Tag Archives: Why Some Books Suck

The Year of the Flood by Margaret Atwood

Posted on by
10

Synopsis:
The events leading up to the “waterless flood,” a global catechism wiping out almost all of mankind, as told from the point of view of two survivors, a sex worker and a healer, both of whom were members of a radical vegetarian cult.

Review:
The Year of the Flood is Margaret Atwood’s companion to Oryx and Crake, presenting the events that led to Jimmy the Snowman’s reign over the gentle, sinless Crakers in a post-apocalyptic landscape. Atwood resolutely refuses to call either book “science fiction,” in a disingenuous bit of verbal sleighthand that I find snobbish to the core–and this despite Atwood’s status as one of my favorite authors of all time.

I’ve never liked her so-called “speculative fiction,” and The Year of the Flood tried my patience with its rampant coincidences. I’m really meant to believe that the only survivors of a cataclysm consist of:

  • a stripper with a heart of gold
  • her best friend, located in another city
  • a man both of them slept with (who also randomly ended up roommates with a third girl they both grew up with)
  • one of the women who raised them in the cult
  • that woman’s seriously abusive ex-boyfriend–who comes and kidnaps the stripper and the best friend
  • two other boys who grew up in the cult

And nobody else! It angered me to no end, these coincidences in a book whose theology seems to deny the existence of any ordering principle in the universe. I don’t believe in coincidence in stories, or in fate or destiny or any of those things. In a fictional world, you can’t escape the presence of the author’s hand, so if you’re going to deal in coincidences you have to make something of it, not just shrug it off and expect me to swallow it.

As science fiction, The Year of the Flood doesn’t offer much that’s new or innovative. The religion she invents for the God’s Gardeners doesn’t seem particularly well thought out. The hymns she writes for them lack theological depth, with barbless satire that doesn’t point to any discernible real world equivalent.

The best parts of the book concern Ren and Amanda’s friendship, but of course that’s what I’ve always loved about Atwood. Her ability to limn the contours of female relationships has always been her genius, and it shines just as brightly here. But it wasn’t enough to save this book for me.

Stories (Booking Through Thursday)

Posted on by
5

btt button

If you’re anything like me, one of your favorite reasons to read is for the story. Not for the character development and interaction. Not because of the descriptive, emotive powers of the writer. Not because of deep, literary meaning hidden beneath layers of metaphor. (Even though those are all good things.) No … it’s because you want to know what happens next?

Oh yeah, this is totally me. Story trumps all. I wouldn’t give two figs for diamond sharp prose and stellar ideas without a story. That’s why I love fantasy and YA so much.

Household Gods by Judith Tarr and Harry Turtledove

Posted on by
6

Synopsis:
A San Francisco lawyer finds herself magically spirited back to ancient Rome, where she ends up running a tavern and weathering a German invasion.

Review:
I’m reading Household Gods for an online book club, and the only reason I didn’t quit this book is because I really like the people in the book club. I am not worried about hurting anyone’s feelings by admitting it, because I’m the one who chose it! It’s been languishing in my TBR stack since Christmas 2006 when my ancient Rome-loving dad gave it to me.

I really had trouble with the fact that Nicole accepted her fate so readily–especially since she was a mother. If I were in her shoes I’d be freaking out worrying about Superfast Baby. I wouldn’t be able to think about anything but getting back to her. Nicole barely thinks about them. It really kept me from connecting with her.

The writing isn’t that great, either. I was hoping for something magnificently trashy like Diana Gabaldon’s Outlander, but this didn’t even come close. However, I am looking forward to hearing what my book club has to say about it–should be a fun discussion.

Lit-Ra-Chur (Booking Through Thursday)

Posted on by
4

btt button

When somebody mentions literature what’s the first thing you think of? (Dickens? Tolstoy? Shakespeare?) Do you read literature (however you define it) for pleasure? Or is it something that you read only when you must?

Honestly? I think of books I don’t want to read, not because they’re bad, per se, but because they’re written to do something other than tell a captivating story. I put Joyce and Pynchon in this category. They’re about as “high art” as novels go, and while I appreciate what they achieve, you won’t find me reading them for pleasure, the way I do with Tolstoy and DMeickens and Shakespeare.

The Starter Marriage by Pamela Paul

Posted on by
Reply

Synopsis:
An overview of the recent phenomenon of marriages that end before they reach the five-year mark.

Review:
I hate books that never tell you more than what you read in the title. I generally enjoy books like this, as I’m keenly interested in human behavior and social trends, but this book really didn’t do it for me. I never felt like Paul’s interviewees came alive, and as a result I wasn’t sucked into the drama of their lives. I gave up on it 2/3 of the way through because I just do not have the time to spend with a book I don’t like right now.

Story of a Girl by Sara Zarr

Posted on by
8

Synopsis:
Deanna’s lived under a dark cloud ever since her dad caught her having sex when she was just 13, and her dreams of getting out just might expire under the weight of his disapproval.

