Willoyd's Reading 2015

[willoyd]

Wow, a 6-star and a 1-star read, one right after the other! I'm sure I've asked this before about your Book Club, but who picked this 1-star book as a read?

We have a 'cycle', where, once we reach the end of the previous cycle, each member puts in two titles. They are then drawn out of a hat to decide in which order they are read. Sometimes we nominate books we've read and enjoyed, other times books we want to read. This was one that somebody (not me!) wanted to read. Of the 1200+ reviews on Amazon, over 1000 gave it 4 or 5 stars, so it will have looked promising to whoever chose it. Goes to show that just because a book is popular, doesn't mean that any one reader or group will enjoy it. It did surprise me that we all thought it was poor, as we're usually pretty diverse in our views (which of course makes for good discussion!).

 

We do have some apparently duff choices, but I like the results of this system.  I used to be in a group which was set up with the help of the local library service, who supplied sets of books to borrow.  Trouble was, the books were all very samey (generally mainstream literary fiction), and after a while I got bored with the choices.  No chance of that here, and I enjoy the fact that one month we can get something I think is complete rubbish, whilst the next month I'll love it, often books I wouldn't have otherwise read.

 

[Alexi]

I'd love to join a group like that - my Mum is a member of something similar but she always feels dreadful pressure when it's her turn to choose the read!

[willoyd]

I'd love to join a group like that - my Mum is a member of something similar but she always feels dreadful pressure when it's her turn to choose the read!

 

I think the thing to hang onto is that if you are choosing a book that you haven't read (which most jpeople will be doing), you can't be expected to know what it's like, other than what you can garner from reviews etc.  Also, book clubs are surely about trying out different books together: the thing that annoys me most is when people won't ever go beyond their comfort zone for choices.  So, if somebody chooses a book the group doesn't like, so what?  You've still moved on as a group. I've certainly had my fair share of successes and failures - and it's the failures that have often resulted in the best discussions.  The worst discussions are where everybody loved the book!

Edited December 17, 2015 by willoyd

[bobblybear]

Of the 1200+ reviews on Amazon, over 1000 gave it 4 or 5 stars, so it will have looked promising to whoever chose it. Goes to show that just because a book is popular, doesn't mean that any one reader or group will enjoy it. It did surprise me that we all thought it was poor, as we're usually pretty diverse in our views (which of course makes for good discussion!).

 

That's interesting. I've just looked on Amazon and it does have mostly rave reviews. Mind you, I have read and hated some books that have been raved about on Amazon. It's just down to personal taste I guess. I wonder if there was a lot of hype and promotion around the book as the title sounds familiar.

[Janet]

I've certainly had my fair share of successes and failures - and it's the failures that have often resulted in the best discussions.  The worst discussions are where everybody loved the book!

This is absolutely true of the book club I belong to! 

[willoyd]

The Eagle of the Ninth by Rosemary Sutcliffe ****** (out of 6)
 
And then we go from the ridiculous to the sublime! Having commented in my last review (Little Coffee Shop of Kabul) how unusual it was to go from one extreme to the other (from 6 stars to 1 in that case), the swing goes completely the other way this time, from 1 star to 6!

I hesitated quite a bit in giving this 6 stars, and it may be one I come back to in future, but if in doubt I tend to go with my initial gut feel, and that said stick with the six. It's just that this is a bit unusual for me nowadays, The Eagle of the Ninth being a children's book; with my working life so much involved with children, I've found my reading time, my recreation time, has tended to swing the other way more and more. However, one of my challenges this year involved reading a book that I missed out on when at school, and this is one of those classics that I always intended to read but never got around to doing so. My loss!

The Eagle of the Ninth is the first of a series of books set in Roman Britain. I thought the series was 'just' a trilogy (The Silver Branch, The Lantern Bearers), but Wikipedia suggests there's actually eight in total. Eagle tells the story of Marcus Flavius Aquila, a young centurion posted to Britain, who lands up investigating into what happened to his father's legion, the famous lost Ninth, which disappeared without trace in 117 (although that is now disputed). The story is beatifully paced, building to an exciting climax in the wild border country around Hadrian's Wall.

