2016 Favorites

Favorite fiction: Shahnameh by Abolqasem Ferdowsi (Dick Davis translation)
An unusual pick as it was a year long read but a very worthwhile endeavor

Favorite non-fiction: Margaret Mahy: a writer's life by Tessa Tuder

Favorite mystery/thriller: N/A

Favorite historical fiction: Mr Allbones' Ferrets by Fiona Farrell

Favorite fantasy: The Obelisk Gate by N. K. Jemisin

Favorite Sci-fi: Planetfall by Emma Newman
The end left me a bit unsatisfied but this one otherwise really kept me turning pages

Favorite Romance: Mr Allbones' Ferrets by Fiona Farrell

Favorite Short Stories: Best of Women's Short Stories, Vol 3

Surprise hit: Sunstorm by Arthur C. Clarke and Stephen Baxter
This title sort of petered out for me but still, for a random audio pick at the library, I was really into it.

Surprise blunder: Station Eleven by Emily St. John Mandel

Favorite author discovered in 2016: N/A

Most re-read book first read in 2016: N/A

Most re-read author in 2016: Laura Kinsale


And since I do occasionally do something other than read...

Movies:
Favorite - Moana
Surprise hit - Love & Friendship
Surprise blunder - The Hunstman: Winter's War

Video games:
Favorite - Portal 2


Honorable mention to 3% but I didn't watch a lot of TV so I don't really have much of a list to begin with



Past Editions: 
2015 Favorites
2014 Favorites
2013 Favorites
2011 Favorites
2010 Favorites

Year in Books

Still a sucker for my Year in Books

That's a wrap!

After seven years of great fun exploring books and their adaptations, Michael and I are rolling credits on our duo posts. I guess this is an epilogue of sorts... just to make sure we keep in line with our chosen media.

My partner in crime (and science fiction and horror and drama and Etc) in what I ended up tagging the joint post series has a wonderful summary of what we analyzed over the years (with charts! be still my heart!) which you can find here:

Seven Years in Parallel at It Rains... You Get Wet

Have a wander over there to see exactly what we've been up to over the years. That includes genres, authors, directors, etc. It's an excellent breakdown.

I'm truly surprised 7 years went by for this series without me really noticing that holy shit(!) 7 years have gone by! What a fun ride it's been. Finding Michael in the blogiverse (back when we were only a car ride apart rather than an ocean) and then finding our Craisie love overlapped in scifi as well, is what got this whole ball rolling. I asked Michael if he would (please, please) review Minority Report because I loved the movie and his film reviews and wanted to see what he would have to say. He's a clever one and said "Yes, but..." And that resulted in me reviewing the short story that inspired the film. I love that that one kicked us off as I still watch and enjoy the film these 7 years later; and it's fitting for a Duo that had the most overlap of enjoyment in that genre.


My favorite reviews for whatever reason

I'm definitely also including Minority Report. I'd never reviewed a short story before and hadn't thought to give it a re-read after seeing the film. Jurassic Park and Life of Pi were definitely up there as faves since they are enduring favorites in my reading life. A Scanner Darkly was a true delight as I'd never even heard of it and ended up loving it. I'm going to throw Hombre in there as well as I'm not a huge fan of Westerns but this one charmed the heck out of me (but please don't be confused, it's not charming:)

My favorite reader pick
Movie: Edge of Tomorrow
Book: Breakfast at Tiffany's

My favorite collection of reviews is also 2011's.

My favorite and least favorite reviews to do for titles we each picked
  Me
Favorite: Jurassic Park
Least Favorite: Gonna repeat on that Salmon Fishing in the Yemen
  Michael
Favorite: Empire of the Sun
Least Favorite: Hell House


Thanks for an amazing run, Michael! Without you I'd never have learned to listen to audiobooks, read so many books published in the 70s or had this much fun spread over 7 years! Cheers.

rating: 5 of 5 stars ;-)

The Sentinel by Jeffrey Konvitz

Title: The Sentinel
Author: Jeffrey Konvitz
Publisher: Simon & Schuster (1974) 

It's that spooky time of year again when the pick of the month is a creepy title to stick with the mood of ghosts, goblins, and the like. Funny, these never feature candy...

For those that are new to our monthly series, this is when Michael reviews a film adapted from a book which gets a review here.

