Calling a novel the best ever in its genre is a bit hyperbolic because nobody has read every single book in any given genre. Plus, there’s no way to prove that a book is the best ever in any category because no matter what book you choose, somebody is going to disagree. For example, some mystery lovers think Murder on the Orient Express is the best mystery novel ever, and I heard this opinion several times when the movie came out a few weeks ago.
I like Murder on the Orient Express, but I don’t think it’s the best mystery ever. If there is such a thing as a best mystery novel ever, I think it is The Thin Man by Dashiell Hammett.
Determining the “best mystery ever” can be difficult because so many mysteries are so similar. Despite various sub-genres (the whodunit, the hardboiled, the “think like a killer to catch a serial killer”), once you’ve read a couple within each category, you’ve read them all.
But a BEST MYSTERY EVER should be a unique book. It should combine all elements (except for the “think like a killer to catch a killer” because those suck). It should be both a hardboiled detective story and a whodunit. It should be so good that it can’t be copied (though it might have been tried). And that book is The Thin Man by Dashiell Hammet.
NICK AND NORA
The Thin Man is known for Nick and Nora Charles, the first (that I know about) husband-and-wife detective duo. Maybe by 1930s standards, Nora was considered part of the sleuthing team, but by today’s criteria, she just…
View original post 723 more words
The Midnight Line by Lee Child starts off with a breakup. I hope that’s not a spoiler. I try to avoid spoilers, but the relationship(?) breakup is on the first page. I don’t think something on the first page of a book is a spoiler. Maybe page 50 is a spoiler. But page 1?
After reading further, I can see why the breakup happened. The protagonist Jack Reacher is kind of a jerk. He’s a jerk with a sense of honor, but he’s still a jerk. He probably has a reason to be. I’m not sure because I haven’t read many of his books.
Jack Reacher is also a bad ass. I don’t mean that sarcastically. He talks like a bad ass and gets himself into bad ass situations. So far, The Midnight Line is one of those books where all the characters talk tough. Every character is a bad ass or thinks he/she is a bad ass.
To be fair, it’s tough for me to relate with Jack Reacher.
I’m not 6’5, I don’t have Special Forces training, and I can’t beat up 99% of the population without breaking a sweat, so I can’t relate to Jack Reacher’s thought processes. As a reader, I try to sympathize with protagonists, but it’s hard when they intentionally put themselves into unnecessarily bad situations. In the following scene, Jack Reacher walks into a bar to interrogate a biker named Jimmy Rat who’s hanging out with seven of his biker buddies.
If I had to interrogate a biker, especially one with a tough name like Jimmy Rat, I probably wouldn’t do it by myself, and I definitely wouldn’t walk into a bar full of bikers either. I’d get to the biker when he was by himself or at least with fewer of his buddies. But I’m not a bad ass, not like Jack Reacher. Here’s an excerpt of Reacher’s bad ass behavior in a bar filled with bikers. The parenthesis are my opposite of bad ass comments:
Reacher waited. One of the bikers drained his glass and stood up and headed for the restroom corridor. Reacher crossed the room and sat down in his vacant chair (I wouldn’t do that, but I’m not a bad ass). The wood felt hot (I wouldn’t worry about that right now). The eighth guy made the connection. He stared at Reacher, and then he glanced at Jimmy Rat.
Who said, “This is a private party, bud. (Uh oh. When a biker calls you “bud,” you know the biker means business). You ain’t invited.”
Reacher said, “I need some information.” (I probably would have introduced myself first. Or I would have left after I’d been called “bud.”)
“About what?”
“Charitable donations.”
Jimmy Rat looked blank. Then he remembered. He glanced at the door, somewhere beyond which lay the pawn shop (and everything else in the world), where he had made assurances. He said, “Get lost, bud.” (“bud”? plus “Get lost”? I don’t know why any sane person would still be there).
Reacher put his left fist on the table. The size of a supermarket chicken. (It’s important to show the bikers, and remind the readers, that Reacher has big hands) Long thick fingers with knuckles like walnuts. Old nicks and scars healed white against his summer tan. He said, “I don’t care what scam you’re running. (I wouldn’t imply to Jimmy Rat that he was running scams) Or who you’re stealing from. Or who you’re fencing for. I got no interest in any of that. All I want to know is where you got this ring.”
(Maybe Reacher should have implied that Jimmy Rat was running a legitimate business instead of calling him a scammer and a fencer. Maybe Jack Reacher is a bad ass, but he could work on his negotiation skills. Dale Carnegie could give him a suggestion or two.)
