Fantasy Update

I do completely read books, honest! And I've read a number of great ones lately (and am currently reading one I'm super excited about) but I feel that it's important to tell you about the ones that don't work out too. It keeps me honest and maybe down the line it will help me figure out the books I do really like to read.

The latest incomplete book is A Game of Thrones by George R. R. Martin. Yes, I know - A Game of Thrones! Didn't I just recently defend this book in a vitriolic blog post? Didn't I express my excitement and longing to read it? I did do all those things. And then I read the book.

Or, to be fair, read probably about only the first fifth of the book. I love fantasy; I really do. (I just finished reading Mercedes Lackey's The Snow Queen and a hilarious one by Diana Wynne Jones that I am going to talk about soon.) But I did not love this fantasy.

It is vaguely Tolkein-esque: there's a map and at least part of the world seems vaguely Celtic or Western European. Martin writes from the viewpoint of several different characters. The reader gets a brief snippet of an important event before the chapter ends and we move on to the next character's point of view. I didn't enjoy the rapid changes between characters. Maybe it's supposed to keep the book moving: I just felt it held it back. There's a way to change viewpoints between characters, and I felt this was not it. Sharon Kay Penman does it very well: there's one main character, a number of minor characters, and then very inconsequential characters whom we just meet at the beginning of a chapter. They're sketched out quickly, they help you understand where the story's going and tell you about events the main character could never know about without being totally historically inaccurate. Then they disappear. I found Martin's way somewhat jarring. You never really got to settle inside a character.

I did see how Martin reads like Tolkein but with less depth. His characters are more like characters than beings in a narrative myth-arc. The problem is that you never really get to settle in with a character as you are always being wrenched off into another character. I would have settled with a few less major characters. Or maybe more of an omniscient narrative as opposed to a story with multiple third-person narratives.

I read the synopsis of A Game of Thrones on Wikipedia and the book sounded great! Too bad that I couldn't get into it and that the conspiracy/plot took so long to develop. I had understood that A Game of Thrones was about a conspiracy for a kingdom and I didn't get that so much from the beginning. Maybe a little glimpse of one, but I wanted to be right in the room with the conspirators.

Further, the background was too complex. I do read a lot of history/non-fiction and I can keep track of sprawling royal families, but for some reason the vast networks of kinships in A Game of Thrones seemed to be too much. Everyone seemed to be referring to some earlier cataclysmic event that the reader was not privy to. Why not start the story there? And why have so many different houses and characters that a multi-page appendix is needed to describe who these people are and to whom they are related.

A note to the New York Times writer regarding the sex scenes that were placed in the show (from the book) in order to "entice the ladies". Well, this lady remains un-enticed. First, incest. (Gross!) And then an older greasy barbarian gets to sleep with the lovely young highborn maiden who is beautiful and the heiress to some long-lost kingdom, naturally. I'm not sure whose fantasy this is, but it isn't mine!

And, finally, for those of you who have read the book, the part with Sansa's direwolf was too much. Yes, make us love an animal right before you take it away so cruelly. (I was trying to avoid spoilers for those who have read the book, but that may have given it all away.) I'm sure that event leads to great repercussions further on, but I was not interested in sticking around to find out.

So, another one bites the dust. Maybe I'll skip over the part I really disliked and try reading it again later. But probably not. Life is short, and there are books I'd much rather read. Like One of Our Thursdays is Missing, the latest book in the Thursday Next series by Jasper Fforde. I'm just about to start Chapter 14 and it is fabulous!

The Incomplete Polygamist

The first part of my quest to read popular books was going really well. I enjoyed the two non-fiction books I had to read, but stalled when it came to the fiction book. My first popular fiction choice was The Lonely Polygamist by Brady Udall. Now, I love Sister Wives on TLC (don't watch Big Love, however, don't get HBO and I'm not interested enough to search out where it might be on), so I figured I'd love this book.

Well, yes and no. The first chapter was terrific - I felt pulled in and connected immediately. I understood both the loneliness and chaos that defines Golden's life. Golden is the main character - the titular Lonely Polygamist. He is the patriarch of his family, the somewhat happy husband of 4 wives and father of numerous children. Right away in the first chapter the reader is introduced to the chaos and disorder of a big family - made even more chaotic by expansion of that family. I was intrigued and interested. I wanted to read more.

But then, I don't know, somehow it just dropped off. I don't know if that's because I was leaving it to read late at night when I was tired, but somehow I just didn't feel as driven to read the book. Sure, I was still enjoying the characters and was interested in reading more about Golden, but I wasn't compelled to pick up the book. Perhaps that had something to do with the structure: the author jumps from Golden's current perspective, to that of his wife Trish, to his son Rusty, to Golden's past, and to a mysterious omniscient narrator in italics that talks about the house in general. I liked all the different voices, but it did make the book a little difficult to come back to if I'd been away from it for a little while. Also, I just kind of wanted to hear about Golden's story. I am interested in Trish, but I would rather that she had her own story. Rusty I wasn't really interested in as much as the adults.

