The Address (Book Review)

The Address by Fiona Davis
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

While The Lions of Fifth Avenue has the better title, The Address may have the better plot. While I definitely appreciated all of the facts about the New York City Public Library in the former, I was often distracted by what I felt were inconsistencies in the historical settings; by contrast, The Address doesn't seem to offer up nearly as many factoids, but the timelines are spot on.

One may consider Davis' novels to be a bit formulaic: two women on two different ends of history, one (real) historic building connecting them, with a mystery across decades/centuries to solve. So far, though, the mysteries are not the same, and The Address provided some extra twists that I did not anticipate. And everyone knows it's the above formula that counts, it's the "how" -- how we get there, how the stories connect, etc. Davis seems to have that aspect well in hand.

As with Lions, The Address has an undercurrent of (much appreciated and respected) feminism throughout, much subtler, actually. And she deals with classism as well.
I also like that her main characters are well-rounded. 

**SPOILER**

When we get to the final reveal, our villain isn't a villain with one huge deep dark secret that drops like a bomb; it's a series of "smaller" items that add up to make him not the person we thought he was. I don't think he's 100% bad in way that would seem cliche or stereotypical; that might feel anticlimactic to readers, but I appreciate the nuance.

This novel doesn't exactly have a happy ending; it's far more tragic than The Lions of Fifth Avenue, in my opinion.

I've borrowed Davis' other novels from my local library, and at least one of them does not deal with two women on opposite ends of the century; it will be interesting to see how Davis deals with the shorter timeline(s).

View all my reviews

The Lions of Fifth Avenue (Book Review)

The Lions of Fifth Avenue by Fiona Davis
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

If you enjoyed A Gentleman in Moscow , you may well enjoy this book as well, with its strong sense of place, both historically and physically with the main building involved. In many ways, The Lions of Fifth Avenue is what I wanted Donna Tartt's The Goldfinch to be: pieces of historical fiction with an art mystery at the center (and no whiny white boy with mommy issues just making the same mistakes over and over again -- can you tell I did not care for The Goldfinch?).

Fiona Davis does extensive research on the buildings in which she places her research, and it shows. I continue to say it's the mark of a good piece of historical fiction when I want to do more research afterward, to see what's "true" and what isn't, to learn about the subject matter. And Davis has done that here; I know more about the New York Public Library than just that it's featured in Ghostbusters, and now I really want to visit it if I ever get back to New York again.

My quibbles are just that --small and probably trivial, but here are they are nonetheless:

**CONTAINS SPOILERS**

• I nearly wanted it to be longer as I finished it in a day.
• I sometimes questioned the math regarding the ages and relationships of our two main women, Laura Lyons and Sadie Donovan. I would have expected at least one more generation in between them. If Sadie is 43 during the "present day" (1993) pieces, that means she was born in 1950. So why does she wear vintage 1950s things when those are the very fashions she grew up with? That would be like me wearing 1980s stuff now, which doesn't seem far enough removed to be "vintage" or "retro," just odd.
• And her brother Lonnie is roughly 10 years older than she is, making him born in 1940 (and a 53-year-old father of a six-year-old girl, still pretty unusual in the 1990s), making their mother (Pearl, age 7 in 1913) 34 when she had Lonnie and 44 when she had Sadie -- that seems a bit of a stretch, especially for a woman in 1940s America.
• Davis may have been better suited to place Sadie & Lonnie about ten years later in time, inserting another generation between the families. I can see why she chose 1993, though, as she doesn't have to deal with the technology of mobile phones, social media, etc., which can make mystery-writing infinitely more complicated.
• Even though I said I nearly wanted the book itself longer, the ending/wrap-ups seemed too long. We like to have things wrapped up, and yes, we wanted to know the specific connection of Robin to the family, but that entire section seemed too long. It was a lot of exposition, particularly about Harry, and I don't think we needed that much detail. We wanted to know the connection, but why he stayed away, etc. -- we could have easily filled in the blanks ourselves. So much guilt and cowardice at the end didn't really benefit anyone, audience or characters. I also found the sentencing at the trial to be a bit sanctimonious and heavy-handed.

I'm pleased to discover that Davis has other similar historical books with mysteries at the center of them, and I'm looking forward to reading them.

View all my reviews

The Other Bennet Sister (Book Review)

The Other Bennet Sister by Janice Hadlow
My rating: 1 of 5 stars

**DNF**

I could not finish this book; it was an effort to get through the 100 pages (only 22% of the book!) that I did. It was simply too sad, too depressing.

After I got through the issue of reconciling what I knew of Mary's character from Pride & Prejudice with Hadlow's "version," there was the much larger issue of this "new" Mary's existence being utterly awful. Hadlow seems to have forgotten that Austen's original work is a comedy; this book is not a comedy but some terrible drama about a lonely, misunderstood girl surrounded by one-dimensional characters. While many of the original Pride & Prejudice characters are intended to be ridiculous, farcical, and/or satirical, Hadlow has made them simply mean.

Remembering that this book does "catch up" to the events of P&P, I forced myself to at least read that far, for curiosity's sake. And while I believe this book extends past the events of P&P to continue with Mary's life, I simply couldn't punish myself any further. I have no idea how it ends, but I couldn't endure Mary's misery any longer.