*****
When you read a book in a series like Jack Reacher, it’s tough to decide which one to read. Do you read the early books, which were probably better written but feel dated because they happened 20 years ago? Or do you read the current bestseller that was probably churned out to meet a deadline? I’m not sure. But when you’re not sure, just take a glance, a literary glance.
The books that we keep forever aren’t necessarily our favorite books. I’ve enjoyed many books in my life, but I don’t hold on to them anymore. I store a bunch of books on my kindle or my phone, but they don’t take up much space, and phones/ereaders are disposable anyway.
A book that we keep forever has to have a special quality, one that probably has nothing to do with the author, cover, or plot/topic of the book.
This might be beat up, but it’s been in my family for generations.
I don’t keep many books anymore. Up until a few years ago, though, I used to be a book hoarder. I was proud of my collection. But then my wife and I had kids, other stuff accumulated in our house, we started moving around a lot, and books became digitized.
With all that was going on, it was more convenient and practical to sell or give away most of my books. I don’t miss them. But there are a few books that I kept, and I’m glad I did. Each book that I kept has a story behind it, and those stories are more important than the stories in the actual books.
Book With Sentimental Value- The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain (pictured above)
Tom Sawyer isn’t my favorite book ever, but I like it, and…
View original post 821 more words
The Christmas season starts at different times for different people. For some, it starts this week because of Thanksgiving. For others, it might have begun after Halloween or even Labor Day. There are many challenges that go with the holiday season, such as travelling, gift choices and party etiquette, but the biggest challenge for an introvert and bibliophile like me is… reading.
If you read during the holidays, prepare to be interrupted. (image via wikimedia)
The holiday season can be a frustrating time for introverts, especially for those of us who like to read. Even if we introverts have time off from work, we often have to use that time for extra chores/errands, or traveling, or spending time at other people’s homes.That leaves little quiet time for reading, and that can be frustrating.
Holidays shouldn’t be frustrating. We introverts need our quiet time, and here’s how to read during holidays without causing conflict or putting ourselves in danger:
- READING IN PUBLIC
Reading is almost essential for holiday traveling because traveling is really boring. However, reading in public places such as airports or bus stations (or even the mall) can be risky because you leave yourself vulnerable to getting conked on the head or having your stuff stolen (or both). It’s easy for evil-doers to sneak up…
View original post 781 more words
Thanksgiving is a time to appreciate family and friends, but since I’m a book/writing blogger, I’d like to focus a moment on authors for whom I’m thankful. I appreciate that I live during a time when so many authors can publish a wide variety of books, so many that a reader’s selection is limitless.
I’m thankful for James Patterson writing so many cheesy books that I always have something easy to critique on my blog. I’m thankful for authors like Dickens, Twain, Tolkien, Howard, Christie, Rowling, and many others who have given us bibliophiles countless hours of cheap entertainment and enlightenment.
But most of all, I’m thankful for Stephen King.
(image via Wikimedia)
A few weeks ago, a friend of my wife came over unannounced and uninvited with her family. Any visitors we get are because of my wife. I don’t have friends, so nobody comes over to see me. My wife has lots of friends, and sometimes we end up entertaining families of people whom I barely know. Most of the time I don’t mind, but I don’t like it when the visitors are unannounced and uninvited.
In this case, the family had a teenage son who, according to his parents, is addicted to video games and hates to read. He’s capable of reading, my wife’s friend said, but he won’t do it unless it’s a school assignment.
“At least he completes his school assignments,” I said to my wife’s friend.
“Yeah,” the son said to his mom, but she gave him a dirty look.
I could sympathize with…
View original post 812 more words
Tom Hanks has had a decent career outside of writing. He’s acted in a couple good movies. He has won a couple awards. His son is on a TV show. Nobody has accused him of sexual assault yet. He has stayed married for a while, I think. By Hollywood standards, he’s doing alright.
Now he’s written a collection of short stories called Uncommon Type: Some Stories. Normally I roll my eyes at celebrity books, but I decided to give his a chance. After all, he’s Tom Hanks. He didn’t write a children’s book. It’s not a political book. And it’s not a Hollywood insider book. It’s a book of short stories. That’s an unusual approach for a celebrity, and I appreciate unusual approaches.
I know nobody cares what I think of Tom Hanks’s writing. Fans of Tom Hanks won’t care if I don’t like it because they like Tom Hanks. Tom Hanks doesn’t care because he’s rich, even without his writing. At least, he shouldn’t care.
But maybe he does. Maybe he’s just as insecure about his writing as every other writer. That would be funny, one of the most successful actors of a generation nervously reading reviews of his book.
