The Hand of a Master, Even If the Medium Is Different

Well I finished my books on reserve... and found myself, perhaps due to neglect, with a zero-length backlog.  So I was free to pick up whatever I fancied, as long as I could get my hands on it.  That of course, limited me to Georgette Heyer and a few other choice favorites I have in my possession.  I did, indeed, choose a GH, but the question is, which one? The only one I've read at all recently is Venetia (and I'm not sure how recently that was, since I don't think I reviewed it on the blog) so I had many old favorites I could turn to... then there were those that I like, but that I didn't buy on the first round since they aren't *that* good... and then there's The Quiet Gentleman, which I picked up last summer from the Border's going-out-of-business sale (see if you can find the other book I picked up reviewed here :)) simply because they had it.  This is one I've read once (back when I first read them all and got out the last 10 or so from Pratt library) and I don't think since then.  It's more a mystery than a romance, like Regency Buck, but only the mystery parts.  But Gital (Dov's cousin - is this the first time I'm mentioning Dov? maybe :) - nope, just checked, two other times - I guess he does figure quite largely in my reading life :)))  mentioned that she liked it (she got into GH a few years ago and has been reading them slowly, I gather) and that was somewhat of a recommendation.  Plus Jennifer Kloester's Regency World kept mentioning Gervase Frant of all heroes.  So I was ready to give it another go.

It is indeed, more a mystery than a romance - and mystery is not GH's strong suit (not that it would matter much if it was, since I don't go in much for mysteries no matter how good they are).  But in any case, I've never read any of her actual mystery, but her other romance + mystery is really Regency Buck (though that one is more of a romance / tour of Regency society than a mystery) and I found them quite similar - mostly in the dispositions of the villains, who were both refined, almost smarmy, and overtly concerned for the interests of their victims.  But if the meat of the book was the mysterious accidents that befall Gervase and the fallout from his return to the family seat, there was plenty of distraction in light flirtations, balls, and pleasant conversation.  So don't get me wrong - this book was not hard to read.

In fact, I'd say TQG made me appreciate GH all the more.  Even in a book with little romance, and between a couple I couldn't really get behind for much of the book (I appreciated Drusilla's practicality from the beginning but Gervase did not seem to be "one of the downy ones" until much later and it was hard to see his coolness at first), it was just so much fun to read.  The usual stock characters, the practical heroine, and everything moving along so delightfully.  I'm not saying this book was a favorite, or even that I'm surprised I haven't read it in years, but I'm not sorry I own it, and I'm sure it'll make its way back into this blog (if it's still around :)) a few years from now.

Verdict: 4/5

Almost, But Not Quite, More of the Same

Remember way back when, through the fog of time, this blog was a newborn babe, and I did other things besides reviewing every book I read, methodically? It was a short but sweet time, glorious in its variety.  Oh how I miss it... but nothing remains the same, not forever anyway... All right, enough nostalgia.  The point is, one of the first reviews I did, about a book I had read before I started the blog, was The Spellman Files #4.  Last year (I think it was last year), I read and reviewed Lisa Lutz's stand-alone, and this year, I'm back to #5.  I think we were all a little surprised that there is a #5, since #4 ended off just fine from my POV.  But she chose to write a #5, and if I have gleaned properly from the website, there's more where that came from!  Sarah Sp. has not been happy with her since at least #4, and I think #3 too, so she wasn't very enthusiastic about the continuation.  My feeling was that Isabel was with Henry, and all grown up, so why go further? And yet, here we are.

Two years into the future that is (and we actually *are* two years in the future, how funny :)) Isabel is with Henry, Rae is in college, and the ex-convict Isabel liberated in the last book has taken up residence with the Spellmans.  Isabel herself has not regressed in maturity, I'm happy to say.  Other than the slight irregularities that are a product of her personality (and perhaps Lisa Lutz's) she appears a stable, relatively successful adult.  The rest of her family is up to their usual antics, but they were never as crazy as Isabel.  So to start off with, less self-destructiveness and just as much harmless zaniness as before.  I think it's a change for the better.  The plot itself is mostly harmless too.  I have to say I don't have that much of a memory for previous plots, which suggests they are mostly of the same nature as this one - lots of meandering threads that get somewhat loosely enmeshed towards the end.  I think it's Spellman as usual, for most part.

But Spellman as usual can get irksome after 5 books.  Rae is definitely not aging gracefully.  And I find the unnecessary rudeness and shenanigans... unnecessary.  And maybe it's just this book, but I feel like I can very much hear Lisa Lutz writing.  Isabel is funny when we're laughing at her and her insane family.  But if Isabel is right in her "quirky" view of the world, even a little bit ... well what's there to laugh about?   I guess what's left is a certain cleverness in the antics.  I definitely stayed curious the entire book, through all the plot twists and jumps.  There is the little annoyance of *constant* event-droppping (just coined the term) where all we hear is "we'll get to that later".  If *you* know, we want to know too! Get that through your head.  But I guess it's just par for course with the Spellmans... even though I bet Lisa Lutz could write a whole book in chronological order and I would still find it interesting.  Really, she should try it.

ANYWAY... why am I going on and on about this? It's not like I care about any of this (ok not like I care *most* about any of this :)) What's going on with Isabel and Henry? Of course that's the question on all your minds :)) And first, let me say that, in book #5, I would have been just fine with letting I&H fade into the background as a mature couple - their story was well-played out already.  What I am NOT fine with is them breaking up! I will however forgive LL if/when they get back together in #6.  I'm betting they will, because otherwise, what was the point of breaking them up? To be realistic? I mean, really? I'm definitely going with engagement in a book or two.  But even with that, I'm not sure we needed a breakup now... Oh well, what's done is done.  'Twere well it be repaired forsooth.

Verdict: 3/5 (I don't know, I just didn't find it at all hard to read)

The Humorous Side of Chic Lit

More familiar authors, though less avidly followed perhaps - Sophie Kinsella's latest is one of her one-offers, not a Shopaholic installment - that means greater potential for romance, but nothing to get too excited about if its last few predecessors (Remember Me, Twenties Girl) are any indication.  Anyway, I've Got Your Number did not impress fellow readers Huvi and Chava (Huvi read it three Shabbosim ago at Bubby's, Chava at my house :) two Shabbosim ago), but they are rather harsher judges than I.  I expected not much, as most of Sophie Kinsella's characters are utterly silly, but maybe some good chic lit-style boy-girl plot.

Now, from the start, IGYN promised to live up to any SK work in both plot and character silliness.  First of all the character - Poppy Wyatt, a Becky Bloomwood soul mate in flakiness, some naivete, and a gift for twisted logic and getting herself into trouble.  Then there's the plot... I gave Dov's family the pleasure of a synopsis, which was greatly appreciated as a piece of unlikely farce - girl loses ring, then fire alarm rings, then phone is stolen, then she steals another phone... and then she strikes up a relationship with the phone's owner, all the while refusing to return him his property?! Only forgivable because in chic lit, implausibility cannot be allowed to stand in the way of good romance and maybe some funny moments along the way.  So far, so silly... I could well understand H and C's lack of enthusiasm.

