Retro Review: Maestra

When I started this blog, I had been posting reviews on Goodreads for about 6 months. In the interest of having all of my book writing in one place, I will post one of these old reviews every Friday. They weren't written with a blog in mind, so please forgive the lack of summary and off-the-cuff tone.

5 stars. So, Maestra tells the story of Judith Rashleigh, art expert and expert murderess. She spends her days toiling away as a junior employee at an art house and her nights at a creepy hostess bar being paid to satisfy customers with her company. Upon discovering her shady boss’ shady fraud scheme, Judith goes on a rampage of sorts - a sweaty spree hopping from country to country leaving dead bodies and fake names in her wake. It’s wonderful and sneaky and fun. Maestra is zesty! It is zesty Italian with extra zing. The pace, the drama, the bloodshed, the sex - delightful - the most enjoyable reading experience I’ve had in a long time.

It certainly isn’t perfect; Judith displays some incredibly contradictory personality traits. It’s absolutely, one hundred percent unrealistic. It’s superficial. Still, there is strong writing in the “art parts,” which I found enjoyable and an interesting distraction from the somewhat rompy plot. 

Speaking of, I hope people weren’t too shocked. I didn’t find it that shocking, I just found it … open in ways other books aren’t. It’s constantly like, yeah, let’s go there, let’s open this door. I respect that. I admire it. It’s irresistible. I don’t know if it is feminist in the traditional sense of the word (though I hesitate to put parameters on that word), but it certainly expands upon a favorite topic of mine: complex, sexually aggressive women. More of that, please.

I can see the comparisons to Tom Ripley and Vicky Sharpe, but honestly, Judith feels like her own new thing. Is it wrong to say I relate to her? That I enjoyed watching her succeed? She channels that massive chip on her shoulder into getting exactly what she wants whatever the cost. It’s kind of impressive.

Maestra isn’t particularly profound, but it is profoundly entertaining. I can’t wait to read more, if for nothing else than the author’s expertise on a subject I love. Many individuals in the art world are - to quote a colleague of mine who spent years in the gallery business - “snooty,” and Hilton completely challenges that notion by creating a female character who is not only badass but also super, super emotionally into art. I loved it.

Maestra on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: Carrie

5 stars. I can't believe it's taken me so long to read this King - out of all the Kings - but I'm making my way through his repertoire at a slow pace so I can savor his books. Obviously, Carrie is amazing, and I loved it. I read it in one day and the whole time I was just like, yup, classic.

Carrie, of course, is about a teenage girl named Carrie White (the names in this book are really interesting), struggling under the terrifying influence of her intensely religious mother. Bullied and basically ignorant, Carrie attempts to grow and navigate puberty while harboring a remarkable and powerful secret skill. After being targeted by a cruel plot, she goes on an explosive and bloody rampage marking the town forever.

I think it's fairly well-known that this was King's first published novel (the fourth he'd written), and it's full of hints of what's to come. (TBH, I was looking for the hints because I'm obsessed with patterns and recurring motifs.) He plays around with themes he'd continue to explore for the duration of his career; small towns, masculinity, femininity, obsession, religious mania, youth, innocence, sexual awakening, sexual repression, bullying, etc.; in a deft and experimental way that's frankly really genius.

It occurred to me, as I turned the pages of a scene in which a 16-year-old girl gets her period for the first time in a high school locker room and is immediately mocked and pelted with pads and tampons, that King took something very preposterous and made it seem very reasonable and realistic. His attempt to capture the female psyche is so vivid and painful - maybe not right, exactly, but it's very vivid.

Along those lines, I won't attempt to poke at some of the feminist and religious messages in Carrie, but I didn't read this looking for that sort of thing. Carrie is just plain weird, and fascinating, and fun, and funky, and disturbing. It doesn't go quite as deep or as wide as some of his others, but it's distinctly King-ish and worth a read.

I've written before about how reading King is kind of a magical experience: you're like WTF is going on, but you can't stop or look away, and finishing is hugely satisfying until you kind of sit back and think about it and go WTF did I just read?! But that's part of the charm and what makes him so impressive. It's why I keep coming back for more.

