May 01, 2007
Breakfast of Champions (with bad punctuation!!)--
A couple of weeks ago, right after we brought Eleanor home from the hospital, I was searching for something to read. Remembering that Kurt Vonnegut just died and feeling bad for having only read Slaughterhouse Five once a long time ago, I checked out Breakfast of Champions from the Winthrop Library. I finished it the night before last and enjoyed it immensely; it makes me sad Vonnegut has passed away.
There were many things I thought made the book great -- the matter of fact style, the humor, the inclusion of the "and so ons" -- but two things really stood out -- the self-referentiality of the author/narrator and the thematic tension between the sacred and the profane (and I know I just used three dashes, a hyphen, and now a set of parenthesis in one sentence).
I always enjoy it when a narrator reveals himself. I think it's an interesting conceit that, if done well, can really make the reader think about his or her own subjectivity and place qua reader. Another layer is added when the narrator reveals himself as author and creator, as Vonnegut does here. Now, it does not seem novel -- I think of Stephen King writing himself into The Dark Tower books and Eggers self-conscious memoir AHWOSG. But it's always risky. And it must have been really risky and novel in 1977.
As for the tension between the sacred and the profane (or the human and the transcendent, or machine and man, or however you want to construct it), it shows up in a number of my favorite sections of the novel:
"our awareness if all that is alive and maybe sacred in any of us."
"At the core of each person who reads this book is a band of unwavering light."
Vonnegut describes this as his "spiritual climax". But can a book have a real spiritual climax when the author as character says "Now comes the spiritual climax. . .", especially after most of the book is spent demonstrating how humans are nothing more than complex biological machines linked by coincidence, which is made even more ironic because it's not all concidence, because the author is in the book telling us he made all the other characters do exactly what they are doing? It's complex and wonderful!
I also noted this sentence, which is oddly and sadly prescient given the Virginia Tech shootings:
"[Americans] were doing their best to live like people invented in story books. This was the reason Americans shot each other so often: It was a convienient literary device for ending short stories and books." Wasn't the guy a VA Tech after, not just revenge for perceived wrongs, but for a "storied" ending to his life? For all of my education talk about making meaning, I have to remember one way to make meaning for oneself is to hurt others, to write a narrative that puts onself at the center of a bloody story that ends badly for everyone concerned.
So, I really enjoyed Breakfast of Champions.
And so on.
Posted by Nakia at 07:31 PM | Comments (0)
February 13, 2007
Blogging the Bible
I ran across this project to day in Slate. A fairly devout Jew who, although religious, has never sat down and read the Bible all the way through decides he's going to read the whole thing and blog about it.
I think it's a neat project.
Posted by Nakia at 12:55 PM | Comments (10)
February 08, 2007
January Reading: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius
Dave Eggers was on my radar for quite some time. I remember when the book came out; I had it in my hands as honeymoon reading but chose Chabon's Kavalier and Clay instead. I picked up occasional copies of The Believer. I would visit McSweeny's webiste and was thrilled by the Mammoth Treasury of Thrilling Tales. Yet I stayed away from the book that, in some ways, kicked off this new genre (is it a genre? a movement? just a bunch of authors who were in their 20's and wrote stuff that seemed all in the same ballpark?). I stayed away for one reason -- everything I had heard about Eggers indicated he was a huge prick.
I hate pretentiousness. I thought Eggers was pretentious. Look at the damn title of the work. Look at all the little attempts to be "clever" -- the drawing of the stapler, the list of symbols used in the book. I didn't need this book. I needed story and seriousness, or at least an honest lack of seriousness, not someone who thinks they are smarter than everyone else.
Dave Eggers may be a prick. He may even be pretentious. But AHWOSG is really, really good.
What makes the book for me is Eggers' obvious concern about, well, being pretentious. Memoirs may be the ultimate expression of cannabalistic narcissim. You eat your life -- your friends, your family, your own experiences -- in order to tell the story of yourself. Everyone you have ever met becomes a character in YOUR story, even though all those people have stories of their own. One thing I liked about AHWOSG is Eggers awareness of this very fact and the way he presents that awareness. Characters in the book -- who are "real people" -- suddenly break character to give voice to Eggers' doubts about his project. At first it's subtle, but once you realize it's no longer Toph talking but Eggers using Toph to voice his own reflexive doubt, it becomes an integral part of the work. Not only does the technique make the reader aware that Eggers has these doubts about his own project, but it makes us aware that Toph, Beth, and everyone else in the book are characters who are made up and controlled by an author, even though they are also actual human beings with stories of their own.
