octavia_cade's Reviews (2.64k)

I've never read a Stephen King book that I didn't enjoy, and this is no exception. It's not his best, though, and I'm not entirely sure that I'm fond of the Dark Tower creep. I understand the desire to link work together, but this isn't the first time I've seen it barge in where perhaps it doesn't belong - although, I think it's handled better here than it was in "Needful Things".

I gobbled the book down in a day, so obviously the gigantic thing held my attention, but I think it may lack the cohesion of some of King's better work. It seems a little scattered?

Derry, however, will never not creep me out. It's been 20+ years for me and I still can't get over that damn clown.

This is a well-researched - if slightly repetitive - account of the 19th century European discovery of the moa. It really is interesting to learn about how the bird was accepted and theorised about from a quite small scrap of bone... in that sense, it's something of a detective story. While I would have liked some more focus on the bird itself, the back cover makes it clear that it's about "scientific intrigue and personality clashes" so I don't really feel that I can use that as a point of complaint: the book does what it says on the tin.

It is rewarding as a historical study, and its focus an unusual approach to take regarding the discovery of the moa. That being said, the research can get bogged down a little: while much of this book is a fun, enjoyable read there are places where I do think it gets weighted down with minutiae and wanders a bit. Could have been a bit more concise, is what I'm trying to say.

This book suffers from not being the film. That in itself is a rather ungenerous statement, given that the book predates the film, but I can't help myself. The film is, after all, one of my very favourites...

That being said, it's still an excellent book, managing to be both creepy and thoughtful at the same time. I like how all the characters have their own stories and background, separate to the possession storyline. So often in horror, the characters are ciphers (often interchangeable or stereotypical) but these feel like real people. I also like the ambiguity of the plot - even at the end, the question of Karras' guilt and sanity always leaves just a little bit of doubt... this is one point where, I think, the book is better, subtler than the film.

I highly recommend it, and have read it more than once over the years.

I've read this book several times now and I still find it hilarious. Mostly, I admit, because I identify with Katz. I do a bit of tramping myself in New Zealand, and inevitably I end up thinking "Why, WHY am I doing this, torturing myself with this repulsively heavy pack, when I could be at home (re)watching The X-Files?" Katz, I feel you mate.

But the book's more than an excuse for self-mockery. It's quite informative, with historical and geographical info sprinkled in - enough to give a sense of the Trail, and possibly make it sound more attractive than it might really be. I suspect hiking the Appalachian Trail is one of those bucket list ideas that's a lot nicer in theory than practice, but still...

I can understand why Bryson's fascinated with it. He's got me fascinated with it too.

(Apart from the bears. I can live without those, thank you very much.)

I'm torn on this. The idea is original, the language is beautiful. The structure is interesting, and the ending is powerful, though not perhaps as shockingly twisty as it thinks it is.

Yet it's very much a book of two halves. "Gretel and the Dark" alternates chapters, telling two different stories that come to a connection in the end. The problem with this type of story-telling is that the author runs the very great risk of having their reader find one story that much more interesting than the other. Half the story is set around a young girl called Krysta, and this is beautiful and tragic and fascinating, extremely subtle work. Unfortunately it's constantly followed by disappointment, as I consistently finish Krysta's chapters and groan at the thought of more time spent with Josef.

Josef is, to be frank, a tiresome old lecher. Sadly, the writing - so luminous with Krysta - doesn't seem to have the same spark when it comes to her counterpart.

I'm sure there are people who have the opposite preference; people who prefer his chapters. Even people who like them both the same. Fair enough, tastes differ and all that. But for me, it made the book uneven. It actually took me several weeks to finish it, because every time I'd come to Josef I'd put the book down and walk away. I'd have to force myself to continue so that I'd eventually get back to Krysta.

In summary, I found this book an exercise in frustration, albeit one shot through with some startlingly lovely work.

A fun easy read. No-one was egregiously stupid this time out! Granted, I've only read four of this series thus far, but Anita seems to be more intelligent in the even-numbered books. (Perhaps a bit like Star Trek?)

