January 30, 2011

Authors should take caution to reviewing? Say what?


I really don't do enough discussion-based posts on here, so I'm hereby trying to change that. There's a lot going on in the world of reading and writing and YA literature that gets me fired up to talk for hours. So here we go. (Only not for hours - don't wanna bore any of you!)



Recently, as in, six days ago, a post regarding a touchy subject was made by Urban Fantasy author Stacia Kane. That said post then sparked further debate, causing Kane to produce this post.
*Nothing here is directed personally at Stacia Kane. I'm merely responding to what she's said.


Now that you've got the background material, let's move on.

The touchy subject is that of the struggles of being an author and posting negative reviews - the benefits, consequences, etc.

You think, Sure, there are pros and cons. I don't want to diss a fellow writer's hard work and have them lash out at me. Yet, I want to be honest.

But what if your negative reviews prevented you from signing with a particular agent? Would you give up reviewing forever? Would you try to find a different agent?

In her initial post, Kane says she heard from two agents in a chat that they wouldn't want to sign on a writer that has dissed their work in the past.

What I don't understand is why that affects anything. There are always going to be people that dislike your work. That's how it goes. So why should you not give them their moment when you've had yours - just because they didn't give something you've written a stellar review? Isn't that mixing personal matters with business matters?

Writing is a very personal act - what you write maybe has a little part of you attached to it, or maybe a part of a friend, or a loved one. It's your feelings on paper. So of course rejection is going to hurt, to a degree. Especially something as publicly rejecting as a negative review. But every reviewer is entitled to their own opinions. So why should they be rejected just because they may not have enjoyed one of your ("your" being any author) works?

Kane says there's a difference between being a reviewer and a writer. You can't (or shouldn't?) be both. When you become a writer, as in, a published author, things change:
" The fact is, when you decide to become a writer you give up some of your personal freedoms. When you sell your first book you give up even more. There’s no getting around that, and there’s no changing it. You can no longer say exactly what you think exactly the way you think it at all times. You can no longer assume that only the people you’re familiar with are reading your blog or your tweets. You no longer have the luxury of an opinion, honestly, on a lot of things. "
Admittedly, this perturbed me the most. What kind of sick irony is this - to strip an author of their freedom of speech? I understand there's a level of professionalism that should be maintained - no one wants to be trashy, classless or ignorant. But I believe authors should be allowed to write negative reviews - they're people, too. They don't like everything. So why shouldn't they say so (in a tasteful manner, of course)?

Kane has an answer for that in her follow-up:
**Profanity is used.

" Here’s a question. Why the fuck would you want to possibly alienate someone who could help your career? Just so you can tell the world what you think of their book? Do you really feel that strongly about being able to inform the world at large that you found Author A’s dialogue unrealistic? It’s really that important to you? "
By "someone who could help your career," she means that, as an author writing a negative review, why would you want to alienate another author that could help you in some way?

I don't understand why writing a negative review has to be taken to such an extreme. It's one opinion. Why does that have to mean you're "alienating" the other author? And if that other author does perceive it to be alienation on your part and does not want to converse and/or help you in the future, so what? It's just one author. Isn't it better to be honest about your work and someone else's rather than play it safe on the off chance that they might later help you?

Maybe I've got it all wrong. Maybe I'm crazy. But if I ever become a published author, I will do what I can to not be silenced in such a way, and be stripped of freedoms.

***The reason I say all of this is because of the alarming amount of bloggers that are suddenly closing up shop, so to speak. Or going on haituses. All because of this controversy. They're afraid reviewing will impose on their futures as writers. And I hate to see that.

What about you guys? Agree? Disagree? Inbetween?

January 28, 2011

Book Blogger Hop (21).

Book Blogger Hop

I came across the Hop and Follow Friday while I was blog hopping - how appropriate! - and decided to join in on the fun.

The Book Blogger Hop is a weekly thing going on over at Crazy-for-Books. If you're a new blogger like I am, or have been blogging for a while, stop by the sites and get involved!

--------------------------------------------


Weekly question: What book are you most looking forward to being published in 2011? Why are you anticipating that book?