Click here for Michael's film review of The Sentinel 

at It Rains... You Get Wet

Allison Parker has returned to New York after spending 4 months at her family's home. She left 7 years ago due to traumatic events within the family and her father's funeral has brought all those memories to the forefront. As she tries to settle back in with work and friends, her over-bearing and prickly boyfriend turns out to be the least of her daily annoyances. The neighbors in her new apartment building take quirky to an entirely different level.

Allison's physical health also seems to have deteriorated. She suffers from acute, blinding migraines; sporadic paralysis; and blackouts. Along with the visit to her childhood home, the mental and physical stress she is experiencing have inspired her to re-explore her Catholic faith. Her desire to rekindle this, and the conflict that arises with her boyfriend (Michael) because of it, was an interesting angle that wasn't really pursued beyond what was convenient for the plot. I found that a disappointing hole in the book in light of what is slowly revealed about Allison.

Speaking of slow reveals, that was probably my favorite thing about this title. There is a very pleasing blur between horror and mystery in the plot. In fact, the horror comes rather later and it's the mystery that hooks from the beginning. Not only do events start to unravel for Allison (and the reader) but the possibly ominous backgrounds of Allison's friends and neighbors become known as Allison's poor health lands her in the hospital.

Konvitz sets up a mystery within a mystery when the reader learns that Michael has a history with a local detective. When the homicide detective hears that Michael is connected with Allison (and as such with the strange happenings around her) he takes the case and becomes a thorn in almost everyone's side. The fun part is, as a reader, you're never quite sure if it's the detective or Michael you should be suspicious of. 

It's slightly aggravating that Allison's story slowly gets taken over by Michael. As a character, Allison is presented sometimes very pro-active in investigating what is happening to her and sometimes as Michael's puppet. I found it annoying as a reader but also it just didn't seem to fit with Allison. The plus side of Michael taking over is, again, you're pretty sure you should be suspicious of him but he's also the only one finding any kind of satisfying answers as to who might be orchestrating a very bizarre series of events designed to undermine Allison's mental and physical well-being. 

For all that I enjoyed the mystery and character reveals there are a lot of really annoying tropes found in this book. I'm pretty limited in my horror genre reading but it seems like any horror title I peruse from the 60s and 70s relies heavily on sexual deviation* and sexual violence, women as victims, and caricatures. Obviously there is nothing wrong, in and of itself, with any of that (though I don't really care for the writing shortcut of caricatures) but a pattern seems to have been popular in those decades for horror novels that really doesn't speak to me as a reader. (I'd love to know if current horror readers feel the genre retains these tropes and patterns or if new ones have come into fashion.)

*I have to take a moment here to say that the sexual deviation is, way more often than not, simply sex against prevailing convention. For instance, the homophobia on display in this particular book is rampant and, while the two women in question were quite rude, their defining characterization was Lesbian and, for this book, lesbian = sexual deviant. Pretty terrible.

I also didn't find the prose to be particularly smooth. I was often distracted by over-long sentences and weird strings of adjectives. I suppose, in the end, we're here for the mystery and the horror but I could have done with a little more polish to the text.

For those looking for an intriguing mystery and a bit of horror (with what can only be described as a balls-out audacious ending) you'll certainly find a lot to enjoy in The Sentinel. However, be prepared that the prose and prejudices can be quite distracting.



Now about that movie... Don't forget to check out Michael's post. 

rating: 2 of 5 stars
 

Coming up next:  
The Finale

Click here for an index of the joint post series

Strangers on a Train by Patricia Highsmith

Title: Strangers on a Train
Author: Patricia Highsmith
Publisher: Harper & Brothers (1950) 

This month’s pick is the second of the year that we got from our reader poll at the end of last year. It's really fun to do these that were voted on. Interestingly for me, I happened to read my first Highsmith earlier this year so this was a second foray into this very popular author’s backlist.

For those that are new to our monthly series, this is when Michael reviews a film adapted from a book which gets a review here.

Click here for Michael's film review of Strangers on a Train 

at It Rains... You Get Wet

Title: Germane. :)

Synopsis: Two strangers meet on a train (who knew?) and one of them, Bruno, is a bit of an odd one. However, the second, Guy, clearly has odd lying in wait beneath the surface. When Bruno gets Guy drunk and then suggests they help each other out with some murdering, Guy is pretty sure he wants to say no. He does but he also underestimates just how much Bruno wants to “help.”

What works: How easily the reader can get lost in the minds of Highsmith’s characters. She gets you so close to these weirdos that you almost want a quick shower after you finish reading.