View all my reviews

The Southern Book Club's Guide to Slaying Vampires (Book Review)

The Southern Book Club's Guide to Slaying Vampires by Grady Hendrix
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

In all fairness to Mr. Hendrix, I should stipulate that my two-star rating has less to do with his writing quality and more to do with the fact that this book was not what I was expecting.
Based on the title and the synopsis, I was expecting something funnier, cleverer, sassier, possibly even sillier. This book is not those things.

I did not expect but did appreciate the feminism, the blasting of 1980s and 90s patriarchy, the acknowledgement of systemic racism and white privilege.

Hendrix lost me at the gore, I suppose. If you are a fan of horror as a genre, you may well enjoy this book and his gruesome turn of phrase. I did not, and a few times considered putting the book down; another point in Hendrix's favor that I did actually finish the novel.

**SPOILER ALERT**

I would also call this "the book of false endings." 

At several different chapters' ends, I expected the next chapter to be a sort of wrap-up, a "where are they now" with our antagonist firmly put in his place with perhaps a smug thought from Patricia and/or her cohorts. That does not happen. The book keeps going, and when the antagonist does finally meet his doom at the hands of the Southern ladies, it is neither clever nor smart nor neatly tied up with a bow; it is, however,...thorough.

View all my reviews

Lady of Devices (Book Review)

Lady of Devices by Shelley Adina
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

FINALLY! A steampunk novel that isn't utter crap! I am wary not only of popular things, but of incredibly prolific authors; for some reason, I am suspicious of authors that can "crank out" so many novels, feeling that the writing quality can't possibly be good or sustained (if it starts out well enough). Also too many fancy covers and promises of steampunk with strong women characters have left me utterly disappointed.

Thanks to Shelley Adina, I can finally put my finger on what was missing from those other novels: the Britishness, the Victorian attitudes and mores and language. It's not enough to simply throw some steam gadgetry at your characters and have them drink tea.
Like Gail Carriger, Adina knows how the classes in Victorian England function, in addition to modes of dress, and how the people sound. Far too often wannabe steampunk novels simply don't sound like Victorian England.

My trepidation when starting this book (this series, really) soon vanished. While the overall story arc was absolutely not what I was expecting, I read the entire novel in one sitting and have already purchased the next three. I hope Adina can maintain this trajectory (and my faith in her writing skills).

View all my reviews

The Girls With No Names (Book Review)

The Girls with No Names by Serena Burdick
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This was very well-written, although I'm still not entirely sure what to say about it. The tragedies involved are almost Shakespearean with their miscommunication and misinformation. It is a tragedy, but not hopeless, I don't think. Towards the end, I found myself thinking not quite "How are we going to get out of this?" but "How is this going to end in a way that isn't utterly despairing?" But Burdick found a way that was both (mostly) satisfying and still believable within the context of the story.

I read it in under two days, which means it kept my interest the whole time (and that's saying something). The changing point of views in the chapters is well done and not confusing; the same with the changing time periods in the main story timeline. Even as the original "mystery" gets answered, we still want to see how all the different stories come together. The historical aspects feel accurate; also be sure to check out Burdick's afterword as she touches on some important points, including the use of the word "gypsy."

I guess I'm giving it three stars ("I liked it") rather than 4 because I'm unsure what I was supposed to get from it -- other than feminist anger and hatred for organized religion, both of which I already have in spades. It could also be the tragic nature of the stories being told; that's not my usual preference or genre in what I read.

View all my reviews

Snowspelled (Book Review)

Snowspelled by Stephanie Burgis
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book came recommended from Gail Carriger, whose writing I greatly enjoy, and it was available for free at that particular moment in time.

I enjoyed it for the most part. I particularly like Burgis' feminist take on politics and having a matriarchal society; unfortunately, women are still pigeon-holed, and our brazen protagonist challenges those stereotypes head-on.

My quibbles, I think, mostly have to do with Burgis' writing style. There are several repeated words and phrases (like "cossetted") that could have benefitted from an editor with a thesaurus. "Cossetted" is a good word and definitely appropriate for how it is being used, but it should have been changed up a bit more. Burgis also continually refers to the soft "hiss" sound that the falling snow makes. I grew up in Midwestern winters and have never once heard snow "hiss" -- unless, of course, it was falling on an open flame of some sort. Not only was that bit repetitive, but didn't quite make sense.

Lastly, we continually get reference to whatever traumatic event happened to Cassandra 4 months earlier and she pretty much wanted to commit suicide after. I think that reveal could have come earlier on, as it's a bit anticlimactic where it is; and again, the references to the event (including word choices) grow repetitive to the reader.

I am partially tempted to continue this series as I do enjoy the world Burgis has built, but we shall see.

View all my reviews

The House in the Cerulean Sea (Book Review)

The House in the Cerulean Sea by T.J. Klune
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I loved this book. I really did. I may have been slightly hormonal while reading as I cried (often "happy" tears) throughout the entire thing. I also devoured the book in one sitting. The colorful characters, these poor traumatized children; "found family" is one of my favorite tropes.

I also love that Klune does not pull any punches when it comes to bigotry and prejudices; he makes sure you get the symbolism and allegory right away, unambiguously: "Just because you don’t experience prejudice in your everyday doesn’t stop it from existing for the rest of us.”
For all of those moments (many of which I highlighted in my notes), this is a perfect book for right now in 2020.

I gave it 4 instead of 5 stars for the following reasons:
-despite having queer characters and a lot of nontraditional aspects, the two main (adult) characters are still two white men.
-the Black woman character spends most of her time in the kitchen.
-the Black boy character is a "dog."