Definitely Sarah Dessen's What Happened to Goodbye. I love all of her novels, and I'm sure this one won't be disappointing. I love a good YA contemporary.

January 27, 2011

Word Bit! (5)

Or, WHAT'S THAT WORD?

As a reader and writer and blogger, I'm surrounded by words all the time. Some are old, some are new, some are funny, difficult to pronounce, fun to say, interesting, or just pure awesome.

I love words. Words are important. They're the basis of books. They're what makes everything come together. One word can change the feel, emotion and effect of a sentence. You can never know too many.

So every week I'm going to be sharing words of interest. They'll come from my readings. And who knows? Maybe you'll come across that one word that can change the feel, emotion and effect of the sentence you're working on in your novel, essay, short story, etc.



This week's word is...

TRADUCE
tra·duce
{verb}
 to speak maliciously and falsely of; slander; defame

I came across TRADUCE in my latest read, The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. I know, doesn't sound exciting, does it? But I'm reading it for a class, and when I came across TRADUCE, I stopped. It's certainly not used much, if at all, anymore. But I like the feel of it. 

Want to join in? I think it would be a neat little chain reaction to have fellow bloggers share their favorite, most interesting, craziest words each week. I know I'd love to see what you share! Feel free to sign up on the Mr. Linky. There are no specific rules. If you want, grab the above button, link back here, share your word, explain why, where you heard/saw it, and whatever else you'd like to add!

Just leave your name and blog name, and of course, the link to your post!

All definitions from Dictionary.com.


January 25, 2011

Talk to Me Tuesday (3).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: Do you have any specific literary pet-peeves in the genres you read, and why?

First, and totally unrelated: I missed last week's TTMT, so I'm glad to be participating again. Definitely love to get my brain thinking about books and the literary world I'm involved in.

Now, to answer the question.

One of my biggest pet-peeves in any genre (but which appears most in the YA literature I've come across) is the use of overly ecstatic, super girly squeals of delight or disbelief or anger, etc. You know what I'm talking about. The dialogue that is literally written as "Omigosh!!!!!" or "Ohmygawsh!" or "Ohmigod!"

You know you've seen it. It's in some of the most hyped books on the YA circuit, such as The Duff.

There's something about the use of omigod! and others that actually makes me cringe. Whether it's the incorrect grammar (although that's intentional, I know) or the pure girly-ness of it that bothers me, I'm not quite sure. I think it's a combination of the two. It just makes the character so unrelatable and fake to me. If I come across any use of the aforementioned, or a close variation, I sometimes refuse to read the rest of the book. I cannot tolerate it, unless there's something else about the story worth reading. I don't understand why it's ever necessary. It always seems to make the characters using such expressions appear unintelligent.

January 24, 2011

Grammar Bit #11.


THEN vs THAN

Then refers to time.

Than refers to a difference in comparison.


EXAMPLES (THEN):

It snowed during lunch, then stopped.

I was in better shape then.

Brittany cut in front of me, then Michelle, and then Tina.


EXAMPLES (THAN):

I would rather walk than run.

She had nothing to do other than study.

Rather than wait for the bus, I took my car to work.

He is younger than me.

January 23, 2011

AWP anyone?

In two short weeks I'll be heading to the 2011 AWP Conference in Washington, D.C. I'm super excited. Three full days of books and reading and writing! Oh, and authors! (Carrie Jones, anyone?)

I'm a bit overwhelmed, having never previously attended a book/writing conference. There's so much I want to see and do! No idea how I'm going to find the time to fit it all in, while still remembering to eat and sleep.

Anyone else heading to the AWP Conference? And anyone that's been to a similar type of conference - how was your experience with it? Any advice/tips?

January 22, 2011

REVIEW! The Taker.




The Taker
J.M. Steele



FROM THE COVER:

High school senior Carly Biels is a shoo-in for acceptance into Princeton, her dream school. (Dad's an alum - love that legacy status!) As long as she does decently on the SAT, she's good as gold.

