Category: Book Reviews

“Many books are to be read, some are to be studied, and a few are meant to be lived in for weeks. Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is of this last kind…Magnificent and original.”— Washington Post

And that is what I did – lived in it for a few weeks. I am usually a fast reader, especially when it comes to fantasy, but this book was meant to be lived in for a time. It is not a typical modern fantasy novel, but is as literary as it is fantastical. It draws of the influence of the Romantics like Austen as much as it does classic fantasy writers like McDonald and Tolkien. It is a book full of side stories, minor characters, a fantastic magical literary history told through footnotes, and a plot that builds slowly but deliberately upon itself.

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell is an epic tale of the re-birth of magic in nineteenth-century England. Amidst familiar elements of setting (such as the Napoleonic wars) one is presented with a world where magic actually worked. Or did until the habit became to study about magic rather than to actually do magic. Two magicians – very different in character- who, as teacher and pupil and then as rivals, attempt to bring practical magic back to England. A rambling exploration of their attempts and the consequences thereof comprise the extent of the book.

The magic in play is not some disneyfied nursery appropriate version, but this is a fairy-tale that remembers that fairies are dangerous and magic holds its own perils. It is the divergent responses of the two magicians to the unveiling of the danger that most intrigued me. Norrell chose to hide it – to suppress any mention of Fairy so as to protect the common people by letting any recollection of Fairy just fade away. He essentially bans books, forcefully prevents the publication of information he disagrees with, lies about the power of Fairy, and ridicules those who believe in it. By controlling knowledge he hopes to protect the people from the danger – and retain all magical power for himself. Strange wants to embrace knowledge and crosses the lines of sanity in his quest to do so. He pays dearly for his knowledge, but still chooses to discover what he can so as to be equipped for his job. He wants magic to be in the hands of the people – accessible to all – allowing all people the power to protect themselves.

I kept having this book recommended to me as something that a person involved in religion would find interesting. The parallels between the debates in the world of magic and those of the church are interesting. Besides the amusing critique of those who merely talk about and study magic/religion and don’t actually practice it, I found the whole idea of the control of knowledge relevant. People in power can often control ideas. Even with the advent of widespread communication, it is those with the most money and therefore audience who hold the power. What then becomes most important – truth or power? Will they twist the facts or lie in order to serve a greater good? In the church, will ideas and knowledge be suppressed if they get people asking the wrong sorts of questions? Is it more important to keep people ignorant within the safe confines of a particular doctrine than it is to earnestly seek truth? I’ve seen Norrell’s power plays in the church as knowledge and the right to ask questions is suppressed. I find myself as more of a Strangeite who will pursue ideas no matter where they lead, no matter what it might cost. And I support that for all people. To blindly trust in a voice just because it has authority/power seems wrong because I don’t know how I might be being manipulated. I want to be a truth seeker.

Many reviewers commented on the near absence of the church in this book. I found it refreshing to not have to read another book lamenting how the church persecuted magic, but I think the symbol or idea of the church existed in her structure of magic. The magic here seems to contain the debates, structures, and realms of religion, philosophy, and academia combined. It is an alternate world that speaks to the issues in our own. Its questions can be our questions if we care to scratch the surface of the story.

So I’m sitting here in my Jedi knight costume handing out candy while Mike takes Emma trick-or-treating (I’ll post pictures tomorrow). As I look at my blog, I realize that it looks like I’ve been ignoring my “recent reads” or just not reading recently. In all honesty I haven’t had much time to read recently, but that doesn’t mean I’ve stopped.

As I mentioned before, I recently read through every single book Anne Bishop has written (I just didn’t want a long string of fantasy books by one author over on the sidebar). I really enjoyed her books and liked journeying into a very feminist (but not misandric) take on high fantasy. I most enjoyed the Black Jewels Trilogy and its spin-offs. The Tir Alainn books were also a great read. I enjoyed how she created other world in true high fantasy fashion, but also included unique twists on elements from our world.

