What Are We Currently Reading?

[Hanahope]

Recently read Night School and Midnight Line, the latest two Jack Reacher novels by Lee Childs.   One was while Jack was in the army, and the other was his last in the timeline.  I noticed that both books included some fairly current topics (racism/nationalism and prescription opiates), which I hadn't specifically noticed in some of the earlier books.  Other than that, fairly typical Jack Reacher stories, but good enough.

Edited September 26, 2018 by Hanahope

[Spartan Girl]

I'm reading Sisters of the Winter Wood by Rena Rossner and I can't put it down! Highly recommended for any fans of Russian fantasy/fairy tales!

[aradia22]

I finished Act One (I think there are three) of the Vivien Leigh biography written by Anne Edwards. I like it enough and I'm bookmarking so many parts that I bought it from Amazon so I will probably wait to finish it when I have my own copy and can return the one from the library. As these things go, it's pretty entertaining instead of being so dry (which is the reason I avoid a lot of historical nonfiction... like kings and queens, even though I love that stuff in fiction) though I question the veracity. Sometimes she outright quotes letters and other primary sources but other times she fills in details that, unless she has letters she is quoting, she would have no way of knowing. It makes the story more interesting but I'm also taking it all with a grain of salt. Also, she can't stop talking about how special and beautiful Vivien was. Which, OK, yes, obviously I think so too which is why I'm reading this biography... but it's a bit much. Some of her prose is actually very simple and flat but that's a minor criticism as the bulk of it is pretty engaging so far.

[Minneapple]

11 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I'm reading Sisters of the Winter Wood by Rena Rossner and I can't put it down! Highly recommended for any fans of Russian fantasy/fairy tales!

If you like Russian fairy tales you should try Spinning Silver by Naomi Novik. It's so good. 

[Jenniferbug]

I just started The Cruelest Month by Louise Penny, which is the 3rd book in the Inspector Gamache series. I liked the first two books, so odds are good I will like the rest as well. 

[Neko]

*sigh*

Okay...I'm 37 years old.  But, for some inexplicable reason, I read Anna and the French Kiss, by Stephanie Perkins.  It was there.  It was pink.  And hey, I like books with pink covers. ;P

Anyway, what a complete waste of time it was.  I'm not averse to YA, I will read the occasional YA novel if enough people are talking about it, and I feel like it might have something to offer, but...THIS.  This was nearly 400 pages of a hypocritical, idiotic girl, lusting after a guy who has a girlfriend.  THAT'S IT.  THAT'S THE ENTIRE BOOK.

I mean, I wasn't expecting great things, but I expected a story.  The conflict is totally contrived, and there is absolutely no reason for it to go on, as long as it does.  Anna was a whiny turd , and Etienne was a needy prick who could do next to nothing without a girl by his side.  Seriously, this character has no agency.  Why is he considered swoon-y by so many people on Goodreads is beyond me.  There is even a point in the book where he tells Anna he's afraid to be alone, and it's never revisited, or examined, in any way.  She just says she's also afraid to be alone, and then they act like that's fine?  Like, that's not a HORRIBLE foundation for a relationship?  WHAT?!?

Yay, codependency!! :-D

I'm done with YA.  I can't believe I read this shit-tastic book.  Why did I do this to myself?  WHY??

[scarynikki12]

I just finished Playing With Matches by Hannah Oreinstein. The Fug Ladies were all about it and they rarely steer me wrong. This was one of those times. I think the premise is good and the writing is fine but the story is incomplete. It needs more. It feels like she had an hour until her deadline and still had a third to write. All the points are hit: definitively dumping the cheating boyfriend, getting fired for breaking the rules, getting the better job, getting dumped by the new boyfriend who turns out to not be as great as she thought, but it’s rushed and abrupt. Could have used another go.

[Melgaypet]

I just finished Trouble in Nuala by Harriet Steel, which was one of the "Recommended for You" books on my Kindle. It's a short murder mystery; a bit slight, but that was exactly what I needed during a difficult week. Though I do wonder if it wasn't too light and fluffy, given the setting: Sri Lanka in the 1930's under British colonial rule. The book gave some lip service to the conflicts the protaganist, a Sinhalese policeman named Shanti de Silva, would feel, but seemed to want to back away from it. Understandable, given that this is supposed to be a cosy mystery, and again, I didn't want heavy, but it does kind of make the world of the book feel a little artificial. Another disappointment was how flat the characterization was for de Silva's British wife Jane. She's sweet and kind...and that's it. There was no conflict between them, even when Jane became friends with one of the murder suspects.

Still, the description of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) was lovely, the mystery worked, de Silva is a pleasant hero - not flashy, but quietly dogged. This was the first in a series, I'm leaning towards reading the next one.

[GaT]

2 hours ago, Sweet Summer Child said:

*sigh*

Okay...I'm 37 years old.  But, for some inexplicable reason, I read Anna and the French Kiss, by Stephanie Perkins.  It was there.  It was pink.  And hey, I like books with pink covers. ;P

I feel for you. I got sucked into reading the Selection series by Kiera Cass (also a YA series) just because of the gowns on the covers.

