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.
|
July 30th, 2008
Filed under English, Fiction, Historical
7287pwkr
Wicked Lovely
Melissa Marr
328 p.
Harper Teen, 2008.
(First published 2007.)
Back cover blurb:
RULE #3:
Don’t stare at invisible faeries.
RULE #2:
Don’t speak to invisible faeries.
RULE #1:
Don’t ever attract their attention.
Aislinn has always seen faeries. Powerful and dangerous, they walk hidden in the mortal world. When the rules that have kept Aislinn safe from them stop working, everything is suddenly on the line: her freedom; her best friend, Seth; her life; everything.
Faery intrigue, mortal love, and the clash of ancient rules and modern expectations swirl together in Melissa Marr’s stunning twenty-first century faery tale.
Right. The cover of this book is gorgeous. The story, not as much. It isn’t a bad story, no. It just reminded me a bit of the Twilight series, which I can’t really say is praise. However, it didn’t feel as far-fetched. I can buy glowing faeries, but never glowing vampires. Like in Twilight, there is a bit of music that I do not find appealing (e.g. Limp Bizkit), which kind of put me off. Despite this, it was pretty fun!
As usual, I felt more sympathy for the mythical creatures than I did for the humans. Aislinn was a little boring, her grandmother was annoying, and Seth was just… dull. Aislinn’s would-be faerie boyfriend is much better. He was ~dazzling~, without the annoying Edward Cullen-aspects. Okay, maybe he wasn’t very cool, but he was like Edward Cullen without the Lame-o. (I hate Edward Cullen. Almost as much as I hate Bella Swann.)
There is apparently a second book in this series, but I don’t really feel that interesting. Especially as it isn’t even about sparkly-king. It’s about tattooes! I’m not even interested in tattooes! Of course, it does have a very pretty cover. Maybe if it’s on sale. Or if I feel like half-bad teenage fantasy.
|
July 30th, 2008
Filed under English, Fantasy, Fiction, Young Adult
7287pwkr
The Strange Case of Dr Simmonds & Dr Glas
Dannie Abse
194 p.
Robson Books, 2003.
(First published 2002.)
Back cover blurb:
‘Take the phial from the medicine cabinet, I thought. Hesitating, haunted, I eventually went down to my surgery to pick up my leather emergency bag,
And so Dr Simmonds drove through the night to treat the aging, sick and loathed husband of the young woman whom he loved.
Inspired by the disturbing 1905 Swedish classic, Doctor Glas by Hjalmar Söderberg, a novel which questions the possibility of pure moral murder, Dannie Abse draws on his own medical experience as a doctor to create a strange, luminous story of love, infatuation and deceit in 1950s London. The Strange Case of Dr Simmonds & Dr Glas was longlisted for the 2002 Booker Prize and shortlisted for the Wingate Prize.
This book centres around a Swedish novel, which I read last autumn in school. It was one of the best books I read that autumn. And The Strange Case of Dr Simmonds & Dr Glas has in many ways the same kind of feel as Doctor Glas. The story is incredibly similar, without making it redundant. It is very good. And cleverly told, too.
Of course, in the choice between this novel and Doctor Glas, I would easily choose Doctor Glas, but this is a really good book. And if you’ve read Doctor Glas, do read this. …if you haven’t read Doctor Glas, read this anyway.
|
July 29th, 2008
Filed under English, Fiction
7287pwkr
Vladimir Nabokov
Lolita
309 p.
For Russian Reading Challenge.
Replik, 2001.
(First published 1955.)
Back cover blurb:
none (they stuck the bar code over the text!)
So, Lolita. A tale about peadophilia and desire and such things. And, surprisingly, a dull tale. I expected it to be many things, but dull was not one of them. Everyone speaks so warmly about it! (though, of course, damning the subject.) But I, however I tried, could never really find it very interesting. In my eyes it was to a great extent the rantings of a deranged man. (A man who willingly calls himself Humbert Humbert can’t be sane, especially as he sometimes, in first person, describes his actions in third person. What!)
Of course, I could blame this on that I read it in translation. It was full of tiny, annoying typos (e.g. Lo!ita), but I can’t say it was a bad translation. It is of course possible that the translation was bad but well-written.
I must say I really liked Nabokov’s language, even though I didn’t care too much about the story. It flowed nicely, and it built a feeling which, although it made me quite uneasy, was believable. Naturally, I believe the language is even better in the original language, so I assume I’ll have to read something more by Nabokov, then in English.
(Okay, to distract our thoughts for a moment, here’s a fun story about the first Swedish translation of Lolita. The man who translated it shared Humbert Humbert’s passion for young girls, and added to the story several explicit sex scenes. After some time, I believe it was after publication but I can’t swear on it, Nabokov read the Swedish translation. He was one of these writers who knew every language. He, of course, was more than a little surprised to find stuff in the novel that he hadn’t written! Needless to say, in all subsequent editions these added passages have been removed.)
I’m a little sad I didn’t like it much. I mean, T-Rex in Dinosaur Comics talks loads about it! And other people, too! Though, I guess, you can’t like everything. And perhaps, it might have been the burning sun and the 30 degrees Celsius that put me off. I feel that it might not really be a lazy beach book. Still, now I have read it, and one day I might re-read it and discover that it really is terrific. It might be one of these books that has to grow on you, and I might have given it too little time. How can I know?
|
July 29th, 2008
Filed under Challenges, Classics, Fiction, Russian Reading Challenge, Swedish
7287pwkr
Next Posts
Previous Posts
