Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood
Atwood has a way of describing the future that is horrifying and at the same time very plausible and even (here's where it gets really horrifying) inevitable. Calling this an enjoyable read probably isn't accurate, but it had my attention from beginning to end. Jimmy (aka Snowman) may be the only human left on earth after a terrible plague wipes out everyone -- except Snowman himself (who received immunity shots) and the genetically designed creatures that live in the sealed dome where Snowman worked with his brilliant but dangerous best friend Crake. Snowman is left to figure how things got so out of hand, and how he is going to survive. However, I didn't realize when I picked this up that it is one of a series and at the end there is no resolution, just an introduction to the next stage of the story. But I believe I'm hooked. I'm going to have to find out what happens next.
Thursday, July 23, 2015
Sunday, July 19, 2015
2015 Reading Challenge -- The Lewis Trilogy
Lewis Trilogy #1 The Blackhouse
Nothing like a rainy Saturday to delve into a murder mystery set in the cold bleak and dangerous Hebrides Islands. Edinburgh police detective Fin MacLeod is assigned to return to his childhood home to investigate a murder that bears a strong resemblance to a murder in Edinburgh. Here he must face not only a dangerous murderer but also the reasons he left his home decades ago. Loved it and can't wait for Book 2.
Lewis Trilogy #2 The Lewis Man
Another very satisfying, dark murder mystery set in the Hebrides Island north of Scotland. The protagonist, Fen Macleod, has retired from the police force and returned to the Isle of Lewis to renovate his childhood home. His former colleague on the Lewis police force calls on him for advice when a body is found buried in the peat bogs. It's common knowledge that a body buried in peat can be preserved for centuries -- but this one has a tattoo of Elvis on the forearm. Ah Ha! This one has an interesting twist in that one of the possible witnesses to the crime is an elderly man suffering from dementia. His inner memories of the past are quite clear but his interactions with the people in the present are muddled and confused. Now on to the last of this trilogy -- The Chessmen. Can't wait!
Lewis Trilogy #3 The Chessmen
I regret to say that this third installment seemed a little forced. We think we know our hero Fin pretty well and then "Oh by the way I was a roadie for a rock star whose plane disappeared 17 years ago. And one of the members of the group was my best friend who saved my life a couple of times and who still lives on the Isle of Lewis." We thought we knew who your best friend was. Remember Books One and Two? Also, I don't know who characterized this as a trilogy but in my opinion a trilogy should be a story in three parts. This one clearly leaves the door open for another installment. So the truth is the rating should probably be 3 stars due to these flaws but I enjoyed being whisked away to The Hebrides Islands for another absorbing mystery among the friends and family of Fin MacLeod. And should there be another installment -- I'm in.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
2015 Reading Challenge -- Love Triangle
Anna Karenina
I have to say this one really has me scratching my head. This book has been described as "the greatest novel ever written" and a "flawless work of art". The love affair between the title character and her lover Count Vronsky is described as "tragic" and "passionate". If someone had handed me this book and asked me to read and tell them what I thought I would have said it is a scathing satire about the Russian aristocracy. But classic tragic love story? No. I found Anna to be childish, selfish and completely unsympathetic. Count Vronsky is less annoying, but still ridiculous at times. For starters, these two fall madly passionately forever-and-ever in love across a crowded room. They literally have barely exchanged 5 sentences before they are willing to endanger Anna's marriage which includes estrangement from her only child for the sake of their romance. Can you say high school?
She confesses her affair to her husband who after consideration tells her to carry on if she wants to, but to keep it discreet and that Count Vronsky is not allowed in their home. That seems more than reasonable. But of course Anna decides that she can't bear not being with Vronsky and invites him to the house. Childish.
Later in the story Anna abandons her son to take off on a grand tour of Europe with Vronsky and their illegitimate daughter. She then is very surprised when upon their return her husband is hesitant to let her visit the son. Can't say I blame him. While Anna and Vronsky are touring Europe together Vronsky decides he wants to learn to paint. To quote from the book, "Medieval Italian life had at that time become so fascinating to him that he even began to wear his hat and throw his cloak across his shoulder in a medieval manner which was very becoming to him." Ridiculous. During this tour the happy couple visits an up-and-coming artist. They agree that he is very talented, but also agree that his talent could not develop because he does not have the education that they have. Snobs. I don't like them.