When Carly gets her scores, she has to face facts: she tanked. Really tanked. Now she only has one more chance to take the test, and she's going to have to buckle down and get some help. Unfortunately, her boyfriend Brad seems to have other, less academic things on his mind. Her geeky neighbor Ronald turns out to be surprisingly helpful (and sweet), but will his tutoring be enough to get her the scores she needs? Desperate, she turns to the mysterious Taker, who will take the exam for her. But that decision will have consequences that affect every aspect of her life.

All of the following can be inferred from the text above except:
(A) Carly is not good at standardized tests.
(B) Carly discovers that love and the SAT don't mix.
(C) Carly gets in way over her head.
(D) Carly finds her perfect life thrown upside down.
(E) Carly knows what she's doing.

My rating: 4 stars.

MY THOUGHTS:

A humorous and fun read, albeit typical.

Carly is a nice, well-rounded character. Although she starts off as that character you just want to hate - the one with the all-too-perfect grades, boyfriend, parents, and lifestyle. But she eventually eases into situations nicely and less stereotypically. As for Brad, he's pretty much your typical meathead jock of a boyfriend; you don't quite hate him but you don't quite like him. He's just there. Ronald is, of course, such a sweetie. And we all want the geek to get the girl, right?

The plot isn't too straightforward/black-and-white/predictable. There are a few twists and turns. None that throw you for a loop, but they keep the story fresh. It doesn't drag; it moves at a nice, even pace. The writing itself is respectable and provides Carly with a believable voice. Also, the format is fitting. Occasionally SAT-like questions pop up, like the one from the cover's description. They're fun to get to.

The Taker is simply a good, quick read.

And really, who hasn't stressed out about the SATs or other standardized tests at one point or another?

January 21, 2011

News, news and more NEWS!

Facebook, Twitter and buttons ... oh my! And a layout!


That's right, The Grammarian's Reviews is now on Facebook and Twitter (the connect buttons can be found on the right sidebar)!
FACEBOOK
TWITTER

There's also a new, cheerfully yellow layout and a matching button! Make sure to grab it from the right sidebar!

There's not much going on at the Facebook and Twitter pages yet. I'm still trying to get the hang of Twitter, actually. I know it must be simpler than I'm making it out to be! Any advice or help? It'd be much appreciated.

I'm also looking for any kind of feedback about the new pages, layout, button and site overall. So lay it on me! The good, the bad, the in between!

Word Bit! (4)

Or, WHAT'S THAT WORD?

As a reader and writer and blogger, I'm surrounded by words all the time. Some are old, some are new, some are funny, difficult to pronounce, fun to say, interesting, or just pure awesome.

I love words. Words are important. They're the basis of books. They're what makes everything come together. One word can change the feel, emotion and effect of a sentence. You can never know too many.

So every week I'm going to be sharing words of interest. They'll come from my readings. And who knows? Maybe you'll come across that one word that can change the feel, emotion and effect of the sentence you're working on in your novel, essay, short story, etc.



This week's word is...

IRIDESCENT
ir·i·des·cent
{adjective, noun}
 displaying a play of lustrous colors like those of the rainbow.


I came across IRIDESCENT in my latest read, Twenty Boy Summer by Sarah Ockler. It's one of those words that I immediately fall in love with because of its beauty. It's an uncommon description, but I wish it was used more often.

Want to join in? I think it would be a neat little chain reaction to have fellow bloggers share their favorite, most interesting, craziest words each week. I know I'd love to see what you share! Feel free to sign up on the Mr. Linky. There are no specific rules. If you want, grab the above button, link back here, share your word, explain why, where you heard/saw it, and whatever else you'd like to add!

Just leave your name and blog name, and of course, the link to your post!

All definitions from Dictionary.com.


January 20, 2011

REVIEW! Deadly Little Games.




Deadly Little Games
Laurie Faria Stolarz



FROM THE COVER:

Camelia and Ben have discovered a powerful bond: They both possess the power of psychometry, the ability to sense things through touch. For Ben, the gift is a frightening liability. When he senses a strong threat or betrayal, he risks losing control and hurting people. Camelia's gift is more mysterious. When she works with clay, her hands sculpt messages her mind doesn't yet comprehend.

