book beginnings on Friday: In Cold Blood by Truman Capote (audio)

Thanks to Katy at A Few More Pages for hosting this meme. To participate, share the first line or two of the book you are currently reading and, if you feel so moved, let us know what your first impressions were based on that first line.

Ooh, I’m very excited about this one. For some reason, I’ve been hearing a lot lately about this (not new) book and am anxious to get started. We begin:

The village of Holcomb stands on the high wheat plains of western Kansas, a lonesome area that other Kansans call “out there.” Some seventy miles east of the Colorado border, the countryside, with its hard blue skies and desert-clear air, has an atmosphere that is rather more Far West than Middle West.

Okay, well, it’s not a GASPworthy start, but I still feel the pull. For one thing, the idea of “hard” blue skies and “desert-clear” air, and a Far West atmosphere, feels both familiar and alluring to me. I’m all in.

What are you reading?

miscellany: literary links

A few fun items for you today!

  • The Best 100 Opening Lines From Books
  • followed intuitively by The Best 100 Closing Lines From Books
    (I am proud of Papa Hemingway for making several appearances!)
    Do you think they chose well? I took issue with only one of the closing lines – the one about diarrhea didn’t strike me as especially profound or clever. It sounded like a middle or filler line to me.
  • and, 10 Real-Life Places That Inspired Literary Classics. This really got me excited, mostly about the farmhouse that supposedly inspired Wuthering Heights. I would love to see that! We have just nixed the idea of the UK as a travel option (vacation fast approaching here) in favor of another literary destination, the Florida Keys, for the Hemingway House (along with lots of other features, including Husband-friendly ones).

the value of fiction

I want to share with you something that I wrote, oh, in 2007 or thereabouts. (I am resisting the urge to edit myself. It is a strong urge.) And then I think I will respond to myself. And hopefully you will share your thoughts, too.

My best friend is self-educated, and claims that he reads only non-fiction because he sees no value in studying fiction. He thinks that fiction’s purpose is entertainment, and he wants to learn new facts and better understandings of the world, and thus needs to read non-fiction. I like to counter with, for example, Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin. This book is fiction, but I think it’s pretty clear that its purpose is to teach and educate and hopefully to change minds about one of the most important issues of the last century.

One of my favorite books is Ernest Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls. This book is fiction, but closely based on the author’s experiences. It served an important purpose: it taught readers that the Spanish Civil War, and by extension war in general, is not one-sided and has no “right” side to it; once violence has begun, innocents on both sides will suffer and everyone finishes with blood on their hands. (I hope Hemingway will forgive me for brutally simplifying this masterly work for my purposes here.)

Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle is another great example of fiction that performed important social functions. Although Sinclair’s concerns began by centering on social issues, food safety turned out to be an enormous beneficiary of his work, as public response was enormous. Historical perspective on this book in its time helps us to understand its significance; however, just reading the novel without context would give a person new respect for the purposes of fiction.

The question of whether Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn should be taught in high schools strikes me as a parallel to my friend’s complaint about fiction. It is clear to me that this work should be taught to high school students because, while it is fiction, it brings to light some extraordinarily important and very real questions. For example, Huck’s relationship with Jim and the development of their friendship addresses the humanity of slaves and the moral rectitude of this American institution. The racial slurs need to be read by high school students – with the right guidance – to teach beyond the idea that they are wrong, to why they are wrong.

Thus, the question of whether to teach Huck Finn is the same as the larger question, why read fiction? (For that matter, if it’s not worth reading, why write it?) I find the study of literature (fiction and otherwise) to be pleasurable as well as important, so I take it upon myself to argue on its behalf. My assertion is that just because a story is not true, does not mean it can’t hold massive significance on wildly important issues. For that matter, if fiction were truly and solely for entertainment as my brother asserts, one could argue that there is value in this purpose as well. Humans need entertainment to draw their minds off of the problems of our world; to blow off steam; to relax and/or exercise our minds. If fiction served no higher purpose than these, it would still be worthwhile to write, and read, and study, fiction. However, I find that fiction can serve the purposes of, for example, bringing a nation’s and a planet’s attention to dire social issues: the enslavement of blacks by whites; the wage slavery of many white and nonwhite immigrants to the United States; the corruption and lack of hygiene in a meatpacking industry; and the damage inflicted by massive violence on a people. I continue to bring my friend works of fiction to read.