I realize that the above are not without nuance when reading the actual story, but I think it's important to also realize how the facts look "on paper," so to speak, without context, when attempting to be diverse and inclusive.

Lastly, Phee seemed to be the least developed character. I would not be surprised if an editor said, "You need more than one girl child character. Put in another one," and this is the result. I say that because in almost any of the given situations, you know the reactions of almost all of the children, where they are, and/or what they are doing (often because they are so unique). Except Phee. There is the one scene with her and Linus and Zoe, but other than that, I feel like she is an afterthought.

View all my reviews

The Magicians - Almost a Review

The Magicians by Lev Grossman
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I did not finish this book. I was curious as to how the written texts were different from the show (which I do watch as a guilty pleasure), but simply not curious enough to keep reading. I'm already bored with Quentin's near-constant teenage horniness for nearly every breathing female that crosses her path. I'm also surprised (don't know why) and depressed by the overwhelming whiteness; characters of color in the TV show are boring ol' Anglo-Saxons in the original text.
Frankly, it became too much work to keep reading, especially when I already know (or at least think I know) what major events are going to happen.

I will say one thing in its favor: author Lev Grossman nails on the head what depression often feels like with this one quote:

"Quentin knew he wasn’t happy. Why not? He had painstakingly assembled all the ingredients of happiness. He had performed all the necessary rituals, spoken the words, lit the candles, made the sacrifices. But happiness, like a disobedient spirit, refused to come."

For now, I'll still to indulging in the TV show as it isn't taxing, and I love Margo's swearing.

View all my reviews

Reticence: A Review

Reticence by Gail Carriger
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Reticence marks the end of an era, as Miss Gail Carriger has already stated that there will be no more books in the Parasol Protectorate/Custard Protocol universe. For that alone it deserves the four stars as creating this universe and such a series of books (3 generations of characters!) is no small feat.

The rest of this review does have spoilers, so click accordingly. 

Was Reticence Carriger's best book in the series? No, it wasn't. She's had others that made me feel more (How to Marry a Werewolf comes to mind; I bawled like a baby at Faith's big reveal); she's had others that made me laugh more at some of the ridiculousness and utterly dry delivery (the lobster line in Poison or Protect, anyone?). And, of course, nothing beats the original; Soulless was the first love for many of us.

Like many sequels, prequels, and other "-els", Reticence sometimes falls into the trap of wrapping up things a little too neatly; Carriger, of course, acknowledges this with the cheeky epilogue, aptly titled "With a Neat Little Bow." Bringing in the characters from the Finishing School series felt a little forced. While we knew that Agatha was sponsored by Lord Akeldama (a.k.a. Goldenrod), the fact that he's been playing this game with these ladies all along was perhaps a little too contrived. Similarly, mentioning that "Miss Imogene" had been around "forever" (with Genevieve LeFoux) felt shoe-horned in, probably because of the writing order; when we're first introduced to adult Quesnel in Prudence (and his mother), Romancing the Inventor (Imogene's introduction to the universe) hadn't been written yet.

My other quibble (and it really just a quibble, a matter of style and preference, really) is one that I also noticed in both The 5th Gender and Competence: playing the ending. When our two main characters meet, their romantic involvement is already a foregone conclusion. Granted, we spend the book watching them try to tell each other (which is amusing); however, I seem to prefer it when we spend a good portion of the book watching the characters trying to figure out their feelings. Arsenic and Percy (and Tris and his detective, and to a lesser extent Prim and Tasherit) already know they are attracted to each other. To me, the rest of the novel then feels a bit rushed since we already know the conclusion coming. I much preferred it, to use an example, when Alexia and Connall didn't quite realize their feelings for each other (though nearly everyone else around them did); their dance around each other (and their feelings) was much more interesting to me that way. It could also be due to the narration type in the books; Alexia's books are primarily (though not 100%) from her limited POV; in the others, we get fairly unfettered access to several different characters' minds.

All of that said, do I regret buying this within minutes of it being released and procrastinating at my office over the course of two days to read it? Absolutely not.
It was still full of Carriger style: charming, sweet, flirty (yes, please, to the boot-unlacing bit!) and had my favorite cameo thus far (Lady Manami).

View all my reviews

School for Sidekicks: A Review

School for Sidekicks by Kelly McCullough
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book is fun and a fairly easy read. It definitely could be classified as "Young Adult" lit. I liked it just fine, although there's nothing particularly outstanding to write home about. #SPOILER -- STOP READING HERE[leave plenty of room for a sequel or three as there is no real resolution, not to the major issue at hand. That said, there's barely a resolution to many of the smaller issues. That's not necessarily a bad thing; not everything has to be wrapped up neatly in a bow. (hide spoiler)]



McCullough does [eave plenty of room for a sequel or three as there is no real resolution, not to the major issue at hand. That said, there's barely a resolution to many of the smaller issues. That's not necessarily a bad thing; not everything has to be wrapped up neatly in a bow.


If you have a day to spare and like superheroes, give it a try.
A quote I highlighted (and good to know):  "for the record, fresh scabweb tastes like condensed essence of armpit."

View all my reviews

American Godz on Starz

When it was announced that Neil Gaiman's American Gods was being made into a television show and a good portion of my Twitter went wild, I decided I should read the book (before watching the show, of course, like a good doobie).  When Tom + Lorenzo started posting their reviews and I would catch a glimpse of a costume in their thumbnails, I thought, Now I really need to read this.  And then, eventually, I really need to finish this book.

