South of Broad by Pat Conroy - No Rating Inflation Here - C-

One thing that I refuse to do on this blog is provide any spoilers.  The whole point is to recommend/not recommend a book without giving too much information--I refuse to read through Amazon reviews until after I've read a book for the same reason.  I want you to be able to read my recommendations without worrying that something in the post will spoil anything in the book.  I'm going to push that policy here a little.

First, Prince of Tides is one of my all time favorites.  Top 50 for me--not top 1 or 2.  Pat Conroy is a great author, probably one of the best of his generation.  So this recommendation pains me.

The good.  Conroy still writes very well.  He captures his setting--Charleston--beautifully, and his love for the city comes through in the writing.

Also, there are themes in the book that previous Conroy readers will find all too familiar.  Psychologically damaged characters, particularly due to childhood experiences.  Daddy issues.  Mommy issues.  Personal histories of violence.

The main problems here are that (1) the characters are caricatures--way too predictable and (2) the plot is unncessarily and shockingly contrived.  I'm still not sure where the book "went."  I hated the ending.  The character development is also contrived, particularly when Conroy jumps between different time periods and works way too hard to fill in the blanks that the reader is going to need.

All of these are effortless in previous Conroy books.  The characters were flawed, yes, but imperfectly flawed and unpredictable.  Here, they are predictably flawed, and there are no surprises.

If you want a well written book, and if you just can't help yourself because you are a Conroy fan, give it a try.  Otherwise, make sure that you've read Conroy's previous books before you feel the need to pick up his newest.

Feeding the Beast

http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2009/08/booksmart_ideas_for_the_frugal.html

I prefer owning most of my books--like many, I'm funny about that.  I also prefer hardback books, probably because I'm likely less than 18 months from needing the dreaded bifocals.

I will borrow older (i.e. available) books from the library.

Anyway, I will read paperbacks, particularly when I'm travelling (the Kindle wasn't for me; I know plenty of people who think it's the greatest device ever).

About a year ago I read about paperbackswap.com in the Wall Street Journal.  It's a book swapping site, and there are other such sites as well (discussed in the link above).  To get started on paperbackswap.com, you post 10 books that you'd be willing to swap.  Then, you get two credits to acquire books from other members.  You also commit to send books that you have posted to other members.  Each time you mail a book to another member, you get an additional credit.  You pay postage to for books you send to other members; they pay postage for books you request from other members.  You can also buy credits if you want.  Anyway, the site works pretty well if you are looking for paperbacks.

The Classics Never Die - "To Kill a Mockingbird"

Atticus Finch.  Scout.  Jem.  Boo Radley.

Because most of us associate To Kill a Mockingbird with high school English class, we rarely think of it as one of our favorite books.  I know many people who attribute their decision to become a lawyer to Atticus Finch.  Robert Duvall's greatest role?  The Godfather films?  Of course not.  It has to be his wordless debut as Boo Radley opposite Gregory Peck in the original film version of the movie.

Atticus and Scout are iconic, unforgettable characters.  They represent hope and goodness.  The book is full of emotion--Scout's coming of age, Atticus' strength.  It's a book that you can read again and again.  I get emotional each time I read Scout's greeting near the end:  "Hey Boo."

What classics stick with you?  Others that stick with me include "Huckleberry Finn" and "Uncle Tom's Cabin."

Robert McCammon Interlude

I had never heard of Robert McCammom until late last year when I went on a bit of a Robert McCammon kick.

The impetus for my "kick" was that I read some reviews/articles that had compared him to Stephen King.  I find it a somewhat apt comparison.  Each of the four McCammon novels that I read had some supernatural overtones with no horror, per se.  I do not recommend all of them, but I did enjoy each of them.

McCammon's an interesting novelist in that he essentially stopped writing after publishing Gone South in 1993 (at the ripe old age of 41).  Then, beginning in 2002, he started his historical fiction Matthew Corbett series, which began with "Speaks the Nightbird," continued with "The Queen of Bedlam" and is set to continue in late 2009 or early 2010 with "Mr. Slaughter."  "Speaks" was reportedly written in the early 1990s and not published until 2002.

