Book 52 - "Blood oozed across the top and down the front of the seat, adding to that pooled around the gas and brake pedals..."

The last book! But not the end of this blog. Watch this space.

In the mean time, thanks to everyone who has been reading - I hope you've been enjoying following me as much as I've enjoyed the readin' and writin' (no 'rithmatic, luckily.)



Title: Grave Secrets (2002)

Author: Kathy Reichs

Why this book:
Because I watch the tv series Bones, which is very-only-vaguely based on Kathy Reichs' Temperance Brennan novels. Of which this is one! Also: they're best sellers, and I usually enjoy even the most turgid of best sellers.

What's it about?
Dr Temperance Brennan is a forensic anthropologist - that is, she looks at very dead bodies to try and understand how they lived (and how they died). She is currently working in Guatamala, trying to identify the bodies of peasants killed in a bloody massacre so that they can be given a proper burial. While there, a local policeman who knows she has worked with police before asks for Temperance's help on a case involving the dead body of a runaway teen found in a sewerage tank.

Neither job is going to be easy. There are plenty of people who want the past to stay buried - people with power, people who are now living respectable lives who don't want their former crimes revealed. People who see Temperance as a threat. People who may have just killed one of her friends and colleagues.

Temperance is stubborn, and she's determined to find the truth. But will it be at the expense of her own life?

The Good and the Bad
This is one of those books that just didn't click for me. I read furiously through the first half, and then I lost interest in it and had to really push myself through the second half. Actually, I think that had less to do with the book and more to do with how hectic my life got while I was reading it, but when I really want to read something I'll read it, come hell or high water. Grave Secrets just didn't quite make it.

Not that there isn't plenty to like about the book! I don't really think Tempe Brennan is the most interesting of characters, not to me personally, but she is a highly intelligent older woman who still enjoys (several!) romantic relationships, which is something nice to see (and probably part of the reason the series appeals to so many readers). The science-y bits in it are, as far as I understand, almost always right, as Kathy Reichs was (is?) herself in fact a forensic anthropologist. And the dig is based on one which Reichs herself attended, which just helps to make it more believable and horrifying.

I suspect I actually would have enjoyed this book more if I'd already "met" the characters, as a fair it of the non-mystery aspects of the book involve Tempe considering her relationship with her male detective friend, and I just wasn't that interested in reading about it - but if I'd read more of the background to the series, I expect I would have been super into it. I mean, the guy does sound pretty hot.

So should I read it or what?
I am decided "meh" about this book. I can't recommend it, but I don't... not recommend it. You know what I do recommend though? Bones, starting at season 3. It is ridiculous and hilarious, and I love it.

Video of the day:

Book 51: Old Peter's Russian Tales / Google and Me

As I'm coming up to the end of my 52 Book Challenge - one book to go after this! - I thought I'd share some of the better searches people have used to find my blog. I've been subscribing to a couple of google stats thingies for a while now - sadly not all year, or I suspect I'd have some ever better results. I use the word 'better' lightly.

Firstly, there's the people who have stumbled across my blog while trying to do their homework. How do I know they were trying to do their homework? Well, because they used to following searches:

• an excerpt from agatha christie's book that explains her life but in diferant characters
• how was yu-fang able to be happy even though she and dr. xia lived in abject proverty in wild swans
• how does yu-fang (the grandmother) escape her life as a concubine?
• what does the author think of the kuomintang rule in the book wild swans
• where does a pocket full of rye take place?
• sparknotes for the graveyard book
• waht's bad about dreams of my russian summer

and my personal favourite: in what country did the bloodhound invented

Children, Auntie Helen has a piece of advice for you, and this is it: the best place to find out what happened in a book is to read the Goddamn book. Also, here is some other advice: just typing your homework question verbatim into google will probably not find you the best website for answering it. I mean, you might end up here.

I'm giving this advice for a reason: sometimes people land here looking for some! They want to know what would happen if while visiting a friend at his house, you accidentally broke an expensive vase. They want to know why all redheads look the same or what guys notice about you within 6 seconds. And they want to know how did you notice if it is manual book. If my blog has managed to help just one of these desperate souls, then that has made my life all the richer.

Other stats coming soon, possibly, if I think they're interesting. (They're probably only interesting to me.)

Title: Old Peter's Russian Tales (1916)

Author: Arthur Ransome

Why this book:
I read Arthur Ransome's childrens' adventure series, Swallows and Amazons, growing up, but it wasn't until I read a somewhat-mostly-partially fictionalised account of his own life in Blood Red, Snow White that I realised how truly badass he was. He was an Englishmen living in Russia at the time of the revolution who may have been a spy for the British, and may have been a spy for the Russians. He definitely married Trotsky's secretary, at any rate. Anyway, I was interested enough in Ransome's life in Russia to be interested in this book.

What's it about?
Old Peter's Russian Tales is basically a collection of Russian folktales, and was (I believe) instrumental in taking these stories to a foreign audience. Some of the stories may be familiar to readers, like the tales of Baba Yaga; others are a little more obscure, but fascinating nonetheless.

I'm particularly fond of Baba Yaga myself, but there are so many good stories in this slim volume that it's impossible to mention them all. Frost is similar to the story of Cinderella, only more people die (they don't mess around in Russian folktales). Little Master Misery is a morality tale of the good-poor-brother mean-rich-brother, but there's always something enjoyable about people getting what they deserve. Oh, and Who lives in the skull is great too. It's about some animals who... live in a skull. Until a bear squashes them. That's the whole story.

The Good and the Bad
One of the lovely things about this book is that it's written as a grandfather, Old Peter, telling the stories to Maroosia and Vanya, his granchildren, and in that way they're stories that are just dying to be read out loud, perfectly inkeeping with the idea that these would have traditionally been oral tales. There's also interruption in the stories as Maroosia and Vanya ask their grandfather questions; but in such a way that the narrative flow is steady. I also love that, when his grandchildren are too disbelieving of his stories, Old Peter insists that of course they're true - he knew one of the characters, or was at their wedding.

So should I read it or what?
If you like folktales and fairytales, then definitely; otherwise, it's not a book that's going to hold much interest to you. However! I do highly recommend Blood Red, Snow White by Marcus Sedgwick. Quite apart from starring Arthur Ransome, it's an interesting and readable account of the revolution, which does contain fictionalised scenes but is pretty good on most of the facts.

Book 50 - "...all the secret agents following each other round and round Geneva, all knowing each other by sight, and often ending up at the same bar"

Title: Cat Among the Pigeons (1959)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book:
I, um, accidentally tripped into a second-hand bookshop, and then I bumped into a bookshelf and this book just happened to fall into my hands, and then as I was trying to get rid of it I dislodged my cash and it just flew onto the counter, and for some reason the bookseller thought I was trying to buy it, and I was too flustered to explain that that wasn't what I had intended to do at all. Honestly.

What's it about?
Murder most foul, of course!

In the fictional Middle Eastern country of Ramat, a revolution is about to take place. Warned ahead of time, Prince Ali Yusuf entrusts a very important package to his friend and pilot, Bob Rawlinson. Bob hides it away for safekeeping, then does his best to fly Ali to safety. But the plane is lost...

...and some months later, at his niece's school, a gymteacher is shot dead in the brand new Sport Pavilion. She won't exactly be missed, since she's very new and she's not very likeable, but for a school like Meadowbank reputation is everything, and having a murdered teacher in one's sport pavilion does not exactly increase the school roll. What exactly was Grace Springer doing there that night, and who would have a reason to kill her?