But, even with all the ridiculous setups, snort-worthy scenarios, and lack of common sense I couldn't stop noticing, I found myself laughing out loud once in a while.  She does have great comic timing, Ms. Kinsella, no doubt about it.  So she succeeds in at least part of her goal (what I assume is her goal), to write a book that keeps us laughing most of the time.  At the beginning, I was doing less laughing though, and more worrying, as Poppy was (of course) being an idiot about dealing with the loss of the engagement ring (word of wisdom, it's ALWAYS better to tell).  But then... it didn't spiral off into disaster after fiasco... about half-way through, it's actually resolved! Leaving us to concentrate on Sam (the phone owner's) problems, which are much more interesting, and also much less tense than our heroine's (last tense because they aren't our heroine's, strictly speaking he has lot more on the line).  So we are left more free to enjoy both the funny stuff and the romance.

The romance is decent, nothing to rock the world, and I'd say in the background for the most part - but that's pretty typical SK, she's never all about them getting together.  And it was there all the while, something to look forward to.   And if its progression was fairly typical, I have to say there were a few surprises along the way for the plot in general.  Nothing *major*, but I was definitely surprised at how certain things were resolved (the fiance's parents, Sam's Dad, Lucinda...) Impressively not what I'd expected, I'd say.

So the book was silly, no doubt about it.  It wasn't the greatest romance ever written, without a question.  But as a solid, funny, chic lit romp, I have to say, I was quite, quite pleasantly surprised! Less tense, less predictable, and quite a bit more funny than I would have thought.  Not bad, Sophie K.  Not bad.

Verdict: 3.25/5

Perhaps a Bit Warmed Over, Still Tastes Good

While I was immersed deep in the P&P universe, a few long-reserved titles arrived at the library.  The first of those to which I turned my attention was naturally the one the excited me most - Lauren Willig's 9th Pink Carnation, The Garden Intrigue.  The PC series is, of course, one of my favorites, uniting accurate (ok, somewhat vaguely realistic) history, well-formed prose, and *solid* romance.  The books might almost be categorized as romance novels, especially the earlier ones, but they are so superior to the lot as to be almost literary in comparison :) So what more could I want than a well-written romance novel? Well-written and true to its chosen time of course.  That's as far as the series goes, and #9 is really true to form.  A new hero and heroine with as classic a romance as any, liberal "good angst" moments abounding, and a plot to keep things going without distracting.  There's also Jane around (unlike some of the latest ones) to keep us entertained, admiring and waiting for her story.

But... I'm really not sure what it was, my enjoyment of the book did not compare to previous times.  Some of it was almost definitely things I just happened to pay attention this time (or this time more than others) - notably the very anachronistic writing style, and even conversation at times.  This doesn't really bother me, as it's done deliberately to amuse - I don't find it particularly amusing, but I can hear the smirk behind it so the inaccuracy doesn't grind the way it could.  I do think that the little jokes may be becoming more prevalent (and obvious) though - Be careful with that case, it's a Vuitton? Approaching the level of Terry Pratchett when it comes to tongue-in-cheek anachronism,  but without his skill and certainly outside his genre.  But like I said, that didn't really take away from my enjoyment of the book.

It was more like... I don't know, I just didn't have patience.  My heart failed to wrench at Emma's memories of Paul and her regrets of past life, Augustus's unwillingness to think of home never went anywhere at all, and the characters' constant second-guessings and wistful imaginings left me mostly unmoved.  Even the love story itself seemed somewhat hurried and unsatisfying.  It was certainly not developed well, as the time during which they were supposed to fall in love is brushed through in a single, short chapter of notes back and forth.  But that's ok, they're believable enough as a couple.  It was more like that once the real happenings got going - the scenes on the stage, on the lawn, in the guesthouse... I just felt like it was all just too pat.  We knew he would say this, we knew she would feel that - not that I ever expect romance to be unpredictable, but this time it almost felt like it all unfolded along premarked lines.

And that's the part where I'm not sure whether it's me or the book.  I'd like to think it was the book, since that means I haven't lost my ability to enjoy romance.  And I think it's definitely somewhat that LW is probably feeling the same fatigue I am on #9 - yet another couple, with their own cozy little romance.  And there's the fact the Augustus is a poet, so a little high-flown sentiment may have seemed in order, even at the expense of more relatable writing.  But there's no question that if I had read this book a year or two ago, I would have enjoyed it a little more.  I guess that bothers me a bit, but it's not like I couldn't read this at all... and I do think that a good part of my failure to get interested was reading it in so many bits and pieces, which I can remedy easily (well as easily as I can free up some time on a Shabbos :)) So maybe The Garden Intrigue has been a gentle prod towards diversifying my book pool from romance.... but I wouldn't say it's not a good, old-fashioned example of my favorite genre, all the same.

Verdict: 4/5

Return to Pemberley

February's done up and gone (or almost)... and how have I been occupying myself away from my loyal followers? Do not fear, my little ones... I have been most gainfully employed.  At last, at last, gainfully employed.  Whimsicalities aside, I have finally made it all the way up my backlog.  To the one, the only, the one and only book that deserves all the fanfare you could possibly come up with... yes, you guessed it, L&Gs, ppppP aaaaan ppppP!!!! Shockingly enough, I have not read the book since I came back from seminary - which means 5 years last June, IIRC.  In that time of course, I have not been leaving my beloved idle.  Movies, sequels, prequels, take-offs, spins... I have spent a fair bit of time immersed in the world of Pride and Prejudice (embarrassingly enough, some might say).  But it was time to get back to basics.

I was afraid I wouldn't be able to read the book, since I know it so well.  And indeed, it wasn't a fast read (it has been over a month since I posted, after all).  But I guess I don't know the book as well as I thought I did, since I had very little trouble absorbing the meaning of the words (and not just letting them wash over me, as I find I can do when I know something really well).  I mean, I definitely had to read passages twice at times... but it was all the more worthwhile.  It's amazing how much I can still pick up, on my upteenth reading (maybe it's even at 20? who knows...) Little nuances, like that when Elizabeth says "a deep and intricate character is more estimable than one such as yours", estimable means *good*, not easy to understand! It all makes sense now :) And those pyramids of grapes, nectarines, and peaches served at Pemberley? For the entire table, not for each person.! Oh... We're literally talking about single words here that I feel like I'm reading for the first time :)

So yes, there's more to be gained every time I read it (and that's of course, besides everything that I forget).  But it's not all about tiny details... as always, my perspective on the characters themselves shifts when I follow their stories once again.  Darcy seems more than ever an awkward and reserved man, not necessarily the paragon of perfection we like to imagine him as.  Mr. Bennet's neglect of his family gets more comdemnable.  Georgiana's youth is even more apparent.  Wickham's impudence shocks and amuses more than ever.  5 years, alternative perspectives, and attentive reading will get you that.

To some extent then,  the P&P experience is influenced by its supplementary universe.  But, too, reading the book itself reminds me of what it's really all about.  I feel like in the carefully crafted sentences I can find out the truth to what these characters feel and who they really are.  Yes, it's ridiculous to care so much (and you know I really don't), but reading all that paraliterature makes me appreciate the real thing all the more.  Oh the perfection of plot, of scene, of characters... and of prose! It's simply ridiculously well written.  Elegant, subtle, and gently mocking all the while.   With feeling ever present, but always restrained, often hidden.

