Awards

This post has been long in the making. Somehow I couldn’t find the time to write it, due to sick horse (again), remodeling our bathroom, and being sick myself. I haven’t stopped reading, so there is enough to write about. But… here we are.

Some time ago I received an email from Waterstone’s bringing to my attention that Hillary Mantel is on the shortlist for the  Costa Book Awards 2012 with “Bring up the bodies”. She also won the Booker’s Prize (again) with the same book. I don’t know if you particularly like to read books that won awards, but my experiences with them are usually not that good.

Last year I bought “Wolf’s Hall”, not merely because it won the Booker’s Prize in 2009, but because I liked the subject. Tudor England, and particularly Henry VIII, is one of my favorite topics in history (besides the Roman Republic and Wellington/Napoleon). I’ve read a lot of books on Henry, his wives, the period, both fictional (Philippa Gregory, C.J. Samson, S.J. Parris) and scientific (Antonia Fraser). So I was really enthusiastic to read this book. But somewhere along the line I got disappointed: I don’t like her way of writing and somehow I didn’t like the story. Taking Thomas Oliver as head character is probably a good idea, but the result kind of let me down. So, I put the book back on the shelf and haven’t tried it again. My chance of reading her new book will be quite slim, considering my previous experiences with “Wolf’s Hall”.

The funny thing is that mostly I don’t like books that won huge prizes. The oldest example I can remember was “Devil’s verses”. Maybe it was my age, but I tried to read it (partly out of interest what all the controversy was about, and partly because I thought it looked interesting, reading these kind of books). I cannot remember anything from the plot, nor whether I finished the book or not. Actually, I think I did not finish the book. Maybe that is how my aversion for award winning books is coming from.

Or maybe it is just because the books I like to read don’t win prestigious awards? That doesn’t mean they don’t win awards, but usually these awards don’t mean a thing to me. The most important thing for me is the book itself. Do I like it or not? The fact that a book won an award could be an indication of a certain quality, but I’m not sure whether my perspective of quality is the same as the judge’s. I like to be entertained. To be swept of my feet in a different world. To be amazed with what the main character experiences. Even to be terrified or brought to tears sometimes. If the writing is in a pleasant style, that’s very easy. I read enough difficult books for my study.

Could you consider I’m reading pulp?

Shoplifting?

In the beginning of September I visited Stockholm and Uppsala for work. Being my first time in Sweden, I think it is a wonderful country. As we approached the airport, all the trees immediately fulfilled one of my prejudices about Sweden: yes, there are a lot of trees. And coloured houses. And very kind people. Their language – please don’t get me wrong, I don’t mean this in any condescending way – reminded me about the Swedish Chef of the Muppets. Although I could recognize some Dutch and German words, the language at large still remains quite difficult.

While staying in Stockholm and Uppsala I already noticed that there were several bookstores, even with a good section of English books (try that in France or Italy for instance). In the hotel on my floor, there was a small bookcase with several books in them – Swedish and English – to read and return. Well, I took one of the books for reading, but I didn’t return it. Naughty? Yes. Guilty? A bit. I just didn’t have enough time to finish the book in just two nights. Why not bring a book of your own, you might think. Well, I did. But I wasn’t really making much progress. The middle section of the book was kind of dragging along, a bit never ending (like the middle section of the latest Harry Potter). I was in a desperate need to read something else.

So, which book did I take? That was “Confessions of an ugly stepsister” by Gregory Maguire. He wrote an alternative Cinderella story. This story takes places in 17^th century Haarlem. Yes, with two a’s. It is a town in the west of Holland after which the New York neighbourhood of Harlem is named after. New York used to be Dutch, in case you might not know. Alright, 17^th century Holland is a Calvinistic strict country. Think about all the stern looking, dark clothed gentlemen of a Rembrandt painting. Into this town comes a mother with her two daughters, Iris and Ruth who have fled from England. The mother is of Dutch origin. They find work first with a Dutch painter, named the Master and later on with Van den Meer, an investor in tulips. Van den Meer has a very beautiful daughter, Clara. And here the Cinderella story starts. You know from the beginning that Clara will become Cinderella, and Ruth and Iris the ugly stepsisters. And they are indeed ugly. Ruth most likely has some sort of Down syndrome and Iris is just being plain. In the end their mother usurps the place of Clara’s mother, Hendrieka. Clara is not at all happy with this and withdraws into the kitchen, turning into Cinderella. Crisis strikes as the whole tulip market crashes and Van den Meer loses his whole fortune. The whole household is a kind of downfall. They have no more money to buy any food.

Of course the Prince is also there. The dowager queen of France comes, searching for a wife for her godson. Clara knows to charm the prince and leaves with him. Iris is happy with her apprentice painter, and her mother and Van den Meer are condemned to each other.

Maguire different intake of the classical story is that it focusses more on the handicap of being beautiful. Clara was kidnapped as a child and therefore her mother never let her leave the house. Iris and Ruth are plain or stupid, but are allowed to leave the house. They lives are entirely different. As Clara grows older and after the crash of the tulip market she is seen as a potential commodity to decrease the debt through marriage. She has nothing to say in all of these matters. 

Funny thing is, Maguire is an American, but the book takes place in 17^th century Haarlem. He did some amazing groundwork. Not only on 17^th century Holland, but on the names and customs as well.

In the end, am I happy that I took the book with me? Yes, the story was compelling enough to finish it. It is interesting to follow how Maguire mixes up the original Cinderella items – think about the glass slippers, the fairy Godmother - with his 17^th century story. In the end, “Confessions” is a nice book about the up- and downsides of beauty.

My life in books

In the afternoon (around 13:00 GMT) there is a very nice program on BBC 2, which is called "My life in books" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01czdrq). The presenter Anne Robinson – better known for her grilling performances on 'The weakest link' – interviews two British well-known personalities about the books they love. The series is now in its second season, so apparently I'm not the only one who likes to watch it. Unfortunately I haven't seen a suggestion for the To Be Read List, but I haven't seen all episodes yet (thanks to the digital recorder), so maybe… who knows.
An episode usually starts with a book from their childhood years, followed by one from their adolescents, and three from their grown up years to end with one guilty pleasure. At the end of the episode, the personality also has to say what their books say about them.