The school headmistress, the successful Miss Bulstrode, has felt since the beginning of term that something is wrong - but what? It's not just that one of her new staff members is a government spy, or that the Prince Ali Yusuf's former fiancee may get kidnapped at any time. Luckily, one of the school's best and brightest pupils, Julie Upjohn, knows just who to ask for help - a certain Belgian detective...

The Good and the Bad
I was always going to love a book which melded my two favourite genres - detective fiction and girls' boarding school stories - and Cat Among the Pigeons was everything I had wanted. Thrills! Murder! Tennis! I think I read the entire thing with a goofy grin on my face. The plotting, the insight into the characters, the twists and turns and red herrings, everything about this book screams that this is Christie at her best.

But - and this is a big but - this should never have been a Poirot novel. He only turns up more than halfway through the book, and feels like an interloper, an uncomfortable presence. He solves the mystery - of course - but the book simply feel imbalanced after he appears. I can't exactly blame Christie for Poirot's appearance. She was constantly being hounded to write more about him; she got to the point where she came to loathe her own creation (and even invented a fictional detective writer, who obviously represented herself, who similarly hated her most famous detective, obviously an outlet for Christie's frustration.) But she could have worked him more naturally into the story, if she had to have him, rather than have him appear at the end like a thunderstorm raining down the denouement on the unprepared reader.

Other issues? Well, there's some dodgy racial opinions going on - Ramat will never be a democracy because, it's implied, the people of Ramat aren't capable of understanding the benefits of it. Prince Ali Yusuf, of course, has the benefit of a superior Western education, which is why he wants to reform his country. A Middle Eastern country rejecting Western values could almost be a contemporary storyline - but the suggestion in Cat Among the Pigeons is that the prince's subjects simply aren't enlightened enough to want to change. Completely usual thinking for someone of Christie's age and era, I guess, but that doesn't make it grate any less.

I loved the melding of thriller and detective yarn, though - and, given that I also enjoyed Destination Unknown I'm definitely keen to read a few more of Christie's thrillers, however far-fetched they may be.

So should I read it or what?
The day I find a Christie I wouldn't recommend will be a traumatic day indeed.

Book 49 - "The thunder grumbled over the hills, like a man saying "And another thing…" twenty minutes after admitting he's lost the arguement."

Title: And Another Thing (2009)

Author: Eion Colfer

Why this book:
Because it is the sixth book in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy trilogy, and I have read every other of the five books.
What's it about?
At the end of the last book, written by the series' original author, Douglas Adams, Arthur Dent (the hero of the long-running series) died.

Well, sort of. Despite the Vogon's best efforts to eradicate the entire human race, Arthur, his daughter from another reality, and Trillian (also from an alternate reality, but not particularly different to the one Arthur had previously known and been in love with) are saved at the last minute (possibly accidentally) by the formerly two-headed Zaphod Beeblebrox.

If you haven't read the Hitchiker's Guide series, you are no doubt by now incredibly confused. Basically, here is what you need to know: Arthur Dent is, entirely by accident, frequently one of the last human beings left in the universe. This time, he finds that there is a human settlement left on a distant planet - that's good news. The bad news is that the Vogons - a bureaucratic and murderous alien race - are already on their way there to kill them. Meanwhile, Zaphod is having a little trouble with some Ancient Greek Gods, and Trillian has fallen in love with an immortal alien who would really like to die.

Can Arthur save the rest of his race? Can his daughter come to terms with her mother's new boyfriend? Can Zaphod make some serious money? And can Ford Prefect realise his dream of being seriously froody? Or is this the end for everyone... er, again?

The Good and the Bad
I was a little skeptical about this book, but only a little. The ending of its predecessor, Mostly Harmless, was so depressing that even if this book had been written by George Orwell during a particularly bad bout of toothache it could only be an improvement. My biggest worry was that Colfer would try too hard to ape Adams' writing style, and it would come out as flat and uninspired. Because that's happened to me once or twice before. I was only familiar with Colfer from his Artemis Fowl series, which was sci-fi, yes, and a lot of fun, but definitely aeons away from Adams' work.

Luckily, my fears were never to be realised. Colfer revels in a style that is entirely his own, but with a sense of humour which matches Adams' exactly. I actually laughed out loud while reading, which isn't exactly a frequent occurrence for me. He also manages to inject a small amount of humanity into the Vogons - well, into one of the Vogons - without it feeling like he's destroyed something that Adams created. Rather, Colfer has added something new and creative to the legion of Hitchhiker's canon.

The biggest problem I had with the book was to do with the actual layout of the text, not the writing itself. In Hitchhiker's tradition, the story is interspersed with excerpts from the famous intergalactic traveller's companion, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. But in my copy of And Another Thing - I don't know if it was like this in every edition - the excerpts were only distinguishable from the story in that they were italicised. Reading that much italicised text was a little painful, and it actually felt like the story was being interrupted, rather than supplemented. Hopefully they'll do something a little different with it in future editions.

So should I read it or what?
There isn't any point reading it if you haven't read the rest of the series, of course, but a. you should read the rest of the series, and b. if you have, but you've been avoiding this one because it's not Adams, let go of your anger, young padawan, and give it a go. It's worth it.

Book 48 - "Things were very strange 'Back East' and even stranger 'Down South.'"

Title: Roadstrips: A Graphic Journey Across America (2005)

Author: Pete Friedrich (ed.)

Why this book:
My brother-in-America sent it to me for Christmas.

What's it about?
Edited by Pete Friedrich, Roadstrips is a collection of comics - um, I guess basically the graphic equivalent of short stories - looking at different parts of America. It includes contributions by over twenty different 'alternative' cartoonists. The stories are divided by region - "Pacific Northwest", "The South", "East Coast" and so on, but are incredibly diverse in terms of art and story (and I'm not going to list them all here!)

The Good and the Bad
Like any anthology, there were some narrations that really appealed to me and some that didn't, and there were one or two that must have just gone straight over my head because I didn't get them at all. But none of them were bad - it was simply a matter of taste.

What is interesting is that this book was published in America's Bush Mach II years, and the feelings that are in a lot of the stories - helplessness, and hopelessness - already feel like they're part of a bygone era. However, just because the stories already feel a little 'of the past' doesn't mean they're not still moving - several of the stories dealing with the aftermath of September 11 had me in tears. Other works dealt with the huge cross-section of people in the States, family and belonging, and that whole 'What it means to be American' thing, but in a way that even a non-American could appreciate without rolling her eyes.

I loved being introduced to so many talented artists - the only one I knew before reading was the fabulous Keith Knight whose take on the 1992 Football World Cup is pretty hilarious - and taking in so many different points of view. The stand-out for me was probably Pat Redding Scanlon's heartland Q&A, simply because it made me laugh the hardest - one of her 'interviewees' answered the question, "Where is the Midwest?" with

"I consider Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, India, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Kansas, Nebraska, Wiskonsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Liverpool, England, to be Midwestern states. I scoff at the notion that Missouri is a Midwestern state because they want to be shown things, which makes them weird."

The other respondents are equally chuckle-worthy, but it was the inclusion of Liverpool that really did it for me.

So should I read it or what?
Yes, yes, yes. This is a beautiful book, and I recommend it to everyone.

Link of the day: Willow's blog post on the latest book-to-film, The Lightning Thief, and Recognition Rejection.

