• 852 and counting …

    9 Comments

    Finished Twilight by Stephenie Meyer. This post contains some spoilers so if you haven’t read the book yet, you may want to skip this one.

    This is a young adult novel about Bella Swan, who goes to live with her father in Forks, Wash., and falls in love with Edward Cullen, a beautiful boy who just happens to be a vampire. I’d heard a lot of people raving about this book, which is why I decided to read it (Hi, Chasity!).

    I can see why people love the book so much. Bella is a great character with a wonderful voice. She considers other people’s feelings before her own and tries to do what’s best for everyone. Like telling her classmate Mike that her friend Jessica likes him when Mike asks Bella to a dance. Or going dress shopping with her girlfriends even though Bella isn’t going to the dance. She even makes her father, Charlie, dinner almost every night.

    It was really refreshing to read about a teenager who is smart, thoughtful, and not obsessed with designer labels and being prom queen. Bella reminded me a lot of one of my favorite heroines of all time — Beauty in Beauty by Robin McKinley (If you haven’t read that book, go get it. Now.)

    But I also had some serious problems with Twilight.

    The first half of the book was entertaining, as Bella adjusts to her new life in Forks and the horror of humiliating herself in gym class every day (sports rackets become deadly weapons in her hands). Bella also slowly realizes that Edward isn’t human and tries to figure out what he is — and soon becomes obsessed with him.

    And this is where the book goes downhill for me.

    At its heart, Twilight is a modern, angsty, fairy tale version of Romeo and Juliet, except with vampires instead of feuding families. Romeo and Juliet is a story/concept I’ve never particularly cared for, which is probably one of the reasons I didn’t love Twilight. I’ve never understood the appeal of obsessive love. Also, I’m a little burnt out on vampire books right now.

    And then, there’s Edward. He’s smart, he’s gorgeous, he does everything well — he’s perfect. Even his breath smells good — all the time. And I didn’t like him for that. To me, the most interesting heroes are the ones who have some weakness. Edward doesn’t. Sure, he has to resist eating Bella, but that’s about it. As one of the other vampires says, they don’t have any weaknesses. Even their beautiful appearance is designed to lure in their prey (humans).

    Then, there’s the way Edward treats Bella. He alternates between aloof and cold and warm and adoring. He watches her while she sleeps and goes berserk if someone (even Bella’s father) tries to interfere in their relationship. Creepy, not romantic, but Bella gives herself over to him with no reservations.

    Edward also feels because he’s a vampire that he knows what’s best for Bella — always. Another thing I didn’t like about him, especially since Bella demonstrates time and time again how brave and smart and thoughtful she is.

    Bella says it herself best near the end of the book, when she tells Edward that people have to be equals to have a real relationship. Bella and Edward aren’t equals, and they never will be – which is why Bella wants him to turn her into a vampire. So they can be together forever.

    Me? I want Bella to remember how smart she is and find a healthier relationship. But I know it won’t happen.

    So, I’m going split decision on this one. Thumbs up to Bella and the first half of the book; thumbs down to the rest. (Don’t hate me, Chasity!)

    Up next: Probably Don’t Look Down by Suzanne Enoch.

  • Happy 2009 …

    Hope your new year is starting off on a good note. I totally wimped out and went to bed before they dropped the ball in Times Square.

    I’ll be posting my writing and reading resolutions later this week. Until then, enjoy some college football and write down your own goals for 2009. :ww:

  • ·

    Resolution time …

    8 Comments

    Happy New Year! :bub:

    Hope you’re having a good one so far. So, it’s time to write those pesky yearly resolutions. I thought I’d share some of my writing goals for 2008 with everyone:

    1) Write the second SPY book (my James Bond-esque series with magic).

    2) Write the second ASSASSIN book (my series about a Southern assassin who can control certain elements).

    3) Write something different. I want to try something new this year, and I’m kicking around a couple of ideas. I’m just not sure exactly what genre I want to write yet. I always have paranormal ideas, but I’m thinking about branching out and trying my hand at romantic suspense (I write pretty darn good action scenes). Maybe a romantic comedy or even a funny young adult. What would you guys like to see me write next?

    4) Sell my two new urban fantasy series. LIVE & LET SPY is my James Bond series, and GIN ON THE ROCKS is my assassin story. Of course, there’s not a lot I can do about this resolution, other than write the best books I can. (Which I hope I’ve done). But sales depend on so many things — agents, editors, the marketplace, etc. But hey, a gal can dream, right? 😉

    5) Work on the world of Bigtime. Enough said.

    What about you? What are your goals, writing or otherwise?

  • ·

    Some thoughts on The Sandman series …

    I also promised to post some thoughts on The Sandman series of graphic novels by Neil Gaiman. This post contains some spoilers, so if you haven’t read the series, you may want to skip this post. Here goes. The top five things I did and didn’t like about Sandman.

    What I didn’t like:

    1) Overall, I enjoyed the series, but it didn’t turn me into a raging Gaiman fangirl. I doubt that I will ever be a raging Gaiman fangirl. I admire his style, his mechanics, his storytelling, but I just don’t connect with it on a deep level like other people do.

