Splendors and Glooms

by Laura Amy Schlitz

Grade: 3 1/2 stars
Story summary: Strange puppets, creepy puppet masters, old witches dying slowly, lost children, a fair amount of thievery, etc. etc.

Thoughts: Schlitz is good at a mix of creepy, sad, adventurous, and heartfelt. A Drowned Maiden's Hair was similarly excellent in this regard.

The characters were unique while still being familiar. Parsefall was a typical poor, thieving scamp in some ways. A bit of an Artful Dodger type, except more serious. Lizzie Rose was a "good girl", but with the few interesting things she convinced herself were acceptable. Grisini was quite Fagin-ish in many ways, but had interesting complexity in his history with Cassandra and the fact that he's in the puppet business because it's actually his passion. Clara and Cassandra were my definite favourites. They both had rather tragic pasts which psychologically screwed them up royally.

If I had a criticism, I would say that although the multiple view points decidedly create more complexity for each character, they also distract slightly. I didn't feel like the book was quite as cohesive as it might have been.

P.S. Just look at that awesome cover.

The Adventures of Sir Gawain the True

by Gerald Morris

Grade: 2 1/2 stars
Story: Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. You know the story. And if you don't, you should, and it's not my job to enlighten you.

Thoughts: Good. Funny. For kids. I'm rather too old to properly judge this (despite the fact that Sir Gawain is my all time favourite knight ever), as it is for a much younger audience than me. So...yeah. That's all for today.

How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy

by Orson Scott Card

Grade: 4 stars

Thoughts: Even better than Characters & Viewpoint. While Characters & Viewpoints made me feel like less of a writer--like getting my ideas and characters in words might be more of a challenge than I was up to, this seemed like something I could do. Perhaps it's because I "belong" in SFF. In fact, there's a description on page 33, that sounds much more like my style of writing than many other descriptions I've read. I'm not going to quote it because it's longish, but the basic idea is that for Orson Scott Card (and me!) the initial story thoughts begin years before hand, slowly mature and change, as little bits and pieces are added or completely re-imagined, and by the time it's done, it bears almost no resemblance to the original. Makes me feel a bit better, because I was starting to feel a bit worried about the fact that my stories keep changing so drastically.

The first bunch of the book was actually more defining what science fiction and fantasy, or "speculative fiction", actually is. This would be a fantastic resource to be able to argue against those people who snobbily look down on speculative fiction as somehow lower than literary fiction. It also included TONS of references to excellent SFF authors, most of whom sound awesome. It'll take years and years before I'll get as far into that list as I'd like to be.

Then it went on into more actual writing suggestions and tips (with specific emphasis on world creation), which was also really interesting, but I'm not going to go into much detail about it. Read it yourself if you want to know more.

The last bit (which he admitted in the preface might be outdated by the time you read it) is more about getting published: various magazines to try out, tips about handling agents and finances, all sorts of stuff. I actually found this part really fascinating, even if it is outdated. There were all sorts of things about getting published I had no clue about.

Characters & Viewpoint

by Orson Scott Card

Grade: 3 1/2 stars

Thoughts: Really good book about writing and characters, by the author who wrote Ender's Game and a million other SciFi/Fantasy books. From the good and bad parts of stereotypes to the importance of characters suffering to writing in 1st person vs. writing in 3rd person, he looks up close at the actual craft of writing.

This is one I'd like to buy and use as a reference. I don't write all that often, but I love thinking about characters and why exactly I find them fascinating/boring/whatever adjective suits them.



P.S. WARNING: RANT FOLLOWS WHICH DOESN'T HAVE THAT MUCH TO DO WITH ANYTHING IMPORTANT. YOU MAY SKIP THIS PART. I  DON'T MIND.
A while back, Orson Scott Card made some sort of remarks that many people took as homophobic. I don't actually remember what those remarks were, so I'm not going to comment on that. However what I would like to comment on is the fact that so many people on the internet are now saying, "I really want to read this book, but OSC's a total jerk, and I never want to read his books again". This really annoys me. Are they going to stop reading all books that have authors they disagree with? Part of the POINT of reading is to become familiar with someone else's mind, sometimes because they have good things to say, and sometimes because they have bad things to say, and you need to be able to recognize the bad when you see it. Why do you think "Mein Kampf" is still widely read and available when it's author was one of the worst people in history?

Maybe it annoys me so much because I, as an orthodox Catholic, end up reading TONS of books whose authors I disagree with. All the time. Always. Sometimes it shows up in their books, sometimes not. Sometimes I really strongly disagree with them, sometimes only a bit. But it doesn't stop me from reading them, unless it figures so strongly that it makes the actual reading of their books unpleasant. OSC's views don't show up in his books at all, as far as I know--and people STILL go on and on about this.

Anyhow. This rant is sidestepping the point somewhat (which is why it's in the P.S. and has that huge warning at the top), but I have read some reviews of this book that have mentioned this point, and it annoyed me so much that I had to write about it somewhere. A book like this doesn't talk about an author's views on anything like that ANYWAY; it's purely about the art of writing. WHAT you write about, or what your ideas on life are, isn't discussed.

Forming Intentional Disciples

by Sherry A. Weddell

Grade: 4 1/2 stars

Thoughts: Fascinating book about the state of the Catholic Church today, and how one as a Catholic should evangelize. There are ton of statistics (Yay, reading about statistics! Bleh, actually doing statists!) in the first chapter or two, followed by discussion about charisms, different states of discipleship, and how to engage with the many people inside the Church who are lonely and distrustful of Her.

