I read cozy and historical mysteries, a bit of Paranormal/UF, and to mix it up, I read science and gardening books on occasion.
I found my forever book home, my bibliomecca, my promised land of the printed word, my people.
4 years ago (and 1 month) I found BookLikes!
I don't have to tell you guys how much I love this place; if Poland-based book sites had cheerleaders, I'd have the biggest set of pom-poms. But it's not just the wonderful creation David and Joanna gave us in the form of this wonderful platform that has so much potential, it's the community we've created here.
You guys really are my people - you're all wonderful, kind, funny, interesting and best of all, you put up with me and my half-assed reviews and intermittent librarian nags. Lest you think I'm getting too gushy, you've also all been hell on my TBR! You've introduced me to so many wonderful new books in so many new genres I'm seriously thinking of resorting to dewey decimal-ing my bookshelves. Truly there's not one of you that haven't expanded my reading horizons...and the linear footage of my library shelves.
SO as a direct result of all this horizon expanding I've had to cull my shelves to make room for all the new ones and that means...
Another jellybean book contest!
Easter-cat: Seriously, wtf are you doing?
Carlito: Looking for books!
4 boxes of books - a mix of hardcovers, paperbacks and mass-market paperbacks. First person to correctly guess how many are in the boxes, or comes closest to, without going over wins. Only one guess per person, please.
Prize: Well, in the US when I was a kid we got birthday spankings (no, I don't know why, yes it sounds horrid now, but we loved it) and there was always one to grow on. So, prize is $50 USD worth of books. If you're an Amazon user, a $50 gift card, if you're not, I'll buy you $50 worth of books from BookDepository and have them shipped to your shipping address of choice. (I delete these addresses as soon as shipping confirmation arrives.)
Contest ends: Wednesday, October 25, 9am Australian EST - This should be roughly Tuesday night in the USA and... I have absolutely no idea in Europe, but everyone should get about 3 days to submit their answer.
Good luck to everyone and here's to at least another 4 wonderful years on BookLikes!!!
The official start date for the read is November 1st. Everyone is welcome. I know of at least one person who has started the audio early, due to borrowing availability and personal reading schedule - if anyone else is in the same situation, please by all means, get started - it's not a race and we're all looking forward to your thoughts on the book.
If you're interested in participating, please take a quick moment to visit the threads and turn on notifications, so you don't miss out on the book chat.
As always, Huggins will take you there:
I needed a break from golden age mystery, and with bad back pain, I needed something that didn't require a high degree of concentration, and where there was a high probability of violence so I could vent vicariously. Urban Fantasy to the rescue!
I generally love Chloe Neill's writing for its wit and snark almost more than for her ability to tell a good story. Luckily she does tell a good story, because this series has less wit and snark than her Chicagoland series did. It's not barren of humor at all, but it lacks the verbal dances Merit and Ethan and Mallory entertained me with.
Still, it's a good story line and Clair is a strong protagonist who does not engage in love triangles or damsel in distress crap. I was able to get lost in a post apocalyptic New Orleans where magic is a thing and the author explores the 'us' vs. 'them' mentality that is so very, very prevalent today.
Good escapist reading with characters you can like and cheer for. I could do without the book ending with a soft cliffhanger, but I girl can't have everything and I'll take soft cliffhangers over love triangles any day!
Before there was Winnie-the-Pooh, Christopher Robins, Eeyore and Piglet, there was murder most foul. Before there was murder most foul, there was a stint as editor of Punch, a British weekly magazine of humour and satire published until 2002.
Now I don't see a huge influence of the murder most foul at the house on Pooh corner, but Punch definitely left its mark on The Red House Mystery. A.A. Milne set out to write a traditional mystery following all the 'rules' of fair play, and he took the plotting very seriously, but that did not keep him from planting his tongue firmly in his cheek while he wrote the story. It's alive with small jokes aimed at Holmes and Watson, mysteries in general, and at the characters themselves.
As such, it's a great mystery - heaps of fun to read, if sometimes it felt a tad long. I thought to only give it four stars for this reason, but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt for two reasons: I read this while flat out with hideous, unrelenting back pain, and I read the introduction. The former might be more obvious than the latter, but Milne was very careful in his introduction, to state his desire to play fair and make sure the reader had all the same clues as the amateur detective. So I might have over-focused on recognising the clues instead of enjoying the ride.