Urges to edit this piece of writing aside, I stand by my original position. On the other hand, I’ve also written before about the perils of reading historical fiction for educational purposes. While my friend has not specifically used this argument (that I recall), I think it’s an important concern. If we read really convincing, accurate, moving, memorable historical fiction, I think we run the risk of taking it as fact. Even the most discerning and aware reader (even me!) could end up with blurred lines in her subconscious about what she learned in a nonfiction vs. a fiction book. Once I learn a “fact,” it can be hard to call up its source, especially years later. This is especially concerning for someone like my friend in question, who is a highly intelligent man and who likes to have serious debates. I think he feels the importance of being able to cite one’s sources.

So I acknowledge the dangers of confusing high-quality historical fiction with fact. And even more confusing are the books that are billed as nonfiction and get questioned years after the fact (ahem, James Frey and Greg Mortenson). How’s a person to keep it all straight? Don’t even get me started on the library patron who was SURE, and could not be convinced otherwise, that John Grisham only writes nonfiction books. Everything in The Firm happened, she says. I couldn’t talk her out of it. (This is why the front of the book says, “This is a work of fiction…”)

So I do respect some of the challenges. My position hasn’t changed; if anything, I feel more strongly than ever that fiction is important. Some of the fiction I see doing good work in my day-to-day job is not even what we might call Important Fiction – it’s a lot of Louis Lamour, Danielle Steel, Debbie Macomber, and James Patterson, in fact. I work in a cancer hospital where my little library provides leisure reading for people experiencing incredible difficulties, great pain, or great fear. If reading Nora Roberts/J.D. Robb improves their day, I rate the value of even this pop/genre/fluffy/call-it-what-you-will fiction very, very high. My favorite examples are still Huck Finn, The Jungle, and the like. (Also Slaughterhouse-Five…) But it goes beyond such Important Books. Fiction can be beneficial, enlightening, world-changing, and uplifting in so many ways. Also, it can be fun. What’s so bad about that?

I’m not the first to ask this question or to try to answer it; and I’m certainly not the most eloquent, articulate, thorough, or exhaustive. Have you seen any great examples of answers to the question, “what is the value of fiction?” Do you have a great answer? I would love to hear (read) it. Do you disagree? I would be interested to read your argument on either side.

On a related note, I’m still hoping to find time to tackle Mightier than the Sword: Uncle Tom’s Cabin and the Battle for America by David S. Reynolds. Maybe I’ll have something new to contribute soon!

10 books you should have read in high school: a fresh list

Recently several of you commented on 10 books you should have read in high school. They’re back. Here is an alternate list of 10 books, leaning towards more recent, “experimental” choices. Do you like these any better? Unsurprisingly, my readership level is much lower here: only 2 of 10, as opposed to 8 of 10 in the first round.

  • Infinite Jest, David Foster Wallace: No.
  • Maus, Art Spiegelman: No, but I’m interested.
  • Anna Karenina, Leo Tolstoy: Haven’t read. Interested, but also intimidated. Tolstoy intimidates me.
  • Swamplandia!, Karen Russell: No. But I did buy it for the library!
  • Reality Hunger, David Shields: huh?
  • The God of Small Things, Arundhati Roy: No, but it was recently discussed here… I took it off the shelf :-/
  • Against Interpretation, Susan Sontag: No, but I think I’m in favor all the same!
  • Ender’s Game, Orson Scott Card: I read this one! Just recently, for a reader’s advisory class. Very much enjoyed it, recommend it, and see an application for high schoolers. Think it would be well received, too.
  • The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, Robert Heinlein: No, but I did read Stranger in a Strange Land as self-education while I was in high school. That recommendation came from my parents and fit into the same period, for me, as 1984 (loved) and Brave New World (didn’t really work for me but maybe I should try again?).
  • Beloved, Toni Morrison: I read this for school. Must have been high school. Enjoyed and could recommend for this purpose.

