Buddy Book Review: The Debt of Tamar by Nicole Dweck

The Debt of Tamar by Nicole Dweck

Completed: March 2, 2014
Length: 330 Pages

Synopsis from Goodreads:

"Scheherazade, the ancient Persian Queen, could tell a good story, But so can Nicole Dweck..." -Book Morsels

During the second half of the 16th century, a wealthy widow by the name of Doña Antonia Nissim is arrested and charged with being a secret Jew. The punishment? Death by burning. Enter Suleiman the Magnificent, an Ottoman "Schindler," and the most celebrated sultan in all of Turkish history. With the help of the Sultan, the widow and her children manage their escape to Istanbul. Life is seemingly idyllic for the family in their new home, that is, until the Sultan's son meets and falls in love with Tamar, Doña Antonia's beautiful and free-spirited granddaughter. A quiet love affair ensues until one day, the girl vanishes.

Over four centuries later, thirty-two year old Selim Osman, a playboy prince with a thriving real estate empire, is suddenly diagnosed with a life-theatening condition. Abandoning the mother of his unborn child, he vanishes from Istanbul without an explanation. In a Manhattan hospital, he meets Hannah, a talented artist and the daughter of a French Holocaust survivor. As their story intertwines with that of their ancestors, readers are taken back to Nazi-occupied Paris, and to a seaside village in the Holy Land where a world of secrets is illuminated.

Theirs is a love that has been dormant for centuries, spanning continents, generations, oceans, and religions. Bound by a debt that has lingered through time, they must right the wrongs of the past if they're ever to break the shackles of their future.

This is a buddy review with Marg from The Adventures of an Intrepid Reader. She has the first part, so you will have to read it over there for it to make sense. She is in black and I am in the red colour.

---------------------

The story jumps around a fair bit from 16th century Spain to modern day Turkey and America, and to Israel and France in the mid 20th century. How did you find these changes in time and characters? Did it flow smoothly for you?

As to the actual time changes themselves, I enjoyed the glimpses of different aspects of history, but just like the characters I wish we had a chance to experience things longer. I think that might be one of the shorter glimpses of the Holocaust, for example, I have ever experienced. And, I read this book because of the ‘different’ aspects of history and still didn’t feel like I learned enough. I suppose as a ‘learning’ experience I should read a non-fiction book and not look for it in fiction.

Had you read much about the expulsion of the Jews from Spain before? I had only read about about it a few months ago in another book so it was interesting to contrast how two authors handled the aspects of the story which were similar.

I have not, actually. I think that is why I was curious about this book. I have read a lot about the Jewish experience, but it was typically surrounding the Holocaust and those aspects of history. I will have to seek out some more books and read more about these times in history.

I thought that the changes in time and setting were handled well but I wanted more from each of the stories. We were just starting to learn about one character and then it would change to another story. I guess wanting more is better than being bored with a particular story and wishing that it would change to someone else though! I did find the story of Davide very interesting. That one thread alone would have made a really good subject for a book. A Jewish baby raised by a Catholic family, the drama when the truth came out, the divergent path of the two brothers. I wanted more!

That’s true. I wasn’t bored at all. I actually found that the book was a relatively fast read!

It was definitely a fast read, and one that it is easy to get invested in. It is actually one of those books that I probably wouldn’t have read if not for the enthusiastic reports from other bloggers. This meant that when we got the offer for the blog tour I was primed to accept it and to read the book. Did the book meet your expectations, were you surprised it was a debut novel and would you recommend it to others?

I have to admit I was just looking for something ‘different’. I wasn’t even aware that it was getting a lot of buzz. I should pay more attention, I guess! I agree with the buzz, though. My only complaint was that I wanted more. And, yes, for a debut, it was very well done. To be honest I didn’t know it was a debut and I think I probably only read it because of the tour. Now, the tour might have changed that when I saw the book around more!

What about you? What did you think of the ending?

I liked the ending. I liked how everything came together. I think that even though it was quick snippets, you find yourself waiting for the ending. I am not sure the book ended as I expected, but that was not a bad thing! I think the ending made me love the book where I was only sort of a fan before that.

I thought it was a good place to end the story. There is a glimpse of hope for the future but it wasn’t a sugar coated fairytale type ending. There was a good mix of history, a touch of romance of the doomed variety, and, for a debut novel, I thought it was a good read. I will definitely look out for Nicole Dweck’s next book.

Me too! Thanks for doing this buddy review with me!

This book was part of a tour hosted by the Historical Fiction Virtual Blog Tour.

The Long Earth by Terry Pratchett and Stephen Baxter

The Long Earth by Terry Pratchet and Stephen Baxter

Completion Date: May 13, 2012
Reason for Reading: Received review copy/New Terry Pratchett/Buddy read with Ana.

1916: the Western Front, France. Private Percy Blakeney wakes up. He is lying on fresh spring grass. He can hear birdsong, and the wind in the leaves in the trees. Where has the mud, blood and blasted landscape of No man's Land gone?

2015: Madison, Wisconsin. Cop Monica Jansson has returned to the burned-out home of one Willis Linsay, a reclusive and some said mad, others dangerous, scientist. It was arson but, as is often the way, the firemen seem to have caused more damage than the fire itself. Stepping through the wreck of a house, there's no sign of any human remains but on the mantelpiece Monica finds a curious gadget - a box, containing some wiring, a three-way switch and a...potato. It is the prototype of an invention that Linsay called a 'stepper'. An invention he put up on the web for all the world to see, and use, an invention that would to change the way mankind viewed his world Earth for ever. And that's an understatement if ever there was one...

...because the stepper allowed the person using it to step sideways into another America, another Earth, and if you kept on stepping, you kept on entering even more Earths...this is the Long Earth. It's not our Earth but one of chain of parallel worlds, lying side by side each differing from its neighbour by really very little (or actually quite a lot). It's an infinite chain, offering 'steppers' an infinite landscape of infinite possibilities. And the further away you travel, the stranger - and sometimes more dangerous - the Earths get. The sun and moon always shine, the basic laws of physics are the same. However, the chance events which have shaped our particular Earth, such as the dinosaur-killer asteroid impact, might not have happened and things may well have turned out rather differently.

But, until Willis Linsay invented his stepper, only our Earth hosted mankind...or so we thought. Because it turns out there are some people who are natural 'steppers', who don't need his invention and now the great migration has begun..

Ana, from things mean a lot, and I were both lucky to get ARC of The Long Earth by Terry Pratchett and Stephen Baxter. This lead to us deciding to read the book together and then answer questions. This book is being marketed as Terry Pratchett's first science-fiction novel in 30 years. I was intrigued by the concept and think that overall this is a promising start to a new series. Ana and I each came up with 4 questions and then answered all 8 of them. My answers are below and you can read hers at her blog.

Ana: I'll start with a slightly unimaginative question - how do you think this book compares to the rest of Terry Pratchett's work? (I won't ask about Stephen Baxter, because I think that like me you hadn't read him before. Do you want to now, though?)
Compared to you, I have hardly read Pratchett. I am so far behind in Discworld that it seems like an overwhelming task to catch-up. This is actually why I jumped at the chance to read this book. I really enjoy Pratchett and this is the start of something new. It seemed a better way to read something by him without worrying about reading order. And, from what I have read of him, you could see Pratchett in this book. The humour was there like always. It was different, but at the same time it was the same. You could tell that he had his hand in it. As for Stephen Baxter, no, I have not read him before but he has always been on my list to get to one day. I guess now I sort of have, but I still want to read something else by him.

Did you think this book worked as a standalone, or did you finish wanting more?
I actually thought this book was a standalone until I got to the ending. Then I wondered if it was just a bad ending, but people are saying it is a series... I would have been happy if the ending was not so abrupt to have this be a standalone. I think standalones once in a while are a good thing. I get tired of keeping track of trilogies and series and stressing about how many I have on the go. Sometimes I just want to read a book and then move on. Sadly, that doesn't happen very often. I will interested to see how this series progresses, though. Don't get me wrong! If I had to start another series, I am glad it is a Pratchett one.