Not that it did me an ounce of good. By the time the denouement arrived I had no idea who did it or why. I can't say the ending was a massive ::gasp:: shock, but it was definitely not anti-climatic.
I wouldn't' suggest for a moment that the world could have done with less Winnie-the-Pooh, but it is a shame that Milne didn't write more than this one murder mystery. I can't help but wonder if this was his first effort, what future bafflement, wonder and entertainment he might have achieved with a bit more practice.
(For the Golden Age of Crime bingo, this could be used for Singleton, or Birth of the Golden Age of Crime)
Here's the thing about most Golden Age mysteries: the puzzle is all. No matter how witty or clever or brilliant the writing is, it's almost never about the characters themselves, but about the murder mystery puzzle. Which is, of course, why I read mysteries; I love the puzzle and I love trying to solve it. But unfortunately, if the reader does solve the murder/puzzle, there's not a lot of characterisation to fall back on; solve the puzzle and the remaining story can be tedious.
I solved this one on page 88-89. I don't think I did anything particularly clever, just that a certain passage hit me a certain way and it all became clear to me. The only thing I ended up getting wrong was the relation of the murderer to one of the characters and then only because I imagined the murderer to be the wrong age.
I didn't dnf, or skip to the end to see if I was correct solely because, when Heyer is 'on' with her writing she is on, and this is one of her better writing efforts, even if the plotting went astray (and I've found out her mysteries were all plotted by her husband). The story behind the mystery plot is a farce and Heyer thoroughly caricatures everyone except Hannasyde. The dialog was electric and even though I was thoroughly impatient with Neville at the start, I thought him wildly entertaining by the end. I wanted to keep reading just to see what he'd say and do next.
So, 2 stars for the plotting because... page 89. There was never any doubt on my part that I was wrong. But an extra star because the characters are Heyer at her wittiest and most hilarious.
Something went wrong somewhere in this book, and I don't know what it was or where it happened. Ok, yes, I know where part of it went wrong; I knew who the murderer was reaching page 80, but that shouldn't have mattered much to my overall enjoyment.
The book is about the discovery of a lost painting of Cézanne's, which right away I love; I even enjoy the flashback POV chapters, a device that I'm at best ambivalent about. The setting is Aix en Provence and it sounds as wonderful as it always has in Longworth's books, and Verlaque and Bonnet get more and more likeable with each book.
But at some point after about 2/3 of the way through, it fizzled. I don't like to say it's because there was no perilous climax, but it might be. Everything was tied up neatly at the end, but it still felt unfinished, or more accurately, un-satisfying.
Still an enjoyable read I always wanted to get back to, but not nearly as well constructed as the previous 4.
I'm sitting at home on a random Tuesday feeling sorry for myself, instead of being at work, because of stupid back issues. This happened to me at the exact same time last year and rather than miss the rare plant show, I went anyway and made my back a thousand times worse. This weekend is the rare plant show, so I'm laying around as immobile as possible today in hopes that come this weekend, my back will be better and I won't have to hobble around the show looking like an old crone.
Anyway, the point is, MT stopped by the house during his work errands to drop off a box that had arrived for me from Mysterious Books in NYC. Yay - books! The perfect distraction! And this box came with built-in further distractions in the form of a catalog, so I can pity shop my way through my back pain! Woo Hoo! ;-)
Here's my haul:
The top three are books by authors of the Golden Age of Crime fiction, part of my vintage mysteries project and The Detection Club's un-official bingo game-thats-not-a-game. Guess what my Halloween read is going to be this year? (Hint: it's not the first two.)
The Barbara Michaels and Gilman books were impulse buys: I know Michaels can be hit or miss, but I can't resist reading whatever she's written anyway, and I liked Gilman's Kaleidoscope so I caved to curiosity. Dunning's Booked to Die was a cheapie I threw in because I found one of the later books at a book sale and it's a read-in-order thing.
That Murder in the Bookshop is the catalog. 150 pages of mysteries involving books or bookstores or libraries, all for sale. It appears Otto Penzler is selling off his personal collection. Hoo boy...someone hide my wallet.
Bestselling crime author Val McDermid will draw on interviews with top-level professionals to delve, in her own inimitable style, into the questions and mysteries that surround this fascinating science. How is evidence collected from a brutal crime scene? What happens at an autopsy? What techniques, from blood spatter and DNA analysis to entomology, do such experts use? How far can we trust forensic evidence?
