Early Reading

Over at Publisher’s Weekly some staff people mentioned books that made them love reading. I thought about their question: “What was the first book that made you love books?” I’m not sure what was the first book. I remember the first book that I had a strong reaction to, the first book that I remember re-reading multiple times, the first one that made me want to go out and read everything else the author had written — but I’m not sure I want to tell you which book it was. Ok. I will. It was Treasures of the Snow by Patricia M. St. John. I have not seen the movie or listened to the audio book. I am not actually sure how old I was when I read this book. I probably started reading the Narnia books before it, and in the long run those have influenced me more, but I don’t remember first reading them. But it was P.M. St. John who really sealed the deal on the whole reading thing. I think I was already hooked, but she made sure the hook stayed in.

What about you? What’s the one book you think hooked you on reading? Or are you still unconvinced?

Examples of Atmosphere; or, A Sense of Place

Previously I suggested that it was a particular kind of atmosphere in some books that meant I classified them as a comfort read. Most books that I re-read have a strong sense of place. Pride and Prejudice is overshadowed by Pemberley, whose shades would be polluted by association with Miss Elizabeth Bennet. All the Harry Potter books centre on Hogwarts. But there’s more to it than just that. Somehow the place has to be properly suggested by the author. Here is an example of a scene that gives a sense of place:

“Respect the Pedestrian, say the street signs of Metro Manila. As soon as Randy saw those, he knew he was in trouble.

“For the first couple of weeks he spent in Manila, his work consisted of walking. He walked all over the city carrying a handheld GPS receiver, taking down latitudes and longitudes. He encrypted the data in his hotel room and e-mailed it to Avi. It became part of Epiphyte’s intellectual property. It became equity.

“Now, they had secured some actual office space. Randy walks to it doggedly. He knows that the first time he takes a taxi there, he’ll never walk again.

“RESPECT THE PEDESTRIAN, the signs say, but the drivers, the physical environment, local land use customs, and the very layout of the place conspire to treat the pedestrian with the contempt he so richly deserves. Randy would get more respect if he went to work on a pogo stick with a propellor beanie on his head. Every morning the bellhops ask him if he wants a taxi, and practically lose consciousness when he says no. Every morning the taxi drivers lined up in front of the hotel, leaning against their cars and smoking, shout ‘Taxi? Taxi?’ to him. When he turns them down, they say witty things to each other in Tagalog and roar with laughter.”

That description comes from Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stephenson. Randy walks to work — the whole of his walk gives a sense of place. It was hard to choose a particular passage from that book — one thing that Stephenson does well is give a sense of the variety of places there are on the planet. Characters in Cryptonomicon travel a lot, and Stephenson manages to capture well the sense of difference between places.

Do you have particular places that inspire your imagination and prompt you to return to books? Or is it an entire world (Narnia?) that draws you back? Or do you just think I’m a little bit crazy?

Atmosphere in Comfort Reads?

I’ve been thinking about comfort re-reads since writing about them on Monday. I went looking for a quote from C.S. Lewis on the atmosphere of a book. I found what I was looking for, but cannot quote the whole essay. You should read “On Stories” which was first published in Essays Presented to Charles Williams (1947) but can now most easily be found in the collection Of This and Other Worlds. I’ll quote a little from the essay, but understand that I’m writing from my own experience to make a particular point about re-reading, whereas Lewis’s essay tries to redeem popular “stories” or “romances” which is what he calls plot-driven books.

I re-read books for the particular atmosphere they contain. Lewis read stories for their particular atmosphere, not just the excitement of the plot, but for the particular kind of excitement in each book. One of his examples compares the book King Solomon’s Mines with the movie version. This is what he says:

