Reading list

Still chewing my way through Book 2. This will probably be my status for a while. :)

In the meantime, I thought I'd post a list of the books I'm currently reading. I used to read one book at a time, finishing it completely before moving on to another--but lately I find that I tend to have several going at once, and hop between them depending on whatever mood I'm in for the day. So here's my list as of now:

1. The Clockwork Angel by Cassandra Clare: Well yeah. It's Cassie Clare. I used to read her fanfic way back in high school....and now, to read her stories set in her own original worlds, I'm filled with ridiculous glee. I luff Jem. I alternate between love and hate for Will. And Cassie's worldbuilding puts me to shame. I bet she knows things about 19th century London that 19th century Londoners didn't even know.

2. The Scorch Trials by James Dashner (Sequel to The Maze Runner): I always feel giddy whenever I fall for a series before it hits the bestseller lists--that feeling you get when you really like a small indie band, and then they hit the big times and you get to be smug with your friends like you're the one who first discovered them. :) I kinda felt that way when I fell in love with The Hunger Games before it became popular. In the same vein, I picked up The Maze Runner long before it hit the NYT List just because I thought the title sounded interesting and I liked the cover. I devoured it. And now that Scorch Trials has hit the NYT in its opening week, I like to sit back and think happily, "I was an original fan!"

3. The Picture of Dorian Gray by Oscar Wilde: Ok, so this is an oldie. But I had a craving for some Dorian Gray and am reading back over it. Even though it's written back in like, caveman days, it still has all the hallmarks of a great story. Tension in the very first chapter. Building up intrigue about our main character (Dorian) before introducing him, something I love seeing in books. And a main character who has a truly epic character development arc--going from naive boy with no idea how beautiful he is, to a monster taking advantage of everyone for his own pleasure, to a bitter and remorseful man. Aaagh love. <3

4. Ash by Malinda Lo: Just got this. I've been wanting to read this one for a while--I'm always up for a fairy tale retelling, especially one with writing that has some of Jacqueline Carey's loveliness in it. :) I read the first paragraph and just about melted into the beauty of it. It's like reading Patricia McKillip. Like jewels wet with rain. Gah. I wish I could write like this.

I'm also in dire need of some books that aren't out yet--namely, Matched (by Ally Condie), and Across the Universe (by Beth Revis). Lots of dystopians. I need my dystopian fix. How do so many people get their hands on ARCs of these amazing books?? I am not special enough to get them early, I guess. Sadness. :(

Speak loudly against censorship

(Reposted from my deviantArt blog)

Okay, this is going to be a rant entry, because I am pissed. Some cussing appears. You have been warned.

Laurie Halse Anderson's entry

For those of you who have not heard of the novel Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson (author of the equally powerful Wintergirls), it is a disturbing and heart-wrenching portrayal of one girl's choice not to speak out about her rape, and how she eventually manages to find her voice.

It's a beautiful book.

And contrary to what this Scroggins guy thinks, it is NOT SOFT-CORE PORN. (For crying out loud, he even thinks Slaughterhouse Five should be banned. I don't think he got the book's message.)

Speak should not be banned from school districts because this guy apparently finds rape to be equivalent to sexual arousal.

I like to think that I'm a fairly even-tempered, reasonable, average person. But few things make me angrier than censorship. When people like Scroggins call for the banning of books because they unveil real teen issues like rape, or when parents try to blame the failings of their children on the things their children are reading, you know what they're really saying? That they are lazy-ass parents. "If my child messes up, it must be because they read something bad, not because I'm a shitty parent." They would rather censor these forms of art altogether than take parental responsibility to talk to their children about the content and the message. They are TOO LAZY to communicate with their kids. So they choose instead to try to make certain books unavailable to ALL kids.

If seeing your child read Speak makes you uncomfortable, fine. That's your perogative. But don't enforce your own Puritan beliefs on the rest of your school district's children. Do not publicly compare rape to soft-core porn.

These are the same people who think gays should not have the right to marry because they don't want to explain it to their kids. "I don't like explaining things to my children. So stop your whole lifestyle, because I don't like talking to my kids about it." (Louis CK does a great skit on this topic.)

Scroggins, you're ignorant and you're a dick.