Any and all are invited to participate; group discussions will be in The Flat Book Society group, but there are always spontaneous discussions on the status updates too.
More info on the group can be found by clicking on Huggins, our mascot:
My real life book club chose this as the October read, and I admit, I've never before read this Christie classic. My contrary nature, I suppose. Plus, I knew how it ended, which dimmed the urgency of reading it. So too did my dislike of Poirot.
Well, I've read it now and it's as brilliant as every person has ever said it is. And there were two bonuses for me: Poirot wasn't as annoying as I've found him in other books - he was, in fact, quite tolerable. And Mrs. Hubbard blew me away. Did. not. see. that. coming.
Since I knew how it ended, I tasked myself with trying to pick up all the clues. Of all of them, I missed only two, I think. Or at least, only two of the obvious clues. I suspect if I re-read it I'd find a whole host of character related clues that sailed right over my head.
If you haven't read this yet and you think you might someday be interested, please take my advice and do not let anyone tell you how it ends. Avoid reading any more reviews, and just read the book. It will be so much better, so much more brilliant, if you don't know what is coming.
What started out strong for the first couple of parts, started struggling towards the middle and by the end it strongly resembled the book that was soon to follow it: The Story of Classic Crime in 100 Books; with paragraphs and chapters stuffed with titles and authors.
Still, it's all relative, because The Golden Age of Murder remains very readable and very interesting from start to finish. It just wasn't as strong at the end as it was at the beginning and as a result, my 4 star rating of what I thought was going to be a 5 star read.
A few minor things did bother me though, in no particular order:
- Edwards assumes the reader knows their dates. This reader is crap with dates, but excellent at reading comprehension, so usually an author gives a date and I can infer the dates of later events. BUT Edwards bounces back and forth on the timeline, so he'll give a date, but then refer back to earlier events for a few paragraphs, then bounce ahead to future events, never stating any additional dates. This became painfully irritating when he started discussing King Edward's abdication, as he bounced between events that happened before his coronation, after his abdication, during his reign, etc.
I should not need supplementary reading in order to make Edwards' narrative flow correctly.
- Edwards' bias for some authors over others is pretty obvious. Which is ok - although I question how ok when someone is aiming to write an authoritative historical text. His contempt for Christianna Brand is glaring and he's outright snarky about the Coles' political beliefs, coming just short of calling them hypocrites. He seems to start out liking Anthony Berkeley, but by the end it's all pity, and perhaps a polite disgust (to be fair, I'm not sure there's much else to feel about Berkeley by the end, it sounds like his was a life wasted for want of a good psychiatrist).
He treated Christie the most objectively, and towards the end goes so far as to offer up some very rational theories for her 11 day disappearance, but at all times it's clear he has a lot of respect and admiration for her. But Edwards saves the most blatant bias for Dorothy L. Sayers; I'd go so far as to speculate that he crushes on Sayers. He's downright romantic about her throughout the book, constantly reminding the reader about her deep, dark secret and the heavy burden of guilt and responsibility she always carried with her, not to mention that drunken lout of a husband she had strung 'round her neck her whole life. And that leads me to my last gripe:
- Towards the end, Edwards does that thing that drives me insane: he speculates ahead of the facts and presents it as truth. It's not often (maybe he just rushed the end?), but several times he presents his interpretation of a book's themes, or an author's motivation, as truth without providing evidence.
The most egregious example was in the last chapter when he (again) tells the reader how big a burden Sayers carried with her throughout her life. I'm going to put the rest of it in a spoiler tag; skip the spoiler if you know nothing at all about Sayers and would like to find out for yourself, or if you just don't care that much about the whole thing, because I do go on and on.
Overall, an excellent book for anyone interested in the Golden Age of crime fiction, even if it does lose a bit of steam towards the end. I'd unhesitatingly recommend it to mystery lovers who want to know more. Or to those I think have TBRs that need beefing up! ;-)
The Magical Realism call finally gave me my first Bingo, and in a case of 'best possible scenario' it was the square Linda Hilton needed for her first Bingo too, so neither of us are left behind and we can celebrate our win together.
And thank goodness for that, because enthusiasm was thin on the ground here at Chez Chats Paresseux...
*Yawn* Go away. But fluff my pillow first.
Wasabi couldn't even bother to make himself known - he was sleeping off a raucous 4am cat rave he hosted this morning.
