I liked the premise of Kiersten White's young adult novel Mind Games. You don't see a lot of novels that focus on sisterly relationships, and while an almost-love-triangle exists in this book, it's not the primary emphasis. In fact, though there's room for romance to develop in future books, you could really say this book isn't a romance at all. It's more of a science fiction thriller and character study at the same time. Though one genre seems fast-paced and the other slow, they meld together pretty well.
Both Fia and Annie narrate the story, but the book is more about Fia, the girl with instincts so good she can almost never choose wrong, the girl who could be a weapon in the wrong hands. And, man, is Fia ever in the wrong hands. Her handler is a boy who she knows is bad and dangerous but who she wants to fall in love with anyway. He, in turn, is the son of an even more dangerous and mysterious man who collects women like Fia and Annie in order to control and use their special mind powers. Most of these women are Seers, seeing the future (like Annie), or Readers, reading minds, or Feelers, feeling emotions. Fia is none of that. She calls herself the hands. With special training and perfect instincts, she is the most dangerous of them all, a killer. And she has to remain a killer if she wants her sister to live.
The dynamics of the relationship between Fia and Annie are what this book is all about, but personally, I didn't really take to Annie. I can't say I loved Fia either, with her obsessive, angry thoughts and stream-of-consciousness narration, but she is clearly the character the author wants you to care most about...not that the reader isn't supposed to care about Annie. The reader is supposed to care about what Fia thinks of Annie, and Fia will do anything to protect her older, blind sister.
The book took longer than some young adult fiction takes me to get through, probably due to switching narrators but also due to flashbacks. That's why I said the story was part character study. We get a lot of background on Fia and Annie leading up to the present. It's an interesting way to tell a story. We get thrown right into the action, and then slowly, the specifics unwind. Interesting, yes, but I didn't love the way the story was told.
Still, having said that, what I really did enjoy was the concept of an unwilling human weapon. My husband can tell you that I love stories with powerful female protagonists. Under very different circumstances, I could have been a feminist, I'm sure. I love to see girls kick butt, and I'm a second degree black belt myself. But I also find it intriguing when a girl is powerful yet doesn't want to be. It provides for fascinating internal struggle, and in this case, it raises a lot of moral questions, too. How do you do detestable things to protect a loved one and still save your own soul? I wish there was a little more about that particular question in the book, but Fia is beyond believing she has a soul to save. Her hopelessness is understandable in light of the story, but it gets a little depressing. I do, however, like the way this first book of the series resolves itself, and I hope there is some interesting moral exploration in the books to come; the set-up is certainly perfect for it.
Three stars.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Friday, March 22, 2013
Quick Takes on Five Recent Theater and DVD Releases
Oz the Great and Powerful (in theaters this month): I enjoyed it, but not as much as I enjoyed Jack the Giant Slayer, which was unfortunately released the week prior to Oz and lacked the same historical and classical background. I liked Jack for its straightforwardness. Oz is a bit too convoluted and busy and has very surface character development. The visuals, however, are beautiful. Three stars.
Wreck-It Ralph (animated feature on DVD this month): I watched this with my husband who, being familiar with similar old-school games, was quite a bit more taken with it than I was. It's pretty clever, but only a certain audience can truly appreciate it. I was, however, invested in the conflict, which centers on the main character's identity struggles. Three stars.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (rated PG-13, adapted from a novel, on DVD February 2013): Though the movie has some heavy thematic material and characters with loose morals, it surprised and impressed me (I have not read the book, so I can't compare.). The quality acting (by Emma Watson, Logan Lerman, and Ezra Miller, among others) is poignant and soulful, coaxing the viewer deep into a twisted story of pain and friendship. I was happy that the story didn't end on a completely depressing note, and while I wouldn't recommend this to just anyone, I'm glad to have seen it. Three stars.
The Master (rated R, on DVD February 2013): Skip it. This story, which is led by a handful of well-known and mostly respected actors and takes place in a cult shortly after World War II, is pointless and vile, containing an emphasis on sexual addiction and prolonged scenes of full female frontal nudity. I thought the cult aspect of it would be intriguing, and it was. But the immorality outweighed everything else for me. One star.