Bruno's super creepy but wholly sincere tokens. I just loved his "nice town" comment on the postcard.

What doesn’t: It’s spoilerish so highlight if interested: Immediately after Guy finds out about Miriam’s murder he could easily go to the police with everything that happened and solve this problem. Instead, the rest of the book happens. It was hard for me to get past that.

I know it’s slightly unfair of me to conflate this book with the other I read this year (The Talented Mr Ripley) but all the characters blend together, within this one and across to the other book I read. When Bruno and Guy sometimes overlapped, which was a little bit the point I think, I kept losing track of who was who but not really in a good way. And if I find her male characters uninspiring her female characters don’t even bear mentioning. Ugh. What a disappointment.

It’s kind of a boring book.

Overall: It’s not that I mind a slow burn type structure, it’s just that I’ve always found pathological self-justification tedious. On the one hand, Highsmith seems to wonderfully capture the pathos of her characters (I say seems because, really, how can I know? these people are that far off their rockers) but on the other hand, as the whiny, entitled mind-ramblings ramble on, I got bored. However, there is clearly a huge fan base out there for Highsmith so obviously YMMV.

Now about that movie... Don't forget to check out Michael's post. 

rating: 2 of 5 stars
 

Coming up next:  
The Sentinel by Jeffrey Konvitz

Click here for an index of the joint post series

The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas (pere)

Title: The Three Musketeers
Author: Alexandre Dumas, pere
Publisher: Century eBooks (2012) Originally serialized March to July 1844 in Le Siecle

We do a lot of older books in our series but we’re hanging out in the way, WAY back machine this month. I had a hankering to read some Dumas so I threw out a couple of titles. It wasn’t until I actually started re-reading The Three Musketeers that I recalled I’m not the biggest fan of this particular Dumas and I don’t think I’ve previously ever actually made it to the end. I’m curious to hear what Michael thought of it. I have to say my Dumas of re-reading choice is The Count of Monte Cristo. But, even if I’m reading a Dumas that’s not a fave I still enjoy their larger than life vitality and my preoccupied musings on the author himself.

For those that are new to our monthly series, this is when Michael reviews a film adapted from a book which gets a review here.

Click here for Michael's film review of The Three Musketeers 

at It Rains... You Get Wet

Seriously, though, if you don’t know a lot about Alexandre Dumas, pere I highly recommend doing a bit of reading. You can start with everyone’s favorite Wikipedia or go here or here or here. And if, in your reading, you notice a mention of his father, a General in the French army, rest assured his story is pretty compelling, too. (And you can read about it in this great book that I never lose a chance to recommend.)

Whoa? This won a Pulitzer? Guess I got my copy before that happened.

 

But what about those musketeers? Well, as with many of Dumas’ novels they’ve been translated into about a 100 languages and are very popular in many English speaking countries. Film adaptations come out on the regular and playwrights adapt it as well (Dumas was a playwright before he was a novelist so I wonder if he ever adapted his own work for the stage?), but I’ll still include a synopsis. D’Artagnan is a hot-headed, talented youth who sets out for the city with very little outside of his embarrassing mount (quickly sold), his father’s axioms, and his mother’s cure-all recipe for injuries (liberally applied). Turns out all a bold, resourceful person needs is those few items and before you know it you’ll be making friends with those you were previously meant to duel. After offending the titular musketeers one right after the other, he becomes fast friends with them after getting to kill some of the Cardinal’s guards (The Cardinal is our resident baddie.). D'Artagnan and his new friends then get up to all sorts of hijinks in the midst of court and international intrigue.

So while it's not my favorite it is hard to resist the charm of characters who feel compelled to sword fight over a shoulder jostle. The plot twists around with fun cliffhangers and the baddies are sinister enough to satisfy and provide a good counter to the heroes. It's a fun, swashbuckling tale but there's real depth to be found, as well. It's what makes Dumas so easy to come back to again and again. Fun and humor are always there but so is something to really bite into.

Not to mention those quietly genius lines

Monsieur, I love men of your kidney... 

Let us say in passing that he had changed his baldric and relinquished his cloak.

"Oh, good lord," cried Porthos, "what precautions for the study of theology!"

Definitely give this one a go but don't stop here. Make sure you give Dumas a solid perusal. 