Carrie on: Amazon | Goodreads

Retro Review: Fates and Furies

When I started this blog, I had been posting reviews on Goodreads for about 6 months. In the interest of having all of my book writing in one place, I will post one of these old reviews every Friday. They weren't written with a blog in mind, so please forgive the lack of summary and off-the-cuff tone.

3 stars. Well, this book is certainly memorable. It certainly has a lot to say.

The writing is unusual and strange and even harsh at times. The characters don’t behave as expected. It’s unique - which sounds like a cop-out observation, but truly, it’s different. And it accurately represents, I think, how relationships are woven - often painfully - into the fabric of your identity. The characters are compellingly grotesque and each new chapter brings a new deep dive into their utter selfishness. It’s pretty fascinating.

But Fates and Furies is also … pretentious. It’s grandiose. The symbolism is heavy-handed and the story is weighed down. Purple prose? Perhaps. I’d describe it as try-hard. Listen, Shakespeare should be referenced. He should inform modern writing. But Groff simply wouldn't let me, as a reader, forget her knowledge of his works.

I feel like I should have a lot more to say about this book than I do. Fates and Furies is interesting and affecting to a certain degree. I’m eager to see how its studied in the future. There’s a lot to unpack and a lot to appreciate. But ultimately, for me, it’s only deserving of 3 stars.

Fates and Furies on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: The Invited

3 stars. This was, honestly, a bit adorable. I like Jennifer McMahon and I'll likely read everything she's written when I'm in the mood, but bless her heart. This is barely, barely horror. It's a great read with an interesting mystery and a satisfying twist - it just doesn't go very deep, or very wide. It's cute. It's light. It's refreshing.

The story starts in the 1920s, when a young single mother named Hattie Breckenridge is hanged for alleged witchcraft. In 2015, Helen and Nate decide to build their dream home on her property. Obviously, things get weird. Helen in particular feels a connection to the history of the land and starts investigating Hattie and her descendants. She becomes acquainted to a youngster in the area, Olive, who is dealing with the disappearance of her mother and has her own connection to Hattie. There are supernatural elements and creepy moments, but it's essentially a thriller.

I did like the creepy stuff: ghosts, seances, a bog, some crimes, the unsettling small town vibes. I liked the albeit superficial exploration of female rage. I enjoyed Helen's relationship with her husband and the way things came together at the end. Calling this "light" doesn't mean I'm calling it simple; there was thought put into the plotting and the characters. Things click into place. I also enjoyed the multiple POVs and the flashbacks - usually I don’t. McMahon is really fantastic and avoiding gimmicky narrative devices.

Two things I couldn't get my head around: the fact that two middle school teachers had the skillset, the strength, and the funds (inheritance or no inheritance) to build a house on their own, and the fact that Olive was supposed to be a mid-teen in high school. Olive seemed younger to me. Stephen King is my benchmark for young voices (he truly is the king!), and this felt a little cliche. And the author clearly did her research on house-building but ... sorry. Couldn't believe it.

I really hesitate to call things Beach Reads because WTF does that even mean? But I could see myself enjoying this with sand between my toes. It's easy entertainment with short chapters and a brisk pace. I'll never not read ghost stories like this; they scratch an itch. This one just didn't scratch very hard.

The Invited on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: The Lost Man

5 stars. This was GREAT, as expected. Jane Harper is becoming one of my must-read authors. If you enjoy quick, well-plotted, atmospheric mysteries (with a distinctly Australian flavor!), Harper's for you. 

This particular book is a low stakes mystery about a man who returns home - to a broken family in a town from which he was exiled - to deal with his brother's death. As he tries to reconcile and recover from the shock, he realizes he has to face some difficult truths about his past, his present, and his future. It's a story about human nature, denial, abuse, and resilience under harsh conditions. And it's incredibly enjoyable.

I think Aaron Falk is my favorite, so far, but I'm kind of embarrassed with how quickly and deeply I became invested in Nathan Bright's journey. I don't always agree with Harper's protagonists, but I almost always understand them. And her characters are all wonderfully distinct, with clever, strange voices and a hearty mix of good and evil in each. Even the dead ones, portrayed in flashbacks and observational comments, come across brilliantly.