Which brings me to another point - P&P is a romance, but a hidden romance.  I don't know, if I was reading it for the first time, whether I'd appreciate it as a romance at all.  There are none (or very few) of those "angsty" moments I love.  Darcy loves Elizabeth, and it's stated more than once... but JA doesn't go out of the way to twist our heartstrings with his longing for her.  But it's there... oh it's there... and luckily for me, I don't have a problem remembering that.

And because I do, I can revel in the original hate-at-first-sight, he-loves-her-all-the-while tale... perfectly written, perfectly humorous, and perfectly wise on top of that.  I really don't think it's just my bias talking - there is just nothing bad about this book.  Ok, it has its tense moments, its uncomfortable interludes... but we know we need them.

So what can I say on picking up P&P five years later, older and wiser? It's still the best book over... maybe because it can still surprise as much as because its first goodness holds fast.  There is only one P&P... but boy are we lucky to have even that :)

Verdict... oh what can a measly number say about perfection? If you will have though, 5/5.  No, 6/5.  No... this is silly.  Perfect.  What else is there to it?

:)

Great Showing By The Less Than Great

Since nothing came up in the interim (or indeed, since), I moved on to the third novel in Claire Darcy's Regency trio, Lydia.  This one was a combination of quite a few GH's - I'd say mostly The Grand Sophy, but with a strong hint of Frederica and just a touch of Regency Buck.  So many different ones, I'd say, one could almost say it stands on its own as an original.  Its characters, or at least its heroine, can certainly hold her own.  And the plot itself was rich with a good number of complexities.  So what am I saying? I was impressed by this last of the three.  With the first two, I felt like CD caught GH's style, but not much beyond that - the books were fun to read because they were Regency, but slow-moving and, at times, clumsy.  I don't think Lydia could be called slow-moving at all - in fact, I enjoyed it from the start, and didn't want to put it down at any point.  It was clumsy in a few places, for sure... but that's only to be expected, and really wasn't enough to mar my enjoyment at all.

I'm not saying we're talking about GH here.  The romance was definitely not particularly well-executed - it's unclear when the falling in love happens, for starters, and the couple in question do not interact very much.  We get some hint of the Viscount's feelings, but nothing extraordinary.  And the Viscount himself, while very likeable in a combination of Mr. Beaumaris (ready enjoyment of amusing situations) and the Marquis of Alverstoke (not a marrying man), and a soldier to boot, is also new to his wealth, having inherited it unexpectedly from his great-uncle.  Not the worst shame in the world, but we like our heros to be "independently wealthy" if possible :)  The second point is a minor detail, the first less so, but despite both, the book was a good read.  I'd say of all Clare Darcy's books I've read (and there were two others besides the trio, both substantially inferior), this one was the only one that makes me regret there aren't more.  Maybe I'll even consider trying to find the others that there are.. maybe.  But in any case, this one was worth the time.

Verdict: 3.25/5

Great Form, Lacking Substance

Way back when, I started Clare Darcy's regency trilogy (or actually just 3 books published together).  At that point, I wanted to review all three at once, but by the time I finished the first, I had higher priority books in the wings, so I just stopped and review the first.  I have made it back to the low priority pile, for the time being anyway, and I finished the second one today.  Just as I thought, there's not much to say about this one that I haven't already said about the first, but that's what I got myself into by reviewing after  only finishing one...

So, recapitulate (actually, I just assume this is pretty much what I wrote, I didn't reread the other post, naturellement) Clare Darcy is remarkable for her uncanny ability to imitate Georgette Heyer.  Right away, I am sucked in by the familiar cadences - the nineteenth century cant, the lifestyle of Regency gentility... it's there, and in a quite delicately copied fashion.  This particular story, Georgina, was an ode to Venetia -  girl is an isolated town falls in love with a known rogue... and there's a young suitor, a crippled young companion, and some other similarities that make me wonder if CD was at all embarrassed by how much she ripped off.  It's so obvious, I almost think she meant it as an homage.  But homage or not, it is of course not Georgette Heyer.  The characters are less believable, the plot more boring... And in this particular case, GH's signature snobbery was just not there in force.  The guy is... well I suppose he *is* nobly born... in a manner of speaking (he's a bastard).  And all that talk about money... whew! You know only the mushrooms care that much!   Then there's the romance itself, which so disappointingly executed. Georgina figures out quite soon that he loves her, and despite some waffling that seems a bit forced, we and she never really doubt it afterwards.  And where's the fun in that?! And nothing less lack of fun like a poor hero and wealthier heroine.  Where are those principles of GH we can rely on? Gentlemen, with some respectable source of income... who can hide their love from their beloved just a little bit better...

But again, why complain about how CD isn't GH? Of course she's not GH.  So judging the book on its own merits, the romance isn't perfectly executed, but she certainly tries, which is more than I can say for most books.  The writing isn't bad at all, I didn't find it grating.  But overall... well overall the book was just boring.  I don't know, it just didn't move.  I'm not even sure why I found it this way, but perhaps I was picking up on the author's central focus - an "authentic" Regency novel, not necessarily a good story.

Verdict: 2.85/5

You're the Mother, Don't Be Such a Baby

A familiar author, if not one I avidly follow - I've reviewed two of Katherine Center's books already and I've been meaning to read the third ever since.  But it was one of those got it out, had to return it, Chava had it out, she had to return it, I forgot about it... but when I remembered, it was very easy to get ahold of.  I thought this was her newest book, but it turns out that it's her first (I think), and, maybe a little surprisingly, I think it made a difference.  I like KC's books despite their plots - overworked Mommy or jobless and manless doesn't really do it for me.  Though surrogate pregnancy isn't a bad twist at all.  But in any case, the books were much more fun to read than their jackets would suggest, since KC has a way of lulling you into calm enjoyment of ordinary life.

But The Bright Side of Disaster (debut or not) was just a little bit less about ordinary life.  It was a Mommy tale again... but a very new, and newly singled Mommy tale.  And it was *all about* just how hard that life is.  So hard it actually made me dread having a baby a little bit... except that it all sounds utterly exaggerated.  Yes, it's tiring to have a new baby, and definitely, it's really hard to do it without a husband.  But seven months in and still doing nothing but taking care of the baby? Pu-leeze, stop complaining.  And in general, stop complaining.  Yes, Jenny's situation is not a pretty one, but seriously, she just makes such bad decisions. Well of course, allowing Dean back in to her life was a bad decision, but that's clear from the book.  It's more just her ridiculous overprotectiveness of Maxie and her constant background whiny tone that just makes it hard for me to feel that sympathetic.  I ended up feeling like she just needed to man up and take better care of herself.

In the end, it all works out of course, but it wasn't all that exciting.  I don't blame KC for that, she doesn't do romance all that well - Get Lucky I found unexpectedly romantic, but it was just a nice bonus.  These books aren't about romance... what they are supposed to be about is women we can get along with.  Women we like, and we want to succeed.  Not that I didn't want Jenny to succeed, but I have to say, I wasn't surprised she had a hard time with.  Wow, I'm being mean :) But the point is, it's not like Jenny was having fun and I certainly had no interest in hangin' with her as she traversed the path of new motherhood.  All I can say is, it BETTER not be that bad - and I'm pretty sure it's not :) So Jenny, glad you ended up with your man, gladder still I'm not you, and not unglad to be finished with the book.

