Yes, I’m desperate for the sixth book in the Harry Potter series to be published, already.
I realize that in some circles this marks me as a rube, a sucker, someone sucking at the mass-market teat. The type of person who, if he wanted Chinese food, might go eat at P.F. Chang’s.
I don’t care. If Roger Ebert gets to like monster movies, I get to like Harry Potter.
I actually do agree with A.S. Byatt that J.K. Rowling does not, in fact, write beautiful sentences. She is not a writer’s writer. She is, however, a superb storyteller who is crafting an intricate tale that is true enough to its archetypes to bestir recognition in most readers. And I like that she can flit back and forth between light humor and earnest seriousness so smoothly: that’s a trick that other writers stumble over regularly.
So yes. I have the book pre-ordered at Amazon, and whenever I encounter an article about it, I read it. But that’s not quite enough to fill the time, and the new branch of the Carnegie Library in Squirrel Hill just opened, and it turns out they have lots of books.
One of these books I picked up because Christina recommended it: Sorcery and Cecilia. Apparently, Susanna Clarke’s Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norrell must have struck a nerve (or being cynical, must have sold fairly well), because suddenly you can’t shake a stick without accidentally whapping a book about magicians in Victorian or Edwardian England. Thwap! Here’s Sorcery and Cecilia. Smack! Here’s The Bartimaeus Trilogy. One wonders what the next trend in light genre fiction might be. Religious cult leaders in 1920′s Hollywood, perhaps?
In any event, I’m finding it an enjoyable, if somewhat silly, read. I’m often critical of fanfiction because I find it intellectually lazy: it feels to me like fanfiction writers are substituting someone else’s developed mise-en-scene, characterizations, and overall setting and then grafting their plot onto it. And plot, generally, is the least interesting and unique part of a novel. To some extent, I feel like this epidemic of neo-Victoriana is similar: really, there are only so many Elizabeth Bennetts I can take before succumbing to despair. The fact that your Elizabeth Bennett is, say, evading a sinister spell in Covent Garden, or, let’s see, having tea with Arthur Conan Doyle in Nevada, while helping Calamity Jane track down the murderer of her lesbian niece, Annabel Lee doesn’t really improve the quality of the writing.
But, of course, I’m not reading Sorcery and Cecilia because I’m looking for superb writing. I’m just waiting for Harry. And in that respect, it fits the bill perfectly.
I’ve also been dipping into David Brin’s Uplift novels, mostly because someone mentioned to me that they were the inspiration for the Star Control games. I’ll have more to say about those another time.
Hmmm, I always click on the sponsors, but I should point out that the FREE book ad links to a company mentioned on http://www.ripoffreport.com. I doubt Google will let yo usay anything, but just in case…
Francisco,
Ugh. That’s disturbing. One of the reasons I was willing to do the google ad thing is I had some level of faith that google wouldn’t let me be evil by proxy. If that proves to be untrue, I’ll have to reevaluate that decision.
Thanks for letting everyone know.
Apparently, Susanna Clarke’s Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norrell must have struck a nerve (or being cynical, must have sold fairly well), because suddenly you can’t shake a stick without accidentally whapping a book about magicians in Victorian or Edwardian England.
To be fair, S&C was reprinted 2 years ago, well before Johnathan Strange started building buzz, and it was originally published way the hell back in 1988. S&C’s sequel, _The Grand Tour_, just came out last fall, though.
They’re all riding YA fantasy’s current wave of popularity. Even if you don’t like Harry Potter, and I mostly do, it’s brought a lot of terrific books back into print.
Pete, you might also try Stevermer’s _A College of Magics_, which has the charm of S&C with considerably less fluff, and also an exploding hat.
I wouldn’t worry too much. Almost all the ads are
pretty relevant, and the cause is good. Actually, now that I think of it, we could click the bad guys into bankruptcy! Appeal to the loyal readers!
I saw…something, somewhere, the other day about Jonathan Strange being a book that fell through from an alternate world where the influential fantasy work was not The Lord of the Rings, but rather Hope Mirrlees’s Lud-In-The-Mist.
Apparently Lud-In-The-Mist is back in print, too.
While you’re waiting, read Garth Nix’s Abhorsen series. I liked it more than Harry.
Meredith Ann Pierce’s Darkangel trilogy is pretty good YA fantasy, as are her Firebringer books…but the latter are about unicorns, which perhaps not everyone can stomach. Pierce does have a knack at prettifying a sentence, even though she will sometimes slightly overuse archaisms.
Now I love reading. I did not even buy The Sorcerors Stone until after I saw the movie. And yes it was easy to read through. And maybe it was not high lit. But it was a fun story, and after all is that not what books are supposed to be, a story. I take Stephen Kings take on it all, a good story trumps all.
But I did not read the 2nd or 3rd book, but my wife’s aunt was giving some books away and I picked up the 4th book from her. It was a better book and you can see Ms. Rowlings starting to come into her own voice a little.
But of course as a fan of Mr. King a lot of people will ignore my comments.
James,
You raise a good point, but I think you assume the answer to your question “after all is that not what books are supposed to be, a story?” a little too easily.
Books _can_ be primarily “about” their stories. But they don’t have to be. Many great books are more about the fully realized depiction of character or invoking a sense of place than of plot.
None of which is to in any way denigrate the value of a good story.
Peter