109, Seven Short Stories

Seven Short Stories
by Anton Chekhov

I like short stories. They get in, tell a snippet of a life, and get out. They don't have time for lengthy descriptions or digressions or too many characters and sub plots. I've never read Chekhov before, but he was, apparently, a prolific short story writer. The stories in this collection were varied and poignant. The only thing that connected them was a sad, modernist metaphorical narrative of alienation. The characters in these stories do not know themselves, nor others--indeed, they are incapable of knowing or being known. Chekhov tells us that man is essentially and whole alienated from other people and even himself, an existential vacuum. He exists, as Francis Schaeffer put it, "beneath the line of despair," disconnected and lost; though he yearns, as the bereft cabbie in "Misery" does, to connect to others, ultimately, to Chekhov, such yearning is a hopeless endeavor.

#104, "A Christmas Carol"

A Christmas Carol
by Charles Dickens

Though I've seen and known this story many, many times in various media (film, stage, radio), I realized this year that I'd never read the book before. Well, that is now taken care of. I enjoyed it very much. I'm not sure why, but I really like the style in which Dickens writes. It might be that I've read so many books of that period that I associate it with good writing. Whatever the reason, he has a clear voice and a moment-by-moment progression that works wonderfully in this classic story. There seems to be some debate as to whether it is merely a cautionary tale, or a full allegory. I lean toward the former, personally--though the fantastic elements are boldly drawn, I didn't read it as anything other than the story of a transformation. I do advocate reading meaning into a text, however, to speak to your own world and circumstances. Overall, it was a worthy read.

The Remarkable Farkle McBride

I didn't know John Lithgow was an author of picture books. This is a story of a musical prodigy who, after seeing and discarding different instruments, finally finds his true calling as a conductor. I loved it. The story is cute, the illustrations are excellent, funny and singular, and--well, I love stories about kids who love music. Great book.

98, "Murder on the Orient Express"

"Murder on the Orient Express"
by Agatha Christie

This is the first book from Agatha Christie I'd ever read. I was happy that this one was another that my wife Jessica read along with me. The version we had was an excellent reading by Kenneth Branagh, who stars in the new film adaptation (which I have not seen). Branagh's performance is truly awesome, and in some ways was more impressive and compelling than the actual material from the book. The mystery is pretty good, however, with a decent build of odd and seemingly unrelated happenings that come to a head at the conclusion well enough. I don't think it is a perfect novel. The conceit behind the final reveal is, to me, a little far-fetched, and I didn't buy it one hundred percent. Jessica guessed the ending, more or less, about halfway through. It was enjoyable, though--in no small part due to Branagh's performance, as I said--and I am glad to have finally gotten around to reading Agatha Christie.

#whatIreadin2017

#91, "The Curious Case of the Missing Mammoth"

"The Curious Case of the Missing Mammoth"
by Ellie Hattie

Beautifully illustrated! The artwork is truly amazing and wonderful. The story is about a boy and a magical mammoth searching for the baby mammoth in a museum that has come alive. The story is fun, and there are lots of flaps with both story elements, as well as--slightly confusingly--trivia about the animals, art, and people that the characters find in the museum. I didn't care for the non-story parts, like the trivia, as it seemed that the book didn't really know whether to be educational or a magical mystery. One or the other would have made for a better, simpler and cleaner book. Fun reading it, though. And, again, the artwork is fantastic.