Book 47 - "All the stories we step into become part of our own story. Our pilgrimage."

Title: Gatty's Tale (2006)

Author: Kevin Crossley-Holland

Why this book?
My mother recommended it to me.

So what's it all about?
Gatty's a field-girl, working the lands of Sir John de Caldicot - until he and his wife notice her singing. The Lady's sister is going on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and she wants Gatty as her second chambermaid, believing that the girl's voice will keep them safe on what is often a perilous journey.

The pilgrims are a mixed bunch - as well as Gatty there is her new mistress, Lady Gwynneth, a priest, a cook, a merchant, and others. They come from all walks of life, but Lady Gwynneth is determined that each and every member of the pilgrimage will contribute his or her best to the journey, and that if they pull together nothing will be able to go wrong.

Things go wrong, of course. Gatty gets lost in London on her very first day there. As the pilgrims start their journey they find themselves tricked and cheated; short of food; ill; in love; stuck at sea; and left behind in unknown territory. Yet they do, slowly, pull together, and Gatty becomes determined that one way or another, she and Lady Gwynneth will make it to the Holy Land.

The Good and the Bad
Gatty's Tale is, in fact, the fourth book in a series - or rather, a sequel to a trilogy. Crossley-Holland's Arthur trilogy follows a young lord, Arthur de Caldicot, who is given a seeing-stone through which he can see into a parallel world, where a boy who looks very much like him becomes Arthur of Round Table fame. I hadn't read the trilogy, but found that Gatty's Tale stood just fine on its own.

I started off not enjoying this book overly much, mostly because it took me until I was about halfway through the book to stop finding Gatty annoying long enough to actually start liking her. Her naivety was perhaps expected from a girl who had never been out of her own village before, but I still found it a little hard to believe that Gatty was so naive that she never realised that most of the men who approached her had intentions beyond those of just being friendly. Or perhaps it was realistic, for someone of her age and situation - but it was still incredibly frustrating to read about. However, once Gatty had finally learned about the harsh realities of the world, she somehow became more likeable - which sounds just awful, when I put it like that. I suppose it was more that she was forced to grow up, and her rather limited world-view was expanded into one that I could be sympathetic towards. She's also an incredibly strong character, right from the word 'go' - while she might have been a slow learner in that one respect, she was also adaptable, friendly, and had a stroppiness which was at times both charming and repelling.

In a way, the book seemed like a long, detailed plot device to get Gatty to a point where she could marry Arthur. She couldn't, obviously, as a peasant girl, but thanks to Lady Gwynneth leaving her title and lands to her (for no reason that made any real sense to me - surely there must have been someone she liked and trusted who she'd known a little longer than Gatty?). But to say that would be to downplay the vivid picture that Crossley-Holland draws of the almost impossible journey of pilgrims to the Holy Land in the Middle Ages, of the reactions of a large cross-section of people to foreign lands and customs who have never had to deal with such things before.

So should I read it or what?
Although I was dubious at first, I definitely enjoyed Gatty's Tale overall. It was nice to read a book set in this period and place which focused on pilgrims, rather than crusades. The books was shortlisted for the Carnegie Medal in 2008, so you don't just have to take my word for it: it's a story worth reading.

Book 46 - "'We'll give it tea-leaves next time. Carpets like tea-leaves.'"

Title: The Phoenix and the Carpet (1904)

Author: E. Nesbit

Why this book:
Nesbits's book, The Railway Children, was one of the mainstays of my childhood, but I'd never read any of her fantasy works before, so I thought I'd give it a go.

So what's it all about?
It's the school holidays, and one family of children are impatient for Guy Fawkes' night. They decide to light one or two fireworks in the girls' bedroom, accidentally setting the rug on fire when they do so. Their mother buys a new rug, a second-hand one which arrives containing an unusual, glowing egg. The egg hatches into a phoenix, which in turn tells them that the carpet it arrived in is, in fact, a magical carpet that will take them anywhere they want to go.



The children are no strangers to bizarre magical happenings, having previously encountered a wish-granting Psammead in the book *Five Children and It*, and are excited to be able to go off adventuring again. They quickly find, however, that the carpet has limitations, when it strands them in a tower in the middle of nowhere. And the phoenix, although an intelligent creature, has its own problems - it's egotistical, and has a habit of accidentally setting things on fire.

However, these problems are minor compared to the trouble the children face when their baby brother, nicnamed Lamb, crawls onto the carpet and flies away. It's hard enough hiding a phoenix and a rapidly deteriorating magical rug from their parents, without trying to explain why the baby has disappeared...

The Good and the Bad
This was, to me, a book which has badly dated. The actual adventures of the children, and even the children themselves, are fine - they're squabbly, at time bratty, but essentially goodhearted - but certain views of the writer (reflecting, I gues, societal views of the time) definitely overshadowed a lot of the fun of the book. Most notably, the racism inherent in the children's trips - one trip of theirs is to a tropical islnd, where the people are simply described as savages. Not only, in fact, are they savages who are given no traits beyond the (dark) colour of their skin, but when they meet the children's Cook, they immediately bow down and worship her as their queen, which made my teeth itch.

There's also the token bit of sexism, although no more than in most early twentieth century chilren's books. The two sisters, Anthea and Jane, are between them the kindest of the children, the only ones capable of sewing, the most easily frightened, and in need of male protection. They do, however, fully participate in all of the adventures, and since these traits are split between the two of them they aren't nearly as bad as, say, Anne from the Famous Five (who I love, but really, talk about overkill with the "feminine" qualities.)

So should I read it or what?
Once again I'm going to say read something of the author's, but not this book. The Railway Children, as I said, was an important part of my childhood, but as I haven't read it recently I can't really comment on whether the -isms are as bad there as they are here (although I suspect not). Most of Nesbit's works can be found here, at Project Gutenberg, and I do recommend checking them out.

Link of the day:

Book 45 - "I don't know how you stay in business, Warshawski. You seem to reason with your endocrines instead of your synapses."

An update, just three days since the last! I know, I'm as surprised as you are.


Title: Tunnel Vision (1994)

Author: Sara Paretsky

Why this book?
I've read a few of Paretsky's books and enjoyed them, on the whole. This one I picked up in a second hand bookshop when I was hunting for Agatha Christies.

So what's it all about? V. I. Warshawski is a P.I. with more than a few problems. Looming largest is the fact that the building she works in is falling apart, and she can't afford to move. One of her clients has suggested - well, OK, decided - that she's going to be in charge of the rehabilitation of his delinquent college son. There's a family of homeless kids living in her basement who are too scared to seek the help of the state. Oh, yeah, and the dead body of a former law school buddy's wife has just turned up in her office.

Who killed Deirdre? Her husband, Fabian, who likes to keep up appearances when guests are visiting, but beats his wife and abuses his kids behind closed doors? Or her daughter Emily, whose own wants and needs have been suppressed for years, and who can't remember exactly what happened that night? Or is this something else, something even more sinister - something to do with the construction company that V.I. has been trying to investigate, even though everyone who knows anything has been telling her the case is too hot, that she better just give it up?

V.I. doesn't give up that easily - but then, neither does Deirdre's killer. V.I. is walking head-first into trouble, and if she doesn't back-off someone's going to get hurt - and this time, V.I. might not escape with her life...

