Dawn of Wonder (The Wakening)

I've just listened to the best audio book ever.

That may be a little bit superfluous, but I don't care, I loved it.

I bought this book because it was on Audible's list of the best books of last year, and they were right.

The book is called Dawn of Wonder, and it is the first book in a series called The Wakening by Jonathan Renshaw.  From what I understand, this is Mr. Renshaw's first published work, and he is off to an amazing start.

As a synopsis with spoilers only for the first few chapters (of a total of sixty six or so), I will say this book is about a 12 year old boy whose best friend is kidnapped and sold to be sacrificed by a strange civilization.  He then chooses to dedicate his life to avenging her death.

The first thing that I noticed about the book, listening to the sample chapter, was the delicious way Renshaw described the natural world and its unnatural disturbances.  Beautiful, detailed descriptions are given to the fantastic "pearlnut trees" as well as to more familiar features of the landscape.

This book is definitely high fantasy in the sense that it takes place in some fictional world, but there are only a few instances of things that could be considered magical.  I would say the book is mostly pretty grounded in rational ideas, but occasionally something that resembles the supernatural does happen.

I would describe the action sequences as being over the top.  In trying to describe violence, puzzles, and traps, I would say it's along the lines of Indiana Jones or Pirates of the Caribbean.  It resembles slapstick, but it is serious, and the actions of the characters do have consequences.

I would say this first book in the series is appropriate for most young adult readers.  I would be remiss in failing to mention that there is a copious amount of child abuse in the book.  There is no lewd content or foul language, but it does deal with some very heavy themes (like slavery), and it also features a copious amount of violence.

Overall, I think the word outstanding fairly describes this ambitious first entry in The Wakening series.  I await the second installment with much anticipation.  I don't have any theories about where it's going to go from here, which is a rare thing for me.

Guards! Guards!

I remember when I first started trying to keep this blog up, someone told me to try to vary my reading.  I imagine they meant for me to try to read lots of different genres and authors.  I then proceeded to mostly ignore them, because I'm doing this for fun.  Rereading Guards!  Guards! is a good example of how I would prefer to spend my time.

What's compelling about Terry Pratchett's Guards!  Guards!  is the way he turns the classic fantasy narrative of the one true king on its head.  There are certain expectations in the fantasy genre of the rightful king in exile.  He's got to have an ancestral sword or a birthmark or something by which he can be identified.  He's got to have some secret explanation as to how he came to turn up claiming his legitimate rule.  He's got to prove himself in some remarkable act of valor.

In the Lord of the Rings, there's Aragorn.  In the Song of Ice and Fire, there's a major spoiler for those who haven't finished the most current season of Game of Thrones.  In The Once and Future King, there's Arthur.

When you find this character in the story, you generally know that somehow he should come to power, and he will work hard to keep the people in his kingdom safe and happy.

This is not really how Discworld works, though the series generally celebrates these high fantasy ideas as much as it makes fun of them.  Guards!  Guards! is one of the strongest examples of this.

Guards!  Guards! is the first book that covers the Ankh-Morpork city watch as operated by Samuel Vimes, one of my favorite Pratchett characters.  Vimes is heavily involved in the series as a whole, and he is as developed and pragmatic as any fantasy character Game of Thrones could throw at you.  He seems to be more influenced by film noir detective stories than by high fantasy tropes.

The rest of the watch is equally colorful.  Corporal Nobby Nobbs, Sgt Colon, and Carrot Ironfounderson are unforgettable characters even in the Discworld with its great wealth of well developed characters.

While this isn't my favorite Discworld novel, I would consider it an essential read for people who like high fantasy.

Clan of the Cave Bear

So, getting back to my little project of reading as many good books as I possibly can, I recently read Clan of the Cave Bear.

