Our favorite Simmons brunch guest has been busy!
Listen or read (click title) the Q & A about his new book, Gatty's Tale.
Did anyone here read his Arthurian trilogy? I only read the first one.
Also, Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy is filming. Photos here. Nicole Kidman plays Mrs. Coulter; excellent casting, I think! Daniel Craig, the new James Bond, is Lord Asriel. Lyra is played by an unknown; no photos!
Furthermore, it looks like the November book is The Body of Christopher Creed by Carol Plum-Ucci, widely available at your library and in paperback.
Finally, I want to point out that Eunice added her part to the Nick and Norah discussion. Do check it out --
Monday, October 23, 2006
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
"The Unreal Deal"
Anita Silvey has an article about the "new breed of teen heroes " and the shift in teen reading on SLJ.com. Click the above title to read it.
What did you prefer read as a YA? (Old school) Realistic or (new wave) genre fiction?
I did not realize she published another book: 500 Great Books for Teens.
Perhaps we can each make our own list of (recent) Desert Island Picks soon...I like Silvey's.
What did you prefer read as a YA? (Old school) Realistic or (new wave) genre fiction?
I did not realize she published another book: 500 Great Books for Teens.
Perhaps we can each make our own list of (recent) Desert Island Picks soon...I like Silvey's.
'ware bears
The Canning Season was not my first Polly Horvath. I've read at least three of her other books, including The Trolls, my first and favorite. Horvath is Canadian and known for wacky, off-kilter characters, particularly adults, who act in unpredictable and bizarre ways.
One of my concerns about the group reading The Canning Season is that it would be too strange, but, believe it or not, Horvath toned down the irresponsiblitity and craziness of the adults in this book. Was the wackiness too great for anyone? I do love me a bit of quirky.
Did it strike anyone else that this book is not just for young readers? I know people go on and on about books that can be read on multiple levels, but I kept running across parts that I thought kids would not necessarily understand. --- that's not a bad thing; I liked it. The story is also morbid and dark! Ratchet's mother is cruel, Harper's aunt is cruel, the house is surrounded by lethal bears, and then there's the whole story of Tilly?Penpen? (I forget) tripping over her mother's head. Despite this (or because of?), Tilly and Penpen have a healthy view of death.
Horvath does not skimp on the language. She uses big words, curses; the two aunts speak freely in their antiquated manner. I forgot about her use of "fuck" until I read through the Amazon reviews and saw that Horvath lost some fans because of it. In my library, the book is shelved in the YA section, which I agree with. And I LIKE that the aunts have a little sass and say "inappropriate" things (Tilly just can't help herself) -- they are not old pushover spinsters, but fiercely independent women who live as they see fit, regardless of the opinion of others. They may be naive about technology and current affairs, but they are happy and loving people.
(Really, I thought people would be more upset about Harper's repeated use of "Christ" as an explitive than "fuck.")
Any thoughts on the ending? I thought it moved a little too fast, and wrapped up a little too neatly, but I liked it.
One of my concerns about the group reading The Canning Season is that it would be too strange, but, believe it or not, Horvath toned down the irresponsiblitity and craziness of the adults in this book. Was the wackiness too great for anyone? I do love me a bit of quirky.
Did it strike anyone else that this book is not just for young readers? I know people go on and on about books that can be read on multiple levels, but I kept running across parts that I thought kids would not necessarily understand. --- that's not a bad thing; I liked it. The story is also morbid and dark! Ratchet's mother is cruel, Harper's aunt is cruel, the house is surrounded by lethal bears, and then there's the whole story of Tilly?Penpen? (I forget) tripping over her mother's head. Despite this (or because of?), Tilly and Penpen have a healthy view of death.
