books #20-#25
Apr. 17th, 2009 06:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
It seems no one else is undertaking the second year of the Fifty Buke Challenge, which is a bit of a pity because I enjoyed reading other people's views on the stuff they were reading. Well, dammit, I don't care if I'm the only one: it's useful for me to have a record of what I've read (and it also, on occasion, shames me into picking up a worthier book than I otherwise might). Besides, I can crosspost my notes here onto GoodReads, where everyone'll think I'm being virtuously industrious by reviewing lots of books rather than merely giving five stars to all of my own . . .
book #20: Captain Alatriste (1996) by Arturo Perez-Reverte (trans from the Spanish 2005 by Margaret Sayers Peden)
Last year I enjoyed this author's The Club Dumas quite a lot, so had high hopes for this one. They were, alas, moderately dashed. It sets out to be a rattling Dumas-style adventure in 1620s Madrid, as the ex-soldier-now-paid-thug Alatriste accepts an assassination commission from which, at the very last minute, he pulls back, thereby finding himself in hot water as powerful forces within the Spanish court both fume that he's disobeyed their murderous instructions and realize that he's in a position, should he blab, to cause severe ructions -- the intended assassination victims being none other than a traveling-incognito future Charles I of England and "Steenie". It's also the story of the boy Inigo, rendered fatherless on the battlefield and now quasi-apprenticed to Alatriste.
The pages turn easily enough, but at the end of the book I was left with the feeling that, despite a reasonable number of events, in a sense nothing much had really happened. Had this been a true story, it'd have been one of those footnotes of history that deserve to remain footnotes.
Okay for passing the time on a train journey, then, but not much more. I gather this is the first in a series, so perhaps the books will begin to add up to something more substantial. The translation's generally pretty good, although there were about three places where, brows furrowing as I tried to work out what the text was telling me, I concluded I was suffering the consequence of translationary screwups that either the copyeditor or the translator herself ought to have sorted out.
book #21: Half -Moon Investigations (2006) by Eoin Colfer
I was planning to get round at last to reading the author's Artemis Fowl and somehow ended up with this book in my hands instead. 12-year-old Fletcher Moon, nicknamed "Half" because he's small, is obsessed with the notion of being a detective. There's a crime wave hitting his school, and he's commissioned by one of the "pink girls" to solve the mystery of a stolen lock of a pop star's hair, bought from eBay and now purloined. Following clues, he discovers this theft is part of a much larger and far more alarming picture; to solve the case he has to ally himself with Red Sharkey, the unrecognized honest member of the local petty-crime lords.
The first score or so of pages of this book are electric, Colfer catches the Chandleresque tone very nicely indeed as he introduces Moon and the situation. But then he strips back the style to something more serviceable, clearly feeling the hardboiled voice would get in the way of the storytelling. I'm not sure he made the right decision. Even though the tale rattles along very nicely and I was never bored, it was those half-dozen instances later on where the PI verbal whipcracks re-emerged for a page or two that I really sat up and enjoyed myself. Colfer must be given full credit for making this a real mystery that it's important be solved, despite its being set largely among schoolchildren.
All in all, I found this plenty of fun but a bit lighter weight than it needed to have been.
book #22: The Link: A Victorian Mystery (1969) by Robin Maugham
Told sequentially by a number of different narrators, this novel is based loosely on the Tichborne Case (as was the very different novel Brat Farrar by Josephine Tey). It's the mid-19th century. Sex addict James Steede, set to inherit a title and a modest fortune, flees his domineering mother and his possibly pregnant girlfriend -- he's primarily homosexual but isn't averse to heterosexual liaisons -- for a life on the ocean wave, finally landing, after much gay revelry in the Americas, in Australia, safely anonymous because (in an insurance scam) a ship in which he traveled is supposed to have been lost at sea with the death of all aboard. Years later, his mother advertises for the return of her son, whom she's convinced is still alive.
Someone arrives back at the ol' family pile in England who's the spitting image of the missing James and can answer all sorts of questions about intimate personal and family details . . . but is this in fact James? Further, is the genuineness or otherwise of his claim as important to the likely outcome of the law case as the turmoil of conflicting special interests surrounding the investigation?