Verdict: 2.75/5

PS - I feel I must note that the cover picture is not of the edition I read but I couldn't find a working link to that one... oh well :)

Yet Another Take on the Classic Tale

For some reason, yet another author felt the need to publish a teen version of P&P (Actually, when I reviewed the last one, Prom & Prejudice, I said that I didn't remember reading any other versions, but it just feels so done).  For all the reasons I detailed in my last review - basically, I have no patience for teenagers, I just wasn't that interested in reading Epic Fail when I read about it on Austenprose (this despite it being by an chic lit author, Claire LaZebnick, whose previous books I enjoyed).  But S.b. got it out from the library and thought it was pretty decent, so I read it over this Shabbos, for which I was in Baltimore.

It was indeed, pretty decent, and also pretty much exactly what I expected.  Rich prep school to imitate the class society of England, and sweet enough teenage romance.  Not hugely romantic, but fun enough to read about.  This one took place in Hollywood and made much of the difficult lives of movies stars and whatnot, more standard chic lit fodder.  And there was the similar issue that Elise Benton's position at her school is far more tenuous than Elizabeth's in the vicinity of Longbourne.  Then there's the fact that the plot just doesn't have that much room since we all know what's going to happen. I always end up being happy when story deviates from the original, since at least it's a surprise. Plus if you try to stay too close, you end up wangling things in a way that make no sense at all.  So this one kept consistent enough, changed a few things, and was the more successful for that.

So basically, decent high school romances, NO surprises, not much else to say, but certainly not too hard to read.

Verdict: 2.95/5

Funny side note, as I was writing this Sarah Sp. emailed me and asked me if I had ever read this or another teen version of P&P.

Approachable Star, Approachable Story

After a hiatus of, what has it been, 3 weeks? and 1 book, I'm back with *yet another* AMS.  This one actually just published, the latest Isabel Dalhousie.  I've reviewed at least one of these before on the site, but I'm not going to go back and read it, because, as you know, I like my reviews fresh :) This series is the least popular one amongst the Swia. public - that is, the Sp's don't even read it.  It used to be my favorite, since it featured a very satisfying, if a little unusual (the unusual is what bothered the Sp's) romance.  But that's been long over (or long-settled), so what's left? Isabel herself and her many musings.  AMS is fond of philosophical ramblings of course, but in these books he's given extra license to digress on whatever he fancies, possessing of the perfect mouthpiece in one who philosophizes by profession.

As you can imagine, that can get annoying.  Especially when I disagree with Isabel, but also because spending so much time delving into every perceived moral dilemma does not make for thrills and chills all day (not that that's what I'm looking for anyway :)) And at times, that was definitely my prevailing feeling while reading Isabel #... 8? I think it's 8 - The Forgotten Affairs of Youth.  She goes on and on about this or that and my feeling is, it just doesn't matter that much, lady.  AMS presents her as the gentle, refined, and cultured woman, but it's hard not to find her boring at times.  And because she's boring, she becomes unlikeable, since AMS is so clearly enamored of her carefully crafted thoughts, feelings, and lifestyle (in other words, we have a Mary Sue).

That was sometimes... and more at the beginning, I'm glad to say.  As usual, somewhere along the way, the pace picked up.  But it wasn't just the plot development - interestingly enough, I actually found myself liking Isabel, a lot more than I have in a while.  For once, she isn't left as this rather inhuman pillar of morality and thought  - to a much greater extent than I think ever (or at least in the past few books) previously, we are invited into her inner life.  A vacuous phrase, but what I mean, we see how much she loves Jamie and Charlie, how she cares about Grace, how she gets frustrated with Cat.  These are things we know about, but I think not ones that took as central a role before this.  Even the obligatory "mystery" feels more personal, more about Isabel meeting people than about finding something out.  And I think it's a good change.  It's amazing how important it is to like the people you are reading about. And in this book, I find that I did like most everyone.  Cat was annoying as ever, but AMS acknowledges her "impossibility" with that very word (maybe in a different form, but that root :))

The plot itself may have been a tiny bit lacking, in that, except for the central story, loose ends were for the most part not tied up.  Not sure what happened with Charlie swearing, with Max Lettuce, with Sinclair+Cat... but I guess none of those were very important, and that was the point.  It was all about Isabel and how she handled them - and I think she did it very well, getting it right and keeping it real too.  Isabel is fun again, at least for the moment. (Ok, not sure she ever was, but she certainly wasn't always as stodgy as lately).

Verdict: 3.25/5

Too Short to be Really Sweet

Wow it's been a while... indicative of my tiredness every morning, my busy Shabbosim (Bubby, the in-laws...), and a slightly lengthier (well maybe just really slightly) work, and well, yes, one that failed to hold my interest consistently.  It's an Austenprose pick, and in a big way - Laurel Ann, proprietress of Austenprose, edited a collection of short stories from Janite writer - mostly of JA paraliterature - with the common theme of somehow being inspired by the woman herself.  This book was not at the library when it came out, but I was eager to read it, since not only did Laurel Ann talk about it pretty incessantly, but Lauren Willig and Margaret Sullivan (Austenblog) contributed, so they mentioned it as well.  So I told Dov to buy Jane Austen Made Me Do It for me from B&N when he wanted to get me a present for Succos - yes, Succos - well actually, the last days.  But you know how it is - if you own it, you don't read it.  Which is why it had to wait for my library backlog to empty in order for me to pick it up.

I did pick it up of course, I think over two weeks ago now.  The stories are, of course, completely self-contained, so there's very little compelling you to go on to the next when you've finished one.  And they, also of course, held varying degrees of charm, humor, and romance.  The genres were (I might be dropping a story here or there), in parallel with Austen paraliterature as a whole, sequels/prequels/durings of the novels, real-life Jane Austen stories, modern spooky Austen ghosts, and chic lit with an Austen touch.  Of these, I'd say the ones I enjoyed the most were the last, which is kind of sad, since a lot of those were quite tangentially inspired by Jane, I'd say.  But of course, that gave their authors the freedom to develop plots/tones suitable to short stories.  So many of the others (well ok, some of these too) felt like they could have made promising novels... but the first lesson of short story writing is... a short story is not a novel.  Back in ninth grade, we studied some characteristics - irony and whatnot - but the point is, you need to manage to develop something we care about in only a few pages.  Or it just kind of falls to nowhere.

I'm not saying the stories were that bad - some of them were cute ideas, and one or two (sadly it was really only one or two) had decent romances going on.  There were definitely some I'd be excited to here were going to turn into a real novel (one, I think it was the Rubino one mentioned there is some possibility) and plenty, that, up to the abrupt ending, I was getting into.  Not surprisingly, most of the ones I liked were the authors I like.  Lauren Willig, Rubino, Jo Beverly (ok, I don't read her, but she's a legit romance writer, not Austen paraliterature) but surprisingly, I enjoyed the amateur one and Laura Viera Rigler's tales as well.  In short, these authors are people (mostly women :)) after my own heart.  There could be nothing too objectionable in a few pages meant to amuse.  And indeed, I found nothing to object to... but nothing to make me wish for a sequel either.

