The Ingenious Edgar Jones
Elizabeth Garner
338 p.

Headline Review, 2008.
(First published 2007.)

Back cover blurb:

The skies of nineteenth-century Oxford are aflame the night of Edgar Jones’s birth. Whilst his father dreams of his son becoming a great scholar, his mother is quick to notice that Edgar has a different kind of cleverness. He is a born inventor, with a rebellious spirit that may be a blessing, or a curse.

Soon his abilities bring him to the attention of a maverick professor, a bone collector with plans for a museum that will for ever change the way mankind looks at the world. Finally Edgar has a chance to show his true talent as he embarks on an adventure fraught with terrible dangers, for himself and those who love him.

um. The adventure discussed in the back cover blurb? Does not happen. In fact, that blurb lies a whole lot. Neither of Edgar’s parents notice his intelligence, at least not at the same time. They do it in turns, and they are equally bad.They are not very good parents.

I wanted to like this book, or, I thought I’d like this book. It seemed like a sweet century-before-last-novel, with a cosy atmosphere and prettiness. This I didn’t get. Why? The story was full of wack. This is what happened: Edgar is born. Edgar works in a forge. Edgar invents a pot. Edgar works at a museum. Edgar works at a toy shop. Toy shop burns down and Edgar is thrown in jail. Edgar flies away. Somehow. Maybe I didn’t really pay attention at the end, but by then, I’d almost given up. The ending was very unsatisfactory. Edgar flew away from his prison, his father became a gargoyle, and his mother was going to move to London to live with a pimp. What is that about?!

Throughout the three-hundred-and-a-bit pages, I waited for the story to lift, for something to actually happen. Nothing did. There was a bit of pretty writing (Garner’s writing is really more than half-way decent), and a lack of plot. It was very sad. This book is, for me, the biggest letdown since Edward Trencom’s Nose.

Macbeth
William Shakespeare
142 p.

Classical Comics Ltd., 2008.
(First published 1623.)

Back cover blurb:

William Shakespeare’s full and unabridged play in comic book form!

This full colour graphic novel presents “The Scottish Play” just as Shakespeare intended: in its original and unabridged format. Ideal for purists, students and readers who will appreciate the unaltered text.

Macbeth is probably the most dramatic of Shakespeare’s tragedies and this version will give you a brand new and totally fulfilling view of the sheer genius of Shakespeare’s story telling.

Witchcraft, superstition, murder - it’s all here! Featuring stunning artwork, and full of action, atmosphere and intrigue from start to finish; this new treatment of The Bard’s wonderful tragedy will have you on the edge of your seat.

I can’t say how many times I’ve read this play. This in itself feels a little ridiculous to say, seeing as I’m not even legal, but already I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve read it. I have read it, at least, four times. Those are the times I can definitely account for. Additionally, I have seen it probably five times, in different versions (stage and film), and then tehre’s this. Macbeth in a graphic novel version.

That concept itself wins my adoration. Especially it makes a good graphic novel. The transposation from the empty text to the illustrated text goes smoothly, and makes it understandable. I did, for a while, get very iffed at the very untrendy haircuts everyone had, but I assume that since everyone probably looked like that, I am a bit unfair for dissing them like that. (oh, ouch, that is very colloquial!)

Now, I filed this in school reads, which is slightly misdirecting. I have read this play for school a number of times, and it wasn’t strictly for school I read it. Oh, alright, if it weren’t for school I probably wouldn’t have crammed in enough time to actually read it. I’m just tagging it for school because in some manners, it is for school. Even if my reading it again didn’t benefit me much!

This being a little sidetrack from the topic, I would like to say that the semicolon in the last paragraph of the back cover blurb creeps me out. I can not at all make it understandable. It ought to be a bloody comma! …I really ought to stop being so annoyed at back cover blurbs, oughtn’t I?

Though this is an opinion I almost fear to voice, I must say I strongly dislike Lady Macbeth. I won’t go so far as to say I hate her, but she irks me quite badly. In my eyes, she is the real fiend in the play. Which is a pity, because in reality, she is quite a fascinating characters, but all her arrogance and self-certainty just annoys me, and makes me pity Macbeth.

Of course, no one holds a candle to Banquo. Banquo is the best. Even though he might, in this version, look like a carrot-headed idiot.

The Diamond of Drury Lane
Julia Golding
424 p.

Egmont UK Ltd., 2006.

Back cover blurb:

At the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, Covent Garden, This present day, being 1st January, 1790,
will be presented

The Diamond of Drury Lane
(written by Miss Cat Royal)

Principal Characters
Miss Cat Royal - orphan and ward of the theatre
Mr Johnny Smith - prompt with a secret
Mr Syd Fletcher - leader of the Butcher’s boys
Mr Billy ‘Boil’ Shepherd - evil leader of rival gang
And a hidden diamond!

With a new musical interlude by Mr Pedro Hawkins, late of Africa.

To which will be added a farce, in which a hot air balloon will land on stage!