It didn't hurt the book at all, but things wrapped up really neatly here. I actually found that to be quite nice, quite satisfying. I don't think this author is particularly worried about being unpredictable (though the twist was nice). Answers are good but a captivating quest to find them is better. Harper clearly trusts her readers and her writing is better for it.

I am personally in awe of Harper's ability to play with emotions, like shame and determination and forgiveness, and things like memory and intricate family dynamics. I also love the way she makes her setting a character - pushing, pulling, inspiring characters in interesting ways. She consistently paints a really vivid environmental picture; I had no trouble imagining the heat and the dust of the Outback. And she dives headfirst into some important issues here in striking and surprising ways. The way she portrays the nuances of rape and consent - breathtaking. I hope she never stops writing about quiet, complicated humans in complicated situations.

AWESOME BOOK.

The Lost Man on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: The Trial of Lizzie Borden

3 stars. What's fascinating about Lizzie Borden is that there's so much more to the nursery rhyme, but so few answers in the end. The grisly murders captured America's attention, and resulted in one of the fairest, most admirable trials in the history of the justice system. But the crime still, to this day, represents a strange, "locked room" mystery. Those of us starved for the truth will find the details presented here of great interest.

And there are many, many details. This reads like a textbook, and was therefore almost a DNF (I kept falling asleep on the train!); but truthfully I am quite interested in the courtroom drama of it all, and was satisfied by a rewarding finish. I had no idea that Lizzie's story had such a sparkling supportive cast - from the bumbling policemen, charismatic lawyers, thirsty spectators, admirable judges to, of course, the amusing crucial witnesses.

I was not previously aware (naively) of how deeply the sexism of the time permeated the proceedings - Lizzie essentially became, as many defendants do, a tennis ball being racketed back and forth by men trying to outsmart each other. Beyond that, however, I learned that her gender was used by BOTH SIDES to prove her innocence and/or guilt. She's a woman: they're dangerous, wily creatures who have committed the worst crimes in history (!!!) - GUILTY. She's a woman: they're weak, dumb, and don't have the strength to wield an ax (!!!) - NOT GUILTY. I found this to be hilarious and tragic and classic.

But justice prevailed - or did it? I found this book to completely prove that Lizzie is innocent from a legal perspective. Yup, that evidence was circumstantial AF. Yup, the police really screwed some stuff up there. Yup, the prosecution's arguments were underwhelming and desperate. But the justice system is imperfect because it's a human system, and I guess we'll never know what really happened that day in the Borden household.

I couldn't help but compare this to See What I Have Done, which I read fairly recently. I really appreciated Sarah Schmidt's attempt to draw a new picture of the Borden murders, but found it a little tryhard. Still, her sticky, dramatic portrayal of a guilty Lizzie starkly contrasts with the portrayal of an innocent Lizzie in The Trial. The Trial is extensively researched and draws from transcripts, newspaper articles, and more. The illustrations are useful and you really get a feel for what that hot courtroom felt like during the spectacle.

My favorite part was the end - a pithy, beautifully-written coda to an exhausting narrative. I loved reading about the various theories out there, and about the locked up, hidden away defense files. I loved reading about the rest of Lizzie's life, and about her love for Boston Terriers, and her refusal to leave Fall River. Ultimately, I'm into this. I'll always be into Lizzie.

The Trial of Lizzie Borden on: Amazon | Goodreads

Retro Review: In a Dark, Dark Wood

When I started this blog, I had been posting reviews on Goodreads for about 6 months. In the interest of having all of my book writing in one place, I will post one of these old reviews every Friday. They weren't written with a blog in mind, so please forgive the lack of summary and off-the-cuff tone.

3 stars. I didn't really like this. I was seduced by the creepy title and the promise of a dark thriller but all I got was a basic story told in weird increments. It was mediocre and predictable and while it kept me turning pages I just really didn't care.