    I suppose it’s because when I read I primarily want to be entertained — not be treated to deep theories about the nature of existence and dreams — which is what Gaiman and Sandman is all about. Deep thoughts … deep emotions … deep ideas. Not what I would pick up first to read. I’m more of an action-adventure reader at heart — I like folks like Ian Fleming and Donald Westlake and David Eddings (the Sparhawk series). Entertainment, pure and simple, that’s more my style.

    2) Also, I thought the end of the series was a big, big cop-out. Instead of killing Dream for good, Gaiman resurrects him by turning a kid into the next Dream. Yeah, yeah, I get that Dream is really an idea and that you can never truly kill ideas. But still. You had all this buildup, all these showdowns, all these dramatic deaths, and then — poof! Everybody comes back to life, more or less. I admire how Gaiman tied everything together and hinted that the same story will play out in endless cycles, but still, it’s a bit of a cop-out. I doubt very few people besides Gaiman could get away with something like that, as far as readers are concerned. And he didn’t get away with it for this reader.

    3) The introductions. At the beginning of every novel, we are treated to a lengthy intro talking about how visionary Gaiman is. Yes, we all know how great Gaiman is and how many awards he’s won. I don’t need to read several pages telling me that over and over again. The gushing intros got old after a while. (My significant other pointed out that if they were gushing intros about me, I might feel differently. True. But I’d probably still get people to tone it down a little bit. Some of the intros went on for more than five pages!)

    4) The rape scene. One of the Sandman stories is about a writer who can’t write anymore, so he goes and gets a captive muse named Calliope to help him pen his second novel. In the story, Calliope is a real woman, instead of a construct. One of the lines in the story goes something like this – His first act was to rape her hesitantly. The art in that panel gives a hint of the rape itself.

    I don’t like stories about people, especially women, being victimized, but I understand what Gaiman was trying to do here (in order to get the muse to work for him, the writer has to make her his). My biggest quibble is with the word hesitantly. What about rape is hesitant? Nothing, to my mind. 

    5) And finally, the boobs — oh, the boobs. The various artists who drew the series were really, really into naked boobs. They were on practically every single page. In contrast, there were very few naked men running around. I know most of the artists were men, but still, they’re just boobs, guys. Every other person has a pair. Get over it.

    Okay, on to what I did like about the series:

    1) The recurring characters. Gaiman brought in a cast of hundreds and tied them all together very nicely throughout the course of the novels. He managed to bring back people from the very first novel and show them in the finale in a way that made sense. Very impressive.

    2) Robert (Bob) Gadling. He was probably my favorite character. We first see Bob in England in the 1300s or so (I’m fuzzy on the exact century). He loudly proclaims to a group of men at a bar that all you have to do to escape Death is to simply not die. And he does it. Every century, Bob goes back to the pub to have a drink with Dream and talk about what he’s seen and done in the last hundred years. And, at the end of the series, Bob refuses to go with Death and decides to keep on living. A cool guy all the way around.

    3) Merv the pumpkin. He’s one of the caretakers in the world of Dreams. He does stuff like paint the volcanos and see to the backdrop scenery. He has a pumpkin head and is usually smoking a cigar. Merv probably has the best line of the series — I’m a pumpkin with a machine gun. I’m your worst nightmare. Hysterical stuff.

    4) The idea of the Endless. In addition to Dream, there are six other Endless beings or constructs that make up Gaiman’s world — Death (my favorite), Despair, Desire, Destruction, Delirium, and Destiny. A very cool idea for a world, and the execution/art of each character was terrific most of the time.

    5) The other gods. Bast, Loki, Thor, Odin … Gaiman threw just about every deity into Sandman, and the various depictions were interesting and entertaining. Especially Thor, who was depicted as a muscle-bound drunkard. Funny stuff.

    Whew! So, that’s it. Those are some of my thoughts on Sandman. Feel free to agree, disagree, or add your own thoughts if you’ve read the series.

  • 851 and counting …

    4 Comments

    And now to talk about the last book I read in 2007 — The Seventh by Richard Stark (aka Donald E. Westlake).

    This is another Parker novel. When the book opens, Parker is holding the loot for a robbert he just pulled with six other guys. He goes out for beer and cigarettes, and when he comes back, he finds the loot gone and the woman he was staying with dead with a sword through her chest. Naturally, Parker spends the rest of the book trying to find out who took the money and why.

    I liked this one a lot, mainly because we get to see several other crooks besides Parker. I enjoyed all the different interactions and how Parker is always the ultimate tough guy, even among others like him.

    The resolution was a little weak. I think it would have been more interesting if one of the other robbers had taken the money, instead of an old boyfriend of the girl’s, who just stumbled across it by accident. But this one had a lot of great cat-and-mouse action between Parker and the boyfriend, and the cops hot on the trail of the robbers. Parker actually goes and braces the lead detective in his own house — that’s what kind of ballsy guy Parker is and why I like reading about him so much.

    So, thumbs up.

    Up next: Probably Twilight by Stephanie Meyer.

    What about you? What’s the last book you read in 2007?