I found the opening one-third of this book a trifle daunting, to be honest, because James, who narrates this section (and is thus in the role of identification character), delights in telling us all about his various gay escapades and his enjoyment of them; my reaction was as if stuck next to that obsessive soccer fan on the train who insists on telling you all the details of Really Good soccer matches he's attended on the grounds that, sooner or later, through his doing so he'll make you see sense and start loving soccer as much as he does. (If he were talking about cricket, on the other hand, he wouldn't be a bore at all . . .) But Maugham's a surprisingly good tale-teller, so I weathered those hundred pages and thereafter was absolutely absorbed. I'm not sure he delivered the "terror and surprise . . . unforgettable climax" the blurb-writer promises, and nor is this really a mystery, whatever its subtitle indicates; but overall I enjoyed it a surprising amount.
book #23: The Answer (1955) by Philip Wylie
I'm not sure this should be included in the numbering, since it's only a novella and not even a very long novella, but it was separately published in hard covers so what the hell. It's an antiwar fable and has survived the passage of time quite well. After each of two US and Soviet H-bomb tests an injured angel flutters from the sky and dies. Two different political systems must endeavour to cope with the implications, and in the event both fail. In a way Wylie was doing the same sort of thing as I did more recently in my Leaving Fortusa, using fantasy in a sciencefictional setting to work out moral/ethical questions, although otherwise the works are extremely different. I can't think why it took me so long to get round to reading this little book, which I bought nearly a decade ago.
book #24: The Almost Moon (2007) by Alice Sebold
I moderately enjoyed this author's The Lovely Bones a couple of years back: I thought it was pretty okay, no more, and certainly hardly deserving of all the hyperbolic accolades. My reaction to this book is extraordinarily similar. Helen Knightly, driven momentarily beyond the borders of reason by the dementia of her mother, kills the old woman. We follow her over the next day or two as she attempts to deal with the consequences of her action; at the same time we learn much about her earlier life, and about how her mother's elegantly expressed madness (mainly agoraphobia, bringing with it an extraordinary self-centredness) has effectively harmed, and in instances destroyed, three generations. A dull-as-ditchwater start -- pages and pages of fastidious detailing of Helen's actions and introspections in the immediate aftermath of the deed -- gives way to a very entertaining narrative that occupies the rest of the book.
book #25: The Defection of A.J. Lewinter (1973) by Robert Littell
A ceramics specialist involved in designing the nose-cones for MIRV missiles defects to the USSR, and the various intelligence organizations on both sides of the Iron Curtain attempt to evaluate the defection. Is it important? Is it a genuine defection or a US attempt to embarrass the Soviets or plant an agent among them? What could Lewinter know that might be of any significance? And so on and so forth, to endless ramification. Lewinter himself barely appears in the book, and we never discover the answer to any of these questions; the central character is really the swirling paranoia endemic on either side during the Cold War, and not just in the intelligence communities. We're shocked by the ruthlessness with which some of the Russians behave in service of this paranoia; but Littell portrays their US counterparts behaving equally coldbloodedly. These are the dimwits who spend an inordinate amount of our tax dollars on what they insist is realpolitik when in fact it's just buffoonery -- buffoonery that'd be hilarious if it didn't destroy so many lives and strangle at birth so many endeavours that might improve the human lot. Neither side is remotely interested in -- regards as entirely trivial -- what is, if it works, the item of real value that Lewinter bears: the technology for an improved and environmentally friendly method of waste disposal.
This isn't the masterpiece of the spy thriller genre promised on the cover, for the very good reason it's not a thriller at all, and clearly has no intention whatsoever of trying to be one. Instead, it's a satire -- quite often a very funny one, more often a very dark one. It's in no sense a gripping read; but I think it's probably a very good book. I'm glad I read it, and in due course I may very well read it again.
As an aside, Penguin should be ashamed of themselves. I read the 2003 reissue, which has clearly been OCRed and typeset from an earlier edition without the benefit of any competent proofreading. There's a minor character whose surname I still don't know, because two different versions of it (Ferri and Fern) turn up with equal frequency. There are countless irritating minor literals (missing close-quotes are a frequent culprit), and in several places the text is so garbled as to be incomprehensible. This is beyond shoddy.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 10:35 pm (UTC)Enjoyed these.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 10:50 pm (UTC). . . and, besides, the dog ate all your writeups . . .
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 10:56 pm (UTC)(Everyone's a critic.)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 11:01 pm (UTC)We've got a cat like that . . . The two kittens, by contrast, because their legs are still rather short have a habit of leaving butt-prints, composed of cat-litter dust, on the top pages of manuscripts they don't like.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 11:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 12:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:52 am (UTC)"Still blaming the cats"
Still blaming the manuscripts, in fact.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 11:51 pm (UTC)I've not read Brat Farrar but saw the television serial. I should have realised at the time that it was based on the Tichborne affair. I rather like, of all things, José Luis Borges's rendering of the Tichborne story.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:50 am (UTC)"'Alatriste' means 'Sadwing'."
My, what a bomb of intelligence you are, as one of my secretaries once told me.
"I've not read Brat Farrar but saw the television serial."
