Book Lust: A Really Long Book Post

A while ago, I promised a post on the books I was reading in Nancy Pearl's (librarian extraordinaire) readers' advisory class where we are taking on genre fiction. We discussed whether or not genre was a useful term--there was much debate--and we read a short essay by Ursula LeGuin called "On Despising Genres." Most of us thought that calling a book genre fiction or even saying that it "transcends genre" places a value call on it--which as librarians we want to avoid (but as a critic...). However, we were not sure if interfiling so-called genre books with "regular" fiction would be helpful for our users (and us) or not.

We started with mysteries and thrillers. I read Murder on the Orient Express by Agatha Christie for my traditional mystery. It was my first Christie (and possibly my last). It was a fine book, but not really my cup of tea. Nancy likes to say there are four doorways to a book: story(/plot?), setting, character, and language. One classmate believes there is a fifth doorway--idea (like a philosophical novel, perhaps). Now most books will have components of all four doorways, but will primarily utilize one or two. And most readers have one or two doorways that they prefer to read. I like books that focus on characters and are beautifully written. Hello Shakespeare! Story and setting are generally secondary to me. So Orient Express is entirely a story book where Hercule Poirot sits back and solves a mystery like a puzzle. Mysteries after all are essentially intellectual books. I will say the solution to the murder was unusual, and I didn't see it coming at all.

For each book we read, we are supposed to provide a brief annotation, basically what you would see under staff recommendations. A one to two sentence review that teases the potential reader while staying true to the tone of the book. Here was my annotation for Murder on the Orient Express: "Get stranded on the fabled Orient Express with a cast of international passengers and follow Hercule Poirot at his finest while he tries to solve a seemingly impossible murder mystery with an unexpected ending." It's not a very exciting annotation.

For my contemporary crime novel, I read the international sensation The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (the original Swedish title translates to Men Who Hate Women). I am boggled by why this is such a popular book. I think the pacing is really uneven which is critical for a thriller; it's probably why I didn't find it very thrilling. I don't think it's well plotted which is perhaps less of a story problem and more of a narratological issue. The setting, in Sweden, is perhaps the best element of the book. Sweden, as presented in the novel, is a very different place than I am used to, and it flavors the whole work. There are two central characters: the journalist Blomqvist, who is really boring (though he somehow has lots of sex), and the (possibly autistic) sociopath and hacker Lisbeth Salander. Salander is a much more interesting person, but I don't quite buy her as a fully developed character. Maybe this is due to her autism and sociopathy (things I don't fully understand), or perhaps that she is a male fantasy, as one of my friends thinks. The language is technically proficient, but it's very literal--lacking any literary devices or figurative langauge. That may just be the translator's issue. Many of my classmates objected to the strong violence portrayed in the work, but I generally don't have an issue with fictional violence portrayed through the written word. Last night I just watched the Swedish film, and it possibly did less for me than the book.

My annotation: "In this shocking and violent crime thriller, a journalist and computer hacker join forces to solve one prominent family's mystery only to uncover a larger conspiracy of corporate corruption." If you've read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, what did you think? Like or dislike? I have to say that most of my classmates enjoyed this book (as well as millions of people worldwide). Opposed to intellectual mysteries, thrillers focus on adrenaline and the emotional impact built on a series of escalating and life-threatening events. So do you guys read mysteries or thrillers? If so, do you have any titles you would suggest?

Our next session was about romance novels. The list of traditional romances included such classics as Wuthering Heights, Jane Eyre, Pride and Prejudice, and Sense and Sensibility. The Regency romance novels of Georgette Heyer were also included and Rebecca which I chose to read. It was a good novel, but I didn't think it was very romantic. Basically a young, unsophisticated woman marries an older and wealthy widower, Max de Winters, and goes to live with him at the estate of Manderley. The titular Rebecca was the first Mrs. de Winters, recently deceased, who by all accounts was beautiful, sophisticated, and charming. The unnamed protagonist is haunted by the memory of Rebecca, but things really get cooking 2/3 of the way through the novel. It was an interesting book, and I'm excited to see the Hitchcock film. Supposedly it's among the least of his works, but it's his only film to win Best Picture. My annotation reads: "At the grand estate of Manderley, the young Mrs. de Winter must contend with a menacing housekeeper, a distant husband, and the ghostly presence of his first wife, Rebecca."