Horvath does not skimp on the language. She uses big words, curses; the two aunts speak freely in their antiquated manner. I forgot about her use of "fuck" until I read through the Amazon reviews and saw that Horvath lost some fans because of it. In my library, the book is shelved in the YA section, which I agree with. And I LIKE that the aunts have a little sass and say "inappropriate" things (Tilly just can't help herself) -- they are not old pushover spinsters, but fiercely independent women who live as they see fit, regardless of the opinion of others. They may be naive about technology and current affairs, but they are happy and loving people.
(Really, I thought people would be more upset about Harper's repeated use of "Christ" as an explitive than "fuck.")
Any thoughts on the ending? I thought it moved a little too fast, and wrapped up a little too neatly, but I liked it.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Rev your engines
Okay! There's been a sorta hiatus, with busy lives and more pressing tasks than La Rumpus, but I hope people can find a quiet moment for good books and gentle discussion. Ahhh.
Discussion is scheduled to begin tomorrow, but I'm not yet finished with The Canning Season. Will do ASAP. How are you coming along?
I'll post a November Book Poll this weekend -- please vote!
Discussion is scheduled to begin tomorrow, but I'm not yet finished with The Canning Season. Will do ASAP. How are you coming along?
I'll post a November Book Poll this weekend -- please vote!
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Genius Grant for Mr. Cathedral
Your favorite deconstructivist and mine, David Macaulay, won a MacArthur Fellowship! That means he gets "$500,000, paid in quarterly installments over five years."
Interview on NPR (audio to be posted later today).
Interview on NPR (audio to be posted later today).
Nick and Norah and the Infinite Heaviness of Being 18
I did not expect this book to stir up huge artistic and philosophical questions for me about children’s literature and what it is/should be/is capable of being, but uh… it did. Sorry – this may not be the best way to start off the discussion! Feel free to start another post/comment thread if it’s hard to talk about other aspects of the book under this umbrella.
Ok. Here is how I feel about Nick and Norah:
1) It’s extremely well-written. I found both the first-person narratives convincing, deft, surprising, funny, and (almost) never seeming as if they were trying too hard. Written by two different authors? You’d never notice.
2) It’s very, very well-observed. Again, both Norah and Nick come across as almost shockingly real human beings – in particular they are utterly believable as 18 year olds born in a specific time period, living in a specific place, obsessed with specific things. All of the music references are spot on (Green Day evokes being 7 years old, Toxic is “vintage Britney” -- hee) and the thought processes and emotional landscapes of all the characters are played out with skill and verve. The book captures precisely what it is like to be in your late teens and figuring out the endings of intense relationships for the first time.
3) It’s totally absorbing: the collapse of the whole novel into one night (or rather the expansion of one night into the space of a whole novel) works, in the sense that change (emotional change) is magnified, easy to observe. You do plunge right into the world of the characters and every small detail seems significant. It’s exactly that feeling you get when you are 18, that this is the night that is going to change your life. They’re engaged in what’s happening with every hair on their bodies, and I’m engaged too.
But…
4) Despite all that, I wasn’t entirely satisfied by the book. Or rather, I was satisfied in the sense that I thought it succeeded in the task of wholly and realistically creating a rich, full picture of one night in the lives of two interesting people. But to me, that’s the entirety of the novel’s achievement. It never tries to connect this night to anything larger, never reaches beyond the intensely personal, self-obsessed, superficially philosophical universe of these characters. While I was reading it I swirled deep into memories of what my life was like when I was that age, but I never felt that the book gave me anything I could carry away with me beyond a pleasant sense of nostalgia.
I guess what I’m saying is that I never felt challenged by it. I kept on thinking, “yeah, yeah, this is just what it’s like.” But never, “Wow! I never thought about it that way before,” or “Hmm. This makes me think of X,” or “This really brings up something fascinating about what happens when two people really connect – I’m excited about taking that idea and reading parts of my life, or the world, or another story, with it in mind.”
And I think for me that tends to be the difference between (a lot of) YA literature and the adult novels I love and that make my heart skip a beat – the YA books seem to be focused on faithful observations of teenage life, on making experiences come to life for their reader; the adult novels seem to expand beyond observation to comment on the lives they observe, and to ask questions about what they might mean.