Clan of the Cave Bear is the first book in a series called Earth's Children by Jean M. Auel.  I will start out by saying that the series becomes increasingly difficult to slog through.  I've been stranded in the middle of the third book for weeks.  They have a huge number of scenes that are so awkward and uncomfortable I find myself skipping almost full chapters.  I'd prefer the books spent more time on the anthropology they're drawn from and less time on romance and mating rituals.  There are people and places with names so ridiculous I won't even attempt to spell them.  The main male character is sometimes very irritating.  I will attempt to finish the series in its entirety, as I've heard nothing but good things.  I have the next two books at ready in case I finish the third one soon.

All of that said, I can remember hearing the title of the first book as long as I can remember, and there's a reason for that.  Clan of the Cave Bear is among the best books I've ever read.  I would never have imagined a story about Neanderthals could be so poignant and entertaining.  I was genuinely touched by Auel's imaginative storytelling and beautifully constructed characters.

The story follows a young Cro Magnum girl named Ayla who is adopted by a family of Neanderthal people.  Together, they have to find a new cave and survive a harsh environment.  Ayla's life is further complicated by the Neanderthal clan's ridged societal norms and customs.  There are many impulses Ayla has to deny in order to fit in with her adoptive family.  Ayla must carve out a role for herself in order to survive, with many obstacles along the way.

The most enjoyable part of this story for me are Ayla's Neanderthal family members.  They're complex, developed characters, some of whom are based in part on real skeletal finds.  My attachment to these flawed but lifelike characters really drove my interest through the first book.  It really helps my enjoyment of the book knowing the results of recent genetic testing that find Neanderthal genes in many modern humans.

There's a lot of science and scientific speculation in this book.  I'm sure many academics have tried to pick it apart and show which parts of it are likely accurate and which parts are completely made up.  Auel did a lot of research, but the book is definitely more art that science.  The line between the real and the imagined is blurred in a unique, distinctive way.  There are parts of it I would argue are science fiction, and there are parts that are unadulterated fantasy, and that's absolutely intriguing.  It makes me want to read more like it, though I wouldn't know where to begin to look for something like this.  So far the second and third books really lack some of the unexplainable magic of the first one, but I'm hopeful for a return to that.

While it did occur to me that Ayla has an unrealistic ability to excel at almost everything she tries, Ayla is an impressive character.  Even though the second book was mostly her alone in the wilderness, she was still much more compelling by herself than the other main character was interacting with a huge number of other characters.  She has a tendency to invent all the tools our ancestors needed to survive almost entirely by herself, but I still find her vulnerable enough that I care what happens to her.  I would describe the character as a feminist icon, a woman who does all the things she's not suppose to do.

A movie adaptation of this exists, but I can't imagine it could do the book any kind of justice at all.  Most of the dialog is spoken in sign language in the book, which would make it very difficult for most hearing people to follow if they did a faithful adaptation.  An adaptation with a lot of spoken words would take out most of the drama of the early chapters of the story.

I would give the first book all of the stars.  It's extremely enjoyable.

Why yes, I sass that hoopy frood, and he does indeed know where his towel is.

I'm rereading the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which was among my favorite books from my youth.  So far, it's been very worthwhile.  I'm relating to Arthur Dent much more as a neurotic adult than I did as a neurotic teenager.  I remembered the book as very humorous and rich, and I was not mistaken.  I've read about five chapters aloud to my nephew, and he seems to be enjoying it.

I didn't remember how much alcohol is in this book.  I was a little surprised.

Anyway, I haven't read quite enough to discuss it in more detail.  I will say that I love the clever tone of the book, and yes I do in fact sass that hoopy frood.

And whether they wander the moors...

There were certain preconceived notions working against me in reading this book.  Although I was told beforehand that there were no likeable characters within it, I didn't take this to heart.  Heathcliff and Catherine are classic characters, I told myself.  Surely, they have some good qualities, or else why would people carry on about them?