Verdict: 2.9/5

Ordinary Life, Slightly Stale

In the back of your minds, I know you've all been wondering, every time I update this blog, what happened to AMS? It's like what, 6 months since he published something? What's with the guy? Never fear, my trusty followers - the fault is mine.  AMS *did* publish a new book, sometime in the summer - the next in the 44 Scotland St series (#7 maybe?), as he always does in the summer (of course, only in England, but my wonderful cousin Sarah Sp. orders it special :)) Anyway, she got it in the summer, and I was supposed to be first (or maybe second) on line to read it, but you know... I was kind of busy then.  And once I didn't read it immediately, and I wasn't living in Queens (i.e. within easy access of the book) it kind of slipped my mind.  But I remembered eventually, and had Elisheva Sp. bring it down to Baltimore when she stopped there on her way to her Thanksgiving Tenessee getaway (I just felt like putting some life details in for color there, if you're wondering).  I had to finish my library books first, of course, but once I did, I got right down to this one.  Finished it unexpectedly fast too, due to an unusually long bus ride yesterday and a ridiculously long wait today (left for work late because I got officially married, more life detail for color :)).

So how was it? 44SS was at one point, I think, my favorite of all the AMS series.  Of course, most of them were at one point my favorite, but the reason I liked 44, I think, was how real it all was.  The characters were so varied, and kept plenty busy, but it was just their lives, basically.  And, for the most part, the characters were likeable enough, so reading about their lives wasn't painful.  I sound rather unenthusiastic, but the point was, these books can be a perfect mix of light-hearted mundanities and absurd little incidents, all about people we care about.  Add to that the finely-painted picture of Edinburgh, the real Edinburgh, we get from these books, and they can carry their own weight (it still thrills me when I recognize the locales that are mentioned with great regularity).  On the downside, there's never much of a plot, since the novels are serialized - what plot there is often doesn't start till the middle and doesn't always end either.  But you get used that after a while.

That's the series, what about the book? Well the book is #7... that means AMS is probably feeling some fatigue, and, the truth is, I am too.  The characters, once so likeable, now seem faintly annoying in many cases. Or too smug, or a little too pathetic, or just a little too cruel.  Bertie is a delight, as always, but I found myself more annoyed than not with Matthew, with Domenica, with Big Lou even.  And of course there's Irene and Olive and Bruce, who are as unlikeable as ever.  The lives themselves... well, the improbable incidents, I'd say, are continuing - Matthew with his triplets, Antonia and her nuns... but the mundanities consist a little too often of philosophical jaunts.  Now, AMS is no stranger to asides, and often asides that I do not agree with, but I felt that, here, there was sometimes little else of significance happening.  Towards the middle/end, that impression started lessening - not surprisingly, the plot was finally picking up.  But even then, I felt like there was just a slowness to it all, or at least a heavy weight pulling back on the faster-pace incidents.  Lou meets another unsuitable man, but it all just peters out before much happens.  Matthew buys back his flat for 300,000 pounds more than he paid, but no one seems to care.  Domenica meets her lost love, but realizes he's just that...

What I'm saying is, it just wasn't that engaging.  I would find myself interested, only to have it either go nowhere at all, or be resolved far too quickly.  And I didn't feel like the usual humor was there either, at least not generously distributed.  I can't say the book was awful, just that Edinburgh doesn't have *quite* the same homey sound as it did before I read this.  And like I said, it's hard to stay fresh, and keep me interested, after 7 books.  With all that though, I still want to know what's going to happen to them all... well I guess there's not that much left dangling right now (other than Pat actually), but I'm sure AMS will find something new to visit upon the denizens of 44 Scotland by the next book.  And, of course, I'll be reading it.

Verdict: 2.9/5

My Unconscious Mind Has Preconditioned Me to Disagree With This Book... Or Something Like That

Man it took me a while to finish this one - took me a while to get it too.  Back in I don't know when, Google had an Author@ for David Eagleman, whose latest book is Incognito.  This was right around the time (I guess that' when :)) when I read Joshua Foer's book, Moonlighting with Einstein, that I found so unexpectedly fascinating.  So I was more than a little open to another neuroscience title.  Plus there were lots of reserves on it, always a goodish sign :) So I put it on hold... and it was the same old story - hold expired, got it out, couldn't renew it... etc. until now (or a few weeks ago) when I finally managed to get a hold of it without reserves and actually had time to read it.  I was slightly hampered by tiredness, since, I have started to go to the gym in the mornings (yes I had to say this, of course I did :)) which means I feel like sleeping, not reading on the bus in the mornings (though it's morning right now and I am writing my blog, that's how dedicated I am :))

So about the book... well in the beginning, I was just unimpressed.  He kept going through all these examples of how what we see isn't reality and how our brain does so much unconsciously for us.  He said these things like they were a revelation, instead of which, almost all of what he said was familiar to me.  I suppose his framing of it was something new in a few cases - that we really don't tend to realize the role the brain plays in composing our view of the world.  But mostly it was like, uh yeah, our brain processes a lot unconsciously, that's what it's there for.  And along with his dramatic reveal of the unconscious, Eagleman continuously refers back to evolution as the cause and impetus of all this - evolution dictates that this was better for survival, this was advantageous... Without offering one iota of proof or even acknowledgement that evoking evolution as a magical force does not cement its place as the most logical explanation of how intelligent life (us) came about.  I mean it's not like I expected the guy to launch into a defense of evolutionary theory, but given the utter lack of any backup when he mentions that this or that was better than some other scheme for survival and that's why it has survived, why mention it at all?

Ah, because my early annoyance at his constant noddings to that origins of life theory was, in fact, a pick-up on his not-so-hidden agenda.  Because once the book finishes showing us how our conscious minds are the smallest, most unimportant, and late-to-the-party part of our brain, it launches into the next phase of Eagleman's exploration of the psyche.  Given that so much of "us" is unconscious, do we even have free will? Well he posits this - the conscious mind is that which decides between warring factions in the unconscious - and in that, I think he's pretty much on the nail.  Why aren't we animals? We have the ability to choose between right and wrong.  But my agreement with his theory of consciousness notwithstanding, I diverge quite far from him at the next juncture.

And that is twofold - 1) that our ability to make decisions is influenced by innumerably many factors that are out of our control and 2) we haven't found a place in the brain that isn't looped in with other parts, making an independent, self-reliant conscious mind impossible.  Now as far as the first point, he is undoubtable correct - we are put into this world with a given set of circumstances about which we have no say - but we all know the big but, and that is that every person has the ability to choose right and wrong *within his personal circumstances.*  No one gets let off the hook just because they had an alcoholic mother or grew up below the poverty line - if you do something wrong, you are culpable.  Of course, we know that we're not the ones who can judge what's wrong (or at least what's a wrong choice) for any one person, so there's no question he has some point - more on that anon.  His second point is the one that really irks me (not surprisingly).  So here's my first needle poke in his balloon - have you isolated the area of the brain that you claim constitutes the conscious mind, that is, the place where arbitration between dueling unconscious processes takes place? I think not.  Which means you haven't explored the whole brain yet, so there very well could be a place that doesn't "take orders" from anywhere else.  And, more importantly, what if you don't find such a place? Well it just proves (or ok, not proves, but indicates strongly) exactly what I (and lot of other people) believe (know) - the seat of the unconscious is the non-material, intangible soul.  It's actually beautiful in a way, to see the scientific arguments in favor of a spiritual consciousness :)

In any case, I really can't expect Eagleman to know all this, I just need to vent when I hear him spewing ideas that are to me so very wrong.  And when it gets down to the practical, I don't think there's anything *very* wrong with his ideas.  He points at that the current criminal justice system, with its notions of blame, is fundamentally flawed.  Well we all know the criminal justice system is fundamentally flawed, and I actually, I disagree with him that it's all based on blame. I think far more of sentencing is based on two things - get 'em off the street and make sure no one ever does this again.   But yeah, jail time isn't the best way to accomplish this in all cases, and I think we're all in favor of rehabilitation over incarceration, if we knew rehab could work.  So as far as neuroscience can help rehab, I'm all for it.  Am I as sanguine as Eagleman when it comes to the possibilities? Well, obviously not, but who knows? We certainly are gaining a better understanding every day of the inner workings of the mind.