Ms. Laurie Halse Anderson, sing it.

And for everyone else against banning books that talk about the horrors of rape, SPEAK LOUDLY. This needs to be heard.

Thoughts on Stephenie Meyer and Dan Brown

I was watching an interview with Stephenie Meyer on YouTube today, and also simultaneously reading a blog entry from another writer that essentially labeled Ms. Meyer as a, to paraphrase, poor writer who wrote a horrible book. With no further explanation on why he/she thought this was so.

I see comments all the time about Twilight along those lines, and it frustrates me more and more each time I see them. I can understand if readers are simply posting their thoughts about the book, and legitimate reasons why they didn't like it or weren't drawn into it. After all, readers are the customers. They have the right to dislike things and blow them off. But it's somehow irritating when professional writers simply flip their hand at Stephenie Meyer and brush off her success as somehow being just luck, or that she has absolutely no talent, or that her writing is 'horrible' without even giving a thought to what they find so horrible about it.

I'm not saying that Twilight is on par with, I don't know, Shakespeare, or whatever is considered literary genius. Then again, maybe it is. Who's to say. But clearly Meyer did something right with Twilight, because there have been plenty of other books that publishers have thrown tons of money behind and have just sunken like rocks to the bottom of the industry pool. You can't have the sort of success Twilight has seen without having the support of millions of readers. And those readers are not buying her books and telling their friends to buy her books because they think she's a horrible writer. Something has clicked with them inside those pages, and naysaying writers would do themselves a great service if they would just admit this and try to study how Meyer managed to capture her readers' imaginations. It may not be your cup of tea, but obviously it's the cup of tea for a lot of others, and if the tea is really that popular there must be something delicious in it.

I'll admit that I'm not a huge paranormal reader. But I do read it, especially the ones that garner critical acclaim or popularity with the public, because I want to see how they did it. For Twilight, imho, Meyer hooks you in the first 50 pages because she introduces Edward and Bella and their attraction to each other, and then withholds Edward from Bella for an agonizing amount of time. Bella's fascinated by this guy, and then he disappears for days, leaving her to ponder in growing anxiety. When will she see him again? the reader wonders. And why does he react to her in the way that he does? Even though Bella might think he hates her, we obviously know better by the subtle things he does, how he takes notice of her in an understated way (at least in the beginning). That's what kept me reading when I picked up Twilight. Meyer uses this device again in New Moon--separating the star-crossed lovers for agonizing lengths of time. And although there are parts of the books that didn't resonate with me (i.e. my connection to Bella as a character went up and down, and I am much more attracted to Jacob's earnestness than to Edward's emo-ness), I do see and respect the parts of it that have hooked so many others.

The same goes for Dan Brown. Writers, especially writers-who-want-to-make-it, don't diss Dan Brown. Look at what he did right. The man is a genius at creating fascinating conspiracy theories (possible alien microbes in Antarctica, or government secret? did Jesus have offspring? did Da Vinci really hide secrets in his paintings? etcetc) as well as chapters overloaded with active conflict. That's his strength and the drawing power of his novels. If you're a thriller writer, look at his weaknesses (i.e. oversimplified, weak characters, imho) with a thoughtful eye, then write a thriller with an equally fascinating premise and make your own characters deeper and more fully fleshed out. Draw on his strengths. Avoid his weaknesses. Don't diss him.

Yes, luck did play a role in the wild success of some of these writers. But they couldn't have gotten there from writing horrible books. Meyer and Brown write highly commercial novels. Their books are full of the things that big blockbusters have--forbidden love, conspiracy, plots that are not too hard to follow (for the most part), and conflict conflict conflict. If you're a writer who only wants to write glittering prose full of well-turned phrases, all the more power to you. But if you want to be commercially successful, don't sit there taking cheap shots at more successful writers that you secretly wish you could be standing on their podiums with. We're all writers trying to create the best entertainment we can for our readers. What's to hate?

Anyway, just wanted to get that off my chest. :)

Mockingjay review (no spoilers)

(Reposted from my blog on deviantArt)

So I picked up and finished Mockingjay yesterday (Hunger Games 3 for those who don't know .... and again, why don't you know!!!! Even Obama's daughters are reading this series!). Let me just say that it did NOT disappoint.