I don’t know. Maybe I’m being stupid and there are many, many YA books that do that too that I’m not thinking of right now. But sometimes, man, I just want to read a picturebook here. They seem to me to be so much deeper than YA novels. ;-)
P.S. Just coming back to say I really did like the book -- it just made me wonder about some stuff.
Ok. Here is how I feel about Nick and Norah:
1) It’s extremely well-written. I found both the first-person narratives convincing, deft, surprising, funny, and (almost) never seeming as if they were trying too hard. Written by two different authors? You’d never notice.
2) It’s very, very well-observed. Again, both Norah and Nick come across as almost shockingly real human beings – in particular they are utterly believable as 18 year olds born in a specific time period, living in a specific place, obsessed with specific things. All of the music references are spot on (Green Day evokes being 7 years old, Toxic is “vintage Britney” -- hee) and the thought processes and emotional landscapes of all the characters are played out with skill and verve. The book captures precisely what it is like to be in your late teens and figuring out the endings of intense relationships for the first time.
3) It’s totally absorbing: the collapse of the whole novel into one night (or rather the expansion of one night into the space of a whole novel) works, in the sense that change (emotional change) is magnified, easy to observe. You do plunge right into the world of the characters and every small detail seems significant. It’s exactly that feeling you get when you are 18, that this is the night that is going to change your life. They’re engaged in what’s happening with every hair on their bodies, and I’m engaged too.
But…
4) Despite all that, I wasn’t entirely satisfied by the book. Or rather, I was satisfied in the sense that I thought it succeeded in the task of wholly and realistically creating a rich, full picture of one night in the lives of two interesting people. But to me, that’s the entirety of the novel’s achievement. It never tries to connect this night to anything larger, never reaches beyond the intensely personal, self-obsessed, superficially philosophical universe of these characters. While I was reading it I swirled deep into memories of what my life was like when I was that age, but I never felt that the book gave me anything I could carry away with me beyond a pleasant sense of nostalgia.
I guess what I’m saying is that I never felt challenged by it. I kept on thinking, “yeah, yeah, this is just what it’s like.” But never, “Wow! I never thought about it that way before,” or “Hmm. This makes me think of X,” or “This really brings up something fascinating about what happens when two people really connect – I’m excited about taking that idea and reading parts of my life, or the world, or another story, with it in mind.”
And I think for me that tends to be the difference between (a lot of) YA literature and the adult novels I love and that make my heart skip a beat – the YA books seem to be focused on faithful observations of teenage life, on making experiences come to life for their reader; the adult novels seem to expand beyond observation to comment on the lives they observe, and to ask questions about what they might mean.
I don’t know. Maybe I’m being stupid and there are many, many YA books that do that too that I’m not thinking of right now. But sometimes, man, I just want to read a picturebook here. They seem to me to be so much deeper than YA novels. ;-)
P.S. Just coming back to say I really did like the book -- it just made me wonder about some stuff.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Et tu?
What excellent taste we have in this month's book. Click on the link for a teaser -- not spoilers, but if you aren't already interested in the book, maybe this will help. If you don't want any hints, just look at the picture and read the bottom panel.
I finished it last week and it was a positive experience (that's all I'll say for now).
I finished it last week and it was a positive experience (that's all I'll say for now).
Monday, August 28, 2006
Peter Continued?
There's an article in the NYT about the Peter Pan sequel; the book comes out October 5th. Any thoughts? Does anyone plan on reading it?
I've seen the Dave Barry prequel books, but haven't read them. I'm pretty snobby about follow-ups that are NOT written by the original author.
I've seen the Dave Barry prequel books, but haven't read them. I'm pretty snobby about follow-ups that are NOT written by the original author.
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Crossover
If you read Bookslut, you probably already saw this article about YA crossover books, but I thought I'd link to it anyways.