Oh, and all the stuff about throwing the frisbee was really nice, too.
I liked Eggers awareness of the innate ridiculousness of what he's trying to do, but doing it anyway. That's a type of courage that's inspiring to a writer.
January Books Bought: A Heatbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, 100 Bullets Volume 2: Split Second Chance, Batman: The Long Halloween, Sandman Volume 1: Preludes and Nocturnes
January Books Read: A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius
Posted by Nakia at 11:35 AM | Comments (3)
January 11, 2007
New book (and what I've been reading)
I wrote this entry almost a year ago, where I promised to do better about reading and writing about it. Obviously, that didn't work out too well. So I thought I would try again.
I received a $50 gift card to Barnes and Noble for Christmas. Sunday I used it to pick up A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by David Eggers. This was a book I have waffled about for some time. I wanted to read it, but everyone was saying how great it was which made me nervous and I was concerned that Eggers may be too talented and pretentious for his own good. The book sort of seemed pretentious, with the notes and charts and everything in the preface and acknowledgments. Now I am a little ways into it and have changed my tune. It is good. Further report when I have finished.
2007 books bought: AHWOSG, Shame of a Nation by Johathan Kozol
Recent (Fall, 2006),Books Read: The Long Tail, The Tipping Point, The World is Flat
Posted by Nakia at 04:56 PM | Comments (0)
January 10, 2007
Wil Wheaton on ST:TNG
I'm a fan of Wil Wheaton's blog. I think he's a good writer and strikes the perfect geek chord -- enough for you to empathize, but not overbearing geekiness. Checking in today, I found out he's been writing reviews and commetary on Next Generation episodes for TVSquad. Good grief, they are funny.
And, yes, I like TNG. And, double yes, I liked Wesley Crusher as a character. Of course, I was 11 when the show premeired, so that explains a lot.
I think "Wesley Crusher" should be one of the "Things that everyone thinks sucks but do not, in fact, actually suck" essays Josh wants me to write.
Posted by Nakia at 04:40 PM | Comments (2)
July 12, 2006
Some gaming comments
After many fits and starts, it looks like I've finally found a group of folks to game with. A former grad student, his roomate, and my old high school friend, Jason, (who now lives in Tega Cay) and I have had two successful sessions so far. I hope to add a player or two, but everything currently working out with the smaller group.
We've been playing in a hombrew world I've been sporadically working on for awhile. The world is Old West meets Arabian Adventures meets Stephen King. There is gunpowder and magic and goblins and dwarves; a lot of the world is still mirky, but my players are helping to fill in the gaps.
Our first two sessions were played using the Risus rules. I reallyt like Risus for a lot of reasons -- the simplicity, mainly. It makes character creation easy (a big help for NPC's) and lets story and concept dictate abilities, instead of the other way around. I have found, however, that it's difficult for a lot of people (myself included) to translate cliches into abilities. Either cliches are abilities (one player had "Sneaky" at three dice) or don't go far enough in actually describing what the character can or cannot do. I've also gotten a little frustrated by combat. The ebb and flow of Risus combat is different from D&D. With "damage" potentially dealt on defense and offense, combat feels very different. There is also the narrative emphasis versus the supporting mechanics. Although a player can describe any action, there is one mechanic for resolving every action. I'm finding this a bit unsatisfying. I know different mechanics for resolving different types of actions make the game more complex, but they also make the different actions feel different, at least to me.
That's why we are going to switch to a D20 system that's basicly Grim Tales. While complex, I think it will allow the different abilites of the characters to feel different and give us more of a mechanical framework for conflcit resolution.
Posted by Nakia at 09:16 AM | Comments (1)
May 06, 2006
Finished the Da Vinci Code
I wrapped up this book last night. Nothing in the last half of the book changed my opinion. Still porly written, still fairly predictable (though, I admit, I didn't figure out where the grail was until the grandmother drew the triangles for "chalice" and "blade". Then I was like "oh yeah! back to the beginning.") and it still kept me up until midnight finishing it.