Ana: What was your favourite thing about the concept of The Long Earth? Was there anything about all those possible worlds that you found particularly exciting?
From the very beginning I liked how this book was a 'what if' book. Each time a new place was discovered, it would be a different level of evolution. There would be different plant life or animal life. Something minor would have happened and set this place off on an entirely different path than the one the people were coming from. I thought this was a great idea because it gave them a chance to invent new creatures, climates, and experiences without being implausible. And, I find that exciting. I like the idea of being able to explore the earth in an entirely different way than thought possible and find something entirely new.

If you had never read Pratchett before, would you consider this a good starting point?
Good question. My very first Pratchett was Good Omens. He wrote it with Neil Gaiman and it was a standalone. Discworld just seemed so big because it had been going for years and I was late getting around to wanting to read them. If anyone pays attention, though, I went about Discworld in manageable small doses. I read the Tiffany Aching books. Technically part of the overall series, but can be read just as a small quartet. Then, I read The Amazing Maurice and his Educated Rodents. Again, part of the overall series, but can be read alone. Now I have started to dip into the bigger series, but it still seems huge. This is all to say that while this is not the best book by Pratchett, it is a good introduction to what to expect and might be more manageable for people not sure if they want to tackle a big series.

Ana: Did the consequences of the discovery of the "stepper" ring true to you? Do you think that's how human beings would react if they were given the opportunity to explore other worlds?
Yes, I believe that everything was handled in a way that wasn't far-fetched. For example, the ability to 'step' is discovered and the population of the earth is almost too high, so people start leaving for better chances and opportunities. As our population predictions from the future hint at too many people for our resources, it was a believable idea. It is also believable that too many people leave for new opportunities and then the 'real' earth starts suffering. I can imagine all that actually happening. And, yes, I do think people would leave if given the chance. At this point there are many people looking out at the stars and hoping for a chance to inhabit another planet. This is just something that is closer to home.

What did you think of the characters? Did any stand out for you? Did any bother you?
I think the characters have potential. There are just too many of them to be able to say with any certainty which ones. I guess I should have known this was a series in the very beginning because there are way too many people to explore to just have one book. I think this book was basically about introducing the characters and setting up the world. I am hopeful the later books will deal with the specifics.

Ana: What did you think about the ties Pratchett and Baxter established between scientific concepts and world mythologies? I'm not alone in finding that kind of thing incredibly cool, right?No, you are not alone! It was a very cool idea. I love mythology and folklore and science fiction. Making all three of those work together was an excellent idea! I think it was my favourite part of the book, actually. And, they make things their own. I like when authors take what could be an old idea and add something to make it even slightly different.

Do you think the ‘real’ world and the ‘stepper’ world combined well? What did you think of the mention of things like WWI? Did it make it seem more or less legitimate?
I really liked the addition of 'read' world history like WWI. I was not sure what to think when the book starts with WWI, but once the story gets going and you get more context I thought it was a great idea. They also remember to include the rest of his story later. I don't like loose ends and would have been left wondering.

Tapping the Dream Tree by Charles de Lint - A Once Upon a Time Group Read - Week 2

So, first we took a week off and now I am a day late... Bad blogger! Here are my thoughts, finally, on the questions Carl asked for our Tapping the Dream Tree discussion this week.

1. “Many Worlds are Born Tonight” posits the idea of multiple worlds happening at the same time, each birthed out of the decisions we make, or don’t make. How do you think it would affect you to the option to view all those worlds the way Spyboy seems to do at the end?
I actually really liked this story. We had read it before and I was happy to reread it. It's a fun idea, and one that is explored in many different ways throughout other books, movies, etc. I think the use of a Ferris wheel was a good way to illustrate the idea. It is actually a big philosophical idea and philosophy sort of hurts my head at times, but it is fun to think about nonetheless. In this story it is in answer to some bad steps in the characters life and he finds that he might have to escape his past. I would like to think that it is possible for happier reasons, too, but then if you were happy maybe you wouldn't need to escape in quite that manner. I know that most people rethink situations: "If I did this instead of this, what would have happened?" or inner conversations along the same lines. It is an interesting idea!

2. In “The Buffalo Man” we see how Jilly sees the world vs. how the Buffalo man sees it, at least at the beginning of the story. What do you think of the ideas Charles de Lint examines through these viewpoints? Can you relate to either or both viewpoints?
I think I am sort of in the middle with these characters. I can see both sides of the coin... On the one hand, the Buffalo Man is overwhelmed with the negativity in the world. Then, there is Jilly that never lets much get her down. I can be a bit of both. There are certain things that I cannot entirely get away from, so I do know how the Buffalo Man feels. Being around people that are negative ALL the time is overwhelming and there seems to be a lot of unhappy people in the world. Just logging into places like Facebook and Twitter can be reminders of that. As a result, I have my moments where I know how the Buffalo Man feels. How I try to be, though, is more like Jilly. If it is possible, I avoid those instances and try to focus on the good in the world.

3. In “Second Chances” the narrator states: “There are people that need stories, that can’t exist without them.” What does that statement mean to you?
I think almost everyone can relate to this idea. Even people that do not necessarily read will maybe watch television, listen to music, or go to the movies. There are stories in those mediums, too. I think the majority of the population thrives on stories in their many different forms and need it in their life. That's how I take it, anyway...

Be sure and visit Carl's blog for his answers. Hopefully I will be more organized next week!

Animal, Vegetable, Miracle: A Year of Food Life by Barbara Kingsolver

Animal, Vegetable, Miracle by Barbara Kingsolver

Completion Date: February 6, 2012
Reason for Reading: Buddy Read with Ana.

In her first full-length nonfiction narrative, bestselling author Kingsolver opens readers' eyes in a hundred new ways to an old truth: you are what you eat. The bestselling author returns with a wise and compelling celebration of family, food, nature, and community.

Today Ana and I are finally posting our buddy review of Animal, Vegetable, Miracle by Barbara Kingsolver. It has been a long-time in the making! The poor book in general. I have an ARC... The book came out in 2007. I have started it a couple times, but just never seemed to be in the right mood. I am glad that reading it with Ana gave me that added push to finally move it from the unread shelf to the read. Today I have the first part of the discussion and then you can read the second part on Ana's blog. Enjoy!


Ana: I should probably start by saying that I really enjoyed Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, and that I'm very glad our read-along gave me an excuse to pick it up at last. However, my experience with it was unlike any reading experience that I can remember. Kingsolver writes about her community and her country in great detail, which is completely understandable considering the goals of the book. But for what I think was the first time ever, I experienced a deep sense of culture shock while reading Animal, Vegetable, Miracle. I'm pretty used to reading US-based non-fiction, and while there's a lot about it that's specifically American, there's usually also a lot that applies to my reality. The US and Europe are different in many ways, but they have enough in common that I can pick up any book and feel an instant sense of familiarity. Of course, the fact that I'm exposed to American culture through my media consumption also plays its role. This is why it surprised me so much to find Kingsolver's book so unfamiliar. The American relationship with food she describes here is very much outside my experience. Was this something that you felt, too?

Kelly: I agree, I also enjoyed this book and am so happy that I finally got around to reading it. As I have stated before this was actually an ARC, so it has said on my shelves for an embarrassing amount of time. I felt a real sense of accomplishment when I turned the last page. As to your question, it is a hard one for me to answer. I also have read many books set in the United States and their country borders mine, so we share a lot. That being said, this book was almost too Americanized for me. That’s not to say that I didn’t appreciate the information that she was imparting, but I think I would have liked this book ten times better if was written from a global standpoint. That being said, Canada has many of the same problems with food production as the U.S. I live in a farming community and I have to go to farmers markets and stands to get actual local produce. And that is mainly because we ship things from the U.S. so that even in the winter we have fresh produce.

I am curious about exactly what you mean about the American relationship with food being outside your experience. Can you elaborate?

Ana: First of all, I should probably amend that to "America's relationship with food as Kingsolver describes it". I realise that the USA are a huge country and that there's a lot of diversity from state to state, so there's no way the picture this book paints is 100% representative. Kingsolver herself doesn't claim that it is, so I don't want to misrepresent her by making unfair generalisations.

Having said that, there were quite a few things in the book that she describes as very common in America but which felt very foreign to me: for example, the idea of people not really knowing anymore what it means for a vegetable to be "in season" and needing the vegetannual to guide them. Or the majority of people no longer cooking at home and mainly living on processed food.