Do adults feel embarrassed looking at books in the children's section? I always figured they could pretend to look at something for a daughter/son or niece, etc. I never felt bad about it.
Do adults feel embarrassed looking at books in the children's section? I always figured they could pretend to look at something for a daughter/son or niece, etc. I never felt bad about it.
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
For next month -
There were four votes for next month's book and, by the slightest of majorities, Nick & Norah's Infinite Playlist is September's title.
Random House set up an impressive website with excerpts and downloads and links to both authors' websites.
I hope people are still reading Wrecked. Please add your comments to the discussion entry below or begin a new one. And add a couple titles to the Wish List if you have ideas. I'm going to try and find some paperbacks, which should be easier to track down.
Random House set up an impressive website with excerpts and downloads and links to both authors' websites.
I hope people are still reading Wrecked. Please add your comments to the discussion entry below or begin a new one. And add a couple titles to the Wish List if you have ideas. I'm going to try and find some paperbacks, which should be easier to track down.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Wrecked
NOTE: We are locked in a tie for next month's book! Please vote if you have not yet done so!
The only other E.R. Frank book I've read is America -- has anyone else read her other stuff? That was a harsh story. Wrecked struck me (ooh, bad pun) as incredibly sad. I cried a lot.
This blurb leans towards the Reader's Response form of criticism, with lots of personal info thrown in, just an FYI.
Anna's relationship with her parents is fragile. She has little to no meaningful interaction with her mother and her dad has anger/control/fear issues. The brother-sister relationship between Anna and Jack has had its ups and downs, as you do when you get older and just don't pick on each other all the time, instead seeing the other as a person. Frank shows these with lots of flashbacks; I thought they were done well and did not seem forced.
This was a hard book for me to read. I liked it, I liked Anna, I liked Ellen. The hospital scenes with Ellen freaked me out. Her collapsed lung and breathing tubes were too much like my mom's; even the name was the same.
And her father's anger -- his need to control; his insistence that his children recognize that they are wrong and he is right; his obsession that things be done his way, even when it is ridiculous, such as picking up leaves by hand. I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of that. Those parts of the book were disturbing to me and very real, even though my dad isn't quite like that anymore.
The family situation becomes unbearable when Anna has the accident. That's the tipping point, that throws it all out into the open and Anna starts to crumble.
Therapy was not a quick fix. Frank knows what she is doing with that; if you read the flap copy, it explains Frank is a clinical social worker and psychotherapist who focuses on trauma.
I don't know if this book resonated with me because of my mom's recent death and the similarities between my dad and Anna's. The final page did not satisfy me -- yes, we know there is still progress to be made, but it didn't fit. Seemed tacked on. I wanted the dad to leave.
The silence of the stopped scream -- poetic and terrifying.
The only other E.R. Frank book I've read is America -- has anyone else read her other stuff? That was a harsh story. Wrecked struck me (ooh, bad pun) as incredibly sad. I cried a lot.
This blurb leans towards the Reader's Response form of criticism, with lots of personal info thrown in, just an FYI.
Anna's relationship with her parents is fragile. She has little to no meaningful interaction with her mother and her dad has anger/control/fear issues. The brother-sister relationship between Anna and Jack has had its ups and downs, as you do when you get older and just don't pick on each other all the time, instead seeing the other as a person. Frank shows these with lots of flashbacks; I thought they were done well and did not seem forced.
This was a hard book for me to read. I liked it, I liked Anna, I liked Ellen. The hospital scenes with Ellen freaked me out. Her collapsed lung and breathing tubes were too much like my mom's; even the name was the same.
And her father's anger -- his need to control; his insistence that his children recognize that they are wrong and he is right; his obsession that things be done his way, even when it is ridiculous, such as picking up leaves by hand. I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of that. Those parts of the book were disturbing to me and very real, even though my dad isn't quite like that anymore.
The family situation becomes unbearable when Anna has the accident. That's the tipping point, that throws it all out into the open and Anna starts to crumble.