What I found interesting is that I definitely had a negative emotional reaction to some of the things she was saying. NOT because they were wrong or bad, but rather the reverse. I was evidence of the fact that Catholics are not used to speaking very openly about their faith in that manner.

Otherwise...well, like most books that actually have depth or try to argue a specific position, I feel somewhat inadequate trying to explain my thoughts on the internet. So I'm going to leave it at this, and if I ever meet someone in person who has read this book, I will gladly become involved in a highly absorbing discussion/debate/argument/whatever.

EDIT: Ok, upon request, here are a couple random thoughts.

--The percentage of people who label themselves as atheist or agnostic but BELIEVE IN GOD is astounding. So is the percentage of people who label themselves as Catholic but DON'T believe in God. Just as an example, according to Weddell, 55% of people who label themselves agnostic believe in God (14% in a personal God) and 29% don't believe in God. So only 16% actually follow the technical meaning of "agnostic" and say they don't know whether there is a God or not. That's so weird... But it does actually make some sense to me. People nowadays seem to use labels less for the actual technical meaning of the label, and more for some of the connotations that go along with it. Thus, people call themselves agnostic if they are not part of any organized religion but still believe in God; or they don't believe in God, but also don't care what anybody believes (as opposed to many atheists who do).

--Here's an observation by a professor Weddell quoted that I actually found weirdly accurate:

"Contemporary culture does not provide the average iGen with a profound grasp of what is right and wrong apart from the conviction that assaulting the self is clearly wrong... Because of trends like the self-esteem movement and the impact of relativism, he concludes that iGens are pre-moral. Mann suggests that they do not feel guilt as much as they feel shame for not achieving what they are designed to accomplish." [pg. 176]

That last sentence, unfortunately, really does apply to me.

--Weddell mentions several things which somehow, to Catholics, just seem too Protestant. Such as actually mentioning Jesus's name:

"I have been part of many conversations about the Catholic discomfort at using the naked name of Jesus. We talk endlessly about the Church but so seldom about Christ as a person with whom we are in a relationship. Few things trigger the fear of being 'Protestant' more quickly than naming the Name. A witty friend summed up this dynamic in a memorable way: Jesus is 'He who must not be named.'" [pg. 141-2]

And again, I find this weirdly accurate. Certain things just smack of Protestantism somehow, even if they are actually really good things we should be doing/thinking ourselves.

--She also talks a lot about discerning charisms. Which I don't really have any idea what I think of, because I've...well, never thought about it. It's a really interesting topic, though, I just don't seem to hear/read anyone talk about it much.

The Drowned Vault

by N. D. Wilson

Grade: 3 stars
Story summary: Sequel to The Dragon's Tooth. Cyrus and Antigone Smith now have a whole lot of powerful immortal people really mad at them. So that's good. And now they have to run away from their previous haven of safety to find the guy who almost killed them last time. And everybody's chasing them, and they still have to keep up their training, and there's a girl with lots of creepy spiders who's supposed to be helping them.

Thoughts: Wilson's visual imagination can be absolutely stunning. The gorgeous cover art is perfectly suitable, what with the pretty colours and the strange happenings (man with tons of hair chained over a sword, all underwater?) But for me at least, this book went the way of his 100 Cupboards series. The first book wowed me with it's imagery and imagination, but not enough happened with the characters. They were very interesting characters with lots of potential, mind you. They just didn't live up to that potential in the second books of both series. Really cool people like Nolan and Di were just sort of there throughout the whole adventure. They didn't even have much to do with the plot, let alone the character development.

But while I never ended up reading the third book in the 100 Cupboards series, I will still definitely read the third book in this series (assuming there is going to be one). For one thing, I really like the ideas in these books, like the Order of Brendan. I want to see where he goes with that. I'm also still hoping it's just a middle book thing, and the characters will still develop further. Because they really are cool. (Especially, in this book, Arachne. Her imagery was so creepy and fascinating.)

The Pirates! In an Adventure with Whaling

by Gideon Defoe

Grade: 4 1/2 stars
Story summary: Sometime after their adventure with scientists, the pirates are in need of a new ship. So they rashly buy one from Cutlass Liz and get into terrible debt as a result. Chaos and escapades ensue as they try out gambling at Las Vegas, performing shanties and monologues, and finally, whaling. (Also called, "The Pirates! In an Adventure With Ahab".)
See also the next book in the series, The Pirates! In an Adventure with Communists.

Thoughts: Awesome, tiny, utterly hilarious.

Evidence:
--It has a recommendation from Eric Idle (one of the Pythons) on the front. (Actually, it's a recommendation for the first book, not this book. But this one is pretty much as good.)

--It was written by  guy to impress a girl. What better reason to write  book? Apparently it didn't work. Silly girl.

--He includes lots of random footnotes. Awesome footnotes put any book high on my list.

--It is full of hilarious quotable passages. I had one picked out for evidence, but then I lost the paper that I wrote the page number on, and I'm too lazy to look through the book to find a good quote.

To sum up: very light and funny. Aptly named. If a book with an exclamation point and the word "adventure" in the title appeals to you, you'll probably like the book a lot. This book also includes pages listing non-existent sequel titles at the end (e.g. "The Pirates! In an Adventure With Public Sanitation" and "The Pirates! In an Adventure With Boggle"), and fake chapter titles making the book sound very exciting and adventure-y, even if it isn't (e.g. "Skull Hunt on Pygmy Island!" and "I Knifed My Way to a Diamond Pit!"--nothing whatsoever to do with the actual plot line).