[Ceindreadh]

I am working my way through the complete Mary Poppins books. 

I saw the trailer for the new movie on youtube and then started googling and realised that there were a few books in the series that hadn't shown up in the local library when I was a kid. 

I'd forgotten quite a lot of the stories, from the ones that I had read and I didn't remember Mary being quite so nasty in tone to the kids - or maybe I just assumed that that's how nannys behaved. 

Still, it's nice to revert to my childhood every now and then!

[truthaboutluv]

Re-posting this from the movie thread. Will spoiler in case anyone hasn't seen the film or well, read the book.So I recently read To All The Boys I've Loved Before. I've actually had it for years but just never had any interest in reading it, until I saw the film, which I absolutely loved. After completing the book, I can say with complete certainty that the movie was way better. I think all the changes they made for the film were for the best. I think the biggest thing for me is that book Lara Jean and Peter weren't nearly as endearing as movie Lara Jean and Peter.

Spoiler

 

Honestly, I was totally confused when Lara Jean decided she liked Peter in the book  because I couldn't figure out when and how that happened. And in my opinion that should definitely not be the case for a book where the author has way more opportunity to write conversations/build connection/etc, as opposed to a movie that's limited by time.

The sisters' relationship was also way better in the movie than in the book. Sure they were close in the book but Kitty for example was not nearly as endearing as the character was in the movie. In the movie she was adorably precocious while in the book she just came across as a straight up brat at times. Which actually ties into a major change between the movie and the book, that I thought was for the best - i.e. Kitty's motivation for sending the letters. Josh was also way less annoying in the movie than in the book and that's because his presence was thankfully significantly reduced. So in conclusion, loved the movie, don't really have much desire to complete the book series. 

 

 

I am also currently reading The Woman In Cabin 10 by Ruth Ware. It's been on my to read list forever. I'm about 3/4 done and I have to say I'm really enjoying it and in a rare turn for me, since I usually figure out the mysteries half way through the story, I don't really know where it's going. The one thing I will say and I'm still not completely sure if that's a positive or negative thing - Ware wasted no time getting to the action of the story. And so I feel like at times it feels like story has been a bit rushed. And it's probably why I haven't been able to figure out what's coming next and what's happening because I feel like I've barely had a second to catch my breath. Literally the book opens in the first chapter with the main character 

Spoiler

being mugged and attacked. And so she's in a state of panic from like the first five pages, unable to sleep and that state hasn't let up at all. 

[Spartan Girl]

I just finished The Dark Descent of Elizabeth Frankenstein by Kiersten White, an awesome YA retelling of Frankenstein. Anyone who thinks Elizabeth deserved a more interesting story than just being fridged should definitely check it out.

Edited September 30, 2018 by Spartan Girl

[LilWharveyGal]

On 9/28/2018 at 3:52 PM, GaT said:

I feel for you. I got sucked into reading the Selection series by Kiera Cass (also a YA series) just because of the gowns on the covers.

LOL, me too!  I think my brain cells are still in recovery.

[Minneapple]

On 9/28/2018 at 4:42 PM, Sweet Summer Child said:

I'm done with YA.  I can't believe I read this shit-tastic book.  Why did I do this to myself?  WHY??

I love YA. But these days it's SO HARD to find a good YA novel. Even in newer YA novels, there's a surprising amount of slut shaming, body shaming, et al, despite claims that the books are about girl power and feature strong female characters. Books like The Hate U Give are notable exceptions. I also liked The Belles by Dhonielle Clayton. And Spinning Silver by Naomi Novik, as I mentioned in a post above.

Anyway, what's everyone choosing for October First Reads? I'm trying to decide between The Dark Heart, a true crime story, and Daughters of the Lake, which is classified as Gothic fiction. I'm leaning toward Daughters of the Lake right now.

[Jenniferbug]

10 minutes ago, Minneapple said:

I love YA. But these days it's SO HARD to find a good YA novel. Even in newer YA novels, there's a surprising amount of slut shaming, body shaming, et al, despite claims that the books are about girl power and feature strong female characters. Books like The Hate U Give are notable exceptions. I also liked The Belles by Dhonielle Clayton. And Spinning Silver by Naomi Novik, as I mentioned in a post above.

Anyway, what's everyone choosing for October First Reads? I'm trying to decide between The Dark Heart, a true crime story, and Daughters of the Lake, which is classified as Gothic fiction. I'm leaning toward Daughters of the Lake right now.

I'm trying to choose between the same 2 books, Mineapple. 

Maybe I'm more of a prude than I thought, but I've been surprised by how much graphic sex is in some of the YA literature I read recently (notably The Court series by Sara Maas). I mean, I know young adults are aware of sex and possibly active themselves, but some scenes are described in such graphic detail (which is fine in adult literature) but I'd be uncomfortable letting my daughters read it as 14 or 15 year olds. I do appreciate the heroine having sexual agency of her own and that not being treated as abnormal or sluttish. 

