Iron Kissed (Mercy Thompson #3)

Is that not the worst book cover ever??

So I'm not really sure what I want to say about this book (and series), since I frankly am not sure I want to admit that I've read it in the first place. I mean, look at that cover?! Why isn't she wearing a longer shirt, why is she posed like that? Like a weird twerking squat? I don't understand!!!

I wish I could say "don't judge this book by it's cover!" But I can't say that, because it's pretty much what you see is what you get. Cheesy paranormal mysteries - think Twilight, but without a shallow main character. Mercy is actually pretty badass. Only this time, she added a surprise at the ending. I won't tell you what it is, because spoilers, but it pretty much had me pissed off and although I bought the next book in the series, I'm pretty sure I won't be reading it. I just can't get over how unrealistic it was, and this is a book about werewolves, dammit! That I could handle, but the ending was just so bullshit. I'm all about a strong main character, but I think it's badly done to have your character experience something so horrendous that unfortunately many people can relate to, and rather than have them be an example of how to cope, she - relatively quickly - shrugs it off as if it was nothing. And it just didn't fit the mood of these books anyway - she jumps from plucky paranormal mystery to lifetime movie network drama in only a few chapters. What. the. hell.

So, without giving anything away, I hope, I didn't care for it.

On to the next!

(I'm trying to catch up, as it was an busy year end and beginning.)

Speaker for the Dead

I have no made reviewing books an easy task. The Hobbit. Now this? Good grief.

Whew. 

If you have not read Ender's Game, then just do that first...and right now... It's insanely good. Orson Scott Card is a superb writer, too smart for us, that's for certain. I adore Ender Wiggins. He may be my favorite literary character ever. So start with Ender's Game...

Done? Okay, now for the sequel - Speaker for the Dead.

This is one of those books that I think you have to have a specific mindset or attitude when you approach. When I tried reading it immediately after Ender's Game, I didn't get very far. The tone and story is so different I found it difficult to continue. This book requires patience.

A few years later I was desperate to read some science fiction, and too cheap to buy a new book, so I figured why not try again? I think it was the right time, as I've changed quite a bit in those years, so this time I was so glad I found this book.

I feel like this is the science fiction equivalent to those literary novels with gravitas - like The Alchemist or something (love that one, by the way). I've heard it described as much more "meta" than Ender's Game, but otherwise not really talked about at all. I suppose "meta" is accurate, but rather vague, so let me do my best to further describe this book. First, it is philosophical, sure. But in a satisfying way. Card seems to challenge us as individuals, communities, and humanity as a whole. It's like a thought experiment, but entertaining, and inspiring. I felt the same way reading this book as I did reading the works and convictions of practical ethicists like Peter Singer or Lisa H. Newton - reminded of my moral obligations and inspired to act on them. I read this and felt absolutely inspired to be a better person, and to see myself as a better person.

I'm a religious person, a Christian. And I really enjoyed Card's take on human religion outside of Earth. That part was especially intriguing. It was a critique for balance and perspective, grace and humanity - as in benevolence - especially in practice toward non-humans. I found this side of the story especially encouraging, and faith building. I realize Card and I may not agree on specific religious tenants, but faith is faith. If you are not religious, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on his presentation. but I did not find it preachy at all.

I feel like this is a book that everyone should read, like a required text for students. It's much more important than say - Wuthering Heights or Jane Eyre, which I had to read in high school...it's even one part love story, like those books, but it is so much more...

“No human being, when you understand his desires, is worthless. No one's life is nothing. Even the most evil of men and women, if you understand their hearts, had some generous act that redeems them, at least a little, from their sins.” 

The Hobbit

Well, I have successfully managed to put off this review for a while. It's not from dread, but anxiety - what can I possibly say about one of the Greats? This definitely cannot stand as a book critique, since I don't feel at all qualified to remark about the pros and cons of one of the greatest writers ever. You don't have to agree-- but I'm not wrong! ;)

I think the best part about reading the Hobbit is how I've changed reading the Hobbit. I don't mean some sort of literal growth and maturity. Boo. I'm still as weird and immature since the first time I read this book in middle school. But perhaps "literary maturity" is a better term for it...

In middle school, I thought this book was amusing, but mostly a required intro to the world of Lord of the Rings. The movies had just started coming out, and I was so excited after seeing the Fellowship movie that on a friend's advice I started reading the Hobbit. (I will now claim this was the moment that determined we would become BFFs 4 Life! (middle school remember?!) and we are as nerdy now as we were then). But really, if I was being honest, I didn't care for it a ton. It was kind of slow, and oddly technical, and I remember the part where they are in Mirkwood lasting EONS. I would have swore it was half the book.

I was so dumb.

I've been on a kick to revisit my old favorites, and since that includes Lord of the Rings, once again I started with the Hobbit. This time it was kind of hilarious, but in a sneaky surprising humor, that I did not understand or appreciate in my youth. Dry wit, I guess.

And excitement! I can't believe I found this book boring in the past. There is so much that happens, and none of it takes too long, unless you stubbornly refuse to keep reading. It does seem after a while that the structure is repetitive - the dwarves get in trouble, it seems hopeless, until Bilbo uses the ring and saves the day. But it's still a lot of fun anyway.

