Showing posts with label Westerfeld. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Westerfeld. Show all posts

Monday, June 4, 2012

Monday Review Post, 6/54/2012

Aaaaand, I'm back. I'd love to say that I was off saving the world or something noble like that, but it's just that the week got away from me early last week, and when I caught up, it seemed silly to post about it.

I've read a bunch of books over the past two weeks. I'm going to refer you to my establishing post, in which I said that I would thumbnail some of the books and only do big reviews of one or two each week. Consider yourself thus referred.

Jana Oliver -  Soul Thief - sequel to The Demon Hunter's Daughter. Not a bad second book. The use of accents bugged the heck out of me, and the book doesn't end, as the first one didn't end - problematic. Still a solid piece of world building, and I will find the third book.

Scott Westerfeld - Goliath - a solid conclusion to a stellar trilogy. I love love LOVE the illustrations, and the feel of the book made reading these a tactile pleasure. Strong characters throughout, nice world building, nice alt-hist, interesting ... well, I would call it steampunk, but it wasn't really, was it? Darwin-punk, perhaps. The steam was in the background, because the heroes were the Darwinists. interesting Darwin-punk. Go, read these books.

Robert Sawyer - WWW: Wake - a nice establishing book, introduction to some strong characters. Sawyer writes strong female characters. I loved the "Americans in Canada" schtick - made me homesick. All three books have been published - this is an old series - so I'll pick up the second one. Oh - a fascinating trip through the discussion of identity, because everything cycles back to that at the moment. A book about learning who you are and how you fit into the world, even if you are the self-aware embodiment of the internet.

Mary Robinette Kowal - Shades of Milk and Honey - This book was AMAZING, and if you like Jane Austen, and/or magic, and/or regency romances, you must must must read this book. Right now. Kowal bills it as the novel that Austen would have written if she lived in a world where formalized magic worked. So. It's very much an Austen novel about social relations, finding the right spouse, making your family proud, and etc. It's got jilted lovers, young men who are not what they are pretending to be, for good and for ill, a semi-detached father, a hypochondriacal mother, a sensible daughter and a silly one - it's very Austenesque. Plus, it has glamour - exactly the sort of decorative magic that the regency world would have cultivated - completely artistic and functionally useless, fantastically expensive, yet totally lower class. Oh, and there's a duel. I know at least three people in my readership who will adore this book, and probably two others who will enjoy the heck out of it - you know who you are, and this book is worth hunting down.

In the theme of judging books by covers - this book has a Very Serious Cover, so you can pretend to be reading Serious Literature while on the bus - a decided plus.

See - totally serious cover!


Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williams - The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism

A big serious book about the Tea Party movement. This is that rarity in academic books - full of academic rigor - charts, footnotes (extensive footnotes), details of complicated social science studies - and yet entirely readable. This is what makes Skocpol a luminary in the poli-sci and political/cultural history fields - she can write without covering the whole thing in bafflegab and jargon.

So. The motto for the Slactiverse is "It's usually more complicated than that," but we're, for the most part, lefties, and, as such, we've been pretty dismissive of the Tea Party (when it comes up at all) as either a bunch of old folks who have been duped by a convincing astroturfing (that is, a fake grass-roots movement) effort by the elites on the Right, or a bunch of old folks who have stewed in their hatred and bigotry and then been duped by a convincing astroturfing effort. Skocpol and Williams are not in agreement with the aims of the movement, but they contend, quite effectively, with the idea that the Tea Party is a top-down astro turfed
group. Their studies show, fairly conclusively, that there is a strong disconnect between the efforts to direct the Tea Party by elites on the Right and the movement on the ground. The Tea Party IS a grass roots movement, but it is ALSO being directed (with varying levels of success) from the top down. It IS more complicated than that.

Skocpol and Williams are legitimately impressed by the ability of the people on the ground - the actual Tea Partiers - to understand the legislative ins and outs of Congress. They are also appalled by the lack of solid knowledge about what legislation is actually intended to do that the Tea Partiers display. They end their work by almost bemoaning the fact that leftists have a firm grasp of the facts, but no idea of how to influence political change, while Tea Partiers have a strong grasp of influence, but no grasp of the facts at all - if only these two elements could be merged somehow...

