The Hobbit

The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien

Everyone has read The Hobbit, and with Peter Jackson's movie under production at this writing, many will be reading it for a tenth or twentieth time.

Is The Hobbit a children's book? Yes and no. Keep in mind the man, and the times. Tolkien was a survivor of trench warfare in the World War, the most brutal and dehumanizing form of hate and ugliness mankind had yet devised. He would not have been eager to glorify combat, and indeed the focus is on the adventure rather than the hack and slash.

I'll not compare the morals and mores of 1930s Britain to the world of today, except to note that children then were more mature, and adults were less jaded. The Hobbit struck the right balance for the time. In a world without television, Middle Earth was good entertainment.

In my re-reading, I found one particular passage very interesting. Recall the scene of confrontation between Thorin Oakenshield's dwarves and the men of the devastated Lake-town. Bard makes an appeal to Thorin for a share of the treasure, citing the damage and death done to innocents and the fact that a good portion of the gold had come from their ancestors. A very stirring case, and the reader finds himself nodding along. "Yeah! We gave the dwarves food and shelter, and sang songs about them, and they went up there and got Old Smaug all fired up, and now they're going to keep all the cookies? All we got out of the deal was burnt stumps where our town used to be!"*

But then Thorin makes his reply, reminding the Lake-men that he himself is the rightful heir to the Kingdom Under The Mountain. "You people come marching up here to my house, armed with bows and spears, demanding a share of what is mine? You can leave you weapons at home, and ask nicely, and we might talk. But as it is, you look like thieves and robbers, and we don't negotiate with terrorists!"*

Both are good arguments, who is right? It may not be the exact point Tolkien is trying make, but I took from this the thought that forced charity isn't charity at all - that a grudging charity only leads to hatred and bloodshed. The author doesn't answer the question; the standoff is resolved when goblins swarm down the mountain and all sides must unite for survival.

Or maybe that is his answer.

Read The Hobbit again. It's still as good as it was the first time. And if you haven't read it, what are you waiting for?

*I'm paraphrasing, of course.

We Need to Talk about Kevin

We Need to Talk About Kevin: a novel
Lionel Shriver
Paperback: 400 pages
Publisher: Harper Perennial (July 3, 2006)
2/5 stars

One of the reading challenges I'm doing this year is the Take a Chance Challenge. Number ten had several options and I chose this one:

Random Book Selection. Go to the library. Position yourself in a section such as Fiction, Non-Fiction, Mystery, Children (whatever section you want). Then write down random directions for yourself (for example, third row, second shelf, fifth book from right). Follow your directions and see what book you find. Check that book out of the library, read it and then write about it. (If you prefer, you can do the same at a bookstore and buy the book!)

With that in mind, the last time I went to our local used bookstore, I went with this written down:

Fiction aisle
Left hand side
20th column
4th row
7th book

We Need to Talk About Kevinis what my hand landed on, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't consider moving one over either direction. Sure, it was sandwiched in between chick lit, which I don't read, but. . . This just didn't look all that good. But, a commitment is a commitment and We Need to Talk About Kevin it was.

In We Need to Talk About Kevin, Ms. Shriver attempts to tell the story of events, reasons, undercurrents leading up to a school massacre. The story is told from the point of view of Eva, the mother of the murderer, in the form of letters Eva is writing to her husband.

This is a very large undertaking and the premise is great. Ms. Shriver has an excellent story to tell, and at times it is well told and even gripping.

Unfortunately, the very style of the story (letters describing events to a person who was there) was a draw back. It made for very awkward language as Eva told Franklin what he already knew (with such phrases as "You told me. . . ", "You gave me. . . ") and gave a very egocentric feel to the novel from the first page, as Eva describes her her life to one who knows it intimately. I suppose this was to set up for surprises later in the book, but it simply didn't work.

The story of Eva's relationship with her husband and son would have made for interesting reading, but it was so hard to get past the fact that I was reading a novel, due to the self-important (and unrealistic) style and language. This is "a novel", and the reader is not going to forget it. There were times, though, that the story was interesting enough for me to over look this (hence the 2 stars instead of 1), but those instances were few.

In addition, We Need to Talk About Kevin is simply too long. Ms. Shriver spends too much time on details and issues that don't add to the story and that could easily have been pared. Other school shooting incidents discussed in detail, the 2000 election fiasco in Florida referred to again and again, feelings examined in minutiae. . . This book weighs in at 400 pages in oversized paperback, and would probably have been a good novel if 1/4 of that had been left out.

Another difficulty I had with We Need to Talk About Kevin was the discussions (generally arguments) between Eva and Franklin (recounted in detail by Eva to Franklin despite the fact he was there) about their son. These conversations were not realistic, read like how a young person might imagine adults talk, and certainly did not read like adults talking about their own children. Perhaps Ms. Shriver intended this, used it show the difficulty between Eva and Franklin. Perhaps, but to this reader it did have any purposeful use, and made reading even more difficult.