Please share your thoughts? We all like a good list, yes? (Or a list we can argue the goodness of…)

I don’t regret the books I’ve read, but those I did not read

I work in a library that focuses mostly on fiction, mostly on bestsellers, and mostly on recent releases. Recently released bestselling fiction is the big hit, although we certainly carry exceptions to each category, too. I get asked a lot about books. I get asked for advice on what a patron should read – this is the most common and the most natural and appropriate; I’ve taken courses and read books about “reader’s advisory” service, which means advising what books a person might enjoy, based on what they’ve enjoyed (or not) in the past. (I still consider myself woefully inadequate, mostly because we can’t read them all! But I try – and I’m familiar with what’s expected, with what reader’s advisory entails, even when I can’t perform.) Almost as frequently, I get asked about what I am reading, what I like to read, what I’ve read recently. This can be a tricky one. It should be easy – I should be able to answer honestly, and that should often lead to a fun, stimulating conversation, even if our reading tastes differ. (Which is fine! I like to say, how boring would it be if we all liked the same things? And how long the lines would be, too!) But sometimes I get some strange questions or strange responses. Today, when asked what the last book I read was, I answered truthfully: The Taming of the Shrew. I was rewarded with deep, uncontrollable belly laughter as the patron stumbled out wiping his eyes. I don’t entirely understand. Carry on, sir.

I also get asked difficult questions, like, “which Christian fiction author do you like to read?” The truthful answer is none; the diplomatic answer is “Jan Karon and Karen Kingsbury are very popular. What are you looking for? Who have you enjoyed in the past?” It always makes me smile bemusedly when people ask me, “do you read?” (I’m sure there is a librarian out there who doesn’t, but really.) Or another favorite, when a big batch of hot-off-the-presses, brand-new books arrive: “have you read all of these?” To which I reply, “no. I put them out for you all, first.” But sometimes I can’t resist grabbing a brand new one, I confess. The Reversal and The Paris Wife both came straight home with me, for example. And sometimes I get to read a gally before publication, as I did with Chevy Stevens’ Never Knowing (review yet to come, via Shelf Awareness). But mostly, my access to our library’s new books is limited in the same way my patrons’ access is: by availability. Also, I’m very busy, have lots of reading to do, and try to prioritize their access more highly than my own.

I do get excited about a lot of the books that I buy for the library. And I do get to read a lot of them, but I miss more than I hit. By how many? Well, I got curious. Out of 2011 book orders to date, I have read (in no particular order):

**Some of these were among the best I’ve read this year, too.

But on the other hand, I wanted to read:

  • Turn of Mind, Alice LaPlante
  • Once Upon a River, Bonnie Jo Campbell
  • County: Life, Death and Politics at Chicago’s Public Hospital, David Ansell
  • Tolstoy and the Purple Chair: My Year of Magical Reading, Nina Sankovitch
  • The Invisible Line: Three American Families and the Secret Journey from Black to White, Daniel J. Sharfstein
  • The Clamorgans: One Family’s History of Race in America, Julie Winch
  • The Story of Beautiful Girl, Rachel Simon
  • The Reading Promise: My Father and the Books We Shared, Alice Ozma
  • Ruby Red, Kerstin Gier
  • The Butterfly’s Daughter, Mary Alice Monroe
  • Claire DeWitt and the City of the Dead, Sara Gran
  • I’ll Never Get Out of This World Alive, Steve Earle
  • Mightier Than the Sword: Uncle Tom’s Cabin and the Battle for America, David S. Reynolds
  • Georgia Bottoms, Mark Childress
  • One of Our Thursdays is Missing, Jasper Fforde
  • Mr. Chartwell, Rebecca Hunt
  • Oracle of Stamboul, Michael David Lukas
  • Cleaning Nabokov’s House, Leslie Daniels
  • Crime: Stories, Ferdinand von Schirach