But I think my favorite part of the book was the writing style, which I was much more sensitive to this time around, especially reading it during Nanowrimo - when I failed to successfully complete the target words in my own fantasy novel. But really, The Hobbit has so much voice. Honestly, my favorite character was the narrator. It was so spot on, and clever, and I loved that he spoke to the reader directly. He's a story teller! It was brilliant. I could never come close to recreating that, and wouldn't even dare to try, but it was so wonderful. The true brilliance of this story, I think.

Anyway. That's my initial thoughts. I don't want to dig deep on it, this is a book review not The Hobbit and Philosophy. But it's great. No, Great. Capital G.

I can't wait to read it again in another decade!

P.S. - On the movies... well. They are crap. They are entertaining, and some of it stays true to the *spirit* of the book, but it messes with the story for the sake of an action sequence and CGI for no real benefit. But it doesn't need to be three movies, it didn't need to be done so special effects heavy, and that's what I have to say about that!

Cinder(ella!)

So general news - I'm pretty close to finishing a couple books in the next week, so look for more reviews soon! But Nanowrimo is in full swing, and I've managed to keep on track every day, so it's taking me a bit longer than usual. The upside is that Nanowrimo is in full swing and I've managed to keep on track every day! LOL But really, Poehler was write  right - writing IS hard. But when you plan a little and take risks a lot, and just keep going, it's kind of a blast! Seriously, if you are ever in a rut on finding a book to read because they aren't quite what you are looking for, maybe it's a sign that you need to create it instead. I think some famous Literature writer person said something to that affect as well, but I don't remember who or what they said exactly.

In other news!

Cinderella, guys!

Okay, so little known fact. I grew up with a collection of Cinderella stories. I inherited it, but was extremely proud of it (even though I was admittedly more of a Sleeping Beauty fan when I was younger. But whatevs. I've learned the err of my ways. Cute songs but creepy premise. Haha.) I still have all the books, and some are super old, so I should probably take pics and share them so you can all admire these things... anyway, if you've been on the internets and have girly friends, you probably know that there is a live-action Disney Cinderella coming out (eventually?)! Here's the trailer, or in this case since they assume you know the whole story anyway, I'm considering it a mini-movie:

They seriously hold nothing back. It's more of an "enjoy the ride, not the destination" story, I would guess... Regardless, I will likely be watching this one in theaters, because reasons. Although I haven't owned a copy of the Disney animated movie (the biggest weakness of my collection admittedly) since I was a little kid. True story.

If you are looking to enjoy some Cinderella goodness while waiting for the movie, there are so many versions (for the record, I did not give Ella Enchanted the time of day), I'm going to recommend Cinder. by Marissa Meyer.

It's an inventive, futuristic, slightly dystopian take on the classic tale, so pretty much a YA-reader's dream come true. (Bibbity-bobbity-boo!) I did enjoy it a lot, but it is a series, as much of YA is anymore, but alas I have not attempted the rest of the books yet. I think it goes Little Red Riding Hood and then Rapunzel, for what it's worth.

P.S.- I just realized it's a red glass slipper on her foot in the cover. Can I just say that is sooo wrong! It's not Wizard of Oz, geez!

A Long Way Down

I really want to give it 5 stars, but I just can't. I don't think I would introduce this book to anyone as "it's amazing!" but I would absolutely, without-pause present it as "it's really good." (All my reviews originate on Goodreads, by the way...if a little context helps.)

I don't know how it would feel to read this as a seriously depressed person who has thought about killing themselves. But as a person in a state of flux that sometimes feels pretty miserable about themselves, I enjoyed the company. And it made me laugh. And I really wanted to see the movie. So that's something. It's borderline literature with a capital-L. It get's pretty deep, but a book about suicide is likely go there. But it was all pretty believable. And I loved the different perspectives. These four characters are so different, and you wonder if they really would experience it all together in the way that they do, and I was kind of skeptical but I believed it anyway. It just worked. It was messy, but "der" that's life (now who is getting too deep?).

Anyway, if don't know anything about this book - it's about four people that end up on the roof of a building to jump off, and convince each other not too (obviously, or it would have been a very short novel). And it's just about how to keep going once you've so committed to making the decision to jump, and then changing your mind to not. What do you do? Anyway. This is just about what these four did. And it was really interesting. Like, make me want to study psychology if this is what it's about...

SO yeah, I'd say it was really good.

Yes Please

I was really torn about whether this book belonged on my "humor" shelf, if that tells you anything. It's not that it isn't funny, because at times it did make me laugh out loud. But that just wasn't the point, and for someone who is quite famous for being hilarious, it was slightly surprising. Another surprise is that the large part of my adoration for Amy Poehler isn't just her brilliance in Parks & Recreation, but because of her role model qualities for young people across the internet via Smart Girls at the Party. But it wasn't really about that either (definitely not written for all ages, by the way). Sure, there were some tidbits of wisdom and advice in the pages, but that also wasn't the point.

