So, here is another friend suggestion. My best friend, Sarah, suggested a romance that she liked so much she read it three times before giving it to me. Since she is the person who made me realize that romance novels are not all "the Sheik and the Virgin Stable Girl" kind of thing, I usually take her suggestions very seriously. I mean, who would have thought that I would have gone from reading Kozinski's The Painted Bird to Nora Robert's Born in Shame and liked every minute of it? That is not an easy transition, let me tell you.
I credit Sarah with giving me books that were a surprising (at least to me) marriage of great character development, good romance (not too cheesy, not too outlandish), and great stories. I mean, I actually cared about the main characters in the books she suggested. So much so that I was sad when the book ended. So, when she said she loved Julie James' newest book Something About You, I was excited.
Unfortunately, this book really didn't live up to the hype. It seemed rushed and underdeveloped. Which is too bad, since the premise of the book was so promising, and the characters were so likable. But, where James had issues is in her conflict resolution. And isn't that what romance is all about? You cannot have a great romance without a little conflict, whether outside or within the relationship. There is quite a bit of that in James' novel, but the resolution to that conflict is limp at best.
The plot premise is actually a take on a traditional "accidental witness to murder" scenario. This can be a lot of fun. I often like books that have an element of "what if the noises you heard/ something you saw were actually something much more sinister?" It reminds me of a really good ghost story. Or a Hitchcock movie. Either way I know I am in for a treat. But... when the story lacks real depth, it comes off like something I have seen a hundred times before. I mean, the cliches of the smoldering (James actually uses that word) FBI agent who ends up head of the investigation into a senator's call girl getting strangled, and the only witness is a gorgeous attorney the agent happens to have a past with... haven't we seen this on L&O? It's fine for serial TV, bad for stand alone novel.
Something only great writers can pull off is spending time with the bad guys, their motives and their incentives. Sometimes that is a really good plot device. Sometimes, it is necessary to understand the intricacies of the plot (see Death Echo review). Sometimes, it just seems like filler. That is the case with this attempt. I mean really, do we care about the nuances of why he killed the "escort?" Nope. Can't say I do. Seeing the plot from the killer's eyes can be disturbing (JD Robb), insightful (Elizabeth Lowell) or just plain fun (Amanda Quick). But, not so much in this case. The plot device seemed corny and cliched without giving the plot any real help. Not sure what the point was, but it was lost on me in any case.
The characters seemed really interesting in the first few chapters when they were sniping and berating each other. Unfortunately, the female lead is way more interesting than the male. This happens with a lot of female authors. It is hard to find a female author who can do justice to a male point of view. Sad, but true. The main character is tough and smart. Unfortunately, she is a little too good to be true. Not the kind of character where I go "hey, I really wish I knew her," but the kind where if I did I would have a major case of "no way anyone is that gorgeous, smart, and tough, without being a total bitch." I mean, where is her vulnerability? Where are the personal quirks that make people worth knowing? And being sexually attracted to someone you really don't like is not being vulnerable, just horny. I think Julie James didn't get that memo.
The FBI agent would have been more interesting if his character didn't seem to be the culmination of every (I'm going to use it again, since the book did) "smoldering police officer/ FBI agent with a heart of gold underneath the rough exterior." I could have figured out the angle without being told explicitly every few pages that was the character James was going for. Again, where is the vulnerability? And those damn quirks are missing again.
But, the main gripe I have with this book is that the main character's initial conflict found a very lame resolution about halfway through the book. That left me wondering if James decided halfway through that she just didn't know how to get the characters from hating each other's guts to falling in love. It wasn't gradual, but more like a band aid being ripped off a wound. It gets the job done, but it isn't pleasant. The way the conflict between the leads was resolved can be summed up in two sentences (and may as well have been).
1. Guy asks girl why she did ...
2. Girl tells him.
Really.
That's it. And then, everyone is understood, forgiven and all happy. Huh? One of my favorite romance plots is the reunion. It can be heartwarming, gut clenching, or just plain explosive in the hands of the right writer. This was not one of those times. AAGGGHHH! That is the sound of my frustration.
So, all in all my issues with Julie James' novel Something About You are plentiful. Yet, none of them make me think James is an awful writer. More like, she had a good idea, writes well enough, but has no depth. Frothy is a word that comes to mind. Not the worst thing a book can be, but I think I will wait for another few years to see if Julie James has matured in her writing before I pick up another. Maybe she WAS rushed, maybe she just needs a few more books under her belt, who knows? I hope she will be around long enough to grow, because I think I would like the results.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Thank you, Donovan
My good friend, Donovan, told me to check out a series of books the other day, and that I would love them. Well, Donovan may be a really great guy, and a good friend, but I don't always agree on reading materials with him. It can be really hard to get advice on my next novel from someone whom I don't agree, but I thought I would take a chance. His summation intrigued me enough that I was willing to pick up the first book.