Anyway, it's an important book, it's very very well written, and if you want to have any idea of what the heck is happening in American politics right now, I suggest you at least take a look at it.

Lizzie Stark - Leaving Mundania


This is a serious book about larping - live action role playing. It is fairly deep, but not all that broad. There were elements of larp that I thought could have been better covered - the whole Vampire:The Masquerade/White Wolf/Theater of the Mind's Eye could have been better addressed, for instance - but what Stark does look at, she looks at in exactly enough depth. I'm biased - I'm a total geek, as you all know - but I think Stark does a good job of explaining what larp is for someone who doesn't already know. She describes a couple of long running games - Avatar Systems/Nexus, and Knight Realms - explores the ways in which larp can be used by "mundanes" for education purposes (she spends some time with the US military, exploring their training facilities - perhaps looking at some of the emergency training which she mentions but doesn't explore would have been good also, but the military bit is illustrative), and then goes off to Scandanavia, where they take larp VERY seriously - it's an art form, and it really didn't sound all that much fun based on Stark's descriptions. Stark also takes the ultimate plunge and runs a larp - and not a half-way effort, with a "murder mystery" from a box - she helps to write and run a Cthulhu larp with a bunch of complete larp novices. Yikes! It sounded like everyone had fun, though.

In between the descriptions of various larp and larp-like activities, Stark provides fascinating background on several people important to the modern larp movement in the US. She also traces the historical roots of larping back to Tudor England and to Prussian military training - that, alone, is worth looking at the book for.

There were gaps. I would love to know more about the zombie boffer larps. Also, where should we put non-larp games like zombies vs. humans - the sort of large scale "getting to know you" game that gets run on college campuses every September - or like Quidditch, where college kids run around holding brooms and pretending to play J.K. Rowling's iconic wizarding sport? What about renaissance faires? These aren't larp, per se, but they have larp elements - there's room for more exploration here. But, what Stark does look at, as I say, she dives deep - and, like a narrow, deep river, the book moves really quickly. It's a serious book about a sort of silly thing, but in the end, it's more complicated than that. For established larpers, a must read, for the curious, highly recommended. And, check out this cover:
That's pretty bad ass.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Friday review, only a few hours late: 1/22/2011

So, this is late. But I have a valid excuse!



Yesterday, we brought our second child home from the hospital. That took precedence.
(The book is Scott Lynch, Red Seas Under Red Skies, the second Locke Lamora novel. The baby is Helen.)

Three books this week.

S.M. Stirling - A Meeting at Corvallis


This is the third book of the first Emberverse trilogy, which I have now finished re-reading. Stirling has done an amazing thing with this trilogy - he's more or less re-invented the fantasy novel. It might be argued that this is actually sci fi, but I think it's pretty clearly not. The second series really makes that clear - what we're looking at is a work of fantasy, with magic spells, noble heroes, and a divine sword that would not be out of place in something by T.H. White - actually, it might have been lifted from White in the first place. And, at the same time, it does what a good sci fi book should do - provides gentle commentary on the modern world. It's solid writing, the heroes are heroic, the villains are still human in this one, and the solutions are palatable. You'll probably like these books better if you tend towards fantasy - the fans of hard sci fi will find these a little fluffy, I think, and might want to stop after book 1.

Scott Westerfeld - Behemoth

This is the second in the Leviathan trilogy. It's an alt-hist work, focused on WWI.  England and her allies are Darwinian, meaning their society is based on genetically modified beasts - huge beasts of burden, tiny talking lizards, vast floating airship beasts, and voracious sea monsters, among others.  Germany and her allies are Clankers, meaning their society is based on technology - flying crafts, giant metal walking tanks, Tesla cannons, things like that. Within that context, Westerfeld is a) pretty consistent and b) oddly historically accurate, all things considered.