…that’s a lot of books. I may still make it to several of these – I have my heart set on County, for example. (I want to continue my reading of history and historical fiction in Chicago and the northeast, as in The Devil in the White City, Newspaper Titan, Around the World on Two Wheels and Clara and Mr. Tiffany.) But others will just fall off my wish list gradually for lack of attention – or move up it, if someone else raves. This is the joyful problem of the avid reader and professional librarian: so many options, so little time.

I know I’m not alone! What has passed you by this year that you’re still hoping to find time for? Or, what DID you find time for that turned out really, really well? Best of 2011? (We’re talking published in 2011 here for now. My best of 2011 [published in] are those asterisked, above.) Anything really terrible? (I found Gone with a Handsomer Man very disappointing.) Please do share. Tell me I’m not alone. 🙂

The Accident by Linwood Barclay

A relentlessly paced thriller in which a man has to turn detective to protect his little girl and determine the truth behind his wife’s death.

When Glen Garber’s wife, Sheila, is killed in a drunk driving accident, he’s shocked and disbelieving when he learns that she was the drunk driver. Suddenly a single father, he struggles to reconcile Sheila’s final act with what he knew of her, but things just keep getting stranger. One of Sheila’s best friends is killed in another bizarre accident right after yelling at Glen’s eight-year-old daughter, Kelly, for overhearing a phone call.

The intrigue mounts. Glen receives threats and inexplicable instructions from Sheila’s friends; someone shoots out Kelly’s window; and a sinister figure with ties to organized crime pays a visit to the Garber household. Glen’s contracting business, already in financial trouble, may be on its way to becoming another victim. The background and setting are über-current, with small-town families struggling to survive a recession, tricky sub-prime mortgages and home foreclosures. Unsure of the local police department, Glen is forced to undertake his own investigations. Is someone trying to destroy his business? What questionable sideline dealing was Sheila involved in? And who or what, exactly, killed her?

Glen, a competent builder but a decidedly amateur investigator, is most importantly a loving father. After all the dust settles, this heart-pounding thriller is surprising family-oriented. Barclay’s (Never Look Away) fast-paced, twisting plot keeps the reader guessing at who the good guys and the bad guys are. Allegiances shift. Glen isn’t sure who can be trusted; and while we stay a step ahead of him, the ending still comes with a shocking crash.


This review originally ran in the August 9, 2011 issue of Shelf Awareness for Readers. To subscribe, click here, and you’ll receive two issues per week of book reviews and other bookish fun!

Teaser Tuesdays: A Bitter Truth by Charles Todd

Teaser Tuesdays is a weekly bookish meme, hosted by MizB of Should Be Reading. Anyone can play along! Just open your current read to a random page and share a few sentences. Be careful not to include spoilers!

A Bitter Truth is the third Bess Crawford mystery from mother/son writing team “Charles Todd.” I am finding it a) enjoyable and b) decidedly like Jacqueline Winspear’s Maisie Dobbs series. (See them ALL reviewed by me here.) That is – Maisie is a British interwar detective and former nurse; Bess Crawford is a British nurse during WWI who, while on leave, gets involved in a murder mystery of her own. Both women are apt to sympathize with people in trouble, in this case, a young women who shows up on Bess’s doorstep with a big bruise on her cheek.

Your teaser comes from page 223:

She smiled at me in that way that some children have when meeting a stranger, and now I could see what George Hughes had seen, a likeness perhaps not as strong as he had wished to believe it was, but so pronounced that this child and Juliana could have been sisters. I wanted very much to speak to her, to hear her voice, to hold her on my lap and watch the play of emotions on her face.