The Good and the Bad First of all, ugh. I don't know what it was about this book, but I just couldn't get into it. I usually love Paretsky's books - I've been reading them since I discovered her short stories at high school, but this one just didn't click for me. I usually like V.I., but she was just too hard in this story - something which does have consequences for her, but it just sort of made it difficult to like her. And the plot I just found to be too confusing - V.I. is investigating several things for several clients at once, and I could never straighten out who was who in the huge cast of characters. A thumbs down, then, albeit a reluctant one.

So should I read it or what? Obviously this is not a book that I am enamoured with, but I hate to think that this review would put anyone off Peretsky's books, because usually I really enjoy them. Instead, I'll say - don't read this, but do read other books in the V.I. Warshawski series - I particularly enjoyed Fire Sale (2005) in which she goes back to coach her old high school basketball team and gets involved with local corruption and teenage romance.

Link of the day: How about some fanfiction? In this highly enjoyable Futurama fic, the Planet Express crew are attacked by space ninjas - Just Desserts.

Book 44 - "I have no patience with the modern neurotic girl who jazzes from morning till night and uses language that would make a fishwoman blush!"

It's been a while since I read any Agatha Christie! It's also been almost a year since I first read this book. Sometimes I'm a little slow to blog things, I guess!


Title: Murder on the Links (1923)

Author: Agatha Christie

Why this book:
Agatha Christie! Poirot! Hurrah!

So what's it all about?
When his good friend, Captain Hastings, returns from a trip, Poirot receives a letter bidding him to come at once, for the writer - Paul Renaud - fears his life may be in danger. When Poirot and Hastings arrive, they find they are too late; he has already been murdered, stabbed in the back and half-buried on the golf green.

Poirot is determined to find the culprit, and is highly amused at the arrival of another detective who is fails to take note of the clues which are, to Poirot, extremely important - while the other detective sees a flowerbed with no footprints in it, Poirot sees a flowerbed where there should be footprints. Hastings, however, can't help but doubt his old friend. Poirot seems to be doing nothing but asking irrelevent questions, and making increasingly bizarre statements - how does the length of a man's coat have anything to do with his death?

Paul Renaud's son is arrested for his murder, and he will surely be found guilty if Poirot can't find a way to convince the police that he didn't do it. But then, who did? Renaud's wife, who is clearly lying about just what happened that night? His blackmailer, who may or may not have been his mistress? The two mysterious South American men Mme Renaud claims to have seen? Or the English performer who was in love with his son - the very same girl that Hastings can't help becoming increasingly fascinated by...?

The Good and the Bad
I read this book through twice, and hated it the first time; the second time I loved it. The problem I had with it the first time through is simply that the end seemed to drag on a little too long. Agatha Christie is queen of the twist ending, by the ending here was so twisted that reading was both exhausting and confusing. The narrative also irritated me on my first read - it is told, in the first person, by Captain Hastings, and I quickly grew frustrated by him forever jumping to the wrong conclusion and his apparent lack of confidence in Poirot.

On my second read, however, I found the books a lot easier to enjoy. As I wasn't racing through it to find out what was going to happen next, it was a lot easier to enjoy Christie's style, her observations of human behaviour and her well-crafted plot - because, despite the overly-long conclusion, the story as a whole is well-crafted. I also found myself warming more to Hastings. He may be a bumbling idiot, but his heart is in the right place - besides, Poirot's love of his friend gives the detective a human side he might not otherwise have.

It also took me two reads to figure out what the "links" was. I was so sure it was going to be some kind of train, and was exceedingly confused when (despite at least one very important train ride in the story) Renaud was murdered in the middle of a field. As I now know, a links is in fact a type of golf course, and the fact that his murder took place there is yet another important clue.

So should I read it or what?
This is, I think, one of the better books in the Poirot series. Christie has yet to become fed up with her own creation, Captain Hastings meets someone who is to become very important to him in the future, and the mystery is set not in England but in France, giving it rather a different flavour. Highly recommended, but then I almost always say that about Christie's works, don't I?

Book 43 - "One day a prince would come, even if Glenda had to drag him on a chain."

Title: Unseen Academicals (2009)
Author: Terry Pratchett

Why this book?
Because it's the latest in the Discworld series, of which I have read every single book. All 37 of them! I really like Terry Pratchett, OK.

So what's it all about?
Most of the Discworld books satirise or parody "round world" - real world - culture and history. Unseen Academicals is no different, taking on the grand English tradition of "foot-the-ball" - soccer, that is, not American football - and includes references to the historical banning of football, modern footballers with their model girlfriends, glamorous international players, and the bitter club rivals and fights between fans. As well as football, Pratchett plays with other topics which may be familiar to round-world readers - rivalries between universities, the stealing of intellectual property, and a Tolkeinesque orc who may be the last of his kind, and is sure he isn't a blood-thirsty as the legends say - well, mostly sure.

So: Unseen University, the home of the greatest wizards in Ankh-Morpork and therefore (as far as they're concerned) the world, have just discovered something rather horrifying: that unless they put together a football team, their funding is going to dry up. Therefore, they are charged not just with putting together a team, but with turning football into a game that isn't played in underground games by fifty-aside teams.

Below stairs at the University, large and practical Glenda - maker of fine pies - has always known where her place is (to whit: in the kitchen, making pies.) But when her friend, the beautiful and not-too-bright Jools drags her along to a fashion show and is suddenly being hounded by the press, Glenda starts to realise that times are changing, and that if Jools can become a model for a dwarfish fashion house, then maybe Glenda can also go on to bigger and brighter things?

Nobody knows where Mr Nutt came from, or what he is - not even Mr Nutt. But he's a very quick learner and an efficient worker, and when Trev drags him along to a football game he takes to it very quickly, and soon finds himself coaching the University team. Still, Mr Nutt is sure he must be carrying some dark secret; will letting it out hurt himself, and his new friends? Trev already has his own problems - he's fallen in love with Jools, even though they supports rival football teams. And even though Trev promised his Mum he'd never play football, not after the way his Dad died, he may be the only player capable of winning the game for the University without anyone else getting killed...

The Good and the Bad
It's kind of hard for me to be objective about anything Pratchett's written, mostly I'm a huge Pratchett fangirl, but also because I'm so familiar with his style, ideas, and characters that I find it difficult to think critically about them. I will say, though, that while I've been disappointed with a few of his more recent books (notably Thud and Making Money, both of which were readable but somewhat weaker than his usual fare) he's finally back on form. The ending was still a little weak, but it was in no way an anti-climax, nor did it ruin the rest of the book for me. I enjoyed both the new characters he introduced and the revisiting of the wizards - some of his oldest and most popular characters. His word-play and lengthy footnotes, for which he is renowned, were brilliant and hilarious - and the book is, overall, thoroughly enjoyable.

So should I read it or what?
Obviously I'm going to say "yes", but I would say that maybe this isn't the best book to start with if you're completely new to Pratchett. If you are new, then I'd suggest starting either with The Witches Abroad, which plays with fairytales and ideas of good and evil, or with Men at Arms which is a good introduction to the city of Ankh-Morpork where many of the Discworld books take place (and it also has most of my favourite characters in it!)

Irrelevant link of the day: Of all the literal music videos youtube has produced, this one for Take on me is still the greatest.

Book 42 - Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter (no seriously that's its name)

It's coming up one year since I started blogging. I've got ten weeks to blog the remaining 11 books. However, being the incredibly over-excited young person I am, I'm already planning a new reading challenge for my second year blogging. It'll involve a quick and dirty site revamp, a banner (I've been meaning to put one up for ages) and a new approach to the books I read. So what's the challenge for year two? I guess you could say that it's a mystery...