Heathcliff is truly repulsive by the end of this novel, and I found myself relieved when he was dead.  The manner in which he treated Catherine Jr. (the daughter of his romantic interest) was so reprehensible that any sympathy I had for him quickly vanished.  He was selfish and hateful, and no matter how deeply he claimed to love Catherine, to treat her daughter that way was repugnant.  Love for her should have motivated him to help her daughter rather than lash out at her as though she were an extension of her father.  I suppose even in life Catherine did not have the hold over him she supposed she did, or else he would not have married against her wishes.

The part I appreciated about the ending most greatly was the failure to confirm that any such ghosts attended the moors as Catherine Linton and Heathcliff, and in fact such a notion is largely dismissed by the narrator.  Heathcliff desired the grave, and he acquired it, and there he lay quietly as all men do.  To die and be buried beside someone is no sweet reunion.  Far better to spend your time with your loved ones in life and in memory than to wish for death, for there is no guarantee of awakening anew.  I greatly understand his loneliness and regret, but it did not excuse his behavior.

I suppose the final verdict for me in the case of this book is that occasionally it entrusted the story to as many of as three narrators at once, which is excessive.  I did have occasion to look up a few words in this novel, which was luckily considerably shorter than the last I read.  Wuthering, by the by, is a roaring sound, such as made by the wind, which is an apt name for a book with such a setting.

It was a wearying read, which I am relieved to finish.  I liked it fairly well, though I will never read it again so long as it isn't required of me.  It appealed to my own melancholy too greatly.

For my next blog post, I aspire to happier topics.

She begs I let her in, though I dare not

I must say, Emily Bronte has succeeded in manipulating me.  This book is all feeling and little logic, though it provoked me quite well without it.

Imagine me, curled up with my Nook in the lonely darkness of the lake house, scanning the screen and despairing in pity for each of the mad fools Emily has designed.  My mother remarked on what a poor place it was to partake in such literature, but I felt it fitted the purpose of the narrative.  I allowed myself to empathize with the madness of each player in their role.

I understood why Catherine made her choice, though it was certainly a choice in folly.  If she'd only reflected that Heathcliff was most dear to her, she would have spared many people a great deal of misery.  She could have married him, and they would have struggled, but he more than proved there was means for them to survive.  She would still have been mad, but maybe less mad if her protestations were true.  Alas, she elected a more traditional path and doomed them all. 

I pitied Heathcliff the most, though he is monstrous.  He certainly was detestable in his behavior, and here I mean his treatment of his wife and of Hareton.  I don't believe he was meant to be wicked from the start, I think if he'd been treated with kindness after the death of his foster father he might have turned out normal.

I think Hindley's madness caused a great bit of the awfulness in the book, between his drunken rages and his own selfish bitterness about Heathcliff.

And what is with Nelly Dean?  She sits down and tells a totally stranger the whole history of this tragic family of fools.

I'm only about 90% finished with the book.  I've enjoyed it, if enjoyed means allowed it to torment me for several hours.  It has all the tragedy and loss of Gatsby or The Count of Monte Cristo and an additional depth of hopelessness.  At times it gives me pangs of futility.  I must persevere, as I have yet to learn whether the specter at the beginning is truly the dark spirit of Heathcliff's lost love or whether it is merely an apparition resulting from the very sort of late night morbidity in which I am indulging.

I can only hope I do not invite in fearful visions of my own.

Weeks later, I've finally finished "A Feast For Crows."

And here's what I thought about it:

This book was LONG.  It was in the neighborhood of a thousand pages.  This is probably the longest book I've ever read.  I've probably read series shorter than this.  And the book was originally much, much longer, and he cut it in half!  I don't know how George R.R. Martin manages to write so prolifically and pack so much plot into the books.  I mean, there is filler, but it's hard to tell what isn't important, there are so many important things.  And I've talked to other people who've read the books, and the things that stood out as important to me were things they didn't remember well.

I think I know who Jon Snow's mother is, and my theory is my favorite thing about the books.

