November Reading Thread

[nobodymN]

I finished a particularly uneventful detective/mystery novel called Gospel Truths by JG Sandom. There was this rather dire back-story where the detective was motivated in solving a crime because one of the suspects happened to be an arms dealer involved in the war that killed his son. It was a complete stretch and not at all necessary. Throw in the common "secret religious text" that could cripple the Church if found, and you can already feel my pain.

[Talyn]

I finished Betrayed by P.C. Cast last night and really enjoyed it.

I also read The Weavers of Saramyr by Chris Wooding and although it was a reread I still found it to be a great book, I'm starting the second book in the series now.

[Ser_Not_Appearing_In_This_Book]

OK, just finished BTAH by Abercrombie. Almost wish I wouldn't have ordered from UK cuz now I'm jonesin' for the 3rd one badly!!!

[IheartTesla]

1491 is pretty good and yes almost everything taught about life in America before Columbus is wrong. Just the other day in my GRADUATE level colonial history class i was thinking how half the stuff the professor was saying was completely wrong.

I'm glad to hear that the book is not some outlandish fairy tale writ large on the pages of a book. Since I'm not a historian by trade (or even an anthropologist) it would be hard for me to judge the merits of the book critically.

The main thing I am curious about are the claims about population in the book. Which is, the Americas were more populous than is previously believed.

[Budgie]

Have finished The Elves of Cintra - Terry Brooks, was a typical Brooks book same as usual, me thinks this will be the last series by Brooks i will read unless he changes his writing style!

Will be starting The Blade Itself - Joe Abercrombie, have high hopes for this i am expecting a thrilling read.

Will also be starting Gardens of the Moon - Steven Erikson, have been looking forward to this for awhile now.

[Mr. X]

I started Forever Peace last night.

I left that out of the buy pile at a used book store yesterday.

I did get James Blaylock's The Last Coin, which I intend to start now that I've finished Gary Gibson's Stealing Light, which turned out to be entertaining, though not great.

[Mr. X]

Sorry...double post.

[IheartTesla]

I enjoyed Forever War too.... and some of the subject matter was ahead of its time as well, to be sure. But the only thing I found a little underwhelming was the notion of wholesale changes in society going on while the protagonist was away. I prefer to see these changes happen rather than be told about them. Somewhat hard to show in a first person narrative, I agree, and the also that was the whole point of the book I guess. We are supposed to feel the same disorientation the hero does.

But still, of the three military sci-fi books I have read it is my third most favorite (Enders Game, Starship Troopers and Forever War in case someone was curious)

[Serious Callers Only]

I enjoyed Forever War too.... and some of the subject matter was ahead of its time as well, to be sure. But the only thing I found a little underwhelming was the notion of wholesale changes in society going on while the protagonist was away. I prefer to see these changes happen rather than be told about them. Somewhat hard to show in a first person narrative, I agree, and the also that was the whole point of the book I guess. We are supposed to feel the same disorientation the hero does.

But still, of the three military sci-fi books I have read it is my third most favorite (Enders Game, Starship Troopers and Forever War in case someone was curious)

You never did read Armor (John Steakley) did you? You might find it superior to all of those. As for Joe, i liked Forever Peace (a alternative parallel setting story) much better that the main sequence. That third book does goes the deep end ...

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

Armor? Superior to ST, FW, EG?

Heeeeellll nah.

[bossfan2000]

I just finished The Briar King. This was a good test of my new review format, since it was such a complex book. It was also a great read, and highly recommened (especially for you Martin fans). Review here.

Next up is The Skewed Throne, then either Academ's Fury or The Charnal Prince.

[Smeech]

Just finished The Harvest, by Robert Charles Wilson. It was written more than 10 years prior to Spin, a personal favorite of mine. This was quite good, though very similar similar to Spin. In The Harvest, even moreso than in Spin, the science is peripheral to the characters. Whether this makes for a better read hinges upon the reader, of course.

Edit:

Read Ubik (Philip K Dick) as well...I think I loved it. Going to have to think about it some more--what a mindfuck.

Next up: Cat's Cradle, The Road (for an english class!), and maybe River of Gods.

[saint777]

Finally finished Reaper's Gale: Bloated, meandering and messy. Way too much inner monologing by people I was wishing for a violent death. The last two hundred pages are awesome but don't save this from being the worst in the Malazan series.

200 pages into The Name of the Wind and it's good so far. Not much happening but very readable.

150 pages into The Lies of Locke Lamora and find it slow going. I'm giving it to the Gray King chapter and if it doesn't hook me by then I'm crossing Lynch off my list.

[lessthanluke]

Just finished The Harvest, by Robert Charles Wilson. It was written more than 10 years prior to Spin, a personal favorite of mine. This was quite good, though very similar similar to Spin. In The Harvest, even moreso than in Spin, the science is peripheral to the characters. Whether this makes for a better read hinges upon the reader, of course.

I just read this as well and I enjoyed it quite a bit. I haven't read Spin yet, though I have it waiting on my to be read pile.