Review:
I’m a latecomer getting to Sara Zarr’s National Book Award Finalist novel Story of a Girl, though it’s been on my radar for quite some time. I’m so glad I finally carved out some time to read it. I’ve often criticized young adult literature for piling on the woe, so it’s refreshing to read a book by a writer who recognizes that the simplest stories are often the best.

Zarr doesn’t make a big deal out of Deanna’s transgressions. Rather, she focuses the conflict of the story around Deanna’s family, which includes her older brother, his girlfriend, and their baby daughter. Deanna dreams of saving up enough money so that they can all move out, away from their clueless mom and disapproving dad, but she’s coming to realize that at some point she’ll have to stand on her own.

I only have superlatives for this book. It’s an outstanding entry into the crowded YA genre, and well worth all of the accolades it has received.

Negativity Meme

Posted on by
3

Created by Dewey, picked up at Becky’s Book Reviews:

1. When you dislike a book, do you say so in your blog? Why or why not?

Oh, yes–absolutely. I even have tags about it (see my tag list below). I do try to be fair, in that I like to analyze why I didn’t like a book, figure out what went wrong, instead of just ranting. I believe that I am able to discern when something just isn’t my taste versus when it’s not good, probably because in my reading job I had to set my own personal taste aside. I also like to stretch myself and read things in genres that don’t ordinarily appeal to me because I’m genuinely curious about how books work.

2. Do you temper your feelings about books you didn’t like, so as not to completely slam them? Why or why not?

I believe in being honest, and I’ve certainly given out my fair share of harsh criticism, but again I really try to make sure I’m acting in the best interests of reading, if that makes sense.

3. What do you think is the best way to respond when you see a negative review about a book you enjoyed?

I don’t do anything about it. Life’s too short to leave comments on all the blogs that could possibly commented on. I’d much rather use my time to talk with people who agree with me. And I get enough dissenting opinions in my comments to keep me on my toes.

4. What is your own most common reaction when you see a negative review of a book you loved or a positive review of a book you hated?

As I said before, I don’t do anything about it. I just don’t have time.

5. What is your own most common reaction when you get a comment that disagrees with your opinion of a book?

I try to understand where the person is coming from, and find away to have a fruitful conversation. Reading taste is so subjective, and I don’t really need to be “right” as much as I want to engage with my blog readers.

6. What if you don’t like a book that was a free review copy? What then?

If I really, really don’t like something I will not review it in advance. I just don’t think the author needs that kind of energy prior to the release of the book. I always offer to send the book back as well. And ultimately it comes down to time. I don’t have much of it, and I want to spend it on a minimum of unpleasant tasks. I already have to clean the bathroom, so why should I read a book I don’t like?

7. What do you do if you don’t finish a book? Do you review it or not? If you review it, do you mention that you didn’t finish it?

I wrote a post about this, called When to Give Up on a Book. I don’t like to do it, but sometimes it’s necessary. If I’ve gotten through at least 100 pages, then I’ll blog about it, but I don’t consider it a review.

The Blade Itself by Joe Abercrombie

Posted on by
2

Synopsis:
In a world characterized by politics and intrigue, a sorceror unites a legendary rogue, a dandyish fighter, and an outlaw woman in the fight to… oh, I’m not really sure what, honestly.

Review:
Seriously, what is The Blade Itself about? I was lost from really early on. The characters were interesting, but there didn’t seem to be much of a story, just a bunch of incidents loosely threaded together. I never got the connections or what the stakes were, or what anyone’s goals were.

Now, I’ve heard such amazing things about the First Law trilogy that I’m wondering if the problem is that book 1 is just all setup. Or even worse, all backstory? Joe Abercrombie’s writing is strong enough that I will read book 2–or at least, I will begin book 2. I really hope it starts off with a summary that explains what I was unable to glean from book 1; namely, the story.

When you have as little time for reading as I do these days, it’s hard not to take something like this personally. Oof.

The Summer Tree by Guy Gavriel Kay (The Fionavar Tapestry, Book One)

Posted on by
14

Synopsis:
Five Toronto college students are pulled into an alternate world where they discover their true destinies at the outset of a war that could affect all worlds, including their own.

Review:
Yep, another hard-to-synopsize epic fantasy book. The Summer Tree by Guy Gavriel Kay employs one of the standard fantasy templates–ordinary people drawn into an extraordinary world–making the book “execution dependent.” That means that Kay has to work twice as hard to make the story feel fresh and exciting. Continue reading →

Thirteen Reasons Why by Jay Asher

Posted on by
7

Synopsis:
When Clay receives a box of cassette tapes recorded by a girl who recently committed suicide, he wonders why he was chosen as one of her thirteen reasons.

Review:
Compelling premise ultimately founders on muddled execution. Asher throws in at least four separate social problems as part of Hannah’s reasons for her suicide, and the construction ends up feeling far too contrived. This has the odd effect of making the story seem small, as though all of the suffering endured by the various characters occurred so that Clay could become a better person. Add that to Asher’s frequently muddled prose, and the result is a chaotic blur, not a cohesive story.