So, sadly, I returned The Lonely Polygamist to the library when it was due, without having finished it. I think it is a book I will eventually enjoy, but I think it just fell through the cracks at the moment. I think I'll give it a try this summer when I have a few days and nothing else much going on.

In happier book news, I picked up Game of Thrones at the library today. Now I will get to see what all the women-unfriendly hype is all about!

A Reading Rut

Hello, faithful readers. Well, as you may have surmised from my lack of posts here recently, I am in a rut. A reading rut. Yes, I do have 3 different books on the go right now, but somehow I just don't want to read any of them. So, instead, I'm whiling away my usual reading time reading Entertainment Weekly (all about Harry Potter), Glamour (the festive Christmas issue!), and recaps of Gossip Girl episodes on Television Without Pity (TWOP). And I don't even watch Gossip Girl. That much. (Actually, reading the recaps on TWOP is better than watching Gossip Girl - the recapper is very erudite and intuitive with the right amount of snark. You find out exactly what happens on each episode with an enormous side-helping of wit and psychological insight. The only thing about reading the recaps is that you don't get to see the great outfits Serena and Blair pull off in each episode.)

Ahem, sorry, this space is not about my varied TV-show obsessions that I get. It is about books. And right now I am reading three different books - none of which I am entirely satisfied with. What am I reading that has me down in the dumps?

The Six Wives of Henry VIII by Alison Weir. This is a good book by one of my favourite authors. I am reading it for an upcoming post which should be highly entertaining (at least to those history buffs out there!). However, upon occasion, Weir can be a little dry in places. Plus, the story of Henry's wives is so familiar to me that it can be difficult to read the same history again. But I do like Weir, so I'll take a short break from it and then jump right back in with Anne Boleyn.

A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century by Barbara W. Tuchman. This was recommended to me by a friend as an excellent way to get into the Medieval mind. And - she was right - the book is a fascinating exploration of the life and times of a 14th century nobleman. The one problem: it is extremely detailed about all the aspects of life in those times. There is a lot to get through and I can't just skim through it with my usual quick read. An excellent book - just rather dense and it takes time to read.

And finally, I am also reading This Scepter'd Isle by Merecedes Lackey and Roberta Gellis. This book is a magical retelling/reimagining of the life of Henry FitzRoy, bastard son of Henry VIII. Now, subject matter like this is near and dear to my heart - I have long wanted to write/read a "history" of Henry VIII (fictional, obviously) that incorporated magic and the unknown into the commonplace tale of Henry VIII and his 6 wives. Maybe Anne Boleyn really was a witch and lured Henry away from Catherine with witchcraft. Maybe an evil wizard actually killed Jane Seymour. I think that mixing of magic and reality would be very interesting to read.

However, this book is not quite it. The first problem is, there are too many characters and I'm only past the first 2 chapters! Any book that starts off with a list of characters is troublesome. First of all, I'm not going to read it because I'm not going to remember all these names (many of which sound the same as they are that sort of usual fantasy Celtic-esque stuff), and secondly, because if I can't figure out who the characters are from the book and narration then the writer isn't doing a good job. The writer should tell me who all my characters are and why they are important. If you have to have a list at the beginning, then you have too many characters.

The second problem is that the concerns of Henry and his court seem to be more in the background. Sure, I've only just started the thing, but it seems to be more about the concerns of two sets of identical fraternal twins (one brother, one sister) who are elves. One set is with the good elves, one set is with the bad elves. So, everyone is tall, blonde, and beautiful, and everything is just a little too run-of-the-mill, faux-Celtic, Tolkien-esque fantasy to me so far. Sure, Celtic-based fantasy makes sense in England (after all, wasn't Henry's brother called Arthur to emphasize the links with the Tudor family's Celtic/Welsh past?) but this is overdoing it. I didn't really want to read about some elves and the Tudor court, I wanted to read a book where King Henry was the chief elf, or wizard, or troll, or whatever. I want Henry and his wives to be the main characters, not some identical blonde elves with long, Celtic-sounding names. I want to read a fantasy involving Henry VIII in London, not about Rhoslyn Teleri Dagfael Silverhair of the palace of Caer Mordwyn! I suppose it's in poor taste not to like the book because it's not what I wanted it to be. But it may be awhile before I get back to it.

Hmmmm....looks like my problem is too much history, not enough non-fiction. So, faithful reader(s) - any suggestions to help me break out of my reading rut? Can you suggest a book I'll actually continue reading beyond the first few chapters? Give me your suggestions in the comments below.

Unfinished

When I start a book, I usually commit to finishing it. It takes a lot to make me put down a book unfinished. Usually I like the book enough to want to know how it ends, even if I'm not enthralled by it. Not every book is amazing - some are merely good or even okay, but I will still usually finish the book. Usually.