Before either teen has a chance to fully grasp these abilities, an unresolved family tragedy resurfaces in Camelia's life, irrevocably changing everything she cares about...

My rating: 4 stars.

MY THOUGHTS:

So good! A bit like the first and second installments, but not boringly so. There's clear development.

Camelia's more stubborn than ever, which is at times both annoying and frustrating. How many bad decisions does it take to realize you need to do things differently? Nevertheless she comes to better terms with her psychometry and learns from it. Ben remains the same: mysterious and incredibly sweet. I can't say I was a fan of Adam's return and inclusion, mainly because he just seems to be trying too hard to be nice and that makes him appear fake and transparent as a character. However, I really liked Camelia's parents and her friends, Kimmie and Wes. Her parents, although minor in their roles, developed some, especially her dad. Wes and Kimmie were just hilarious; their dialogue is very witty and sharp, which lightens the darker tones of the novel. Still, I wish something more would happen with them. They deserve more credit.

Another nice addition was Camelia's aunt, Alexia, who made an actual appearance in this installment. She doesn't have a huge part, but an important one nonetheless. I look forward to her progression and growth in the upcoming book, Deadly Little Voices (due out next Fall!).

The writing itself was nothing exceptional. The plot was a bit unsatisfying. What made it great were the characters.

January 19, 2011

REVIEW! Banana Kiss.




Banana Kiss
Bonnie Rozanski



FROM THE COVER:

Robin Farber lives in a psychiatric institution. In her mind, she creates the world by looking at it: a quantum theory-world where matter pops in and out of existence as she observes it, a world where she is God. And, because the reader of Banana Kiss must take a long look through her schizophrenic eyes, this is our world, too, a world where the disembodied voices Robin hears are more real than the people who stand in front of her.

Robin's world is populated by a rich variety of characters, both real and imaginary. Her father, a sailor who died when she was a baby, shows up in her head whenever he's on leave. Derek, her charming, lovelorn friend, goes from mania to depression and back several times a day. There's her insufferable sister Melissa, who stole her boyfriend, Max. And, of course, there's Dr Mankiewicz, or 'Whitecoat', the long-suffering therapist who, Robin tells us, 'thinks there are some things that are real, and some things that are not, and that he knows better than anyone else.' Finally, there is Robin herself, whose confused, psychotic, funny, compassionate voice is one you are not likely to forget.
My rating: 2 stars.

MY THOUGHTS:

Great concept with a not-so-great execution.

Rozanski starts right in the drama, leaving you to figure out Robin's story through a series of present and past recollections. At first, this works. I was confused and wanted to know more because Robin is such a unique character. Not only does she hear voices, but she thinks she's God.

But the story spirals downward at an alarming pace. The pairing of Robin and Derek is so spontaneous, so random, that I never expected it to carry through the rest of the book. Yet it does. I still don't know how or why it happens. The rest of the characters, especially Robin's family, seem just as random in their feelings and actions - my biggest problem with her family is that despite knowing Robin is schizophrenic and needs medication, they never check to make sure she takes her pills. And it got to the point that many of the story's climactic moments happened in result of her family not checking, which eventually just made it frustrating to read. It didn't seem logical anymore that after two or three incidents they still wouldn't think to check.

The writing itself is well done. However, the styling and format didn't appeal to me. Parts vary from having too little description to too much description. Dialogue is consistently heavily relied upon, although not necessarily in the way most stories are constructed. Robin has a constant dialogue going on with herself, with the voices in her head. This interrupts the flow of the story.

Banana Kiss begins with a strong, detailed premise, but ends up going nowhere.

January 14, 2011

Word Bit! (3)

Or, WHAT'S THAT WORD?

As a reader and writer and blogger, I'm surrounded by words all the time. Some are old, some are new, some are funny, difficult to pronounce, fun to say, interesting, or just pure awesome.

I love words. Words are important. They're the basis of books. They're what makes everything come together. One word can change the feel, emotion and effect of a sentence. You can never know too many.