Meanwhile, how about a little historical fantasy?


Title: Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter (2009)

Author: A. E. Moorat

Why this book?:
Because it's called Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter. I mean, really.

So what's it all about?
In a somewhat alternate reality, the night that Victoria learns that the King is dead and she will soon be the Queen of England (and, you know, everywhere else) she is attacked by a succubus, her life saved by the mysterious Maggie Smith. Maggie, it seems, has a very particular role: protect the incumbent ruler from demon attack, and make sure that the Devil never gets to put a finger in the ruling pie. Needless to say, this comes as something of a shock to Victoria.

Her thoughts are soon directed elsewhere - to politics, of course, and to her country that may still follow France's example and revolt; but also to her cousin, Albert, with whom she has fallen hopelessly in love. The good news is that Albert loves her, too: the bad news is that he is almost certainly the son of a demon. The really bad news is that Victoria's parents aren't exactly who she thought they were, either, and Victoria and Albert, for all their good intentions, might just be a match made in hell...

The Good and the Bad
One of my friends called this book "a waste of a perfectly good title" and I am forced to reluctantly agree. It starts out very strongly, with prostitute-eating zombies and Victoria fighting for her life, but afterwards, when Victoria is learning how to Queen, as it were, and angsting over Albert, my interest waned, and not even a kidnapping and a werewolf attack could bring it back. I think the problem is that Moorat tries too hard to mingle fact with fiction - a lot of the incidents in the story did actually happen, but few of them are really that relevant to the plot and as a result the story continually builds up tension and then loses it again. Or perhaps it's simply Moorat's style - there were several high-action scenes where I ended up skipping ahead rather than impatiently reading every word to see what happened.

The other problem is that I found the supernatural elements weren't quite concrete enough - there was religion mixed in to them, with the idea of the anti-Christ and the devil, the dead walking the Earth, but I didn't really buy it, not without the other side of the battle for good and evil being mentioned as well - Victoria, as the head of the Chruch of England, surely would have considered where God and Jesus were in this equation. I know, I know, I'm probably demanding too much from a story about Queen Victoria fighting demons but I think it may have helped the story to be less muddled (and more interesting) if the pseudo-religious bits were left out.

Having said that, the book does have the occasional good joke:

"Amazed, Quimby looked at her, then gazed at her internal organs quivering on the boards. She had the body of a weak and feeble woman, he thought, distractedly, but she had the heart and stomach of, well, a seemingly invincible zombie."

So should I read it or what?
Enough one-liners to cause a chuckle, but not enough to save the book's confusing plot or bad pacing. I wouldn't recommend.

Link of the day: One of my favourites show ever ever, Never Mind the Buzzcocks.

Book 41 - Boy and Girls Forever: Children's Classics from Cinderella to Harry Potter

Book related link of the day: Did you ever read that picture book Each Peach Pear Plum? LJer fox1013 has created a more contemporary version. The rhyming scheme is at times a little... crazy, but her collages are simply amazing. The first page is here.


Title: Boys and Girls Forever: Children's Classics from Cinderella to Harry Potter (2003)
Author: Alison Lurie

Why this book?
Because I found it in a second-hand bookshop and... it looked good? Basically I should just not be allowed in any second-hand bookshops.

So what's it all about?
Boys and girls forever is a collection of essays exploring various facets of children's classic literature - some on specific books, like Little Women, and some on general themes, like the place of nature in children's books.

The Good and the Bad
I nearly put this book down as soon as I picked it up, thanks to this paragraph:

"Other nations have produced a single brilliant classic of series: Denmark, for instance, has Andersen's tales; Italy has Pinocchio, France has Babar, Finland has Moomintroll. A list of famous books in English, however, could easily take up a page in this volume"

I'm sorry, but I call bullshit. I'll admit that I can't name many books beyond those that Lurie has mentioned (aside from the French Le Petit Prince and Le Petit Nicholas) but then, I'm not Danish or Italian or French or Finish and I wouldn't expect to be familiar with their children's literature. (In fact, I learned French at school, which is why I have at least a passing familiarity with some French works.) Of course, I'm hardly an expert on the subject, but given that most of the books which are considered New Zealand children's classics would be unheard of in the UK or the US, I don't doubt that the same applies even more so to classics from countries where English is not the mothertongue.

I also think it's far too soon to be labelling Harry Potter a "classic". Yes, I read every Harry Potter book and loved them, but without the mania whipped up by both publishers and media, will my kids be interested in reading them? I mean some of the books were just awful. (I'm looking at you, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.)

However! I pressed on, and despite my initial misgivings and Lurie's Anglo-American focus there was still plenty to interest me among her essays. The place of feminism and gender identity in The Wizard of Oz and its sequels, Louisa May Alcott as a fairly revolutionary writer, and an essay on the humanity in modern fairy tales were all of great interest to me. They were all good enough for me to bookmark them for future reading - others, however, didn't interest me at all, or were perhaps a step too far from the "children's classics" theme of the book.

So should I read it or what?
If lit crit lights your pipe (and it certainly lights mine) then this is a book worth dipping into, but it's hardly the seminal work on children's lit (although it doesn't claim to be, either).

Books 35 - 40: Six (Girls Own) Geese a-layin'.

Seasons greetings! Currently I am in an awesome mood, because a. I got some seriously awesome stuff for Christmas (although sadly few books) b. I'm on holiday until January 5, which allows for some serious reading, and c. this is the view from my deck:


Awwww yeah. I currently have no plans for New Year's, either, so I'm planning on seeing in 2010 by reading as many books as I can in one night. Dorky and socially isolating, sure, but a lot less harrowing for the liver.


35.
Title: Robins in the Abbey (1947)
Author: Elsie J. Oxenham

36.
Title: The New Abbey Girls (1923)
Author: Elsie J. Oxenham

37.
Title: Maid of the Abbey (1943)
Author: Elsie J. Oxenham

Sometimes when you begin reading a new series of books you can start anywhere and pick up what's going on and who's who. The Abbey Girls is not one such series. I started with seventh-to-last book, out of thirty-eight books, and for at least the first three chapters I had no idea what was going on. The main character, one of the titular Robins, was easy enough to grasp. She's a young heiress travelling back to Wales from New York, by ship: when she receives news that her father, also overseas, has been in an accident, she's invited home by Lady Quellyn, who lives at the Abbey.

So far so good, right? Only when she gets to the Abbey the virgin reader - ie me - is confronted with characters by the names of Joy, Jean, Joan, Jandymac and Jen, all who seem to have several pairs of twins who are all named after each other; then there's Rosamund, whose daughters are all named some variation of Rose; as well as their first names, they're all Ladies or Countesses, and Joy used to be Lady Marchwood but she's now Lady Quellyn and Jen is Lady Marchwood; oh, and then they've all got nicnames, after flowers, so they're also called Primrose or Daisy or Hyacinth or Violet and I never knew who anyone was talking about.

Even amongst all this confusion, Oxenham's strengths shone through. Of all the writer of "Girls Own" stories - a term used to describe books written exclusively for girls in the late 19th and early 20th centuries - Oxenham is probably the best known, besides Enid Blyton. Her characters, although not always incredibly complex, are still human: in Robins, the female Robin is impatient and frustrated when she realises she is in love (with a man who has the same name as her) yet she can't approach him because she's a woman, and you really get a sense of how a girl in her position must have felt. Oxenham also writes beautiful, vivid descriptions of her settings, whether it's the English Abbey or Robin's home in Wales.