Which brings me to my last (side) point - whatever the mind is like, it is not a computer and I find it patently ridiculous that Eagleman attempts to explain its myriad functions as a series of subroutines, that get programmed in some vague manner.  I don't think that's how the brain works, and I don't think we're going to achieve AI via modeling it that way.  But he probably knows  more about AI than I do, and I'm sure they've gotten somewhere with that approach :) In any case, I found this book to be mostly hand-waving in the important parts (that is, the science) and, unsurprisingly, mistaken in its conclusions.  Disappointingly enough, I don't feel like I learned anything much at all from this book... but I suppose it made me understand my own faith just a little bit better - so there's something to be said for that :)

Verdict: 2.5/5

A Cozy Setting For a Nice Murder

Second English historical mystery series in a row! This one not a romance in any sense though (I hold out hope for the future, but it'd have to be a long time in the future :)) I have just completed Alan Bradley's Flavia de Luce #4, I Am Half-Sick of Shadows (quote from The Lady of Shallot, as is helpful cited in the front of the book).  #1-3 are of course (not of course, of course, because if I had started them over a year and half ago, it wouldn't be the case) reviewed elsewhere on le blog, but I am going to go courageous route (for the second time in a row) of not reading my previous reviews before writing this one.  Actually, of course, that makes my task a lot easier, since I never repeat myself if I can help it (and clearly I can't if I don't remember what I wrote :)) Though I have to admit, for someone who likes to original, my reviews can get pretty uniform... but I digress.

The Flavias are fun because Flavia herself is quite the character, and because so many of the other denizens of Buckshaw and Bishop's Lacey are worthy of gracing the pages of a Dickens novel (oddly specific, but that's what they are - quintessentially English, somewhat one-dimensional (or is it 2d? In any case, flat) but oh so detailedly perfect in their roles.  The setting is PG Wodehouse meets Agatha Christie meets... well really, meets Homer Priceian small town insularity.  (And that's leaving out echoes of I don't know what in Flavia herself, who combines an agile mind and talent for sleuthing with the confused pre-teen perspective on life).  And the mysteries are always well-crafted, if a little too... well, a little too mystery-ish for my taste.

#4 is a Christmas tale, I think actually a Christmas special, so it's a little shorter than usual, though still well crafted.  The scope of the tale is smaller, with all the action taking place at Buckshaw (in a snowstorm) and within a few days (right before Christmas).  On the other hand, the case of characters is entirely (well not entirely) new, as a film crew has taken up residence at Buckshaw.  The variety is, I think, welcome, if only because too many murders in one small town might become ridiculous (though the film crew isn't all that different from Rupert Porson's traveling puppet show in #2).  The shortness of the book means we get less of Flavia doing things besides solving the murder, or at least getting distracted while on the trail (less of Inspector Hewitt too, I think).  And the mystery is solved a little too easily - I'd say before Flavia should have had a chance to put it all together (she figures it out by talking to enough people, but i think things fall into place a little too easily).  But that's okay, it's a good enough mystery for me.

What's more important? Well I didn't love the ending - I think I remember thinking that the first book had too melodramatic a finish and Flavia's close brush with death continues here, I think just as implausibly.  Though Flavia investigates real, live murders, she never seems to get involved enough for it to seem possible their sordid surroundings to touch her - and yet they do.  It's almost an unevenness of tone... one that is evident in a few more places in the book.  First of all, it never does become very clear who are the good guys and bad guys amongst the book's newcomers.  I don't mean the killers, obviously they're bad guys (well ok, I guess sometimes the killers aren't bad guys, but they are this time).  But everyone else... the victim, her maid, the set guy (don't know his title) the second-in-command set guy... they all seem mildly unpleasant, but we never really get their personalities resolved one way or the other.  And, more severely, Flavia herself continues to exhibit a strange mix of vulnerability and cunning, cut to the core by her sisters' cruelty, yet utterly unmoved by some pretty scary stuff.  That is, of course, Alan Bradley's intended portrait of Flavia - but it's a picture that doesn't always blend easily.  These are all minor details though, overall I find myself quite carried along by the olde-English way of life and its various livers (wow that sounds funny - but it's the right word, it is :))

So what do I really want more out of this book? Well I want a full-length novel, because I believe AB can do better with 100 more pages or so.  And I want someone to explain to me what in the universe is with the dL family anyway?! It just gets a little too weird sometimes, Harriet's presence and Father's distance, Daphne and Ophelia's harsh treatment and their very occasional lapses into human decency... oh, and why is Flavia never in school? I think it's high time we get some answers, but I don't know if we will any time soon (I should probably look that up, I bet he's answered that in an interview somewhere).  And of course, let's get Flavia some romance! A few years in the future of course, she's immature even for an 11-year-old.  Personally I'm rooting for Dieter to throw over Olivia and get together with our heroine, in the fullness of time... you never know :) And meanwhile, I'll keep reading for kicks.

Verdict: 3.5/5

Less Compelling, More Amusing

More familiar writing... I just reviewed the new Deanna Raybourn, so of course the new Tasha Alexander couldn't be far behind.  I actually deliberately did not reread my previous reviews (I think there are two on here)  before writing this, so I have the benefit of reviewing this one entirely on its own merits :) As you know (or would know if you read this blog regularly and remembered it, finger-wiggle :)), I am not an unabashed fan of Tasha Alexander's style.  While I prefer her lighter touch and the more familiar Victorian England it generates, her writing has always left something to be desired.  This book is no different, with high-flown statements that don't come off as grand as they are meant to sound, tender moments that seem more awkward to me, and passages that just don't flow sometimes.   I realized while reading this that TA is a prime example of an author who violates the "show, don't tell" principle (which I may have, kind of, sort of, invented :)).  I don't care if Emily is overwrought, highly disturbed, angry, confused, horrified, grief-stricken.... I want to feel that myself.  And so many times, I'm instead caught by surprise by Emily's reactions, since, while they may be perfectly legitimate to someone experiencing them, we the readers don't  come close to that status, and instead are relegated to the post of distant observers.

