One more discovered author and two other significant authors of 2012

The other day I wrote about three authors I discovered this year. Today I want to talk about three more authors, one of whom was a new discovery, one a re-discovery, and one whose backlist I finished reading.

1. Deborah Crombie. I discovered Crombie’s books this year when I started taking ebooks out of the library on my iPad. I like her mysteries a lot. I read five of them in very quick succession in June. I think I need to go back to more Deborah Crombie for December.

2. Ann Granger. Granger is a re-discovery. I’d read one of her books ages ago and thought it was ok, but didn’t really follow up on reading more of her work. In the spring, a friend of mind passed me a large shopping bag full of books. I reciprocated the favour. Our public library system was on strike for a few days, so we were helping each other through this crisis. My friend had quite a few Granger books in that shopping bag, and I found I quite liked Granger’s mysteries. There was one in the pile with Fran Varady. I am going to follow up on that series in December.

3. C.J. Sansom. I finished reading Sansom’s Matthew Shardlake mysteries. I quite enjoyed these books. They were part of my Henry VIII and Tudor England run in the spring. I hope Shardlake shows up in another book soon. I will read other books by Sansom, I just haven’t tracked any down as yet. Maybe I’ll put them on my Christmas list.

Whose backlist did you finish this year?

Authors I’ve discovered This Year

Sometimes I discover an author, then proceed to read the author’s entire backlist. This year, there are a few authors I’ve discovered. I’ll talk about three today.

1. Haruki Murakami. I heard 1Q84 was really good, so I made a note to read it. Before I read 1Q84, though, I read Sputnik Sweetheart, mostly because of the title. Sputnik. I’m an aerospace engineer, what can I say? Anyhow, I quite enjoyed SS, so kept looking for 1Q84, and finally decided to borrow it from the library on ebook. This worked well. I was only on the waiting list for a couple of days. I really enjoyed 1Q84. Now I’m on the look-out for Murakami whenever I go to used bookstores.

2. Julia Spencer-Fleming. This is a pretty recent discovery. I’d heard of Spencer-Fleming before in lists of clergy mysteries, that is mystery series that have a clergy person as a main character. When I was moving, I decided to get a couple of audio books from the library so that I had some listening material while I packed and unpacked and organized. Spencer-Fleming’s first book In the Bleak Mid-Winter was available as an audio book. I picked it up as I’d heard of the author, plus, as a bonus, it was the first book in the series. I like starting things at the beginning. I quite enjoyed listening do In the Bleak Mid-Winter, told the manager at the bookshop where I work about the series, and now we stock them! And I read book two! And I’m going to read more!!

3. Robertson Davies. Some of you may think that as a Canadian who reads voraciously I should have discovered Robertson Davies long ago. I think it was the beard that put me off. Anyhow, I got over that. I wrote about my discovery of Davies in this a blog post earlier this year. I’ve now read two sets of three books by Davies, the Deptford trilogy and the Salterton trilogy. Coming up: the Cornish trilogy.

What about you? What authors have you discovered this year?

Audio Books While Packing

I’ve talked about audio books in this space before. I don’t think that listening to an audio book is the same thing as reading, but I will concede that listening allows one to access the content of books in a different way. As I’m cleaning and packing and culling and doing all the things associated with moving, I’ve been listening to an audio mystery, In the Bleak Mid-Winter by Julia Spencer-Fleming. This is the first book featuring Rev. Claire Fergusson, an Episcopal priest in a parish in a small town in up-state New York. The book involves parish politics as well as bodies and mysteries. I am quite enjoying it. I shall have to investigate the rest of the series once the move is over.

In conversations around decorating my new place my friends think I am overly concerned with bookshelves. I think they don’t quite get it. The living room is the library. In a library, the shelves are very important. The shelves need to be placed first, and other furniture around the shelves. Why? Because once a bookcase is anchored to the wall and filled, it isn’t going anywhere very quickly. Also, the most exciting thing about moving is having more shelves, and the chance to arrange and reorganize my books. This is Very Exciting.