Now, on for some quick hits, presented in the order in which I read the books:

1.  "Boy's Life."  Easily the pick of the litter.  There are definite supernatural overtones in this novel, and while the paragraph below describes McCammon's "jumping off point," the novel is really a coming of age novel told from Cory's (12 year old) perspective.  Outstanding and highly recommended.  Here's the first paragraph from the dust jacket:

"The year is 1964. On a cold spring morning before the sun, Cory Mackenson is accompanying his father on his milk delivery route. Without warning a car appears in the road before them and plunges into a lake some say is bottomless. Cory's father makes a desperate attempt to save the driver, but instead comes face-to-face with a vision that will haunt and torment him: a dead man handcuffed to the steering wheel, naked and savagely beaten, a copper wire knotted around his neck. The lake's depths claim the car and the corpse, but the murderer's work is unfinished as, from that moment, both Cory and his father begin searching for the truth."

2.  "Gone South."  You ever have a bad day?  I mean, a REALLY bad day?  Well, Vietnam vet Dan Lambert is impacted by a series of unfortunate events culminating with him being on the run from the law and bounty hunters.

I read this novel during the great Cincy Blackout of 2008.  Mostly by flashlight, pioneer style (ok, I know that the pioneers didn't have flashlights . . .)  Good story and entertaining but only recommended if you really like McCammon.

3.  "Swan Song."  An apocalyptic and post-apocalyptic novel told in the spirit of Stephen King.  Almost like a "The Stand" meets "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy.  As stated earlier on this blog, "The Stand" is one of my favorites.  Reviews of "Swan Song" that I read indicated that "most people" who enjoy one ("The Stand" or "Swan Song") also enjoy the other.  I enjoyed "Swan Song" very much and highly recommend it for anyone who likes apocalyptic fiction or "good versus evil."  I do not recommend this novel for most readers, however.


4.  "Speaks the Nightbird."  Liked it.  Didn't love it.  I have Queen of Bedlam in my pile o' books but haven't read it in the 8 months since I finished "Speaks the Nightbird."  That should tell you something only about my taste, not the quality of the book.  First, "Speaks" takes place in 1699.  I'm not much for historical fiction.  Second, I don't love the authentic speech from the period.

"This is Where I Leave You" (A-)

I was in a mood for what I'll call a literary comedy. Something like "Then We Came to the End." [A short interlude. Is it just me, or is the title, "This is Where I Leave You" (six words) a lot like "Then We Came to the End"? Is there any doubt as to why I found myself comparing the two novels? Anyway.]

I just finished "This is Where I Leave You" by Jonathan Tropper. There are one and two word excerpts from back cover book quotes on the dust jacket. Leaving aside the self-serving "Brilliant"-type excerpts, I think that "Darkly Comic," "Wickedly observant" and "Brutally honest" are the most accurate.

The setting for the novel is the aftermath of the death of a family patriarch. The family patriarch, Mort Foxman, not terribly religious in life, had a dying wish that his family--wife, daughter and three sons--sit shiva for him. Like most families, the Foxmans can be called Dysfunction Junction. Over the week of sitting shiva, family secrets are revealed and family resentments are revisited. The tone, though, despite often heavy subject matter, is light and humorous, producing a fun and rewarding read. "Witty" (as another one worder states on the back cover).

I know that it looks like I'm engaged in some "grade inflation" here as I've been fortunate enough to have selected very good books one after the other in the last few months. I'd like to keep it going because there are unfortunately times when it feels like I haven't read a great book in a long time.

"Blood in the Cage" - B-

Here is another non-fiction entry with a longer title than the one presented. "Blood in the Cage: Mixed Martial Arts, Pat Miletich, and the Furious Rise of the UFC" by L. Jon Wertheim.

OK, so I knew nothing about mixed martial arts or "ultimate fighting. Zero. I saw this book referenced in Sports Illustrated and I said, "Hmmm. I'd kinda like to learn about MMA. I just don't get it."

Imagine the look I got at Barnes & Noble when I asked if they had "Blood in the Cage." B&N had it, and the look didn't disappoint.

Anyway, the book essentially follows an MMA "pioneer," a guy named Pat Miletich. The book explores the different disciplines that came together to form MMA and chronicles the early objections to the sport. The book also tells the history of MMA tournaments, the coverage of MMA on television and the different leagues that predated the sport's current structure.

I did enjoy this read, but it's a definite B. The subject matter is simply unappealing to anyone with no interest in finding out what MMA is all about.

One of my earlier posts concerns "Joker One." That's another book that may not appeal to all readers, but I would recommend that book over "Blood in the Cage" any time.