In my country, cooking at home is not in the least unusual, even in families where both partners work (which is the majority of families, actually, since most people just can't make ends meet on one income). Kingsolver briefly discusses European countries like Spain and France, and I could relate to that sort of food culture a lot more. I grew up with home-cooked food and with the idea that ready-made meals and fast food are bad for you and should be had very, very rarely. My parents never really made things like cheese, yogurt or pasta from scratch, but they made (and still make) a lot of other things.

When it comes to eating vegetables out of season, we do import and eat certain things all-year round (tomatoes, lettuce, and bananas are probably the main ones, though the first two are grown locally in greenhouses), but the idea of waiting for the right season to eat, say, strawberries or asparagus or fresh basil or cantaloupes is not novel to me. It's something we've always done, mostly because off-season vegetables are a lot more expensive and thus difficult to afford - and also not nearly as good. These are the ideas I grew up with, and so they became part of my general attitude towards food - and I don't think my family is at all unusual in this regard. Also, my father is a big gardener and has always grown his own vegetables, particularly fruit trees. I grew up knowing when apples, grapes, oranges, lemons, peaches, or plums were in season because that's when we got to pick them.

Another thing that differentiates my experience from Kingsolver's is the size and climate of my country. Of course, this just proves her point about the fact that our relationship with food is shaped by our relationship with the land. But for example, Portugal is pretty small, which means that while oranges from the Algarve are by no means local by the one hour's drive definition, they come from a place that's eight hours away. That's not ideal, but it's also not the same as shipping produce from California to the East Coast of the US, or importing bananas from the Dominican Republic. Also, supporting national produce has always been a big part of my country's culture. One of the main supermarket chains uses the fact that their produce is mostly national as their biggest selling point. People do this more for economic reasons than for environmental ones, but the end result is similar (though sometimes this is also justified in nationalistic terms that I'm uncomfortable with). "National" is not the same as "local", of course, but it's a much closer approximation in a country this size than somewhere like the US.

And then there's climate: the months as Kingsolver describes them in Animal, Vegetable, Miracle were just so off to me. The climate in Northern Portugal is by no means tropical, and we do have winters and occasional snow; but the ground never freezes and in the grand scheme of things temperatures are very mild. Spring really does start in March. Basil pots that I get in April are often still green in October. When I came home in December, the lemon tree in my parents' backyard was loaded. Things like this obviously make a huge difference to the notion of "in season", and consequently to our relationship with food.

All this to say that I hear you on wishing the book offered a more global perspective. I realise that's not the book Barbara Kingsolver set out to write, which is fair enough, but I'd love to find some other book that did attempt to do that. If anyone reading this has any recommendations, I would love to hear them.

Something I really wanted to discuss was the relationship between the lifestyle Kingsolver advocates and class. She spends a lot of time dispelling the notion that eating locally is an elite thing, and I believe that this is really important. But do you think the book as a whole really does dispel it? I have some thoughts on this I want to share, but I'd like to hear yours first.

Kelly First, I want to add my two cents to my perspective on what you said and then I will move on to your questions. I live in Canada and we often get grouped in with the U.S. when it comes to our common practices. I was happy when Kingsolver made a quick detour into Montreal, but even still that is enough distance to be entirely different than people on the east coast. I know that when I grocery shop I read where my food is coming from. For example, we have a mushroom farm about 30 mins from my house. There are two major grocery store chains in my area: One sells the mushrooms from the local farm, but the other one imports them from Ontario. Yes, this is still Canada at least, but it baffles me why they are not supporting their local farms. And, if the grocery store that does sell them is sold out, I refuse to buy any at all. They still come from other parts of Canada, but it is the principle of things. Canadians need to support their local farmers and stop importing from other markets. That’s a big thing here right now.

Another thing that I couldn’t help being surprised about is how big a deal she makes about farmer’s markets. In my province they are everywhere. Now, there are the ones that only happen like once a week or whatever, but then there are store-type places that sell local produce and are open depending on the farming season. For that reason, I am well aware of what is in season. Take peas for example. I love peas and you can buy ‘fresh’ peas year-round at the grocery store, but I only actually buy them for the month or so that the farmer’s markets here sell them. Then, I eat frozen ones that are packaged locally. I couldn’t imagine not knowing when seasons are. The big thing around here is apples. While you can generally buy apples throughout the winter; people around here know the best time is the fall. And, people come from all over to pick their own fresh apples at that time.

So, as you can see, I had a hard time with the idea that people do not know the seasons of things. I think that the only time that happens for me is for things that we don’t have the climate to grow, like bananas. I actually think it is fun to wait for the season for things. In the spring there are fresh strawberries, then there is the blueberry season. Or, what about the first fresh watermelon of the year? (And, I am sorry, this generation is entirely missing out on the joys of standing on your patio spitting watermelon seeds with your siblings or whatever.) That makes my mind drift to my pet peeves about the farming industry. Take blueberries for example, people must have never had a wild blueberry because you cannot tell me those organic, huge things taste anywhere near as good. If I can’t find wild blueberries we just do without that year. I suppose my point is that while I am sure many Canadians could relate to this book, I had a harder time with some of it because I just think so differently.

And, now, to your question. It is actually a hard one because my mind was on other subjects and I wasn’t as necessarily concerned with this one. Frankly, I don’t think that eating local has anything to do with ‘elite’, but more to do with the world of ‘quick and easy’. But that is just me. If you have never had anything to do with farming you also don’t necessarily know any different. My grandfather was a farmer, so we grew up with his gardens. I knew when to raid them for my peas because I had been doing it since I was really little. Now that he is gone I think my pea obsession is a combination of actually enjoying them and the memory of when he was alive and gardening. That is all to say that I think about your question differently despite what Kingsolver said in her book. I am curious what you were thinking about it, though.

Don't forget to head to Ana's blog to read the second part!

Tapping the Dream Tree by Charles de Lint - A Once Upon a Time Group Read - Week 1

Good morning! Once again Carl and I are reading a Charles de Lint book together, but for a fun change Susan has decided to join in, too. We will be posting on Tuesdays for the next little while about the book Tapping the Dream Tree. It is a short story collection that we have broken up into 3 stories a week and will be taking turns coming up with questions and then answering them. This first week I came up with some questions and will be answering them below. Be sure to visit Carl and Susan's blog to see their answers. And, if you have the book and want to join in let us know. It is not too late to catch-up.

1. One of the common themes in de Lint’s books is the use of music. What did you think of the musical elements of in ‘Ten for the Devil’? Did it make a believable story?
I think that de Lint does a wonderful job of using music in his books. It has played at least some role in everything I have read by him before and it is obvious that music is an important thing to him. It means that the music parts of the book really come alive when you read about them. And, they are different. There are conventional musicians, but there are also moments where the music takes on a life of its own. This story is one such example. Carl and I recently met Robert Lonnie in Spirits in the Wires. As a result I knew what to expect from him, but technically Spirits in the Wires hadn't happened yet chronologically. This was an introduction to Lonnie if you were reading in order. Music is a very important part of Lonnie's character. It is addressed in greater detail in the novel, but this book hints at the importance. What the story does centre around is Staley, a woman that is very gifted in her music, but was unaware of her real powers. I thought the connection between her music and the 'other' world was a really nice idea. It is something that has happened before with de Lint and I really think he writes it in such a way that it is believable.

2. Once again ‘Wingless Angels’ uses music as, what turns out to be, a major plot device. What did you think of the way music was used? What were your thoughts on a canister of film turning out to predict the future? Were you sceptical of the story at all?
I wasn't really sure what to make of this story. On the one hand it was rather interesting; but on the other hand I thought it was kind of bizarre. I wasn't entirely sure what to make of it for a while, but I think when it ended I was a huge fan. Actually, I thought ending was really great. I think my initial problem was how everything was so orchestrated. It didn't entirely seem believable to me. I also have never really been sure about strange plot elements about predicting the future. I wasn't sure if it was going to work for me. So, I guess I had my sceptical moments. But, as always, de Lint comes through. The story grew on me and by the end I was very happy with it. I think part of my initial problem is one of the main characters in the story is called Christiana. That is the name of another major Newford character, so I kept expecting it to be her and it wasn't. It confused me.