Listening to a Writer

I seldom go to author’s events. I don’t really pay attention to when literary persons might be appearing in a venue near me, nor am I very fond of crowds or the slightly stalkerish feel I perceive these events to have. This blog is, however, being written as I sit in a public library event space waiting for an Author Event to begin.
At thirty minutes before the event starts, the room is filling and there is a crowd buzz. The conversations around me are quite interesting. Authors behind me are talking of the price of sending in mss and the unreadability of self-published material and the uselessness of Twitter.
Now in the post-event mental buzz. The Author featured this evening was Val McDermid. I got her to sign my copy of Killing The Shadows, my favourite (so far) of her books. McDermid is an excellent public speaker, and a fantastic story-teller, and very funny as well. Not all authors are either of these. McDermid’s stories and wit made for a very pleasant hour and a bit. Though I have done a book launch and a panel discussion in support of a publication (Let Her Speak for Herself), I think doing endless events in different cities would get pretty tiresome after a while.
How about you? Do you like going and meeting authors or would you rather let their books speak for them and not be disappointed by how they look or sound?

Talking about books

I had dinner with the Playwright last night. We sat on a patio, drank dark beer, and discussed many things. One of the things we usually talk about is books. We went to a bookshop when we finished dinner, and that was when we started talking about books. This is slightly unusual — usually books come up sooner in our discussions. Oh wait, a Henri Nouwen book came up at dinner as a side bar to the conversation. Usually our book talks begin with “What are you reading?” and it doesn’t matter who asks the question. The other person answers and some discussion of that book follows. This leads to other books previously read, or a discussion of books both of us have read. It is all very pleasant. The Playwright has an MA in English Lit, and I do not, so she has a different reading view than I do. I *think* I tend to be more forgiving in initial assessments of books and writing styles, but it could also be that we look for different things in our reading. Tonight our longer discussion was about The Hunger Games trilogy, where I’ve only read book 1 and the Playwright has read them all.

What am I reading? Currently I’m reading Sputnik Sweetheart by Haruki Murakami. There’s a huge waiting list for IQ84 at the library, so I decided to try Murakami’s backlist first. I like the book so far. There are some stylistic things that bug me. The translator uses sentence fragments a little too frequently for me. I am not a fan. These are the kind of sentence fragments that I find when marking papers, the kind that students don’t realize are incomplete sentences. I think the translator knew what he/she was doing, but I’m still a tiny bit irritated. Of course, the fragmentation could faithfully reflect something that is there in the original. I don’t read Japanese, thus cannot tell.

I’ve just finished a couple of mystery books by Deborah Crombie in the Gemma James/Duncan Kincaid series. The two I read are from much earlier in the series. I quite like the books. The first one I read had no body in evidence for a really long time. I began to think no one would be murdered in this murder mystery! I rather liked that. I’m now in search of all the books that came before the two I read, which were A Finer End and Kissed A Sad Goodbye.

What are you reading?

Connections between books

I just finished The Retribution by Val McDermid. It is a mystery featuring Tony Hill and Carol Jordan, recurring characters in 7 of McDermid’s mystery books. This book followed up on an earlier Hill/Jordan mystery, The Wire in the Blood, the first McDermid book I ever read. It hooked me on this series, and on McDermid’s work more generally. I was amazed that she killed off a key character in Wire. Now in The Retribution the killer Hill, Jordan, et. al. caught in Wire escapes from prison and sets out to revenge himself on Hill, Jordan, and others he thinks have betrayed him. It is a bit of a wild ride. I quite enjoyed the ride. I might have to go back and re-read Wire in the Blood because it is good, and because it has been a while.