After a glance of his first short story “Three Exhausting Weeks,” I’ve decided that Tom Hanks should not write in the 1st person point-of-view. That is my only criticism. Since I can picture Tom Hanks in every phase of his life, I visualize the narrator of this story as Tom Hanks. Even if the narrator had been female, I would have pictured her as Tom Hanks. That’s not necessarily his fault. It’s the price of being Tom Hanks. When you’re Tom Hanks, a lot of readers might visualize your protagonist as Tom Hanks.
Here is a scene where the 1st person narrator is being seduced by a long-time friend:
“You know what?” she said to me. “It’s Sunday.”
“I do know that,” I told her. “I live in the moment.”
“I admire that about you. Smart. Caring. Easygoing to the point of sloth.”
“You’ve gone from compliments to insults.”
“Change sloth to languorousness,” she said, sipping wine. “Point is I like you.”
“I like you, too.” I wondered if this conversation was going someplace. “Are you flirting with me?”
“No,” Anna said. “I’m propositioning you. Totally different thing. Flirting is fishing. Maybe you hook up, maybe you don’t. Propositioning is the first step in closing a deal.”
While I was reading this scene, I thought, of course the woman is flirting with Tom Hanks. Every woman would flirt with Tom Hanks. Even women who don’t flirt would flirt with Tom Hanks. My wife would flirt with Tom Hanks. I’d flirt with Tom Hanks.
If this scene were in the 3rd person, maybe I could imagine a character who wasn’t sure if the woman were flirting with him. But this is Tom Hanks. Even if the character isn’t Tom Hanks, he’s still Tom Hanks.
Maybe Tom Hanks should write under a different name. Unfortunately, the book wouldn’t get the publicity and perhaps nobody would read it, and that would defeat the purpose of a celebrity book. If I were Tom Hanks, I’d want everybody to read my book too, so I’d put my name on it. But I’d write my stories in the 3rd person. At least the first story in the collection would be in the 3rd person.
*****
A few years ago, Tom Hanks wrote a piece about his love of typewriters. I gently mocked it because he used his op-ed opportunity to gush about typewriters when there were other issues he could have talked about. I’m sure he has some uncommon typewriters in his collection. Maybe he used an uncommon typewriter to write these stories. Now he has a book called Uncommon Type. I’m sure it means something.
*****
Here are two books that I wrote under a different name. Maybe I’m Tom Hanks. Okay, I admit, I’m not Tom Hanks, but what if I were?
Now only 99 cents each on the Amazon Kindle!
The upcoming holidays can mean a little more time to read than normal. If you’re traveling, maybe you can read in the car or on the airplane (but not if you’re the driver or the pilot). If you’re at a party or a family gathering, you can pretend you’re checking messages while you’re really reading a book and not seem rude. Maybe, just maybe, you’ll get a few minutes to yourself where you can actually sit down at peace and read.
I’m pretty sure next week I’ll have a little extra time, and I need a good book to read, a sure thing. The last time I asked for a book recommendation, several people suggested The Rosie Project by Graeme Simsion. That worked out great because both my wife and I read it, and we rarely read the same books.
Since I might have some reading time and I don’t want to waste it on just any bestseller, I ask again:
Has anybody read any good books lately?
These are all good books, but I’ve read them, and I’m not in the mood to read them again.
I have a little bit of extra time this week, so I’d like to read a book, maybe two, but I don’t want to waste my time with a book that isn’t any good. I went to the book store a couple days ago and walked out with nothing, not because I’m a cheapskate (Actually, I am a cheapskate, but that wasn’t the reason I walked out with nothing), but because I wasn’t sure I wanted to commit myself to any of the books I looked at.
I don’t have reader’s block. Reader’s block is when nothing interests me. This is a little different. I think I’m getting too hyper-critical. I’m getting annoyed at bad dialogue in novels. I’m losing interest in long paragraphs with lots of description. I get suspicious…
View original post 473 more words
Here’s a recent MUST-READ list that was spotted on a weekly entertainment website. This new MUST-READ list was titled “ 12 Must-Read Books If You Love Murder on the Orient Express.”
That’s a lot of pressure to put on people just for enjoying a book or movie. If they love Murder on the Orient Express, now they MUST READ 12 other books, some of which might not be that good.
For example, Before the Fall by Noah Hawley was on this MUST-READ list. Before the Fall was okay, but I wouldn’t call it MUST-READ!!! Now I can never trust another MUST-READ list again.
And that’s the problem with MUST-READ lists.
This novel is on almost every must-read list, so it must be pretty good.
Whenever I see a Must-Read Novels list, I automatically don’t want to read the books on the list. It’s a stupid knee-jerk reaction, I know. The authors probably didn’t ask for their books to be put on the list. I just don’t like being told what to read anymore.