3. The third story, ‘The Words That Remain’, was a bit of a ghost story, but it also used ideas that we can probably relate to ourselves at one time or another. What did you think of how de Lint chose to address this?
Now, this story, this story was good. This is a really creative look at conforming and changing yourself to suit someone else. I feel like if I say too much about it, though, it will ruin the story. I would rather other people go out and and read it. I was happy to see a Christy story. After being introduced to him more in Spirits in the Wires I am even more interested to see more from him. I think of all the talents that the characters have in these books, his being a writer is the one I am able to relate to more. I am a reader, after all. I don't really paint and my musical skills are limited. So, while I enjoy those other characters, I like that Christy is the character that captures everything.

Now, I open it up to you readers. Have you read this collection? Feel free to chime in. And, what are your favourite Charles de Lint books? Carl and I will likely read another one together at some point in the future, so recommendations are always welcome.

The Dressmaker by Kate Alcott

The Dressmaker by Kate Alcott

Completion Date: April 1, 2012
Reason for Reading: Review Copy from Random House Canada/Titanic Week at Historical Tapestry.

Just in time for the centennial anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic comes a vivid, romantic, and relentlessly compelling historical novel about a spirited young woman who survives the disaster only to find herself embroiled in the media frenzy left in the wake of the tragedy.

Tess, an aspiring seamstress, thinks she's had an incredibly lucky break when she is hired by famous designer Lady Lucile Duff Gordon to be a personal maid on the Titanic's doomed voyage. Once on board, Tess catches the eye of two men, one a roughly-hewn but kind sailor and the other an enigmatic Chicago millionaire. But on the fourth night, disaster strikes.

Amidst the chaos and desperate urging of two very different suitors, Tess is one of the last people allowed on a lifeboat. Tess’s sailor also manages to survive unharmed, witness to Lady Duff Gordon’s questionable actions during the tragedy. Others—including the gallant Midwestern tycoon—are not so lucky.

On dry land, rumors about the survivors begin to circulate, and Lady Duff Gordon quickly becomes the subject of media scorn and later, the hearings on the Titanic. Set against a historical tragedy but told from a completely fresh angle, The Dressmaker is an atmospheric delight filled with all the period's glitz and glamour, all the raw feelings of a national tragedy and all the contradictory emotions of young love.

Today is a buddy review with Marg from Adventures of an Intrepid Reader. The post originally ran on Historical Tapestry in its entirety for Titanic Week, but we have divided it into two parts to post on our own blogs. I have the first part and Marg will be posting the second part on her blog.

K: The Dressmaker has had a lot of buzz surrounding it since its release. It started because of good publicity and positive reviews, but a bit of controversy has happened as well. The big claim for the book was that it was a stunning debut, but it has since been revealed that Kate Alcott is a pen name and this is not her first book after all. She was just a struggling author who was having a run of bad luck, wrote this wonderful book, and then couldn’t sell it. That is my understanding anyway. I have had my copy since before the controversy, so I don’t really care about it so much. I just think it is interesting that this book only appealed to publishers because it was a debut. I wanted to read it because of the positive reviews and because it is a fictionalized telling of Lady Duff Gordon. It is almost fitting that Alcott chose to write about Duff Gordon because controversy surrounded her, too. Why did you want to read The Dressmaker?

M: I had forgotten about the controversy about the author’s identity. I was interested in reading the book because of the Titanic connection. I haven’t gone on the reading odyssey about the Titanic that you have, but I was sufficiently interested to choose one book to read and hopefully enjoyed.

Having said that the Titanic was the main interest, I was somewhat surprised by how little the events on the boat and during the sinking actually took up in terms of page space. Did that surprise you?

K: I had forgotten about the controversy when I went to read the book, but I couldn’t help thinking about it when it came to reading the book. It was just one of those things.

As to your question, not really. As the guy is alway saying, you know what is going to happen, so why continue to read books about the Titanic. I have found a lot of the fiction that has came out this year has the Titanic as a backdrop, but it is about more than the actual event. I think it is the only way it can stay fresh and justify countless books about it. There is only so many things you can say about the ship sinking and keep it interesting. (To be even more honest, I think some books stuck something Titanic related in just to cash in on the centennial, but that’s just me.)

So, let’s get down to business. What did you think of the book overall?

M: Sure you know what was going to happen, but I think that spending a little bit more time on the disaster itself would have helped me to care more about the characters. I suspect you are right that there are more than a few books out there that were put out just to cash in on the centenary remembrances.

In terms of the actual book, I was …. underwhelmed.

I really liked hearing about the reporter trying to find out what happened, and even about the hearings, but I was disappointed by the love triangle which didn’t feel realistic to me, especially one aspect of the triangle!

The writing was okay - it was certainly an easy enough read, but the execution of the plot didn’t really work all that well for me. How was it for you?

K: I don’t know what I was. This is the last of the Titanic books I have read for me to review ,and I finished it before many of the others, because I didn’t know what I wanted to say about it. When it came to actually reading it I found it to be a page-turner, but I have no idea why. I was happy to see a book about Lady Duff Gordon because there is so much mystery surrounding her and her husband. I have never read the testimonies from the reviews, but I do know that Lady Duff and her husband were two of only 12 people in a lifeboat. Many of the other lifeboats were not full either, but this is the one that received the most attention. It has been said that money was paid to the crew members in the boat. The Duff Gordon’s claimed it was because the moment the Titanic sank, the crew stopped getting paid and they wanted to help them out. The more interesting story is that they paid them to not go back for others. And, the picture really happened, too, but not until afterwards. They didn’t get on the Carpathia and immediately pose. The picture followed the handing out of money in a very public manner. I just can’t see if the money was paid for nefarious reasons such a big deal would be made of it.

So, I guess to get back to your question, this book bothered me. The Duff Gordons have been made some of the scapegoats of history as well as others from the ship, but nothing was ever conclusively proven. There was no innocent until proven guilty. The controversy surrounding the Gordons really did destroy their reputations and he really did leave and move back to England. I think I just hoped for a book that didn’t vilify. Other than the question of the money, their boat was not the only one that wasn’t full and only one lifeboat went back and they waited until the screams died down. I also didn’t like the love triangle, but we can discuss that more after. What did you think of the story of Lifeboat 1?

Don't forget to visit Marg's Blog for the second part of the discussion.

My thanks to Random House Canada for my copy of this book.

The Tree of Life - A Movie Review

Today is another review of a movie watched by Suey and I. For those that missed it, we started with the BBC mini-series Sherlock Holmes and watched the first season. You can read my part of the discussion by clicking here. Then, we decided we should do it again and I suggested we try Midnight in Paris because I had been seeing it mentioned around the blogosphere. You can read my thoughts on the movie here. For this time around, Suey suggested The Tree of Life. You can read my answers to her questions below and be sure to head over to her blog to read her answers to my questions.


1. Did you have any expectations for this movie? If so, did it turn out like you expected?
- I really had no expectations for this movie. I had never even heard of it before, but you suggested it and I didn't have any reason to not watch it. I did glance at a synopsis when we were discussing when to watch it, but that was as far as I went. I find the synopsis makes this movie sound so simple, but it is much more complicated.

2. What do you think "the point" was of this movie? What were we supposed to learn, if anything?
Well, before I watched the movie I thought it was about a boy whose brother dies and he suffers from loss of innocence. But, I still didn't really get what happened to the boy. I also never really saw the loss of innocence because when the children were young there were always the three of them. It wasn't until he was old that you see him alone (played by Sean Penn) and I didn't really get it all. Instead, it is one of those movies where there is a lot of imagery is used to tell a story. I always tell people I am a bread and butter reader when it comes to storyline. I would much rather have everything laid out straight, with a few mysteries being fine, but not a story where you basically have to guess what happened.

3. What were your favorite parts, if any.
I do agree with people who say this is a 'pretty' movie. It might not have made sense a lot of the time, but at least those moments were nice to look at.