I wasn’t expecting the connection between Retribution and Wire, but was quite pleased by it. I like it when authors bring in characters or use settings from other books, even when they aren’t in the same “series.” Of course one expects the overlap in books in the same series (though the degree of overlap can vary widely even in a series), but it is nice when it happens in places that are not quite expected. The author has an imaginary world, and populates it with characters who show up in each other’s space from time to time. McDermid does this in some of her other books. Characters or situations make a drive-by or background appearance. John Grisham also did it in some of his earlier books — the FBI director was the same in Pelican Brief and The Firm. Those are the two I can think of off the top of my head. Do you know an author who re-uses background characters or situations in different books, not in the same series?

Henry VIII and Thomas Cromwell. And Cranmer too.

I noted when listing books-read-so-far-in-2012 that Henry VIII is a recurring character in many of them. Henry shows up in the background of one non-fiction book, The Last Divine Service about the dissolution of the monastery at Durham. In Durham the monastery wasn’t destroyed, it was converted into a cathedral chapter that still exists today. Geoffrey Moorhouse managed to catch some of the way things remained the same though everything changed during the English Reformation in that book. There was an ambivalence to the thing, a not wanting to go too far.

That same ambivalence is caught very well in Wolf Hall, the Booker-Prize-winning novel by Hilary Mantel. The point-of-view character in WH is Thomas Cromwell. The book follows his career from his loyal service to Cardinal Wolsey to becoming one of the king’s trusted advisors. Mantel makes Cromwell, who history does not regard fondly, a very sympathetic character. The book left me wanting more history. Shortly after finishing WH I found published letters of Cromwell in the used books at the theological bookshop where I work. I didn’t buy these as I’ve got really large to-be-read piles already, but the letters are out there. I’m thinking Mantel read them. Anyhow, I think Mantel catches the ambivalent nature of the English Reformation, the king wants to be a good Catholic, but now he’s the Head of the Church in England, and what does that mean exactly. Then there’s the whole Cranmer’s SECRET WIFE business. The Archbishop of Canterbury had a SECRET GERMAN WIFE. No wonder he wanted a Reformation in England.

I’ve also read two of the Matthew Shardlake mysteries by C.J. Sansom, Sovereign, and Dark Fire. I’ve been reading the Shardlake books out of order. I started with the first one, Dissolution, then jumped to Revelation, then backed up through S, and DF. May I suggest reading them in order? (Dissolution, Dark Fire, Sovereign, Revelation.) The characters do develop, and there is a historical timeline to be concerned about. They can be read out of order, but some of the suspense might diminish in sub-plots if you do that. Just saying. The Shardlake mysteries are set in England during the reign of Henry VIII. Our Hero is a lawyer who longs for the quiet life, but seems to get dragged into solving mysteries connected to affairs of state. Cromwell features as Shardlake’s employer in the first two, but then he falls and his fall is great. Cranmer shows up in the second book, and in the third is the person Shardlake investigates for. The King is a key character in the third book as well, as might be guessed by the title, Sovereign. While Sansom captures elements of the back-and-forth nature of the English Reformation, and also describes aspects of the time really clearly, I think his main character is too modern in outlook. This can be a problem in writing historical fiction. The past is a foreign country, so how does one adequately get into the characters’ heads? I’ve found historical mystery writers especially prone to writing first-person characters who have a 21st-century outlook and make 21-C remarks about what is going on back in the day. Sansom’s Shardlake character leans in that direction in these books. Maybe this makes them more readable as fiction, but I find some of the revisionist historical fiction becomes unreadable when the revisions are really obvious. (I can’t read Anne Perry’s 19th Century characters any more, because they are too revisionist.)

If you want an interesting way into the English Reformation, give any of these books a try — start with the fiction though, it makes looking at the history more interesting somehow.

So far this year

Since I finished a volume of “The List” last week, this might be an appropriate time to update you on my reading so far this year. I’ve finished 33 books, which means I’m on target to read 120 this year — that’s a book every three days or so, 10 per month. My progress toward the goal has been fairly steady, though March was a bit slower than some other months. I did manage to catch up at the beginning of April.