But enough of that - yes, these books could be better-written.  But I have to say, I had no trouble at all getting through this one.  Yes, it's not that long, and the slightly bald style means little concentration is required.  But it wasn't that - I thought the plot - public exposure of private scandal + clues to a murder hidden in the British museum - was rather innovative, and definitely absorbing.  It wasn't just a whodunnit (though it was a straight detective story, don't get me wrong, not much history/thriller/fantasy thrown in there).  And even though the stakes were high, I never got too nervous... ok, maybe that's because of the writing :) But our main characters had more fun than worry sorting through the whole mess (or if they didn't, we did at least).  Admittedly, when the mess was sorted I found myself a little disappointed - the villain was I thought, a fairly obvious choice from the beginning, and most of the loose ends were tied up any which way, with little coherence to the main resolution.  But you know, at least there was ending, tidy, peaceful and everything necessary.

Oh and side note that's not really a side note, Lady Emily's eccentricities were considerably less emphasized in this book than some others.  Yes, she still trumpets herself on her drinking of port and smoking of cigars (with the addition of whiskey) and she' active in the suffragette movement.  But luckily, she's more occupied with detective work than anything else.  And, surprisingly, in detective work she's happy to take a backseat to Colin, not insisting on being in on all the action all the time - this is a refreshing contrast from Lady Julia's shenanigans (or at least antics).  We will never be entirely free from Ms. Alexander's less than subtle critiques of Victorian society, its social hypocrisy (actual the theme of this book), its restrictions on women, its downtrodden working class, but I guess we've heard it all so much before it just goes in one ear and out the other.  And guess what, TA? If you didn't like the time period as much as I do, you wouldn't be writing about it, so I know you must not care all that much :)  So let's all just sit back and enjoy a light and elegant tale of detection together.

Verdict: 3/5

Had to PS this one - I read my review from last year and guess what "tell, don't say"! points for consistency :)

Not the Universe We Know and Love

In my last post reviewing a Terry Pratchett novel, I said that, although I really like his books, there's not much to choose between them.  He's a master of comic sci-fi, satirizing our world with just the right amount of absurdity thrown in, poker-facedly masterminding creation of the utterly crazy and yet utterly realized Discworld.  That was up until his latest, Snuff.  I think every Pratchett reader (in fact, I think I'll go check now - well I couldn't find it offhand, but I'd be shocked if it isn't there - nope, checked GoodReads, always plenty of people who share my feelings :)) must be saying, what happened?! The truth is, I think I know what happened, and it's kind of (actually really) sad - Terry Pratchett has early-onset Alzheimers.  Now I knew this going into this book, was even kind of expecting it, so maybe that's the reason I felt this way? Maybe it's been too long since I read a TP and my expectations got too high, or my tastes changed? There were probably elements of that, but this was not all in my head.  Snuff was just not up to par, not in the writing, not in the humor, not in the plot, and not even in the characters.

Let's start with the plot.  Now that's the one I care about least, of course, but I was waiting from about 1/3 of the way in for this book to be over.  There was overdramatic foreshadowing all over the place, but the actual movement... well it just felt like something out of an amateur thriller's playbook.  There's always some action in the Discworld, but it's never enough to distract me from the humor and the fun bits.  But I guess in this case, there just weren't many of either not to be distracted from.  The predominance of scatological and that other inappropriate kind of humor was disappointing enough.  The lack of subtly in the writing and the clumsiness of the occasional bits of Pratchett wisdom seem to suggest that Pratchett is trying, but can't hit his stride - or even manage a steady jog.  I hope it's not his brain, it could be just a temporary slump, but this is not the Pratchett I know and love.

But it's not just the the pale imitation of TP's usual style - I don't think I have read a Discworld novel yet that is so completely unfun.  It's almost as if Pratchett wants to write, besides a more thriller-esque tale than usual, a philosophical tome of sorts.  The central theme - sentient, non-human species are people too - is one that Discworld readers are eminently familiar with.  I hadn't remembered that the last book featured a creature known as the orc, but was reminded of it by someone's GoodReads review. Then there's the dwarves, the vampires, the trolls, the golems even... yes, we are all worthy of respect and common decency.  So why do we need another book pounding - and I mean pounding - it into our heads? Add to that Sam Vimes always present anxieties about class and how unfair it all is... and don't forget his crisis of conscience about his darker side and whether he lets it take over... and what you get is one heavy hunk of reading material.  Sam himself alternates between internal monologues stressing about the above issues and being supposedly supercool and tough-as-nails - but even that, the classic Vimesian grace under fire and inimitable ability to carry the day, seems mostly forced.

So overall, it's what have you done with the real Discworld? When we can we have our absurd and crude, yet sprightly alive universe of awesome dudes (Vimes and Vetinari, go Vs! :) and over-the-top something-other-than-dudes (can you say Nobby Nobbs? :)) Let's hope it's with the next book, though I don't hold out much hope of that.  I guess I can just go back and read the ones I skipped, or just reread them all.

Verdict: 2/5

Skin-deep Life Lessons, Chic Lit at Heart

Way back before this blog started, we (you know, my we) all read Marisa de los Santos's debut novel, Love Walked In.  The G. girls and Chava *loved* it because the writing (flowery) is just their style.  Everyone else (including me) liked it because it's a solid romance.  The sequel was published around Thanksgiving when Batya was engaged (which I remember because I read it at her pre-Shabbos kallah in cl).  That one was not a romance, and in fact, did a good job of destroying the romance of the first book (okay not destroying, but certainly tarnishing).  So I was not that excited about her new book, Falling Together, since clearly, romance is not MdlS's first priority (she's got like a Ph.d in poetry or something so I would say her flowery writing is actually priority #1 :)).  And Huvi and S.b. read it over Succos and were both quite unexcited about it, Huvi saying it was everything we don't like about MdlS - overdramatic, too flowerly etc.  So you can guess that I did not have hugely high expectations for this book.

It seemed like Huvi might be right as I plunged right in to the "epic" tale of three friends-closer-than-siblings, at their center a girl supposedly wholly adorable whom I failed to find so.  To be fair though, MdlS acknowledges that she sounds annoying, having Pen assure her friend that, really, she is adorable. But on the plus side, the other two friends, (that's Will and Pen) are quite likeable.  And guess what? we get the book from their POV, not from Cat's at all.  I'm not saying that all is well with the world just because the characters are likeable - there's plenty about the book to be approached with skepticism.  The family drama, the overblown significance of little incidents, the similes I find more distracting than illuminating...

But bottom line, surprise, surprise, I think this book is even more of a romance than the first one.  First of all, we get plenty from Will's POV - a major plus, as we get nothing at all from Teo's standpoint, as far as I can remember (at least as hints of his love for Cornelia, whereas Will's for Pen, while never outright stated, is clear and obvious from the start).  And with all else that's going on, the book gives fair prominence to the playing out of the romance - so maybe I was wrong about Marisa de los Santos, she is a romantic at heart :) (one might say a chic lit writer, but I wouldn't be so cruel :)) So basically what we have is two likeable narrators and a good romance.  And not only that, I just realized this now, but a supreme lack of tension! All the uncertainty (other than romantic-wise) comes from not knowing Cat's whereabouts - but who cares about Cat anyway? Will and Pen are in good places in life, and not really in danger of losing them.  So as long as I didn't get distracted by those other things (see paragraph above :) I really enjoyed this book).