This quotation comes from an uncorrected advance proof and is subject to change.

two-wheeled thoughts: London Judy

two-wheeled thoughts

away on the road where the dusty clouds whirl
away with a spirit ecstatic
goes the cool-as-an-icicle, bicycle girl
bestriding the latest pneumatic;
she heeds not the scoffers who scorn,
though knickers her kickers adorn,
the cool-as-an-icicle, bicycle, tricycle maiden by no means forlorn.
–London Judy, Buffalo Illustrated Express, July 29, 1894, as quoted in Around the World on Two Wheels

Don Quixote by Cervantes, trans. by J.M. Cohen: The First Part

Thank goodness Cervantes gives us a “First Part” division right at the halfway mark of this big book, because I need it. I have a huge number of galleys to read for review, and the Gone with the Wind readalong going on as well. So Don Quixote is getting a break. But, I am enjoying it and will be picking it back up! So, eventually, expect a Second Part.

For a chunkster, this is surprisingly easy reading. Don Quixote and sidekick Sancho are just goofily traversing the Spanish countryside, having haphazard and silly adventures which they view in different terms. At the beginning, Sancho’s perspective is that of reality, more or less, with an ongoing desire to please his master and see things his master’s way, and Don Quixote’s perspective is entirely fantastical, based on the novels of chivalry he has read until his brain became mush. (The perils of novel-reading, children!) As they continue their adventures, though, Sancho buys into the fantasy – mostly. He retains a more cynical view that his master, who is completely off his rocker where errantry is concerned.

I was definitely intimidated by its bulk, but these 900+ pages of story are split into little episodes only 2-3 pages long in some cases. What I’m saying is, if you’re intimidated by the bulk of Don Quixote, don’t be! It’s remarkably easy, and entertaining, reading.

Don Quixote is a gentleman of leisure living in the countryside of La Mancha. (This is Spain in, erm, the 1600’s or 1500’s? Published in early 1600’s. I’m not too clear on the precise setting in time, 16th vs. 17th century Spain, and the niceties thereof, not being a strong point in my education to date.) He becomes so obsessed with his novels of chivalry and the knights errant and their lady loves and great deeds, etc., that his mind becomes confused. He outfits himself in a comical assortment of bits and pieces and substitute parts, thinking he is an elegant knight. He roams the countryside on his tired old horse, with a squire named Sancho on a mule, imagining that he achieves feats of gallant and courageous battle and strength, when in fact he (famously) does battle with windmills, releases dangerous criminals from the King’s custody, gets himself and Sancho beaten repeatedly, makes promises he clearly will not be able to keep, and generally makes a fool of himself.

The book, which was originally published in two volumes (thus, two parts!), follows a meandering story line; it is more a series of small adventures, the kind that might be published serially. Some of these adventures leave Don Quixote and Sancho sidelined while we meet other temporary protagonists. These are a welcome respite when Don Quixote’s ridiculous behavior becomes tiresome. I get most excited and engrossed in his adventures when there are plenty of other characters milling about; just Don Quixote and Sancho together can get a little bit repetitive. It is easy to get annoyed with Don Quixote because he is exasperating; but this is intended. He is a ridiculous character.

I am surprised at what an easy and quick read this is turning out to be, and at how often I giggled aloud. Don’t fear the chunky Classic of Literature, friends. Although setting the book aside for now, I look forward to returning to it. Part the Second to come.

One for the Money by Janet Evanovich

Perhaps you noticed how badly my last Evanovich experiment turned out. Perhaps you are shocked (as am I, rather) that I tried again. Well, for one, I was still trying to figure out what people like so much about Evanovich; I hope to be the kind of librarian who at least knows something about all the different genres and tastes. Also, I spoke with a friendly regular patron after my failed attempt with one of her little-known romance novels (above), and decided I was misguided in judging her based on that. I was advised to try again with the Stephanie Plum series, and so I picked up the very first. [For the record, yes, duh, I should have started here in the first place. I did know these were her bigtime contributions. But I guess I was trying to knock out a pure-romance-genre read – again for the sake of breadth in my reading – at the same time. Failure. Note: Always read what the author is famous for.]