The most recent book I tried to read I couldn't. I just could not finish it and had to put it down and probably won't read any further books in the series. Which book is this that sparked my wrath? It is book 2 of the Morland Dynasty series, The Dark Rose, by Cynthia Harrod-Eagles.

Now, I had earlier expressed my reservations with Ms. Harrod-Eagles in my previous post about the first book in the series; The Founding. But I was willing to give her books another chance. But after getting part of the way through The Dark Rose I just had to put it down and walk away. There are two reasons why I had to put the book down: I will discuss them now. Also, I'm not pulling any punches here - I will discuss the book so if anyone does want to read it you may want to stop reading this post now.

First, and this is probably minor, but annoying all the same. The Dark Rose takes place during the reign of Henry VIII, so of course all the families of the wives are involved. (And, indeed, it is kind of neat to meet a number of the wives pre-Henry: especially Katherine Parr and Anne Boleyn - we know what's going to happen, but they, poor ladies, don't, of course.) The Morland family is becoming friends with the Boleyn family. Harrod-Eagles has a character comment on the death of Thomas Boleyn's wife (father of Anne) and express sadness at his resulting second marriage to a woman of low class. And not only once - but twice.

The problem with this comment? It is simply not true. Thomas Boleyn was only married once, and that to Elizabeth Howard, mother of his three children (who lived to adulthood): Mary, Anne, and George. Elizabeth actually outlived both Anne and George, dying a few years after their execution. I checked and double checked this fact in my two books about Anne Boleyn and Wikipedia. Nowhere, anywhere was there any kind of fact that said that Thomas Boleyn's wife had died relatively young and that he had married again. I have no idea what sources Harrod-Eagles is using here, but they are clearly incorrect! And why make such a silly and inconsequential historical mistake? Maybe this becomes an important plot point later in the novel - I don't know. But if it's not an important plot point, why have this clearly wrong fact mentioned twice?

I must say I'm a little suspicious of Harrod-Eagles' research abilities in general. I had a look at her website and her writing output is staggering. In addition to the Morland series, she's written a number of other historical fiction books, general fiction books, and mysteries. She must average a book a year - so I'm not sure how she has time to do all the research and write the novel. Maybe she is just exceptionally quick at writing and researching. But her books don't have that lived-in feeling of a Sharon Kay Penman novel - where you can tell the author did so much research that she probably felt she was living in that time period when she wrote the book!

My second problem with the book concerns a plot point in Chapter 9, about one third of the way through the book. Again, if you want to read this book yourself, don't read this blog any further! Nanette Morland is one of the vast Morland family. She is at court as a lady-in-waiting to Queen Catherine (of Aragon: wife #1 for those of you keeping track at home). There is a great celebration and tournament and Nanette is visited by her half-uncle Paul Morland. (Paul and Nanette's father Jack are half-brothers; Paul and Jack are great-grandsons of the Eleanor in the first novel.) Paul hated his wife and had a mistress, but recently both have died. Before Nanette went to court, the author hinted at romantic tension between the two and they kissed. I was unsure at this point, but continued to read on, sure in my belief that the author would not bring these two characters together.

Well, I was wrong. Nanette and Paul rendezvous in the gardens after the tournament and sleep together. Yes, Nanette had sex with her uncle Paul. A niece and an uncle sleep together. And then talk of marriage and getting some sort of dispensation from the Pope. Really? Really. I do not want to read of incest, thank you very much Ms. Harrod-Eagles. Is the big romantic relationship of the book between a niece and uncle? That is just disgusting and I don't want to read about it. (See also the terrible Philippa Gregory novel Wideacre, which I also couldn't finish - although that was slightly worse being incest between a brother and sister.) I do understand that uncle-niece marriages did happen - but that was in the Habsburg family of Austria and Spain, and we all know what happened to them. (The Spanish branch was so inbred that eventually the last Habsburg king of Spain was a blithering and infertile idiot, died with no heirs, and brought about the War of the Spanish Succession.) But I don't think that uncle-niece marriages were common among the aristocracy/grand families of England, ever. Cousin marriage was very common among both royals and non-royals, but not uncle-niece marriage. Not in England.

At that point I just had to put the book down. I was not interested in reading further about Nanette and Paul's romantic struggles. It was really enough to turn me off of the whole series. Interestingly enough, I've read a few other online reviews of The Dark Rose and no reviews really mention the whole incest aspect or criticize it in any way. So, maybe it's just me, but I'm not really interested in reading a book that uses incest as a pivotal plot point and relationship between two major characters. My skin would crawl every time she mentioned Paul and Nanette. I've put the book down, unfinished, and I will not be reading any further books by Cynthia Harrod-Eagles.

What do you think, faithful readers? Is incest enough to make you put down a book? Have I overreacted? Fortunately for me I am not a huge Cynthia Harrod-Eagles fan, so I don't think I'll be missing much by not reading the rest of her series. Life is short: why read books you're not interested in. Less time with Cynthia Harrod-Eagles means more time with writers I truly adore, like Sharon Kay Penman and Judith Merkle Riley.