4. In the end, are you glad or bugged that we took the time to watch it? :)
Well, the entire experience started out interesting. We were watching through my computer because the Blu-Ray player is driving me nuts (turns out we have a loose cord). So, I push play and we sit there... No sound. And, the movie starts with some of those imagery moments, so I have to admit between the sound and the strange pictures on the screen that I thought the movie was entirely ruined. When I figured out that someone muted my sound and that those pictures were actually part of the movie, I got a bit scared. I actually am glad we watched it. The Twitter conversation was fun, the random commentary from the guy in the background was entertaining, and it is much easier to write this review than say the one for Midnight in Paris because that was a gushing positive experience.

5. What movie did 'the guy' watch after this one, and did it help ease the pain?
Yeah, he hated this movie. He had some colourful things to say the entire time. So, he decided he was going to stay up and watch another movie. For reasons that I am not quite sure, he chose Mona Lisa's Smile and he didn't like it. So, no, he just had a bad movie night all around.

6. Would you recommend this to anyone?
I think people that like artistic movies would probably like this one. I just don't really like artistic movies myself...

Don't forget to visit Suey's post! I believe that our next viewing experience will be The Help. I have seen it, but Suey has not. We have both read the book, though. Tune in soon to see our thoughts on the experience!

Spirits in the Wires by Charles de Lint - Discussion Part 2

Spirits in the Wires by Charles de Lint

Completion Date: April 3, 2012
Reason for Reading: Buddy Read With Carl at Stainless Steel Droppings.

Part 2 of our 2 Part Discussion. You can read Part 1 here.

At a popular Newford online research and library Web site called the Wordwood, a mysterious crash occurs. Everyone visiting the site at the moment of the crash vanishes from where they were sitting in front of their computers. Christy Ridding's girldfriend Saskia disappears right before his eyes, along with countless others.

To rescue their missing friends, Christy and his companions must journey into Newford's otherworld, where the Wordwood, it transpires, has a physical presence of its own...

1. This book made several references to incidents that happened in other stories. Were there any in particular that stood out to you?
One of the first things I observed about this book was how it chronologically falls between The Onion Girl and Widdershins. I have read both so I knew where they were coming from, but I also knew where they were headed. I actually liked that this book filled in a bit of the in-between time. It wasn't a Jilly story, but it still contained characters like Christy, Geordie, Holly, etc. I have always been interested in Christy because he has always been a secondary character in the other novels that I have read by de Lint. It was interesting to see the full picture of who he is as a character. It was also interesting to learn more about his Shadow because she has popped up in other books, but again as only a secondary character. The other story that came to mind was the one about Holly and the Pixies. That is a short story that we read last year and it was referenced several times throughout the book. It was interesting to see the story almost developed upon for a novel. I am not sure what came first, though. The novel could even have came before the story.

2. Suzi and Aaron were certainly the most distrusted characters as the story progressed. What were your feelings about them throughout the story and were they any different when all was said and done?
Yes, Aaron. I wanted to talk about him this week anyway. Can we say 'wow'? What a huge turnaround he went through during the course of this book. I was a bit sceptical to be honest, but then the end happened and I thought it was believable. I actually sort of expected him to do something amazing to change impressions of him. I also think he was believable and now I want a book about him and Suzi because I think there is more to look into there. I didn't get caught up in Suzi as much, though. I don't think we could really appreciate her strangeness because we didn't get enough background. I did think it was strange she was there at all, though. She sort of came out of no where, but again it all worked out in the end.

3. Charles de Lint wrote some chapters from a first person point of view and others were not. How did you feel about this back and forth style of storytelling?
It didn't really bother me at all. I actually paused for a moment and thought 'He did?'. I thought it worked really well for the type of story that he was telling. There were times when first person point of view wouldn't have worked and then there are times when first person point of view worked the best. I think he figured out the best way to tell the story.

4. As the story came to a close, which character(s) were you most drawn to? Which one(s) did you make an emotional connection with?
Well, I want to see more from Holly, Geordie, Christy, Aaran, Saskia, Christiana, and Suzi. I think they all have more stories to tell and I want to know more. Some I have read about a lot, but others I feel like we have just scratched the surface of who they. Geordie of course features prominently in Widdershins, so we know where he is headed. And, Christy and Saskia are still together, so we know that much, but they are all great characters and through them we experience even more great characters.

5. We seem to ask some version of this question whenever we discuss his works: what makes Charles de Lint's stories so special? Or to bring it down to just this particular story, what, if anything, makes Spirits in the Wires a special book?
I love Charles de Lint because he easily takes the unbelievable and makes it believable. When I visit Newford I feel like I could entirely go there and visit with Jilly or see Geordie making music on a street corner. It just seems like a real place. I want to go there each and every time I read about it. I read a lot of books each year, but there is just something about Newford and the characters that inhabit it that sticks with you long after you have closed the pages of the book that other books don't seem to have. I constantly want to read more from there, but at the same time I want to go back and revisit ones I have read before. There is just something special about this series. As to Spirits in the Wire, I was happy to visit with old friends. These names have come up or have been explored in detail, so it was nice to see a name I knew and experience a new chapter in their life. It's almost like the adventures they get into are secondary to the great characterizations that de Lint comes up with.

6. Any other thoughts you would like to share about Spirits in the Wires?
um-mm... This book is another example of why everyone should rush out and read de Lint.

Ready Player One by Ernest Cline

Ready Player One by Ernest Cline

Completion Date: January 21, 2012

Reason for Reading: Fun!

At once wildly original and stuffed with irresistible nostalgia, READY PLAYER ONE is a spectacularly genre-busting, ambitious, and charming debut—part quest novel, part love story, and part virtual space opera set in a universe where spell-slinging mages battle giant Japanese robots, entire planets are inspired by Blade Runner, and flying DeLoreans achieve light speed. 

It’s the year 2044, and the real world is an ugly place.

Like most of humanity, Wade Watts escapes his grim surroundings by spending his waking hours jacked into the OASIS, a sprawling virtual utopia that lets you be anything you want to be, a place where you can live and play and fall in love on any of ten thousand planets.

And like most of humanity, Wade dreams of being the one to discover the ultimate lottery ticket that lies concealed within this virtual world. For somewhere inside this giant networked playground, OASIS creator James Halliday has hidden a series of fiendish puzzles that will yield massive fortune—and remarkable power—to whoever can unlock them.

For years, millions have struggled fruitlessly to attain this prize, knowing only that Halliday’s riddles are based in the pop culture he loved—that of the late twentieth century. And for years, millions have found in this quest another means of escape, retreating into happy, obsessive study of Halliday’s icons. Like many of his contemporaries, Wade is as comfortable debating the finer points of John Hughes’s oeuvre, playing Pac-Man, or reciting Devo lyrics as he is scrounging power to run his OASIS rig. 

And then Wade stumbles upon the first puzzle. 

Suddenly the whole world is watching, and thousands of competitors join the hunt—among them certain powerful players who are willing to commit very real murder to beat Wade to this prize. Now the only way for Wade to survive and preserve everything he knows is to win. But to do so, he may have to leave behind his oh-so-perfect virtual existence and face up to life—and love—in the real world he’s always been so desperate to escape.

A world at stake.
A quest for the ultimate prize.
Are you ready?

I started the year out listening to this book on audio, but then the guy walked off with my mp3 player and lost my spot. This lead to me switching to reading it. When I was in the midst of this I was discussing possible buddy read with Melissa from Book Nut and we decided we would review this one together. We just asked each other questions. Here are my answers:

1. First off, what did you think?
I was very impressed. This book is like the nerds answer to literature. Plus, it is a love affair with the 80's which is a bit entertaining. I had been enjoying the book immensely for quite some time, but I think the moment I decided I was going to love it was when he dedicated an entire chapter to the band rush and their album 2112.

2. I'm going to ask a personal question: are you old enough to have gotten the 80s pop culture references in the book? Did it work for you as a plot device/gimmick?
I did get many of the 80s pop culture references. Not all of them, though. The funny part of the whole experience is I have never been much of a gamer and here I am reading a novel that centres around games from the 80's. I was very happy when there was lots of explanation because I had never heard of most of those before. The music, the movies, and the culture, though, I think I got most of it. And, I loved that aspect of the book. I don't think I would have enjoyed it as much if it was just a dystopian novel with a game as its main feature.