~Spoilers Follow;  You've Been Warned~

It was a beast of a book to read.  And I'm still not entirely sure why.  Yes, it's 600-some pages long, but I've read longer.  Yes, it deals with a lot of mythology, but hello, Tolkien nerd here.  If I had to try to verbalize (in bullet-point fashion, of course), why getting through this book sometimes seemed onerous, I'd say:

• Non-linear timelines
• Non-tangential tangents/storylines
• A lot of dusty, back road travelling
• Some tough visualizations (mostly with the coin tricks, but I eventually had to accept that my spatial recognition is sub-part at best and just move on)

Some of those may seem odd (especially the travelling bit), so let me explain.  American Gods the novel is very interior; it is almost entirely Shadow's story with a lot of important pieces taking place entirely in Shadow's memory and/or subconscious.  American Gods the novel is also a literal journey (not just the figurative hero's quest, which it also is); Gaiman does a good job conveying the sense of wandering and sometimes isolation/desolation when traveling the dirt roads of the Midwest and other places.  For someone who doesn't enjoy that sensation (one too many road trips in Midwest growing up), that can be a bit headache-inducing.

There were some points that left me hanging and some things that I just didn't "get."  Many of the "non-tangential tangents" are simply there to show how the old gods came to America.  And that's it.  They are part of a larger tapestry, but on their own, they're sometimes just loose threads.

But I finished it nonetheless and wasn't entirely dissatisfied with the process.  And then my Unit and I started to watch the first season of the television adaptation via Starz.  And damn.

Shit just got real, as they say.

I could write an entire paper on the opening credit sequence alone.  The visualization and symbols used are amazing and intense and I have yet to get tired of watching it.  It's even been nominated for an Emmy (did you know there's a category for opening credits?  I didn't.).

I had read on Twitter from Gaiman himself that:

• Season 1 ends at House on the Rock
• Some things happen out of order

I remembered getting to House on the Rock in the book, and I thought Wow, it takes an entire season to get there?

And then shit got even real-ER.  As in there is a veritable shit-ton of stuff happening in this series that simply does not exist in the book.  A friend said, "Oh, so they're expanding the shit out of it?" but I'm still not convinced "expand" is even the right word.  More like "created mythologies to go along with the other mythologies [that Gaiman invented to go with existing mythologies]."  Are you confused yet?  Good.  

First and foremost, Gillian Anderson is a goddess.  Watching her as Media in these different representations is a fucking master class on acting.  She's amazing.  She's never quite doing an "impression" of the famous person/character, but she is unmistakably them and also herself as Media.  And here's where we differ from the books.  Media talks to Shadow as Lucy ("Hey, you wanna see Lucy's tits?") from I Love Lucy, that's there (and awesome).  But then, THEN, THEN Media shows up as:

• David Bowie (in his blue "Life on Mars" suit)
• Marilyn Monroe (white dress from Seven Year Itch, complete with wind effects;skirt-blowing)
• Judy Garland (in her final costume from Easter Parade, complete with a dancing Fred Astaire, of sorts)

It's brilliant and makes me think, Why didn't Gaiman do that?  In fact, I find myself asking that a lot whilst watching.  But more on that later.  Watching Anderson in American Gods is worth the price admission, period.  Any other faults, supposed or real, are washed away.

Another major difference is the treatment of Laura (a.k.a. "dead wife"), as in, she actually gets one.  There's little background to Laura in the book, and I was fine with that.  In fact, I am strongly disliking this extra treatment of her in the series.  I'm not sure if it's the actress or the character, but I am so over her.  Shadow could do so much better than her.  Her initial boredom with life, her treatment of him -- she has few redeeming qualities.  I think I'd rather know nothing about her than know that she really is a horrible human being (dead or alive).  The book offers a small bit of redemption for her, and that was all we needed.  I also appreciated the fact that in the novel she only sporadically showed up to Shadow; we have way too much Laura in this visual version.  It also doesn't help that they cast an actress whose nude body looks like a 12-year-old child, therefore making all of her nude work and sexual interactions really, really uncomfortable.  Eww.

On the positive side, in this incarnation, more Laura means more Mad Sweeney!  Yay!  I am really enjoying Pablo Schreiber's performance; you could have fooled me that he's not actually Irish.  And his IMDb.com headshot makes him look like a psychopath; I think I prefer his Mad Sweeney look.  But I often wondered about Mad Sweeney and the coin (with regards to the book); maybe I just wanted things spelled out for me more.  At any rate, him saying, "She's a lepre-cunt" made me LOL.

More thoughts, Leonard's patented (not really) bullet-point style:

• Ricky Whittle is a STUNNING man and does very solid work as Shadow Moon
• Ian McShane does some darn good work as Mr. Wednesday, too.  Not quite the casting coup as Gillian Anderson, in my opinion, but a close runner-up.
• Hey look, it's Cloris Leachman!
• "Vulcan."  I see what you did there.  (That entire episode is not in the book, nor are any swords, but I enjoy Corbin Bernsen, so I'll let it slide.  Plus the gun commentary is timely, appropriate, and terrifying.  P.S.  Did you know a Psych movie is coming??)