And, credit where it's due, for once I didn't figure out the bad guy well in advance. The thing with K. took me all unawares. Credit also due for one particular bit of imagery. I've always been a bit iffy about where this series falls on the genre-scale, and so far it's plumped itself mostly under urban fantasy. To my mind, at least - I'm sure I've seen some people refer to it as horror, but it's never quite fitted there for me. The image of the skinned naga, though: strong, horrifying, and creepy-creepy so well done there.

On the other hand, I see a love triangle looming (well, it's here already to be honest) so that doesn't win any extra points as I'm not at all fond of them. I've got a good idea who's going to lose already: as always, the guy I prefer. Like clockwork.

Okay, so here's the thing. Three books in, and this series is already relying on repetition and reversion. After a welcome rise in IQ in "The Laughing Corpse", Anita's back to her first book self. Unfortunately that self is not very bright - at the end, Richard has to tell her what he is - a blind woman could have seen the very heavy hints along the way, Anita - and as before, this is frustrating to me as a reader. I want to think well of the main character, but she appears to have "Idiot" periodically stamped across her forehead.

Worse (and again, this is a problem that's come up before) so do the antagonists. Exactly like the ending of the last book, the Big Bad gives Anita the means by which to off them - despite the fact that doing so goes against all common sense and basic experience (and Oliver has no excuse here, he's a million sodding years old so all rookie mistakes should be well past by now). Of course, once she's given the means Anita immediately offs said threats, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together could see that she would.

Threats stop being threatening when they can be out-thought by a drunken toddler, is what I'm saying. I'm ploughing my way through these books because this series is a giant in urban fantasy and I want to be well-read in it, but for the love of God. The only person I'm actually rooting for now is Edward, and that's only because he hasn't done anything monumentally foolish - yet. I suspect it's only a matter of time.

While I've heard about the Anita Blake series I've never read any of it before, so thought I'd give it a go, see what all the fuss was about. "Guilty Pleasures" is a quick, easy read. What did impress me was the sense of pre-existing life, as it were - I had to check at several points that GP really was the first book in the series because of all the references to past events. So often characters read like blank slates, as if they only pop into existence at the beginning of the story. I like that there's such a sense of background to the characters, even if it's not yet (if ever?) fully explored.

That being said, though a quick and relatively enjoyable read, this doesn't rise above average for two reasons. First, I figured out whodunnit before Anita did - long before, so she struck me as a trifle thick, to be frank. Secondly, the Big Bad. Interesting character, got taken out far too easily for the threat she appeared to be. That got side-eyed a bit from my side of the page, I can tell you.

Upshot is, I'm interested enough to read the second book, but I hope the heroine is allowed to be more intelligent and her enemies more consistently dangerous.

I recently came across a list of "50 books every kid should read before 12", and granted, some of the list was published long after I left childhood behind, but still: I was dismayed at how few of these supposed classics I'd actually read. And I was a reader as a child! I checked on Goodreads and someone had put the list up there, so I bookmarked it with all the other to-read lists I have, on the grounds that being well-read is an admirable goal and exists regardless of age.

And lo, while I was searching through the local library for The Cat in the Hat, which I also (unaccountably!) have not read - and still have not, as it was out - I came across this book, also on the list. And readers, it was not for me. I mean, the illustrations were fine and the rhymes were fine, but it did not grab at my stultified adult imagination and, from what I remember of my early reading days, it would not have enthralled child-me either. I can easily picture kids who would love it, because there is nothing actually wrong here, it's purely a matter of personal taste, but I just didn't find it as charming as the picture books I loved as a kid (and still love now, I'm looking at you, The Lighthouse Keeper's Lunch, you and your greedy, thieving seagulls).

I recently read And Then There Were None, and like that Murder on the Orient Express is very clever. And though it was still a really enjoyable read, I'm not sure it was quite as good as ATTWN. The structure is a little more plodding - an interview a chapter for however many suspects there were, it was all rather too linear. But there is justice at the end, moral if not legal, and I'm quite surprised at how much more I enjoyed the character of Poirot than I did in the only other book with him I've read (The Mysterious Affair at Styles). Still, that was Christie's first book, and it's clear that she's improved since then - especially in pacing and character.

I don't usually read a lot of mysteries, but I think I may be hooked on her now...