Therapy was not a quick fix. Frank knows what she is doing with that; if you read the flap copy, it explains Frank is a clinical social worker and psychotherapist who focuses on trauma.
I don't know if this book resonated with me because of my mom's recent death and the similarities between my dad and Anna's. The final page did not satisfy me -- yes, we know there is still progress to be made, but it didn't fit. Seemed tacked on. I wanted the dad to leave.
The silence of the stopped scream -- poetic and terrifying.
Friday, August 04, 2006
It is time!
I have a hunch where the poll results are going to fall...I really wish this book was better; it got great reviews in The Horn Book; that's why I recommended it.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Nothing New
I finished Burning City the other day but haven't gathered my thoughts about it yet. Is Erica the only other person who has finished it?
Nonetheless, I did want to post that Locus had a whole young adult fiction issue in May. I'll have to buy it once I have a Texas address; it looks pretty good.
Also, I love Roger Sutton's comment about The Giving Tree in a recent blog entry.
Nonetheless, I did want to post that Locus had a whole young adult fiction issue in May. I'll have to buy it once I have a Texas address; it looks pretty good.
Also, I love Roger Sutton's comment about The Giving Tree in a recent blog entry.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Hooray for Miss Libby!
One of Simmon's Own has a book on the presses RIGHT NOW!
Take a looky-look! I don't remember who took Publishing in the fall of '03, but Alisa Libby was a demure presence among the rather whiney new recruits. She's been working away on Blood Confessions, and when I last saw her on the T, she had the first color-cover galleys.
Just a lil cheerleading for one of our Simmons alumn! Who's next, ladies?
Take a looky-look! I don't remember who took Publishing in the fall of '03, but Alisa Libby was a demure presence among the rather whiney new recruits. She's been working away on Blood Confessions, and when I last saw her on the T, she had the first color-cover galleys.
Just a lil cheerleading for one of our Simmons alumn! Who's next, ladies?
Monday, June 26, 2006
WHOOPS
Okay. Blogger and Blogpoll, usually happy bedfellows, are fighting right now.
I lost all the comments from that last poll when I tried to set up a new poll. Here's what we are gonna do:
Vote by comment. Makes it public, but also keeps the site from eating itself. Hopefully this will not be a problem for long.
WHICH BOOK FOR JULY?
Burning City by Ariel and Joaquin Dorfman
A Room on Lorelei Street by Mary E. Pearson
Wrecked by E. R. Frank
Sorry -- I couldn't make it work otherwise. I'll rescue the previous comments and add them.
I lost all the comments from that last poll when I tried to set up a new poll. Here's what we are gonna do:
Vote by comment. Makes it public, but also keeps the site from eating itself. Hopefully this will not be a problem for long.
Burning City by Ariel and Joaquin Dorfman
A Room on Lorelei Street by Mary E. Pearson
Wrecked by E. R. Frank
Sorry -- I couldn't make it work otherwise. I'll rescue the previous comments and add them.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Grind those gears, Shawn!
I don't know what I want to say about this book, but no one else is initiating discussion (and it's been a while since I have), so I'll just start rambling.
Wow. That's my impression of this book. I felt it extremely strongly within the first ten pages, twenty pages, thirty pages—and even at the end, I'm still thinking "wow" (although a little less strongly). This entire premise is fascinating to me. I loved Shawn—his voice, his personality, his honesty, his earnestness—and I loved being in his mind (especially since no one else ever is or could be).
It's so wonderful to think about Shawn being a secret genius, being so with it inside, being so aware and alert, but it's also so sad, to think that no one will know, no one will know him, no one can hear what he wants to say.