So every week I'm going to be sharing words of interest. They'll come from my readings. And who knows? Maybe you'll come across that one word that can change the feel, emotion and effect of the sentence you're working on in your novel, essay, short story, etc.



This week's word is...

CONGEAL
con·geal
{verb}
- to change from a soft or fluid state to a rigid or solid state, as by cooling or freezing.
- to curdle; coagulate, as a fluid.
- to make or become fixed, as ideas, sentiments, or principles.


I came across CONGEAL this week in Banana Kiss by Bonnie Rozanski. It's one of those words that makes me stop and think, Gross. I don't know about you, but when I hear or see the word CONGEAL, I think of blood. It's just that perfect horror/gore word, perfect for thrillers.


Want to join in? I think it would be a neat little chain reaction to have fellow bloggers share their favorite, most interesting, craziest words each week. I know I'd love to see what you share! Feel free to sign up on the Mr. Linky. There's no specific rules. If you want, grab the above button, link back here, share your word, explain why, where you heard/saw it, and whatever else you'd like to add!

Just leave your name and blog name, and of course, the link to your post!

*All definitions from Dictionary.com.


January 13, 2011

Book Blogger Hop & Follow Friday (20).

Book Blogger Hop


I came across the Hop and Follow Friday while I was blog hopping - how appropriate! - and decided to join in on the fun.

The Book Blogger Hop is a weekly thing going on over at Crazy-for-Books. Follow My Book Blog Friday is hosted by Parajunkee. If you're a new blogger like I am, or have been blogging for a while, stop by the sites and get involved!

--------------------------------------------


Weekly question: Why do you read the genre that you do? What draws you to it?

I primarily read contemporary YA fiction. Why? Because I was a teen not so long ago, and it's what I can relate to best. I don't need to be taken to another world or galaxy or universe filled with faeries and unicorns and zombies and vampires and werewolves to be happy. Those are occasionally good, of course. But I like learning and seeing more of the world we live in, the world I know. I like going along with a character who's been through what I've been through, to see how they handle it. I get to view the world I know from different perspectives. I enjoy observing what's around me, so to read about what I observe from a different view is sometimes enlightening.


----------------------------------------------


January 11, 2011

Talk to Me Tuesday (2).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: Do you prefer series or stand-alone novels and why?

Okay, awesome question, because I've been thinking about this for a while now, what with all the hubbub over paranormal romance/fantasy series. Thankfully I haven't run into many because I'm all for contemps, but still.

I will always prefer a stand-alone novel to a series. Always. For me, series rarely live up to their expectations (save for, you know, Harry Potter, which I adore). But the Harry Potter series is so developed, so thought-out, that a series was necessary; Melissa explains it best over in her answer!

I used to be the type that, when starting a series, felt the need to finish it, to read all of the later installments. Even if I disliked the first, or any in the middle. Case and point: The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants series by Ann Brashares. It was one of the first series I really, really got into. But by the end of the second book, and a little into the third, I realized the story and storytelling was falling flat. But I plowed through the rest anyway, and just like I knew I would be, I was disappointed in the ending.

I fell into several similar series ruts after that. The Jessica Darling series by Megan McCafferty, the Joe Pitt series by Charlie Huston, the Iron Fey series by Julie Kagawa, and even the Wicked Lovely series by Melissa Marr. Granted, I finished both the Jessica Darling and Joe Pitt series. But I have no interest anymore in finishing Julie Kagawa's series or Melissa Marr's series. Does that mean I'll never read them? No, because I probably will. But not right away. The point is series are no longer even able to maintain my interest and loyalty.

I know people have a beef with stand-alone novels trying to wrap everything together in a neat, tight little presentable package by the end. But not all stand-alone novels come together, and they don't always have precious, happy endings. And I'm okay with that, because I don't need stories to drag on. Of course, sometimes I wish they would, but in the end I feel like the characters had their time in their moment and in their place. There's no need to ruin that or switch it up - to do that, all I have to do is go find another book with another story with its own characters in their own moments and places. To me, this offers more, because I get a new story every time, and if I become frustrated with it, I can just move on to the next, which will have nothing to do with that frustration. Basically, I obtain a clean reading slate.