7 of the 33 books I’ve read have been non-fiction. Three of the non-fiction books are worth mentioning here – The Last Divine Office by Geoffrey Moorhouse, Why Narrative? edited by Stanley Hauerwaas and L. Gregory Jones, and A Pathway into the Holy Scripture edited by Philip E. Satterthwaite and David F. Wright. The Last Divine Office is about a bit of England I don’t know much about, and gave a different view of the dissolution of the monasteries under Henry VIII than I’ve read before. Reading it made me want to visit Durham Cathedral. The book itself isn’t a particularly well-written history, but I was fascinated by the subject matter. Why Narrative? is a collection of key texts on narrative theology. I chose this book as my Pick-of-the-Month in the bookshop where I work. The Famous Chaplain, whose office is down the hall from the bookshop, came through one day, picked up Why Narrative?  and announced that this was the best book ever as a starting point for learning about narrative theology. I have to agree with him. I’m sad I didn’t read the book earlier in my theological career. I’m also sad that I didn’t read A Pathway into the Holy Scripture earlier in my theological career. This is a nice collection of essays on biblical studies that I’ve had sitting on my shelf for at least 12 years. I dipped into it before, but reading them through was very interesting. I particularly appreciated the metaphors in I. Howard Marshall’s essay on Biblical and Systematic Theology.

If 7/33 books I’ve read have been non-fiction, that means the other 26 books have been fiction. Elsewhere in this blog I noted that I began reading Robertson Davies. In addition to Davies, the literary books I’ve read are Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel (about Henry VIII, who has been a featured character in my reading this year), The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis (a reflection on life after death told as a dream-story), and The Marriage Plot by Jeffrey Eugenides (though my friends have been loudly debating whether this book is literature or pop-fiction with no staying power). 11 of the fiction books have been mysteries, which are my favoured form of brain candy. One of the mysteries also features Henry VIII, Sovereign by C.J. Sansom. That is one of the best mysteries I’ve read so far this year. Of course I really really liked Death Comes to Pemberley by P.D. James, but I’m afraid Sovereign wins on plot twists. The rest of my reading has been fantasy, short story collections, and science fiction. Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman is the stand-out of those books.

What have you read so far this year? Any recommendations?

Letter G, Letter G, Letter G, Letter G – there will be an answer…

The letter

brings you today’s post. G is for Genre.

I’ve discussed genre before a couple of times and noted that part of what makes a book great is the subversion of genre, or blending genres (example: Joss Whedon’s Firefly series). That being said, booksellers and publishers classify books by genre because then people have some idea what they are getting. People decide they like or dislike various genres, thus saving themselves the bother of perusing those shelves at the local library or bookshop. I, for example, don’t bother looking at the Romance or Horror sections of any bookshop. My friend the Restless Teacher avoids the Science Fiction section along with the Fantasy section (should they be separate items). I like the genre sections of bookshops and libraries because sometimes, I just want a straightforward crime story, and if I look in the mystery section, I’ll find one. Problem solved. Well what to read next solved, the mystery itself may take a little longer.

I also read science fiction, but this is less of a fall-back category for me as I find that this genre has a significant range in it and I don’t like all aspects of its range. Some SciFi books feel like poorly disguised romance novels with a little space travel thrown in to fit the genre. You may recall that I’m a rocket scientist — I find some SciFi books are just not interesting because of the lack of science/technology or the poor science/technology in them. SciFi books are idea books. Crummy concept = crummy book. Thus I am more cautious about the SciFi genre, though I’ve been getting back into it in the last year or two.

Mysteries are my fall-back, a comfortable genre that I can usually count on for brain candy. I like finding new authors and reading through their backlist. Over the last couple of years I’ve worked through Margaret Maron’s Deborah Knott books, Stephen Booth’s Cooper & Fry set, and David Hewson’s Nic Costa series. I don’t always read everything an author has written — sometimes I stop after one or two. I’m not a fan of Martha Grimes, for example, I couldn’t get past the first few of her books that I read.