Now about that movie... Don't forget to check out Michael's post. 

rating: 3 of 5 stars
 

Coming up next:  
Strangers on a Train by Patricia Highsmith

Click here for an index of the joint post series

Why lie when the truth would do?

I was really excited to see The Eagle Huntress doco, and with good reason. As it turns out, Aisholpan and her family are immensely charming and lovely to spend time with. Their support for each other is inspiring and the young Aisholpan's hard work and dedication would encourage anyone to follow their dreams. I was even more interested in the fact that she was, as purported by the synopsis, the first woman to participate in the eagle hunting tradition of her family and nation.

Imagine my surprise when it turns out that wasn't true. And, moreover, that the truth is just as good if not better than the fiction the doco makers felt they needed to cultivate.

The Eagle Huntress Ancient Traditions and New Generations by Adrienne Mayor is well worth the read. Aisholpan is following in the traditions of the men and women who came before her and the truth inspires on its own merits.

I am wholly mystified by these film makers. Why lie when the truth would do?

52 Pickup by Elmore Leonard

Title: 52 Pickup
Author: Elmore Leonard
Publisher: Martin Secker & Warburg Ltd (1974) 

Apologies for the technical issues. Hopefully this time around all will be well. 

I don't know if Michael planned for us to post another Leonard tale almost 2 years to do the day from when we did one before but it's a fun coincidence. I had a great time with Hombre but, unfortunately, not at all with this title. (PS Michael, send me some of that warm weather!)

For those that are new to our monthly series, this is when Michael reviews a film adapted from a book which gets a review here.

Click here for Michael's film review of 52 Pickup 

at It Rains... You Get Wet

Title: Should have been called Not Even 1 Reason to Pickup Much Less 52.


Synopsis: A trio of criminals try to blackmail a businessman by exposing his infidelity. As it happens, they end up getting more than they bargained for with this particular businessman.


What works: Leonard's spare prose and snappy dialogue. I do like an author who let's the story tell itself.


What doesn't: For this reader, pretty much everything else. Mitch was so over the top about the only thing I found believable was the fact he thought his stupid ass excuse re Cini was something he should say out loud. Barbara may as well have been called Convenient Mitch Decoration or Needed Plot Device. The union rep was ridiculous, Mitch's "straight talk" employee management scheme was just a little too easy and the criminals were really boring and stupid. I was already grinding my teach in chapter 3 so I knew this was going to be a rough one. One thing I'll say for it, I think you can figure out pretty quick whether it's a title for you or not. And even though I plugged away to the finish, I never came around to rooting for or caring if Mitch got the better of the bad guys.

I could go into the relentless violence against and exploitation of women, the one dimensional or non-existent roles for anyone who doesn't look like Mitch, the faux sexual liberation theme but, really, I think my point has been made re this title. 


Overall: Even this gem of a line didn't make it worth the read. 

"Well, I guess you'll think of a way," Vic said, "if that's what you want to do, light up a briefcase."
"It's kind of what I want to do," Mitchell said. 

Now about that movie... Don't forget to check out Michael's post. 

rating: 2 of 5 stars
 

Coming up next:  
Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas

Click here for an index of the joint post series

Life of Pi by Yann Martel

Title: Life of Pi
Author: Yann Martel
Publisher: Random House of Canada (2001) 

I take full responsibility for this month's pick. Life of Pi is my favorite book. I've been wanting to add it to our series for a few years now but never could bring myself to watch the movie. Finally, I asked if it was ok to add it even if I had no intention of ever watching the movie. Michael, ever a generous friend and partner in crime, readily agreed and here we are.

I remember first hearing about the rights being sold (many, many years ago now; long before the movie was ever filmed) and thinking how? HOW?? It's not possible! But beyond my limited ability to imagine an adaptation of this story what it really came down to is the fact that Pi, his view of life, and his incredible journey are fully alive in my mind. The connection I have with this book is the perfect expression, embodiment even, of my connection with Books. When a story comes alive in the mind it is the greatest, most satisfying, link between artist and consumer. It's the lightning we're all trying to catch every time we open a book. This is my lightning in a bottle. I sincerely hope you, Dear Reader, have one as well (here's a list of my faves; maybe you'll find one there:).

For those that are new to our monthly series, this is when Michael reviews a film adapted from a book which gets a review here.