[Browncoat]

It's hard to find a good YA novel that is a stand-alone, too.  I'm sick to death of trilogies (or more).

[Black Knight]

3 hours ago, Jenniferbug said:

Maybe I'm more of a prude than I thought, but I've been surprised by how much graphic sex is in some of the YA literature I read recently (notably The Court series by Sara Maas). I mean, I know young adults are aware of sex and possibly active themselves, but some scenes are described in such graphic detail (which is fine in adult literature) but I'd be uncomfortable letting my daughters read it as 14 or 15 year olds. I do appreciate the heroine having sexual agency of her own and that not being treated as abnormal or sluttish. 

Heh, if your daughters are anything like me and the girls I went to (Christian!) school with decades ago, they've already read more explicit stuff by now than Sara Maas. We came across that stuff around 6th grade. It really didn't do any harm. The reality is that by then people are having sexual feelings and getting off in some way, whether through a book or photos or videos. It's just normal. I know parents don't want to think about it, just like kids don't want to think about their parents being sexual beings, but that's the reality.

What irritates me about sex in YA is the total double standard for describing gay sex vs. straight sex. Though some series can be ridiculously prudish about straight sex too - I always roll my eyes at the Hunger Games series (which I actually do love despite its faults), which is so typical of America in how all the violence is a-ok but the heroine getting turned on by kissing is described in the vaguest of terms, and when she finally sleeps with the guy she wants it's totally elided. But at least some YA will have more graphic sex scenes for their heterosexual couples. I've yet to come across a YA that dares to describe anything remotely explicit for gay sex.

[Jenniferbug]

My kids are still too young to read, so my letting them read it as young teens was hypothetical. But you are totally right that I was probably reading more racy stuff in middle school than I remember and thinking nothing much of it.

Also a good point about gay sex- I can't think of any novel I've read that depicts it in graphic detail. 

[Neko]

First read for October is The Clan of the Cave Bear, by Jean M. Auel.  I'm enjoying it, so far.

[Hanahope]

I decided to choose The Dark Heart for the Amazon October book.

[LucidDreamer]

Quote

It's hard to find a good YA novel that is a stand-alone, too.  I'm sick to death of trilogies (or more).

Shameless plug for my critique partner -- Lindsey Duga. Her debut YA Fantasy came out in July, and it is a standalone. It is fun, with romance but no sex scenes. Lots of adventure and some good fighting scenes.  Title is: KISS OF THE ROYAL and it's published by Entangled Teen. 

[Browncoat]

I will see if I can find it!

[Hanahope]

At my oldest daughter's back to school night, her Language Arts teacher listed the books the class will be reading this year.  Finally some books I recognize, like 12 Angry Men, To Kill a Monkingbird, The Outsiders, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Tuesdays with Morrie.

One of the books I didn't recognize is Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.  Its apparently fairly new.  It sounded interesting, so I borrowed it from the library so I could discuss it with my daughter.    I've only just started it, but it already makes me think that my youngest daughter is going to be struggling in school and sports because I made the decision to put her in school immediately after she turned 5 (she has an August birthday and the cut off was August 31), instead of waiting a year (the new 'red shirt' ideology).  The book talks about how kids who are born in the "early months" tend to be more successful because they are always older than their "peers" in school, sports, etc., and that those in the later months must work significantly more to "catch up."  Great.....

[Jenniferbug]

@Hanahope, that sounds awful! I wonder why the teacher would read that to the class? If I were one if the kids with a birthday in July, I know I'd be thinking "great, so I'm basically screwed?" And I sympathize- our school cut off is also August 31st, and my younger daughter has a birthday in July so she will always be one of the youngest in her grade (but would also be bored if I kept her back). If you choose to keep reading, I'd like to hear how it progresses.

While I'm waiting on the 6th Inspecter Gamache book to arrive, I picked up City of Bones from the library. It's ok so far, but honestly reads like any other supernatural teen novel. I had a friend say she absolutely loved the series, so I guess I'm still waiting for it to grab me too. 

[Katy M]

17 minutes ago, Hanahope said:

One of the books I didn't recognize is Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.  Its apparently fairly new.  It sounded interesting, so I borrowed it from the library so I could discuss it with my daughter.    I've only just started it, but it already makes me think that my youngest daughter is going to be struggling in school and sports because I made the decision to put her in school immediately after she turned 5 (she has an August birthday and the cut off was August 31), instead of waiting a year (the new 'red shirt' ideology).  The book talks about how kids who are born in the "early months" tend to be more successful because they are always older than their "peers" in school, sports, etc., and that those in the later months must work significantly more to "catch up."  Great.....

