Take a photo of a barcode or cover
octavia_cade's Reviews (2.64k)
There's a lot of good stuff here. The bells, particularly, are really interesting and I liked the world of the Old Kingdom. But I rather feel as if I should have liked this more than I did - and I liked it well enough. I wish there were a word for when you just don't emotionally connect with an otherwise decent read - not because of the story itself, but because I quite simply didn't care about anyone in it. Unbalanced, perhaps? Great world-building, but the rest of it didn't quite live up to the same standards for me.
Having recently been asked to write a small graphic story, and not having the first clue, I promptly went down to the local library to find a way to save myself. David's explanations are clear and understandable, and the book has a welcoming, informal (and funny!) tone. But the first two-thirds of it are not really what I was looking for. They're more a Writing 101; all the examples come from comics, but could just as easily apply to short stories or novels or any other form of fiction writing. What I needed, the actual writing-for-comics bit, started two-thirds of the way in, with explanations on script format, word bubbles, working with illustrators and the rest. When it finally arrived, it was very helpful.
I've finally got around to reading Sherlock Holmes, and it was thoroughly entertaining. There were perhaps a few too many cases here hinging on disguises - one should be enough - but that is a small quibble considering that I guessed the conclusion correctly in at least two stories. (A sense of smugness and self-satisfaction has resulted. Usually I'm hopeless with mysteries.)
Katherine Mansfield was rather forced down my throat as schoolgirl of 11 or so, and I did not appreciate her at the time. Coming back to reread her stories some decades later has been a wonderful surprise. This is a painfully observed and quietly brutal collection. It also contains, in the title story, one of my very favourite lines in all of literature: "All the same, two minutes later Jose and Laura were licking their fingers with that absorbed inward look that only comes from whipped cream". "The Garden Party" is cream puffs and sudden death all jumbled together... it's Mansfield all over, and it's fantastic.
The beginning of one of my favourite fantasy series of all time. It's not stunningly original, I know, but I first read it as an adolescent and absolutely devoured it, ran to spend my pocket money on the next book, and the next.
I think what I liked best was the sympathy for the devil, as it were. MST is not grimdark, not by any stretch of the imagination, but possibly it's a precursor in moral ambiguity. As Jiriki points out, there's a certain fairness and potential for rejoicing if the hero and his people all get theirs. There'd be something of delayed justice in their destruction. Williams is sympathetic to Ineluki (and Elias too, I reckon) and wants us to feel some level of sympathy as well. And I did. That was something I'd never really come across in my prior fantasy readings, and it left an impression.
Also, I really appreciated - even on first read - that Simon was such a whiny little sod. Goodness knows if teenage me were in his place I'd be a seething mess of self-pity and over-reaction as well, and I liked he was never made into a cardboard heroic protagonist. Very relatable.
I think what I liked best was the sympathy for the devil, as it were. MST is not grimdark, not by any stretch of the imagination, but possibly it's a precursor in moral ambiguity. As Jiriki points out, there's a certain fairness and potential for rejoicing if the hero and his people all get theirs. There'd be something of delayed justice in their destruction. Williams is sympathetic to Ineluki (and Elias too, I reckon) and wants us to feel some level of sympathy as well. And I did. That was something I'd never really come across in my prior fantasy readings, and it left an impression.
Also, I really appreciated - even on first read - that Simon was such a whiny little sod. Goodness knows if teenage me were in his place I'd be a seething mess of self-pity and over-reaction as well, and I liked he was never made into a cardboard heroic protagonist. Very relatable.
This is one of those books I admire rather than love. It's a stunningly original and intelligent text - but goddamn, does it go on and on and on. I was ready for it to finish 300 odd pages before it did. Yes, I'm aware that makes me a Philistine. No, I don't really care.
World-building in SFF is a two edged sword. I tend to begrudge it, necessary though it may be, as too often it's used as an excuse to write an encyclopaedia rather than a story. This is definitely the case here, and framing it as an anthropological exploration of a society doesn't make me care any more. I was interested in Stone Telling, deeply so, but her story kept getting shunted off to the side for another go at describing houses or musical instruments or grammar. I found that deeply frustrating, even though I recognise it as a means to compare and contrast with the problems of modern life. In that it succeeded, but its relentless approach to the subject matter was frequently a hammer blow to my interest.
World-building in SFF is a two edged sword. I tend to begrudge it, necessary though it may be, as too often it's used as an excuse to write an encyclopaedia rather than a story. This is definitely the case here, and framing it as an anthropological exploration of a society doesn't make me care any more. I was interested in Stone Telling, deeply so, but her story kept getting shunted off to the side for another go at describing houses or musical instruments or grammar. I found that deeply frustrating, even though I recognise it as a means to compare and contrast with the problems of modern life. In that it succeeded, but its relentless approach to the subject matter was frequently a hammer blow to my interest.
I remember reading somewhere that there are stories you like, and stories you admire. This is one of the latter. It's original, well-written (the opening paragraphs are killer), and the world-building is truly excellent. That said, I didn't connect emotionally with it at all, or with any of the characters, whose fates I was largely indifferent to.