I support house Targaryen's claim to the iron throne.

I still hate Cersei Lannister.  I've also decided she's stupid.

HOUSE MARTELL.  Oh my gosh, if you haven't read these books, go do it.  I'll wait here.  House Martell is legit amazing, I love every last one of those characters.  I had to stop and hug my book at the end of Arienne's last chapter.  THAT FAMILY.  I'm amazed.

I love this world so much, I've bought supplies to cosplay Lyanna Stark.  And after that, I want to do Elia Martell.  Because Starks and Martells, lovelies.

A Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire is now my main fandom.

I'm going to have to pick a shorter book for my blog next time, though, because this took forever.

<3  Can't wait for April.

Cersei Lannister is the reason we can't have nice things

Still working on this book.  It's a lot to chew on.  But here are my thoughts so far on Game of Thrones in general.

I hate the Lannisters.  Okay, Tyrion is awesome.  Jaime is okay in small doses.  But the rest of the adults in that family?  They can go straight to the white walkers.  Especially Cersei.

She's paranoid.  She's selfish.  She's obnoxious and hateful.  She hasn't got a kind word to say about anybody, including her own family and friends.

And this is a world where there are tons of likeable characters.

I love the grand majority of Tyrells.  Margaery is very bright and sweeter than a cupcake.  I mean, yeah, she's playing politics, but that's the whole plot of the book.  Everybody's playing politics, at least she does so in a way that's kind and not terribly bloody.  Then you've got Margaery's grandmother who is so incredibly sharp and witty.  A truly kicking older female character is always a welcome surprise in this media climate.  And of course there's Loras who's a cool knight and who had this really interesting romantic storyline.

Then there's the Starks, who are to the last man understandable if not likeable.  You've got Ned Stark, who was a man of principle.  I give him a little bit more credit than most people because I believe I know who Jon Snow's mother is.  You've got Catelyn Stark, a tough but flawed woman.  And there's Sansa, the brave prisoner who struggles to stay afloat politically.  There's even Arya, the child with a warrior's spirit.  If you count Jon Snow as a Stark, then the Starks have one of the coolest characters in the game.

My favorite house is House Targaryen, which has more evil in its history than most of the rest of its competitors, and yet somehow they still manage to have some of the best characters as well.  The famous and acclaimed one for fans of the show is Danaerys Stormborn (the Khalessi), but there are plenty in the books as well.  Can't tell you who they are without spoiling things for you, but they are seriously very cool.

The Lannisters?  They have Tyrion, who is clever and who champions the weak and the maltreated.  They've got Jaime, who is a flawed man who made some bad choices, but who has also done some heroic things.  And that's basically all there is nice to say about them.  Tywin Lannister was a cruel, cold father to his children.  Cersei craves power and manipulates and isn't afraid to have people assassinated to reach her goals.   Joffrey is easily the most warped character in the whole lot, killing and torturing people for fun.  And they form alliances with all these petty lords and knights like The Hound and The Mountain.

The Greyjoys, the Martells, practically every house I've witnessed in this book series has more good in it than the Lannisters.

Practically all my favorite characters are in one way or the other working against the Lannisters, most of all Cersei.  I know I'm only on the third book.  I know there's a whole additional book to go before I'll have read the series.  I've been told they get better.  But I really, really hate those Lannisters.

There was a moment on the show where I started to feel some empathy for Cersei, as she was sitting on the iron throne with Tommen (her young son), preparing to poison her own son to spare him from dying a more painful death.  In that moment, I feared for Cersei Lannister, which is a testament to the quality of the show.

Is it possible that Cersei will become a more sympathetic character?  I highly doubt it.

A Waiting Game of Thrones

Tonight the ground is under a blanket of snow, and my instant coffee and I are under a blanket of blankets.  Baby, it's cold outside.  Temperature tomorrow doesn't look good, either.  Winter isn't just coming, it's here.