I wasn’t as big of a fan of Sebastian. It tried to be high fantasy, but was too surreal and full of the sordid realities of our world to flow together well. I did find its use of the concept of resonating with landscapes to be meaningful. For the shattered world of Ephemera the only way one can travel between the scattered lands is if one’s heart resonates with that particular land. Of course one can always be surprised about which lands one can enter, but one also always knows when one is at home – fully resonating with a landscape. I liked that idea and having recently traveled to Texas and Santa Fe I understood what it meant to resonate with a place. It is the places I have encountered where I find beautiful surroundings, creative/progressive culture, local shops, and great conversation (with family or friends- old or new) that I resonate with and long to be. So Austin, Boulder, Santa Fe… these are places I enjoy and desire to be. Not that I can’t find resonance and make a home elsewhere (say Yorkville, IL), it just feels different.

Anyway, my other recent reading has been in Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell. I’m just now about 300 pages into the 1000+ page books, and its just beginning to show signs of a plot. It’s a very Victorianesque book. So we shall see how it goes. I usually like to finish one book before I start a new one, but this one is so slow and my reading list is so long… Its interesting in its own way and I was very amused by the opening of chapter 1. It reminded oh too much of religion and how we treat it vs. spirituality. If you’re interested, this is how the book begins. –

SOME YEARS AGO there was in the city of York a society of magicians. They met upon the third Wednesday of every month and read each other long, dull papers upon the history of English magic.

They were gentleman-magicians, which is to say they had never harmed anyone by magic – nor ever done anyone the slightest good. In fact, to own the truth, not one of these magicians had ever cast the smallest spell, nor by magic caused one leaf to tremble upon a tree, made one mote of dust to alter its course or changed a single hair upon anyone’s head. But, with this one minor reservation, they enjoyed a reputation as some of the wisest and most magical gentlemen in Yorkshire. …

In the autumn of 1806 they received an addition in a gentleman called John Segundus. At the first meeting that he attended Mr Segundus rose and addressed the society. . . . recently he had begun to wonder why the great feats of magic that he read about remained on the pages of his book and were no longer seen in the street or written about in the newspapers. Mr Segundus wished to know, he said, why modern magicians were unable to work the magic they wrote about. In short, he wished to know why there was no more magic done in England.

It was the most commonplace question in the world. It was the question which, sooner or later, every child in the kingdom asks his governess or his schoolmaster or his parent. Yet the learned members of the York society did not at all like hearing it asked and the reason was this: they were no more able to answer it than anyone else.

The President of the York society (whose name was Dr Foxcastle) turned to John Segundus and explained that the question was a wrong one. “It presupposes that magicians have some sort of duty to do magic which is clearly nonsense. You would not, I imagine, suggest that it is the task of botanists to devise more flowers? Or that astronomers should labour to rearrange the stars? Magicians, Mr Segundus, study magic which was done long ago. Why should anyone expect more?”

An elderly gentleman with faint blue eyes and faintly-coloured clothes (called either Hart or Hunt – Mr Segundus could never quite catch the name) faintly said that it did not matter in the least whether any body expected it or not. A gentleman could not do magic.. Magic was what street sorcerers pretended to do in order to rob children of their pennies. Magic (in the practical sense) was much fallen off. It had low connexions. It was the bosom companion of unshaven faces, gypsies, house-breakers; the frequenter of dingy rooms with dirty yellow curtains. Oh no! A gentleman could not do magic. A gentleman might study the history of magic (nothing could be nobler) but he could not do any. The elderly gentleman looked with faint, fatherly eyes at Mr Segundus and said that he hoped Mr Segundus had not been trying to cast spells.

So I recently saw a book advertised called Mommy has a Tattoo. The book is described as follows –

Mommy Has A Tattoo tells the story of a little boy named James, who is afraid of his tattooed neighbor until he discovers that his own mother has a tattoo as well. The book emphasizes the importance of familiarizing children with tattoos at a young age and eliminates the common notion of “scary” that has sometimes been linked to tattoos. Tattoos are a source of pride for lots of Mommies, and a source of endless curiosity for their kids. The charming characters, bright colors, and delightful illustrations in Mommy Has A Tattoo show kids that tattoos, in fact, aren’t scary at all!

There are so many books out there that help kids become familiar with other races, but I think its great that this book is out there to help kids be okay with how people with tattoos look. In America 49% of people age 18-29 have a tattoo – it is far more common than it ever has been, but we are still in the transition period. That means that soon a lot of mommies and daddies will have tattoos, but there are still some people who have negative stereotypes about people with tattoos, businesses that discriminate against them, and children who are taught to fear them. So I think the concept of this book is great – teaching love and acceptance of the diverse and beautiful ways people look.