Three things came out of my reading this book. One, I understand what MMA is all about and know that it is not the "barbaric" sport others believe it to be. Two, I appreciate the physical training and ability, as well as the mental toughness, of those who participate in MMA. Three, I pause a little longer on USA and SpikeTV when flipping channels when MMA is on. I have not developed any desire to learn who the fighters are or to follow the sport, though.

"Joker One" - B+

The full title of this non-fiction entry is "Joker One: A Marine Platoon's Story of Courage, Leadership and Brotherhood" and was written by Donovan Campbell. Campbell, a graduate of Princeton and Harvard Business School, tells his story of enlisting in the Marines and becoming a (largely unprepared, through no fault of his or his platoon's) commander of a 40-man infantry platoon called Joker One.

"Joker One" is a Band of Brothers-ish view of a Marine platoon in Iraq. The book is remarkably honest. Campbell beats himself up about the tough decisions he is forced to make and is unabashedly critical of his unit and of the Marines where necessary.

There will be times where I will compare "similar" books on this blog--basically saying, "if you want to choose between these two books with similar themes, read this one first." However, I haven't read Band of Brothers, but I'm certain that those of you out there who have will, at least in the backs of your minds, be comparing the two books. I can't tell you if Joker One will disappoint on that level or not. What I can tell you is that the honesty and emotion with which Campbell relates his experiences will elicit an emotional response in all but the most heartless reader. I give this book, which I enjoyed immensely, a "B" because it is not for everyone. Scenes will shock and will be upsetting for some. Also, a book on war, especially a book on THIS WAR which has polarized the US, will be unappealing from the get go for many.

"Shadow of the Wind" (A) and "Angel's Game" (A-)

I read these two books by Spanish author, Carlos Ruiz Zafon, one after the other, "Shadow of the Wind" first. "Shadow" was the first of the two translated into English, but chronologically, "Angel's Game" takes place before "Shadow."

Both novels are set in Barcelona, Spain. "Angel's Game" in the early 1900s, "Shadow" beginning around 1940.

I had heard about "Shadow" and looked it up on Amazon. I immediately had a huge disconnect. On the one hand, the description of the novel interested me not at all. Zero. The disconnect was because of "Shadow's" very high customer rating after over 500 reviews!

I was so doubtful that I would enjoy the novel that I borrowed it from the library rather than purchasing even a used copy. For some reason, I was enthralled from page 1. The novel is extremely well written (especially impressive given the translation), has terrific characters and a suspenseful story. The story is secondary, though, as it serves more as the vehicle for the study of the characters.

I then read "Angel's Game." I only give "Angel's Game" an A- because I read it second; I am curious if anyone who reads the books in reverse order will also enjoy the book read first a bit more. Again, phenomenal characters. Again, a suspenseful story. Again, very well written (and translated).

Both novels are essentially about book lovers for book lovers. The main character in "Shadow" owns (with his father) a second-hand bookstore; the main character in "Angel's Game" is an author.

I do not believe that any other Ruiz novels have been translated into English. I defer to anyone out there who is fluent in Spanish to provide a short outline of the premise for his other novels.

"The Girl Who Played with Fire" - A-

I RECONSIDERED MY GRADE AFTER SOME COMMENTS AND ADJUSTED IT DOWNWARD TO A-

"The Girl Who Played With Fire" by Stieg Larsson - A-

"The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo," the first book in this "trilogy" (quotation marks explained below), introduced us to Lisbeth Salander, a rarity in that she is an extraordinarily unique character. While Salander was ancillary to the main storyline in "Tattoo," she still stole the show.

Salander is front and center in "The Girl Who Played With Fire." Mikael Blomkvist is back as are a bunch of other characters from Tattoo. Make no mistake, though, "Fire" is about Salander. She is a layered, mysterious character, and under every layer, there is still more to learn about her, and she surprises throughout.

Larsson died in 2004 and never saw any of his books in print. The third in the "trilogy" has not been translated into English, yet, and a fourth in the series was in process at Larsson's death.

"Fire" is a well written, suspenseful novel, difficult to put down. I got through it in only a few days.

Recent Quick Hits

To start this thing off, I thought that I'd list some Quick Hits of books that I have read recently including some in each category:

A - "And Then We Came to the End" by Joshua Farris. This was a 2007 National Book Award Finalist (Denis Johnson's Vietnam novel, "Tree of Smoke" won). I cannot remember another book that made me laugh out loud. Almost like a crazy episode of "The Office" with funny vignettes and great characters. Also well written, in the royal (and unknown) "we."