The cut off when and where I went to school was December 31st.  I have a late November birthday, so I was 4 for about 1/4 of kindergarten.  I actually did struggle in school for years, but there's no way to know whether I would have anyway.  But, my sister always breezed through school, and my mom said that having to struggle now would build more character for later.  I have no idea if she was right or not, but maybe that's something you can focus on.  And, a better ray of light for you, our class valedictorian had a December birthday, and no she didn't start late, she was the youngest in our class.

[helenamonster]

3 hours ago, Hanahope said:

At my oldest daughter's back to school night, her Language Arts teacher listed the books the class will be reading this year.  Finally some books I recognize, like 12 Angry Men, To Kill a Monkingbird, The Outsiders, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Tuesdays with Morrie.

One of the books I didn't recognize is Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.  Its apparently fairly new.  It sounded interesting, so I borrowed it from the library so I could discuss it with my daughter.    I've only just started it, but it already makes me think that my youngest daughter is going to be struggling in school and sports because I made the decision to put her in school immediately after she turned 5 (she has an August birthday and the cut off was August 31), instead of waiting a year (the new 'red shirt' ideology).  The book talks about how kids who are born in the "early months" tend to be more successful because they are always older than their "peers" in school, sports, etc., and that those in the later months must work significantly more to "catch up."  Great.....

I'm curious to know what evidence Mr. Gladwell has to back this up. Late July birthday here in a school district where the cut-off was the end of September. My mom thought I was ready for kindergarten at five and I think she was right. I was a good student all the way through high school and college (graduated cum laude) and any academic problems I had were a result of my severe anxiety, which I probably would have had to deal with even if she'd kept me back for one more year. I never felt that being one of the youngest in my class was ever a disadvantage.

Meanwhile, I knew plenty of kids who started senior year of high school already 18 who were dumber than a box of hair. I feel a counter-argument could be made that kids who are held back a year could potentially suffer as they miss learning certain information before crucial developmental milestones pass. For example, it's best to start teaching kids to read and write as early as possible so that by the time their brain has developed enough to actually understand it, it can become second nature. The later a kid learns to read and write, the harder it is for them to master it.

You can poke plenty of holes in my argument as well, because we all develop at different paces. You know your daughter better than anybody and if you thought she was ready to start kindergarten at five, you were probably right. I'm curious what about the rest of this book makes it something that would be taught in a language arts class, and I'm nervous about some of this guy's other claims that could give perfectly competent kids an unnecessary complex.

[Mabinogia]

I definitely think it depends on the individual, whether they are ready to enter school early or late. I'm sure there is an argument to be made using the same data that would state it is harmful to a child to wait a year. That they may face the stigma of being the oldest in their class. 

The beauty about humans is that we are all different. You can't make a blanket statement about what is right for everyone. I think most parents will know if their child is or isn't ready for school and they shouldn't feel pressured to either put them in too early or hold them back. I also think that if you do put your kid in too soon and it is clear they are struggling, there should be no penalty for taking them out and waiting till the next year. It shouldn't be about what is normal and acceptable, it should be about what is best for each individual child so long as it isn't disrupting the rest of the class. 

I just hate the idea that some "expert" thinks they can decide what we all should and shouldn't do. Who are they to decide? It's the old "Eggs are good for you eggs are bad for you". These "experts" are always "revising" what they say and manipulating the data to suit their opinion. Just do what feels right for you and your child, not what some expert who has never met your kid says. 

Edited October 8, 2018 by Mabinogia

[Hanahope]

23 minutes ago, helenamonster said:

I'm curious to know what evidence Mr. Gladwell has to back this up.

As I said, I just started the book, so I'm hoping that there's more to it than what I read in the first chapter.  

As for evidence, he primarily pointed to certain sports rosters and that the birthday months for the majority of players were in "early months", which he defined as January - March (saying that most sports for kids' teams tended to use Dec. 31 as the cut off date for age-based teams), a bit smaller group from April to June, and then only a few people with birthdays in the later half of the year.  Thus he said that kids with birthdays in Oct - Dec. are competing against some kids almost a year older than them, and that makes a difference in physical sports.

He then expanded this theory to education, noting that some parents have now chosen to keep their later birthdate kids back a year, for similar reasons.  I'll be interested to see whether this addressed further in the rest of the book.

[aradia22]

Quote

*sigh*

Okay...I'm 37 years old.  But, for some inexplicable reason, I read Anna and the French Kiss, by Stephanie Perkins.  It was there.  It was pink.  And hey, I like books with pink covers. ;P

[...]  There is even a point in the book where he tells Anna he's afraid to be alone, and it's never revisited, or examined, in any way.  She just says she's also afraid to be alone, and then they act like that's fine?  Like, that's not a HORRIBLE foundation for a relationship?  WHAT?!?