Anna Karenina (rated R, on DVD February 2013): I have not read the Russian Tolstoy novel, but my husband, who has and who watched this with me, was able to clarify any details I didn't get. It's a rather depressing story about adultery and its sad effects on the main character. The redeeming value of the movie is the genius of its filming, as though it takes place on an elaborate stage, and the transitions between scenes, which are fluid with the ever-evolving set. The style takes a bit to get into at first but leaves the viewer somewhat spellbound and awestruck. Also, hurray for Levin and the simple life. Three stars.
(Note: The three-star rating spans such a wide range of movies for me. Though I've rated most of these three stars and cannot easily rank them due to the huge difference in genre and target audience, I can categorize them according to morals, widespread appeal, and pure artistic beauty. Anna and Perks have troublesome morality issues and sex scenes, but surprisingly nothing is too graphic, even in Anna. Both of those are for specialized, mature audiences. Oz and Wreck-It have a much larger audience appeal and are family-friendly, but in my opinion, they are less artistic.)
Wreck-It Ralph (animated feature on DVD this month): I watched this with my husband who, being familiar with similar old-school games, was quite a bit more taken with it than I was. It's pretty clever, but only a certain audience can truly appreciate it. I was, however, invested in the conflict, which centers on the main character's identity struggles. Three stars.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower (rated PG-13, adapted from a novel, on DVD February 2013): Though the movie has some heavy thematic material and characters with loose morals, it surprised and impressed me (I have not read the book, so I can't compare.). The quality acting (by Emma Watson, Logan Lerman, and Ezra Miller, among others) is poignant and soulful, coaxing the viewer deep into a twisted story of pain and friendship. I was happy that the story didn't end on a completely depressing note, and while I wouldn't recommend this to just anyone, I'm glad to have seen it. Three stars.
The Master (rated R, on DVD February 2013): Skip it. This story, which is led by a handful of well-known and mostly respected actors and takes place in a cult shortly after World War II, is pointless and vile, containing an emphasis on sexual addiction and prolonged scenes of full female frontal nudity. I thought the cult aspect of it would be intriguing, and it was. But the immorality outweighed everything else for me. One star.
Anna Karenina (rated R, on DVD February 2013): I have not read the Russian Tolstoy novel, but my husband, who has and who watched this with me, was able to clarify any details I didn't get. It's a rather depressing story about adultery and its sad effects on the main character. The redeeming value of the movie is the genius of its filming, as though it takes place on an elaborate stage, and the transitions between scenes, which are fluid with the ever-evolving set. The style takes a bit to get into at first but leaves the viewer somewhat spellbound and awestruck. Also, hurray for Levin and the simple life. Three stars.
(Note: The three-star rating spans such a wide range of movies for me. Though I've rated most of these three stars and cannot easily rank them due to the huge difference in genre and target audience, I can categorize them according to morals, widespread appeal, and pure artistic beauty. Anna and Perks have troublesome morality issues and sex scenes, but surprisingly nothing is too graphic, even in Anna. Both of those are for specialized, mature audiences. Oz and Wreck-It have a much larger audience appeal and are family-friendly, but in my opinion, they are less artistic.)
Saturday, March 16, 2013
The Forgotten Garden
It's rare that I step away from my fast-paced, short-but-sweet young adult novels to read a lengthy piece of regular fiction, particularly one that spans several generations and jumps between character stories. But occasionally, I find myself wanting a delightfully long read that's not over in two days, and since my sister-in-law had recommended The Forgotten Garden to me several times (shocked each time she asked me if I'd read it that I had not), I picked this one, knowing absolutely nothing about it.
But the young woman who discovers on her 21st birthday that she is not the person she always thought she was, whose life is turned upside down in an instant, and whose granddaughter inherits her unsolved mystery captured my full attention. The story spans a century, from the early 1900s to 2005, and two continents, taking place in Australia and England. The characters include Nell, the woman left on a ship by herself when she was only three or four years old; Cassandra, Nell's granddaughter with her own life trauma and baggage; Eliza, the mysterious and captivating Authoress; and a wealthy, selfish, merciless English family.