As it is better to steal a good idea, than to invent a bad one (bad translation of a Dutch saying), I'm going to steal the BBC's idea and give you my selection of five books.

Childhood years

As I grew up in the Netherlands, my childhood books were only in Dutch. I couldn't read any English than, although now I prefer English over Dutch. My favorite author was Thea Beckman. She wrote children's books for all ages. Even my grandfather enjoyed them. Beckman won several awards for her books and some were even made into a film. Her most famous one must be "Kruistocht in spijkerbroek" ('Crusade in jeans') about a modern teenager – Dolf – which is transported by accident back to the Middle Ages where he gets mixed up with the children's crusade. All in all an exciting tale where many things happen, not all good.
My favorite Beckman book would be "De gouden dolk" ('The golden dagger') set in the second crusade (1147-1149). Jiri Rambor, the son of the black smith follows the French army to Jerusalem. Again, many things happen. It is an adventure. After many years Jiri and his nephew return to their small village. There, on the wild outskirts he climbs a stone heap. But it isn't a stone heap but an old grave. He finds the prophesized gold dagger and enough gold to start a life in Paris. All is well.

Looking back on her books, it should not surprise me that the books I liked most all had a historical aspect. For instance the crusades or the Hundred Years War (trilogy "Geef me de ruimte!" ('Give me room'), "Triomf van de verschroeide aarde" ('Triumph of the scorched earth') en "Het rad van fortuin" ('The wheel of fortune')). And I liked her older work ('The golden 'dagger' was written in 1982) better than her newer works (she died in 2004). All in all, if you can ever find anything from her hand in translation, do give it a try. Or learn Dutch and read her in the original language.

Adolescent years

I was a very progressive reader, if that is the correct term. The library catalogued Thea Beckman's books for 12 and older. But by the time I turned 12, I already read all of her books. I do remember finding it very difficult to find new books to read. In the end, I picked up a green book from an unfamiliar author named J.R.R. Tolkien. As you might guess, it was "The fellowship of the ring". The first time (I've reread several times now) I read the whole book in Dutch, now I prefer the original, English version. The first book did, and still does, gave me some problems. I found it long-winded and it really took me a long time to finish it (in my memory about a month). But when I picked up "Two towers" and "The return of the king" I finished them both within two weeks. Tolkien has defined my taste for fantasy and in the years to come guided me to Tad Williams, Robin Hobb, Robert Jordan and even G.R.R. Martin. Fantasy still is one of my favourite genres and Tolkien one of my favourite authors. The only issue with fantasy is originality, that's why I don't read Terry Brooks. But that is a different story for another time.

Grown up years

I went to college when I was 18. I discovered Robert Jordan and read numerous books on history. The only books (series) which really stood out in those years was the Sharpe-series by Bernard Cornwell. I saw the movies, read all the books, devoured Cornwell's website and even the one from the Sharpe Society. I don't have a particular favourite in the series, but "Sharpe's Waterloo" and "Sharpe's devil" were not the best. I can remember that these two were the only ones I didn't finish. What did I like about Sharpe? Well, he's a brute with a soft heart. He worked himself up from the ranks. Despite his lack of manners, he is well liked by his men and disliked by his fellow officers (remember, Simmons!). Through his books you can follow the whole career of Wellington and the downfall of Napoleon. And yes, Cornwell allowed himself some historical freedom, but the discrepancies are explained in the historical endnote. The funny thing is, that I haven't read a Sharpe-book in years. I kind of grew weary of Uthred and that is all he seems to write these days. So please mr. Cornwell, write another one about Sharpe!

One day, I was with my friends in Amsterdam and in the American Book Center I found a hard back copy of "To green angel tower" by Tad Williams. The cover art was fantastic and I really, really like books in hard back. My friends thought I was crazy, and maybe I was. I bought the book, read it and was very happy. The trilogy "Memory, Sorrow and Thorn" stand in a Tolkien-like tradition. Young Simon sees his world thrown into chaos as dark powers force their way into his world. As all epic fantasy novels, it ends well. Simon marries his love and become king of the realm. But before the good side gets there, there's a lot a struggle, loss, pain and fighting. Absolutely a nice read. I found another of my favourite authors. I think it's time for a reread.

When I moved out of the student dorm I lived in a small village called Oegstgeest. It is close to Leiden where I had lived previously. In a bookstore on the central market square I found a book which – I have to admit – I bought for the outstanding cover art (by John Howe). This books was "Assassin's apprentice" by Robin Hobb. The series about Fitz and his wolf rekindled my love for fantasy (again). I really cried when Nighteyes died. So terrible. Although I had some trouble in the beginning with the series on the Liveship traders, even those books 'got' to me in the end. The way she paints her world is so entertaining you want to return again and again and again. I've met Robin during a book read in Amsterdam. That was amazing. She was so kind, so interesting. She stayed one of my favourite authors ever since.

Since my college years I really read a lot of different books, different genres (everything but horror), different authors. And although I've read so many books, only those mentioned above made an everlasting impression. Strange, but true.

Guilty pleasures

My guilty pleasure is more a genre than a specific book. Although I'm not a huge fan of the genre and am still very picky about which one I choose, I do like to read the romantic books – the lovey-dovey – when I'm tired, or in the mood for a not too difficult book (which is quite often lately). Then I read J.D. Robb or Elizabeth Lowell. And yes, I do something feel embarrassed to read these books. On occasion I find them insulting for my intellect. I'm not the type to swoon over strong, handsome men and independent women. But for fun, they are perfectly alright. So, for an introduction in this genre, which one would I recommended? That's difficult, because these books don't really have an everlasting impression. But thinking about the one I reread the most (when I'm dead tired), it would be "Midnight at Ruby Bayou" by Elizabeth Lowell. A strong man and an equally strong woman. It's a fun read.

What does this selection say about me?
Right, what do all these books say about me? I've a passion for history, am frequently out of this world and am really a romantic at heart? Or as a friend said long time ago: 'strange girl'.

Recommendation
So in the end, which one of these books would I recommend to you? Ai, that is very difficult. All books have their own flavour and taste. All books In the end, I think I will stick with Tolkien. He paints such a magical world full of its own languages and traditions, that I returned more than once. For me, he set the bar for the whole of fantasy. After you get through "The fellowship", the story is entertaining, quick paced and enthralling. So forget about the 1200 pages and just start reading!