Written in the 1950s (1954), It is in many respects very traditional, being a good, old-fashioned, adventure story with a completely honourable hero. What makes it stand out though is the way that Sutcliff so vividly evokes the period. Without overloading the reader or showing off, she uses a huge amount of historical detail to both bring the period alive, and drive the story forward in a way that so suits its Roman setting. Her language is straightforward and direct, every word and phrase serving a purpose, but never simplistic. For the time I was reading, I lived and breathed both the narrative and the historical and geographical settings.

There is a certain type of book that seems to be somewhat rare nowadays (maybe it always was), the children's book that is, in fact, anything but: classics such as Treasure Island, Kidnapped, The Jungle Book, Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn reach out way beyond the limitations of age definition, if they ever were originally written as 'children's books', being almost ageless in their appeal. Harry Potter probably comes closest in the modern era, but even then, whilst thoroughly enjoying them, I still felt I was reading books aimed primarily at children. The Eagle of the Ninth is another that reaches beyond its 'children's book' classification, simply an outstanding novel that is accessible to all ages. It certainly, IMO, earns its status as a children's classic but would more accurately be described as an adventure classic.

Edited December 30, 2015 by willoyd

[willoyd]

Clockwork by Philip Pullman **** (out of 6)

 

Read as preparation for teaching in school, this is very much a book for younger (10 and under) readers. Succinct, well written, it works on multiple levels, weaving together a variety of threads and issues seamlessly into a short but gripping tale. I particularly enjoyed the transitions between traditional story telling - it's set in the old Germany of the Brothers Grimm - and 'real life', albeit one where magic seems part of the fabric, giving an extra spookiness to an already potentially unnerving narrative. I also enjoyed the format, with boxed out snippets and asides that added to the texture of the book, although where to include them when reading the book out loud will be a challenge! There's certainly plenty for us to look at as a class.

 

Because I was reading this for work, and because the target audience is very much younger than me, it's not a book that I have rated as highly as my review might suggest, given that those ratings are based on personal enjoyment, but as a model of its type, it's excellent, and one I'm looking forward to working on with the children in my class.

Edited January 1, 2016 by willoyd

[willoyd]

Consider Phlebas by Ian M Banks ** (out of 6)

 

I used to enjoy a fair bit of science fiction when younger, and have been meaning to try out Ian Banks's Culture series for some time, of which Consider Phlebas is the first volume. I've had mixed experiences with his other writing, under his uninitialled name, so was intrigued as to what I would find.

 

It got off to a good start with a gripping introduction. After that though, it all seemed to fade into a rather tedious tale, moving a gang of space pirates from one set piece raid to another, a gang which was effectively a list of names with very little character development, other than what I was rather boringly told. I stuck it out for a couple of hundred pages (about half the book) and then decided that I really wasn't interested at all, and called a halt. And no, I wasn't sufficiently interested to skim or turn to the end to find out what happened.

 

I've given this two stars simply because the premise of the book is a good one, and because it may just be me not relating particularly well to the genre. Having read some of the reviews (not the 5-star ones!), this may not be the problem, but I'm giving the author the benefit of the doubt. Whatever, I'm not giving up on sci-fi just yet, but I don't think it's Ian Banks who is the one to hook me.

Edited January 1, 2016 by willoyd

[Athena]

Iain M. Banks's books, at least the couple I've read, aren't the easiest books to read when you haven't read much science-fiction yet (in my opinion). I don't find them the easiest books to understand if you're new to the genre. I should point out that while I've read Consider Phlebas it's not my favourite book, I believe it's one of the less strong segments in the series. But I liked it enough to read other books by the author.

 

I hope your next science-fiction book will be better!