Unfortunately, I call bullshit on the casting of Kristin Chenoweth as Easter/Aostara.  Yes, she's adorable and should probably always dress in pastels and be surrounded by bunnies.  But in the novel, Shadow specifically uses the word voluptuous to describe Easter.  Despite her many other qualities, wee Chenoweth is decidedly not voluptuous.  It's important because Easter represents life, fertility, the bountiful plenitude of spring and harvests.  She should practically be bursting with womanhood.  They should have cast Christina Hendricks (a.k.a. Joan from Mad Men) as Easter.  Or, y'know, me.  But whatever.

I can see a bit why Hendricks may have scared them off; she plays a lot of strong characters.  They would have missed the adorable "cuteness" of Chenoweth's candy-colored extravaganza.  They would have missed the (cheap?) joke of her getting upset at her own swearing.  I know Hendricks can play sweet and girlie because I've seen Firefly, but I can see that thought process against using her.  Nonetheless, her body type (not to mention her acting chops!) is what Easter requires.

Other changes (really without commentary):

• Laura interacting with Audrey post-death
• Ibis and Jacquel sewing Laura back up
• Mr. Nancy sewing Easter suits for Shadow and Wednesday
• More of Salim (who is still looking for his Ifrit-lover).
• Bilquis' back story.
• Bilquis interacting with Technology Boy
• Wednesday and Shadow getting caught, arrested, and then an entire police station of workers murdered.
• Easter joining "the fight."
• Taking back the Spring.

Continually comparing the show to the book is not necessarily an exercise in futility but not always helpful either.  Sometimes it is just comparison for comparison's sake with no real purpose (English teacher habits die hard).  Having read the book helps point me in the right direction, but (and my English teacher self cringes typing this) I don't think it's all that necessary in order to watch and enjoy the television adaptation.

I've read this far; where the fuck are the pics, Leonard?

I couldn't possibly do them justice, friends.  Do yourself a favor and go read TLo's breakdown and costume analyses of each episode (which is what I'm going to do in a hot second).  They go episode by episode and are therefore much more in-depth than Leonard is here.

Armada (Book Review)

Armada by Ernest Cline
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

First things first: is it as good as Ready Player One? That's kind of a loaded question. I can answer it by saying this is different from Ready Player One. While still definitely science fiction, Armada is firmly rooted in the present (well, 2015, when it was published), whereas Ready Player One exists in a mythical near-future. If you like your sci-fi farther away than the here and now, then no, you probably won't enjoy Armada as much as you enjoyed Ready Player One.

Putting Armada in the "real world" (so to speak) does allow for some great additional pop culture references that wouldn't have otherwise made it in. Pop culture and geeky stuff is one of the things Ernest Cline excels at, so he's doing us all a favor by adding some more. Where Ready Player One had a heavy 80s nostalgia going on, Armada gives us that, some mid-70s nostalgia like Star Wars, and then some more contemporary stuff like Firefly and Battlestar Galactica, plus some additional genres -- meaning, we're not just dealing with video game-type nostalgia here, we're dealing with science fiction across movies and games, alien invasions like Close Encounters, Contact, and (of course) Independence Day.

Armada is pretty action-oriented; indeed, most of the major plot events take place over the course of just a few hours, rather days or months. Additionally, if it's hard for you to visualize some things like spaceship cockpits, aerial maneuvers, and fighting techniques (like it is for me), you may start to glaze over (like I did) when Cline's text gets weighed down by his own technical prowess. Even so, I didn't stop reading (finished it in 3 days).

Other possible "cons" -- yes, it is a coming of age story of sorts. So if you don't like reading about teenage white boys attempting to figure out life, you won't like this; thankfully, that aspect is neither forced nor the focus of the story, otherwise my patience would have been spent. And it's definitely a story with some "daddy issues," which Cline's protagonist calls out right away. In fact, he acknowledges a couple of tropes right out of the gate, and some of them even get subverted a bit, which I always appreciate. But "daddy issues" also have their place of honor in most sci-fi canons, so it's not out of place in Armada either.

Last but not least, these are teenage boys, and they speak like teenage boys, most of which I found both realistic and pretty amusing. And possibly indicative that I might also speak like a teenage boy.

View all my reviews

Review: Marine Biology

Marine Biology by Gail Carriger
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Three stars is rather low for me for a Gail Carriger book. I think much of that stems from it being rather short (yes, I know it's a short story). Nonetheless, it felt a bit rushed, especially toward the end: one sort-of dinner date, and now (Read on Goodreads to view spoiler)[ Alex and Marvin are together forever? Okay, maybe not forever, (hide spoiler)] but it still seemed a little too "wrapped up neatly with a bow" for my taste.

On the other hand, some of the exposition just left me with more questions: like why are two merpeople investigating financial crimes? Is this a twentieth-century, American version of B.U.R. (and maybe I missed that detail?)?

Now that I think about it, "Two merpeople investigating financial crimes" actually sounds like a decent T.V. series -- BRB!

Review: The Paper Magician

The Paper Magician by Charlie N. Holmberg
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Well, like many books, this one started out well. My first thoughts within the first couple of chapters were that it was hitting the Daddy Long-Legs-meets-Jane-Eyre genre fairly hard. That's not necessarily a bad thing; it was just very obvious. Just as that bit was nearly played out, EXPLOSIONS!

And then the majority of the book was spent traveling through Magician Thane's literal and metaphorical heart(s). At the same time. Don't ask me how that's possible because I don't know. Once Ceony survived that, the ending was predictable as the above mentioned books would have it, if a little "twee" (and less adult) in its presentation.