Diamonds are a girl’s best friend?

Personally I'm not a huge fan of diamonds, or other expensive stones. "Act normal, that's more than enough" is the rough translation of a very familiar Dutch saying. Maybe when I get older, but for now, I'm doing fine with the few gold pieces of jewelry I own. Lucky hubby, I should say.

But not owning much jewelry doesn't mean you can't read about it or appreciate them. And the books of Elizabeth Lowell are all about diamonds, rubies, emeralds and other precious stones. Yes, I have to admit, her books fall in the lovey-dovey category, but in the more intelligent category. Of course it's still boy meets girl, they like each other, they fall out, they come back together, happily ever after. But besides this, as I have said before about J.D. Robb: something happens! It's not just the 'development' of their relationship. Some things actually happen. Usually in her books it involves either art of precious gems. It could be a priceless book an collector is willing to murder for ("Moving target"), lost Russian crown jewels hunted down by a ruthless Russian criminal ("Midnight in Ruby Bayou") or eerie paintings depicting gruesome deaths ("Die in plain sight").

The funny thing is, it doesn't matter which book you read by Lowell, you always learn something. In "The color of death" (the one I've read recently) and "Midnight at Ruby Bay", this is about sapphires and rubies. And what did I learn? Well, a ruby is actually a red sapphire. They're quarried in Asia. The best quality ruby is an untreated Burmese ruby, but these are very rare. People use all kind of treatment – for instance heat – to deepen the color of the ruby, but this can also lower the value of the stone due to the removal of the clarity and the clarity is very important. Don't ask me how, it is a chemical process. Just read one of Lowell's books (or Wikipedia). And of course, these rare rubies or sapphires play a big part in some of Lowell's books.
In "The color of death" it are seven (orange?) sapphires, which Kat Chandler turned into a necklace called 'the seven sins'. Somebody wants to steal the sapphires and in doing so killed Kat's brother. So she's on a witch-hunt, which only turns successful after she met FBI-agent Sam Groves. And yes, they fall for each other. In the end her brother's murder is solved, the bad guys apprehended, the jewels recovered and everybody's happy.

A funny thing about "The color of death" is that it is depicted as the fourth installment in the 'Rarities Unlimited'-series. And here comes the funny thing: Rarities Unlimited – an art appraisal house – doesn't feature in the book at all. The firm doesn't even get mentioned. Funny isn't it?

In the end I have to say, the books by Lowell are not of a very high standing. It is what I like to call 'a snack'. Fun to read, not too difficult, a nice plot and perfect to read before going to sleep, or in a train or bus, or on holidays. Just something easy in between. Is this a crime? No, absolutely not as long as your expectations aren't too high.

Guilty

It's been too long since I wrote my last post. I know. I really feel guilty, but somehow, I just couldn't find the time between work, a sick horse, social responsibilities, being abroad for holiday and for work to find time to write. It's not that I didn't read any books. I did. So I promise I will better my life and write more often. Well, at least once a week.

In the mean time, of course, a lot has happened. I've bought some new books and I've read some books. In order not to spill everything at once, I will stick to the new books for now.
At the end of August dear hubby and I took his mother on a holiday to England. We had great fun and of course enough time to buy some new books. I did my best not to buy too many, because the space on my shelves is limited. So... what did I buy? As usual it is of a wide variety:

1. Jemery Clarkson, "On cars"
2. Philippa Gregory, "The other Queen"
3. Deborah Harkness, "Shadow of the night"
4. J.E. Lendon, "Soldiers and ghosts. A history of battle in classical antiquity"
5. Pittacus Lore, "The rise of nine"
6. Elizabeth Lowell, "The color of death"
7. Desmond Morris, "Catwatching"

The Clarkson book is for dear hubby. I read some pages, and I don't really like it.
I already finished "The color of death". I bought it in a charity shop in Canterbury and as I didn't bring any books along with me, I just started to read. A review will follow later.

Luckily enough a week later, there was a book festival in Utrecht. Although I had a very limited budget (€23), I managed to buy some nice books. Due to the tight budget, I was unfortunately forced to leave some books behind. So which one did I bring with me?

1. Jeffrey Archer, "Cat o'nine tales"
2. Laura Hillenbrand, "Seabiscuit"
3. Michael Jecks, "The traitor of St. Giles"
4. Michael Jecks, "The leper's return"
5. Michael Jecks, "The devil's acolyte"
6. Michael Jecks, "The outlaws of Ennor"
7. Michael Jecks, "The tolls of death"
8. Steven Saylor, "The triumph of Caesar"
9. Sjöwall & Wahlöö, "De gesloten kamer"
10. Brian Buckley, "Fall of Thanes"

All in all not bad for just €22,75. Truthfully I thought the Buckley book was too expansive (€7.50), but it is the last instalment in a trilogy and I really wanted to read it. That's why I did buy it. And yes, you're right. A lot of Michael Jecks books. Last time I didn't buy them all, so this time I tried to make up for that error. The Dutch translation of a Swedish book is for dear hubby. I tried to read the first book in the series. I did finish it, but I didn't like it. He however likes them. So to make hubby happy...

So more books to read, and still not enough time. But I will manage, cope, or whatever.

Angry

'He was loose in his enemy's rear, he was angry and he was ready to give the bastards a taste of hell on earth.'

Bernard Cornwell, "Sharpe's tiger", page 419

Price of glory

Last time I wrote about the use of historical figures in modern day action writing. The Knights Templars are frequently used, but so is Alexander the Great. Of course his life and achievements are amazing. He conquered more than the known world, discovered new places, won numerous battles and died at a young age. His legacy was quickly divided among his generals, his wife and son (born after his death) dead, the only thing remained his deeds.

‘Toil and risk are the price of glory, but it is a lovely thing to live with courage and die leaving an everlasting fame.’ Arrian wrote these famous lines, as they were supposedly said by Alexander himself.

This week, I finished “The Venetial betrayal” by Steve Berry. This book concentrates on two things: Alexander’s grave and a strange draught the Scythians gave him. This draught cured him from a fatal illness, but later failed to cure his friend (and lover?) Hephaestion due to a lack of it by the physician. Who of course paid for this indiscretion with his life.