I remember when good old Ned Stark first said "Winter is coming," on a Game of Thrones, the television series.  It's an amazing family motto.  The phrase is truly ominous and full of meaning.  That said, I am beginning to feel that winter in "A Song of Ice and Fire" is dragging its feet.

A Song of Ice and Fire is a fantasy book series by acclaimed author George R.R. Martin.  He has been called the modern Tolkien.  The series has five entries so far, with a sixth coming out in the near future (no date so far).  The books are about rival factions attempting to secure power.  Many of these factions are vying for the Iron Throne, some are only attempting to solidify control over smaller regions, and many individuals are scratching and clawing just to stay alive in the wake of the others.

I'm 282 pages into A Feast For Crows.  I began reading this book because I'm becoming impatient.  Season 4 of a Game of Thrones cannot come fast enough.  I had attempted to read the earlier books, but I became somewhat stymied because the books were very much like the series.  I felt like I'd seen it before, and those books are very long.  Surely, if the first season was basically the first book and the second season was basically the second book, then it stood to reason that the third season would be the third book and the fourth season would be the fourth book.

No.  No, that isn't how it works.  Best I can understand, the third book was stretched out so it could feature in season 4, possibly to give the author more time to work on "Winds of Winter."  I've read some concern in the past that the series may catch up with the books if they aren't careful, and that would be bad because there would be a longer hiatus between seasons.

The gist of my problem is season 3 of A Game of Thrones ends right in the middle of the third book.  So, when I began reading A Feast For Crows, major characters were dead, other characters were thrown to the wind, and there are new characters I'm still not entirely sure about nearly 300 pages into the book.  Also, major details are different between the books and the TV show.  I knew that going into the book, but it still changes my reading experience quite a bit, to have these ideas about the series that aren't fully reflected in the actual material.

A Feast for Crows is slow reading, and metaphorically speaking, it needs more cowbell.  Many of my favorite characters from the series are used sparingly if at all.  Winter is taking forever to get here.  There is a whole lot of gearing up for war and very little actual war.

I love the diverse landscapes over which the story takes place.  I love the vast scope of the book, with all its strange, mighty, beautiful, and terrible characters.  I love the conflict at the center of the tale.  I love the strange dark magic, mysterious myths, and mortal struggles contained within.

It's an excellent book, but it's slow reading.  I miss the characters that compelled my interest in this series.  They're still floating around out there, somewhere.  As far as I'm concerned, winter cannot get her fast enough.  I've grown tired of these Lannisters and their petty paranoia.  Bring on Jon Snow and all the little Starks.  I want to revel in the dragonfire and cower in the wake of the white walkers.

When I finish the book, I'll come back and say more.  And then I'm going to go back and read the third one, because clearly skipping it was a critical error on my part.  Meanwhile, here are some interesting Song of Ice and Fire news items and fun stuff:

Five Game of Thrones Events to Look Forward to in 2014
Winter is Coming:  Government Uses Game of Thrones to Warn Americans About Snow
If Lisa Frank Designed the Game of Thrones House Sigils
Japanese Editions of Game of Thrones are Incredible
English Town Will Change Name to King's Landing for Game of Thrones

A Study in Lavender: Queering Sherlock Holmes

I like to judge a book by its cover.  This might be partly because all my life, people have been insisting I shouldn't, and partly because I am not Sherlock Holmes.  I cannot determine which books are "good" by smell, taste, or weight.  The only hope I have for judging books without having already read them* is by examining their exterior or asking someone else's opinion.

Based on the evidence at hand, I suspected A Study in Lavender:  Queering Sherlock Holmes was a "good book."  I reasoned it would have to be at the very least a relevant book.  Sherlock Holmes is an immortal literary character who overshadows all other famous detectives, real and fictional alike.  In recent times, there has been considerable debate about Sherlock's identity.