Since my recent posts have sparked so much debate (I cant wait for the mudslinging the linguistic profile post will spark…) I’ll keep the trend going with more controversial stuff.

I posted awhile back about reading Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn. His books have really caused me to rethink a lot of stuff about education and parenting. I like what he says and generally agree with his ideas. Discussing them with friends and family has been fun. What has been hard is putting them into practice. He says a lot about what’s bad for kids, but gives little specifics as to how to do things differently. So I recently got over to his website and its message boards. There are a lot of resources there and the message boards are a great place to discuss practical ideas (and general philosophy of parenting) with others. I’ve mostly been lurking, but hope to jump in on the conversation soon.

What is interesting is how almost anti-religious the boards are. Many people there see religious people as cruel parents who show only conditional love to children and support stuff like spanking and harsh discipline. I was attracted to Kohn’s ideas because I am a Christian and dislike the conceptions they have of most Christians (although I admit the conception is based in truth). I think it will be fun to join the discussion and learn things. Perhaps I can be a new kind of Christian there, but I mostly want to be a mom trying to discover how best to love her daughter.

Anyway as for the controversial stuff… I read this great quote on one of the threads that I wanted to share –
“When a child hits a child, we call it aggression.
When a child hits an adult, we call it hostility.
When an adult hits an adult, we call it assault.
When an adult hits a child, we call it discipline.” – Haim Ginott
So that’s where I’m at. Trying to discover how to love, model, and teach without resorting to manipulation or violence. And I’m discovering that’s its way harder than it seems. I find myself so focused on “me” and “my needs” that I try to manipulate and control Emma all the time. So I’m grateful for a place to test ideas, dialogue, and learn.

I recently read Simply Christian by N.T. Wright and want to recommend it to anyone interested in a good overview of Christian belief. This book is similar to C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity , but it is more relevant for today’s readers. Whereas Lewis wrote as an Anglican and dealt with a certain set a questions apropos to his historical moment, Wright (himself an Anglican) takes a more ecumenical approach and addresses faith in a way more palpable to today’s audience. It is of course not an exhaustive work on why Christianity makes sense, but it is a great general introduction. He addresses the issues humbly and acknowledges the necessity of faith (as opposed to proof) in the Christian life. Wright does a good job placing Christianity into its cultural context and still exploring what it means to live for the kingdom of God in today’s world. In all it is a good introduction to Christianity that is appropriately written for the postmodern ethos of our historical moment.

So I recently read Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn. He’s the guy who wrote Punished by Rewards which was a love it or hate it type book. His focus is how we (in school, businesses, and in parenting) have bought into the concepts of Skinnerism and behaviorism. We dangle to chance of reward or the threat of a punishment in front of people to manipulate them to change their behavior. Its everywhere. In schools there are grades and gold stars, at work incentives, at church badges for scripture memory, at home time-outs, spankings, praise, and bribes. Kohn’s theory is that contrary to common belief the use of such manipulation actually causes people to be less motivated and less interested in the behavior itself. He uses many studies to prove his point.

His parenting book took his theory a step further in that he claims that not only are the methods of behaviorism (bribes, threats, time-outs, spanking, praise) not effective (and sometimes cruel), they stand in the way of our childing knowing that we love them unconditionally. For even if we say that we love our children as we manipulate them in order have their behavior line up with our desires – what really matters is what the child perceives us doing. If the child perceives that we only express interest in them (act happy) when they perform tasks well – the message they internalize is that our love is conditional on their performing well. While I fully reaffirmed his theories on why hitting/spanking children is always wrong, the book caused me to think hard about the subtle messages other more accepted forms of discipline send to children. And to evaluate as he suggests what the ultimate goal of all of my interactions with my child is. Am I encouraging her to be the kind of person I want her to be, or am I using my power over her by giving or withholding my love in order to get her behavior to be the way I find most comfortable.

The book has sparked a lot of thought for me and some good discussion. I highly recommend it for anyone who has kids or works with kids. Even if you don’t agree with all of it, it helps to see how deeply behaviorism has infiltrated our culture.