My issues with this book can be listed as follows:
No subtlety: in addition to the obvious ploys listed above, there was little subtlety anywhere to be found. Our villainess Lira had blood-red lips, dark eyes, a large bosom, and if that wasn't enough, she actually threw blood from her dripping fingertips. Nothing delicate or subtle there.

Time period anachronisms: if you're going to insist that the book is set in late eighteenth-early twentietch century London, then you best be sure to not use contemporary words such as "make-up," "barrettes," "catering," and the like. How could a man slip his "ungloved hand" up Ceony's skirt if she was standing and he was seated? The skirt would have been down to her ankles, not to mention the layers of petticoats and undergarments. A lady, even an evil lady like Lira, never would have worn pants. A schoolgirl like Ceony would have been shocked to seem them. And they wouldn't have been called "pants" (see below).

Lack of Britishisms: I haven't looked up if Holmberg is British, but for a book set in England, it was nearly devoid of Englishness, including but not limited to: tea (serving and making of), saying "trousers" instead of "pants," etc.

It's entirely fine to have an English-like universe set it an unnamed time where one can mix and match their verbiage as they see fit. However, by giving concrete times and places, a writer is best to stick within those conventions. If you don't know the conventions, do the research. If you don't want to do the research, don't give concrete details to which your story is tied.

Pros:
To quote the book, "I like the dog."

While Book #2 promises to continue Ceony and Thane's story, I doubt I'll be reading it.

View all my reviews

Book Review: Poison or Protect

Poison or Protect by Gail Carriger
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

Let it be known that I don't often give five-star reviews. So for a novella to earn that from me,...well, that's kind of a big deal. But when I finished Gail Carriger's Poison or Protect I was satisfied, for lack of a better word. I couldn't think of something I'd want to change or rewrite or edit; there was nothing dangling in my head as "unfinished."

It is the mark of a good writer that s/he can make us feel affection for villains, or, more accurately, that s/he gives us rounded, fleshed out characters who are complicated and complex, rather than flat characters who can be described as "hero" or "villain" with no grey area in between*. And Carriger has just done just that with Lady Preshea Villentia, the Mourning Star (and extra points for always giving us fantastic character names!).

If you've read Carriger's "Finishing School" series, you will recognize Preshea as one of the "mean girls" of Mademoiselle Geraldine’s Finishing Academy for Young Ladies of Quality.

[Please note that you absolutely do not have to read those four books in order to read and enjoy this novella. Some of the winks and nods to the reader may be lost on you, but you won't even notice as they fly by.]

Telling (at least half of) this story from Preshea's point of view gives us a chance to understand her and her meanness just a bit more. Carriger doesn't try to change or rescue Preshea; she simply gives us insight to a complicated character. As Poison or Protect takes places a couple of decades after the Finishing School series, there is plenty of time for Carriger to fill in Preshea's backstory.

I also found it rather remarkable that, for a universe built on the existence of the supernatural (as that's where the Parasol Protectorate books start), there are only two -- count' em, TWO -- supernatural characters in this book**. And only briefly at that. (You'll recognize them both.) While some of the other characters refer, briefly and generally, to werewolves and vampires, they are not the focus; and the book does not suffer for it. I don't think that's a feat easily attained.

And while we're on the subject, the "steampunkiness" of Carriger's universe is also not such a focus in this novella. A couple of dirigibles here and there, and that's about it. Very little gadgetry, yet we do not notice that it's missing. It was only after the fact that I came to these two realizations.

So without the supernatural and without the steampunk, what are we left with? Dammit, Gail Garriger, you got me to read a romance novel(la)!! And I may or may not have enjoyed it. I may never forgive you for that.

Speaking of romance, Carriger manages to write some very tasteful (though no less sexy and/or erotic) sex scenes. I think I saw the word "cock" maybe once. I'm no shrinking violet when it comes to sex (or sex scenes), but there was nothing crude or vulgar about these. I appreciated that.

Last but not least: writing in Scottish dialect. I don't think I'll ever tire of some of these characters and their "dinna's" and "ken's." It's just sprinkled in there, even in their thoughts, and never forced in a way that feels like "I'M SCOTTISH. HERE I AM SPEAKING SCOTTISH AND DOING SCOTTISH THINGS."

So go, read, enjoy. Whether or not you do it whilst drinking tea and wearing a corset is up to you.

*See also Marissa Meyers' Fairest (Lunar Chronicles #3.5), or even just the first few chapters of Game of Thrones. When the POV switches, we suddenly find ourselves not sure whose side we're supposed to be on.
**I should say three, I think. There is Formerly Connie.
***Y'know what,...there is something slightly left unfinished: (click to read whole review with spoiler).

View all my reviews

Book Review: A Hundred Essays I Don't Have Time to Write

100 Essays I Don't Have Time to Write: On Umbrellas and Sword Fights, Parades and Dogs, Fire Alarms, Children, and Theater by Sarah Ruhl
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

You MUST read this book. If you are an actor, playwright, dramaturg, technician, director, producer, stage manager, and/or lover of theatre/storytelling of any kind, you need to allow Sarah Ruhl's brilliant essays into your life. There are only a hundred of them (with the longest being maybe three pages); you'd do well to find the time.