For those that don’t know, Stephanie Plum is reluctantly and accidentally employed as a bounty hunter in New Jersey. This first book is her intro to the business. She’s an unlikely candidate, but she needs the money – Plum is kind of a mess, but a cute one. Her first job is to hunt down Joe Morelli, to whom she lost her virginity behind an eclair case in high school. Her feelings for him are mixed, but she barely has time to even try to work them out as the corpses mount up around her, she’s stalked by a sadistic serial rapist, and somebody else is trying to kill her.

I know, just from cover blurbs and general awareness, that Plum has a ping-pong-style love triangle with Morelli and fellow bounty hunter Ranger. This love triangle and sexual tension, as I understand it, is going strong – and still unresolved – after the recent publication of Smokin’ Seventeen, the 17th (yes, true) in her by-the-numbers Plum series. On top of these there are a number of between-the-numbers Stephanie Plum novels, so that for over 20 books, Evanovich’s fans have been eagerly awaiting resolution. Or have they? Maybe they enjoy this ongoing tension and drama, but I have read a few reviews myself indicating that her readers do desire decision. I confess, this is something that would get old for me. Indecisiveness, especially of the multiple-lovers variety, is a bit of a peeve of mine.

Another mild complaint: I’m not offended by sex or violence. I literally haven’t found my boundaries yet; I can handle whatever an author throws. But! I am offended, stylistically, by gratuitousness. And I found some of the sexual references gratuitous. Again, I’m not much of a reader of romance novels; I suspect this is a staple of the steamier of that genre that its readers expect and cherish. But the random appearance of genitalia for its own sake throws me off and yes, offends me – not because it’s sex, but because it’s random. [Seekers of “clean” books, look elsewhere.]

I was conflicted during most of my reading of this book. Stephanie Plum is feisty, hectic, and cute; she has attitude; her narrative voice is funny. Funny things happen to her: awkward moments and moments of conflicted sexual tension. There is some real humor here. But I was annoyed, too. I realize that the outlandish, unrealistic, pure silliness of these story lines are part of their appeal – Evanovich’s fans appreciate this – but I don’t think it’s for me. I’m too easily exasperated with Plum and her indecision (did I say that already?) and her clumsiness and poor decision-making. These books may not be my cup – but of course that’s a subjective judgment, and that doesn’t mean others can’t enjoy them.

I was repeatedly tempted to put this book down, but I hung in there. Just as I got annoyed by Plum (I promise you, if we were friends, I would constantly be rolling my eyes, sighing, and giving her unsolicited advice. Maybe we wouldn’t be friends very long), she’d make me giggle and I’d decide to keep going. Plus, I already quit on Evanovich once, and I was determined to see this one through.

After finishing the book, I remain ambivalent. This book did make me laugh, and it did keep me turning the pages, so Evanovich accomplished several goals: suspense and humor. But I finished with the same exasperation and frustration I’d felt for the whole book. I don’t entirely respect Plum. I’ve had my share of male-female interactions, and I don’t think people behave like this in the real world. It reads like a romance novel, not like life. I’m bothered by the scene, prevalent in romance novels, wherein a man can seduce a woman by being aggressive, rough, rude, even violent. I think this is a dangerous concept to propagate. But perhaps my overarching complaint is, this book is silly. And pointing to this as a criticism rather than a selling point is a matter of my personal taste, not of the objective value of Evanovich’s work.

As a final aside, it was cute to see how dated some of the details were. Cassette tapes, and the impressive tape deck in Morelli’s tricked-out Jeep, made me flip to the front for the publication date: 1994. Rather a fun little blast from the past. As you may have noticed, I’m not too concerned with reading series in order, but I’m glad I started at the beginning of this one. I’m willing to give Evanovich credit – sight unseen – that her characters & style develop as the series progresses. I’m happy to have started off at the beginning.

Final verdict? My options would have to be pretty slim to pick up another one of these books, but at least I now understand what Evanovich fans are looking for. She’s not to my personal taste. But I can see the appeal.