Haha. Loved this review. I think I actually have pretty good luck just picking things up from the library instead of listening to Goodreads. That's what I did throughout middle school and some of high school. I need to get in the habit of doing it more often at my local library but I tend to just put books on hold and then drop them off in the big mailbox minimizing my actual library time. Sorry you had bad luck this time. I can't talk since I read plenty of problematic romances (I comfort myself saying it's fine since I acknowledge they're problematic) but I think maybe I've aged out of that audience too. I think it's part of the reason I'm drawn to shorter books. I don't want to invest all that time only to realize the author doesn't get how healthy relationship are supposed to work. ;)

Quote

I feel for you. I got sucked into reading the Selection series by Kiera Cass (also a YA series) just because of the gowns on the covers.

Oh, no. Are they bad? I've been so tempted every time I see a bestseller list with those pretty gowns. It's very Danielle Steel/new Lisa Kleypas. I don't know why the gowns get me. It's not like most authors can even describe fashion that well.

Quote

Anyway, what's everyone choosing for October First Reads? I'm trying to decide between The Dark Heart, a true crime story, and Daughters of the Lake, which is classified as Gothic fiction. I'm leaning toward Daughters of the Lake right now.

Same! I considered the YA book but the characters' names made my brain hurt. I'm never that excited about a book with two timelines (when will this trend die???) but the reviews for The Dark Heart are trending negative. I might wait until later in the month to see if things improve.

[Haleth]

19 hours ago, Hanahope said:

As for evidence, he primarily pointed to certain sports rosters and that the birthday months for the majority of players were in "early months", which he defined as January - March (saying that most sports for kids' teams tended to use Dec. 31 as the cut off date for age-based teams), a bit smaller group from April to June, and then only a few people with birthdays in the later half of the year.  Thus he said that kids with birthdays in Oct - Dec. are competing against some kids almost a year older than them, and that makes a difference in physical sports.

I can see how maaaaaybe younger kids are maaaaaybe at a slight physical disadvantage, but kids develop at different rates both physically and intellectually.  Shoot, I knew a boy who could ride a bike at 3.  Certainly kindergarteners have a low bar for what "ready" means and I can't believe a few months difference in age is necessarily a warning flag.  You as a parent know what your child is capable of and can better assess how she will do in that environment.  Drawing fingers on stick figures may be an indication of readiness (just an example), but it shouldn't preclude a precocious child from starting school early.

[Joe]

I'm reading Adam Hills' autobiography, Best Foot Forward. Yeah, groan. But it's really not what I expected it to be. When I flicked through in the shop, I got a really funny bit. But the whole thing, while light and certainly amusing, hasn't produced a LOL moment yet. Still good, though.

[Crs97]

I am reading From the Corner of the Oval by Beck Dorey-Stein.  Enjoyable, light read. I think someone described it as West Wing meets Sex and the City, which is on point so far.

[Hanahope]

4 hours ago, Haleth said:

I can see how maaaaaybe younger kids are maaaaaybe at a slight physical disadvantage, but kids develop at different rates both physically and intellectually.  Shoot, I knew a boy who could ride a bike at 3.  Certainly kindergarteners have a low bar for what "ready" means and I can't believe a few months difference in age is necessarily a warning flag.  You as a parent know what your child is capable of and can better assess how she will do in that environment.  Drawing fingers on stick figures may be an indication of readiness (just an example), but it shouldn't preclude a precocious child from starting school early.

There will always be exceptions.  As the author said, there were a few with later birthdays.  But the majority had the earlier birthdates.  As he continued to explain in chapters 2-3, that with a slight advantage early, more opportunities tend to follow to help develope and continue those advantages even more.  Again, his example that kids with the earlier birthdates tended to be slightly better enough that they'd get picked for special advanced sporting practices/teams/camps, giving them even more opportunity to put in more hours practicing. 

As an example, anyone can pay to join the local recreational hockey teams.  but then you have to "try out" for the traveling competitive teams.  The author states that the players that tend to get chosen for those teams are the ones with the earlier birthdates because they tend to bigger/stronger and thus play better.  They get chosen for the travel team and thus get the opportunity to play for even more hours and thus get even better.  The next year, these same kids will again get chosen to be on the new travel team because not only are they possibly still bigger/stronger than their late birthdate teammates, but they got the extra practice with the prior travel team and so are even better.

The author doesn't limit it to sports.  He went on to show another example with computers.  This time, it was "luck" of what year you were born.  He points out that people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Bill Joy (founder of Sun Microsystems), Eric Schmidt (CEO of Google), and several others, were all born from 1953 to 1956, and thus as young adults, were at a key age to take advantage of the dawn of personal computers (not too young to still be in milddle or high school, but not too old that they already had jobs/wives/kids that might make them more conservative with business ideas - and have less time to try new things), coupled with their interest in computers that caused them to spend hours and hours working with them.

He has other examples, which again seem to based on the "luck" of being born at the "right time", and then taking advantages of the opportunities that your luck opened to you.  So far, its interesting from a historical and statistical view, but I'm wondering if the book is anything more than that.