B - "Duma Key" by Stephen King. Confession. I love Stephen King. He scared the bejeesus out of me when I was in high school. I haven't read EVERYTHING he's written (I'm no Annie Wilkes), but I've read the vast majority. Some of his books are not great (Pet Sematery, anyone?), but I think that, largely because of his subject matter (oh, the horror), he gets a bad rap in that he's a much better writer then he's given credit for. As he said in "On Writing," (and I'm paraphrasing), sometimes it's enough to "spin a good yarn," and Stephen King does this more often than not and does it well. Duma Key is about friendship and redemption in the context of a physically flawed protagonist who relocates on, wait for it, wait for it, Duma Key. And, there's scary stuff, too. This should absolutely NOT be your first Stephen King book, however.

B - "The Tourist" by Olen Steinhauer. This is a present day spy novel, and what's somewhat rare is that I have recommended this book, and each person who read it on my recommendation liked it more than I did. I found it somewhat formulaic (which is fine, it's a spy novel after all), and I didn't love the ending (it reminded me too much of a movie ending, and I could spoil the book ending if I tell you which movie).

C - "The Doomsday Key" by James Rollins.  This is the latest in the Sigma Force novels written by James Rollins.  Others include "The Last Oracle," "Black Order" and  "The Judas Strain."  In my opinion, "The Doomsday Key" was the weakest of the bunch.  WAY too formulaic.  Unlike the previous books, it seems like Rollins just mailed this one in.  If you've been reading the Sigma Force books, this is the time to either stop or hold your nose, read it and hope that the next one is better.

D - "Without Warning" by John Birmingham. I don't know why I picked this book up. I know less why I suffered through 528 pages. I suppose that, at some point, I figured that I had lost enough time reading the book that I had to finish it. The general premise of the book is that an unexplained natural (i.e. non-terrorist) event takes place in the majority of the US, and the novel explores the economic and political repurcussions of the event. The book is not poorly written, per se. I just could not get invested in premise or the characters. I didn't care about the characters. That's always a problem.

F - "Ravens" by George Dawes Green. Perhaps I didn't give this book a fair shake, but the fact remains that I didn't finish the book. That automatically gives it an F. I'm not a big James Patterson or Harlan Coben fan. I don't like page turners where there is little description and not much of what I'd call "skilled writing." Sure, Green, Patterson and Coben can "spin good yarns," but, as a matter of personal preference, I want more than that. We're too busy to waste our time on something that we thing is not a good read.

Mark's Book Blog

Welcome to Mark's Book Blog!

Why did I set this up? Several reasons.

1. I'm constantly asked for book recommendations. I often cannot remember what I've read recently and, consequently, struggle for a recommendation. This will keep me up to date.

2. We're all busy. Sometimes I forget what I liked and what I didn't like about a book I read a month or two ago. As a result, this blog commits me to memorialize a book shortly after reading the book.

3. I, too, want book recommendations from those I trust (so I may or may not read your recommendation). From this blog, you can see what I've liked--you may not like my taste, may never come back to the blog--that's ok. If, though, you like some or all of what I like, tell me. And, more importantly, tell me what else I'd like!

Here's my recommendation scale--I will rate all books I read (subject to my ability to rate a book that I stop reading for good reason).  The recommendation scale has gone through many iterations since inception of the blog (but before going "live").  I will use plusses and minuses for differentiation purposes.

A - Strongly recommend; if you are a reader, you should enjoy.

B - Recommend to certain readers or recommend with a caveat. If I give a book a B, I enjoyed the book.  However, I didn't find the book "perfect."  I didn't love the ending.  The middle dragged.  The characters were not believable.  For non-fiction, I didn't need/want the pages and pages of useless description.

C - Not recommended.  I may have enjoyed the book, and I may even recommend it to some readers.  For instance, I may follow an author or a series.  I may still rate the book a C, but others who follow the same author may enjoy the book (and may enjoy it more than I did).

D - Ay yi yi--why did I finish this book? Just stubborn, I guess.

F - Couldn't finish the book. Life's too short.

Despite Reason No. 2 above, I will also populate this blog with the following:

"Quick Hits": Ratings and short commentaries on books read recently but before inception of the blog.

The "Classics Never Die": Ratings and short commentaries on books read at any time. Whether a book is a "Classic" is decided only by me. For instance, "The Stand" by Stephen King is a Classic. Excellent story, extremely well written, memorable characters=Classic.

Mark