I also like speculative fiction, fantasy, and historical fiction. Historical fiction is seldom separated out from the general fiction or literature section in libraries and bookshops. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it with its own spot on the shelves. I’m not sure why that is. Of course you can have mysteries with an historical setting (Ellis Peters pops to mind), and thrillers set in the past, and romances with history as a backdrop, so maybe a setting in the past isn’t enough for a separate section. Fantasy and speculative fiction often get blended in with SciFi as SFF. I’ve ranted in other places about why this should not be so. I can see speculative fiction and science fiction getting along better than SciFi and Fantasy. I’m not sure at all why fantasy get’s put in that category. If someone has an explanation, I’d be happy to hear it.

All that to say, genre sometimes determines what I’m going to read next. I look for books that are similar to others that I’ve liked. At the same time I recognize that genre blending or genre twisting can make a book great — so classifications as issued by publishers or booksellers or librarians don’t always reflect the potential a book has.

What genres do you like? Why?

[The title of this entry probably means you've all got Mother Mary running through your head. Sorry about the earworm, I'm just passing it on.]

The Letter F brings you today’s post

is for Friends & Family who recommend or suggest books. At times they demand that I read books.

You may object that a friend or family recommendation is pretty similar to books suggested by conversations, which I’ve already mentioned in my list of How I Find What To Read Next. Let me make some distinctions between friend/family recommendations and books suggested by conversations. The conversations that suggest reading don’t have to be about books to begin with, and often the conversation suggests a book only afterwards, when I’m thinking about the discussion. Example from last week’s post, later reflection on the endnotes vs footnotes conversation got me thinking about the Bartimaeus trilogy, fantasy books that feature footnotes. When friends or family recommend books to me they are quite specific about the book they suggest, they often give mini-reviews of the book in question, and may follow up the recommendation by lending me the book.

Friends & Family often begin conversations about a book they are going to recommend with the question “Have you read X?” When I admit to not being familiar with that particular book, responses range from gasps of horror (“How could you not have read ____?? You are a book fiend/math person/geek/other descriptor as appropriate!”) to mild dismay (“Really? But I thought that X is the kind of book you read”) to lack of surprise (“OK, it might be outside your usual reading, but I think that this one is worth your time”). Then comes the pitch. The friend or family member who asks “Have you read X?” expecting a “no” answer may skip the response part and launch directly into their pitch for the book. “Oh you MUST read this.” The pitch then goes on to give reasons for reading the book and may give a synopsis of plot if that seems appropriate. If the book is of a particular genre, that may be mentioned in the pitch, especially if the recommender knows that I read the genre.

I like family and friend reading suggestions. If the book in question is thrust upon me as part of the recommendation it makes it easier for me to read the book. I’ve got a friend who doesn’t like it when people lend her books so she’ll read them. She tends to avoid those books. I don’t do that. I may not get to it immediately, but I will read the book. Friends & family may suggest books to me but I may forget what the book is called, or the author’s name. Those are the suggestions I don’t follow up on, not because I don’t want to read the book, or I mistrust the recommendation, but because I can’t think of the information I need to find the book. If the book is a bestseller or a movie is out based on the book, I’m more likely to remember what friends & family say about it.

Last year I read a lot of books based on recommendations from family and friends: Room, the first few Sookie Stackhouse books, Treason, and I’m sure there are more. Those are the ones that pop immediately to mind. I’ve got a few on my list for this year: Wolf Hall is one. A while ago someone recommended Neil Gaiman’s works in general, so I’ve got one of his in my TBR pile. The Restless Teacher is going to lend me Kate Atkinson’s most recent book because she really liked it.

What about you? Do you trust recommendations by your family and friends? Do you suggest books to them?

Follow up: Last week while writing the A for Author post I made the happy discovery that Atkinson and Atwood both have stories in the collection Crimespotting. I said I was hitting the library, and I did. I’ve just finished the book and quite enjoyed it, and recommend it. I don’t think you’ll find it to buy, you’ll probably have to go to the library. Hunt it down.