“I was one taken to see a film version of King Solomon’s Mines. Of its many sins — not least the introduction of a totally irrelevant young woman in shorts who accompanied the three adventurers wherever they went — only one concerns us here. At the end of Haggard’s book, as everyone remembers [you don't? It's ok, neither do I], the heroes are awaiting death entombed in a rock chamber and surrounded by the mummified kings of that land. The maker of the film version, however, apparently thought this tame. He substituted a subterranean volcanic eruption, and then went one better by adding an earthquake. … No doubt if sheer excitement is all you want from a story and if increase in dangers increases excitement, then a rapidly changing series of two risks (that of being burned alive and that of being crushed to bits) would be better than the single prolonged danger of starving to death in a cave. But that is just the point. There must be a pleasure in such stories distinct from mere excitement or I should not feel that I had been cheated in being given the earthquake instead of Haggard’s actual scene. What I lose is the whole sense of the deathly (quite a different thing from simple danger of death) — the cold, the silence, and the surrounding faces of the ancient, the crowned and sceptred, dead. You may, if you please, say that Rider Haggard’s effect is quite as ‘crude’ or ‘vulgar’ or ‘sensational’ as that which the film substituted for it. I am not at present discussing that. Teh point is that it is extremely different. The one lays a hushing spell on the imagination; the other excites a rapid flutter of nerves. In reading that chapter of the book curiosity or suspense about the escape of the heroes from their death-trap makes a very minor part of one’s experience. The trap I remember for ever: how they got out I have long since forgotten.”

For Lewis, the appeal of the scene in the book is a particular atmosphere, not just the danger of the situation. Later in the essay he says he doesn’t like The Three Musketeers because “the total lack of atmosphere repels me.” When one re-reads, of course, the excitement or suspense or surprise are gone, but the atmosphere remains. Lewis again: ”We do not enjoy a story fully at the first reading. Not till the curiosity, the sheer narrative lust, has been given its sop and laid asleep, are we at leisure to savour the real beauties.”

When I’m looking for a particular kind of atmosphere, I go back to old favourites. I’m also always looking for new favourites, though, places with atmosphere that I might want to revisit in the future.

Comfort Reading

I re-read books. I’ve mentioned this before. I re-read books because I like them, and because I find the familiarity somehow comforting. Not all re-reading is for this purpose, as I don’t think all books can be called “comfort reads.” What makes a reading comfortable or comforting? I’m not sure I have a good answer to that question, but I’ll give it a shot.

I just finished re-reading Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. I felt a little Potter fix was the thing I needed this weekend. Part of the reason may have been the anti-Rowling article I wrote about last week. I wanted to find out if I still thought that Potter and Rowling were worth defending. Yes, I still think they are worth defending. This was the 9th time I’ve read Philosopher’s Stone – that’s not quite once a year since I first read it in 2001. I also find the Potter books comfortable reading. Rowling tells a good story,  with funny bits and suspenseful bits and also heart-warming bits. Sometimes I’m just in the proper mood for hot chocolate and Harry Potter.

Other comfort authors include Maeve Binchy, Rosamunde Pilcher, Jane Austen, C.S. Lewis (Narnia books), and Dorothy L. Sayers (the Wimsey detective stories). I do re-read other authors but those authors and books I re-read for purposes other than comfort. I think part of the attraction in these books is the setting. I like the setting well enough to lose myself in that world for a while. And I like the characters enough to spend time with them. But I think that all my comfort reads have settings I wouldn’t mind living in. (I’m not looking for a Lost in Austen experience, though.)

What about you? Why do you re-read books? Which books are your comfort reads?

I’m off to jump into Pride and Prejudice. Good times.

Day 12: Epiphany

To celebrate the arrival of the Wise Guys and epiphanies everywhere, a final song for the 12th day:

And a Light Sabre from my Daddy.

If you didn’t guess, this version has a Star Wars theme. How does this fit with epiphanies you might ask. “Luke, I am your father.” I think that might count as an epiphany of sorts.

To celebrate Epiphany I’ll share my final thoughts on the best of my 2011 reading. First, the best of the science fiction. I mentioned that I read a lot of SciFi in 2011, but didn’t actually come out and choose the best of the lot. I have to go with Implied Spaces by Walter Jon Williams. I also must give a shout-out to Anathem by Neal Stephenson, which I re-read at the end of the year. It stands up to re-reading and the complexities remain. I think both of those books are worth seeking out.

Next, the best of the Fantasy, which includes all the Dragon books. I’m going to pick two non-Dragon books, both by Lois McMaster Bujold – Paladin of Souls and The Hallowed Hunt. Look for the resurrection in both of these. These are books set in a world introduced in The Curse of Chalion. You might want to start with TCoC to make better sense of Paladin of Souls. The Hallowed Hunt stands alone better than PoS. The whole series is about resurrection. Look for it.