Laurell K. Hamilton's Guilty Pleasures is definitely just that. I have always been a fan of Buffy and her ilk, those tough but girly women. I would love to think that I would be one if there really were vampires out there. I doubt I am alone in that thinking, since they have been so popular. But, I have never been a huge fan of "vampire books". I often find them cliched and predictable. I mean REALLY predictable. (And that is from someone who loves happy ending books). If anyone were to say, "Jessica, you must like paranormal romance," I would tell them that they are wrong (to an extent), but that label doesn't do this book justice in any way.
It isn't a romance.
I know, I know, crazy as it seems to those of you that have only known me for the last 4 years, since romance (and other "ever after" books) has been the bulk of my reading, but I do enjoy other genres.
This book transcends genres to such an extent that I had no idea where to look for the next one in the store. Truly, it is part paranormal (vampires, werewolves, etc), but also horror, and in some cases pretty violent. Actually, if you keep going through the books in the series, very violent. Yet, the violence is justified by the story (mostly) so not too gratuitous. The strange thing is that a woman is doing most of the violence. I don't usually like books with a lot of violence, since my imagination is often too good. I often subscribe to the Alfred Hitchcock idea that violence is much more terrifying if the mind makes it up, than if it is shown. But, the violence in these books is kind of like that in a Quentin Tarantino movie: over-the-top. It makes it possible to read it and still go to sleep at night.
For someone that likes her women multidimensional, Anita Blake is a protagonist in the best sense of the word. She is unlike any woman I have ever met, but that just makes it all the more fun to read what she is going to do next. She is tough and smart. Yet, she is often scared, terrified and horrified (all her words, since it is written in first person). That makes her all the more real and memorable. It is nice to hear the thoughts of a woman who is going into a nest of vampires be scared of what they can do to her. I mean, she always comes out on top in the end, but still...
The fantasy world that Hamilton creates is better than most in the fantasy book world, because it is our real world with some changes in both history and the here and now. As you move through the series, you get a good look into what the world might be like if vampires, werewolves, ghosts, goblins, and zombies always existed. How we, as people, learned about them. For example, the vampire struggle for voting rights in the US is an interesting parallel to historical questions of the political ramifications of any group (women, black people) voting. Most books about vampires (if you can use them as a gauge for this one) just take the easy road and make the vampires unknown to the rest of the world.
I like the fact the Hamilton didn't take the easy way. She made a truly new world within our own, and that is often the most exciting thing about her work. Her philosophical questions about "what is dead?" is a good example of the protagonist questioning her own beliefs and has us understand how she is thinking. Kind of like the question "what is gay?" or "what is spiritual?" It really makes me wonder.
Unfortunately, even though I thought this book was WAY better than almost every other vampire book out there, the fundamental issue I have with the genre still holds with this one... The cliches of the vampire being effeminate and bisexual that is French, while the werewolf is "big, strapping MAN" is a bit silly. Didn't Ann Rice do this to death? Or maybe I am just over it.
I also thought the book dated itself too much. I have read many books written in the same time frame that didn't have this problem. I mean, Anita actually wears a fanny pack. Need I say more? She seems to either wear early 90's casual (polo shirt and black jeans) or 90's slut (strips of leather and fishnet). I keep having to change her wardrobe in my head. I am not sure why Hamilton spends so much time discussing wardrobe, but it is distracting.
I also enjoyed the first person narration at the beginning, but think it may limit Hamilton's development of other characters. It is hard to get what the others are thinking if it is always written from one perspective. I think that is one of the reasons I never felt like I KNEW any other character but her in these books. Too bad, since it would have been fun to know more about a lot of the others.
In the end, I thought this book was a great read with a protagonist that is so intriguing, I just kept wanting to hear her view on everything. I also liked the new-old world feel Hamilton created. That take is much newer and fresher than any other I have read. Although there were a few issues that I am not sure "vampire books" can really get around. I mean, is there really any other way to describe sucking blood in these books other than "erotic"? The cliches have to stop (don't they?)
Even after reading this book, I have yet to decide whether I like "vampire books" or not. It shouldn't be too hard of a question, but it seems to be for me. I like some, really dislike others, and have yet to find the ONE that will make me a believer. Unfortunately, this wasn't quite it.
Laurell K. Hamilton's Guilty Pleasures is definitely just that. I have always been a fan of Buffy and her ilk, those tough but girly women. I would love to think that I would be one if there really were vampires out there. I doubt I am alone in that thinking, since they have been so popular. But, I have never been a huge fan of "vampire books". I often find them cliched and predictable. I mean REALLY predictable. (And that is from someone who loves happy ending books). If anyone were to say, "Jessica, you must like paranormal romance," I would tell them that they are wrong (to an extent), but that label doesn't do this book justice in any way.
It isn't a romance.
I know, I know, crazy as it seems to those of you that have only known me for the last 4 years, since romance (and other "ever after" books) has been the bulk of my reading, but I do enjoy other genres.