3. So, what did you think of the whole contest -- did the book work as a dystopian adventure story?
I liked the book because it was a bit different from the 'typical' books out there. It was still a dystopian novel, though, and they are very popular right now. I enjoyed the contest. I think it worked rather well overall. I enjoyed watching things play out and the thrill of moving on to the next level. I also enjoy how he didn't make things too simple and there were epic battles with the enemies. It was a book about a lot of things and I think that made it all the more special.

4. Did you like any of the characters? What did you think of the whole real vs. virtual life aspect of the story?
Well, who hasn't dreamed of escaping? The Oasis offers the perfect way to do that, right? I am not so sure I could imagine vanishing entirely, but they didn't have a great world to live in at the best of times. The world now is getting more about having a 'real life' identity and an 'online' identity. Just look at the world of blogging, online dating, etc. I think he picked a topic that most people can easily relate to.

As to the characters, I think they all worked well together. If the book was just about Wade it might have got a bit boring. It makes it more human when he has friends, enemies, and even a love interest. I even enjoyed James Halliday as we learned more and more about him as the book progressed.

5. So, I thought he got a little moralistic at the end... what did you think of the ending?
Yeah, the ending was just... weird... I didn't really feel it had the same tone as the rest of the book. It was almost like Cline had this ending in mind for the entire writing process and didn't much care if it didn't fit the book as well as it could have. I have all ready started forgetting the parts of the ending I didn't care for and just remembering the overall experience in a positive light.

You can read Melissa's answers to the questions I asked her by clicking here.

Friday Reads - 5th Edition, A Sherlock Holmes Viewing Experience, and a Few Other Things...

Friday Reads 5th Edition

I only read the introduction to this book. I am supposed to read it for a buddy read this month, though, so I really should get around to it soon. I want to finish the Kingsolver first, though.

I didn't really need another short story collection, but this came in for me at the library and I decided to see about finishing it to post about on Valentine's day. It just seemed to be good timing.

I am really enjoying this book, but with all my other 'projects' it keeps getting pushed to the side. When I do read it I spend a bit of time with it, but obviously I need to spend a bit more!

This will probably be on here for the month. I am just reading a story or 2 here and there depending on how much time I have. I think this is going to be my method for the year because I have many short story collections that are unread.

This book continues to be rather interesting. For one thing, I think it is brave for people to share their experiences in such a public format. It also gives you things to think about. I like to say I am pretty open-minded, but there are times where I probably could be more so...

I am about halfway through this book and really enjoying it. I have been brain-storming ways to have even a little garden this year, which I do most years anyway, and I was explaining to the cc yesterday that I would really like to learn how to make cheese.

At the rate I am going this is going it will be 2013 before I finish it. It's my own fault. I never have enough hours in the day for everything that I want to do and I always have too many books on the go!

Watching BBC Sherlock Season 1: A Q & A About the Experience with Suey and Melissa.

Suey's Questions:

-- Favorite thing about this show?
Well, first up I am very happy that Sherlock Holmes is played by someone other than Robert Downey Jr. As much as I enjoy the movie versions he is just not who I had pictured for Holmes. I am a bit torn on the two actors playing Watson, though. They are both very different; but each have their strong points. On a more serious note, my favourite things about the show are the humour, creativity of changing the time period entirely and making it work, and the chemistry between Watson and Holmes. Obviously that ties into the humour over and over again, but what I actually mean is that the two actors work well together.

-- Least favorite thing about the show?
Okay, I am sure there is probably something, but nothing is really coming to mind at the moment.

-- Analyze the characters.
Well, first there is Sherlock. I think that he is played really well. I can picture the character that I have read about easily while watching him on the screen. He might not be a perfect casting choice, but that is the hard part about watching books become movies. I enjoy watching his mind work and his humour even if he is not necessarily trying to be funny. I think it is a good interpretation of how Sherlock works. Then, we have Watson. When I saw him in the very beginning I didn't really think he matched what I had always pictured as a Watson, but as I continued to watch I couldn't help thinking he captures the character very well. He is a perfect companion for Holmes and plays off him very well. I also enjoy that instead of writing their adventures into books he is blogging about it. I am just going to go with the two main characters.

-- How is this one different from other Sherlock shows?
I have to admit that I have only really watched Sherlock the one other time and that was just the Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law movies. I believe that their core the shows are very similar, but the writers also have their own interpretations of how to show it on the screen. Also, this show is actually British with British actors. The movies are not. They do have things like the humour, the connection of Holmes and Watson, etc in common, though.

-- Are you most into the stories? Or the characters? Or the actors?
I think it is a little bit of both. The stories really come together and I enjoy learning both the back stories and watching Holmes get to the bottom of the cases.  Then, I really enjoy both Holmes and Watson. They make the watching experience a lot of fun. And, in order for them to work so well they have to be played by wonderful actors. So, I enjoy all three.

My Questions:

-- Have you ever read the original novels? If so, how do you think the characters compare to those in the books? 
I have read some of the original books, but I haven't finished. I would like to catch-up this year, though. I have read enough to get an idea of the characters, though, and like I said above they might not be exactly as I pictured them, but they still have a lot going for them.

-- Which was your favourite episode of the 3?
I think the very first one was my favourite just because I enjoyed the puzzle of it all. But then, I also enjoyed when Moriarty was introduced through a voice on the phone and Holmes had to solve puzzles to save them all. I really think all three episodes had redeeming qualities that made them all very enjoyable overall.

-- Did you like how the show is set in the present day?
I love it! I think it opens up much more creativity for the show to break away a bit from the 'common' story. It also opens up the door for new technology. In the very first episode when they are having a press conference and Sherlock keeps sending text messages to all of the reporters telling them the police are wrong is priceless. This is not something that would have been possible if they had set it in the past.

-- What do you think of how while Sherlock is thinking words appear on the screen instead of the watcher being left in the dark.
I love this idea! The guy does, too. I like watching how Sherlock comes up with his ideas. The way that he thinks is wonderful. We should all be more observant!

-- What do want to see in the second season?
Well, I am going to be obvious and just say I want to know how the cliff-hanger ending is addressed.

Final Thoughts: This was fun! I don't watch a lot of things as a group, so I was excited to do something a bit different. If you have read my blog with any regularity you will notice that I enjoy buddy reads, so this was the next possible step. I also think we chose a great show to try this with. I look forward to more review with Suey and Melissa in the future, but also to more Sherlock!

Then, I just wanted to inform everyone that there will be the first months wrap-up post on Lu's blog today. Be sure and check it out and make sure you didn't miss anything. The Linky and such for February will be on this blog on the 28th. I hope to see people participate!

Lastly, I know I won't have time to join in for this event, but if anyone needs someone to write to I will happily write back. I also collect postcards... Just saying! (If you need my address just ask.)

Foundation by Isaac Asimov (Foundation Trilogy, Book 1) - A Group Discussion Part 2

One of the great masterworks of science fiction, the Foundation novels of Isaac Asimov are unsurpassed for their unique blend of nonstop action, daring ideas, and extensive world-building. The story of our future begins with the history of Foundation and its greatest psychohistorian: Hari Seldon.
For twelve thousand years the Galactic Empire has ruled supreme. Now it is dying. Only Hari Seldon, creator of the revolutionary science of psychohistory, can see into the future—a dark age of ignorance, barbarism, and warfare that will last thirty thousand years. To preserve knowledge and save mankind, Seldon gathers the best minds in the Empire—both scientists and scholars—and brings them toa bleak planet at the edge of the Galaxy to serve as a beacon of hope for future generations. He calls his sanctuary the Foundation.

But soon the fledgling Foundation finds itself at the mercy of corrupt warlords rising in the wake of the receding Empire. And mankind’s last best hope is faced with an agonizing choice: submit to the barbarians and live as slaves—or take a stand for freedom and risk total destruction.

This is the second-half, and thus conclusion, of the group read and discussion of Foundation by Isaac Asimov. I have wanted to read Asimov for years, but for whatever reason have never got around to his books before. I didn't even know what his books were about other than some guesses based solely on his titles. Foundation has been on my radar for a while, but this is my first time actually sitting down with the book. I am very glad I tend to join all of Carl's read-alongs because we usually have some similarities in our reading and I tend to read books that have been on my TBR pile for ages. I am looking forward to more from the Foundation Trilogy and more group reads as the year progresses. Now, on to the questions from the second-half of the book.

