing left after that is to see how she tells it, and that didn't turn out at all well. The improbable plot is designed at a level which would be more appropriate for ten- to twelve-year-olds rather than for the age it's aimed at which, judged by the age of its main character, is late teens.

In a sense this is a newspaper story, because it's a novel about 17-year-old Sherri Richmond, who is a newspaper reporter, if only for a summer internship at the Lewton Leader-Post (about that name…), so rather than have the new girl arrive at a new high school or prep academy, she arrives at a new town to start a new summer job. She stays at her Aunt Gillian's hotel, which is, she discovers, run down and looking like it's going out of business - as indeed is everything else in Lewton. The only business that's doing well is Shopwells, the mega-store that opened its doors a year or so before.

Sa hits us over the head with this dichotomy repeatedly. What she doesn’t explain, is how it is that Lewton has parking meters in a town we’ve already been told is not only tiny, but practically dead. She does however loudly announce the not-so-devious means by which Shopwells is doing so well on page 30. The problem is that none of her plot makes sense, and the story simply doesn't work even within it's own framework. The town seems to be simultaneously both large and small so that it can accommodate her widely disparate views on what kind of a town it actually is!

The newspaper 'organization' makes no sense especially given the size of the town. The paper employs only five staff including the editor and the receptionist, but the three reporters are given "beats": sports, covered by Bill, a municipal beat covered by Krystal; Sherri gets the social (sherry, social, get it? lol!) beat which was previously held by Krystal. Mac (what else would his name be?) the editor, warns Sherri that there is to be no cross-over reporting. Apparently Mac lost his nose for news in some sort of catastrophic amputation, if we're to judge from his complete docility and lack of interest in what’s been hard-hammered into our skulls since page 14. OTOH, Shopwells is a big advertiser in the paper. OTO,OH, if everyone in town is losing their business and their jobs, and/or spending their money at Shopwells, who has any change left to buy a newspaper? Again, it makes no sense.

Very little makes sense, much less economic sense in this novel. There is no way that Shopwells could be putting everyone out of business and then doing a roaring trade with hoards of customers. Where are those customers earning the money to buy all the crap they're brainwashed into buying at Shopwells? Yeah, some of the mega-store's employees are those who went out of business in town, but seriously? The economics simply doesn't work. This same story was told in the movie You Got Mail and it was better done notwithstanding the fact that it was another Nora Ephron extravaganza in Trite Brand™ sugar.

Sherri's instalove was announced loudly on p48. We've been prepped for this by her 'difficulties' with her current boyfriend, Michael, which amount to nothing more than a mild tiff; however, that seems to be more that enough for Sherri to treat him like dirt, to ignore his calls, texts, and emails, and to rudely rebuff his every attempt at apology and reconciliation. You know, if Sa wanted her main character to get a new love interest, she could have dispensed with Michael altogether and just had Sherri be unattached. I don't get what the point was of even having Michael as a character, unless it was to do precisely what Sa achieved as far as I was concerned, which was to convince me that Sherri is a heartless bitch, and certainly not someone I'd want to know even casually, let alone someone with whom I'd want to become involved.

Just six pages later we're shown how petty both Sherri and Krystal (a rival reporter) are as we see their first encounter, and then watch Sherri type a "story" about her. Krystal is the one who has the beat which Sherri covets. The whiny fake story which Sherri types has nothing whatsoever to do with Krystal's attitude; it’s devoted entirely to how Krystal dresses, which confirmed for me that Sherri is indeed a bitch, and actually a bigger one than is Krystal.

This trend was to continue over the next few pages. By the time I’d reached page 100 or so, all there was left for me to conclude about Sherri is that she's a juvenile, petulant, moody, vindictive, and petty person who probably needs to get on some medication for being a manic depressive. She's all but flirting with new interest Ben, while she's simultaneously angry with her boyfriend Michael for going out to dinner with an old friend, accusing him of sleeping with her! What a hypocrite! If her so-called "love" story with Ben was handled better, it might have helped OT ameliorate this situation, but all that was on offer for us there was your standard, pathetic, juvenile, YA clichéd crap.

Sherri decides to visit the mega-store, to meet with Rebecca Scott, the reporter who quit her job to go work at Shopwells. This is where we realize that Sherri is utterly clueless and oblivious to what’s going on around her - that's hardly a great recommendation for a reporter. She doesn’t suspect a single thing, even though she's being manipulated up the wazoo. I mean, they don't give every staff member that flu shot for nothing you know. And…wait a minute - a flu shot when it’s not even flu season? Sherri is so bad a reporter that she doesn't become even remotely suspicious.