Ruhl's wit and wisdom are apparent in the very title, and they carry through her offerings. One of this book's best qualities is that these are a hundred essays she "doesn't have time to write" -- meaning, none of them are too long, and Ruhl isn't necessarily digging for truth or trying to unlock the earth's great mysteries. She asks a lot of questions, but does not force any answers. Ruhl tells some wonderful, touching, funny stories (some of which may or may not have brought me to tears whilst on the treadmill at the gym), but she's not didactic. She'll make you stop and think about storytelling and theatre and drama and communities and our need for play and social interaction. But she'll never make you feel like she's demanding that you think about these things.

I didn't necessarily agree with all of the points she brought up (her bit on subtext in dialogue, in particular, seemed counter to everything I've learned), but I appreciated the opportunity to see another viewpoint and to maybe -- just maybe -- approach some of my own work differently.

I borrowed this book from the library, but that didn't stop me from highlighting a passage in nearly every essay, sometimes two! (On my Kindle, people, don't freak out.) I'm still going to have to buy it so I can go back and read those gems whenever I like.

Like I said, you MUST READ THIS BOOK. This book is a necessary tool of the craft, right up there with Anne Lamott's Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life. The two shall be bosom companions on my bookshelf.

View all my reviews

Matched: A Review

Matched by Ally Condie
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

There were times that I was willing to write off this book as yet another YA, dystopian lit. knock-off, focused on "does he really like me?" What separates this book (and hopefully the whole series) from the herd, I think, is its focus on art and creativity. The ruling class ("the Society") doesn't just control food, (read entire review on Goodreads for spoiler)[they control ideas, art, music, poetry, and literature. That hit home with me. In order to "streamline" civilization to the most advanced, only one hundred of each category (songs, paintings, poems, books) were chosen to be preserved. The rest, sadly, were destroyed. (hide spoiler)] That aspect made this futuristic Society very real for me, more so than most other novels, because it refers to things we have here and now in tangible manner.

Yes, there is the teenager love-triangle issue, although I imagine that all dystopian fiction has to have some aspect of love/want/desire to fuel the protagonist's fight for change. (At least in the The Hunger Games, the initial love was familial and not romantic.)

Condie's novel kept me reading and interested (which is saying a lot), and I will be pursuing the next book in the series to see where it goes. Hopefully she can maintain this momentum and interest through all three books (and not fall flat by the third, as so many do -- Allegiant, I'm looking at you).

View all my reviews

Let's Talk Stalking

January 2016 is National Stalking Awareness month, and naturally, Leonard has something to say about that.  But first, a story.

Once upon a time Princess Leonard Leonora was cast in a show playing an actual princess.  The show came at a very difficult time; Leonora was in the midst of a very public, very messy divorce.  Leonora's ex had also been cast in the show; at the time of casting, they were still married.  Leonora's soon-to-be-ex-husband quickly dropped the show before rehearsals started, during the divorce process.  Leonora couldn't understand why.  Their characters barely had any stage time together, and when they did, they hated each other; where's the acting part?

The night immediately after said soon-to-be-ex-husband dropped the show due to impending divorce, I got a call (while performing elsewhere).  The caller was from one of my future cast mates suggesting we get coffee or lunch together sometime soon, since we would be working together.  It was at this time that my "silent alarm" went off, for a couple of reasons.

1. People using the cast contact list for non-work-related reasons should be treated with suspicion.  One must have a very good reason to use a work distribution list to contact a near-stranger for something personal.
2. For whatever reason, this man, this cast mate, gave me that knot in my stomach.  My inner alarm said, "DANGER WILL ROBINSON!"  And I should have listened.  But I didn't.

As I've written before, we (especially women) are too often taught to "give people the benefit of the doubt," even despite our gut reactions.  This man never once said the word "date," which was good because I had no intention of dating him, ever.  It's just a friendly coffee between friends, right?  Except we weren't friends.  I barely knew him.  It's possible that we could become friends during the rehearsal process, but we hadn't started rehearsing yet.  So against my better judgment I agreed to a coffee meet.

We had coffee on an afternoon, and it was weird.  I still had that silent alarm going in my head and gut, but I did my "due diligence."  I gave him the benefit of the doubt.  I had coffee; I was polite.  And I had no intention of ever doing more than that, besides doing a show together.

Now it's been some time since these events occurred, so you'll have to excuse me if they get out of order.

We started the rehearsal process, and this man kept paying me undue (unwanted) attention, but not always the positive kind.  One night during rehearsal he called a stop to the scene just as I was opening my mouth to say my line -- more than ten times in a row, at the exact same time every time, breaking character.  (Typically actors only stop when the director asks them to stop [or "hold"], and he was most definitely not the director.)

Before we broke for Thanksgiving, he brought me "gifts":  a sparkly glitter tiara that said "BITCH" on it and a copy of the book Even Cowgirls Get the Blues with the "instructions" that I should read it during our holiday break from rehearsal.

Once, he asked me if I could be backstage when he got done with a scene to help him "calm down" like "Alice would to Henry" (our characters' names).  I actually started to laugh out loud because I thought he was joking.  I, of course, said no; I was on the other side of the stage getting ready for the next scene (not to mention the outrageous creepiness of the request).

One night he claimed that the train of my dress was ruining the scene because it was in his way.  I offered to try to move it a bit out of the way, but we had a small 4x4 platform we were on; act around it.

During the rehearsal process, he started a thread on a local theatre discussion board about on-stage kissing, and then he forwarded to my e-mail all of the responses, first saying he was "just trying to give some advice."  When I asked him to please stop emailing me, he claimed (repeatedly) that I was "ruining the scene" (where we had to awkwardly kiss; the kiss was supposed to be awkward and brief).

