![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
what i'm reading wednesday 8/1/2025
Finally back to this! I finished quite a few (mostly short) books during the end of the year!
What I finished:
+ The Unselected Journals of Emma M. Lion volume 8. This continues to be my happy place, and delightfully this book was full of some Backstory Reveals about main characters that were very fun. I have no insights to share about it--I am sure it had lots of weaknesses, but I simply do not care. Beth Brower has a direct line to my id, and I am so glad.
+ Wicked Uncle, the latest entry in my Miss Silver read-through. It's funny that the last time I posted about Patricia Wentworth, I said she always has the same setup because this one was a little different! And stronger for it! A good Wentworth book.
One thing she is very, very good at is making her murder victims a person that, tbh, I don't mind seeing murdered. Like, she does take murder seriously, but often times the murder victim is such a terrible person who's ruining so many people's lives that, in the context of the story, it's a relief that they're dead. Which I don't think is a bad thing in a mystery novel.
+ The Perilous Life of Jade Yeo is a little novella about a Malay Chinese woman living in London in the 1920s. The focus was on her romantic entanglements. I liked this a lot, particularly Jade's voice, but frankly, it was not long enough--well, it actually was just as long as it needed to be to explore the romantic entanglements, but I wanted to know so much more about her life!!!! I would have loved if this was a full novel with all the other aspects of her life fleshed-out. If it was, I'm sure it would be a favorite. As it is, I came away wishing Cho would write more historical fiction novels.
+ A Garter As a Lesser Gift has been read and loved by many of you, but for those who haven't heard of it: it's a retelling of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, but instead of medieval (or pre-medieval) knights of the round table, they are an RAF squadron. A genius way to re-imagine Arthuriana imo. I can't believe how long it took me to get around to reading this, which was as delightful as everyone always said.
And now I will say something I almost never say about novellas: this was exactly as long as it needed to be! Did I wish for a million other books in this same world exploring all the other characters? I absolutely did. But this story, this retelling of Gawain, perfectly fit the novella form.
I loved especially the way the writing/prose recreated the early-to-mid-20th century style, which suited the story perfectly.
This is for you if you like: Arthuriana, retellings, bisexuality, winter stories, golden age mysteries, emotional repression with good payoff, etc.
+ Payment in Blood by Elizabeth George. This is the second Inspector Lynley book--I read a bunch of these in high school and then reread the first one a few years back and was seeing if I want to continue rereading this series. I have decided I do not. George is an excellent writer, her mysteries are good, her characterization is great, but. But.
The premise of this series is that an actual British lord (I think he's an earl? I forget) is a detective and his partner is a working class woman with a chip on her shoulder. Class conflict is baked into it. Which should be my thing. Except...George is way too sympathetic to the upper class. She thinks she's being even-handed, and idk, maybe she is. I am prepared to admit that I am a bit of a radical when it comes to this sort of thing.
But the thing is: Havers (our working class woman) is constantly assuming corruption and favoritism on the part of all the rich people in the books (same, girl, same). But she's almost always wrong! Her perspective is undermined by the fact that Lynley and his friends, who are all similarly upper class, are So Good Actually. They never use abuse their power! Some of the villains might, but our Good Ones never do. Havers assumes, she is slapped down. I do not like this.
It's just so frustrating! It would be so much more interesting if the Good Ones needed to be called out by her more. Instead, we have this main character who is angsting over his own privilege, but never actually acts on it?
I don't know how to articulate it, the class stuff just rubs me the wrong way and I get pissed. So I don't think I will reread anymore of these. Which is a shame because she really is such a good writer, and it's hard for me to find mysteries that are well written and serious enough for me.
+ The Queen's Gambit is the first in a fantasy trilogy by the aforementioned Beth Brower. I was excited to read this because of how much she taps into my id in the Emma books, but this one didn't work for me nearly as well, and I'm struggling to put my finger on why.
Basically, young queen of small country that has heretofore been protected from outside influences is threatened by a foreign empire. At the same time, a mysterious young man from that empire has shown up in her kingdom and requested asylum. You can guess why he's there.