Click here for Michael's film review of Life of Pi 

at It Rains... You Get Wet

Truly, I was going to try to do a proper review with attempts at objectivity yadda yadda yadda but since this is my favorite book all attempts merely spiraled into a love letter to one of my favorite reads so, um, hope you enjoy anyway? NB: I usually aim to keep my posts spoiler free but beware

CONTAINS MAJOR PLOT SPOILERS

Pi Patel, devotee of God/s and religion (and take backer of his name) is immigrating with his family to Canada in the 70s. The ship carrying them and some animals destined for new zoos (the former family business is zookeeping) sinks in the Pacific. Pi finds himself on a lifeboat with some very aggressive castaways. This book is the story of his survival. 

Brother, there's something I forgot to mention.

My love of this book is not limited to story and character. I think it's an amazing piece of craft. The writing is exquisite and the voice is impeccable. The richness of the writing is as layered as the story it tells.

I was more afraid that in a few words thrown out he might destroy something that I loved.

Pi is at once naive and keenly observant of the world. I think it's the secret to his resilience and what makes him uniquely suited to surviving his ordeal at sea.

The obsession with putting ourselves at the centre of everything is the bane not only of theologians but also of zoologists.

I'm particularly fond of this line as my enjoyment of this book has a lot to do with putting me and my interpretation at the center of it. Seems fitting. But I suspect a serious streak of self-consciousness in Martel, as well.

There are always those who take it upon themselves to defend God, as if Ultimate Reality, as if the sustaining frame of existence, were something weak and helpless.

Also a compelling line, not only for its relevance to the theme of the book but because, unlike the reviewer at The New Yorker (according to the backcopy anyway) I do not think the book is "an impassioned defense of zoos" but an impassioned defense of religion. It's why I didn't just say that Pi is a devotee of God/s. He is also quite drawn to religion. I think he finds as much satisfaction in the ceremonies and meditation of devotion as he does in simple faith. In fact, I'd argue that God/s without religion would not appeal to Pi at all. He might even call that "dry, yeastless factuality."

I mean compared to other animals, of course. Next to Richard Parker, I was deaf, blind and nose-dead. 

I distinctly remember first reading this book and thinking "Pi, what is wrong with you? Why are you hitting Richard Parker over the head instead of helping him?" And then, "Wait, what?" as I flipped back through the book wondering how it was I never noticed Richard Parker was a zoo animal and not a school friend. It's very nicely done subterfuge because it makes no difference to the story if you did think Richard Parker was a tiger (and I'd be curious to know how many readers weren't fooled) and, more importantly, it prepares the reader for what is to come. Things are perhaps not what they seem. Pay attention. It's a beautiful set-up.

There couldn't be both a hyena and a tiger in such a small space.

No, indeed, Pi there couldn't. If you've read this book only once I highly recommend reading it again. The book is filled with these gorgeous lines of double meaning. But, thankfully, this is not a coy piece of work. Each well-chosen word speaks to the situation at hand but a re-read shows that there is more at hand than one at first suspects.

Oh, the delight of the manufactured good, the man-made device, the created thing!

Did I mention that lovely voice? This book is filled with horrors but you're as likely to laugh and smile as despair. The tone is absolutely dead-on and I think I've never seen such excellent use of exclamation marks (Yep, I've just praised the punctuation, I told you this was a love letter!).

I will tell you a secret: a part of me was glad about Richard Parker. A part of me did not want Richard Parker to die at all, because if he died I would be left alone with despair, a foe even more formidable than a tiger.

I've never looked it up but I really hope there is a survival manual out there as shown in the book.

Only one important topic was not addressed: the establishing of alpha-omega relationships with major lifeboat pests.

What I can't help wondering is at what point did Pi start telling this story? I suspect it's right around:

I have survived so far, miraculously. Now I will turn miracle into routine. The amazing will be seen every day. 

I've said already that I think this is an impassioned defense of religion (which, by the way, has yet to be effective for this reader) but I've never been able to reconcile that with its comparison to zoos. Perhaps that's part of the expression of Pi's naivete. He seems to think it makes no difference to go with "the better story" but the sad fact of life is that it does. Stories, better or otherwise, do not exist in a vacuum but in societies. What society does with a story matters.

I continued to disbelieve my eyes. But it was a thrill to be deluded in such a high-quality way.

  
Now about that movie... Don't forget to check out Michael's post. 

My much read and beloved copy

rating: 5 of 5 stars
 

Coming up next:  
52 Pick-up by Elmore Leonard

Click here for an index of the joint post series