I am sorry for the blurb looking so messy - it is actually quite pretty, it’s just that I’m not sure how to present it.  It’s got lots of different fonts and boldnesses, and it is really quite a beauty. In fact, the entire cover, both front and back, is beautiful. It is smaller than most books I own, despite being in hardback. It’s 18×13.4 cm, which, compared to most normal novels, is really quite tiny. Additionally, it is a delight with its colours and its glittering diamond on the cover. Oh, I’ll admit it: I only bought this novel for its cover. I skimmed through the blurb, slightly amused. It is the kind of book I just want people to look at and awe. That is how pretty it is!

Had I been in charge of marketing this book, I would not market it in my age category; I am a bit too old, and maybe a bit too cynical. It is the sort of novels ten-fifteen-year-olds could easily fall in love with. (I ought to try and make my younger brother, approaching fourteen, but barely a reader read it - I have a feeling he might love it.) However, I enjoyed it. Admittedly, there were parts I thought that were a bit too childish, and I constantly hoped Cat to get involved with either of the friendly nobles in this book. Then I got to know that Cat is twelve years old, and then I felt like a pervert. Obviously. Genre-wise, I feel that it has a lot in common with Philip Pullman’s excellent The Ruby in the Smoke and the other novels in the Sally Lockheart-series. I am a big fan of Philip Pullman, and comparing this novel to him should be thought of as great praise.

Also, like in the Sally Lockheart-series, one of the things I love are the characters. Although some of the characters do not feel fully fleshed-out, most notedly (unfortunately!) Cat herself, most of the characters, especially minor such, feel so real. One of my favourite characters in this novel was the Lord Francis, colloquially termed Frank, a young Lord (I assumed he was seventeen-eighteen, but later I had a sneaking suspicion that he was in fact younger than that, and not older than fifteen) who takes an interest in boxing and the lower classes, albeit in a completely loveable way. Disguised as a chimney-cleaner, he finds Cat, who has been held back by the rivaling gang and says “we wondered what had happened to you! I was very perturbed to find that you had not followed us.” (148) Apart from being a quote which still, days later, brings a smile to my face, it more or less sums up Lord Francis. He is foppish and absolutely wonderful.

Another lovely aspect of the novel is the time and location setting as well as the structure of the story. Set in late eighteenth century London, it is a convincing picture of a society which really seems quite ghastly. I am complete tosh at history, but even I could navigate myself through some of the references, to my great pleasure. And, the structure! Portrayed like a play, it is divided in five acts, with act descriptions and parts of maps of London. It was so pretty.

Come Wednesday, I have some free time, and I’ll be able to go downtown, and if I’m lucky, they’ve got the next part. I don’t have a clue the next time I’ll have time to read properly, but it is never wrong to stock up!

Kärlek het som chili
(Como aqua para chocolate)
Laura Esquivel
Translated by Inger Fahlander
217 p.

Natur och Kultur, 1999.
(First published in Mexico 1989.)

Back cover blurb:

På släkten De la Garzas stora lantegendom i Mexico styr änkan Elena sin familj med järnhand. När Pedro friar till hennes yngsta dotter Tita, avvisas han eftersom Tita enligt uråldrig tradition måste förbli ogift och ta hand om sin mamma.

För att få vara i den älskades närhet gifter sig Pedro med hennes äldre syster. Och Tita finner ett sätt att ge uttryck åt sina heta känslor: hon gör sig till kökets härskare. Hennes underbara kokkonst påverkar alla i familjen, oväntat och dramatiskt.

Kärlek het som chili är en ångande het berättelse om kärlek och mat, om fantasi och passion.

This is yet another novel I’ve read for school. Most people who read this before me hated this novel with a passion, and I thought that, seeing as it seemed quite “easy”, I would hate it as well. But I didn’t. My main problem with this novel is not the fact that it is full of strange and unrealistic happenings; my main problem is that I simply did not believe in the love Tita and Pedro held for each other. Throughout the novel I hoped that Tita would get over Pedro, or Pedro would get over Tita, and Tita would get married to Doctor Brown, a lovely kind man who falls for her the first moment he sees her. Needless to say, this doesn’t happen. Pedro and Tita’s love is, apparently, the truest love ever. And I just don’t believe in that. It’s not that I don’t believe in love, what I don’t believe in is the fact that there is only ever one love for you - ever.

The book we read in class before this was Crime & Punishment. This novel is obviously less difficult to read, and I more or less flew through it. The only parts where I feel a little lost is where they start talking too much about Mexican food, which I am very bad at. I can identify enchiladas, tortillas and tacos, but that’s it. The long-winded descriptions of how to make the foods I skimmed through, even though I felt that it would be quite fun to make the food, even if it seems to be, on the most part, impossible. Where on earth would I be able to find those coffee beans you need to make the chocolate cakes which, in turn, you make hot chocolate with? I will have to investigate this further.

With this book I have realised that I have serious problems with the endings of books. The ending of this book made me groan aloud - not that! A dissatisfying ending leaves me with a bad taste in the mouth, much like sour milk. Or, more like milk which is slowly turning sour throughout the course of the novel. Kärlek het som chili is by no means a bad book. Its problem is merely that the ending isn’t very good. In fact, if you want a nice and happy openended ending, don’t read the last chapter. At least if you root for Tita and Doctor Brown, which I did. If you hope Tita and Pedro will be able to relish their love, do read the last chapter. (I kind of spoiled the ending there, didn’t I? However - there are surprises to be had!)