Due to the over-scrutiny, the self-importance and the length, by the time the book ended, the "surprise" was no surprise and the ending was simply a relief. If Ms. Shriver had kept with just the basic story, and had Eva give it in a different format, this could have been a stellar read. As it is, I advise you give it a miss.

Note: This is just my opinion; 52% of the reviews on Amazon were 5 stars.

300

300
Frank Miller and Lynn Varley
Hardcover: 88 pages
Publisher: Dark Horse; 1098 edition (December 15, 1999)
5/5 stars


Wow! This graphic novel is a simply stunningly rendered telling of the Battle of Thermopylae. Is it "historical"? Not entirely, no, but then it never makes that claim. The Battle of Thermopylae has become as much legend as history and that is the treatment given in 300: legendary.

300 follows the Spartan King Leonidas as he takes his 300 warriors to stop the Persians. Leonidas is shown as a true Spartan hero and his wit and arrogance toward Xerxes along with his unflinching bravery make the reader (this one anyway) want to take up shield and spear and stand along side of him.

The art is so fitting for the story. Heavy lines, silhouettes, and much red spattering create the atmosphere needed for each frame. The eye is drawn forward--no pulled forward--and eagerly follows. The art tells as much of the story as does the words.

For those like me that had the misfortune to see the movie version first, never fear: the crappy wife subplot is NOT in this book! Huzzah! Nor is the blatantly off-putting, totally not Spartan image of the child Leonidas crying as he was being taken away from his mother for his trials.

Breathtaking and rousing from beginning to end, 300 is a nearly hero-worshipful retelling of a legend, not a historical thesis--and there is nothing wrong with that! Read it, enjoy it and find it haunting the memory for days to come.

~~Read for the Graphic Novels Challenge~~

Star Island: my first "did not finish" of the year.

Star Island
Carl Hiaasen
Publisher: Knopf; 1St Edition edition (July 27, 2010)
Did Not Finish

I enjoy Carl Hiaasen; have been reading his novels for years. Back in August, when I saw he had a new one published, I added myself to the library waiting list. Number 102 of 102 waiting. And I waited. And waited. And waited.

Last week, my turn finally came. I opened it eagerly and began to read. About two chapters in, I thought, "I'm really not into this!"

The story, as far as I got, is about a young pop star starting to spin out of control, her undercover double, and an icky paparazzi stalker. Skink, my favorite returning character is in it as well.

I read for an evening, dutifully, and made it 113 pages. As I turned out the light my thoughts were on how I dreaded picking it back up the next night. I'd waited so long for it. . .

Then it hit me. D'oh! Just because I've waited five months to read it doesn't mean I have to read it! I can admit defeat and go on; I've done it before, I can do it now!

I don't know that the book is really all that terrible, maybe it just isn't the season for me to be reading it. I don't remember Hiassen being so vulgar, crass and tawdry, though, so I'm thinking it's the subject matter that is my problem, and the reason for Hiaasen's more brash and unappealing writing style this go 'round.

Then, it could be that his novels have always been like that and my utter absorption of late into the world of gentler Victorian novels has made my tolerance for such way lower.

Either reason, or both, is good enough. The fact is, while I have enjoyed Hiassen in the past, I could not work up one grain of sympathy for any of the characters this time (including Skink). This one will go back to the library and the other fifty or so in line after me can have their chance at it.

(Hmmm. . . I just looked at Amazon. Out of 173 reviews, this book has a 3.5 star rating. Could be I'm not far off the mark in saying it isn't up to his standard.)

The Leavenworth Case

The Leavenworth Case
Anna Katharine Green
originally published 1878
5/5 stars

(Project Gutenberg has a free eBook version.)

Anna Katharine Green (November 11, 1846 – April 11, 1935) was one of the first Americans to write mysteries that featured a detective, and is also credited with shaping the genre into more legally accurate fiction, as well as inventing both the (new stereotypical) meddling busybody sleuth and girl detective.

The Leavenworth Case (her first novel), is a complex mystery with a well penned and well planned plot. It takes many twists and turns, but none unbelievable or contrived, and arrives at a solution at once surprising, satisfying, and obvious from the beginning if the read had been looking in the right direction.

Loosely, the plot of The Leavenworth Case is that Horace Leavenworth is found murdered in his locked library. Naturally, his household is suspected, and evidence points to one of his nieces, Eleanor.