The New Abbey Girls cleared up a lot of my confusion. It's book 13 in the series, and although it was severely abridged I finally got a handle on who everyone was and why they were so important. Particularly of interest were the scenes where Joy - at this point, neither Lady Marchwood nor Lady Quellyn - takes her new ward, Maidlin, to various folkdancing classes. Folkdancing seems to happen in every single book - as well as the crowning of a May Queen - but here, so early in the series, it seemed a lot more interesting and was better integrated with the story. Even if I'd never heard of any of the dances, it was still fascinating to read about. Sadly, my copy of this book was severely and noticeably abridged, which made the story jump all over the place.

Maid introduces two more characters, Anne and Belinda Belanne, who also appear in Robins. A sick Anne is invited to the Abbey along with her sister, who is delighted to find her idol, the singer Maidlin, lives there. When disaster strikes the Abbey in the form of measles, Anne takes over as cook, and Belinda become a nurse-slash-governess to Joy's twin girls. Maidlin is caught up in her own romantic drama - she's being wooed by a dear friend, but she's in love with his uncle.

The books are mostly light fare, although I'm given to understand that others in the series touch on deeper subjects, such as religion, and death and illness. Fun though, and surprisingly hard to put down.


38.
Title: Ruey Richardson: Chaletian (1960)
Author: Elinor M. Brent-Dyer

39.
Title: Cornelia of the Chalet School (2009)
Author: Jackie Roberts

40.
Title: Before the Chalet School: The Bettanys of Taverton High (2008)
Author: Helen Barber

Ruey Richardson doesn't settle in easily to the Chalet School. Until recently, her and her brothers were more or less looking after themselves, and she's used to going to bed whenever she likes, doing her homework whenever she likes, and has never given much thought to the way she looks or dresses. At boarding school, things are different, and even though her idea for the school to start playing lacrosse quickly brings her new friends, she has less luck with the teachers.

This is kind of an odd book. Brent-Dyer had been writing the Chalet School series for almost forty years at the point, and she kind of makes a conscience effort to modernise her plots. Ruey and her brothers haven't just been abandoned by their father for any old reason: he's a space-mad scientist hoping to fly to the moon. I am not even kidding, it is hilarious/ridiculous. The other odd thing is the lacrosse: there is literally a chapter on lacrosse theory, and it read almost exactly like a text book on the subject. I pretty much skipped that chapter, in case you're wondering.

The other two books I read in this series were, as you can see from my handy list, not written by the original author, which is something I'm not usually super keen on. Cornelia starts off pretty badly, too - Roberts seems to be trying to ape Brent-Dyer's style, and it just feel awkward and uncomfortable to read. The writing picks up later, though, and the story becomes quite interesting - Cornelia, a former Chalet pupil, is travelling back home to America with her millionaire father, on board a ship that includes a former Nazi officer and his wife, and old school-mate of Cornelia. During the war, Brent-Dyer emphasised that just because someone was "the enemy" it didn't make them evil, and Roberts does a good job of carrying this message one. The Nazi officer openly hates Jews, but his wife confides to Cornelia that she herself would have gone to a concentration camp for helping Jewish refugees if he hadn't intervened to save her. He's undoubtedly a terrible person, and yet he is still human.

Taverton High was much more in touch with the original series as far as actual content went. It follows the school's founding family before the founding, as a poor (but not so poor they can't afford a maid!) family of siblings dealing with a lack of funds, a guardian who is kindly but out of his depths, and a very ill little sister, who is painfully close to dying. The narrative focuses both on Joey, the youngest sister who despite being constantly sick is also constantly in and out of trouble: and Madge, the eldest sister, who in the absence of her twin brother is the one who has to try and make ends meet. Among other things, it's an interesting look at English village life during the Depression that followed the World War I.

Brent-Dyer still holds a special place in my heart that Oxenham can't possibly replace, but I'm still keen to read some more of her books. I'm ridiculously close to having read every single book in the Chalet School series anyway - when I finally have, I'll have to find something else to obsess over. Oxenham may be that something!

Books 33 and 34 - Double your (mystery-solving) pleasure.

Titles: Shock Waves (1989) and Dangerous Games (1991)
Author: Carolyn Keene

Annnnyway, a while ago I read some Hardy Boys books and mentioned that Nancy Drew was about a million times cooler than they were. But! Having now read two Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys Super Mysteries I can inform you that it's probably only about a hundred times when they're hanging out together. I assume Nancy's coolness rubs off on Frank and Joe.

The first thing to tell you is that both of these books have HORRENDOUS puns as their titles. Shock Waves takes place during a seaside holiday, and Dangerous Games is set (during another holiday) at some kind of international athletic competition. The second important thing is that the characters have "grown up" a bit since their earlier books. By "grown up" I mean that Joe's girlfriend (or his favourite date) Callie... died. In a terrorist bombing. And now Frank and Joe work for some mysterious international organisation where they do undercover work. In other words, you need to suspend your disbelief even further than you had to back in the 70's.

Since Nancy is a girl, her equivalent grown-upness is that she occasionally has fights and/or temporarily breaks up with her boyfriend, Ned. Perhaps the writers went to the Todd Wilkins and Elizabeth Wakefield school of relationship writing. In the course of these two books, Ned proves himself to be jealous of pretty much every guy Nancy spends time with, particularly Frank Hardy. To be fair, Nancy thinks Frank is hot like jalapeños, but she loves Ned and would never do anything to hurt him, so Ned kind of comes across as a huge dick. Since in Nancy's own books he's generally really sweet and supportive, I'm going to choose to believe he's been corrupted by the Hardys.

Anyway, in Shock Waves, Joe's dead girlfriend's ring that is the only thing he has to remember her by, (sob), gets stolen. The boys are determined to track the thief down. Nancy, meanwhile, starts to think that someone wants her new friend Buck dead when he first claims to have seen a dead body and is then attacked by poisonous jellyfish. The cases turn out to be related! I did not see that coming. Most of the plot surrounds Buck hitting on Nancy, and Nancy not noticing, and Ned getting jealous. This is actually not what I look for in a mystery, Nancy dear.

Dangerous Games is so much more awesome. Nancy and the boys are both seperately called to investigate when an international sporting star starts getting threatening notes, and everyone, including Nancy's friends Bess and George (yay!) go undercover. George (who's the sporty one) turns out to be so good at swimming that she considers taking it up professionally, and the sporting star's sister is totally hot for her. This is awesome, because usually it's Bess (the pretty, girly one) that all the guys want. Sorry, did I say I don't want to read about relationships in my mysteries? I meant I don't want to read about melodramatic relationships in my mysteries. Meanwhile Nancy and the Hardys realise that the threat has something to do with a drugs scandal that happened five years before, and I totally called who the bad guy was going to be ages before any of them did. Clearly I would make a much better teen detective than the Hardy Boys! But not Nancy. Her and I would just hang out with George and Bess and solve mysteries and be BFFs for ever and ever and ever.

Sometimes I guess we'd let the Hardy Boys join us and, IDK, fight vampires or something.



In conclusion: I need to get my hands on some more of these books.

One last thing - I know I'm late posting again! But here's why:

His name is Frosting. Frosting the Snowman. He took a while to make.