One kick I got out of this book is that its premise is essentially a daydream I've had for years. I like to imagine, "What if I was the queen of a small kingdom that was surrounded by mountains and ocean and so basically un-attackable, and I could set up the society in any way I wanted, what would I do?" (Obviously I would never, ever want this to be reality as it goes against all my principles, but it's fun to lay in bed at night and be like, "And then I would invite in the fantasy!Jews and make them full citizens, and then I would slowly introduce gender equality, and then I would...")
Of course, in this book, the kingdom becomes attackable, which is where the plot comes from. But still. I laughed.
I really don't know what it is about this that didn't enrapture me, and I do think I'll read the second two books, because I actually don't know where it's going to go from where it ended. But this was a useful reading experience in that it taught me that Brower is not a writer who is going to work as well for me every time as she does with the Emma books. I imagine I'll always check out what she publishes, but I won't necessarily assume I'm going to love it madly.
+ And then last night I finished The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which somehow I didn't read back in my Poirot phase during middle school? I feel like I really would have remembered this one because it's Christie at her best. I did figure out whodunit a few pages before the reveal, but I genuinely hadn't up until then and I can only imagine how people reacted to it when it was published!
On the down side, hate getting smacked in the face with a sudden, completely and totally unnecessary bit of antisemitism. BOO!
What I'm reading now:
The Ultimate Hidden Truth of the World, David Graeber's posthumous collection of essays. I'm sure I will have more to say when I'm done, but I will say this now: every time I start to think maybe I'm not an anarchist, I read Graeber and I'm like, "Oh, yeah, I definitely am." I'm probably not a good anarchist because I'm also an incrementalist in a lot of ways, but wow, I really do believe that free association and lack of coercive violence should be the cornerstones of human life and society!
And now, a meme:
1. Best book of the year? You know me, I can never pick just one. I refer you back to this this post
2. Worst book of the year? I can't come up with an answer to this. If a book is bad, I stop reading it. A few of the books I read this year were mediocre, but none of them were terrible.
3. Most disappointing book of the year? The Woods at Midwinter probably, because I was just...expecting more. It's a short story being passed off as a book, and it's not even a very good short story? Idk. Like I said at the time, I don't resent paying Clarke for it because she's given me so much joy in other books, but it felt like a cash-grab, tbh. I don't get why it was published.
4. Most surprising (in a good way!) book of the year? The Anthropocene Reviewed. I still can't get over how much I loved it.
5. Book you recommended to people most in the year? Probably the Emma M. Lion books. Or The Anthropocene Reviewed.
6. Best series you discovered in the year? The Emma M. Lion books, definitely.
7. Favorite new authors you discovered this year? Let's say Felicia Davin for fiction and Erik Larson for non-fiction. I had read Devil in the White City before, but I kind of thought it was a one-off as far as quality goes. Not so! Now I will read everything he's published.
8. Most hilarious read of the year? I'm not really a funny book person, so most years I wouldn't have an answer, but I do have an answer this year, and it is David Mitchell's Unruly.
9. Most thrilling, unputdownable book of the year? Isaac's Storm omg and it's nonfiction about something that happened over a century ago!
10. Book you most anticipated this year? Talia Lavin's Wild Faith
11. Favorite cover of a book you read this year?
for the visual joke
because the old-fashioned style perfectly tells you what kind of book it is
12. Most memorable character of the year? Young Hawkes from Emma M. Lion or the narrator from Tamsin
13. Most beautifully written book of the year? O Caledonia
14. Book that had the greatest impact on you this year? Probably The Anthropocene Reviewed again.
15. Book you can't believe you waited UNTIL this year to finally read? So many! Tamsin, for one, or The Question of Palestine or Farthing or A Garter as a Lesser Gift
What I finished:
+ The Unselected Journals of Emma M. Lion volume 8. This continues to be my happy place, and delightfully this book was full of some Backstory Reveals about main characters that were very fun. I have no insights to share about it--I am sure it had lots of weaknesses, but I simply do not care. Beth Brower has a direct line to my id, and I am so glad.
+ Wicked Uncle, the latest entry in my Miss Silver read-through. It's funny that the last time I posted about Patricia Wentworth, I said she always has the same setup because this one was a little different! And stronger for it! A good Wentworth book.