The narrator is a young lawyer, Mr. Raymond, who has no experience is mysteries or murders. The police detective, Mr. Gryce, enlists Raymond's help because he is a gentleman, and as such will be welcome in places that Gryce would not be. While Raymond hates the thoughts of playing spy, he has become extremely interested in protecting Eleanor's reputation, so agrees. All the clues and information the reader sees are what Raymond sees, so at times, the reader is deducing (like Raymond) without all the facts. As new information comes to light, Raymond has to fit that into his hypotheses, or scrap it all together and form a new one--and so does the reader.

Anna Katharine Green

The Leavenworth Case was a most satisfying mystery, and kept me guessing til the end. I was certain I knew who the guilty party was time and time again. Time and time again I had to reform my ideas around new information. The clues and misinformation did not feel contrived at all, rather it came about very naturally, as one would expect during the course of a police investigation.

Not only does The Leavenworth Case provide a meaty mystery; in it, one sees a very clear picture of life among certain classes in the U.S. in the late nineteenth century.

Given both the quality of the mystery, and the slice of history it gave, I look forward to reading many more of Green's mysteries.

~~Read for the Victorian Literature Challenge.~~

The Eyes of the Dragon

The Eyes of the Dragon
Stephen King
Publisher: Signet (April 10, 2001)
4/5 stars

When I joined the Take a Chance Challenge, I knew exactly which book I'd read for the "Loved One’s Choice" book. Years ago, Bryan handed me The Eyes of the Dragon to read. I put it on my to-be-read shelf and apparently forgot all about it. He mentioned it again a few months ago and after a search, I located it and placed it in a prominent spot so I wouldn't pass it over this time.

Unlike King's usual novels, The Eyes of the Dragon is not full of horror or gore or even profanity. It is an almost gentle story; a fairy tale told with restraint by an unknown narrator who often speaks to the reader personally, as though the tale were being told by a storyteller to a breath-baited audience.

The story is that of a weak king, his evil magician adviser and his two sons. I really don't wish to tell any of the plot; I'd rather you read it yourself. Suffice it to say that bad things happen, worse things are thwarted, heroes show themselves stalwart and dangerous situations make even the weakest strong when it counts.

The Eyes of the Dragon is not a quick read, the language is too rich and reminiscent of vintage fairy tales to allow for that. Instead, it's a book to read slowly, savor and enjoy the experience of being in a fairy tale world.

My complaints were minor, if any, because now that the book is finished I can't remember them. Instead, I remember only that I loved the hero with great devotion, hated the villain with pure hatred, and was sorry when my visit to the land of Delain was over.

(I must add that I thoroughly enjoyed King's quiet nod to the master of the horror story, H. P. Lovecraft. Very amusing for Lovecraft fans, non-intrusive for those not in the know. Well played!)

Graphic Novels Challenge

Okay, just one more challenge. . . . Ever since I started the Sandman series in December I have fallen in love with the medium of the graphic novel. I don't know if it's just Gaiman's writing that makes it so fabulous, or it is really is a great medium, but my intent is to read more and find out. Then, I stumbled across this challenge, the Graphic Novels Challenge 2011. Perfect way to encourage me to do what I was going to do anyway: read! :D

The level of participation:
Beginner (3 comics or graphic novels)
Intermediate (3-10 books)
Expert (10+)

I'm going for the Intermediate. I think I can easily read four new-to-me graphic novels, and possibly more. I'd like to eventually review one of the Sandman novels so that I can show how simply fantastic they are, and rereads are okay for this challenge, so I might easily make ten. Look forward to trying though!

*a post on my view of graphic novels

Graphic Novels Read:
1. 300 by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley. (my review here)
2. Fables Vol. 1: Legends in Exile by Bill Willingham and Lan Medina. (my review here)
3. Fables Vol. 2: Animal Farm by Bill Willingham and Mark Buckingham. (my review here)
4.Rapunzel's Revenge by Dean and Shannon Hale, illustrated by Nathan Hale. Read 25 January 2011. (my review here)

Woot! Beginner level completed 25 January 2010! On to Intermediate!

5. Calamity Jack by Dean and Shannon Hale, illustrated by Nathan Hale. Read 26 January 2011. (my review here)
6. Britten and Brülightly by Hannah Berry. Read 27 January 2011. (my review here)
7. The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Vol. 1 by Alan More, author and Kevin O'Neill, illustrator. Read 30 January 2011. (my review here)
8. Locke & Key Volume 1: Welcome to Lovecraft  by Joe Hill, author and Gabriel Rodriguez, illustrator.  Read 25 February 2011. (my review here)
9. Locke & Key Volume 2: Head Games by Joe Hill, author and Gabriel Rodriguez, illustrator.  Read 8 March 2011.(my review here)
10. Veils by Pat McGreal.  Read 16 March 2011. (review)
Intermediate level completed 16 March 2011!

11.  American Vampire, Volume One by Scott Snyder and Stephen King, illustrated by Rafael Albuquereque. Read 24 March 2011.  (review)