Cotton Malone is dragged into the whole thing by his old friend Thorvaldsen, when the latter informs him that Cassiopeia needs his help. Cotton always is a gentleman, so he comes to the rescue. And gets sucked into an amazing adventure for Alexander’s tombe. But more important than Alexander’s tomb is this strange draught. It supposedly cures everything. There is some greedy businessman who found the draught. It entails Archaea bacteria, which preys on other bacteria and viruses. It can even cure aids. In short, it is the cure the whole world has been waiting for. But our slimy business man has been waiting for 20 years, to build up a market as he says himself. To make more money.

In the mix is also a very ambitious Supreme Minister from a non-existing Central Asian county. She wants to take over the whole Middle East, like Alexander used to do, only then East concurring West (and not vice versa as Alexander did). Her weapon: biological warfare. Her companion: the slimy business man.

Luckily for us, Cotton does not agree with these plans. And after action in Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Venice, we end up in the mountains in our non-existing Central Asian country. In these mountains the slimy businessman found the draught, not knowing Alexander’s tomb is nearby. Of course Cotton finds both the cure and the tomb. And after some difficulty, Cassiopeia and he succeed. The slimy businessman and the ambitious Supreme Minister are not the only ones who die, but our hero and his friends go unharmed. The world is saved. Aids can be cured, Alexander’s tomb to be excavated. All is well that ends well.

A long while ago I read “The Alexander cipher” by Will Adams. Hugely entertaining. But this book has the same problem as the books concerning the Templars. Even now I can’t remember anything about the plot, the kind of action, even the name of the hero (at least, not without peeking). I assume it will be the same for Berry’s book about Alexander. These books are fantastic for a holiday, a train ride, just for entertainment. But they won’t have an everlasting fame.

Templars

What is it with men's never ending interest in the Knights Templar? Last night, while watching SyFy, dear hubby and I saw a rather bad, hinting on spectacular "findings", show called "Legend Quest" with Ashley Cole as host. Everything was so obvious staged, that it was almost annoying to look at. Cole was on a quest for the final resting place of the Arc of the Covenant and followed a trail from Jerusalem to Ethiopia, to Italy, to France. We entered the episode shortly before he arrived in Ethiopia, so I don't know how he got there. But the clue to continue the search in Italy was a double headed eagle painted in the search, and the form of the church (which represented a Templar's cross). So the Templars took the Arc from Ethiopia back to Italy. To Tuscany to be precise and to a specific castle which owners use/used the double headed eagle as armorial bearings. And of course there still is a Grand Master of the Templar Order and our dear Cole himself is also a member of this Order. And in the small church there was a hatch for an underground place which should be big enough to hide the Arc in. Sure. Right. The Grand Master points him to France, to Chartres. And in Chartres, in the middle of the maze, there is again a kind of hatch which should be great enough to hide the Arc. Despite an underground search, Cole does not reach the secret hiding place under the maze. But that should be where the Arc is located. Oh come on! There were holes as big as the Arc in his reasoning. I've seen better historical (scientific) shows on National Geographic. This is funny, but nowhere historical or scientific underpinned.


What started this? Oh yes, the Templars. In some way this order still fascinates a lot of people. We are talking about an order which was banned by the pope Clement V in 1312, but not after king Philip IV of France and the pope stripped them of all their wealth under false accusations. So that's 700 years ago!

Can we 'blame' Dan Brown for this? No, not really, although I do think he pushed the Templars back into the public eye. No, even before Brown, Tom Egeland wrote "Circle's end". Strangely enough, this book resembles Brown's "Da Vinci Code" quite a lot. So maybe Brown wasn't so original as people think. And before Egeland there were Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh and Henry Lincoln with their "The holy blood and the holy grail". Not particularly a fiction book, but it deed concern the Templars. A banned order, it's members persecuted as heretics (and more), of course make the perfect background for an action filled book. And that is exactly what some authors write.

I have some of these books on my bookshelves. And yes, they always make a nice read. For instance: Steve Berry with "The Templar legacy" or Raymond Khoury with "The last Templar". I'm sure there are even more (even on my book shelves), but these I could easily locate. The sad thing about these books, however, is although I read them and enjoyed them, I cannot remember the plot or anything that happened. Yes, there was a lot of action and of course our hero saved the day, but that's all. And in some way that's very sad. Because I think that every author wants his book remembered for ever and not ending up in the Cemetery of Forgotten Books.

So yes, Templar can be easily used for a non-historical action book. But please, do take the audience serious.

Odds

It's been a busy week with not much opportunity for reading or writing about it. With my horse in the clinic (everything is okay), work, and dear hubby, the only time I had for reading was on the train and before going to sleep.


I did manage to finish "The Hungergames"-trilogy though. I'm not sure what to find about it. I did like the first book. It was new, foretold a gruesome kind of future and of course a kind of happy ending. It was clear however that the Capitol wouldn't appreciate Katniss's actions.

"Catching Fire" started out all right": the victory tour, the troublesome relation between Katniss, Gale and Peeta. It was all realistic until the Quarter Quell. Katniss, Peeta and a selection of previous victors are all enlisted to participate again in the Hunger Games. There is a side story about the rebellion which is getting more and more playground. In the end some victors are involved in the rebellion and save Katniss from the Games. Peeta is being left behind. This starts of a kind of irritating section of both books two and three where Katniss struggles with her sanity and prefers to hide in strange corners. Yes, of course it is very realistic to be shell shocked after all she has been through. And yes, both Snow and Coin take advantage of her. But just like the middle section of the last Harry Potter book, it gets annoying after a while. She has (verbal) fights with all most everybody: Gale, Finnick, to name a few; she ignores direct orders and does what she wants. There is no thinking about the consequences, even though people get hurt or die because of that. Yes, she does struggle with all the dead just by seeking a remote place and sit.



The strange thing is that all turns around once she is back in the Capitol for the final battle: rebels against Peacekeepers. Collins pictures it as being back in the arena during the Games. Katniss is able to shut down her emotions and do what she is best in: pissing off the enemy. But then her sister dies. You have to read that scene for yourself. A short conversation with Snow sets the whole scene in a different light: who is responsible for the death of her sister? Snow? Coin? Both? Would Snow use innocent children to finish off the war? We know that Snow used children in the Hunger Games to keep the population in check. So yes. Would Coin go that far too? Katniss outlived her usefulness for Coin: the Capitol was in rebel hands. And why was her sister there? Somebody high up in the rebel command must have cleared her participation. It could be that Coin used her sister to push her over the edge. In the end, Katniss believes Snow and kills Coin. Rightful? I'm not sure. Both sides were capable of atrocities during the war. Nobody could wash their hands clean.