One thing she is very, very good at is making her murder victims a person that, tbh, I don't mind seeing murdered. Like, she does take murder seriously, but often times the murder victim is such a terrible person who's ruining so many people's lives that, in the context of the story, it's a relief that they're dead. Which I don't think is a bad thing in a mystery novel.
+ The Perilous Life of Jade Yeo is a little novella about a Malay Chinese woman living in London in the 1920s. The focus was on her romantic entanglements. I liked this a lot, particularly Jade's voice, but frankly, it was not long enough--well, it actually was just as long as it needed to be to explore the romantic entanglements, but I wanted to know so much more about her life!!!! I would have loved if this was a full novel with all the other aspects of her life fleshed-out. If it was, I'm sure it would be a favorite. As it is, I came away wishing Cho would write more historical fiction novels.
+ A Garter As a Lesser Gift has been read and loved by many of you, but for those who haven't heard of it: it's a retelling of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, but instead of medieval (or pre-medieval) knights of the round table, they are an RAF squadron. A genius way to re-imagine Arthuriana imo. I can't believe how long it took me to get around to reading this, which was as delightful as everyone always said.
And now I will say something I almost never say about novellas: this was exactly as long as it needed to be! Did I wish for a million other books in this same world exploring all the other characters? I absolutely did. But this story, this retelling of Gawain, perfectly fit the novella form.
I loved especially the way the writing/prose recreated the early-to-mid-20th century style, which suited the story perfectly.
This is for you if you like: Arthuriana, retellings, bisexuality, winter stories, golden age mysteries, emotional repression with good payoff, etc.
+ Payment in Blood by Elizabeth George. This is the second Inspector Lynley book--I read a bunch of these in high school and then reread the first one a few years back and was seeing if I want to continue rereading this series. I have decided I do not. George is an excellent writer, her mysteries are good, her characterization is great, but. But.
The premise of this series is that an actual British lord (I think he's an earl? I forget) is a detective and his partner is a working class woman with a chip on her shoulder. Class conflict is baked into it. Which should be my thing. Except...George is way too sympathetic to the upper class. She thinks she's being even-handed, and idk, maybe she is. I am prepared to admit that I am a bit of a radical when it comes to this sort of thing.
But the thing is: Havers (our working class woman) is constantly assuming corruption and favoritism on the part of all the rich people in the books (same, girl, same). But she's almost always wrong! Her perspective is undermined by the fact that Lynley and his friends, who are all similarly upper class, are So Good Actually. They never use abuse their power! Some of the villains might, but our Good Ones never do. Havers assumes, she is slapped down. I do not like this.
It's just so frustrating! It would be so much more interesting if the Good Ones needed to be called out by her more. Instead, we have this main character who is angsting over his own privilege, but never actually acts on it?
I don't know how to articulate it, the class stuff just rubs me the wrong way and I get pissed. So I don't think I will reread anymore of these. Which is a shame because she really is such a good writer, and it's hard for me to find mysteries that are well written and serious enough for me.
+ The Queen's Gambit is the first in a fantasy trilogy by the aforementioned Beth Brower. I was excited to read this because of how much she taps into my id in the Emma books, but this one didn't work for me nearly as well, and I'm struggling to put my finger on why.
Basically, young queen of small country that has heretofore been protected from outside influences is threatened by a foreign empire. At the same time, a mysterious young man from that empire has shown up in her kingdom and requested asylum. You can guess why he's there.
One kick I got out of this book is that its premise is essentially a daydream I've had for years. I like to imagine, "What if I was the queen of a small kingdom that was surrounded by mountains and ocean and so basically un-attackable, and I could set up the society in any way I wanted, what would I do?" (Obviously I would never, ever want this to be reality as it goes against all my principles, but it's fun to lay in bed at night and be like, "And then I would invite in the fantasy!Jews and make them full citizens, and then I would slowly introduce gender equality, and then I would...")
Of course, in this book, the kingdom becomes attackable, which is where the plot comes from. But still. I laughed.