There are only two legitimate reasons for a book to be a “must-read.” You fail a class if you don’t read it. Or you get fired from a job for not reading it. I don’t have to worry about failing classes anymore, and I don’t have to read books for my job (I have to read stuff that’s worse than most books), so there are no must-read books anymore.
I understand that using the term must-read is hyperbole. I have nothing against a little hyperbole. And I usually don’t like…
View original post 655 more words
Going to law school is a big deal for a lot of people. When you ask ambitious high school kids what they’re going to be, they usually answer doctor, engineer, or lawyer. Out of those three professions, lawyer is the career that seems to make the most interesting fiction. You don’t see too many bestselling novels about doctors or engineers.
Maybe you can make the case for doctors, but I think there are more lawyer novels out there. I haven’t done the research, though. I’m just making this up.
Anyway, I was once planning to go to law school and I didn’t, so whenever I feel bad about it, I read a John Grisham novel. Grisham has built a successful writing career out of depicting shady lawyers, unethical, law-breaking (and any negative adjective that can make me proud not to be a lawyer) ambulance-chasers.
But that’s not what makes me glad I didn’t go to law school. Sometimes Grisham shows that law school can be really difficult with lots of debt and no hope of getting a good job unless you’re from a prestigious school. I don’t mind hard work (but I avoid it unless it’s necessary), and I don’t like debt, and I really don’t like a shaky job situation.
Reading the first couple chapters of The Rooster Bar by John Grisham makes me glad I didn’t go to law school. At the beginning, a couple guys (Mark and Todd) are finishing their final year at a cookie-cutter law university and have little hope of well-paying jobs and no hope of getting out of debt. I’m not sure what their plan is going to be because it’s taking a long time to set up the novel. And that’s the problem so far with The Rooster Bar.
Lots of exposition and little characterization.
It’s not a good sign when even the dialogue is exposition. Here is part of the conversation at a bar between Mark and Todd about Gordy and Zola (two characters who hadn’t been introduced yet):
Mark took a long drink of beer and shook his head. He asked, “Zola’s back already?”
“Yes, evidently she and Gordy hurried back for a few days of fun and games, though I’m not sure they’re having much fun. She thinks he quit his meds about a month ago when we were studying for finals. One day he’s manic and bouncing off the walls; then he’s in a stupor after sipping tequila and smoking weed. He’s talking crazy, says he wants to quit school and run off to Jamaica, with Zola of course. She thinks he might do something stupid and hurt himself.”
“Gordy is stupid. He’s engaged to his high school sweetheart, a real cutie who happens to have money, and now he’s shacking up with an African girl whose parents and brothers are in this country without the benefit of those immigration papers everyone is talking about. Yes, the boy is stupid.”
“Gordy’s in trouble, Mark. He’s been sliding for several weeks and he needs our help.”
Mark pushed his beer away, but only a few inches, and clasped his hands behind his head. “As if we don’t have enough to worry about. How, exactly, are we supposed to help?”
They keep talking, but they don’t really think of a way to help their friend. I’m guessing that whatever they come up with, it’s going to make the situation worse.
John Grisham can write very tight action scenes and can set up much more interesting situations than this with his exposition. The opening of a recent novel of his had some clear descriptions where several characters were working together in different locations to commit a crime. Grisham is good at stuff like that.
But so far this dialogue sounds really unnatural. It’s tough for me to read a novel with bad dialogue.
Maybe the rest of the book picks up, but it’s okay if it doesn’t. Even if I don’t finish reading The Rooster Bar, I’ll always be glad that I didn’t go to law school. That’s something nobody can take away from me. Thank you, John Grisham, for helping me maintain my self-esteem.
Nobody likes to be called a cheater. Even cheaters will deny that they’re cheating. It doesn’t matter if they were caught cheating on a test or cheating on a significant other, they rarely admit it.
I don’t consider myself a cheater. I always completed my own tests (when I lived through that period when I had to take tests), and I’ve always been faithful in my relationships.
I admit to reading a few abridged versions of books in my time, though. I admit that I’m an abridger. But I was once told that reading an abridged book is cheating. That means I have to admit to being a cheater.
Or I have to justify reading an abridged book.
It’s too long, and most people don’t know how to pronounce it.
The problem with long books is that they take a long time to read. Most people, if given a choice, would rather read a short novel than a long one. At least, that’s what I think. I’ve never seen a stat for it, but I bet it’s true. It’s not necessarily a matter of laziness. With so much other stuff to do, it’s kind of inconvenient to read a book that’s too long, even if you like reading long books.
A few days ago I found an old copy of an abridged Les Miserables that I had read in junior high. This reminded me that even before the internet and cable television, I had other things to do besides reading long classics. Now that I think about it though, I didn’t have all that much to do, so I…
View original post 477 more words