In the course of the books characters die, it is a war after all. These include some characters you preferred having a happy ending. Like Finnick who was so happy being finally reunited with Annie. Like Cinna, like Prim, like Boggs. In a strange way it makes me happy that the cat of whom Prim was so fond – Buttercup – make it in the end. And that he and Katniss made peace. It is a kind of fitting end, that something from her past made it through alive.


All in all the three books make a good read. The story is convincing, realistic and writing in a good pace. If this by the way is anything like our future will be, I pass. It makes me wonder though, why so very often our future is depicted so grim and hopeless. Or is it because a bright, happy future doesn't sell any books or make good films?

Murder and mayhem

 It’s been a while since I’ve read one of Bernard Cornwell’s novels. For a long time he was one of my favorite authors. But after reading all the Sharpe novels, the Grail Quest-series, the Warlord chronicles, the Starbuck chronicles and some of his standalones, the whole series around Uthred (“The Saxon stories”) just doesn’t kick in. It’s just Sharpe with a different name in a different time. Yes, all the books about Uthred are on my shelves but I stopped reading them after “The lords of the north”. And most of the books Bernard wrote the last couple of years are either about Uthred or are standalones. How does it come that a favorite author loses his shine after a while?

Berend once explained – I think it was on his website – that he had a schedule for writing a book. And I think, after reading almost all of his books, that this schedule is becoming too apparent. It is not that his schedule ‘makes’ a bad book, it’s just that after a while they all seem alike, only the time, the battle and the hero are different.

If you look at the historical periods Bernard writes about, there also is a kind of schedule. Most of his books take place during a war, which at least involves a major battle. For instance: the Sharpe novels: Napoleonic wars; The Grail Quest: Hundred Years War; the Starbuck chronicles: American Civil War; Agincourt: the Battle of Agincourt (1415). Strangely enough, Bernard doesn’t try to write about the Romans. Maybe he really doesn’t need the competition from Simon Scarrow (“The Cato-series”).

Even the ones who don’t clearly take place during a war – for instance “A crowning mercy” – have some kind of militaristic background or feel to it. So Bernard needs war, battle or any military action to place his characters, and to have control of their actions and adventures. The war/battle/military action provides a nice framework in which certain events are locked and the outcome is most certainly set. Because Bernard does not let Napoleon win the battle of Waterloo. No, his novels are more or less historically accurate. No flying dragons like “The Temeraire”-series by Naomi Novik (fun!) or a complete alternative history, like “Fatherland” by Robert Harris (still to read). Bernard’s alterations are minor: a different detachment who reached the battlements first, a different hero (Sharpe!) who saves the day. In his ‘Historical notes’ at the end of each novel, Bernard sets straight all the historical deviations.

All in all: does Bernard writes bad books? No, absolutely not. They are entertaining, comprising (necessary) violence, romance, adventure, alpha males and history in one book. Although not all the historical background is evenly interesting (at least to me), the novels still have a good pace and enough happens. Never a dull moment with Bernard. Just don’t read them all in one go.

Maybe I should give his books one more try…

Book or film

It makes you wonder, how it is possible that men can take a perfectly good book and turn it into a very lousy movie. Just think of most of the Steven King adaptations for the screen: most of the thriller/horror-films based on his books suck. The best adaptations based on his books is “The green mile” and that isn’t even horror or thriller. Of course there are instances where the book is as bad as the film (or vice versa). For me “Twilight” is a very good example of that. The book was whining and the film as well. Very impressive.

Sometimes they adapt a whole trilogy: do you remember the Jason Bourne films with Matt Damon? The first film was pretty much like the book, the second had several deviations of which the death of Marie was the biggest. And the third – alas – only had the title in common with the book. The films were fun, believe me I liked them. But true adaptions of the books, no, not really.

And yes, sometimes a adaptations turns out good, with some (major or minor) errors. Maybe I’m performing sacrilege, but I likes “The lord of the rings”-films. I’m a huge fan of Tolkien. His books were my first encounter with fantasy. And although Peter Jackson made some directorial decisions, over all the films are not bad. The one thing that bothered me most was the battle at Helmsdeep. In the book it were not the elves, but the Ents who destroy the army of Sauruman. And I understand that the books offer little or no roles for women. But the way Arwen was constantly put in the spotlight was more irritating. But as always choices has to be made and you can’t adapt every line of a book. Especially if that book is 1200 pages.

The same with the Harry Potter adaptations: some films are better than the others But even – let’s be honest – some books are better than the others. For some reason though, I did not like what they have done with book nr. 7. The book was okay, the midsection being a bit slow and boring, the end being exiting. And I don’t know how they done it, but the film did not live up to my expectations. I was really looking forward to the final movie: the battle of Hogwarts. But somehow the magic of the book wasn’t transferred to the film. If I remember correctly dear hubby even fell asleep. And that means a lot. It’s not that I’m a huge critic, but it just didn’t work for me.

Last year dear hubby and I saw “I am number four”, a light, but very funny film. It turned out it was based on a novel by an author name Pittacus Lore, a synonym of course. As I liked the movie, I purchased the book. And it turned out quite nice. It had a nice pace, a good story and the main character was likable enough. I even read the sequel “The power of Six” which was alright as well. Huge difference with the first book however, was that in the first book the whole story evolved around John. In the second book, there were two stages of action: one around John and one around Six (on the other side of the world). In a way more interesting, but in a way also some what distracting.

And in a rare occasions, the film is better than the book. I’ve tried to read some of the books by John le Carré. After not being able to finish “The tailor of Panama” dear hubby and I saw the film. And somehow that was much better than the book. Maybe it’s Le Carré way of writing.