The point is, it's a memoir of someone wise and hilarious that is neither incredibly insightful or all that humorous. It's mostly her talking about her life to date. Which I guess is the point of a memoir anyway. And it was engaging, I certainly read it rather quickly - consuming it in hours reading one-third at a time. But it wasn't that well written. As she repeats throughout, writing is hard (preach it, sister!) but you can really tell because the organization was hard to follow. Maybe I was disadvantaged by reading it in e-book format. The hardcover is supposedly quite colorful, and according to Orson Scott Card the audiobook version is required and delightful. So maybe I will go that route next time, because I guess ultimately that was the real problem- I don't have Amy Poehler's voice in my head. I heard it in my voice, and that context it just didn't make sense to me (unlike Mindy Kaling's Is Everyone Hanging out Without Me? which confirmed that she is in fact my soul sister.) And since maybe I don't have very much experience with memoirs, maybe I just didn't know what to expect.

To put it as precisely as I can - she still rocks, and it was still interesting for the most part. I would totally hang a poster of the cover in my office at work, and will keep watching Parks & Rec and my copy of Baby Mama, and laugh with joy at her work. But I don't know that I would read this again.

Gone Girl *spoilers*

** spoiler alert ** 
So, I got 60-some percent through the book and was like, "good gravy this is Tom Sawyer retold, still in Hannibal, Missouri. Well done, Flynn." And then Nick says the same thing not but a couple pages later. Darn. I thought I had some original revelation about this book. Not even a bit.

But really, could Missouri be the setting for a book that doesn't have someone fake their death and/or is filled with incredibly offensive stereotypes and profanity? (lookin' at you Huck.) Thanks guys. And I admit, I'm slightly bitter that Flynn can speak so horrendously of the state of Missouri. I blame Chicago as a terrible influence. A mere footnote in her acknowledgements reveals that she doesn't in fact loathe the state or the people; she agrees with Nick. Who knew? I certainly could not tell.

Anyway. I hated this book. But it was admittedly very well written. Even if I hated it. Amy and Nick both had such clear voice that certainly kept the momentum and intrigue up. But it was awful. It was *too* clever. I almost can't believe they were as smart as they were supposed to be. But what do I know? I don't read crime, true or otherwise. There could absolutely be crazy people out there. I guess I believe in crazy, I've just never read from the POV of crazy. That's what was so unsettling. I hate Amy. I'm glad Nick didn't try to kill her in the end, but if I had been him I'm not sure I would have been so introspective and had clarity to let go at the last minute. Just sayin'.

I think, lastly, what I resent about this genre - thrillers and plot twists and unreliable narrators (and not the good kind like The Things They Carried) is it's not surprising, not really. It's manipulative. I obviously don't speak to her character as a person, but Flynn's *tricks* as a writer are to an audience what Amy was to Nick. And it pisses me off a bit. Of course it's a twist and she's still alive. You've given me literally no evidence that that was the case. No body, not dead. Period. In any book or story ever, I'm almost convinced. Anyway, same with the ending. It's "oh no, what happens the rest of their lives?" because she decided it to be that way. It's entertainment, I get it. But meh, not my cup of tea.

But damn it was well-written, even if the whole thing was ridiculous. I'm surprised it doesn't take place in the fall. Then it could be the annual literary "It's the Great Pumpkin Something-or-Other, Charlie Brown."

Also, I just saw the movie on Sunday. It was strikingly similar to the book; having it read it so fresh I could tell which parts were left out but the edits made logical sense. I had forgotten it was a David Fincher film (also Trent Reznor). So, when I saw that on the intro credits I became a bit on edge. This man's work is intense. Ultimately, I've decided it was a good fit, because like the book, the movie has great talent on a ridiculous plot. Still a messed up story, but damn Fincher is good. And Reznor is obviously intense as well. What struck me as odd, and perhaps says more about me, is that in the pivotal seen toward the end with Barney Stinson (Neil Patrick Harris, yes I know his real name)... THIS IS WHERE THERE ARE SOME SERIOUS SPOILERS...

DO NOT KEEP GOING IF YOU HAVEN'T READ IT AND WANT TO BE SURPRISED.
YOU'VE BEEN WARNED.

So, anyway, Amy (aka blonde that no one remembers from Pride & Prejudice) is seducing Barney Stinson (weirdo guy in the book who I legitimately don't remember his name)...and it's... uncomfortable. I'm not a prude (yes, yes I am) but I don't want to see Barney's ass. Ever. Anyway, they are going at it, and uh, he gets to his vinegar strokes (any fans of the League out there? haha, oh dear.) ANYWAY. She slits his throat. And I know it's going to happen since they've followed the book so darn close. And it's that scene. And I hide. But something compels me to look, maybe it's over? And it's so not. He is gushing blood. They are wrestling kind-of and rolling around in it, Fincher keeps changing the camera angle, it's just so INTENSE.

And I laugh. 

Seriously. I never laugh at stuff like this. I don't do scary movies, I hate gore, and blood, and yuck! But I think this just shows how over-the-top everything was. GREAT PRODUCTION VALUE. But totally ridiculous. So I giggled.

I hated it.