As a whole I was absolutely thrilled with the way Collins tied everything together and wrapped it up. It's extremely dark, easily the darkest of the three, and probably the darkest book I've read in a very long time. This book has a very strong anti-war message. And if anyone thought that the love triangle in Hunger Games was somehow the main plot/conflict of the trilogy, you are sorely mistaken! Collins makes it very clear that the main issues we should be grappling with are not who ends up with whom, but just how devastating war can be and how much of your humanity you're willing to sacrifice in order to achieve victory. That's the theme of the books. Love in a very different light.

One of my favorite things about Mockingjay was the intense character development happening throughout the book. Dude. I have not seen such deep character dev in a long, long time! There are some painfully eloquent "monologues" where Katniss ponders the dark issues of war and morality, and both Gale and Peeta's characters are explored thoroughly. Even many of the minor characters are very fully fleshed out. This is one of Collins's greatest strengths and most enviable talents, I think, and what makes her series so popular. She is dynamite at character development. They go beyond 3-dimensional. This is one of the few series I've read where the love triangle's angsty romance isn't there just for the sake of being emo and angsty, but is angsty for very very good reasons. The relationships are real. The angst is justified. It makes all other love triangles look like trivial and frivolous walks in the park.

And finally, the last line of the book in the epilogue gave me goosebumps. Rest assured that when you close the book, you will feel pretty satisfied. Thank you, Suzanne Collins! Seriously, she is one of the greatest YA writers ever. I hope to one day have even a smidge of her talents. <3

Mockingjay, Gale, and Peeta

(Reposted from my more updated blog on deviantArt)

Mockingjay (Hunger Games 3 for those who don't know .... why don't you know!!) comes out next week. SQUEE. I am going to die from anticipation.

I was reading some forum posts online and although there are fans for both Gale and Peeta, I have to say everyone seems very heavily leaning Peeta. Which makes me sad and borderline defensive because I like both boys equally. Why must I choose! It's not really a fair argument because Peeta got SO much book time in Catching Fire (and Hunger Games, for that matter), while Gale only had a couple of chapters devoted to his character. I know, I know....Peeta is noble, lovable, sensible, logical, understanding of Katniss's many sides and weaknesses, etcetc. But he also never seems to really react to anything. He never really gets angry, or sad, or happy, or whatever. (Edit: except for that one part in Catching Fire, as one commenter pointed out, where he does go off on Haymitch and Katniss. Ok, I'll give him credit for that one bit. :) ) When I think of Peeta, I think of someone very "level-headed". Which is a good trait, to be sure. Maybe Katniss needs more of that in her life, given her impulsive ways of handling situations. Sometimes, though, I want to slap Peeta upside the head and tell him, "REACT, dammit! Are you at all angry? Shout it to the heavens! More moments like that one in Catching Fire!"

But Gale. There's something about Gale. First of all, as aforementioned, it's not fair pitting him against Peeta because he just hasn't had the chance to be developed as much. I think we'll see much more of him in Mockingjay due to the circumstances of Catching Fire's ending (no spoilers in this blog, although I can't promise the same in the comments, so be careful if you haven't read both books). And when Suzanne Collins gets that chance to develop him more thoroughly, I think we'll see more people on Gale's side. Yes, he's rash and impulsive, and sometimes quick to anger, but I like to think of those things as things that make him interesting and admirable. He's flawed. He's stubborn. He's hot-tempered when appropriate and he can show a wide range of personality traits that range everywhere from nobility to selfishness. I like his selfish moments, when he just wants to leave everything behind and run away with Katniss. He's extremely human, and I find that aspect of him quite appealing. Anyone in his situation would feel that way at times. Granted, that might not be the best match for Katniss. They're both hotheaded and relationships with two hotheads tend to end in flames (or at least, a lot of angry sparks). Still, chapters with Gale hold my attention with a vice-like grip. Peeta is more like lukewarm water....very comforting and soothing, but no Bellagio fountain. :)

Anyway, that's my assessment. I figure Katniss can't really go wrong with either one. And on August 24, I will be in line at the local Vroman's bookstore, clutching my copy of Mockingjay to my chest with a feverish light in my eyes. Muhahaha. My precioussss! *faint*