#87, "The Time Machine"

"The Time Machine"
by H. G. Wells

This book was published in 1895. I love the old-timey writing (most of the time). Wells has a fairly good sense of character and realism of tone, though the pacing and the propulsion of the book I felt was lacking. It is short enough that you can just hash through the story fairly quickly, as there is no character development, no subplots, and is realistically written as if some guy was telling a tale to his colleagues of something he just did. I suppose that's what Wells was going for. As a thought-experiment, then, it is interesting, but as a novel, it is not particularly compelling once you get past the time travelling bits. My favorite part of the novel was when the Time Traveller went 30 million years into the future. It's one thing to think about what the world will look like a hundred years from now, or even a thousand...but 30 million years! It would be a different place altogether. There is a lot of speculation on human development, a lot of evolutionistic theory and talk--though the Time Traveller admits that most of his theories end up being dead wrong and we aren't given any resolution as to what actually happens, which keeps the book from being preachy or prophetic, as you might expect from such a book today. It is low on plot and explanation. A fine read, but not a favorite, and, if I compare it to other of Wells' stories, certainly less compelling than The War of the Worlds. However, as I say, it is a worthy thought-experiment and in that it succeeds quite well.

Didn't Write Reviews, But

I finished two other books this month:

#84, "Creating the Constitution," a quick account of the circumstances and some of the debate surrounding the writing of the US Constitution
#85, "A Good Marriage," a Stephen King novella about the wife of a serial killer who must decide her future after she learns of her husband's deeds (the title is ironic)

The former was good but not exhaustive--bullet points only--which left me wanting more. The latter was also good, in the sense that it is well-written, but a little reaching in terms of plot.

I have been wanting to read a book called "Bioshock: Rapture," which is the pre-story to one of my favorite video games, for years, and I finally started it on Monday. Sadly, I stopped reading it after the first chapter, as both the writing as well as the narration were horrible. I don't have time to spend with mediocre material, really, and have moved on to H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine."

#80, "The Night Circus"

"The Night Circus" Erin Morgenstern

This is Morgenstern's first (and to date, only) novel. It began way back in the ye-olden-days of 2004, as a project through NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month). I think it is pretty cool that an on-again, off-again writing project by some random person grew into a full length published novel, which went on to win several awards and get optioned to become a feature-length film. That is a great story of persistence, hard work, and do-it-yourselfness that, I think, exemplifies what being an artist in the 21st century is all about.

Unfortunately, the result of all that persistence, hard work and do-it-yourselfness is a middling book with a superficially interesting concept that doesn't really pay off, half-drawn characters who speak in an odd and unreal fashion, poor pacing (including a confusing and unexplained jumping back and forth between past and future), and lots and lots of nice adjectives that describe very odd things. The central tension of the book centers on a strange and mostly unexplained wager made by a pair of old wizards/magicians/enchanters/gods? who use mortals in their neverending game of whose-is-better. This wager binds two souls together, who then must work against each other in an undefined and brain-twisting competition until it runs its course (the conclusion of which I will not bother you with). Naturally this means that the two people fall in love and are then torn between their destinies, chosen for them by their teacher/mentor/evil-Yoda-figure, and their love for each other. Oh, and there's a circus. That's the setting of this duel, the main location for the novel. There are many uncertainties surrounding the circus. I'm not sure where it came from. It was created for the duel exclusively, or possibly it existed before and was twisted by the duellers--duellists?--to fit their schemes against each other. It is very strange. Overall, I think it is one of the strangest books I have ever read.

Besides the mind-bending plot, which is tough enough to swallow, I confess that at least a part of my problem with the novel was caused my own biases. For example, I do not usually enjoy books written in the present tense. The present tense is intended to make the reader a part of the action, directly involved in the moment-to-moment happenings of the book. When used from the first person, it evokes a journal entry, or admits access into the immediate thoughts of the character. It mostly works in a book like "The Hunger Games," which is written expressly from Katniss' point of view, and exists in real-time as you read. It is still jarring to me as a reader, for the simple reason that I am not Katniss. It actually takes me out of the experience. When the present tense is then coupled with a third-person style, it presents an even more uncomfortable sensation, and it is made worse by the dates given at the start of each chapter, which present an instant friction for me as a reader. It is not October 1902, it is August 2017. The assertion of the book (this is happening now) against my reality (no it's not) throws me out of the experience of reading. I admit, though, that is something that I bring to the book, so that is not exactly a fault of the author, even if I disagree with the choice.