The BBC series Sherlock has struggled with this debate intensely.  To understand the problem, you need a working understanding of a phenomenon called queer-baiting.  The gist of it is that a depiction of a character implies LGBTQAI identification without actually intending to explicitly show or express the character's identity.  This practice is intended to attract the LGBTQAI audience without offending homophobic or transphobic sensibilities.  Basically, the practice exploits minorities for cash.  In the early days of the series, many people believed Sherlock identified as gay on the show.  That's certainly one easily accessible reading of the material.  The words in context certainly give viewers the impression that he could be.  But then Steven Moffat, showrunner of Sherlock, confirmed Sherlock is not gay, and that he had no intention of making this clear.  And the series continues to exploit that community to this day.  You can read more opinions about queer-baiting in fandom here and here.

This is an important problem because progress made today in media will affect what tomorrow's media looks like.  Groundbreaking moments like this impact what can happen later.  Queer-baiting makes no progress, it only gives the illusion of representation.  I wish we had more Gene Roddenbery types and fewer Steven Moffats.  I think pop culture needs more writers willing to "boldly go" rather than people who would prefer to capitalize on the status qua, and it certainly wouldn't hurt if actors took a stand as well.  Without an acts of sabotage by William Shatner and Nichelle Nichols' continued performance as Uhura, an iconic television moment would never have taken place.

But back to the reason I chose this book.  I hoped it would comment on BBC Sherlock.  Though it is an anthology of short stories rather than an academic piece, there was a preface that gave some information about the history of Sherlock Holmes and the queer community.

It is hard to fault a book centered on characters as old as Sherlock Holmes and Watson for being somewhat outdated, certainly considering the time that has passed since its publication.  The book states that BBC Sherlock "more or less flat out says Holmes is gay" which is unfortunately somewhat inaccurate.  BBC Sherlock is notorious for leaving this impression in the first series and then turning away from it in the first episode of the second one.

The rest of the background given is intriguing and gives good context for a working understanding of the series and its characters.

Here is an opinion I've reached having read this book:  A good mystery should be solvable with the clues the author has given you.  In my consumption of this book, I realized my enjoyment was greatly hinged on whether I could solve the case as Sherlock did.  There were stories in this anthology that were beautifully written with flawlessly constructed mystery plots, and then there were also a couple that I did not enjoy so much.

Some favorites contained within the anthology:
The Kidnapping of Alice Braddon by Katie Raynes
The Case of the Wounded Heart by Rajan Khanna
The Bride and the Bachelors By Vincent Kovar

I should also mention that many people enjoy an asexual reading of Sherlock Holmes, which is not represented in this particular work.



*Judging a book after you've read it is only marginally useful as you cannot then decide it was a waste of time and demand your time back, huffing about rip off authors.  The best I can do at that point is to warn others or promote the book to those who might enjoy it.  I think it's generally more useful on the individual level to judge the book beforehand.

Goblin Market: A story of beguiling goods

I've always been fond of poetry, although perhaps not to the extent my grandmother was.  I certainly enjoy a few well turned words on occasion, and I absolutely revel in fantasy.  I love reading about humanoid* creatures that have extraordinary powers and ill motives.  So, it should come as no surprise that one of my first selections for this blog is a book of poetry with the word "goblin" in the title.

I was not remotely disappointed.  Goblin Market and Other Poems is a very enjoyable collection of the works of Christina Rosetti.  I came into this reading experience mostly cold.  I did not know anything of Rosetti or her poetry.  She is a very fine writer, her words are gorgeous.  "Goblin Market" is as a luscious feast of imagery.  Her descriptions of the goblins were very different from any I've come across before in that they were "little men" and were depicted as greatly varied.

As far back as I can remember, I've always had a concept for "goblin."  My understanding of what the word means has been influenced by the Labyrinth,  The Lord of the Rings, King's Quest VII and Magic: the Gathering.  It's interesting to note the difference between those franchises, but I find it even more fascinating to learn of her depiction more than a hundred years ago.  Goblins with animal features who sell fruit for silver coins or a lock of blonde hair seem whimsical and mischievous more than beastly.  They are creatures to beware nonetheless.  They certainly drive a very hard bargain.