Normally, descriptive passages slow me down, but author Kate Morton knows just how to hook her readers along, leaving bread crumbs here and there, enticing them to read just a little further to solve just a little more of the mystery. There's a bit of a haunting, magical feel to the story, heightened no doubt by Eliza's fairytales, a few of which are included in their entirety. If anything slowed my reading of this book more than normal, it was probably the character jumping. One chapter might be about Cassandra in 2005. Then we're back to Eliza in 2000. Then we're with Nell in 1975. Some of those points provided too easy of a break at which to put the book down for awhile. However, I was never tempted to leave the story too long. Quite the opposite. I found myself stealing moments during the day to open those 500-plus pages, even when my son was competing for my attention! The last 200, or so, pages were especially difficult to put down. By then, I was starting to piece things together and making guesses about the ending (some of which were right and some of which weren't quite). I put a key piece of the puzzle together approximately 150 pages before the end, but even then, there were discoveries to make and moments to question what I thought I knew.
The Forgotten Garden is a book to delve into at the expense of all else. Kate Morton is a storyteller with a spellbinding gift. This is certainly some of the best adult fiction out there. Five stars.
But the young woman who discovers on her 21st birthday that she is not the person she always thought she was, whose life is turned upside down in an instant, and whose granddaughter inherits her unsolved mystery captured my full attention. The story spans a century, from the early 1900s to 2005, and two continents, taking place in Australia and England. The characters include Nell, the woman left on a ship by herself when she was only three or four years old; Cassandra, Nell's granddaughter with her own life trauma and baggage; Eliza, the mysterious and captivating Authoress; and a wealthy, selfish, merciless English family.
Normally, descriptive passages slow me down, but author Kate Morton knows just how to hook her readers along, leaving bread crumbs here and there, enticing them to read just a little further to solve just a little more of the mystery. There's a bit of a haunting, magical feel to the story, heightened no doubt by Eliza's fairytales, a few of which are included in their entirety. If anything slowed my reading of this book more than normal, it was probably the character jumping. One chapter might be about Cassandra in 2005. Then we're back to Eliza in 2000. Then we're with Nell in 1975. Some of those points provided too easy of a break at which to put the book down for awhile. However, I was never tempted to leave the story too long. Quite the opposite. I found myself stealing moments during the day to open those 500-plus pages, even when my son was competing for my attention! The last 200, or so, pages were especially difficult to put down. By then, I was starting to piece things together and making guesses about the ending (some of which were right and some of which weren't quite). I put a key piece of the puzzle together approximately 150 pages before the end, but even then, there were discoveries to make and moments to question what I thought I knew.
The Forgotten Garden is a book to delve into at the expense of all else. Kate Morton is a storyteller with a spellbinding gift. This is certainly some of the best adult fiction out there. Five stars.
Scarlet
Since I have already reviewed Cinder, the first book in this series, here, I am not going to say too much about Marissa Meyer's sequel, Scarlet. If you like fairytales and science fiction, these books are a great mixture. Scarlet (Can you guess which fairytale this story is influenced by?) continues the story told in Cinder but adds another set of main characters on their own journey.
Scarlet is sure her grandmother has been kidnapped, but no one believes her. So, when a handsome but dangerous street fighter named Wolf has some clues as to where her grandmother might be, Scarlet has no choice but to follow his lead...even if she doesn't trust him.
I pre-ordered this book (Is there anything so wonderful as receiving a package of goodies in the mail?), and I was thoroughly hooked by the story and sad to have it end. Nonetheless, The Lunar Chronicles aren't over yet. This is one of my top recommended, current, young adult series!
Scarlet is sure her grandmother has been kidnapped, but no one believes her. So, when a handsome but dangerous street fighter named Wolf has some clues as to where her grandmother might be, Scarlet has no choice but to follow his lead...even if she doesn't trust him.
I pre-ordered this book (Is there anything so wonderful as receiving a package of goodies in the mail?), and I was thoroughly hooked by the story and sad to have it end. Nonetheless, The Lunar Chronicles aren't over yet. This is one of my top recommended, current, young adult series!
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Jack the Giant Slayer in Theaters Now
Jack the Giant Slayer was my second choice to see in theaters this month, but when you have kids, sometimes you just have to go with the time that works. Oz the Great and Powerful comes out next weekend, and Jack was in town now. So, we went to see Jack. My expectations were set rather low. By now, I should know better than to trust any reviews from Entertainment Weekly Magazine. As much as I enjoy getting my copy in the mail every Friday, I rarely agree with their opinions on movies. Jack got a C+ from them, and though to a certain extent I can see why they thought it was only an average movie, I thought there were aspects of it that really made it stand out from the typical fairytale fare we're often served.