She gets into trouble when she returns to the newspaper office, for going off topic and wasting the newspaper's time with her visit to the store. She never once thinks of going online with her reporting. Fortunately for Sa, this novel is really short (180 pages or so), so I was able to finish it, otherwise I would have ditched it precipitously. The over-arching problem with this novel is that it’s so simplistic and juvenile that I just don't understand how this could have got past a literary agent or a book editor in its published form. And Sa doesn;t understand the difference between 'bunting' and 'punting' on page 139!

In short, this novel is warty. Maybe Sa has a novel in her, but it's not this one. This is Ian Wood reporting for Ian Wood's Novellum. Good Night and Good luck!


Friday, March 28, 2014

Ready Or Not by Meg Cabot






Title: Ready Or Not
Author: Meg Cabot
Publisher: Random House
Rating: WARTY!

This audio CD is read by Ariadne Meyers and she does an acceptable job, but is occasionally annoying.

Ready of Not is a sequel to Meg Cabot's best selling All American Girl Samantha Madison lives in Washington, D.C. (District of Columbia). Sam's in high school and is pretty much your typical YA fictional juvenile, self-obsessed, teen girl, I'm sorry to report. I was hoping for better. The big difference here is that she's dating the president's son after having, in volume 1, saved the president's life. I haven't read volume 1, so I'm going only on this particular sequel. And yes, I'm listening to this while I wait for a more entertaining audio book read to arrive at my library, otherwise I doubt I would have picked this up at all. It did initially sound interesting though. It isn’t.

The dire lack of realism bothered me immensely. I cannot believe, given how close she is to the US "royal family" that there isn't even a hint of a Secret Service presence somewhere, somehow, in Sam's life, but apparently there isn’t. I dunno: maybe the Secret Service actually doesn’t care about who the presidential children date, but I find that hard to believe given how easy it would be to use the 'love interest' of a president's son or daughter to influence or manipulate behavior, or even to threaten the presidency.

I have to wonder seriously about people who write novels like this one, and even more so why this kind of writing is so popular. Obviously girls of a certain age really like to read this stuff, and this makes me sad, because then I have to ask: is there nothing going through young minds other than sex (if the character is a guy) or guys (if the character is a girl)? Yes, this ignores gay relationships, but then, so too does all-too-much YA fiction, except in rather insulting token form. And do YA writers never feel any need to offer alternatives, to enlighten, to inform, to encourage changed behavior, to educate? That really bothers me, because if we as writers are doing nothing beyond pandering to the lowest common denominator, then what differentiates us from parasites?

Cabot renders Sam as a gigantic fan of Gwen Stefani for reasons which seem to me to be more projection of authorial tastes than realism, but in 2005, Stefani was still a popular artist so this isn't unfeasible. Sam also works part time at a video tape rental store, which really dates this novel, but again, it’s not entirely outrageous even though VHS's death-knell had long been rung by 2005 when this novel is set.

Sam's older sister is a cheerleader and a guy magnet so, cliché to the max there. Her kid sister Rebecca, is super smart, so once again we have a special case kid in Sam, because she's so ordinary. Special because you're ordinary? Hmm. Sam is also a special case because of her action in saving the president, yet this seems not to have impacted her life. She herself claims that nothing has changed, yet everyone is paying attention to her. Is she so dumb she doesn’t notice this? For example, one time in school, she's talking on her phone to David, the president's son when there are, for unrelated reasons, cameras in the school, and suddenly everyone goes quiet, the cameras are all turned on her, and they're all listening in. This seemed ridiculous to me, especially since it didn’t seem to faze Sam at all. Yet despite this, there is not a single paparazzo chasing her around.

Sam is also a teen ambassador to the United Nations. This evidently came about in the previous novel, but if the only reason for it was her saving the president, that's pretty pathetic. So this story kicks in when David invites Sam to join him for Thanksgiving dinner at Camp David, the presidential retreat (where he goes when he's being attacked?!). For unexplained reasons (other than that she's a moron, maybe?), Sam becomes convinced that David invited her solely because he wants to have sex with her. Why only she, and not her entire family, was invited goes unexplained.