This weekend, due to the beautiful weather (finally!), I finished “The hunger games” by Suzanne Collins. The first book of a trilogy set in a rather bleak future. The book is writing in nice, clean sentences. Nothing too fanciful. You can see that it was writing for young adults. The heroine of the story is 16 years old, but already very skilled in hunting and taking care of herself. This due to the fact that she lives in the poorest district of a bleak futuristic USA. All the skills she uses at home to put food on the table for her mother, her sister and herself are needed when she has to participate in the Hunger Games. A kind of punishment by the Capitol (the head district) for a rebellion 74 years ago. She has to fight for her life. And of course she wins. From the beginning that was out of the question. Of course she would win (otherwise our trilogy wouldn’t be a trilogy). But before she wins, she will lose some and win some. In the end, she walks out of there alive, but in doing so she make the Capitol look bad. And is there is one thing that the PTB don’t like, it is looking bad. I just have to start the second book, but I’m curious as to how things work out. Of course there will be an uprising against Capitol, and most likely the rebels will win. But in the meantime, people could get killed etc. I’ll let you know after I finished the remaining two books.

One things leaves me curious though: what it is with teenage books-adaptations lately: we had Harry, Twilight, Kattnis, Percy… And I guess there are some more. As soon as a book sells enough copies it is turned into a film. Don’t we have enough imagination any more that seeing a film is much easier than reading a book? And if the book is turned into a film, why than deviate so much from the story? I guess that’s why they always say ‘based on’. And I will admit, I’ve read some very nice books because I saw the film first. And I’ve also seen some very crappy films because I read the books first.

Dirty

For a state to function properly, you need a certain kind of ethics. A code of what is proper, acceptable, and what is not. The police corps will uphold that code. But what do you do when police officers are not upholding these ethics. What if they do everything the code forbids just in order to make some more money, have some more power. What if they don't give a sh*t about whose hurt in the process, even if that includes their own colleagues?

That is the interesting line J.D. Robb took in the latest book I read about Eve Dallas called "Treachery in death". This time it is not about murdering rich boys or jealous partners, no, this time it is about cops on the wrong side of the line. And of course our Eve is furious about it. Because they go against everything that she stands for: honour, dignity, protection of the innocent and your word. So when Peabody comes to her with a report on crooked cops, she takes it very serious. And heads on a collision course to bring them down.
Of course in the end she succeeds. That is hardly out of the question. How tough it may seem, our Eve always, and I mean always, saves the day. There isn't a case she does not close. At least, that is what Robb wants us to believe. And Eve is good at what she does. Luckily, she also runs a good squad, has the ear of the commander and married a loaded billionaire who can get things done on the shadier sides of the law. Little things that make life a whole lot easier.

So does this count for me as a very good book? No, probably not. It is fun to read, the plot is convincing and the time spent is relaxing. But good? No, this is not a Nobel prize winning book. Not that this would stop me from reading any of Eve Dallas' adventures. I tried "Wolf hall" by Hilary Mantel last year. It won the 2009 Man Booker prize. Although it won prizes, and a lot of people praise it and it sets in one of my favourite historic times – Tudor England – it could not gripe me. In fact, I didn't like it at all. I haven't even finished it and it just stands on my bookshelf. Luckily I bought it at an Oxfam bookstore for just ₤3 so not much is lost. And maybe I give it another try sometimes. So, wining prices is – in my book – not synonym with a good book. And if I want something with a nice plot, a couple of nice characters and some entertaining, I just read about Eve Dallas.

As finish, I would like to give you this quote. Or as Eve would say 'some very creative and varied use of the word fuck.' So remember, these are not my words, and the bad guy was apprehended:
    
'Drop the fucking weapon, you fucking motherfucker or I'll fucking scramble your fucking brains. Hands up! Hands where I can fucking see them, you fucking cocksucker. You fucking breathe wrong, you fucking blink wrong, and I will fuck you up.'

And with that nice bombshell, I will leave you. Bye bye.

Medieval murder mystery

I don’t know why, but from time to time I do like to read a detective which takes places in medieval England. This good be during Tudor times (C.J. Sansom, S.J. Parris), during Roman times (Simon Scarrow), or in 13^th century Devon (Michael Jecks). In England there is always something going on.

I discovered the books by Michael Jecks last year on the Book Festival. And still regret that I didn’t buy all the books present. To me it looked as though it were two different series; it wasn’t. In York this May I bought the first instalment of the series: “The last Templar”. So all in all I now own only 11 of his 31 novels. Gives me something to look for when I’m in England.

In “The last Templar” our two heroes – Simon Puttock, the bailiff of Lydford Castle and Sir Baldwin Furnshill, a troubled knight – meet and solve their first murders. Furnshill is the new owner of a local estate after his brother’s death. He spent around 20 years abroad fighting as a Templar knight. This story takes place shortly after the downfall of the Templar Knights and the burning of the Grand Master in Paris. Therefore Furnshill isn’t very open about his past. He meets Simon and the two men instantly bond. The first murder they have to solve is of a very unpopular man in a small hamlet. His house burned down with him in it. Simon thinks it’s an accident, but Baldwin immediately suspects murder. Their murder investigation is however cut short by the murder of the new abbot of the Buckland Abbey. The new abbot was abducted by two men, led into the forest and there burned alive. Some people connect the two murders, due to the use of fire. Simon isn’t very convinced the murders were done by the same murderer. Before they can dig into this murder, Simon is called to a new murder site. A group of merchants is attack. Their caravans burned – even with people still in it, people killed and a young girl abused and murdered. With a posse Simon follows the murdering band and captures them. Among them is also a knight. He rides the horse of the abbot. Well, that should be our murderer right? Wrong. After solving the murder of the unpopular man Simon confronts Baldwin about his suspicions. And Simon was correct. Baldwin in the end tells the heartbreaking story of the downfall of the Templars. The French king and the pope were after their money. They used a former Templar – Oliver de Penne – to convince the Templar knights to plead guilty to the heretic charges. De Penne is rewarded with the archbishopric of southern France. Baldwin tracks him down, but is unable to kill him. But then the pope dies and a new pop is elected. And this pope does not like De Penne. So he is kind of banned to Buckland Abbey. And where is Buckland? Yes, somewhere in Devon. So on his way to his brother’s house, Baldwin meets De Penne. For his hideous crimes against his fellow brothers Baldwin and his faithful helper Edgar burn him alive, the heretic death. Simon does the honourable thing and does not turn in his friend. The murder was done while temporarily insane. Furthermore, nobody is served with Baldwin behind bars. But Simon arranges for Baldwin to be instated as Keeper of the Peace, which will keep him occupied and serving the community.