Book 32 - Chanel: Her Life, Her World, the Woman behind the Legend

First of all, man I'm behind! I've read at least ten books that I haven't written up yet, so I'll probably do a couple of multiple-book posts soon for series and/or books that other people are unlikely to be interested in.

Secondly, it's December already! You may have noticed by the intensification of seasonal decorations around your village, town, or city, and/or by the fact that shops have started playing cheerful Christmas music incessantly. Good times.

Seasonal link of the day: Reindeer Training School.

And now, on to our feature presentation.


Title: Chanel: Her Life, Her World, the Woman behind the Legend (2009)

Author: Edmonde Charles-Roux

Why this book?
After watching Coco avant Chanel ("Coco before Chanel") I wanted to find a more, you know, accurate portrayal of the designer's life. This book was in fact the inspiration behind the film, which means that someone read this book, then got drunk and wrote a script which bares a kind of passing resemblance to a book which must have taken several years of pain-staking research.

So what's it all about anyway?
As I've probably mentioned before, it's kind of hard to give a plot summary of a biography, ("She was born, um, and then some stuff happens... and then she dies") but I will attempt to do so anyhow! Chanel's rather villainous peasant father abandons her and her brothers and sisters at quite a young age, leaving Chanel at a charity school run by a religious order. When she's old enough to leave, Chanel and her aunt (who is about the same age as her) become dressmakers' assistants in a town full of cavalrymen. Chanel soon finds she has a passion for horses, and strikes up relationship with the upper-class, horse-owning Balsan.

Chanel is desperate to make a name for herself somehow, and just as desperate to leave her peasant roots behind her. She starts designing hats as a hobby, then, with financial backing from her new lover Arthur 'Boy' Capel, opens a shop in Paris. With help from her aunt and her younger sister, Chanel manages to open several new stores during the First World War, when exiled Russian aristocrats and the French elite still wished to shop and dress to impress. Chanel's empire slowly grows, and Chanel has a string of affairs - her lovers are mostly from either the French and English elite, or the extended group of artists, musicians, dancers and writers she spent her time with.

Chanel's story is not exactly a happy one, despite her success. Her cynicism makes her a good businesswoman, but also allows her to see all-too-clearly the realities of her own life: that the men she love most will never marry her, that she cannot afford to be anything other than completely independent, that she can never let the media know the truth of her origins. She gives the impression of always looking over her shoulder, waiting for someone to take away everything she has built for herself.

The Good and the Bad:
You don't really have to be incredibly knowledgeable about fashion to enjoy this book. Everything I know about fashion comes from Project Runway, and at no point did Coco Channel have to design a red-carpet gown entirely out of dead insects in order to win a trip for two to New York Fashion week. On the other hand, Charles-Roux spends a lot of time going off into tangents about the celebrities and aristocrats that Chanel hung out with, and the political and social trends and events of the time. You certainly couldn't write a biography of Chanel without placing her firmly in the socio-political context she was living and designing in, but it can be pretty heavy going reading about the political machinations of French and Bristish industrialists who only have very tentative connections with her. Then again, we also get details about Picasso and the great choreographer Diaghelev, and many other artists and artistes that Chanel hung out with, which I found far more fascinating, so perhaps it's only a question of taste.

So, should I read it or what?
Like I said, you don't need to be knowledgeable to read this book, but you do at least need to be a little bit interested in fashion history. Chanel was, after all, one of the driving forces behind such innovations as MAKING DRESSES THAT DON'T HAVE WAISTS. Thank God for Chanel. And yeah, you should totally read it.

Book 31 - Return to the Hundred Acre Wood, or: "'I wonder why things have to change,' mumured Piglet."

When books like the (apparently) long-awaited sequel to the original Winnie-the-Pooh books are announced, I always hear a little tinkly bell in the air. Well, less of a tinkle, and more like the CHA-CHING of a cash register. The House at Pooh Corner ends with Pooh and Christopher Robin coming to realise the Christopher Robin is going to have to leave the wood: he's going away to school. It's a poignant moment, a goodbye to childhood, an excellent end to a sweet, funny and imaginative story. So why does there need to be another sequel by someone who isn't even the original author?

Because people will buy it, of course.


Title: Return to the Hundred Acre Wood (2009)

Author: David Benedictus

Why this book?
A Winnie-the-Pooh sequel! I couldn't not read it, no matter how cynical I was.

So what's it all about anyway?
Christopher Robin is home for the holidays, which kick off with a Welcum Back feast for him in the Hundred Acre Woods. There are various adventures with those old familiar characters: Owl gives a Spelling Bee, Rabbit conducts a Census, Piglet goes down a well during a drought, and Pooh goes on a search for honey (of course). There's also a new animal in the wood, an otter named Lottie who fancies herself to be bit above the others, but nevertheless joins in their adventures. Also she plays the mouth organ, which is kind of cool.

The Good and the Bad
I think I can best explain the Bad by quoting one review I read of the book:

"...this isn't more of the same, this is less. ... Although not as poetic or as heroic, lacking sharp wit or the real emotions of love and regret of the originals, this faint shadow will sell thousands of copies because today we always want more."
- Kerry White, 2009. 'In which a reader gets a bit hot and bothered'. Magpies, Vol. 24

And the Good? Well, it's not Disney. Can I just go off on a slight tangent here and say fuck you, Disney, Heffalumps are not meant to be real what the actual fuck is wrong with you. David Benedicus at least understands that much.

So, should I read it or what?
For kids who love Winnie-the-Pooh, this book gets a pass. For adults looking to reminisce, I'd say stick to the originals.

Book 30: Fables, Legends in Exile, or: "You look out of breath, Jack. Been climbing beanstalks again?"

Title: Fables: Legends in Exile (2003)

Author: Bill Willingham

Why this book?
I was doing quality control for my mother - she buys graphic novels, I have the arduous task of reading them and deciding if they're appropriate for impressionable young women.

So what's it all about anyway?
After their various homelands and kingdoms were attacked by a mysterious and powerful evil, known only as "the Adversary", many fairytale creatures and mythological figures were forced to find refuge somewhere else entirely - in New York, in a part of the city which becomes known as Fabletown.

The Big Bad Wolf - aka Bigby - acts as Fabletown's sheriff, so when the infamous Jack discovers Rose Red's apartment trashed and covered in blood, it falls on him to find the culprit behind the vicious attack - and to discover what has happened to Rose. Has someone discovered the truth of the Fablefolks origins? Or is the person behind it a little closer to home? Rose Red's sister, the intelligent and capable Snow White, has never quite forgiven her sister for sleeping with her husband. Then there's Jack, who had a recent and very public break-up with Rose; and Bluebear, her current squeeze, used to have the happy little habit of cutting off his wives' heads. And what, exactly, is Prince Charming doing back in town...?

If Bigby doesn't solve the case, and quickly, it might just be the beginning of the end of Fabletown. He's sure there's more going on than meets the eye - but who's lying, and why? And hey - if he does solve it, it might just be that he gets his very own Happily Every After.

The Good and the Bad
It'll probably come as no surprise to you that I loved this graphic novel to pieces. It had my two favourite things: a murder mystery, and fairytale characters! That is pretty much the literary equivalent of a peanut butter and jam sandwich. And for a change, I have nothing bad at all to say about it.

Which isn't to say that it's perfect, but its biggest fault is that it's the first story arc in an ongoing series, so while it is a complete story, there are loose ends - the biggest being we have no real idea who the Adversary is, or why he or she forced the Fables into exile. Still, that didn't actually bother me: Legends in Exile was a full enough story that I didn't even feel the need to rush out and buy the next story arc to find out what happens next.