With a series, you don't get that clean reading slate. You're bothered by the same characters with the same problems, waiting for them to wrap it all up after however many installments. Sometimes they go over well, but more often than not they leave me hanging. Then when I'm finished I realize how many other stories I've been missing out on. I hate that feeling.

So for me, stand-alones all the way.

January 10, 2011

REVIEW! I Will Save You.




I Will Save You
Matt de la Pena



FROM THE COVER:

Kidd is running from his past and his future. No mom, no dad, and there’s nothing for him at the group home but therapy. He doesn’t belong at the beach where he works either, unless he finds a reason to stay.

Olivia is blond hair, blue eyes, rich dad. The prettiest girl in Cardiff. She’s hiding something from Kidd—but could they ever be together anyway?

Devon is mean, mysterious, and driven by a death wish. A best friend and worst enemy. He followed Kidd all the way to the beach and he’s not leaving until he teaches him a few lessons about life. And Olivia.
My rating: 4 stars.

MY THOUGHTS:

Painfully real, raw, emotional. Fight Club-esque, in a less mature way.

Kidd and Devon are both great, complex characters. They first come off as one-dimensional, but develop later on in the story. Another character, Mr. Red, is great. If anything, I'd say he develops most. At first you're not sure what his deal is, or why he's such a prevalent character, but by the end it all makes sense. He's one of the better adult characters in a YA book that I've come across. Unfortunately these positives do not apply to Olivia, who is a predictable one-note type; she has a purpose, it's just nothing spectacular that stands out.

The plot is twisted and jumbled and purposely disjointed.  It's told through a series of diary entries, flashbacks, and present scenarios. At first it's off putting, then it becomes rhythmic and the story starts to flow.

The descriptions are a cross between simple and beautiful, and the dialogue is real enough (although not much is used). My only problem is the setting. It's not explained well, and the usage of "tents" and "campsite" really threw me off. I had a hard time picturing anything pertaining to the setting, aside from the beach and boardwalk.

If the story had been a little more developed in the setting and Kidd's past, I definitely would've bumped it to five stars.

EXTRA: I recommend checking out Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk as well, although it's a more mature read.

In My Mailbox (6).

This meme originates over at The Story Siren.


The Lover's Dictionary by David Levithan.
The Secret Year by Jennifer Hubbard.


I love love love David Levithan so I can't wait to read The Lover's Dictionary!
As for The Secret Year, it seems promising, though a bit depressing. But I'm all for the unhappy endings!

January 7, 2011

Book Blogger Hop & Follow Friday (19).

Book Blogger Hop


I came across the Hop and Follow Friday while I was blog hopping - how appropriate! - and decided to join in on the fun.

The Book Blogger Hop is a weekly thing going on over at Crazy-for-Books. Follow My Book Blog Friday is hosted by Parajunkee. If you're a new blogger like I am, or have been blogging for a while, stop by the sites and get involved!

--------------------------------------------


Weekly question: What book influenced or changed your life? How did it influence/change you?

Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson. I'm not sure how old I was when I first read this, but I was young. I already knew I liked to read, but Speak made me realize I LOVED reading and couldn't get enough. It was beautifully written and had such a captivating story and I thought, I want to write something just as compelling, I want to use my voice to talk to everyone. I decided I wanted to become a writer, and nothing got in my way after that.

----------------------------------------------



January 6, 2011

Word Bit! (2)

Or, WHAT'S THAT WORD?

As a reader and writer and blogger, I'm surrounded by words all the time. Some are old, some are new, some are funny, difficult to pronounce, fun to say, interesting, or just pure awesome.

I love words. Words are important. They're the basis of books. They're what makes everything come together. One word can change the feel, emotion and effect of a sentence. You can never know too many.

So every week I'm going to be sharing words of interest. They'll come from my readings. And who knows? Maybe you'll come across that one word that can change the feel, emotion and effect of the sentence you're working on in your novel, essay, short story, etc.



This week's word is...