I will offer a brief comment about the general church uproar over the book. No one tells me what I can and cannot read. I'm also of the thought that "condemning" something just makes it more attractive and gives it a degree of legitimacy. But I do understand why the church (and the Catholic Church in particular) don't like this book. It's not becase it's some unveling of a conspiracy and the Chruch is afraid of the truth. Rather, it's because the book denies the divinity of Jesus -- the cornerstone of the Christian faith. And it does so in such a matter-of-fact, non-literary way. So much of the book is just one character monologues about "historical facts" (which is what makes it a crappy book), and the non-divinity claim is presented so forthrightly, that it's hard not to take the denial of Jesus' divinity as an asserted fact and not part of a story. Couple that with Brown's "Look at all the research I did" forward and I can see why people get a little put out by the book.
I also have a theory about why the book has sold like a billion copies, but that's gonna have to wait.
Posted by Nakia at 09:55 AM | Comments (10)
May 03, 2006
The Da Oreo Code
I woke up at 1:45 this morning, hot, grumpy, with a sour stomach and a head full of allergy induced snot. I opened the window, turned on the fan, searched for some Rolaids, and swallowed an Allegra. By the time all that was over, I was awake.
I heard somewhere that the best way to fall back asleep was not to try too hard. You need to do something, something that will take your mind off not being able to sleep. Eventually you will get tired again and be able to slumber. Heeding this advice, I ended up reading another 100 pages of my current book.
Yes, I am reading The Da Vinci Code. To the Catholic Church, that marks me as sacrilegious. To literary folk, well, it marks me as sacrilegious. To most, it just means I've joined the uncounted masses who have made Dan Brown into one of the bestselling authors of all time and, if he were so inclined, able to buy me and sell me into popular fiction slavery. "Yes. Mr. Brown. I'll be happy to scrub the floors of your grail shaped mansion. Please don't buzz me with your helicopter again."
I'm 200 pages into this book and fully intend to finsih it before we leave for Ireland. Almost everyone I know has read it and liked it. Here, I'm putting forth the contention that The Da Vinci Code is the literary equivalent of Oreo cookies -- fundamentally not good for you, immediately tasty but ultimately of poor quality, and borderline addicitive.
On Sunday, I got grocieries for Sarah and I. For some reason probably having to do with farm subsidies and economies of scale, a gallon of milk was cheaper than a half-gallon, so I put that in the cart. I knew there was no way Sarah and I could drink a gallon a milk before we left on our normal "cereal for breakfast" routine, so I picked up some Oreos to facilitate the milk consumption, even though I knew it was a bad idea. It was a bad idea because I inhale Oreo cookies. The package was going to last two, three days tops, even without Sarah's help. Dunked in milk, dry, whatever, I go after them like Boba Fett after Han Solo, not stopping until my stomach, it feels, is encased in carbonite.
How are Oreos and The Da Vinci Code alike? Well, both are not really good for you. The Da Vinci Code is not going to send me to hell or anything. Nor am I a pop-lit snob who believes that entertainment is not a function of prose; clearly it is, and I believe that's all some prose has to be to be good -- entertaining. But The Da Vinci Code does not challenge me in any way. Certainly not on a literary level. Not even on an ideological level. I've played enough RPG's and watched enough X-Files to not be terribly surprised at an ancient conspiracy resulting in murder. The Vatican, covering things up? Wow. Never seen that device used before. Oreos are, at best, neutral in nutritional value. At worst, they put inches on my waist and fill my veins with trans-fats. At best, I'll be entertained by the book. At worst, I'll feel a little less smart after it's all over.
Oreos are, in the overall hierarchy of cookies, not really that great. They're chemicals, fats, and sugars. They're nowhere near the level of a homemade molasses or chocolate chip cookie, fresh out of the oven. Even so, there is something immediately satisfying about them, the texture of the thing as you bite into it -- crunchy chocolate, smooth vanilla creme, then chocolate again. (A texture, of course, that changes into a sublime chocolate-vanilla mush when dunked in milk. I've never been a twist off the top and lick the middle kinda guy). With The Da Vinci Code, there is an immediate satsifaction in reading it. It certainly moves, in it's own awkward fashion. But, let's face it, the writing sucks. I'm 250 pages in and have no sense about any of the characters other than what is immediately relevant to the plot. There are sentence fragments -- not Faulkner-stream-of-consciousness-fragments, but I'm-too-lazy-to-finish-a-thought-fragments. There are mixed metaphors and cliches. Half the book violates a primary rule of writing -- "Show, don't tell" -- as there is a whole lot of telling about the great consipracies. There are plot elements that make sense only as a mechanism to establish what needs to happen in order for the story to function. For example:
spolier space for those three people IN THE WORLD who haven't read the book
In the very beginning, when Silas is going to kill the Louve curator. He shoots him once, in the stomach, and then RUNS OUT OF BULLETS!!!! Opus Dei assassin, sent to kill the man who has covered up a millenia-old conspiracy to set years of planning in motion, only brings one clip, even when he's been assigned to kill four people. I guess he had to shoot each of the other Priory of Scion guys four times, leaving just one for the Louve fellow, and left the other clips in his spare cassock. Of course, the stomach wound is necessary for Louve curator to have 15 minutes to live to leave the clues that set the book in motion. All because the assassin ran out of bullets. Yeah, right.