Finally some historical fiction of note. I quite enjoyed The Mistress of Nothing by Kate Pullinger. It is set in the British ex-pat community in 19th-century Egypt, and is very interesting indeed. It was part of the pile RABro gave me last Christmas. I’m surprised I didn’t read more historical fiction this year, but I had all that catching up on SciFi to do. That must have been it. What historical fiction did I miss that I should catch up on this year?

Day 9: Back to Work (sigh…)

In celebration of going back to work, a song from people who don’t think much of yesterday’s song:

Real Redneck 12 Days

In reviewing my 2011 reads, I found one more stat for you: 11/107 (10.3%) books read were re-reads. I’ve not actually counted this before, so I can’t compare, but my gut says this is lower than some years.

In the summer I read two really amusing books which also ended up having a rather less frivolous ending than one might have expected. Freddy and Fredericka by Mark Helprin (published 2005) was extremely funny but also thought-provoking by the end. The title characters are the heir of the throne of Britain and his wife. Clearly, though history has been changed in the book (no abdication for one thing), the characters are based upon People We Know. Freddy is particularly clueless and has to prove himself worthy of the throne by conquering America. Nope, not kidding. For real. Read it. You will enjoy it.

The other (mostly) amusing book I read was Her Fearful Symmetry by Audrey Niffenegger. Niffenegger’s first book (The Time Traveler’s Wife) was primarily a romance with a backdrop of fantasy (time travel, thus not in this world!). I’m not sure how to classify Her Fearful Symmetry at all. Humorous Horror is perhaps the best I can do. (Niffenegger seems to have that whole genre-bending thing down cold.) Let’s just say that HFS is about twins taking up an inheritance from their aunt, who is their mother’s (estranged) twin. Oh the oddities of this book, not least the ending. Do read it and tell me what you think, because I’m still not sure what I think. By the way, have you seen Niffenegger’s art? Also odd, yet appealing. Like this book.

The thing I liked about these books was the tone the authors used. They are both very tongue-in-cheek. Lovely. This is not LOL or ROTFL sort of stuff, it is rather more subtle than that. Possibly if you aren’t into the add-water-and-stir sort of humour, you may not find these funny or appealing. Just a warning.

Happy New Year or 7th Day of Christmas

In the church calendar this used to be known as the feast day of the Circumcision of Our Lord. Usually the circumcision bit now gets ignored (people are squeamish) and the day is celebrated as the Baptism of Our Lord. I still think it would be more accurate to think about Jesus’s circumcision than his baptism today. Ah well.

In other news, the Rose Bowl Parade and the football game, along with many other US College Bowl games will happen tomorrow, not today, in deference to people being at church on Sunday. True story. Happy parades and football day — tomorrow. It’ll be a nice brain-free way to wrap up the holidaze.

I’ve been promising an announcement of the Best Book I Read in 2011 category. Others have already published their picks. It is hard to pick just one books, so I won’t. I’m in good company as only a few of the people who published a pick chose only one book. I’ll be looking over my books read in 2011 list in the next few days as I update my database, a task that usually begins my year. As I go through the list I’ll mention other books of note. But for now (drumroll) my most memorable read of 2011 is Room by Emma Donoghue.

Why Room? A couple of reasons. First, 2011 will always be an important year for me personally as I met 1Mom at the beginning of the year. Room was the first book (of many) she passed on to me to read. Second, this is a really really really good book. How do I know? A. Donoghue took a major risk in making her point-of-view character a small child, but she fully pulls this off. B. There are few books that pull me in entirely so that I lose track of time anymore. This is sad, but the bright side to this fact is that there are some books that so have the loss-of-time effect. When it happens, I know I’m reading a great book. C. Though I don’t usually judge a book by how it does on the bestseller list, Room has done very well — it is on both the hardcover and paperback top-selling books of 2011 lists. D. At one point the author used a TV talking head to comment on the story she was telling. I found this quite brilliant.

Obviously there are loads of reasons Room was a memorable read for me. If I remember a book, if it sticks with me, then I think the book is a good one. Room is the book that stuck to me like glue for 2011. Check it out if you haven’t already. Let me know what you think.