At some point Anna reveals that while she misses her abandoned son terribly, she really hasn't formed an emotional bond with her daughter with Vronsky. She begins to tutor a child and develops an emotional bond with that child that seems to exceed her bond with her own daughter. When Vronsky mentions this she flips her lid and accuses him of not loving her. I don't like her. Someone suggests that instead of tutoring one child Anna could tutor at a local orphanage. She replies that she couldn't possibly work with those "dirty orphans". I really don't like her.
After their return, they establish a house in Moscow where Vronsky attempts to create a life for himself. Not so fast, Count. You've forgotten about the love of your life. He finds that he is not allowed to socialize without her, because (again quoting from the book) "one attempt of that kind had produced in Anna an unexpected fit of depression quite disproportionate to the offence of a late supper with some acquaintances." This is not love. This is a grown woman throwing a tantrum. How am I supposed to take these people seriously?
While I appreciate the insight into political and social realm of post-feudal, pre-revolution Russia, I found other characters -- specifically Levin and Kitty -- much more interesting, likeable and believable. I cannot understand why Anna is held up as an example of a classic tragic heroine.
Another classic duly read. I'm glad it's over.
I have to say this one really has me scratching my head. This book has been described as "the greatest novel ever written" and a "flawless work of art". The love affair between the title character and her lover Count Vronsky is described as "tragic" and "passionate". If someone had handed me this book and asked me to read and tell them what I thought I would have said it is a scathing satire about the Russian aristocracy. But classic tragic love story? No. I found Anna to be childish, selfish and completely unsympathetic. Count Vronsky is less annoying, but still ridiculous at times. For starters, these two fall madly passionately forever-and-ever in love across a crowded room. They literally have barely exchanged 5 sentences before they are willing to endanger Anna's marriage which includes estrangement from her only child for the sake of their romance. Can you say high school?
She confesses her affair to her husband who after consideration tells her to carry on if she wants to, but to keep it discreet and that Count Vronsky is not allowed in their home. That seems more than reasonable. But of course Anna decides that she can't bear not being with Vronsky and invites him to the house. Childish.
Later in the story Anna abandons her son to take off on a grand tour of Europe with Vronsky and their illegitimate daughter. She then is very surprised when upon their return her husband is hesitant to let her visit the son. Can't say I blame him. While Anna and Vronsky are touring Europe together Vronsky decides he wants to learn to paint. To quote from the book, "Medieval Italian life had at that time become so fascinating to him that he even began to wear his hat and throw his cloak across his shoulder in a medieval manner which was very becoming to him." Ridiculous. During this tour the happy couple visits an up-and-coming artist. They agree that he is very talented, but also agree that his talent could not develop because he does not have the education that they have. Snobs. I don't like them.
At some point Anna reveals that while she misses her abandoned son terribly, she really hasn't formed an emotional bond with her daughter with Vronsky. She begins to tutor a child and develops an emotional bond with that child that seems to exceed her bond with her own daughter. When Vronsky mentions this she flips her lid and accuses him of not loving her. I don't like her. Someone suggests that instead of tutoring one child Anna could tutor at a local orphanage. She replies that she couldn't possibly work with those "dirty orphans". I really don't like her.
After their return, they establish a house in Moscow where Vronsky attempts to create a life for himself. Not so fast, Count. You've forgotten about the love of your life. He finds that he is not allowed to socialize without her, because (again quoting from the book) "one attempt of that kind had produced in Anna an unexpected fit of depression quite disproportionate to the offence of a late supper with some acquaintances." This is not love. This is a grown woman throwing a tantrum. How am I supposed to take these people seriously?
While I appreciate the insight into political and social realm of post-feudal, pre-revolution Russia, I found other characters -- specifically Levin and Kitty -- much more interesting, likeable and believable. I cannot understand why Anna is held up as an example of a classic tragic heroine.
Another classic duly read. I'm glad it's over.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)