Undeniably, Morgenstern writes in an extremely visual way, and you can often grab onto her descriptions of places and things for a while to tie you from event to event, scene to scene. Maybe it would make a better movie than a book, especially if a quality screenwriter got ahold of some of the worse dialogue. Good lord, the dialogue. It is sometimes ok, but most often has a quasi-old-fashioned feel that doesn't ring true. The best way I can describe it is that the characters talk as a writer thinks people talk, not as they actually talk.

In the end, I say good on Morgenstern for getting a novel out. I am all for people creating and sharing their work. What do I know? I don't have a published novel. But I didn't like this one. #whatIreadin2017

#76, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"

"The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy"
Douglas Adams

I read this book when I was a teenager. I have friends who used to quote bits of it to me, and many moments in it have become a part of my regular lexicon. It has so many memorable parts! That being said, coming back to it 15 years later, I did not enjoy it as much as I thought I remembered. The jokes are still pretty good, although I think some of my grins were partly due to nostalgia bias. I tend to enjoy British humor, which is characteristically dry. Adams is drier than most, and gives his nonsensical phrases in absolute and unbroken deadpan. He'll pop off with something completely out of the blue and then just move on like it was nothing, and that is the key to his style. It's pretty good, as far as it goes. The story is quite wandering. Adams is not concerned with drafting a perfect archetypal story of rising and falling tension, good and evil. He needs none of that. The story just goes until it is over, almost but not quite like a stream-of-consciousness narrative, with many detours and odd asides. That's just how he writes.

The philosophy behind this book was my big takeaway, however, much more than the jokes. Adams was, in his words, a "radical atheist." I see this on almost every page of this book. His militant and piercing hatred of Christianity, his scorn for God and even the concept of God are plainly seen, and intentionally threaded into the story. Absolute meaninglessness is, in fact, the main theme of the book. The phrasing, the words, the non sequiturs--yes, they are funny, but they are also calculated to lay a foundation of meaningless nothingness (if that sentence is syntactically possible). An obvious example of this nihilistic worldview is the central joke of the book: the search for The Ultimate Answer to Life, The Universe, and Everything. The answer, given after 7.5 million years of calculation by the supercomputer Deep Thought, is, of course, "Forty-two." Such an absurd "answer" is a wonderful joke, we think. What a foolish way to spend 7.5 million years. We discover that the Earth was actually a giant computer constructed to calculate The Ultimate Question, the Question that corresponds to the Answer already given. It is at this point that the joke stops being funny, and we realize in Adams' two potential Questions that the implications are deadly serious: either "How many roads must a man walk down?" or "What do you get when you multiply six by nine?"Both of these are nonsense.  That is the point. The answer to the universe is meaningless. The question is meaningless. Everything is absurd and random. Chance is god, impersonal and uncaring.

As Ford Prefect says, "Drink up. The world's about to end."A paraphrase and thematic twisting of 1 Corinthians 15:32. But if the world does end, Adams will tell us that no one cares. It does not ultimately matter if the world exists or if it, and everything on it, vanishes in the next five minutes. There are no answers, no questions, no reasons, and no meaning. That is not funny. It is heartbreaking.

#71, "Animal Farm"

"Animal Farm"

George Orwell

Though this is a book generally assigned in high school, it somehow slipped by in my adolescence. Oh, that's right, it's because I chose my own reading lists and opted for philosophy, The Lord of the Rings and Star Wars. Anyway, I finally got around to it. It is a shortish work (one of the characteristics of many books I like), often funny with mercilessly dry remarks, and pretty good as a political satire. I guess by now just about everyone knows both the plot of the book and the intent of the author in writing it. I feel that, though the novel was specifically constructed around the Bolshevik revolution and the ensuing rise of Stalin, its themes--of the danger of totalitarianism, of a community accepting dictatorship with little real questioning--ring true for all eras, and not least our own. While madmen lead nations once again, the allegory of a self-inflicted downfall is a sobering one. A well written, thoughtful, and stimulating (in the sense of engaging our minds to compare the past with our present) novel.