[Mabinogia]

51 minutes ago, Hanahope said:

He points out that people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Bill Joy (founder of Sun Microsystems), Eric Schmidt (CEO of Google), and several others, were all born from 1953 to 1956, and thus as young adults, were at a key age to take advantage of the dawn of personal computers

That's kind of stating the obvious.

So basically, he's really just saying bigger kids are more likely to be picked for sports which...duh and that kids get bigger as they get older. This guy made money 'studying this'?

[mojoween]

I have found that I enjoy the Barnes & Noble book club meetings, and the next book is An Absolutely Remarkable Thing by Hank Green.

I bought the book on Friday.  The meeting is October 24.  And I don’t know if I'm going to get through the book on time.

This book is so bad.  The protagonist is unlikeable (which may be by design) and the writing is just...I can’t describe it.  If he would stick with dialogue I think it might be ok, but he’s constantly sticking extemporaneous details as chunks of paragraphs that do not advance the story in any meaningful way.

[Lovecat]

On 10/8/2018 at 9:14 AM, Hanahope said:

At my oldest daughter's back to school night, her Language Arts teacher listed the books the class will be reading this year.  Finally some books I recognize, like 12 Angry Men, To Kill a Monkingbird, The Outsiders, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Tuesdays with Morrie.

One of the books I didn't recognize is Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.  Its apparently fairly new.  It sounded interesting, so I borrowed it from the library so I could discuss it with my daughter.    I've only just started it, but it already makes me think that my youngest daughter is going to be struggling in school and sports because I made the decision to put her in school immediately after she turned 5 (she has an August birthday and the cut off was August 31), instead of waiting a year (the new 'red shirt' ideology).  The book talks about how kids who are born in the "early months" tend to be more successful because they are always older than their "peers" in school, sports, etc., and that those in the later months must work significantly more to "catch up."  Great.....

 

On 10/8/2018 at 1:04 PM, helenamonster said:

I'm curious to know what evidence Mr. Gladwell has to back this up. Late July birthday here in a school district where the cut-off was the end of September. My mom thought I was ready for kindergarten at five and I think she was right. I was a good student all the way through high school and college (graduated cum laude) and any academic problems I had were a result of my severe anxiety, which I probably would have had to deal with even if she'd kept me back for one more year. I never felt that being one of the youngest in my class was ever a disadvantage.

Meanwhile, I knew plenty of kids who started senior year of high school already 18 who were dumber than a box of hair. I feel a counter-argument could be made that kids who are held back a year could potentially suffer as they miss learning certain information before crucial developmental milestones pass. For example, it's best to start teaching kids to read and write as early as possible so that by the time their brain has developed enough to actually understand it, it can become second nature. The later a kid learns to read and write, the harder it is for them to master it.

You can poke plenty of holes in my argument as well, because we all develop at different paces. You know your daughter better than anybody and if you thought she was ready to start kindergarten at five, you were probably right. I'm curious what about the rest of this book makes it something that would be taught in a language arts class, and I'm nervous about some of this guy's other claims that could give perfectly competent kids an unnecessary complex.

I agree with Helena and the other posters; kids are all different, and you know your kid the best, so I wouldn't fret over Mr. Gladwell's theories.  I have an August birthday and started Kindergarten at 5 years and one month old.  I was so bored (these were the days where Kindergarteners learned letters, numbers, colors, manners, and naps, not Chinese, algebra, and geopolitics) that I became a bit of a problem--I thought we were going to learn how to READ--so I they had me attend Kindergarten in the AM and join the 1st grade class in the afternoon.  That didn't last too long; eventually I just skipped Kindergarten altogether and went to 1st grade.  I don't consider myself particularly brilliant (in high school I was the dumbest of the smart kids), but I wound up graduating at 16 and heading to college at 17.  Any social issues I had were due to me being a fairly shy kid, being a chubby kid, and being a little bit of a nerd, and finishing Kindergarten wouldn't have helped any of that.  I didn't outgrow my shyness until much later, and I'm still a chubby nerd!  A big plus is that this year my classmates have started turning 50, but I just turned 48 :)

[starri]

I just finished Less, this year's Pulitzer winner.  I had a hard time getting into at first, but once it grabbed me, I ended up loving it.  The titular character, Arthur Less, doesn't want to attend his ex-boyfriend's wedding and is depressed about turning 50, so he accepts a bunch of invitations and sort of bumbles is way around the world.  It's a very funny take on being gay and middle-aged, which is, ahem, becoming relevant to me.

[helenamonster]

Just finished: A Simple Favor by Darcey Bell. I...have thoughts.

As just a general criticism, the style the book is told in is not my cup of tea. There aren't so much individual scenes as montages of events told through stream-of-consciousness first-person narration. This narration is very much nonlinear, which isn't a dealbreaker for me, but I never felt like I could settle into the story. All the jumping around to different moments in the characters' lives made it hard to connect to the plot or care about what was happening. It read more like a 300-page outline than an actual book.

I can't comment any further without major spoilers so...