I really don't know what it is about this that didn't enrapture me, and I do think I'll read the second two books, because I actually don't know where it's going to go from where it ended. But this was a useful reading experience in that it taught me that Brower is not a writer who is going to work as well for me every time as she does with the Emma books. I imagine I'll always check out what she publishes, but I won't necessarily assume I'm going to love it madly.
+ And then last night I finished The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which somehow I didn't read back in my Poirot phase during middle school? I feel like I really would have remembered this one because it's Christie at her best. I did figure out whodunit a few pages before the reveal, but I genuinely hadn't up until then and I can only imagine how people reacted to it when it was published!
On the down side, hate getting smacked in the face with a sudden, completely and totally unnecessary bit of antisemitism. BOO!
What I'm reading now:
The Ultimate Hidden Truth of the World, David Graeber's posthumous collection of essays. I'm sure I will have more to say when I'm done, but I will say this now: every time I start to think maybe I'm not an anarchist, I read Graeber and I'm like, "Oh, yeah, I definitely am." I'm probably not a good anarchist because I'm also an incrementalist in a lot of ways, but wow, I really do believe that free association and lack of coercive violence should be the cornerstones of human life and society!
And now, a meme:
1. Best book of the year? You know me, I can never pick just one. I refer you back to this this post
2. Worst book of the year? I can't come up with an answer to this. If a book is bad, I stop reading it. A few of the books I read this year were mediocre, but none of them were terrible.
3. Most disappointing book of the year? The Woods at Midwinter probably, because I was just...expecting more. It's a short story being passed off as a book, and it's not even a very good short story? Idk. Like I said at the time, I don't resent paying Clarke for it because she's given me so much joy in other books, but it felt like a cash-grab, tbh. I don't get why it was published.
4. Most surprising (in a good way!) book of the year? The Anthropocene Reviewed. I still can't get over how much I loved it.
5. Book you recommended to people most in the year? Probably the Emma M. Lion books. Or The Anthropocene Reviewed.
6. Best series you discovered in the year? The Emma M. Lion books, definitely.
7. Favorite new authors you discovered this year? Let's say Felicia Davin for fiction and Erik Larson for non-fiction. I had read Devil in the White City before, but I kind of thought it was a one-off as far as quality goes. Not so! Now I will read everything he's published.
8. Most hilarious read of the year? I'm not really a funny book person, so most years I wouldn't have an answer, but I do have an answer this year, and it is David Mitchell's Unruly.
9. Most thrilling, unputdownable book of the year? Isaac's Storm omg and it's nonfiction about something that happened over a century ago!
10. Book you most anticipated this year? Talia Lavin's Wild Faith
11. Favorite cover of a book you read this year?
for the visual joke because the old-fashioned style perfectly tells you what kind of book it is12. Most memorable character of the year? Young Hawkes from Emma M. Lion or the narrator from Tamsin
13. Most beautifully written book of the year? O Caledonia
14. Book that had the greatest impact on you this year? Probably The Anthropocene Reviewed again.
15. Book you can't believe you waited UNTIL this year to finally read? So many! Tamsin, for one, or The Question of Palestine or Farthing or A Garter as a Lesser Gift
no subject
This sounded interesting, thanks for the rec!
no subject
no subject
no subject
The old editions used to have typos where you could see the guy she was dating was actually... I can't remember if it was Thomas Hardy or Henry James, but someone like that whose name she'd changed.
Aww!
no subject
This is such a perfect encapsulation of Graeber's writing! I haven't read the posthumous essays yet, but I should.
no subject
no subject
!! Oh my god. So. My mother started reading Elizabeth George [some years ago], loved them, and started buying them for me.
And I... do not like them. I read the first two, started the third and just... couldn't carry on.
I have tried to formulate why many times over the years. It's not the class thing as such (although Havers' life is so freaking miserable and Lynley's is so ~delightful~), but what I think of as Elizabeth George's clinical viewpoint? I don't know how else to express it. Like she is watching all her characters like they are bugs (or butterflies or whatever) stuck on a board with a pin, and they are very well rendered, but there is no love for them? I think in the 2nd book the murder victim is a young boy? Like 12 maybe? Poor kid at a boarding school murdered by his classmates (!) and that should be horrifying. We should feel something, and I never really did. 3rd book (it's all coming back to me!) a girl is kidnapped and her politician mum is more concerned about the press than about the child. And I remember thinking: This kid's not gonna make it, and I can't read another book about a dead child with that weird, clinical distance applied to everything.