#whatIreadin2017

#69, "A Study in Scarlet"

"A Study in Scarlet"

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

A good mystery, and a fine introduction to both Sherlock Holmes and the narrator of the story, Dr. John Watson. The book is, as you know, the first of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and is concerned with a murder that continually increases in complexity as the story progresses. There are memorable characters, but of course the primary focus is on the eccentric and brilliant detective Holmes, and on the narrator Watson. The main mystery is fine. The section that goes back in time and to America, nearly 2/3 through the book, was very jarring and strange initially. It became apparent after a while how it fit with the rest of the story, but I wonder if would be more seamless transition if it had been advertised a little better what the deuce was happening. Anyway, it was a good crime story, if not the best of the best of the Holmes tales.

#whatIreadin2017

#65, "The Hound of the Baskervilles"

"The Hound of the Baskervilles"

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

I've read this book before, years ago, and did not enjoy it quite as much as when I was younger. It was lengthier, for one thing, than I remembered, with a large introductory portion. The set-up is pretty good, the building mysteries in the main middle are better, and the conclusion left me feeling somewhat unsatisfied. Doyle writes his stories like a Scooby Doo mystery: no matter how odd or out of the ordinary or seemingly supernatural the culprit or clues are, it always resolves to pure natural fact. I wonder if there's something to be said about Doyle in that. Anyway, in this case, I think the lack of Sherlock in much of the second act was a factor; it is always fun to try to guess what he's thinking, why he makes certain choices (which always are explained later). That element was gone during a lot of the book. All that being said, though, it is a fair mystery with an acceptable premise and lots of action.

#whatIreadin2017

#63, "A Time to Kill"

"A Time to Kill"

John Grisham

This is John Grisham's first novel, published in 1989. While it was initially mostly ignored by readers and critics alike, following the explosive popularity and acclaim that accompanied Grisham's subsequent two novels, "The Firm" and "The Pelican Brief," "A Time To Kill" was later widely considered to be an excellent example of Grisham's style and eventually a classic in the legal thriller genre.

The story is complex, extremely well-written, and thick and sticky as a Mississippi summer in the legal, ethical, and moral problems it deals with. Grisham doesn't look away from tough topics. There are very few characters who don't make poor choices, and none that are unquestioningly good--though there are quite a few that are the opposite. The novel opens with a shocking, brutal scene that sets the tone for the rest of the story. There will be no hand-holding. As a reader, you must, before the first chapter is complete, agree to the terms that Grisham sets out: this is not going to be a fun, rollicking ride, but a harsh, painful, and dangerous one. And indeed it is.

The rape is merely the opening act, however, as it precedes the subsequent murder by the girl's father, which is the subject of the remainder of the book. This is the moral and ethical quandary that is really at the heart of the story: is murder ever justified? Does society trust the legal system to condemn and punish offenders, or is the impassioned revenge of a devastated father acceptable as a method of carrying out justice? Though the story ends with the jury suggesting a possible answer, I don't think Grisham is as interested in answering questions as he is in asking them. I appreciate his restraint here, as he never editorializes; he acts almost as a reporter, detailing events that might have happened calmly, objectively. He never instructs his readers HOW to think, but he continually demands that they THINK something. I have my own conclusions

His style is very easy to read, and the story goes from one character and situation to the next with incredible smoothness. He notes every detail in just enough words to convey his meaning without being wordy. I especially enjoy his dry and occasionally ironic humor. The dialogue is fantastic, and the legal sections are fascinating. Grisham started his career as a novelist with courage and clarity, two things I think every writer ought to aspire to.

#whatIreadin2017

#60, "The Adventure of the Cardboard Box"

"Sherlock Holmes and the Adventure of the Cardboard Box"

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

An excellent little mystery by the greatest mystery author in our language. It has all the hallmarks of a Sherlock Holmes story: innocuous beginning, mysterious puzzle with obtuse clues, a smug and ever-changing Holmes, a desperate crime and a nicely wrapped ending. Great read for anyone who enjoys mystery, short stories, Sherlock Holmes, or ear-related crime.