“The chapel of bones” and “The butcher of St. Peter’s” (books 18 and 19) take place in and around Exeter. “The chapel of bones” was actually the first book of the series I read. These two books are slightly different from the first book. In the first book Simon is the main hero. The book evolves around him. Baldwin is just a side character. In “The chapel of bones” and “The butcher of St. Peter’s” Simon is a side character and everything is about Baldwin. He is married with a child, going though some marital issues – he cheated on her and his conscience is playing with him ever since. “The chapel of bones” is about a murder many years ago which took place on the cathedral grounds. It still has his repercussions. Even high placed clergy aren’t save. The chapel of bones is an actual chapel, where the bones of dead monks are laid to rest.

 “The butcher of St. Peter’s” takes place immediately following the events in “The chapel of bones”. Baldwin got injured and couldn’t leave Exeter yet. The book tells a tale of what poor people could have gone through in times of hunger, famine and death. This tale is entwined with a tale of human greed and lust.

All in all I liked the later books better. Maybe that’s a consequence of not starting a series with the first book. But with Baldwin and Simon Jecks created two very real, very believable characters. Yes of course they have luck when solving their crimes, but we all need some luck now and then.

If you look at the cover art, I like the one for the later books more. And although I’m not a huge fan of publishers changing covers all the time, I do think this is an improvement. But with everything, the like or dislike of cover art is also very personal.

Fun

Sometimes it is fun to take the boat to Hull, hop on a bus to York and just spend the day shopping. York is a very lovely town. We had unbelievable good weather: the sun was shining, no rain, minimal wind, just perfect.

And of course a trip to England isn’t a proper trip without some book shopping. So, I paid a little visit to Waterstones and bought myself some books. Very happy with it.

These are the books I bought:

1. 1.       John Connolly, “The burning soul”
2. 2.       S.J. Parris, “Sacrilege”
3. 3.       Carlos Ruiz Zafon, “The prisoner of heaven”

I finally have completed the whole Charlie Parker-series. All I have to do now, is find time and the right mood to read them.

I also bought the third instalment in the Giordano Bruno-series. This series – just as C.J. Sansom – takes place in Tudor-England. Gruesome things happened back then. The huge difference is the hero: Parris’ hero is a foreigner, an Italian heretic. Sansoms hero is an Englishmen, a hunchback. Both are kind of outcasts. I like them both (but Shardlake a bit more).

It is always a funny thing to read a foreign book in a foreign translation. I could be lazy and read Zafon in Dutch, but somehow I prefer the English translation. I noticed immediately that the book isn’t very thick. It is smaller than the previous one. I’m looking forward to reading it. A cemetery of books. What a brilliant idea!

I also visited the charity shop of the British Heart Foundation. There I found one more book:

1. 4.       Steve Berry, “The Paris vendetta”

Always fun reading Berry.

And now I have to wait till the end of August when we’ll visit England again. Poor me.

Quote

“So please, oh please, we beg, we pray,

Go throw your TV set away,

And in its place you can install,

A lovely bookshelf on the wall.”

Roald Dahl

Fantasical surprise

I’ve read a lot of fantasy books. So many, that after a while it can be hard to find an original book. I tried Terry Brooks once, only to find that particular book a weak extract of Tolkien’s ‘The lord of the rings’. We had Gollum, a mystical quest, a dark lord and a fellowship. I finished the book, but never read anything by Brooks again. Maybe I did him a disfavor, but I don’t like writers who cannot imagine a story of their own. So originality can be a problem. Of course it can be difficult. After all you are influenced by everything you read and write.

Another problem with reading fantasy is – strangely enough – the author himself. Some write fantastic stories and then keep you waiting for years for a new installment. For instance our friend George R.R. Martin. Don’t get me wrong: I do like ‘The song of ice and fire. It has everything a good fantasy novel needs. But publishing book number 4 and claiming that he had to split the book because it was too long, but that the other one was almost completed, and subsequently keep us waiting for over 5 years… I think it is a kind of contempt for your readers. Especially when you pronounce on your website that you don’t want to talk about it.

It is not only the waiting, but also the (lack of) quality with which the authors overwhelm us. You wait for years for a new installment, only to be disappointed by the pace of the book, the character development or all the unnecessary side stories. For example ‘The wheel of time’ by Robert Jordan. Fantastic beginning. Exiting story. And then we hit – I think it was – book nr. 8. And after that the story slowed down, unnecessary side stories continued. It became a drag. Come on, describing three days in more than 800 pages! I have to applaud Brandon Sanderson. He is doing an excellent job in finishing the series. In three books! He wraps up the whole story in three books.

I know it hard to be original, refreshing and of high quality every time an author has to write a book. Even one of my favorite all time writers, Robin Hobb, had a minor series, at least in my eyes. I love, really love, Fitz and the whole Farseer Trilogy. I had some problems with the first book of the ‘Liveship traders’-trilogy, but that had more to do with my lack of enthusiasm for talking ships. I even liked the  ‘Tawny man’-trilogy and the ‘Rain Wild chronicles’. All set in the world of the Six Duchies and beyond. And then came the ‘Soldier son’ trilogy. What a disappointment. Not that I don’t applaud her for trying a different world, with different characters and different problems. It is just that I didn’t like the Western frontier kind of world. The books were also more political than her previous ones. I read them all with some difficulty and persistence.

When I was in Canterbury last May, I found a fantasy book in an Oxfam store, just of the main street. It was on a sale (3 books for £2,99), so you can never go wrong. So I gave it a try. This book was ‘Sorcery rising’ by Jude Fisher. She is mainly known for companion guides to ‘The Lord of the ring’ –movies. The book is the first episode of a trilogy called ‘Fool’s gold’. Although the name of the trilogy is not very original, the book is. The prologue had me question my judgment for a moment. I did not particularly liked it. But it is only 20 or some pages long. Usually I give a book a chance for about 50 to a 100 pages. Then the story switches. Three very different people populate this planet: there are the Eyrans who live up north, sail the seas and resemble the Vikings; there are the Istrians who live in the south, the ancient archenemies of the Eyrans, who worship a female goddess and press women into an Arabic kind of life of seclusion; and then there are the Footloose, the gypsies who live in their trailers and travel around, despised by everybody. All come together for the annual fair. And of course, all goes wrong. The enmities between Eyrans and Istrians is kindled again, while magic slowly returns to the previously non magical world. The Footloose are the first who discover that something is wrong: their formerly innocent spells suddenly work. The Eyrans and Istrians clash over religious matters (a woman climbed the secret rock – oh shame) and in the middle of all this people die and try to survive. There is secret love, lust, hunt for gold, freedom and power. Everything which makes a human world human.