spolier space over
The book is not well written, yet even so I cannot stop turning the pages. Just as I'll sit and shovel Oreo after Oreo into my mouth, even though I know they are bad for me and really don't taste all that great, I turn page after page of The Da Vinci Code while complaining about the writing and generally knowing where the whole thing is going. I can't help it. Maybe I have a problem. Maybe there is something in the paper. The borrowed copy I am reading, after all, is part of the 42nd print run.
I could go on, I suppose. I could talk about how, like the two parts of the Oreo, there are two parts to the book (the actual narrative and the copious amounts of "scholarly" backstory and explanation), but I should just stop here. I have some cookies to eat.
(and, yes, I want to see the movie. Tom Hanks is a good actor and has a blank slate to create the character of Robert Langdon).
Posted by Nakia at 09:16 AM | Comments (5)
April 19, 2006
Abandoning Neil Gaiman
I am officially giving up trying to read Neil Gaiman's Anansi Boys. I bought this book last November. I was able to have it signed by Gaiman at his Joseph-Beth Booksellers appearance. It's been on my bedside table since then. I've started this book twice. Both times I get maybe 150 pages into it before not really wanting to pick it up again.
The problem I have with this book is just that it's so familiar. I haven't read a ton of Gaiman -- a lot of the Sandman comics, Neverwhere and American Gods, but Anansi Boys seems like it fits the Gaiman pattern to a T: normal guy finds out he has some connection to a larger, mysterious and magical world that most people do not or cannot notice (this connection is often familial), that world intrudes on his life, things get really messed up for him in the process, and then there is a fairly major magical event as the climax where the protagonist learns something about this magical world and himself in the process. Then, things go back to normal, but the protagonist's life is never quite the same.
I certainly don't want to over-criticize Gaiman. I think he's a good writer. American Gods was incredible. There is just a sameness of plot structure that makes me feel like I know what is going to happen before it actually does. Most of the time, the details of the jouney are enough to make me want to trod the familiar plot path with Gaiman. Not this time, though. Anansi Boys is going out of the "to be read" stack and onto the shelf. Hopefully, I'll rediscover it in the future.
Posted by Nakia at 09:40 AM | Comments (2)
April 05, 2006
Important Article on Education
Okay, it's from the Onion. So it's funny and crude and not at all important.
WARNING: FOUL LANGUAGE
And, just for the record, I was NOT that guy in college.
Posted by Nakia at 04:59 PM | Comments (3)
February 28, 2006
February Reading
This past month, I had a scary revelation: I had not completed a book since I finished A Feast For Crows in early December. Not only had I not finished anything, but I really wasn't working on anything. It's not like I was working my way through Moby Dick and it was just taking awhile. I just wasn't reading. For someone who grew up on books, this was startling and unacceptable. I headed to Books a Million to rectify the situation.
Although at one point I had four or five books in my hand, I settled on Nick Hornby's The Polysyllabic Spree. I like Hornby and this book was a managable 120 pages -- a good way to get back into reading mode. What's more, TPS is a book about reading; it's a collection of his columns from The Believer in which Hornby talks about books he's read and bought in a given month.
My favorite line from the book reads: "All the books we own, both read and unread, are the fullest expression of self we have at our disposal. . . With each passing year, and with each whimsical purchase, our libraries become more and more able to articulate who we are, whether we read the books or not." (125)
I agreee with Hornby here. If someone had to examine artifacts of my existence to learn stuff about me, I would have them look at my books -- especially if one includes gaming books and comics. Actually, you don't even need to include the five boxes of comics sitting in the study closet, because I have graphic novels shelved with the rest of the library. I think the books say more about me, who I am and who I think I am, than my CD's or any other artifacts in the house.