The way the various characters have been interpreted is definitely one of the book's highlights. Prince Charming was particularly fun, as a womaniser who has managed to schmooze his way across most of Europe. The illustrations were perfect, too - "gritty" and realistic, but not what I'd call ugly. As for the writing - it was dark without being angsty, funny without being silly, and noir-ish without being forced. In conclusion: Awesome.

So, should I read it or what?
Highly recommended.

Some time this century: The biography of a fashion icon, the lacklustre return of Winnie-the-Pooh, and Queen Victoria: Demon Hunter. That is seriously the name of a book. I'm pretty excited.

Books 28 and 29: "There was nothing the two brothers liked more than tackling a tough case."

Do you know what teenagers love doing best? No, it's not drugs. No, it's not groping each other in their parents' cars. No, it's not dressing all in black and talking about how anti-establishment they are. Teenagers love solving mysteries! And I know what I'm talking about, because I spent about two hours last week hangin' out with the Hardy Boys.

Titles: The Flickering Torch Mystery (1971 revised edition)
The Secret of the Old Mill (1972 revised edition)

Author: Franklin W. Dixon, although he's not actually an actual person as far as I know.

Why these books?
Well... I found them at a flea market. And they were cheap! And they reminded me of my childhood! I couldn't resist.

So what's it all about anyway?
OK, I'm going to do my best to remember the actual plots of these books, but they are honestly so convoluted I can barely separate the two.

In Flickering Torch, the Hardy's detective father is busy on a case involving the constant theft of government property, so he fobs off a new client on to Frank and Joe. Needless to say the client is unimpressed that this famous detective is telling him that his teenage sons will take his case. But! Frank and Joe are used to being treated like this, because it is hard to believe they're so brilliant! The mystery has something to do with silkworms being stolen, and the brothers start working on the farm next door to the silk-worm farm, where they talk like the inbred country bumpkins so no one will actually know their true identities. For some reason, this actually works. Then, um, I guess there's a whole lot of detecting that goes on, mostly at night, and there's flickering torches involved somehow, and the boys' case improbably has something to do with their father's, and there's illegal mining involved? I don't even know.

The Old Mill was less confusing. There is money forging going on, and... you know what? It's not less confusing. The counterfeiting is somehow inexplicably tied to this new technology company that has just moved into Bayport, which keeps having its projects sabotaged. For some reason the criminals behind this scheme set their base in the titular mill, which is far less exciting than, say, an underground lair inside a hollowed out volcano. But! Frank and Joe nevertheless solve the mystery! Oh, and I just remembered there was some kind of motor-boat shenanigans in there. The Hardy's boat is called the Sleuth, just in case you were wondering.

The Good and the Bad
Man, these books are hilarious. Frank and Joe are pretty much indistinguishable, except that Joe is slightly more impulsive because he's a whole year younger than Frank (he was the one I had a crush on when I was a kid, incidentally). Neither of them have actual personalities, though. You can tell their best friend Chet Morton is comic relief because not only is he Fat, but he also isn't Super Keen About Mysteries! He is a Reluctant Mystery Solver! Is there anything more hilarious than that? Chet's hobbies involve eating, and also getting a new hobby every book (hilarious!) Alos, you can tell that this is a book for boys, because unlike Nancy Drew, who has a boyfriend she spends quite a lot of time with, Frank and Joe just have "favourite dates", both of whom are not only pretty, but also excellent cooks. That's what every boy wants in a favourite date!

So yeah, really, really outdated. Everything is "swell", everyone is a stereotype, and each page is so dripping with wholesomeness that it is difficult not to choke on it. These books were written at a time when children's books had Bad Guys and Good Guys and zero moral uncertainty. I mean, the Hardys are so amazing that they can tell who the bad guys are just at looking at them. This because bad guys are Surly and Unpleasant, whereas good guys have Honest Faces! Oh Hardys. If only it were really that easy.

Relatedly: You might want to check out Kate Beaton's comic about Mystery Solving Teens. I found it amusing and accurate!

So, should I read it or what?
Ahahahahahaha... hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Do yourself a favour and don't ruin your childhood.

Later this week, probably: Fairytale characters that are alive! And, in some cases, dead.

Book 27 - The reformed vampire support group, or: "Being stuck indoors with the flu watching daytime television, forever and ever"

Vampires! They are pretty popular at the moment. Everywhere you go (if by "everywhere" you mean "the Young Adult section of bookstores") there they are, hangin' out, all, "Look how cool I am, I could drink your blood if I wanted to but I'm too cool for that! PS: I'm pretty sexy, unlike you. God, when did you last even wash your hair?" I may be projecting slightly.

I have to admit that I've never really got the whole vampire thing. That's not just a reaction to the recent surge in popularity, either; when I was thirteen or so I remember my friends reading a vampire series by Christopher Pike and being equally bemused. There are some exceptions: I loved the over-the-top pseudo-horror mess that was the Underworld movie. I also love Terry Pratchett's satirical take on vampires, who are far more style than substance and prefer to give up drinking blood for other, cleaner ways of gaining power of people. But when I saw this book I was immediately interested, since Catherine Jinks is a pretty talented author.



Title: The Reformed Vampire Support Group (2009)

Author: Catherine Jinks

Why this book?
Jinks wrote the amazing Pagan Chronicles, which was my sole food intake for like a year. She also wrote the pretty excellent Witch Bank. I was interested to see her take on vampires!

So what's it all about anyway?
Nina writes a popular vampire series, about the beautiful Zadia Bloodstone, crime-fighter extraordinaire. Secretly, Nina wishes she was just like Zadia Bloodstone, but she knows that it really is just a story. Real vampires aren't beautiful and strong: they're fragile, weak-willed, constantly sick and anti-social. Nina knows, because for the past thirty years she's been a vampire. And being stuck as a teenager forever isn't exactly fun.

Nina doesn't drink blood, either (at least, not human blood). She, along with the other members of Father Ramon's Reformed Vampire Support Group, have found other methods of coping with their problems. No attacking humans, that's one of their rules. So is not telling anyone what they are, because humans can be a bit - well - scared of vampires (although vampires are for the most part far more scared of them). But one member of their group isn't quite as dedicated to the cause as the others. That becomes apparent when they find him staked to death in his home.

Nina knows there is a slayer out there. And the group is sure that if they just talk to him (or her), he'll come to understand that vampires pose no real threat. But things are never quite that simple, and Nina and her friends suddenly find themselves in a world of underground werewolf fighting, deranged slayers, and vampires who really do think they can act like Zadia Bloodstone...

The Good and the Bad
This book should have been great - but I just couldn't get into it. The characters weren't quite engaging enough, the plot wasn't quite interesting enough, the pacing wasn't quite right - all in all, just not quite good enough. I actually really liked Nina, but since she was narrating the book it lost a lot of its suspense - you know the whole time nothing terrible is going to happen to her, because she's still alive (well, undead) at the end of the story to tell it, and I just couldn't work up enough enthusiasm about the other characters to care if any of them exploded in the sun or were eaten by werewolves or what have you. A disappointing read, overall.

So, should I read it or what?
It's pretty hard to make a story about people who eat hamsters bland, but somehow Catherine Jinks managed it. Not recommended.

Later this week, probably: Teen detectives, 70's style!

Link of the day: Top Ten 15 Saved By the Bell moments, because the 90's haven't really died yet.