The debate of the book—is Shawn's life worth living—is so conflicting and confusing for me to wrap my head around. I love that Shawn likes his life, that he's happy, that he wants to live and doesn't want to die. But I also agree with the dad that Shawn is trapped inside his own body. Because I believe that when you die, it's not the end of you (wait, this isn't going to turn into a religious hedgehogs v. nonreligious hedgehogs argument, is it? KIDDING), part of me really does think that Shawn would be better off dying and being able to be free, fly and soar like he does during his seizures, all the time. He could communicate and have people know him, and he could really be the Shawn that we saw through his narrative. [Obviously we have different versions, if any, of an afterlife, and I'm just imagining mine.] Am I a horrible person for thinking that? Mind you, it's not that I think Shawn's father should kill him. I just can't help but wonder if Shawn would be better off in another world, in another time. He think he's happy now, but I think he could be happier. It's a moot point, since he isn't in another world or another time and he's living life here, but it's still really difficult for me to process, his quality of life and his happiness.
I don't think Shawn's father does or will go through with it. I think he's torn and conflicted, but I don't think he will ever resolve that enough to actually go through with it. It's like Trueman says in the author's note: "I can't say 'yes' to any of these questions. But I can't say 'no' either." And I don't think Shawn's father would go through with it if he can only answer "I don't know." I'm still trying to decide what I think of Shawn's father, though. I know he loves Shawn. But an absent father doesn't gain a whole lot in my mind, even with that.
Before I make any kind of excuses for what I've already written—controversy, controversy, controversy!—I'll stop. Thoughts?
Wow. That's my impression of this book. I felt it extremely strongly within the first ten pages, twenty pages, thirty pages—and even at the end, I'm still thinking "wow" (although a little less strongly). This entire premise is fascinating to me. I loved Shawn—his voice, his personality, his honesty, his earnestness—and I loved being in his mind (especially since no one else ever is or could be).
It's so wonderful to think about Shawn being a secret genius, being so with it inside, being so aware and alert, but it's also so sad, to think that no one will know, no one will know him, no one can hear what he wants to say.
The debate of the book—is Shawn's life worth living—is so conflicting and confusing for me to wrap my head around. I love that Shawn likes his life, that he's happy, that he wants to live and doesn't want to die. But I also agree with the dad that Shawn is trapped inside his own body. Because I believe that when you die, it's not the end of you (wait, this isn't going to turn into a religious hedgehogs v. nonreligious hedgehogs argument, is it? KIDDING), part of me really does think that Shawn would be better off dying and being able to be free, fly and soar like he does during his seizures, all the time. He could communicate and have people know him, and he could really be the Shawn that we saw through his narrative. [Obviously we have different versions, if any, of an afterlife, and I'm just imagining mine.] Am I a horrible person for thinking that? Mind you, it's not that I think Shawn's father should kill him. I just can't help but wonder if Shawn would be better off in another world, in another time. He think he's happy now, but I think he could be happier. It's a moot point, since he isn't in another world or another time and he's living life here, but it's still really difficult for me to process, his quality of life and his happiness.
I don't think Shawn's father does or will go through with it. I think he's torn and conflicted, but I don't think he will ever resolve that enough to actually go through with it. It's like Trueman says in the author's note: "I can't say 'yes' to any of these questions. But I can't say 'no' either." And I don't think Shawn's father would go through with it if he can only answer "I don't know." I'm still trying to decide what I think of Shawn's father, though. I know he loves Shawn. But an absent father doesn't gain a whole lot in my mind, even with that.
Before I make any kind of excuses for what I've already written—controversy, controversy, controversy!—I'll stop. Thoughts?
Monday, May 22, 2006
Helloa!
Well, there were only three votes but that's a majority when that's all there is.
June's book is Stuck in Neutral by Terry Trueman. It has been out for several years in paperback and won a Prinz honor so it should be easy to find or cheap to buy. Except in Alabama, of course.
I hope people's lives slow down a bit so they can read!
June's book is Stuck in Neutral by Terry Trueman. It has been out for several years in paperback and won a Prinz honor so it should be easy to find or cheap to buy. Except in Alabama, of course.
I hope people's lives slow down a bit so they can read!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