I have no idea how Sam can be so utterly air-headed, so this is where this novel really got on the skids for me. The problem was not that sons of presidents never think about, or even never have, sex, but that I honestly couldn’t believe that any presidential son could possibly have an interest in someone as boring, vacuous, and shallow as Sam. Unless, of course, the son was at odds with his president dad, and wanting to rebel. But given the options he has, could he not have chosen someone a little more substantial to employ in his rebellion? And why would he choose a girl who saved his dad's life if he was rebelling? It would make a much more interesting story if he'd taken up with the daughter of the guy who sought to assassinate his dad! Now there would have been a novel!

Worse than this is that her older sister sells herself out as the brainless cheerleader stereotype when she buys into Sam's delusion and provides her with contraception, but apparently supplies no good sex advice along with the tools. This makes no sense on several levels. Sam is ambivalent about having sex (hence the novel's title), which is smart, yet she wants to go fully prepared for sex! In a way that's smart, but in other ways it’s dumb.

I mean, if she's ambivalent, she needs to say "No!" until she's not ambivalent, and it seems to me that while effective contraception is always a good idea, her sister's choice isn’t, and Sam's taking it along anyway suggests that she's willing to be compromised even if she's not on-board with this plan. This struck me as really dumb behavior on her part; it read (listened!) as being very confused and also confusing. I can see what Cabot is trying to do here, but I'm unconvinced that this is the best way to present this situation to a young audience - especially since the most important part - discussing this frankly with her intended partner - is entirely skipped.

Once I’d decided how I would rate this novel, I went out and read some reviews (positive and negative) to see if I’d missed anything that I ought perhaps to have considered. In general there was not, but what really struck me in a few of the negative reviews was the significant amount of hypocrisy in evidence. Several of them went beyond reviewing the novel into reviewing the author, accusing Cabot of having an agenda (which was to promote teen premarital sex)! I found it hilarious that not a single one of those reviewers ever considered that they themselves had a religious agenda which they were promoting.

I don’t have time for religion, which to me is no better than a bad fantasy novel. I do agree that keeping children safe and healthy is of prime importance, but the only proven way to do this is to educate them and continue to educate them, and this means being realistic about the way things actually are. You're not going to get anywhere if you put on religious blinkers and try to pretend that things are in real life like they were in old fifties TV shows, where the family is white, and completely respectable, and irrepressibly happy, and there's one boy and one girl, and every problem is solvable in thirty minutes - and there aren't even toilets in the house! Get real!

Teenagers have sex. It’s a fact of life! They're not going to stop. Nor are they going to run-off and start having sex simply because they read a bad Meg Cabot novel. If you think otherwise, you're delusional, period. Those with a Christian religious agenda seem to have completely (or conveniently) forgotten that we ran things their way for close to two thousand years and their religious agenda failed dismally. Christian "love" failed to prevent war, and indeed promoted many. It failed to prevent pregnancies in unmarried women. It failed to prevent women being abused. It failed to prevent children being abused. It failed to prevent diseases from spreading. It failed to keep children safe from exploitation, and from having their life put at risk or prematurely terminated.

These people seem to have forgotten that it was under religious rule - indeed because of religious rule - that we had the crusades and the inquisitions, and that we hung witches and burned heretics. I flatly refuse to go back to those days.

Nor does it make sense to lecture a girl that she must never have sex until some guy puts a ring on her finger. Marriage is not a protection against a guy running out on you. It does not guarantee that a guy will be faithful to you! There are no guarantees. Even going into it with the best of intentions, a couple can fall out of love. Those pushing this agenda are deliberately ignoring divorce statistics. There is no magic solution, and it's the height of dishonesty to pretend that they have a solution in their blind belief system.

The only thing you can do with kids is to raise them in the most loving environment you can, whether you're a happy married couple, a single mom or dad, or two dads or two moms. It makes no difference. You need to keep them as healthy as you can - which includes getting them their appropriate vaccinations - and giving them the best all-around education you can. You must refuse to shy away from some difficult questions they may ask. Keeping them ignorant is not an option and offers no protection. Once you've done all of this, you need to trust them, and that's it. You cannot live their life for them.

Blaming authors like Meg Cabot for the ills of the world is brain-dead and displays ignorance of the real facts of life. Blame her for putting out a badly written novel if you must, as I do, but she's not responsible for the way in which we, as a society, raise our kids, or for the behaviors of those kids when they reach teen-hood.


Thursday, March 27, 2014

Bras & Broomsticks by Sarah Mlynowski






Title: Bras & Broomsticks
Author: Sarah Mlynowski
Publisher: Random House
Rating: worthy!

This audio CD is read by Ariadne Meyers and she does an acceptable job, but is occasionally annoying.