#whatIreadin2017

#47, "The Cardinal of the Kremlin"

"The Cardinal of the Kremlin"

Tom Clancy

Not as good as "The Hunt for Red October," this novel started and ended quite well. There was a long stretch in the middle that dragged a bit, but it all came together in the final 60 pages, which made for a great finish. I really like Tom Clancy's style--easy to read, yet occasionally extremely technical and precise. I enjoy when something happens in a book that I have to look up elsewhere to understand a bit of how it works. I think I'm going to try to read more Clancy soon.

#whatIreadin2017

2017 Book #37, "The Last Juror"

"The Last Juror"
John Grisham

A loosely told story of two relationships; one between the protagonist, the new owner/editor of a small-town newspaper, and the tiny, slow-moving Southern town itself, and between the same protagonist and his friend Miss Callie, a gentle, well-spoken Christian woman with an intriguing history. Their paths all cross following a brutal crime at the beginning of the book, following which Miss Callie is the last juror selected for the trial of the murderer. The trial ends halfway through the book, at which I was surprised (this being Grisham). The remainder of the story is filled with the goings-on of the paper, its rise to prominence in the lives of its readers and editor; the ebb and flow of the town, its changes and resistance to changes. The book touches on things as disparate as the Vietnam war, racism in the South in the mid-70's, and the economic impacts of big business on a small town. It is a rather sprawling book in subject, even as the whole thing is narrowly focused on the main character and the town he grows to care for.

Well written, although the denouement felt anti-climactic. The second half of the book dragged a bit. Maybe that was due to my predisposition to expect big reveals, cliffhangers, twists and turns and things like that. There was little of that sort of excitement in this novel. It felt more like something that maybe actually happened. It was just dull enough that it really seemed like it was the memoirs of a small town newspaperman, and just interesting enough to be curious as to how it turned out. Maybe if I had left aside my preconceived notion of what a Grisham novel is I would have enjoyed it more for what it was; a character-driven drama.

#32, "The Hobbit"

"The Hobbit"

J.R.R. Tolkien

One of my all-time favorites; I know it so well I could almost quote the book as I listened. It is arguably the grandfather of modern nerd culture. It does, of course, lead directly to the masterpiece The Lord of the Rings (which I'm thinking about reading for the dozenth-or-so time), and between the two works Tolkien gave us the modern conceptions of wizards, elves, dwarves, magic, quests, and more. Even if authors and filmmakers and designers stray from the formulas that Tolkien invented or codified (or borrowed from ancient myth), they do so only while acknowledging their debt to them. It is a claim that would be worthy of a dissertation, but I reckon without these books we would not have far-ranging Gesamtkunstwerk franchises such as Harry Potter, the superhero craze, or role-playing games. Tolkien's deep world-building set a standard for storytelling that others since have striven for (mostly in vain). And it all started with, "In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit."

#whatIreadin2017

2017 Book #23, "Till We Have Faces"

"Till We Have Faces" 

C. S. Lewis

A very strange book, one I must say I did not particularly enjoy. I picked this one up because C. S. Lewis is one of my favorite writers, and I had read that this novel, his last work of fiction, was among his very best. It is a retelling of the myth of Cupid and Psyche, a Greek myth that I had never heard of--though I had always considered myself fairly well-versed in mythology. Maybe if I had known this myth I would have understood the book better. There is no doubt that Lewis' writing is excellent. He has a keen style and a razor-sharp insight into how people think and act. However, the plot--a character study of a bitter queen and her anger towards the gods--failed to ignite my imagination.