There were a lot of annoying things about this book but the biggest, for me, had to be the protagonist. I know others have commented on her here and I would agree that she's just damn ridiculous. Consuming a story of any kind requires suspension of belief, and I'm willing to suspend a lot if the action is enjoyable and satisfying in its own way. But I'm really unwilling to believe that a girl was so traumatized by a pretty typical (yeesh, that may be misguided - common? fairly common?) romantic experience that it dictated every action years later. My favorite phrase, used by a reviewer above, is "psychologically improbable." Yeah, that just about covers it.

And it's the plot, too - everything's so campy and melodramatic and twisty in a way that simply isn't creative. It wasn't dark enough, for me. I mean, I was super unsettled by the fact that she even went to the stupid bachelorette party in the first place, but I was unsettled in a "oh, this narrator is really fucking dumb," and "a bachelorette party? I'd rather put a campfire out with my face" sort of way.

I read an interview with Ruth Ware in which she described this book as a combination of Agatha Christie and the Scream movies. Cool! What a fabulous concept. And also an extremely admirable goal. I am into it! I just don't think she got there, though, with this one. Poor execution. I'd like to read some of her other books and try her again, though.

In a Dark, Dark Wood on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: Interview with the Vampire

2019 CHALLENGE: 1 YOU HAVEN'T READ THAT YET?! PER MONTH 05 / 12

3 stars. This is a beautiful, classic vampire tale - very sensual, philosophical and romantic. It's not an effortless read, as the writing is substantial and dense. But it's compelling, in its own way, and gives life to some of the most intriguing, interesting characters in vampire literature. I tried to imagine reading this when it had first debuted - before mopey Brad Pitt - and it struck me how innocently Anne Rice employs the unexpected (the interview concept, a child vampire, a blatant homoerotic flavor) to keep you turning pages. It's pillowy and rock hard at the same time.

Interview with the Vampire is Louis' story: his early life as a mortal in New Orleans, his transition into vampire, the chaotic confusion that followed, and eventually, the unsteady awakening of his immortal identity. He describes in great detail his birth, his clumsy grasps for family (including the shallow, electric Lestat and the cold child vampire Claudia) and his startling and devastating encounter with others of his own kind. It's a bit of an epic, spanning decades and soaring from the tapestry of New Orleans to the sparkly light and deep darkness of Paris.

The central focus of this novel is Louis' internal struggle to reconcile who he is with what he is. He is seduced by Lestat and transformed with little knowledge of what he has become, leaving him with questions and infinite time to contemplate them. He believes killing to be the ultimate sin, and spends most of the novel trying to avoid it or hating himself for it. His conscience - his "passion" - is unique among vampires and they find his self-loathing both strange and attractive. He questions the nature of "evil" and its spiritual, or human, origins. I really enjoyed this exploration; a refreshingly slow take on vampire mythology.

That said, it's a bit ... emo. The way he talks is very melodramatic and a bit annoying - I wanted a break from it after awhile. Louis is straight-up sugar - too rich for me. I wanted more Lestat, more Armand, more Celeste, more PEPPER. And more gay stuff! I know the homoerotic tones are strong here, but they kept talking about love but "not physical love of course," to which I'm like [JOHN CENA VOICE] are you sure about that??! I know it gets less subtle as the series continues, which I applaud. 

So here we are, with the dreaded three stars. I liked it, I wasn't totally blown away, I sort of had to muscle my way through it despite its short length. I'm really into Anne Rice though, I love her rock opera way of writing. That's reflected in the movie adaptation, I think, along with the heavy angst (hence mopey Pitt). Ultimately I'm thrilled to have read this for my reading challenge because it was a MUST. READ. I loved reading it so soon after Dracula. I hope it continues to carve its own pathways within the vampire canon.

Interview with the Vampire on: Amazon | Goodreads

Retro Review: Before the Fall

When I started this blog, I had been posting reviews on Goodreads for about 6 months. In the interest of having all of my book writing in one place, I will post one of these old reviews every Friday. They weren't written with a blog in mind, so please forgive the lack of summary and off-the-cuff tone.