Quite frankly, this one seemed a bit young for me, but I've never shied away from a novel for fear of embarrassment from its subject matter - only from fear of detesting one because it looked like it might be so awful I’d regret it! So this looked, from the blurb, like a fun read, but we all know how thoroughly blurbs lie. The vig was that I’d already read (read: listened) and enjoyed another one by this same author (Don't Even Think About It, so I decided to give it a try.

Once again it’s an unfortunate first person PoV story. I think such novels such have a government warning attached to them:

I nevertheless plunged recklessly on, and I started listening to it when one of my sons was in the car. While I wasn't impressed by the first chapter, he was. Hopefully he's going to drag himself away from his computer enough to read the paperback version I got for him, but I offer no guarantee.

Chapter two is better. This is where the story really begins and you can quite easily skip chapter one and start right here without missing a thing - unless you like rambling intros. There is some humor in it, a few laughs, but chapter one is like a prologue, and prologues, I detest. I resented that the author cheated and dragged me into reading her prologue by disguising it thus. And yes, I know advise authors to make their prologue chapter one instead of a prologue, but that advice carries the implicit assumption they have something useful to say in the prologue!

Chapter two is where the main character discovers that her younger sister has inherited her mother's witchcraft abilities. This power apparently travels only through the female line, of course, because nothing is more genderist than witchcraft. Also, there's no guarantee you'll get it. The main character doesn't, but her younger sister does. The very existence of witchcraft is a joke to the main character to begin with, but she quickly adapts when she realizes how much this can change her life for the better, only to be disappointed when her mom declares that using it only for pretty wish-fulfillment will lead to misery. Like she knows. There's no explanation, at least to begin with, as to why this should be so.

Her sister knew there was something different about her, but until her evil mom actually deigned to tell her she was a witch, she didn’t know what was going on. How a mother could abuse her daughter like this is a mystery, and honestly didn’t ring true to me, but it’s what you have to deal with. The young sister had resurrected her pet goldfish a few times, so she knew she had powers. This led to one of the most flat-out hilarious lines in the novel for me (but then I'm really warped). The narrator reads, "death and resurrection rigmarole", but she makes rigmarole sound like rigor-marole, as in rigor mortis. I don’t know if she did it on purpose, but she made me laugh out loud at that. I also found "The STB" (the name they give to their father's fiance - mom & dad are split up) an amusing way to refer to an un-liked "relative".

Unfortunately, I could not get into this novel. It was far too much whiny "Me! Me! Me!" from the main character and given that I detest the self-indulgence of main characters narrating their own story in the first place, this did not sit at all well with me. I found her story to be tedious, lacking in anything of interest, of no educational value, and with nothing new to say or to bring to the genre. So, I would normally rate this warty, but my son assures me it has merit, so I am going, for once, to use his rating and not mine! He rates this a worthy read. Blame him if you hate it!


Wednesday, March 26, 2014

One Man Guy by Michael Barakiva






Title: One Man Guy
Author: Michael Barakiva
Publisher: Macmillan Children's Publishing Group
Rating: WORTHY!


DISCLOSURE: Unlike the majority of reviews in this blog, I've neither bought this book nor borrowed it from the library. This is a "galley" copy ebook, supplied by Net Galley. I'm not receiving (nor will I expect to receive or accept) remuneration for this review.

Errata:
P14 "…you'll set to choose..." should be "…you'll get to choose…"?

p49 the word 'Capitalize' (which appears to be a reminder to the author) appears in the middle of a sentence.

The page numbering in the Adobe Reader version was bizarre. It seems like this was formatted for a Kindle or Nook, yet Net Galley offered it only in the Adobe Reader version. Page 78, for example, remained page 78 for a second page-down click, whereas p83 jumped straight to p85 with the same single click!

Additionally, in the weird-me-out stakes, there was a weird bit at the bottom of p143 where dad says that Alek has "...so much explaining to do…", then Alek says, "If you guys would just let me explain..." and then dad says "I don’t think I need an explanation for what I just saw..." Seriously? That's messed up, but at least he gets punished, if on a draconian level, for the right reasons.

The plot of this novel (which has the delightful acronym of OMG!) seems rather hackneyed and overdone at first glance: a teen who isn't aware he's gay discovers he is, has to face coming out to friends and family, and discovers the love of his life. if you're thinking of turning it down for that reason, you'll be making a mistake. Barakiva has a different tale to tell and he tells it well.