[willoyd]

Iain M. Banks's books, at least the couple I've read, aren't the easiest books to read when you haven't read much science-fiction yet (in my opinion). I don't find them the easiest books to understand if you're new to the genre. I should point out that while I've read Consider Phlebas it's not my favourite book, I believe it's one of the less strong segments in the series. But I liked it enough to read other books by the author.

 

I hope your next science-fiction book will be better!

 

It wasn't so much difficult to read (indeed, I thought it to be almost too straightforward), as, IMO, not particularly well plotted or written.  I can't say there was anything about it that made a compelling case to me for reading more, especially as I've previously read others of his books, only one of which (Crow Road) did anything for me.

[willoyd]

Reviews

 

Some brief reviews to wrap up the year's reading:

 

Burial Rites by Hannah Kent *****

Set in Iceland in the early nineteenth century, Hannah Kent's first novel is based around a real-life murder. Agnes Magnusdottir has been convicted for the murder, and now faces execution. With no prison available, she is placed with a farming family to await her fate. But did she really commit the crime? Written from multiple viewpoints, including Agnes's own, pulling on original documents, this was as much a psychological exploration, both of Agnes's mind and of those of the family and others involved, as any whodunnit. In fact, the latter aspect increasingly felt almost trivial for much of the novel until, as one approached the end of the book, the prospective execution loomed. In short, I was gripped from start to finish - a great read.

 

La Fortune des Rougon by Emile Zola ****

The first of the Rougon-Macquart sequence, LFDR apparently introduces many of the characters who feature later in the series. In the meantime, the connections and the gulf between the two families is firmly established, whilst young scions of both are sucked up into the 1851 coup d'etat. Long on the drama, I also found a strong streak of unexpected humour mostly focused on the central characters of Pierre and Felicite: ambitious as they are, there seems a distinct whiff of Hyacinth Bucket about them and their machinations. It's going to be interesting following the series as it unfolds.

 

And Then There Were None - Agatha Christie ****

A famous (notorious??) Christie story. Has all the Christie hallmarks that will make it an intriguing read if you are a Christie fan. I read it because I wanted to watch the TV dramatisation. Her plotting was as intricate as ever, and I enjoyed its twists and turns, but I can't say I was wowed - but then Christie never did. Personally, I think she has dated somewhat and looks better on the small screen.

 

Period Piece by Gwen Raverat ***

A childhood memoir of the artist granddaughter of Charles Darwin, one of the Slightly Foxed editions. I had looked forward to this a fair bit, but found in practice that, whilst it is well regarded, it began to pall on me somewhat after the first half. Lacking any real chronological drive, chapters being based on themes rather than any narrative sequence, it started to drag, and could have been successfully edited of some hundred pages or so to make it a much tighter and more effective volume.

 

The Dancer at the Gai-Moulin by Georges Simenon ****

Too long is hardly ever heard in relation to Simenon, who nevertheless writes some of the most effective an atmospheric crime fiction that I know. This was no different, with a couple of interesting twists thrown in for good measure. The series as a whole merits a full six stars as one of my favourites.

 

Human Voices by Penelope Fitzgerald ***

A story based in Broadcasting House during the Second World War, where Fitzgerald herself worked. Unfortunately, it felt like an insider deal, with acronyms and initials abounding. It took time to work out who they all were, and with such a short novel, by the time one had, we were too far on. As a result, only really started to engage me in the second half, almost too late. On the whole, I love Fitzgerald's books, but this never quite grabbed me.

 

The Old Boys by William Trevor ***

Trevor's first novel, and nothing like some of his later work. It rolled on reasonably well, and shows some of the style that was to come, but always felt a tad contrived. Everything - dialogue, plot, setting, characters - came over just that little bit too exaggerated. This may have been deliberate, but as a result I never really settled into absorption, although I did still enjoy even if not in the same league as, for instance, The Story of Lucy Gault.

Edited January 14, 2016 by willoyd