This was a book my mind had fun chewing on when I was not in the midst of reading it, and because of this I gave it four out of five stars. I thought about this book a great deal, not because of the characters or the ideas posed by the author, but mainly because her plot was so much fun to think about. I enjoyed trying to anticipate what would happen during Ursula’s next go round, much like I would a mystery novel.What I liked about the book:
1) I had a terrific time following the lives of Ursula Todd. Her mother, Sylvie, I could do without and I was grateful when the main point of view shifted from her to Ursula. In the middle of the book I couldn’t wait to see how Ursula would die next. Morbid, yes, but there is a good deal of morbidity in the book.
2) I liked watching Ursula become conscious of her many lives. It was interesting to see her evolve from someone things happened to into someone who made deliberate choices.
3) I really enjoyed the historical view into the civilian life of living in London during the air raids. Then seeing the opposite view of civilian life in Berlin before Russia’s takeover. The author’s historical research really came to life, depicting everything from food, to the sounds of explosions, the routines of the people who remained in London, and the hardships suffered in both Britain and Germany. She did not hold back showing the raw brutality of being a civilian casualty during war.
What I didn’t like about the book:
1) The philosophical journey, while a bit much for me, was still appropriate to the book. I was most bothered by Ursula’s first meeting with her psychologist. It was not believable to me for a ten-year-old girl to grasp, have an interest, and carry forward the philosophical information posed by Dr.Kellet. It also failed my logic test for an educated man to be talking about such things with a child.
2) The maturity of Ursula begins in each of her lives around the age of eighteen. I found her remarkably worldly at this stage as the book progresses. I understand the carry over and impressions her previous lives are suppose to have on her current, but it again did not seem logical for her to pass from life to life with an advanced philosophical understanding, while still being naïve as to why men made inappropriate advances towards her. I found it odd the sexual trauma she endures after her “first time” did not leave a strong enough impression to transcend to her future lives, aside from when she avoids the offenders. Shouldn’t she have a little more anxiety over the act, or strange memories of the wallpaper again? How can she forget this trauma yet retain less meaningful bits of information in her future lives. Her second, “first time”, is glossed over and Ursula has a remarkable sexual sophistication going forward in the book. I thought that was odd considering the trouble she went through after her first time, getting a book from the neighbors in order to learn about human conception. How did she become a savvy mistress to an Admiral her second time being deflowered, but towards the end of the book she did not understand Sam Cole was having an orgasm?
3) I think Sylvie’s plot arch became totally lost on me. Either that, or it became so layered in symbolism and vagueness I just stopped caring enough to try and follow it. I did not like the author’s choice to showcase Sylvie as the only other person with the ability to change the events of her future lives. If Sylvie can change her life events then all of the characters should have been doing this, and there should have been a broader spectrum of events taking place each go around.
At the end of the book life seemed to be rendered inconsequential. Ursela is awakened to the fact that she will be back, to do it all over again, and she goes crazy. After this there is only one time where her life seems to take on purpose and meaning. She kills herself and has a plan for her next life. However she dies and once again she is back in the snow, running through her life hurdles trying to stay alive again. So aside from this single plan, Ursula is a woman things happen to, and she goes through her life only correcting events enough to stay alive. Stay alive for what? Fox Corner? This home she dreams of with fields, flowers, and fresh cut grass. Is that really all she (or we the reader) is living for? I would have liked the protagonist more if she corrected her life events not only to stay alive but to find the right man, challenge herself to try something new, or explore the depth of her connections to her family.
Bood Review: Tigana by Guy Gavriel Kay
I give this book three out of five stars.
I will forever remember Tigana as the book full of men crying. The continuous sadness in the book became tiresome and made the never-ending exposition narrative even longer. I think I know who George R.R Martin was reading before he wrote his Game of Thrones series. I am glad I finished Tigana, but after 600 pages of sadness, I feel worn out and I can’t wait to read something quick, fluffy, and chock full of sunshine and rainbows.
What I liked about the book:
1) I liked the depth of Kay’s world building. His twists on our reality made it relatable but foreign and new. How a Ygrath “fool” was not just a fool. The riselka’s and religions referenced lore and dead religions similar to this world, but beautifully painted for the people of the Palm.
2) I liked how the author had a stretched out timeline, but we the reader really only saw a year. The events on this timeline were complex and added layers to the main plot. A series of overlapping sub plots and stories which were all very interesting.
3) My favorite plot points included: Beard fighting with the Walkers. The reconciliation and heart wrenching scene between Tomasso and his father Sandre in prison. Alessan releasing Erlein, and the ring dive of Dianora. I also liked the final battle and resolution.