Hornby's Believer columns always begin with a list of books he's bought in a given month, followed by a list of books he's read in that month. He then spends the column talking about those books -- both sets. He'll discuss how he picked up the such and such book for two pounds at some used bookstore, or how he spent the month working his way through some biography of some British author I've never heard of and makes it all entertaining. I like to read Hornby talking about books because he's smart without being pretentious -- a delicate balance in the literary world, if you ask me.
Inspired by Hornby, I'm going post the books I've bought and the books I've read for the month, beginning with February. This will keep me somewhat accountable. Hopefully, people will ask me about stuff I've picked up and suggest new stuff. I'll also include any graphic novels I buy, but leave out the monthly comic titles to which I subscribe (Conan, The Amazing-Spider Man, and Knights of the Dinner Table magazine. Okay, I guess I didn't really leave them out).
Since this was my birthday month, I received several gift certificates, so my book budget was expanded this month. I've still got a couple of gift cards to Books A Million to suppliment future purchases.
February Books Bought: The Polysyllabic Spree by Nick Hornby; The Fortress of Solitude by Johnathan Letham; Ringworld by Larry Niven; Dungeon Masters Guide II by a bunch of people (shipping from Amazon).
February Books Read: The Pollysyllabic Spree by Nick Hornby
Posted by Nakia at 08:47 AM | Comments (8)
January 31, 2006
On Fantasy
George R. R. Martin sums up the appeal of fanstasy stories (to me at least) quite well:
I've put this one up on the wall.
Posted by Nakia at 11:18 AM | Comments (4)
January 07, 2006
The end of boredom?
Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks and business gadfly, has an interesting blog at blogmaverkick.com. In this post, he talks about how the increasing portability of media, especailly video, is leading to the end of boredom.
I'm curious as to what people think. My gut reaction is that he is dead wrong. I don't think boredom is the product of lack of available media. Boredom is more of a state produced by the intersection of individual psychology (motivation, interests, etc), social forces (what activities are accessible, what activities are permissible and accepted) and avaliablity of stimuli (video, print, whatever).
I find myself bored sometimes at my house, especially if Sarah isn't around. This is despite the fact that I have 75 channels of TV, boradband internet access, hundreds of books, thousands of comics, and LOTS of tasks around the house that still need to be completed (still need to hang the new shower curtain rod that we got for our housewarming back in November).
Even if boredom is dying, should it? Is there some connection between boredom and creativity? What's the difference between boredom and peacefullness? One man's monesstary is another man's temple of boredom.
Just some thinking on this Saturday morning.
Posted by Nakia at 11:17 AM | Comments (3)
September 30, 2005
Neil Gaiman at Joseph-Beths
Last Wednesday, I went to see Neil Gaiman give a talk and sign his newest book, Anansi Boys, at Joseph-Beth Sellers in Charlotte.
There was a good crowd, maybe 150 people. Many wore funny hats. Neil was pretty much what I expected -- funny, a bit dark (dressed in black jacket, shirt, and pants) and very British. He read from Anansi Boys (chapter two) and it was funny to hear him try to do Jamacian accents for some of the characters. He then answered questions for about 45 minutes. He talked about some new projects in the works, including his new series about the Eternals for Marvel. He talked about his involvment in some films, including Mirrormask, the screen adaptation of Coraline, and a version of Beowulf with Anthony Hopkins, Angelina Jolie, and other famous people. Most exciting to me was he talked a bit about returning to some Sandman stories for the comic's 20th anniversary in 2008.
There was also a nice moment when this little girl, who was maybe 10, asked what "it" was in The Wolves in the Walls (as in, when the wolves come out, it's all over). I thought it was nice Neil called on the little girl and gave her a thoughtful answer. He ended up saying "I have no idea, really" but did so in a nice, thought provoking and funny way. That was the highlight of the evening for me.
Neil also signed my copy of the book and we chatted about my "unusual" name for about five seconds. Unlike Frank Miller, he didn't say he was going to use it in a comic.
Posted by Nakia at 01:17 PM | Comments (2)
August 28, 2005
Some Game of Thrones Questions
Since the new George R.R. Martin book comes out in November (God willing), I've started to reread the series. I just finished A Game of Thrones and have some questions and observations I'd like to put out there.
I'm sure spoliers will follow. I've already read the published books, but have stayed away from spoliers from A Feast For Crows, so PLEASE don't give me any spoliers from unpublished material.