One night at rehearsal he screamed at me from across a staircase (during a break):  "I'm just trying to discuss what's going on between us!"
To which I yelled back, flabbergasted, "There is NOTHING between us except air!"
"I'm just trying to be your friend!" he yelled.
"I'm friends with the rest of the cast, they don't feel the need to talk about it!" I said.

And that night he called my phone.  All of my phones.  My home phone, my cell phone, leaving a message on one, then calling the other when I wouldn't pick up, nearly non-stop for over an hour.

At some point during this, yes, I should have spoken up; I should have talked to our director.  But I didn't want to rock the boat.  I wanted a good show.  I didn't want to be accused of being a "diva," of being "hard to work with" (Princess Leonora no longer gives a shit about those things, especially when personal safety is on the line).  And I thought I could "handle it"; I thought he'd just go away.

Then a friend of mine lent me a book of his, Obsession:  The FBI's Legendary Profiler Probes the Psyches of Killers, Rapists, and Stalkers, and Their Victims and Tells How to Fight Back.  
I still get chills when I realize/remember that a book outlined, step by step, what was happening to me right then and there.  Here are some key points:

• The giving of unwanted gifts is literally a textbook sign of stalking
• Assuming there is a relationship where none exists is also a sign
• Explosive, unpredictable behavior (what the rest of us might call "mood swings")

The final straw was during a performance, in the dressing room, when he called me a "cunt" in front of the rest of the cast because -- frankly, I don't remember why.  I don't think it matters why.  The man had problems "acting around" my dress; it's not like he was a stable entity.  The director called my home repeatedly that night to make sure I was okay; she was very worried when she couldn't reach me (I was actually sleeping elsewhere that night).  She told me to just try to avoid him as much as possible (which I was); the run was almost over.  But not before he also contacted my ex-husband via e-mail to complain about what a bitch I was.

My soon-to-be-ex-husband had to call me up to ask if this was true?  Was I being a bitch?  Was I saying horrible things about him (the ex-husband) in front of the cast?

My response:  "We're going through a divorce.  Of course, I'm saying mean things about you.  Who wouldn't?"  Then I proceeded to detail all of the shit this man had done and said over the course of the past couple of months, ending with "this probably wouldn't have happened if you had not dropped the show.  I doubt he would have done it in front of you."

An immature response?  Absolutely.  I'm not going to defend that choice, especially as it's not the point here.

The point is:  I should have listened to my gut.  I should have spoken up at any point during the above actions.  If you feel uncomfortable around a person, it shouldn't have to take them calling you a "cunt" for people (including yourself) to realize something is wrong.  Stalkers are real.  Stalkers exist. Stalking is considered a crime in all 50 states. It is a very big deal when someone does not respect the boundaries you have set.  And it is a very big deal when someone exhibits just one or two of the behaviors list above, let alone all three.

If you feel uncomfortable around a person, if they are beginning to exhibit stalking behaviors, please follow these steps:

• Listen to your gut.
• Document everything.  
• Set firm boundaries with the person.
• It's very possible a person you are required to interact with does not realize they overstepped a boundary.  It's still okay to set boundaries and to let them know they have overstepped them.  That does not make you a bad person, a bitch, a tease, or a cunt.
• You have not overreacted.  It is a big deal, and if you don't speak up about your boundaries, no one will.
• Speak up to the person(s) in charge, louder and louder until someone listens.
• Go up the "food chain" if necessary.
• Even if you are not asking for repercussions for this individual, people need to be aware of what has happened.
• Remember:  it is not your decision whether or not the behavior is stalking.  You don't have to have the pressure to make that judgment call; that is the job of a law enforcement official.  It is your decision to realize that something is not right, that someone is overstepping your personal boundaries -- physical, emotional, or otherwise -- and to speak up about it.
• Everyone has the right to feel safe at their place of employment, in their homes, and frankly, in everyday life.

Leonard has more stalker stories, but the above is one of the worst.  I also have another story from a former colleague, but it is not my story to tell.  I can tell you that the part that made me livid was when our mutual supervisor (also a woman) basically told my friend to "not worry about it," that it "wasn't a big deal," to basically "just ignore it."

Fuck that shit.

Should someone tell you that, feel free to tell them that Leonard said "Fuck that shit!" I will happily send them a Strongly Worded Letter about it.

The Curious Case of the Werewolf That Wasn't, the Mummy That Was, and the Cat in the Jar (Book Review)

The Curious Case of the Werewolf That Wasn't, the Mummy That Was, and the Cat in the Jar by Gail Carriger
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I was delighted to find this little gem from the Parasol Protectorate universe, especially for only ninety-nine cents! It is a quick read (and satisfies the "a book you read in a day" requirement for my 2016 challenge). Even in this short story, Carriger maintains her kid-glove grip on the "free and indirect discourse" style initiated by Jane Austen; her use of language and tone is always spot-on for the time period.

That being said, I was a little surprised at how violent and, well, douche-y Alessandro Tarabotti is. Perhaps it's been too long since I read all of the original Parasol Protectorate, but his (spoiler; click here to read review in its entirety)  Granted, we know very little about Alexia's father until her trip to Egypt -- like I said, it's been too long since I've read that book.

Carriger's blog says this story takes place approximately ten years before The Finishing School series, and it also ties in nicely with the first of Prudence's books, too.
And extra points to Carriger for longest short story title :-)

View all my reviews