This book transcends genres to such an extent that I had no idea where to look for the next one in the store. Truly, it is part paranormal (vampires, werewolves, etc), but also horror, and in some cases pretty violent. Actually, if you keep going through the books in the series, very violent. Yet, the violence is justified by the story (mostly) so not too gratuitous. The strange thing is that a woman is doing most of the violence. I don't usually like books with a lot of violence, since my imagination is often too good. I often subscribe to the Alfred Hitchcock idea that violence is much more terrifying if the mind makes it up, than if it is shown. But, the violence in these books is kind of like that in a Quentin Tarantino movie: over-the-top. It makes it possible to read it and still go to sleep at night.
For someone that likes her women multidimensional, Anita Blake is a protagonist in the best sense of the word. She is unlike any woman I have ever met, but that just makes it all the more fun to read what she is going to do next. She is tough and smart. Yet, she is often scared, terrified and horrified (all her words, since it is written in first person). That makes her all the more real and memorable. It is nice to hear the thoughts of a woman who is going into a nest of vampires be scared of what they can do to her. I mean, she always comes out on top in the end, but still...
The fantasy world that Hamilton creates is better than most in the fantasy book world, because it is our real world with some changes in both history and the here and now. As you move through the series, you get a good look into what the world might be like if vampires, werewolves, ghosts, goblins, and zombies always existed. How we, as people, learned about them. For example, the vampire struggle for voting rights in the US is an interesting parallel to historical questions of the political ramifications of any group (women, black people) voting. Most books about vampires (if you can use them as a gauge for this one) just take the easy road and make the vampires unknown to the rest of the world.
I like the fact the Hamilton didn't take the easy way. She made a truly new world within our own, and that is often the most exciting thing about her work. Her philosophical questions about "what is dead?" is a good example of the protagonist questioning her own beliefs and has us understand how she is thinking. Kind of like the question "what is gay?" or "what is spiritual?" It really makes me wonder.
Unfortunately, even though I thought this book was WAY better than almost every other vampire book out there, the fundamental issue I have with the genre still holds with this one... The cliches of the vampire being effeminate and bisexual that is French, while the werewolf is "big, strapping MAN" is a bit silly. Didn't Ann Rice do this to death? Or maybe I am just over it.
I also thought the book dated itself too much. I have read many books written in the same time frame that didn't have this problem. I mean, Anita actually wears a fanny pack. Need I say more? She seems to either wear early 90's casual (polo shirt and black jeans) or 90's slut (strips of leather and fishnet). I keep having to change her wardrobe in my head. I am not sure why Hamilton spends so much time discussing wardrobe, but it is distracting.
I also enjoyed the first person narration at the beginning, but think it may limit Hamilton's development of other characters. It is hard to get what the others are thinking if it is always written from one perspective. I think that is one of the reasons I never felt like I KNEW any other character but her in these books. Too bad, since it would have been fun to know more about a lot of the others.
In the end, I thought this book was a great read with a protagonist that is so intriguing, I just kept wanting to hear her view on everything. I also liked the new-old world feel Hamilton created. That take is much newer and fresher than any other I have read. Although there were a few issues that I am not sure "vampire books" can really get around. I mean, is there really any other way to describe sucking blood in these books other than "erotic"? The cliches have to stop (don't they?)
Even after reading this book, I have yet to decide whether I like "vampire books" or not. It shouldn't be too hard of a question, but it seems to be for me. I like some, really dislike others, and have yet to find the ONE that will make me a believer. Unfortunately, this wasn't quite it.
First Time
Here's what I am thinking...
A weekly (or more, or less, depending on my mood) blog about the books I read every day. This can be actual reviews, thoughts and ideas. I tend toward romance novels, entertaining books, horror (just a little, but growing), and old-fashioned classics.
Kind of a crazy collection, but there it is. My choices depend on my mood, my life, the state of affairs in the world and affairs in my own home.
Read along with me, give me advice, and agree or disagree til your heart's content.
My Mom would say that I tend to get in a rut, and just do the same thing until I get bored. That is probably a very accurate description, but I can also flit.
Yes... I am a flitter. I go from thing to thing, and enjoy the constant shuffle and change. Annoying to some, but hopefully entertaining to those that love me.
For those of you that don't (love me, that is), ignore what you will, enjoy what is funny (let's hope there is some of that), and read along with me, if you desire.
Jessica
A weekly (or more, or less, depending on my mood) blog about the books I read every day. This can be actual reviews, thoughts and ideas. I tend toward romance novels, entertaining books, horror (just a little, but growing), and old-fashioned classics.
Kind of a crazy collection, but there it is. My choices depend on my mood, my life, the state of affairs in the world and affairs in my own home.
Read along with me, give me advice, and agree or disagree til your heart's content.
My Mom would say that I tend to get in a rut, and just do the same thing until I get bored. That is probably a very accurate description, but I can also flit.
Yes... I am a flitter. I go from thing to thing, and enjoy the constant shuffle and change. Annoying to some, but hopefully entertaining to those that love me.
For those of you that don't (love me, that is), ignore what you will, enjoy what is funny (let's hope there is some of that), and read along with me, if you desire.
Jessica
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)