Hild is an easy book to admire. It's not an easy book to like. There are parts of it that do succeed - I especially enjoyed Hild's personal relationships (with her mother, with Cian, with Begu...). The problem doesn't lie there.
The problem is that Griffith has overdosed on the world-building. She's so determined to stuff every inch of the text with details and names that she forgets she's writing a story. I lost track of who nearly everyone but the main characters were early on, and I just couldn't face going back to reread the endless encyclopaedia of (mostly irrelevant) names.
That makes rating this difficult. I'd give it a four for writing (Griffith does write well, even if her subjects need trimming) and a two for enjoyment. It just goes on and on and on... I can appreciate how much research Griffith's done without needing to read every goddamn thing she's discovered. Granted, a heavy focus on world-building in fiction does tend to irk me so I am probably biased. To me, world-building is like salt. Just enough seasons the text, but the more you dump in the more indigestible that text becomes.
Three stars.
The problem is that Griffith has overdosed on the world-building. She's so determined to stuff every inch of the text with details and names that she forgets she's writing a story. I lost track of who nearly everyone but the main characters were early on, and I just couldn't face going back to reread the endless encyclopaedia of (mostly irrelevant) names.
That makes rating this difficult. I'd give it a four for writing (Griffith does write well, even if her subjects need trimming) and a two for enjoyment. It just goes on and on and on... I can appreciate how much research Griffith's done without needing to read every goddamn thing she's discovered. Granted, a heavy focus on world-building in fiction does tend to irk me so I am probably biased. To me, world-building is like salt. Just enough seasons the text, but the more you dump in the more indigestible that text becomes.
Three stars.
.png)
I know nothing about Russia, really very little. After reading this book, I'm realising that I knew even less than I thought. It's just so... different.
The book itself is very well-written - easy to follow, and it chugs along at pace. I didn't get bored, nor did I get lost or confused which is always a possibility when reading about the unfamiliar. I do think the back-of-the-book classification of this as a biography is a bit misleading, however. It's much more the exploration of the political strategies and environment that have grown up around one person, rather than an in-depth study of that one person's life.
The author's portrait of Putin is certainly a disturbing one. Not so much the man himself, although he doesn't come off well here (and that is an understatement) but the society that exists around him. If even a fraction of this book is true - and it seems well-researched, especially the second half - then there is an enormous population of people on the other side of the world who are prepared to put up with an awful lot from their politicians. I mean really a despicable amount. That is just completely alien to me, and suddenly I feel a bit extra glad to live where I do.
I am interested in reading more about the chess player Kasparov, though. From what Gessen says his political efforts didn't much pan out, but he seems to have an interesting mind.
The book itself is very well-written - easy to follow, and it chugs along at pace. I didn't get bored, nor did I get lost or confused which is always a possibility when reading about the unfamiliar. I do think the back-of-the-book classification of this as a biography is a bit misleading, however. It's much more the exploration of the political strategies and environment that have grown up around one person, rather than an in-depth study of that one person's life.
The author's portrait of Putin is certainly a disturbing one. Not so much the man himself, although he doesn't come off well here (and that is an understatement) but the society that exists around him. If even a fraction of this book is true - and it seems well-researched, especially the second half - then there is an enormous population of people on the other side of the world who are prepared to put up with an awful lot from their politicians. I mean really a despicable amount. That is just completely alien to me, and suddenly I feel a bit extra glad to live where I do.
I am interested in reading more about the chess player Kasparov, though. From what Gessen says his political efforts didn't much pan out, but he seems to have an interesting mind.
This is really an extraordinary little book. Distinctly a product of its time - and Gilman a product of hers - there are definitely some strange gaps here, primarily the total lack of sex. It doesn't seem reasonable to me that, in the absence of one gender, the other would totally eschew homosexuality, but there it is. Whether it just didn't cross Gilman's mind, or whether she thought about it but considered the existing subject matter an uphill struggle enough already, given the times she lived in, is something I just don't know.
So it's not a perfect book. There are substantial flaws, but even taking these into account, as a thought experiment Herland is sustained and original. It's also short, and I appreciate concision in my speculative fiction. In many ways, Herland is as much science fiction as anything else. The two populations are so different, have diverged so wildly, that it's almost as if cultures from two different planets are meeting for the first time, and trying to understand each other - and themselves. Accurately enough, it's the understanding of self in the face of the perceived abnormal that is the most difficult. Not everyone succeeds, and I think that's a painfully accurate observation that Gilman does an excellent job of highlighting.
So it's not a perfect book. There are substantial flaws, but even taking these into account, as a thought experiment Herland is sustained and original. It's also short, and I appreciate concision in my speculative fiction. In many ways, Herland is as much science fiction as anything else. The two populations are so different, have diverged so wildly, that it's almost as if cultures from two different planets are meeting for the first time, and trying to understand each other - and themselves. Accurately enough, it's the understanding of self in the face of the perceived abnormal that is the most difficult. Not everyone succeeds, and I think that's a painfully accurate observation that Gilman does an excellent job of highlighting.