The obvious point of comparison is Peter Wimsey, where the characters are not just well written but it feels like the author cares about them.
I hope this makes sense. I've never been able to discuss this with anyone because I have never come across anyone else who has read the books - except my mother who (as said before) adores them. So I can't really tell her...
no subject
no subject
\o/
First of all: Havers' life is soooooooooooo depressing. And you're right, George doesn't seem to care? About Havers' life or the victims or anything.
It's been forever since I read the books (10+ years), but the grimness seemed so... pointless? Like George was describing something unpleasant, but being very careful about doing so to make sure it's all correct.
So - I went to look her up and she's American?? That could explain a lot.
I think this might have been something that was bothering me too--like, Havers obviously cares about injustice in the world, but the narrative itself doesn't? Whether that's violence or economic injustice?
Yes, this. And crime stories are about justice. Like, that's the point of them. [cf that whole conversation in 'Thrones, Dominations' between Peter & Harriet. Also about why he detects, which is also about justice.]
no subject
Yeah. It's all stuff she's researched, so it remains cerebral instead of having any viscerality?
And crime stories are about justice. Like, that's the point of them. [cf that whole conversation in 'Thrones, Dominations' between Peter & Harriet. Also about why he detects, which is also about justice.]
Exactly! The whole joy of them is watching justice at least pursued seriously and most of the time resolved within the context of that universe.
no subject
*nods* There is that wonderful moment in Busman's Honeymoon where Harriet thinks 'I've married England', and it's one of the MOST class-based moments, yet it's also just delightful and comforting and a feeling that all is right with the world? And it's not that the system is seen as perfect (cf the moment when Bunter notes that 'His Lordship married for love' and Mr Puffet goes 'I suppose he could afford to', which is a VERY cutting line), but the structure of it [the class system] isn't always felt as a burden.
/random rambling.
ETA: So being a little more clear-headed (today was such a long week at work), I think what is missing is Working Class Culture? Which exists and brings people community and happiness. And I don't seem to remember any? The rich types have ~culture, the poor types are just miserable. It doesn't reflect any sort of reality. Where are the rich wives day drinking because they have no sense of purpose? (To grab an example.) The poor who are unhappy are just unable to mask it as effectively as the rich. (OH! Have you seen Saltburn? asakjdkskhdak!) (No one comes out of that well.)
Exactly! The whole joy of them is watching justice at least pursued seriously and most of the time resolved within the context of that universe.
::nods:: Detective stories are comfort food. Just look at Colombo. <3
no subject
no subject
A student at Oxford University finds himself drawn into the world of a charming and aristocratic classmate, who invites him to his eccentric family's sprawling estate for a summer never to be forgotten.
It's a bit The Great Gatsby ('They were careless people') but far more cynical. And very British.
no subject
no subject
I'm not quite sure what's she's doing though, and having only read the one book, I might still be being unfair. But you're not alone anyway!
So glad you enjoyed Roger Ackroyd and had got this far without the world spoilering you first. That's pretty cool. <3
no subject
It was pretty cool! I also can't believe I made it this far in life without either reading it or being spoiled about it!
no subject
So I don't think I will reread anymore of these. Which is a shame because she really is such a good writer, and it's hard for me to find mysteries that are well written and serious enough for me.
I think this is a hard problem with British mysteries, because they're just not revolutionary enough about the aristocracy for me.
Good to know about The Woods at Midwinter! I've only read Clarke's Piranesi but I have Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell queued up for this year.
no subject
I think this is a hard problem with British mysteries, because they're just not revolutionary enough about the aristocracy for me.
I'm okay with this when it's golden age stuff--they're a product of their time--or I would be even with stuff written now that's sufficiently separate from real life. But this writer keeps bringing up class, making it relevant, and then not doing good things with it, which is so frustrating.
Oh, I hope you love JS&MN as much as I do! It's so wonderful!!!
no subject
no subject