That was until almost the end.  The romance got somewhat resolved with a little plot still to go, and I didn't adore the way it finished up.  But that can be forgiven, indeed this is something I often forgive authors for, it being so difficult to do a good finish :) And after that was wrapped up, we wrapped Cat's story up - and to my surprise, I found that MdlS pretty much agreed with me the whole time - Cat isn't a "fairy tale princess" - or if she is one, she sure isn't perfect.   It's Pen and Will who come off good in this one -  Cat's going off on her own, and I say good riddance to her.  That was the end of Cat's story, but since the book is more about Pen, there were a few revelations to go.  I can't say they were earth-shattering, but neither were they wholly misguided.  Pen realizes the importance of love - can't say it isn't.  And Will realizes how important it is to fight for it, which is why he fights for Pen (don't worry, it was just a minor incident that necessitated that fight).  So it was all's well that ends well, though it could have ended sooner and just as well in my book.  Likeable characters, decent romance, and fairly non-intrusive life lessons.  I have to say, more the best of MdlS than the worst.

Verdict: 3.5/5

Going Through the Motions of Romance

Whoop! Moving right along - who's that other author whose constant strem of new books I continue to read, though they are sometimes less than crazy exciting? You can get it, I know you can... Okay, it's Robin Lee Hatcher, the queen of Christian romance herself - just counted and this will be my fifth review of one of her books - not bad, not bad for around a year and a half.  This one is, I think, a new series (or at least not the same one as the last few of her books I've read).  It's the usual - turn of the century small-town Idaho, gruff man meets sweet and faithful woman.  This was gruff widower meets schoolteacher, which I think she's done before (at least gruff widower meets governess).  I'm not sure why she finds this particular matchup so compelling, but I suppose it's as good as any.  Gives a girl a good reason to come out West, and gives a man a good reason (his kids) to get to know the pretty newcomer.

I think I've said everything there is to say about the plot of this book.  What about the more important elements, like the romance? Well it was there, I don't think there was anything I can complain about - no getting together too early or breaking up for stupid reasons.  But at the same time... it just wasn't.  The little heartaches, the breathless moments, the unexpected longing - they happened, but only because they had to.  I just felt like the book was moving along, progressing now and then, regressing now and then, but really biding time between the "real" moments.  And in this book, more than in any other RLH so far, I think, the reality was all about religion.  Well you know I don't have anything against religion per se - but I don't even want to read about it when it's my own and you can bet not when it's someone else's :)  The best Robin Lee Hatchers were those apparently adapted from the time before she was born-again.  It seems like the worst are those influenced most by her time since.  This book did have a little more substance than the Bethlehem Springs books, which I think allowed it to go on longer without seeming dragged out.   But it never really had a place to fall from - it just never got that exciting.  Not that it was that bad or anything, but maybe I need a *little* more than the bare bones of an RLH Idaho cowboy romance.

Verdict: 2.5/5

Tipping the Scales Slightly to the Good Read Side

Sometimes, I eagerly await the publication of an author's next book, checking the library website daily so I can put it on hold.  Sometimes I'm less vigilant, but still excited when I see the book has gotten in.  And sometimes.... sometimes I'm just me, and keep on reading for no very good reason.  I'd say Jill Mansell falls into the third category, but I suppose I do have some reason.  She is one of the last writers I know who still brings forth a prolific stream of chic lit.  Maybe there are others, but my browsing days seem to be mostly over so it's hard for me to discover them.   But Jill Mansell has come out with, I think, her third book in a year - certainly the third one I've read in a year.  No surprises here, it's the same airy mix of boy-meets-girl stories, same drama, drama, drama, same happy ending.  But that's not a bad thing, especially since I'm coming out of a more serious reading curve. (Actually I've literally been on a trajectory up to chic lit - encyclopedia, non-fiction, mystery romance, and, finally, the real junk :))

I have to say, with the caveat that this could (as it always could) be the result of my mood, or my reading choices immediately prior to the book, I found this latest a little less trying than Jill Mansell's other recent offerings.  I had remarked previously (I'm not sure in the blog or if I was just thinking it) that all the books have the same plot - girl likes guy, guy likes girl, but girl doesn't trust guy - not my favorite type of chic lit since the suspense of the romance just isn't there.  But guess what - she changed it up! Ok, she changed it up by making the main character a widow who isn't interested in romance... with which angsty drama (and not in the good angst sense :)) I could live without, but at least it's something different.  I was disappointed at first because I was rooting for her to get together with the best friend - I still maintain that would have been a better story.  But the one chosen, while a little far-fetched, was plenty fun - handsome, down-to-earth, successful guy falls in love with our Ellie at first sight, while she remains oblivious.  And we get plenty from his point of view - I think more than usual.

So the primary romance was pretty decent.  The requisite secondary romances (friend and older couple) were not overly interesting, but I think took up less space than usual, so that was a plus.  The characters themselves were... I don't know if they more interesting, more realistic, or just more London than the two previous books, but I think I liked them better.  The plot was, I think, even more implausible than usual - but the good side to that is that the implausibility was in keeping the couples apart for so long - and I'll take that over the alternative, which is a boring ending because everyone is already together.  Even the writing seemed not quite as cringeworthy, though I concede that is almost definitely a product of my greater willingness to go in for a bit of chic lit than last time.  In short, I had more fun reading this book than I expected,  even up till the ending.  Which is why Jill Mansell will remain an author whom I check out, if not one who gets on-holded a month in advance :)

Verdict: 2.9/5

Sleuthing, Victorian Style

Back to a familiar name and a familiar genre, the next book the library had ready was Deanna Raybourn's 4th Lady Julia (wait, actually it's the 5th), the 4th of which I reviewed last year on this very blog :) That review was all about the comparison between Tasha Alexander and Deanna Raybourn and the truth is, that's pretty much a lot of what I thought about while reading this one too, but I really think I should move on.  (Don't worry, I'll come back to it anon :)) But meanwhile, let me try to review this one on its own merits.

So let's start of with what we can best expect from Lady Julia #5.  Even in #s 1-3, before Nicholas and Julia tie the knot, the romance is very much not the focus of the book.  It's quite intense and quite well done, but just doesn't take up that much space.  These books are really serious mysteries, and mysteries with quite a fantasy element thrown in.  Victorian mystery... that frustrating genre, so familiar and yet so removed from the lovely Regency settings of GH and co.  It's amazing how much I love England (old-fashioned England especially of course), given that I don't know how much these books could hold my interest if they were, say, about little green men in a galaxy far far away.  I also must not hate mystery all that much - or at least this type of mystery - more highbrow than whodunit.  There is emphasis on Lady Julia and Brisbane's relationship of course, but also on various elements of Victorian London and on Lady Julia's numerous family.  The pursuit of the case is subtle enough to keep the gaslit-fog atmosphere going and also exciting enough to keep the book moving.  In general, Deanna Raybourn exercising her writing chops well.

Which brings me back to the subject of the last book's review, where I pointed out DR's far superior writing skill.  There, I was left unsure whether the rather more intense tone outweighed the better execution, but here dark side was somewhat less manifest, perhaps because it was tempered by the civility of London as opposed to the wild Indian state of Darjeeling.  So, although the spookiness factor of the book wasn't particularly low, it wasn't so intense as to be distracting.  And one other significant difference - the ending, while I found it disappointing, had none of the dramatic and sudden death I had to contend with in #4.  So what's left when all is said and done? And fairly exciting read about characters I've learned to care about whose relationship still holds some interest for me - not an unenjoyable read at all.

Verdict: 3/5