The book, as I mentioned when I picked it up a few weeks back, is lavishly illustrated. Westerfeld got his publishers to allow for a heavier paper stock, and paid the artist himself, and the result is simply gorgeous. Really, these books are worth the price for the drawings alone, they are quite honestly that good. The end papers this time are a political cartoon/propaganda poster, which is entirely accurate to the spirit of the period, and the pictures internally add a great deal to the narrative.

Of the narrative - you won't be disappointed. It's not Tolstoy, or even Hemingway, but the book is well written. The characters are believable, the plot is strong, and everything basically hangs together. The pace is very rapid - lots of action - but Westerfeld has lived up to the challenge of his illustrations by also packing the book with lush descriptions - the book works nicely as a whole.

The historical note is a very nice touch - I love when authors do that.

One final observation, though. This book seems to be marketed as "steampunk", and I'm not at all comfortable with that designation here. Spleenpunk, perhaps. This isn't an problem with the book - it is what it is - but rather with marketing. Words mean things, and publishing companies should know that.

Final book - an odd treat -

Dr. Ralph Y Hopton and Anne Balliol - Bed Manners and Better Bed Manners
(with many devilish illustrations)


A friend of mine dropped this little gem into my lap. It's a 1942 omnibus edition of two 1930s etiquette manuals dealing with bedroom etiquette. I don't know where she got it, but it came, at one point, from the library of the U.S.S. Hector - a navy repair ship launched in 1942, and decommissioned in 1984. I can just imagine the crewmen of the Hector amusing themselves by reading this trip of a book to each other.

It is a trip of a book. I'm not sure how much of the book to take seriously, frankly - it seems to be about 2/3rds a spoof of the etiquette manual in places - but in other places, it clearly means to be what it purports to be, and that makes the whole thing more absurd. The book claims to be about how best to behave in the bedroom, an area left out of most etiquette books. It opens with a detailed explanation of why the reader should buy this book rather than borrow it from the library - one should meditate on the chapters one at a time - and contains advice on how to behave when sleeping at home, when coming in late, when waking up, when sleeping on a friends yacht, when sleeping on a train, when invited to a country estate, and so on. Some of the humor comes from the over-the-top descriptions of situations and the delightful 1930s style snark (nobody has ever done it better, frankly) about things like sleeping in a train car, and staying home from work, sick, and etc. Most of the humor comes from the assumptions the authors make about their readers (everyone is upper middle class, they have servants and spend much of their time drinking and carousing, everyone sleeps in separate beds...), and the world. Some of that humor is of the "had to laugh to keep from screaming" variety - the diatribe against women wearing face cream (twice. These authors have a real hate for face cream.), for instance, or the casual racism in the advice on how to treat Pullman porters. (If elderly enough to remember being a slave, tell them you want them to be a personal body servant, and call them "Boy." If younger, call them  Buddy, and mention that you know Cab Calloway. Really.)

So, it's a hoot. It's a fascinating glimpse into the ideas and ideals of the '30s. Some of the advice is actually not awful. It contains the following unusual phrases:

bolster buddy
counterpane chum
mattress mate
pillow partner
bedroll buddy
pillow pal

All of which refer, naturally, to the person you are sharing a bed, or at least a bedroom, with. There is, however, no reference whatsoever to the oral-genital kiss of love, or, indeed, anything more than the most glancing reference (wink wink, nudge nudge) to things one might do in bed that don't involve sleeping, reading books, stealing covers, or convalescing from German measles. Indeed, despite the numerous references to maintaining certain standards of attractiveness (for both genders), there is no suggestion of why one might want to do that. There are a couple of references to children (such as: safe topics to discuss in bed: the [poor] quality of food served at other people's houses and the [poor] standards of child rearing practiced by other people. Unsafe topics to discuss in bed: the [poor] quality of food served in your own home and the [poor] standards of child rearing practiced by your spouse.), which implies the sorts of activities which result in children (ie, sex), but there is no discussion of sex whatsoever. Not even a reference to being quiet while sleeping on a boat, or anything like that.

Anyway, if you're interested in old etiquette manuals or the social-sexual mores of the 1930s and '40s, or just want a good laugh at some classic snark, this is an interesting book, and you might enjoy it.

Followers