RICOCHET
ric·o·chet
{noun, verb}
- the motion of an object or a projectile in rebounding or deflecting one or more times from the surface over which it is passing or against which it hits a glancing blow.
- to move in this way, as a projectile.


I came across RICOCHET this week in I Will Save You by Matt de la Pena, and loved it immediately. It's not a word used often, but it's awesome when used as a verb, don't you think? I prefer it to "bounce" or "rebound."

Want to join in? I think it would be a neat little chain reaction to have fellow bloggers share their favorite, most interesting, craziest words each week. I know I'd love to see what you share! Feel free to sign up on the Mr. Linky. There's no specific rules. If you want, grab the above button, link back here, share your word, explain why, where you heard/saw it, and whatever else you'd like to add!

Just leave your name and blog name, and of course, the link to your post!

*All definitions from Dictionary.com.


January 4, 2011

Huckleberry Finn ... CENSORED?

You know the classic. Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. But did you know it's getting "updated for today's times"? Well, it is.

The derogatory terms that Twain uses in the novel will be removed and replaced with more appropriate and kid-friendly terms. By doing so, "more people, including young readers, will be able to enjoy it."

The novel was published in 1884. Why censor it now?

I'm not in favor of making this change, and I'm not in favor of censoring children. The novel is a classic - there's no need for it to change now, after being critically acclaimed for so long. Why strip it of its cultural aspects? If people don't want to read it, they don't have to read it. Of course there's been problems with Twain's language in the past, but that hasn't stopped people from reading his work.

I'm just very against censoring books. And I'm more against this because it's happening now, 127 years after its publication! How crazy is that? Why should today's children be banned and/or sheltered from reading what past generations were able to?

What do you guys think? How do you feel about censorship, particularly about classics such as this? Do you think it's necessary/unnecessary?

If you're interested in all the details, you can read the article here.

Talk to Me Tuesday (1).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: What books have better covers than content, and what books have better content than covers?


I absolutely love Swalling Stones by Joyce McDonald. But the cover... Sure, the book was published in 1999, but the cover is still horribly outdated, and I think that's what makes people overlook it. I've referred it to people again and again, but the cover always makes them hesitate to pick it up.

Seriously, it's a good read!





Another one published in 1999, and another unfortunate cover. Blood and Chocolate by Annette Curtis Klause is an awesome book. And an equally awesome movie (albeit very different from the book itself). I think most readers jumped on board after seeing the movie, because this cover isn't attracting anyone. It's dull, and doesn't appear to match the title in any way.


Look at that cover - gorgeous! Autumn in all its fading green and orange glory.  A serene, tree-lined path. And yet.... A Walk to Remember by Nicholas Sparks falls beyond flat. This is one of those rare times when the movie is actually better than the book. Tragic, right?

But the descriptions go on for pages and they're unimportant, and the story itself moves dreadfully slowly and comes off boring.

Oh, but that pretty cover...






Here we've got another awesome read: Acceleration by Graham McNamee. No, really. This is another awesome book. But you definitely wouldn't think so by the cover. And get this - it was published in 2005. 2005! And it looks that outdated.

I like the blues and the hint of purple, but the face and lame font need to go.





Love the book stack. Love the darkness. Love the font.

The story? Not so much. The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield has such a slow pace, and takes forever to get into the actual story. Hate to say it, but I couldn't even finish this one.





I know, I know. Meg Cabot? A bad read? Unfortunately, yes. I've been a fan of hers for years. But this was the end of the line for me.

Airhead's cover is flashy and glitzy and shiny - 3 things that I love and catch my eye. But the story, the writing, everything... none of it worked for me. This was another that I couldn't finish.

The cover may have lured me in, but I didn't take the bait.

January 2, 2011

In My Mailbox (5).

This meme originates over at The Story Siren.


Deadly Little Games by Laurie Faria Stolarz.
Going Bovine by Libba Bray.


So happy to finally have Deadly Little Games! December 28th couldn't come soon enough! Not sure I'm going to bump this to the top of my reading pile, though, even though I desperately want to.

Going Bovine seems like it's going to be great, too. I finally picked it up, thanks to Nafiza and her awesome review.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...