Mike > Recent Status Updates

The prose is pretty good, if not as amazing as I was expecting. The story is basically exactly what I expected it to be: a Victorian-era soap opera, only with better characters. Let's see how this pans out.

As far as I can tell, this book consists of two completely unrelated stories: a fairly good story about a man's breakup and the collapse of his life following it, and a fairly forgettable riff on Alice in Wonderland. It's almost hard to judge the book when I have so little idea of what Phisher was going for. My only observation is that he's pretty good at writing prose and not very good at writing dialogue.

It's odd that Jane Austen named a character Jane. Especially since, so far, she seems to be a minor side character. I guess this is the Victorian equivalent of a director making a cameo in their own movie.

I think my biggest fear about this book is that its approach is going to feel dated to me. In the early 90s, I could picture a novel that deals with these issues without marketing itself as a problem novel being unusual, but today, that just doesn't hold up as well. Makes me think more about why Speak and The Perks of Being a Wallflower work the way they do, since I've always chalked up their success to that.

If you're wondering where I've been the last few days, I've been working through the most ludicrously excessive introduction I've ever come across. 120 pages before the story starts, some of which couldn't have less to do with fantasy and horror. If you want to do a summation of the year in the genre, be concise! Just hit the noteworthy stuff and move on! This was ridiculous.

This was a very good chapter about agriculture. You can definitely see the roots of Guns Germs and Steel here.

The chapter on art was alright, I guess. Still, I'm not sure if you can count the art of chimpanzees and elephants as art by comparing it to a genre of art whose purpose was to break down and subvert what's typically seen as art. I feel like a scientist who's also studied art history could've written the chapter better.

Going through the nominees for the GoodReads Choice Awards has made me realize just how out of touch I am with what's popular right now. Not only had I not read a single book nominated, I didn't even recognize most of the authors. I'm mostly reading books that were released 3-15 years ago, when I'm not doing required reading.

I do like this a little better than the first time I tried reading it, but honestly? At the end of the day, I just didn't connect to any of these characters. I'm still not a fan, even after all these years.

Not a whole lot to say about this so far. It certainly seems like it could be good, although I might be only be saying that because I kind of have a thing for epistolary novels. We'll see where this goes.

This chapter about why we age is extremely speculative, and it kind of tries to hide just how speculative it really is. Diamond is basically telling us what makes sense to him, but disguising it as proven fact. There is some good information here, but I wish he'd admitted that we don't know for sure what's up with this part of what makes us human.

Well, this went in an unexpected direction. I don't think I realized until just now that this plot is kind of unconventional, just in how loose the structure is, while still having a distinct dramatic arc.

This is a very good climax. Not sure how Meadows can possibly write a resolution with this little space left, though. I really hope she doesn't end a series on a cliffhanger.

This is such a weird book. But I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way. Certainly, the writing is mostly good, and I like Lepus as a character (I guess). I just don't feel like I know what's going on enough to commit to an opinion yet.

This is actually pretty misogynistic. Diamond consistently assumes that his audience is straight men, and a lot of theories seem predicated on the idea of men having some sort of natural dominance over women.

I guess this was an interesting enough exploration of a forbidden love (kinda) in the real world? I'm not sure - the fact that Nick is the narrator really keeps us at an arm's length from the story, and Gatsby's characterization strikes me as a little over the top. I think this book just isn't for me, I can see why others like it.

I think the best way to describe this book is 'smart'. Jodi Meadows has very good judgement in regards to pacing, character develop, mystery, and plot twists. This isn't a particularly groundbreaking novel, but it has a very strong structure.

Maybe I would like this better if I understood any of the symbolism, but I really don't. It all strikes me as very vague and inapplicable to real life, which is a big contrast to what Ness' themes are usually like. Maybe it would work better if I was familiar with the original fairy tale. But honestly, the fact that you need familiarity makes it even worse - it's like you have to be an English major to like this.

Christ, this is a pretentious book in spots. I feel like if Nick talked more, he would be one of those people who constantly thinks they're enlightening you with their really obvious insight.

This is thematically much stronger than the first two books in the series. In retrospect, Meadows is far better at discussions of coming to terms with one's morality than she is at discussions of prejudice.

Just what I've always wanted - three chapters straight about sex. I'm trying not to be a twelve year-old about this, but Diamond is having way too much fun here.

In all seriousness though, I'm not convinced that humans were necessarily monogamous, nor am I convinced that there's any particular need for hunter-gatherers to be sure of the paternity of kids. Recent research about penises and DNA shed light here.

I've seen people tell me about how much they hate Daisy, and... honestly, I don't get it. I mean, maybe she's a bit of a dick, but currently, Gatsby and Tom are having a competition to see who can be the biggest dick in the room, and Daisy strikes me as wonderful by comparison.

The pace is potentially a bit slow, but for the most part, the plotting here is very good. Right balance of a clear goal and twists, and I like that even though we basically have the gist of the world at this point, there are still mysteries.

Well, this is odd. The writing is pretty good, which is a big relief for an indie book. But I just have no idea where the story's going, what all of this means. I think how it all comes together will make or break this book. If it comes together in a coherent way that makes sense, I can picture really liking this. If not... well, I won't hate it, but I don't imagine I'll be able to find much use for it.

This is much more convincing than Guns, Germs, and Steel was. Maybe it's just because this is closer to Diamond's own field, but this doesn't rely on nearly as many assumptions of universal patterns and simplifications as that book did.

I think the fact that this book is extremely evocative and atmospheric is basically the only thing making it tolerable. I would be pretty uninterested otherwise.

This book does have some flaws, but I think Meadows completely nailed the tone.

I have no idea what the point of this book was. Parts of it were okay - I liked Amanda, at least - but I just have no idea what I was supposed to gain from it. I have no idea why someone would want to read this.

Okay seriously, if someone were to tell me that Gatsby was secretly an eleven year-old the entire time, I would TOTALLY believe them. I'm not even talking about how emotionally immature he is, I'm talking about just how little self-awareness he has. It's truly bizarre to read.

It's been so long since I last read from this book that I barely remember what's going on, but it all seems pretty cool.