Spoiler

• I wish there had been more of an edge to how Stephanie's blog posts glossed over the more dubious parts of her involvement with Emily and Sean. The unreliable narrator trope is very effective when used correctly, and the blog posts felt like a missed opportunity. Perhaps Amy's diary entries in Gone Girl set the bar too high for me on this kind of thing.
• I also wish that all of the movies and books that Emily so loved played a bigger role in informing her various plans. They were clearly a great source of inspiration for her, and it felt more like Bell wanting to show off that she was cultured or whatever than actually being important to the plot.
• I called the twin plot twist way early in the book, and it was so obvious once I realized it that I was actually mad I hadn't called it even earlier. It's also such a played-out cliche.
• If Bell wanted me to be sad about the insurance investigator's murder, she should have introduced him earlier and given him more than one scene before he was dead in Emily's car.
• What was the point of Stephanie a) having an affair with her half-brother and b) him being Miles's father? It gave something for Emily to blackmail her with, but it never felt like blackmail was all that necessary.
• The ending--of poor, clueless Stephanie being the ultimate "fish" for Emily's bullshit--would have hit a lot harder if the book hadn't been written in the style it was. As I said, it was hard to care about anything the way that it was written.

Despite having a predominantly negative reaction (I don't think there was really one thing I liked about it--a couple lines here and there made me laugh but that's about it), I think I will still try to see the movie before it leaves theaters. The trailer I saw in no way resembles the book I just read, except for some basic plot points. After finishing the book, I wondered for a second why it was even optioned for a movie, but I think because it is so bare bones it probably gave Paul Feig and whoever adapted the screenplay a lot of room to play around and punch it up. Also, because I had seen the trailer before reading the book, I pictured Anna Kendrick and Blake Lively in their respective roles, and I have to assume a lot of their characterization was changed as well. Stephanie (Anna Kendrick) especially is such a clueless drip, and it's hard to imagine someone as quick-witted as Kendrick playing somebody so stupid. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how the movie improved upon its source material, as most of the reviews I've read have been positive and said the movie is a lot of fun.

 

Next up: Lethal White by Robert Galbraith, the fourth in the Cormoran Strike series--the PI books JK Rowling writes under a(nother) pseudonym. I got the hard copy and this thing is long, quite possibly longer than Order of the Phoenix. And I have the reading speed of your average eight-year-old so...see y'all back here in five months.

[AngelKitty]

I finished Magic Breaks and loved it, in fact, this is reminding me to order the next one from the library. I started Carousel Tides by Sharon Lee, but having a hard time getting into it. Then, I got a notice Anne Rice's new Vampire Chronicles book, Blood Communion was waiting for me, so, I had to go get it. And then, I had to just peek at it. Well, I've been in love with Lestat for many years, so that's the one I'm reading.

[nodorothyparker]

I still haven't read the last Lestat novel as most of the reviews were terrible which made it really easy to just keep putting it off.  So now I'm a full book behind for Blood Communion.  Man, I want to be happy for Anne Rice still writing after all these years and enjoying the fruits of her success because the original Vampire Chronicles were such an enormously huge part of my teenage angst, but she didn't make it easy with The Prince Lestat, which seemed to be about hawking iPhones and assorted luxury goods as much as an actual story. 

[Hanahope]

So nearly finished with The Outliers which I commented about before.  As with the beginning of the book, the rest of the book does make a point to note that many very successful people benefited by being born at the "right year" and then took advantage of the opportunities presented to those at the "right time."    It gave another example about the founders of several very successful big law firms in NYC, how many of them were Jewish, who were denied entry to the older "white shoe" WASP firms, and how those white shoe firms didn't do corporate litigation (mergers and acquisitions) in the 50-60s and thus gave that work to these new firms, who were then well placed to completely take over that work and explode in wealth and prestige in the 70s and on.

It also pointed out that such luck of birth also depended on the 'where', not just the 'when.'  It pointed to a certain person, who had a measured IQ above 190, but struggled with school and college because he grew up in a very poor and transcient family with an abusive step-father, and thus didn't learn certain social skills that helped him get into and stay in college.  Instead of becoming a scientist or engineer, he ended up raising horses on a farm.

But the second half of the book explored how anyone can be at least somewhat successful, by using certain cultural traits.  It noted how some cultures tend to promote loyalty, deference and respect to family, elders, and supervisors and that it sometimes has led to problems and disasters.  It used as example airplane accidents, where the engineer and first officers made 'hints' and 'suggestions' of plane problems to the captain, rather than speaking more affirmatively and forcefully, and thus by the time the captain realized the problem, it was too late. 

Other cultures promoted very hard work, and that has resulted in current generations doing very well academically.  The example used was how Chinese farmers would work year-round, and didn't 'hibernate' during the winter months, like European peasants did back in feudal times.  This 'work ethic' continued through Chinese generations, "no one cannot be successful if they are up before dawn and work all day."  And this is why so many Chinese are better at math, and do well at school.  It then looked at KIPP schools, which the author says works the students much harder (in school 7:30 a.m to 5pm, plus 2-3 hours of homework), but the students will succeed there moreso than in a normal public school.  The author makes the suggestion that year round schools would be much better for students, especially poorer students, so they don't lose the learning over 3 months.