3 stars. I'm a huge Noah Hawley fan. Fargo and Legion are so incredibly creative and engaging and strong, so obviously I opened Before the Fall with high expectations and a side-eye on the hype. And did it get there? Did it do it for me? Well, sort of.

I've been thinking a lot about Goodreads and social media and its impact on the book world, and I would agree with many that Goodreads "reviews" should really be called "reactions." If I were to "review" this book, I'd probably give it a higher score than if I simply "reacted." I mean look, critics loved this book. They raved about it. "Ingeniously nerve-racking" - New York Times. "Terrific thriller" - Washington Post. "Highly entertaining" - AP.

My purpose here is different, though. I just want to chat! I want to provide my opinion in an informal (lazy) manner without feeling the pressure to recommend or not recommend. I want to unpack and extrapolate to a certain degree but keep things firmly in the realm of "response" rather than "review."

Ugh, okay, back to the book: I just don't know. I loved the concept - I like group dissection stories in which a bunch of characters are introduced and we learn about them one-by-one. I liked the mystery and the social commentary and the insights about families and relationships. I liked that it starts with a plane crash and moves backward and forward to build the narrative. I was delighted by the cinematic details and the deep characterization for which Hawley is particularly well-known.

BUT, I didn't like the ending, so much, although it was the type of dark turn I normally really enjoy. I thought the political / entertainment industry satire fell a little flat. Overall, it lacked a spark, I think, for me. It lacked the special flavor that usually keeps me reading something like this. It just wasn't spicy enough! I'm still a huge Hawley fan (his work this season on Legion is triumphant), but as I said, this is just a solid sort of for me.

Before the Fall on: Amazon | Goodreads

Review: Dracula

2019 CHALLENGE: 1 RE-READ PER MONTH 04 / 12  

5 stars. Hello there! It's been awhile. Several things happened in life this month: 1. reading slump 2. puppy 3. new Kindle, which took awhile to get used to. I'm behind but I'm going with the flow. And the good news is, I really enjoyed re-reading Dracula.I wrote about 4 billion words on it in college but I hadn't read it for FUN since I was maybe ... 12? I was in the mood for something like this: long, eerie, Gothic, old school.

Three things really struck me about Dracula, this time: One - my impression of this book is really tangled with my impression of the Coppola adaptation. I actually love that film, I love the aesthetics and the performances (yes, even Keanu!), but I thought I'd be able to separate from them in reading. Not so, apparently. Which was fine; definitely made the reading experience a little unusual.

Two - this book could use some editing. I see now that The Historian felt so bogged down and slow to me because it pulled from the flavor of the original. There are parts that sing (Harker's experience in the castle; the mountain chase at the end), but there are incredibly slow parts as the characters try to figure out - ON PAPER - what the heck they are dealing with. I care about the vampire, not about his "child-brain" or whatever. I care about his demise, not which river he took to get home.

Three - OH THE MELODRAMA! I kept rolling my eyes at the extreme emotion of it all - the love for Lucy, the love for Mina, the swooning, the practically spiritual way they all worshiped and praised each other. Characters "overcome" left and right. Even for a Victorian novel, there were so many tears and promises and feelings - from men more than women, which is interesting. Obviously there are a ton of ways to interpret the role of women in this book and there are a ton of papers written about that. It's complicated. But I was really taken aback by the amount of detail dedicated to the male characters' seemingly hysterical reactions to everything.

Truly though, this is a masterpiece. It's rich and brilliant and perfect to study. There's so much to unpack about what was feared and admired in Victorian times, and how each character explores and embodies those themes. I'm fascinated by the way mental health and sanity played a part, as well as desire and religion and spirituality and old vs new. So many delicious ingredients!

I'm so happy that my reading challenge took me in this direction. My house has been chewed up by an 8-week old corgi, my new Kindle has Wi-Fi issues, I haven't "felt like reading in awhile" (which means I'm deathly ill, probably), but I really enjoyed sinking into the Carpathian mountains when I could. What can I say? Vampires interest me, and this one is the OG.

Dracula on: Amazon | Goodreads