Boy will they all be sorry tonight when they only get 1 cat treat each instead of their usual 2. ;-)
Still - BINGO! Hooray for Linda and me!
Sherlock Holmes is my fictional crush; I know he'd be no damn good for me, but I'd still willingly follow him until the wheels fell off. Proof of this being that I started listening to this audio in April and have since been devoted to it whenever I've been in the car - no cheating on it with Wilkie Collins or Kevin Hearne - and I've never gotten bored or developed a wandering ear.
Huge credit goes to Stephen Fry too, because my adoration of Holmes makes me picky and prickly. If he'd portrayed him as nasally or supercilious I'd have been righteously indignant and all up in his business (metaphorically speaking). But Fry gives him the perfect voice, which is, oddly enough, close to Fry's own (although I almost never heard 'Stephen Fry'). Condescending, a tad bored, but warm and tinged with a bit of humour at himself as well as others.
Where Fry really goes above and beyond though, in my opinion, is his portrayal of Watson. He nailed Watson and he did it for 4,260 minutes without ever losing track of his voice or allowing it to wander into being someone else's. It would have been an easier job to give his own voice to Watson instead of to Sherlock, but it works better this way; Watson sounds exactly like the kindly, naive, generous sort of man Conan Doyle created.
If you've already read the Sherlock Holmes stores but would like to revisit them, this is an excellent way to do it. If you haven't already experienced the brilliance that is Sherlock Holmes, this is a perfect introduction. I cannot recommend it highly enough.
The sections on finance and military idioms was a little boring, to be honest. But then came the Animals. Now we're talking!
Some of my favourites so far are the ones that sound the most bizarre (at least in translation):
A Furphy: This is an Aussie one, but it's only very recently that I've heard it used (probably because a brewer just released a beer called Furphy). To tell a Furphy is to lie, or spread a rumour.
Ir a donde el rey / la reina va solo: Spanish for to go where the king/queen goes alone. And we yanks get grief for our bathroom euphemisms! ;-)
Broodje aap verhaal: Dutch for a monkey sandwich story. Much more fun than just saying something is an urban myth
Avaler les couleuvres: French idiom meaning To swallow grass snakes. To believe everything your told, or to have to suffer a humiliation in silence.
Die beleidigte Leberwurst spielen: German for to play the insulted liver sausage. Explaining this almost ruins the fun of the translation, but it means to get in a huff or go off in a sulk.
And finally, one last one:
Avoir une araignée au plafond: French idiom meaning to have a screw loose, translated as have a spider on the ceiling.
I'm sure there will be more; it's safe to say this book is not all hat and no cattle (one of my favs from my own country).
I'm being generous in my rating of this book because I genuinely enjoyed it. It gets off to a rough start in terms of readability in the first couple of chapters, but it rights itself and becomes a wonderfully interesting wander through some of the elements in the periodic table. Yes, the science is hard (there are a lot of chemical equations and illustrations of molecules), but the author ties it all to historical anecdotes and uses a very conversational style of writing, so even if some of the science feels impenetrable, it's easy to come away from each chapter getting at least the gist of what he's saying.
The extra 1/2 star is a bonus because he's a very well read (or as least a widely reading) chemist: he frequently refers to not only Christie and Sayers' works, but Stieg Larsson, Clive Cussler, and Ian McEwan and Astrid Lindgren amongst others.
I'm grateful to Tannat for making me aware this book exists.
Part III felt like the driest part of the book so far; I admit my mind wandered more often through these chapters as Edwards felt like he was going through the motions with some of it. This could just be me though, struggling to connect with names I've never heard of until recently.
He's also very heavy handed with Sayers' "secret shame"; he mentions it so often, so explicitly, that I'm left wondering if Edwards is a man who would keep your secret, but remind you of his discretion and generosity at every available opportunity.
I knew I was going to enjoy this as I'm a sucker for books about what makes language expressive, but I thought it would be a quicker read than it is. Turns out, this is a collection of idioms from around the world, each with as much historical context as the author could find. So it's taking me much longer because I'm savouring all the new things I'm learning.
So far, the book has covered idioms from the UK, US, DE, FR, ES, DK, NL and AU. Except for the financial idiom section, which is heavily skewed towards the US, most of the entries so far have been 50/50 English/Non-English.
My favourites will be appearing in future status updates!