Salvador Hardin was the first character in the book that we got to spend any significant time with. What are your thoughts on the grande finale of his plotting, scheming and maneuvering to get the Foundation through to the next Seldon crisis?
I am glad that we were able to spend time with Salvador Hardin. When we first meet him he is still relatively young, but then the book jumps ahead a few years and we also get to see him when he is older. Asimov chooses to cut out all the unnecessary years in between, but will fill in details from that period if he thinks they are beneficial to the story. I have to admit that I am a bit of a leery of a system that lets people predict the future. I have never been a big fan of the idea that everything is planned out for us ahead of time. I much rather believe that there really is such thing as free-will. So, I have to admit that I have been second-guessing this book the entire time. I will be curious to see how things play out in the future books.

As to Salvador Hardin, he is doing everything in his power to keep the Foundation on the track that he believes was set out for him by Seldon. The thing is that he does not entirely know what that path is, so he has to guess what the best course of action is to get the results he believes in. So far things seem to be going to plan, but in the process Hardin has to be manipulative, sneaky, and in control of things. On the one hand, you can't help being appalled at the things he does to get the actions he desires. On the other hand, I couldn't help being impressed by how he works the system to get the result that he so desires. I am not sure if he is a good guy or a bad guy. He is just doing what he thinks is right even if it is not necessarily 'right'. Seldon did not lay out a path for them, but they are on a path nonetheless.

What are your thoughts on the way in which control/manipulation to achieve Foundation ends began to shift with The Traders?
In the first part of the book most of the focus on the political leaders and their systems. During the course of the second part of the book, though, we begin to see more of the 'common' folk make an appearance. The chapters that cover The Traders are very different than the ones that cover the leaders and it made for some interesting reading. First of all, those traders had some very cool items to trade. I wouldn't mind having some of them myself. Obviously they go about selling them in a sometimes underhanded manner and they don't always work like they promise they will, but still, interesting items.

This book has a strong religious background. The religious leaders have the control of the people and surpass the power of even though they believe themselves in power. This idea of religious superiority is one of the things that controls the people. Traders seem gifted at using the ideas of the people to gain what they want. It was good reading to watch them manipulate the situations to where they wanted them. The Traders really reminded me of Hans Solo from Star Wars, actually. I can see George Lucas reading these books and taking inspiration from them when he made the movies.

One of the interesting things about Seldon’s psychohistory is how much one man can actually affect it. In Foundation we see characters like Hardin and Mallow as key figures for positioning things just right to work towards Seldon’s later predictions. Do you see this as a contradiction to what Seldon said about psychohistory at the beginning of our story or part of an overall plan? Discuss.
I am very torn about this idea. I have been thinking about this question for a couple days because I am not entirely sure it is answerable. Foundation is still a work in progress, so you really do not know what will play out by the time the trilogy comes to an end. I think that this is the sort of series where you really can't speak to anything without reading all of the books. That being said, you can make predictions of a sort. As I said in the first paragraph, I am still a bit unsure about the whole idea of psychohistory. It all seems a bit too perfect to me, but we will see how it plays out. I am thinking it all part of an overall plan. It is not something that has been revealed yet, though, so a lot can change as the reading continues. What I do know is that when Seldon appears he is always rather cryptic, so it is hard to say if they even are on the path that he predicted. When someone speaks in general terms it is very easy to manipulate what has happened to fit what they are saying. So, they are a path, but who really knows if it is really 'the' path.

Did you see similarities or differences between the way in which Salvador Hardin and Hober Mallow operated and what are your thoughts about this final section of Foundation? Would you have been content as a reader back then with how everything played out?
I enjoyed the final section of the book. Salvador Hardin and Hober Mallow might be different people, but at their core they are the same. They both ultimately have the same goals in mind and will come to those goals anyway that they see fit. They have both been raised with the same ideas of Seldon's predictions and the path that they are on so it is easy to see that they are both after basically the same thing but going about it in slightly different ways. And, because Seldon's path is only hinted at and never expressed entirely, it is easy to interpret the same things differently.

As to the ending, I am glad to know that there is more in store for us and we will hopefully get to see things played out. That being said, if I was living back then I think I would have turned the last page of this book and been baffled. There are many unanswered questions. I suppose it would have made me think about the book trying to figure things out, but at the same time it would almost be disappointing not to see how Seldon's predictions play out.

Has your concept/thoughts of what Seldon was trying to do changed at all since the book began?
um, not really. I have been a bit hesitant in making any real theories about things, though. I am just sitting back and enjoying the ride. I look forward to where we go next.

Any final thoughts on the story as a whole, its structure, what it did or did not accomplish, how it worked for you, etc?
First, the second half of the book acknowledge that women exist. I was very impressed by the couple cameo performances. The book overall didn't entirely lack without mention of women, but at the same time how can you have an entire society without at least mentioning that they exist period? I never understand how books can just leave out half the population.

You can read my first post about this book by clicking here.

Foundation Series:
Foundation
Foundation and Empire
Second Foundation

Foundation by Isaac Asimov (Foundation Trilogy, Book 1) - A Group Discussion Part 1

One of the great masterworks of science fiction, the Foundation novels of Isaac Asimov are unsurpassed for their unique blend of nonstop action, daring ideas, and extensive world-building. The story of our future begins with the history of Foundation and its greatest psychohistorian: Hari Seldon.

For twelve thousand years the Galactic Empire has ruled supreme. Now it is dying. Only Hari Seldon, creator of the revolutionary science of psychohistory, can see into the future—a dark age of ignorance, barbarism, and warfare that will last thirty thousand years. To preserve knowledge and save mankind, Seldon gathers the best minds in the Empire—both scientists and scholars—and brings them toa bleak planet at the edge of the Galaxy to serve as a beacon of hope for future generations. He calls his sanctuary the Foundation. 

But soon the fledgling Foundation finds itself at the mercy of corrupt warlords rising in the wake of the receding Empire. And mankind’s last best hope is faced with an agonizing choice: submit to the barbarians and live as slaves—or take a stand for freedom and risk total destruction.

Today is the first post for the group read of Foundation by Isaac Asimov as part of the Science-Fiction Experience hosted by Carl at Stainless Steel Droppings. I am very late, but at least it is still Monday.

For the purpose of satisfying curiosity, is this your first time reading Foundation or have you read it before?
This is my first time reading Foundation. I am terrible with classic fantasy/science-fiction and actually reading it. I always plan to, but it never seems to happen. I am very happy I am actually reading some at the moment. I am especially happy to be reading science-fiction period. I don't read nearly enough of it any more.

For those reading Foundation for the first time, what expectations did you have going in and has it met them or surprised you in any way?
I really had no idea. I had heard of the books, but I had no idea what they were about. I was just expecting science-fiction of some nature. I know that some people have told me they are intimidated by Asimov. For me, he is just one of countless authors that I haven't got around to reading yet. I don't read the back of books because even in their not spoiling I feel they spoil things for me. I like the surprise of finding everything out. Even with book reviews I read just enough to see if I am going to like a book and then see if the author of the post liked it. Then I add it to my wish list.

What are your thoughts about the structure of the novel thus far? (I am referring to the brief glimpses of different parts of the history of the Foundation with big time gaps between events in the novel).
I think it works for the structure of the story. I applaud Asimov for being brave enough to jump ahead instead of working up to the later dates. He could have filled in the times between and had a 3 or 4 times longer book, but instead he chose a style that I am liking much better. I am not a person that enjoys lots of filler in my books. I know this not apparent in my rambling typing style...

What are your initial thoughts on the field of psychohistory?
uh, yeah, I did the whole history thing in university. I love history. I appreciate that dates are important to history. What I hate is math, so the whole idea of psychohistory and the connection to math just seems wrong to me. At the same time, history is so important because we can learn from it for the events of the future. I think I am conflicted about the whole idea and will refuse to say more until the end of the book when everything plays out. (But really, it seems a bit too... easy... to me... I like to believe in free will.)