Aleksander Khederian (Alek) is forced to go to summer school and take several classes so he can maintain his honors academic status. He hates this, but in attending the class, he meets Ethan, a gay guy of whom he's long been aware, and who he met briefly not long before in an incident in the park. He seems to keep on running into Ethan from that moment on, and becomes rather disturbed as well as excited by the feelings he experiences for him.

Eventually Alek starts discussing Ethan with his best friend Becky, who has feelings for Alek that go beyond being just friends. She's the one who first articulates that Alek is gay. Becky is completely awesome. Why do I always fall in love with the main character's best friend? For me, she was the most awesome character in the whole book. She deserves a novel of her own!

Alek is evidently the last to realize his sexual persuasion, and this did seem to me to be a a bit much to believe, given that Alek is already 14 by this time. OTOH, Alek has led a very sheltered life and has had his TV time severely restricted by his parents who seem to me to be nothing short of evil, although technically, they aren’t. They are, however, improbably (and ironically!) anal about everything. The problem then is that we go immediately from Alek's denial that he's gay to him embracing it completely and at super-speed. I wasn't entirely convinced that these two behaviors go hand-in-hand.

Alek's family are Armenians, and for me there was a bit too much 'Armenian' in the story. For example, this Alek's father wants him to call him by the Armenian equivalent of 'dad'. I don’t get that, and neither, apparently, does Alek, which is why I like him. Personally, I've never understood this obsession amongst Americans to cling to their roots and at the same time cling to being "Americans"! That seems to me to be far too much like eating your cake and wanting to have it, too.

I realize that the 'Armenian factor' was important for the plot, but having it trumpeted so long and loud on every other page, and especially with the restaurant scene at the start, it was too heavy handed for my taste. I found it hard to transition from this 'obsession' to what happened with his parents later in the story, especially given how bigoted and racist (ethnicity-ist?!) they had showed themselves to be. They were also hypocrites given their attitude as stacked against their profession of being Christian. That kind of thing made it a lot harder for me to see the ending flowing naturally from the beginning; however on the brighter side of things, Barakiva did have something new and different to offer - at least in my experience! There was nothing hackneyed or overdone in how the excellent ending played out.

And to his credit, Barakiva nicely avoided a pet peeve of mine, namely that he knows there's no such thing as a tricep! Yes folks, it’s triceps, not tricep, and biceps, not bicep. He gets this and I love him for it!

The relationship between Alek and Ethan moves disturbingly quickly, but they are young teens. The scary part for me here was that I didn't trust Ethan. He's a thief for one thing and he's teaching Alek other bad habits too, like blowing off school, blowing off chores, leaving things until the last minute. In a sense he's also liberating Alek from a horribly stifling life, but I feared greatly for the outcome, and this does come back to haunt Alek. So was Ethan a bad boy to the core? You'll have to read this to find out, and I think you might be surprised at the ending. I was!

One of the most joyous (yes, joyous, you gotta problem wit dat?) things about this novel is that there's a love triangle, but it’s not your trope clichéd YA romance love triangle. It feels like a really honest and natural triangle. Instead of your trope YA main female character who can't decide between two equally worthless guys, this is a gay teen guy who has a boyfriend and a girlfriend, but the latter is in the sense of a friend who’s a girl, not a romance (or is it?!).

In conclusion, this turned out to be a fresh and interesting novel, and it made for a really great read. This is why I was willing to read past a rather naïve gay teen who's not even self-aware to begin with (let alone out!) meeting an experienced (and out) gay love interest. I have to reiterate though, that out of these three characters, the one which most interested and intrigued me was Becky. But that aside, this is a worthy read. Go read it!


Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Magic Lessons by Justine Larbalestier






Title: Magic Lessons
Author: Justine Larbalestier
Publisher: Razor Bill
Rating: Worthy!

Errata and clunkers:
p100 "They didn’t burn everything else, but. Just left a pile of ashes. I added some of the chicken bones. But it hasn’t been noisy or violent since then. Now it just ripples." Seriously?!

p118 "…every single person spoke completely different than her…" That's just clunky!

The "Golem" was originally banana yellow, then it's remembered as being red-brown, "the same color as it was originally"?!! Hmm?

Mere gets Jésus's magic and is able to fix her broken fingers, but when Tom gets a scrape she resorts to antiseptic and a Band-Aid®? Seriously? Clunky!