The story unfolds line by line, and though I am no English teacher, I can tell that it is heavily laden in symbolic meaning as a coming of age story for two young sisters.  I'm still not certain I really understand all of the meaning behind it.  I'm pretty dense when it comes to deciphering symbolism, and I will not spoil my limited understanding of the text by Googling for answers.  I'm sure I wouldn't like what I find.**

And my enjoyment of the book did not end with "Goblin Market."  There are many other wonderful, well worded poems contained within, most of which are short stories in disguise much like the first.  Each one is different from the last, and each adds an interesting takeaway.

As to the format in which I read this book, I have to say, I was not terribly pleased.  Although the book was very easy to obtain and it was free (I read an Epub file from one of the sources I posted  in Radical Paths to Reading), I recommend a physical copy of this book or a digital one purchased from Amazon or Barnes and Noble.  The reason for this is the poetry was frequently interrupted to inform me that it was "Digitized by VjOOIC" which was very disruptive.  However, if you can tolerate that, it is available through said source.

I wish I'd read this one much sooner.  Going back to my first post, the theory that I do not read enough good books, I'm already beginning to see that there are plenty of "good books" yet to be read.  Still not Mark Twain, but I'll get to that later.

 *"Humanoid" is among my least favorite words.  It's a lovely concept, but goodness, that word is ugly.  Any word with the syllable "noid" in it is doomed to failure.  I wish "humanesque" was a word.  Maybe I should go with "nonhuman sentient creatures" but then it doesn't really get across other similarities beyond sentience.  And it's a cumbersome phrase.  I suppose I could have gone with "fae" and it would have covered most of the ones common in fantasy, but it would have completely neglected space aliens and mermaids.  And we can't have that, now can we?

**It seems as if there is an unwritten law in great literature and nursery rhymes that there should be dark symbolism hidden in nice cheery pleasant stories.  Frankly, the world is nasty enough without it in my opinion.

Preface

Recently, someone I know has been implying I don't read enough good books.  The reason she most frequently cites is because I haven't read enough Mark Twain.  I find Mark Twain's subject matter and style uninteresting at best and annoying at worst.  I blame this on a difference in taste.  I don't believe I can do better than Mark Twain did.  Quite the contrary, I'm certain there's a reason his works are considered classics.  I believe Mr. Twain is most known for his tone.  He has a sort of snark laden mischief in his wordplay that would be difficult to replicate.  And his stories are enduring, with memorable characters.  I'm sure many of you would agree with her, that I should read Mark Twain because he is a great writer who has written "good books."

That said, I have certain preconceived notions, as one of my past instructors would put it.  Those preconceived notions concern my vision of Mr. Twain, which is that he was a smarmy, self satisfied person.  I find little of interest in coming of age stories of boys having unlikely adventures in the recent American past.  He lived contemporary to many other authors who wrote in a tone I would more greatly enjoy and on topics that I would find more relevant.  I do not argue that Mr. Twain is a great author, merely that he is not the sort of author whose work I enjoy.

What more greatly intrigues me is the statement that I do not spend enough time reading "good books."  I suppose the purpose of this blog is not so much to prove to her or to myself that I read enough of them, but instead to find out what "good books" are for me.

This blog is not about reviewing books I've read in the past that I enjoyed.  It's about starting over, a tabula rasa of reading.  From this point on, I'm approaching reading afresh.  I'm going to reread my old favorites with new eyes, and I'm going to give Mr. Twain a chance.  I'm going to scratch some titles off my to-do list, but I'm also going to pick out some dark horses.  And then I'm going to set them before you with my honest impression of what I've seen.

Along the way, I hope to learn what a "good book" is, and use that knowledge to improve my own writing.