What, if anything, is holding your interest thus far, what are you enjoying about Foundation?
Well, I read half the book in one sitting because I was behind and really wanted to join in with the reading. I thought it held my interest very well. If it was say Dune it would have been a form of torture (I jest.. mostly), but this had just the right amount of everything to keep my interest. It is not heavy in the action department, but that seems to work well for the book. I enjoy the way Asimov chooses to tell his story and am curious to see how it continues to play out.

What, if anything, are you not enjoying about Foundation?
Well, Mr. Asimov, I think it is wonderful that you have created this whole idea for your book, but obviously procreation still is happening.... And yet, where are the women? Now, I will admit that it wasn't a terrible reading experience for the lack of them, and Carl (and Jeff) claim it will be remedied, but it is like women do not even exist so far. I appreciate that at the time of the writing women were sort of unimportant, but at least mention them so I can bitch about your portrayal. Not including them at all is just wrong... So, I will just mention that.

The other thing that bothered me was Lord Dorwin. I HATE when people do not speak correctly in books and I have to make their words my words. I know it shouldn't bother me, but it always does. I have seen worse in books, but at this moment in time he was annoying me. I was happy to see the end of him. It wasn't that the chapter wasn't funny, but the way he talked just didn't work for me.

The Lantern Read-a-Long - Part 3

The Lantern by Deborah Lawrenson

A modern gothic novel of love, secrets, and murder—set against the lush backdrop of Provence

Meeting Dom was the most incredible thing that had ever happened to me. When Eve falls for the secretive, charming Dom in Switzerland, their whirlwind relationship leads them to Les GenÉvriers, an abandoned house set among the fragrant lavender fields of the South of France. Each enchanting day delivers happy discoveries: hidden chambers, secret vaults, a beautiful wrought-iron lantern. Deeply in love and surrounded by music, books, and the heady summer scents of the French countryside, Eve has never felt more alive.

But with autumn’s arrival the days begin to cool, and so, too, does Dom. Though Eve knows he bears the emotional scars of a failed marriage—one he refuses to talk about—his silence arouses suspicion and uncertainty. The more reticent Dom is to explain, the more Eve becomes obsessed with finding answers—and with unraveling the mystery of his absent, beautiful ex-wife, Rachel.

Like its owner, Les GenÉvriers is also changing. Bright, warm rooms have turned cold and uninviting; shadows now fall unexpectedly; and Eve senses a presence moving through the garden. Is it a ghost from the past or a manifestation of her current troubles with Dom? Can she trust Dom, or could her life be in danger?

Eve does not know that Les GenÉvriers has been haunted before. BÉnÉdicte Lincel, the house’s former owner, thrived as a young girl within the rich elements of the landscape: the violets hidden in the woodland, the warm wind through the almond trees. She knew the bitter taste of heartbreak and tragedy—long-buried family secrets and evil deeds that, once unearthed, will hold shocking and unexpected consequences for Eve.

I am over a week late, but I wanted to catch-up on this book today. First of all, I have to say that I enjoyed this book. It might not have been the best Gothic novel I have ever read, but the author did a wonderful job. In retrospect, I think I would have appreciated it more if I sat down with it and read it straight through. The need to start and stop distracted me when I was really getting into the story. I still enjoyed it, though, and had lots of fun reading the other participants thoughts on the book. Then, Deborah Lawrenson added her two cents once we were finished and it is always fun to hear from an author!

1. Now that it’s all said and done; what did you think of the book? Did you see the ending coming?

Having read Rebecca, I had a rough idea about what was going to happen in the end. I knew Rachel was dead, so it just came down to that being explained. Then there was the relationship between Eve/Dom to bring to a conclusion. They were having some problems and Eve was starting to think about leaving the relationship behind if she didn't receive some answers soon. That being said, I was surprised about exactly how Rachel died. I never thought about her having cancer and deciding to have assisted suicide in Switzerland. Once that is explained, though, it does give a bit more explanation for Dom. That was a very difficult position that he found himself in. I still really didn't like him, but I understand him better.

As to the book itself, it was not perfect, but it was not a bad book either. I found it readable, was interested in how everything played out, etc. I think my disappointment laid in the fact that the book was so influenced by other authors works. It sort of makes it hard for the author because Rebecca and Jane Eyre are such popular and well-read books. I am not sure she is entirely at their calibre, but it is hard to say entirely.

2. What do you think of the characters? Lawrenson took us on a twisty little ride there, I had trouble deciding who was good and who wasn’t for a while there! What do you think of Dom? Of Sabine? Rachel?

Well, as I mention above, I was not a huge fan of Dom. He was untrustworthy, secretive, and a bit of a recluse. We obviously learn why some of this happens, but it is hard to like someone that keeps so many secrets from the woman he supposedly loves. If he was still dealing with his demons he could easily have waited for things to pass before starting a new relationship. It was obvious he wasn't ready at all. I think Lawrenson writes Dom really well, though.

As to Sabine, I have to admit she served a good purpose. I am not sure that Eve would have suspected Dom as much as she did without Sabine in the background. Plus, Sabine leads her to look into Rachel's research and we learn more about the other storyline. There were times where I wasn't entirely sure if she was a 'good' person or bad, but she added to the story.

Then there is Rachel. Eve was not as obsessed with Rachel as Mrs. DeWinter was with Rebecca. It seemed different anyway. She obviously battles with the ghost of Rachel to the point where Rachel is another character in the book even while being deceased. I think Rachel was actually rather interesting. She made things up and was a bit crazy, but the different is what makes characters interesting in books. She also made an interesting contrast to Eve's character.

3. Pierre was such a conflicted character. In the end, do you think he killed Marthe and Annette, or did the fall to their deaths because of their blindness?

Pierre was a scary character. In his youth he was doing such horrific things that you knew some would probably carry on into his adult years and likely get worse. I am of a couple minds when it comes to the death of Marthe and Annette. I don't think they both fell to their deaths, but it is possible that Marthe was coming to Annette's aid and she died. It just didn't seem to me like a good idea for Pierre to outright kill Marthe if he wanted to sell the house. Annette, though, he had no need to keep alive. And, it is still possible that he got into a rage and killed both of them.

4. The book is being compared to Rebecca and Daphne du Maurier’s writing. Do you think the book lives up to that description?

I think that Lawrenson did a very risky thing using such a famous novel as a blueprint for her novel. That being said, I think she actually did a really good job. I am a huge fan of Rebecca, so I am a bit biased in thinking that this book doesn't entirely live up to the awesomeness of that book, but Lawrenson's changes and additions made for a very readable story. I particularly enjoyed the alternate storyline that turned out to be a ghost story. I love ghost stories! Ultimately, I think it comes down to the fact that Lawrenson is a talented author in her own right and I think she can go far in the industry. I look forward to something new from her!

5. Did you have any problems with the book? Narration? Plot? The back and forth between two different characters and times?

I love books that jump back and forth between times and characters, but publishers need to understand it needs to be clear what is happening. I think the biggest disadvantage to this book was that the narrators kept changing, but there was no clear indication of when that happened. It made me pause in my reading to get my head around who was talking and as a result it took me out of the story for a bit.

6. Do you think Lawrenson tied both stories together well in the end? Is there anything she could/should have done differently?

I really enjoyed the ending to this book. The Benedicte storyline was my favourite of the two, but it was fun to see how they were connected. I also love ghost stories! I think Lawrenson tied the two stories together in a creative way. It seemed like there was more to Benedicte than met the eye, but it wasn't entirely evident in the beginning just what was happening. I actually got the impression in the first of the book that she was living in the house at the same time as Dom and Eve, but then the book moved in a different direction and I thought I was wrong. I was happy to see I was actually right on track!

7. One problem I had with the novel is the reliability of the narrators. Do you think any of them were telling the truth? Which ones?

I think ultimately it was a book of lies, but finely crafted ones. It is what made the book work, though. There were many suspicions, unanswered questions, and doubts. It made the story that much more interesting wondering what was happening all the time. I don't think the characters could have told the truth and had it work in the book. It worked best because you never really knew what was going on. It also meant you kept reading until the end to find out how it all played out. I think Lawrenson did a wonderful job with this idea!

Previous Weeks:

Part 1

Part 2