[gyrehead]

I've tried to hold off reading 2008 stuff before 2008, but the pile is tottering and after heavy family rotation for the holiday, my body and mind screams for a reading marathon. I started out small (like every addict does with just a sip, wiff or nibble) with Kevin Brockmeier's The View from the Seventh Layer. It was okay though I'm not a huge fan of his work to begin with. Still there were some interesting and well thought out moments. I think if you really enjoyed his The Brief History of the Dead you will like this collection for the most part.

Then I slid farther from my resolve and went ot David Keck's In a Time of Treason which I liked, though in a different way than the first. The one element that I did not like style wise in the first book was repeated (without giving away plot details) different plot point but the same approach that I though dragged the book down slightly. Still I enjoyed it very much. Of course, I was one of the few readers that seemed to like the first book.

Now I am reading Robert Redick's The Red Wolf Conspiracy but I'm having difficulty staying engaged. Reminds me a bit too much of the heavy style over substance that I thought plagued Abercrombie's work and Tom Lloyd's first book. Different in many ways than those two but I have the same type of reaction. I guess that means it will be a huge hit?!

I've also started my reprint edition of Lajos Zilahy's The Dukays but that looks like something I need to sit down and devote myself to entirely. And not sure when I'll have the chance to really do that in the next couple of weeks.

So it might be Traci Slatton's Immortal as it looks quick and entertaining. It's official. 2008 is here.

[Revie]

Just finished Gaiman's Stardust, which was a very quick and fun read and found myself comparing/contrasting it with the other book I finally finished--Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. Both concern the world of Faerie, but the first felt so much more wholesome and the magic, though some of it is quite evil, felt more rustic--like the magic of Tolkien's woodland elves. The second book portrays Faerie in much less graphically violent terms, but the impression is much bleaker, more desperate, and creepy.

Anyway, Strange & Norrell: I suffered through this--it was a real slog for me. I know that it was heavily hyped a few years ago, but I must have been obsessed elsewhere because I never heard of it before. The pacing of the story does pick up at the end, but I was left wondering if all that was worthwhile or if she could have cut it down to oh, 600 pages or so. In the end I felt like all of that Jane Austen-ish dialogue and footnoting undermined the story. I think she could have done more with the character development of Jonathan Strange and a little less with the plot departures like the war and Lord Byron.

One of my favorite things to do is go back and read old science fiction. I like to see how well the stories "age" and so I picked up Foundation by Asimov over the long weekend. I think I first read this 20 years or so ago so I didn't remember any of it. It is revered as one of those timeless sci-fi classics, but I found that the stilted dialogue, the politics, the characters (one-dimensional, and lack of women) and the science kept making me think "1950" and so in my opinion it fails at being timeless. His narrative felt very disjointed as well. Just as one storyline gets going, a Seldon crisis occurs and then the story jumps forward 75 years or so to the next faction in power. If you are interested in the beginnings of the psychohistory theory, and Hari Seldon, then you'll want to read it, but otherwise it's not as good as Asimov's Robot series.

[Craigopogo]

Right now I'm trying to finish Thomas Malory's La Morte Darthur and Graceland by Chris Abani. After that it's Solaris, by Stanislaw Lem and hopefully the new Stephen R. Donaldson Thomas Covenant book.

[Xray the Enforcer]

I have been remiss: I am now just staring The Dragonbone Chair. I look forward to this series (what can I say? I loved Tailchaser's Song)

[add-on]

Anyway, Strange & Norrell: I suffered through this--it was a real slog for me. I know that it was heavily hyped a few years ago, but I must have been obsessed elsewhere because I never heard of it before. The pacing of the story does pick up at the end, but I was left wondering if all that was worthwhile or if she could have cut it down to oh, 600 pages or so. In the end I felt like all of that Jane Austen-ish dialogue and footnoting undermined the story. I think she could have done more with the character development of Jonathan Strange and a little less with the plot departures like the war and Lord Byron.

I just finished this too, but liked it a lot more. I'm a big fan of Austen's style, so the fact that Clarke's was similar put me at home right away. I also really, really loved everything that had to do with Lord Byron. I kind of wanted more. I think she captured his essence perfectly.

I do agree with a couple of your other points, though. The footnotes were a little much for me. I found myself skimming a lot of them, especially towards the end.

I don't necessarily think she did a bad job with the characterization. She definitely paid more attention to it than Austen usually did. I thought she did a great job with some of the side characters like Childermass and Stephen Black, for instance. But you're right, I wanted more of Strange. I wanted to see closer into Strange, I guess. But then with that kind of style, I don't know that a close kind of character study would have fit.

Overall, a very enjoyable read for me.

[BLU-RAY]

Well, I read The Blade Itself and reread Good Omens this week; and I read I Am Legend on the plane today. All fantastic. I hope they do a good job with the film of I Am Legend.

Got Altered Carbon by Morgan and Orientalism by Said sitting around somewhere.