The book's pretty good. Funny, isn't it, how Tey is best known for three books that are each not only utterly different from the other -- Brat Farrar, The Franchise Affair and The Daughter of Time -- but also quite different from what she thought she was primarily doing, which was writing orthodox mysteries.
"José Luis Borges's rendering of the Tichborne story"
Of which rendering I know nothing.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 04:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:29 pm (UTC)"You should read Borges."
I know I should.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 11:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 12:00 am (UTC)"I should read more stuff by this John Grant chappie, for example."
As indeed should everyone.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 12:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 12:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:47 am (UTC)"second year of the Fifty Buke Challenge?"
At the start of last year someone launched this thing: read and report on 50 books within 2008. Quite a lot of folk found it a sterner "challenge" than anticipated -- i.e., that in the normal course of events they were reading fewer books than they thought they were.
However, enough folk had enough fun with the thing that it was supposed to repeat this year. But this evening I suddenly realized I was the only person on my flist actually doing it . . .
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 04:10 am (UTC)I did try 100 last year (downgraded to 90 towards the end when Life started to get in the way). That was a bit much though, because you start reading to finish, not to enjoy.
50 would be a nice amount, but it's a bit late this year to start.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 04:19 am (UTC)"That was a bit much though, because you start reading to finish, not to enjoy."
I know what you mean. I found the appeal of the "challenge" was not so much the numerical exercise (which is a bit . . . well . . .) but the fact that it made me think about what I was reading rather than just glomming through books with my jaw slack. It's (for me) like a sort of halfway stage between the latter and the far more rigorous effort of full-scale reviewing.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 05:43 am (UTC)I tend to do this on Goodreads rather than blog/LJ
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 02:52 pm (UTC)"I tend to do this on Goodreads rather than blog/LJ"
As noted, I've begun crossposting there.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 12:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 12:30 am (UTC)Time?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 12:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-19 01:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 01:29 am (UTC)At this point it's mostly reading history from that alternate history perspective anyway.
Love, C.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 01:30 am (UTC)Love, C.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:51 am (UTC)"Why should I sign on?"
For fun?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 02:29 pm (UTC)I'm grandfathered in.
Er, um, well, you get the idea.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 02:32 pm (UTC)OTOH, I've been writing for something other than a blog, working with much of what I've been writing about on the LJ for a couple of years.
Then the seminar this week that I taught, for instance.
And getting TYBTF ready for publication -- and if that isn't about these topics I'd like to know what is.
Love, C
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:20 pm (UTC)"if that isn't about these topics"
Which topics? I'm slightly confused. I'm not talking about TYBTF's topics, of which I have some idea, but the topics to which you're relating them. The topics of the books I've been woffling loosely about here seem to be pretty mixed. with none of them having to do with NO or alternate history. Help, C!
xx
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:47 pm (UTC)Love, C.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:55 pm (UTC)"I thought you were referring to the sign-up that many sf/f writers and fans did to read 50 books written by or about poc this year."
Ah! That explains it!
No, I know nothing of this -- at least, I think I may have heard something about it (the turn of the year was a frantic time for me) but had forgotten until you mentioned it just now. Seems like a good idea.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 04:40 am (UTC)I read Captain Alatriste last year because
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 05:02 am (UTC)"I was left wondering what the book was about, frankly"
Precisely: there didn't seem much point to it, and the story wasn't a fully formed story.
"I liked Club Dumas well enough but preferred the movie they made from it (The 9th Gate)."
I swing backward and forward as to which of the two I prefer. I thought it was a pity the movie omitted the entire Dumas part of the plot.
"No more Perez-Reverte for me, probably."
I might well try another of his mystery-type books, but once was enough for Alatriste.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 08:20 am (UTC)I have a copy of The Almost Moon around here somewhere that I haven't read yet -- and, from your write-up, I don't think that'll change any time soon...
no subject
Date: 2009-04-18 03:05 pm (UTC)from your write-up, I don't think that'll change any time soon
Please don't get me wrong: As noted, I ended up quite enjoying it, to the point where I'll quite likely read her next novel, too. I just don't feel she's as good as the chorus of lit crit dittoheads claim she is. There have been better things since sliced bread.
I think the 50 Book Challenge has actually been going for several years.
It has? Ta for the info. I didn't start on LJ until Fall '07, so first became aware of the 50BC at the start of '08 and didn't realize this wasn't a new thing. Nonetheless, the point remains that last year lots of people seemed to be doing it while this year I've noticed no one else.
with a suitably creative definition of 'book'
Ha! I read your first, accidentally "Anonymous" posting of this comment and thought, "thisplacehere should see this . . ."
no subject
Date: 2009-04-20 03:29 am (UTC):)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-20 08:28 pm (UTC)"If the challenge was to re-read 50, would it be the 50 Rebuke Challenge?"
*sob!*