If you don't know what I am talking about, A Song of Ice and Fire is an epic fantasy series by George R.R. Martin that I happen to like a lot. It's realistic, with very little "magic" or elves or any of that stuff. It's also not for kids, as it's pretty violent and there are some "rated-R" moments.
Check out these websites for more:
George R.R. Martin Homepage
Westeros, A Big Fan Site
GoT centers on some mysteries, some of which are explained and some of which are not. These mysteries are:
1. Who killed Jon Aryn? All fingers point toward the Lannisters (Cersei, et al). Jon had figured out Joffrey was not Robert's child and was going to go to the king with this info, so they had him killed. But what of the (mis)information that Jon's son Robert was supposed to be fostered with Stannis at Dragonstone instead of with the Lannisters? That comes up a couple of times, but I'm not sure what to make of it.
2. Who gave the guy the knife to kill Bran? It's Littlefinger's knife, but he claims he lost it to Tyrion, which Tyrion denies. Was it Cersei? Did she hope to kill Bran and goad the Starks into war? Or was it Littlefinger? It's the attempted murder of Bran that sets the whole war into motion.
3. Who were the guys Arya overhears in the dungeon and what are they planning? They seem to be Illyrio and Varys, but I'm not sure. What are they up to? Are they conspiring to put Daenerys on the throne? If so, what's Varys' role in everything else that follows?
I'm also wondering about the idea of "honor" and what Martin is trying to say about it. Ned is, ostensibly, the most honorable of the characters, but that gets him and his family into all sorts of trouble. He eventually gets killed for it (though, interestingly enough, only after he "dishonors" himself by publicly lying about Joffrey's parentage). The death of Ned is the death of the traditional fantasy hero, I think. Jon is the other "honorable" character, but central to his conflict is what the honorable thing is. Is it helping his family or upholding his vows to the Watch? We know in later books he breaks some of his vows by riding with the wildlings and taking one as a "shield-wife", but he then breaks those promises and goes back to the Watch. Jon, who is the easiest character to like, shows the conflict between honor and fairness, or honor and "what's right." It's hard to criticize Jon, even when he breaks his vows. He also demonstrates the most growth in the first three books. Tyrion is another sympathetic character who is frequently "dishonorable" but often does "what's right." You can see some of the same elements in Daenerys' journey. As she becomes more self-confident, she strays further away from traditional notions of honor (either Westero's notions or the Dothraki ones) and more toward guiding herself and doing what is right. Jamie is on the same path beginning in the second book. Come to think of it, all get put on that path of growth by losing something important. Jamie loses a hand, Dany loses two families, Jon loses Winterfell and that family. Tyrion is in a constant state of loss due to his stature.
I know I am rambling a bit. In fact, I should probably stop my lit crit of the Martin series and do some actual work. I'm interested in what others think, though.
Posted by Nakia at 10:27 AM | Comments (5)
July 21, 2005
The Rule of Four
What do you get when you cross a historical, puzzle-solving adventure and some college graduation personal drama? A bit of a mess, actually. I just finished my fluffy summer book, Ian Caldwell & Dustin Thomason's The Rule of Four.
The novel is driven by Tom, a Princeton senior, who is torn between his developing realtionship with Katie, a sophomore, and the Hypnertomachia, a Renaissance text shrouded in mystery and murder. Tom must choose between continuing his father's legacy and helping his best friend solve the text's mystery and going to the big dance. Seriously, that's the conflict. Sure, people are killed, professors are brought low, relationships are brought to the brink, but the main problem is Tom. He can't have his two loves -- the book and the girl -- and so he must choose.
The problem, perhaps, was in the marketing. I expected a historical mystery. The book never makes up it's mind just how important that mystery is. Granted, that may be the point. But I never really felt for Tom, with his internal dialoge full of mixed metaphors, art allusions, and Latin phrases (Does everyone at Princeton think and talk like the people in this novel? I kinda doubt it). I just wanted him to pick one -- the girl or the book -- so we could get on with the story.
It wasn't horrible. I don't feel like I wasted my time or my $8.00. It did generate a pretty good idea for a D&D game (more on that later). But I really can't recommend the book to anyone else -- unless you REALLY like Princeton.
On a realted note, am I the only one that gets a little depressed whenever I finish a novel? "Post Fiction Depression"? I just know that I'll never be able to read that book for the first time again, which bums me out a little.
Posted by Nakia at 02:25 PM | Comments (4)