#whatIreadin2017

2017 Book #21, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows"

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows"

J. K. Rowling

I think this is the strangest book of the whole series. It started great, had a very long bit when they were on the run that broke the pace, and then took a swan dive into a nonstop, mindblowing and satisfying final act. It utterly accomplishes its goal of completing the cycle and finally, finally giving up the secrets that had been hidden since Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone. Rowling is at her very best here, with wonderful dialogue, both lovable and hateful characters, excellent descriptions, and an almost unparalleled sense of how to propel story forward.

Maybe it's because I'm writing so close to the finish, but I'm not sure what to write to wrap this one up. I'm still processing a lot of this one. Deathly Hallows had a lot going on throughout its duration. My favorite thing about it was the complete lack of Quidditch. Besides that, I think my favorite thing about it is that everything is wrapped up, there are no more loose ends, the conclusion is final--and yet I still have questions. Not about the mechanics of the universe, any more--I still think there are practical holes in the whole business, but I'm able now to let it go--but about the little details. I am itching to read through them all again and try to pick up on details that I missed, or that seemed to mean one thing and now mean another, now that I know how it all works out.

Snape's memories threw nearly everything I thought I knew about the whole series into a tailspin. I can't really analyze this right now, but what a revelation, an eyepopping realization.

The finale, the showdown, was extremely effective, I thought. It could have been too tangled, too forced--but all the different parts that fell together made sense, somehow, and Voldemort's downfall was inevitable. Harry has come a long way, and I think a key to understanding his journey is how his response to each of them changes. In the previous books, he met tragedy with anger, increasing hatred. In this one, he is able to meet them with maturity, with the increased boldness of selfless sacrifice, and also, I think, by allowing them to pierce him as he could not have two or three years ago.

I do have to mention that Rowling's naming of characters is very often terrible. Which is a worse name, Albus Severus or Scorpius Malfoy? It's hard to say.

Thanks to everyone for following along as I went on this journey. I think I can now say I'm one of you--a first-year, maybe, but a member nonetheless. I just read that the Epilogue takes places this very year: 2017. Maybe it was fate that I finally finished the series just a few months before Harry and Ginny's kids start their own adventure.

#harrypotter #whatIreadin2017

2017 Book #19, "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"

"Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince"

J. K. Rowling

The pace of the series is near breakneck at this point. Perhaps it was the extreme difference in length between this book and the previous one (Order of the Phoenix is a staggering 88,000 words longer) but I can feel the compression of the story as the arc takes an exponential jump up in seriousness and urgency. Of all the books, this one left me with the greatest sense of a cliffhanger. There, once again, is little wrap-up; there are even less satisfying answers this time around than at the hollow ending of OP. In all the previous books, we've at least had a time to debrief with Dumbledore, to understand things that were confusing, and to catch our breaths mentally as Harry and company returned to the summer holiday. We knew that we were moderately safe until the next time. Now, however, there is no time to talk things over. They have to find and destroy Voldemort, once and for all. This lack of ending gives even greater weight to the rest of the terrible things that occurred throughout the book.

Rowling as an author and a storyteller has really grown in an astonishing way from the often mundane and stilted scenes of the first few books. There was never a time when I wanted to stop, only when I HAD to stop to, you know, sleep and work. Fiction like this is rare for me, and I am really savoring the feeling of anticipation, wonder, and questioning as we continue in the series.

While nearly every chapter had memorable material, the two stand out scenes for me were Harry and Dumbledore's search in Voldemort's cave, and the infamous scene at the top of the tower. While I knew how the book ended, I had no idea that the Malfoy-Dumbledore-Snape confrontation played out the way that it did, and I was still shocked at the brutality and finality of Snape's final curse. How did Snape fool Dumbledore all these years, or, indeed, was Dumbledore fooled, or me the reader? I reckon all questions will be answered in the final Book, which is waiting to be begun as I write.

My guess is that we haven't seen the last of Ginny, and I expect there to be some kind of denouement between Ron and Hermione. Can't wait to finish the series and then go get the books and read them again. #hpandtheHBP #whatIreadin2017