The book concluded by saying that with very hard work, anyone can become at least somewhat successful.  The outliers, who had luck in their lives with various circumstances of their book, still worked very hard and thus became immensely successful. 

It did kindof make me think, oh, I guess its not my fault I didn't become very successful, I didn't have the luck of birth.  I'm not sure that the author really wanted people to think that. ;)

[AngelKitty]

On ‎10‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 9:22 AM, nodorothyparker said:

I still haven't read the last Lestat novel as most of the reviews were terrible

Well, I have to admit, she does tend to get carried away with herself, but her writing always engages me. I started the series with The Vampire Lestat and as I said, fell completely in love with him. Then I read Interview with a Vampire and was glad I hadn't read that one first because I would never have fallen in love with the Lestat that Louis described.

I've also read all the Witches of Mayfair books and the mummy ones. I really enjoyed the mummy sequel she wrote with her son.

[Danny Franks]

The Fall of Dragons, the final book in Miles Cameron's Traitor Son Cycle. I don't know why this guy isn't lauded as the best fantasy writer out there (as well as being an excellent writer of historical fiction, under his real name, Christian Cameron). He gets it all right. Characters, world-building, plotline, and the action sequences are fantastic. He knows how to write small skirmishes, large scale battles, sieges, and he knows how to write them with constantly ratcheting tension and excitement.

[Joe]

18 minutes ago, Danny Franks said:

The Fall of Dragons, the final book in Miles Cameron's Traitor Son Cycle. I don't know why this guy isn't lauded as the best fantasy writer out there (as well as being an excellent writer of historical fiction, under his real name, Christian Cameron). He gets it all right. Characters, world-building, plotline, and the action sequences are fantastic. He knows how to write small skirmishes, large scale battles, sieges, and he knows how to write them with constantly ratcheting tension and excitement.

I gave his first book a shot, read a few pages. It didn't click. Should I give it another try? Start with a different book?

[Danny Franks]

51 minutes ago, Joe said:

I gave his first book a shot, read a few pages. It didn't click. Should I give it another try? Start with a different book?

If you mean The Red Knight, that's part of the same series. It does have an odd structure, with the quick flips between different POVs, but that settles down a lot. It took me a little while to get into it, but once I was, I was hooked. He writes the best siege/defence narrative, over the last third of the book, that I've ever read. I'd recommend giving it another go, if you're a fan of the genre.

For his historical work, under Christian Cameron, I'd recommend his Chivalry series, starting with The Ill-Made Knight.

Edited October 22, 2018 by Danny Franks

[Was-MArsenault]

Jay is a hockey player, and he is forced to learn the saxophone when sixth grade rolls around.

[Joe]

6 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

If you mean The Red Knight, that's part of the same series. It does have an odd structure, with the quick flips between different POVs, but that settles down a lot. It took me a little while to get into it, but once I was, I was hooked. He writes the best siege/defence narrative, over the last third of the book, that I've ever read. I'd recommend giving it another go, if you're a fan of the genre.

For his historical work, under Christian Cameron, I'd recommend his Chivalry series, starting with The Ill-Made Knight.

I'll keep it in mind. Though I put together a physical to-read pile recently, it's big. It includes the Malazan series. I might not need anything new for some time.

[HazelEyes4325]

The past few days, I've been needing a comfort read, so I downloaded an eBook of romance novel that I read and *loved* when I was a teenager.  It is Bitter Sweet by Lavyrle Spencer.  It was released in 1990 and, since I remember reading it in hardcover, I must have gotten my hands on a copy soon after it was released.  Anyway, I was totally into it, loving the character and the setting and the story and then--BAM!--a scene where the "hero" rapes his wife shows up.  People, I do NOT remember this from when I read it as a teenager!  Obviously, the scene was there so I must not have caught on that it was rape--which is pretty darn frightening if you think about it.  So, you know, that sort of took the comfort out of that comfort read!

I have a couple of books going now.  I'm reading Disgrace by J. M. Coetzee for my postal book group.  I'm enjoying it, but the main character is just despicable!  I also have The Secret Language of Cats by Susan Schotz going as I have a review due for it soon.  It's a little technical, but maybe I'll learn a bit about what my crazy cat is trying to tell me!  For something fun, I also plan to start Intercepted by Alexa Martin tonight as I just got a notification that my digital hold is in.

[Wiendish Fitch]

I recently finished The Woman in the Window. Derivative as all get out, but still a fun a page-turner.

[Spartan Girl]

I finally got a copy of Spinning Silver at my library, and while I like it so far, the constant POV changes are giving me whiplash.  The author doesn't even have a name heading at the start of each section/chapter, let alone a font change, to show who is narrating, and it's a little hard to keep up.