The whole idea develops in a good pace. Some expected things occur and also some unexpected. The book really held me captivated. Even so that I had to keep reading, even though I had other things to do (like cooking diner). My dear hubby even noticed (and he already thinks I read too much).

So now I have to search for book 2 (‘Wild magic’) and 3 (‘The rose of the world’). Gives me something to hunt for while visiting England.

Can you call any murder ‘light’?

Currently J.D. Robb's "Indulgence in death" lies on my bed stand. I consider it 'light' reading, although on occasion Eve Dallas investigates some gruesome murders. This time it's a crossbow and a bayonet. Imaginative. Before J.D. Robb I read John Connolly's "Every dead thing", the first Charlie Parker novel. In this book people also die, but in not such pleasant ways. I don't consider that 'light reading'. Why? In both series people die usually in the most horrible ways. Charlie Parker is a troubled lead character, but so is Eve. Is it of the love affair between Eve and Roarke? Charlie also has his love affair, the beautiful, pathologist Rachel. 
So what is it then which makes J.D. Robb 'light' and John Connolly not? I think it has to do with the fact that Connolly writes his detectives more in a horror-style. Nobody is safe. Not the victims, not the murderers, not Charlie Parker himself, not even innocent children. Connolly doesn't spare his readers any of the gruesome, gory details of an autopsy or a murder scene description. Plus Charlie Parker lives in the present. Although Connolly describes horrible things, they do happen in the nowadays world. I think that is the biggest difference between Charlie and Eve. She lives in the future, solves all her cases. Yes, she has her demons, but they are not so present as the demons in Charlie's lives. His demons are not just his own – alcoholism, the murder of his wife and child, his family's history – he is also confronted with the demons within other people. The gruesome things people can do to each other. That also happens with Eve, but besides having nightmares, she doesn't seem to be affected by it. Charlie is literarily haunted by the ghosts of the dead.



And yes, "Every dead thing" has a sort of happy end. The serial murder responsible for the deaths of his wife and daughter is caught. But knowing that an FBI-agent is responsible, kind of makes you lose your faith in human kind. The happy end is therefore not so happy after all. Some of the people involved survive, but scared for life.


Do I prefer one over the other? That depends on my mood. When I'm in for something 'light' I read about Eve, when I'm in for something darker, more sinister, I read about Charlie. As for now, Eve is enough. I'll keep Charlie for the future.

PS. As I remembered later on... J.D. Robb is a pseudonym for Nora Roberts. She writes lovie-dovie books. Is that knowledge of any influence in my decision to consider Eve’s murders as ‘light’? 

PPS. An other funny thing I just noticed: look at the cover art of both books... 

Twenty-five

Every time we go on holiday to England I resolve not to buy that many books. This year (we just returned last week), I even brought books (10 or so) with me to discard at Oxfam. After travelling across the country (and forgetting to drop off the books every available time), they finally found their way to the Oxfam Bookshop in York.
But still, the fun thing about going on a holiday to England is to buy new books. So this year I bought 25. Actually, it is 27, but two books are doubles; one I already bought earlier (in Canterbury and again later on in York) and the other one... well, I didn't have my little blue book with me (at that time) and made a mistake. Yes, it happens. These two books will find their way to Oxfam in August. So, all in all, I have 25 new books.


I bought the following books for pleasure reading:

1. Steve Berry, "The Venetial betrayal"
2. Steve Berry, "The Paris vendetta"
3. Suzanne Collins, "The hunger games"
4. Suzanne Collins, "Catching fire"
5. Suzanne Collins, "Mockingjay"
6. John Connolly, "Every dead thing"
7. John Connolly, "The reapers"
8. John Connolly, "The killing kind"
9. John Connolly, "The white road"
10. John Connolly, "Bad men"
11. John Connolly, "Nocturnes"
12. Bernard Cornwell, "Death of kings"
13. Jude Fisher, "Sorcery rising"
14. Michael Jecks, "The last templar"
15. Jill Myles, "Succubi like it hot"
16. S.J. Parris, "Prophecy"
17. J.D. Robb, "Kindred in death"
18. J.D. Robb, "Treachury in death"
19. J.D. Robb, "Indulgence in death"
20. Simon Scarrow, "The legion"
21. Simon Scarrow, "Centurion"

One of my favourite bookshops is Heffers in Cambridge. It is so refreshing to find at least 6 or more bookshelves filled with books on (ancient) Roman history. I found a new book here which I might use for my thesis and if not, it will still be an interesting read:

1. Harriet I. Flower, "Roman republics"

 Even dear hubby found some interesting books. So technically, I did not buy 25 books:

1. Lloyd Clark, "Arnhem. Jumping the Rhine 1944 and 1945. The greatest airborne battle in history"
2. Ben Macintyre, "Agent Zigzag"
3. Louis Hagen, "Arnhem lift. A fighting glider pilot remembers"

As I didn't brought much books with me to read (only books for Oxfam), I've read already some of these books. A review will follow shortly (or whenever I find the time as a deadline for the thesis is coming up).


But all in all, I'm very happy that I've now almost own all the Charlie Parker-novels (by John Connolly, check him out if you like a darker, more supernatural detective. Oh, and before you start reading, in his books people will die in the most horrible ways).
If you look at the list, it is quite a strange grouping of books: the dark detectives of Connolly, compared to the lighter (but not always less gruesome) detectives of J.D. Robb on Eve Dallas. Some historical novels set in different ages (Romans, Saxon England and medieval England), one fantasy novel (bought in Oxfam Canterbury as a try out), "The hunger games trilogy" (they came cheap) and some Indy meets Da Vinci books. Steve Berry is always fun to read, if you don't demand too much. And then there is Jill Myles. I think I read a book by her some years ago. It was funny and for £ 2,- you can never go wrong. A lot more to read, now I have to find the time...

 
PS. And thanks for my lovely ginger cat for keeping me company.