Seasonal Books 3: Bridget Jones’s Diary

Ah Bridget, what would New Year’s Resolutions be without you and your fine example? How could we think of ringing in another year without revisiting the Turkey Curry Buffet? Bridget Jones’s Diary, either the movie version or the book (in my opinion they are equally good) is quintessential holiday fare, especially for the single female.

BJD is a great read and re-read partially because of Helen Fielding’s adept use of language. I’m always in slight awe of the consistent tone of the diary — Fielding does not break cover. I’ve read all of Fielding’s books — there are only four — and I think BJD is the best of them. Part of this is the consistent tone and the interesting family plots, but there are also interesting literary references throughout the book. The most obvious references are to Jane Austen and Pride and Prejudice. The casting of the movie with Colin Firth as Mark Darcy is beyond brilliant. (Also note that the writer for the BBC production of Pride and Prejudice is also on the writing team for the movie version of BJD.) There is another literary reference that I wonder about. I wonder where Fielding got the name Bridget Jones to begin with. Henry Fielding (1707-1758) wrote a novel called Tom Jones, which has a key character called Bridget. H. Fielding – X Jones. Hmm. No one has commented on this in print as far as I can see. Most people just ooh and ah at the layers of meta-fiction between Bridget and P&P both print and movie versions.

Apparently Helen Fielding spawned the “Chick Lit” genre single-handedly with the publication of BJD. I’d have to do a bit more research to find out whether that assessment is actually true. It is interesting that no-one has a genre category for books like About A Boy when it is (in my mind anyway) very much like BJD but with a male lead instead of a female lead. I’ve been trying to think of a gender-neutral genre label that has the same sort of snap that “Chick Lit” has, but have been thus far unsuccessful. Still thinking. Any suggestions?

Kling Glöckchen!

I forgot to include an Advent hymn in my post for today. Oops.

In honour of the German-English Carol sing that 1Mom and I went to last Sunday evening, here are two versions of Kling Glöckchen, one really funky and the other a bit more traditional:

Funky Klingaling

Klinging more traditionally

 

Present Fantastic World: Harry Potter

I have to admit that I was skeptical of Potter at first. I watched Potter go viral. Then I watched (some) Christians jump up and down and yell about what a bad influence the books were. I finally decided that I’d better read the books before I made a judgment. I started reading Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone after Prisoner of Azkaban  was out in paperback, but before Goblet of Fire was released in July of 2000. One morning I sat in a coffee shop reading Philosopher’s Stone and a girl (aged 10 maybe) at the next table told me that what I was reading was a very good book. I thanked her and said I was enjoying it so far. And it was true. I was enjoying it much more than I expected to.

J.K. Rowling can write! Her imaginary world is tightly woven, filled with interesting detail, and remarkably consistent from book to book. Little details from early in the series come back in a big way later in the books. This requires a lot of organization — and a careful author and careful early readers and editors. Oh that all writers were as careful.

I also like the theological ideas floating in the background of Potter. These become more obvious as the series progresses, and I don’t want to give anything away for anyone who is just beginning to read. Let’s just leave it at the distinctions between good and evil, and the fight between good and evil has strong theological overtones.

It is hard to pick a favourite Potter book because they all have their own distinctive flavour, and together they tell a bigger story. I think it would have to be Goblet of Fire if I was pressed to choose. Partly it’s the dragons, partly it is the interesting contests in the Tri-Wizard Cup. Most of all I like it because this is the book where the world shifts, and it becomes clear that Harry has to fight evil for keeps. It isn’t just little skirmishes any more. The real battle begins.

It is probably obvious that I think you should read Potter, and that you should let your kids read Potter. You might want to think about Harry’s age in the books when thinking about ages that kids can read them. Harry turns 11 at the start of the first book and 17 at the start of the 7th. He does age-appropriate things in all the books, so keep that in mind. Don’t be surprised when, in the fifth book, he acts like a 15-year-old boy. The movies are good (brilliantly cast), but the books are better and should be enjoyed first. When I want to revisit the world of Harry Potter I go back to the books not the movies. Though my reading is influenced by the movies. Professor McGonagall always looks and sounds like Maggie Smith in my head.