Yes! It's Justine Larbalestier month! You didn't know? This is volume 2 in the Magic or Madness series. Volume one is reviewed here. Reason Cansino is now living (if not completely comfortably) with her grandmother, referred to as Mere, but whether as in 'Nightmare' or as in 'grand-mère' remains to be seen! Mere lives in Sydney Australia. Reason still visits her mother in the psychiatric home, and lives somewhat in fear of her evil grandfather, "Jason" (or Alexander - Jason Alexander!) whom she met in volume one. Her grandfather is a magic leech - that is, he has magic, just as Reason does, but if he uses it, he sets himself up for an early death (as does Reason). If he doesn't use it, he'll become insane (as will Reason). The only solution, so he and others believe (Reason disagrees), is to use it, but to prolong your life by leeching magic from other magicians. One of these is Jay-Tee, whom Reason met when she accidentally ended up on New York City after going through the magic kitchen door in Mere's house. Another is Tom, a sweet guy Reason met when she went to live with Mere.

After a dangerous adventure on volume 1, Reason, Jay-Tee, and Tom are back with Mere, but Jay-Tee is dying, having been leeched almost dry by Jason. She has to take magic from Tom to give her a boost, which leaves him temporarily exhausted. Worse than this, someone is trying to force is way through the kitchen portal. At first they think it’s Reason's grandfather, but it turns out to be an ancient, all-but-inhuman ancestor of hers. This part of the novel was a really cool and interesting read, very well-written for the most part.

Eventually this ancestor succeeds in pulling Reason back through the door into NYC. He's extremely powerful, but he seems not to want to harm Reason, but to actually help her, although she seems to be rather slow on the uptake in that regard, as indeed she was from time to time in volume one. She ends up in the freezing cold again in her pajamas. The ancient won’t let her back through the magic door, so she ends up with Jay-Tee's estranged brother who she briefly met when she was here the last time. There seems to be some wish-fulfillment going on here, in that Larbalestier frees Reason from her nomadic existence in volume one in the Australian outback, where she owned nothing more than a backpack, and delivers her into the luxury of her grandmother's house. Even in NYC, Reason enjoys the sweet comfort of Jason's accommodations for Jay-Tee in volume one, and of Danny's luxurious apartment in volume two.

Reason decides to try and sniff-out the old man - since his horrible smell is easy for her to track - to see if she can discern what he's up to and why he's here. Why she didn’t simply ask him is unexplained. This part of the novel was not written at all well. I couldn’t figure out what Danny and Reason were supposed to have agreed they would do! Maybe it was just me because once I got past that confusing page, things made sense again. After being prevented yet again from going back through the kitchen portal, Reason discovers that the ancient stinky guy has put something inside her that helps her to track him without retching as the horrible nauseating stench he seems to trail behind him. It would seem he is trying to tell her something, but again why he doesn't simply speak - or put the information directly inside her head - is unexplained. She follows his path to a cemetery, which is evidently what he intended. Maybe his grave is there. This guy ultimately makes no sense in his behavior, serving only to be a deus ex machina plot-hole filler so... ok, I guess!

I have to ask why YA authors never depict people being killed off by their hero? Jason Blake is pure evil. He shows up to drain Reason of her magic and steals a boat-load of it. Danny renders him unconscious, yet Reason never pulls her magic back from Jason. She doesn’t even get her share back, much less drain him and end the problem right there. Instead, she runs away. That's not even remotely heroic. At some point the hero has to put an end to the evil, period. Anything else is cowardice and stupidity. Danny and Reason at one point have him at their mercy but instead of stopping things there and then, they encourage evil to continue by running away. Not smart, but it does net the author a third volume, which frankly is a bit pathetic.

No more spoilers! I finished this novel having had some issues with it, but overall I liked it and I do want to read volume three (which is just as well since I already have it to hand!). So what didn't I like (in addition to what I've already mentioned)? And why am I asking you? Larbalestier keeps tripping up her action by splitting the story up between Sydney where Jay-Tee, Mere, and Tom are, and NYC, where Danny and Reason are. That was annoying because it kept interrupting the action and larding-up the text with cheap and completely fake 'tragic' moments. I despise this 'cheap-thrill' kind of writing, so I was glad when it had to give way to a straight narrative

Eventually it reached a point at the end of the novel where Reason is no longer the student but the master (mistress? Gender tropes in YA fiction!), so I guess Larbalestier achieved her stated goal in the novel's title. I was less thrilled about going into volume three after I’d read two, than I was about going into volume two after I’d read one, but I was still on-board with this series. It’s original and interesting - if a bit too indulgent of Le Stupide in this volume. That said I rate this a worthy read and I think it’s worth exploring what Larbalestier has to say in volume three.