What I did not like about this book:
1) It took me one hundred pages before I enjoyed these characters or got a firm handle on what the book was about. Kay takes almost to much liberty with the reader’s capacity to keep up with a vast cast of characters who we have little investment in. There were no baby steps, or small incremental dips into this new world. The reader is shoved into this place and forced to tread water and try to keep up with a plot Kay deliberately hides. I’m all for suspense and not seeing plot twists and turns, but it’s not suspenseful if we don’t see the relevance in what is happening. I wanted to start jotting down notes of who was who, and what was from here, and why such and such meant something. I’m a detail loving kind of person, but the endless narrative with vague or non-existent dialogue, was over the top, and in my opinion unnecessary. The Epilogue felt odd and disjointed when I read it, not because of the change to an omniscient point of view, but because the characters were actually talking to each other.
2) The book felt like a run on narrative exposition, with a few stops to show actual action. The action, which is good when encountered, is interrupted time and time again with mental detours into each characters memory. The action of the book never seemed to unfold within a scene, instead it mostly took place off stage in a memory, or as a side thought of what took place. The scenes where there is action, are well paced and exciting, but end to quickly and shove you back into another depressing character memory.
There is very little talking amongst any of the characters to add balance to the looks, hand gestures, and arm squeezes being exchanged. I kind of wish I had an electronic copy of this book so I could do a word find to see how many “sardonic looks” were passed. There are more words dedicated to the description of a character looking at another character who is in turn looking at another character, and what is viewed on their faces, than words illustrating how the characters talk to one another.
The author built up several romance sub plots, but I did not see the romance of Prince Alessan form at all. It took me completely by surprise. When did that actually take place? I saw no hints, body language, or flashbacks indicating his feelings for her. This romance felt flat, and the only proof of their attachment was a shared history and because the author said it was so. I thought Alessan was entirely ambivalent or at best like a brother, to the woman he eventually declares himself to.
3) This is a sad book. Sadness is everywhere even when it does not really need to be there. The author makes you see sadness, hear sadness, or have a character remember saddness. I learned something new about myself while reading all of this sadness. I have a bias against men crying. What can I say, I like strong men, and apparently seeing men “weep” in certain situations in my mind paints them as weak. Get a grip gentlemen-there’s a war that needs to happen with not one but two wizards with armies. This is my issue, I’ll own that, but part of the reason this book wore me out was the number of sad and tragic situations or memories brought up which caused all these men to break down and weep.
The iterations of men weeping, wiping tears away, openly crying, etc just got old. Tigana even starts with a man crying in the prologue. Half way through the book I became conditioned. I fully expected to find a man weeping at least every 40 pages or so, and Kay delivered. I am not exaggerating and if anything the pace of men crying in scenes picks up. I was so worn out by it I became amused by it. I was laughing out loud when not one but two chapters ended with men weeping. I don’t think my laughter was the desired effect by Kay, but the “weeping” became rediculous.
I appreciated the ending, the serendipity of who Rhun was, and the awesome speech Sandre gives. However, all the things Kay does right in Tigana, are overshadowed by the flow of sadness he keeps pace with through the entire book.
Book Review: Starship Grifters by: Robert Kroese
I rated this book four out of five stars.
What a fun read, I was laughing on out loud on page two. This book is full of humor, and the authors comedic range is impressive. What made it even more fun was a nice adventure story to go with it.
What I liked:
1) The comedy, hands down one of the best comedies I have had the pleasure of reading in recent years. Kroese does not hold back and uses everything from play on words, ridiculous situations, character banter, slapstick, and irony. The book is equated to The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, and I agree. Some of the situational humor was better, and so well constructed it reminded me of comedic playwright Neil Simon.
2) The characters were well defined, crazy but still relatable. I liked how we are given opinions about Rex, but allowed to draw our own ideas about him. I thought it was a great choice to not construct the narrative through his point of view.
3) I was so pleased to see the author treating me the reader as smart. We are given details about what is relevant and the narrator routinely breaks the fourth wall, which I enjoyed. The exposition narrative about creatures, places, and things were kept short with enough information to picture what is taking place. There were no dog trails or irrelevant information tempting me to skip down the page.
There was only one thing that bothered me, the authors injections of religious, or I should say anti-religious philosophies. I wont even say I didn’t like it, it was just distracting. While I was reading these things took me out of the story. While I tolerated this, it really felt like the author was exerting his own opinions since they were put forth in such a way they did not flow with the comedic theme in the book. Some were postured as jokes, but others were clearly not.
Recent Comments