So I just finished reading The Sundering series by Jacqueline Carey . There are just two books in it so far (although she is being begged to write more!) Banewreaker and Godslayer . It was a fasinating read that really delved into the nature of good and evil. The series is obviously similar to Lord of the Rings – similar mythology, characters, and quest to destroy the bad guy. But in Carey’s series the tale is told from all points of view. One gets the back story of the “bad guy”, one hears about the orc-like characters’ families and why they chose the side they did. For although the book starts with a very black and white / good vs. evil mythology one soon realizies that reality exists more in the shades of gray. The characters themselves realize such as well. For when people are exposed to the other side of the story they can sympathize – or at least put a human face on the enemy and realize that he is not so very different from themselves. Also played up are how minor choices and true coincedences can have major effects in the outcome of things.

But beyond exploring the vague ambiguities between good and evil the reader is also confronted with the subjective nature of defining what is evil. As the book’s cover asks – “if all that is good says you are evil – are you?” We are so preconditioned to assume that certain things are good and others evil that if things come with those labels we don’t question the rightness of those labels. So in approaching a book with characters like Gandalf, Aragorn, and Frodo – we assume that their side is right and good and the guy they are fighting and calling evil is just that. But Carey turns everything upside down in the end when the “bad guy” become the Christ figure who lays down his life to help others. He is the one who cares for the world – not just for the rich and the powerful – but for the poor, the oppressed, the disfigured, the unwanted. He loved and helped them. It really drove home to me the question of what we as Christians in America support and call good. Perhaps the issues are bigger than we think.
Anyway – this is a great series that is really a well written fantasy story with these deeper elements woven in. I highly recommend it for a fun and thought-provoking read.

So here I am actually sitting at the computer while I eat breakfast (code for Emma’s asleep)and I figure I should post something on my blog. So I decide to say something about the vampire books I read this summer. I should probably say that I’m not a fan of vampires – I haven’t read Anne Rice and I gave up watching Interview with a Vampire after about 10 minutes. So the fact that I read two vampire books this summer is a bit odd. But these weren’t your typical pseudoerotic bloodsucking variety.

The first one I read was Sunshine by Robin McKinley . I had to make myself read it because I love Robin McKinley, but, like I said, dislike vampire books. But of course since it was Robin McKinley it was wonderful. She has this amazing talent for creating alternate worlds – and this one happens to be populated with vampires. The main character, Sunshine, is a baker who thrives on the element of sunshine which makes things interesting when she gets mixed up with vampires. It is actually a good look at the nature of evil and of how nothing is inherently evil but can be used for either good or evil. There is adventure and some scary elements here, but nothing overwhelming.

Then I also picked up The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova which has been on the bestseller lists all summer. It too proved to be a fascinating read. It is set up like a history documentary and follows three generations of a family as they stumble upon and are drawn into researching the Dracula legend. Every time they come close to a clue something dangerous happens to push them away. It is a very well written tale and the unfolding of the story holds your attention. As a reader you find out bits of the story at a time until the whole picture is revealed at the end. Although it has horrific elements, it is not scary. For unlike most vampire books it is not a fantasy novel – it is “historical” fiction.

So there are my encounters with vampires this summer. Will I read more? – most likely no. But these were good books that I would recommend.

I recently read The Genizah at the House of Shepher by Tamar Yellin. It was a very different type of book than those I usually read – very slow, but rich in the unfolding of a story.

The main story focuses on a Jewish women who although she doesn’t really follow the faith teaches on religious and Biblical writings in England. She travels to Jerusalem to visit family and in the process discovers her family’s history. Her present day story weaves in with the stories of four generations of her family. Part of that history is how the genizah (trove of old (unwanted?) documents) came to exist in the attic of the Shepher house. Right before her arrival an old codex of scripture was discovered. Fights over who it belongs to as well as its true nature (is it a cheap fraud or the accurate variant of scripture) frame her time in Jerusalem.

The book is a good commentary on story and the discovery of truth (if it is possible). One is faced with commonly accepted knowledge, but the discovery of evidence to the contrary causes one to reevaluate how one perceives the world. Such evidence can change ones memories, relationships, and faith. The book also is a vivid look at Jewish culture during the past 150 years. The author based some of the stories on her own family and it was an enlightening experience to read about the common Jewish life.