Then we discussed modern romance novels. Oh boy. I read My Lord and Spymaster by Joanna Bourne. I was so opposed to reading one, that I ended up pleasantly surprised. Sadly(?) I didn't finish the book, but the writing was much better than I was expecting, and the lead female character, Jess, was feisty and headstrong. (Apparently the writing goes downhill and Jess becomes a much weaker character in the second half). There was plenty of sexual tension from the very beginning, but I never got to the part where they ended up in bed together. There are two features of every romance novel: a central love story between two characters and a satisfactorily happy outcome. (Also, there is lots of sex.) There is also a surfeit of sub-genres. For example, my novel took place in London during the Napoleonic Wars. Here's my annotation: "Follow the headstrong Jess Whitby as she navigates London's seedy underbelly to clear her father of treason. Standing in the way is the rakish Captain Kennett who has his own plans for Jess and may lead to her undoing." I wanted to finish the book, but there was other homework and it was overdue at the library, but I think a got a good snapshot. It also made me think there might be something to romance novels.

Then we got to graphic novels, and I read a bunch from the class list which was divided into superhero comics and more "literary" ones. My roommate and I both read Superman for All Seasons by Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale, and my roommate developed a huge crush on Superman. I've always been more of a Batman guy myself, so I read Year One and The Dark Knight Returns both my Frank Miller. Year One is pretty good, but I really disliked The Dark Knight Returns (where Miller is also the artist) even though it's widely considered to be one of the best Batman comics ever. I think Miller is an acquired taste. And I also read The Long Halloween by Loeb and Sale. I really like this one because it uses most of the rogues gallery including an origin tale of Two-Face. It also does a good job with meshing Bruce Wayne and Batman. My annotation: "Follow Batman as he tries to deduce the surprising identity of Gotham's latest serial killer, Holiday, who is targeting members of the Falcone crime family. Along the way the Dark Knight must contend with the formidable villains of his rogues gallery and the loss of an honest friend."

Much of our discussion centered on whether or not graphic novels was an appropriate term. I've always thought of graphic novels as a book-length comic or a book of collected comic issues. But I also like the idea of just calling them comics too. Both terms have their problems. We decided it's best to use whatever term the patron is using. We also discussed whether or not comics/graphic novels are a genre or a format. I'm inclined to think format since there's a wide and diverse range of genres in the comics format. People keep talking about the "death of the novel" and I think that comics might really be the next major literary format.

Among the "literary" graphic novels I read Persepolis and Blankets. Both of them are very good. And both are memoirs not novels at all. Persepolis is the story of Marjane Satrapi, a young girl growing up in Tehran during the Islamic Revolution and the Iran-Iraq war. Blankets is a coming-of-age love story by Craig Thompson who grew up in the Midwest in a Evangelical Christian home. Then I read Fun Home by Alison Bechdale which was really good. I won't describe it more than by my annotation: "In this graphic memoir, Alison Bechdale comes out as a lesbian; four months later her father dies--likely suicide. By turns funny and tragic, this is the story of their complicated relationship woven together with books and fraught with secrets."

Next time we're discussing Westerns. For my first Western I read Shane by Jack Schaefer. It's the archetypal story of a man who rides into a Western valley, cleans up town, and rides off into the sunset. Shane is a dangerous man who stays with the Starretts; the novel is narrated by the young boy Bob Starrett. The Starretts are homesteaders who are being driven off the land by a rancher and that's where Shane comes into play. My annotation: "A man's dark past and a boy's future cross paths when a lone stranger rides into a burgeoning Wyoming town where he is soon caught in the middle of a power struggle between homesteaders and ranchers." Right now I'm reading The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford by Ron Hansen. It's ostensibly a work of (historical) fiction, but it feels like narrative history. The book's okay, its just long and dense.

After that we're reading fantasy and science fiction. It will be very exciting, I'm sure. So do you guys read genre fiction? If so, what are your favorite genres and books?