Overall, I really liked Jack the Giant Slayer. I didn't see it in 3D, which is probably an adventure all by itself, but it didn't need the effects to be entertaining. Jack has danger, wild adventure, a bit of romance, and just the right touch of humor, all of these characteristics melding together into a lighthearted but still epic tale of heroism. It doesn't try to be funny just to be funny, but it doesn't take itself too seriously either. It's fun.
The plot itself is very straightforward, but that's not to say it's entirely predictable. The princess gets snatched. The farm boy goes to save her. All kinds of adventure follow. But the conflict isn't drawn out as many other similar movies do. Nothing takes too long to resolve. No conflict lasts throughout the movie. Bad guys die off like flies. But all this keeps the movie moving and changing, and the viewer doesn't get bored. The stereotypical mistrust you often have between a story's good characters, all the misunderstanding that slows the plot down, just isn't there. Although that kind of stuff can make good conflict sometimes, it's so overdone in movies, especially romances, that you feel like yelling at the central characters to get over themselves and see what the audience saw long ago. But Jack moves things right along in a way that's refreshing. Sure, you don't get a lot of in-depth character development, but that's not why you go to see a movie like Jack.
And you don't need a lot of character development when you have fantastic entertaining characters to begin with, as Jack does. Though, admittedly, they are static and somewhat stereotypical, they are also individualized. Even the minor characters stand out, quirky and fun, and you care or at least have an opinion ("he deserved to lose his head") about nearly all of them. I really enjoyed seeing a relatively new face in Jack himself, played adorably by Nicholas Hoult. And Ian McShane and Ewan McGregor give fun, heartfelt, memorable performances as the king and the head guard in charge of the princess's safety. They have the best lines.
Jack is rated PG-13. A fair amount of people die, some rather gruesomely eaten by giants, but nothing is very graphic. There are probably some middle-schoolers who would absolutely love it, but I, personally, wouldn't take younger kids.
(Minor SPOILER alert!) Jack certainly has its over-the-top moments (like falling with a giant beanstalk and landing safely, or the princess coming out of her tent with perfect curls literally ten seconds after looking like she'd just ridden aforementioned falling beanstalk a mile to the ground), but the moments fit in fairytale land without making the movie completely implausible for those of us who like things a little more real. It's a solid fairytale movie without the singing or overabundance of cheap jokes that many lighter, bubblier fairytale movies have. Comparing it to other fairytales adapted for the screen, it's not nearly as serious as Snow White and the Huntsman, but it's not as ridiculous as Ella Enchanted (which I enjoyed anyway, back in the day) or Mirror, Mirror. There's a happy middle that evokes childhood memories of listening sleepily to your parents reading grand adventures. Incidentally, but perhaps not accidentally, that's exactly how Jack the Giant Slayer begins, with children listening to tall tales. And if you go see Jack, just sit back, become a kid again, and enjoy the telling.
Overall, I really liked Jack the Giant Slayer. I didn't see it in 3D, which is probably an adventure all by itself, but it didn't need the effects to be entertaining. Jack has danger, wild adventure, a bit of romance, and just the right touch of humor, all of these characteristics melding together into a lighthearted but still epic tale of heroism. It doesn't try to be funny just to be funny, but it doesn't take itself too seriously either. It's fun.
The plot itself is very straightforward, but that's not to say it's entirely predictable. The princess gets snatched. The farm boy goes to save her. All kinds of adventure follow. But the conflict isn't drawn out as many other similar movies do. Nothing takes too long to resolve. No conflict lasts throughout the movie. Bad guys die off like flies. But all this keeps the movie moving and changing, and the viewer doesn't get bored. The stereotypical mistrust you often have between a story's good characters, all the misunderstanding that slows the plot down, just isn't there. Although that kind of stuff can make good conflict sometimes, it's so overdone in movies, especially romances, that you feel like yelling at the central characters to get over themselves and see what the audience saw long ago. But Jack moves things right along in a way that's refreshing. Sure, you don't get a lot of in-depth character development, but that's not why you go to see a movie like Jack.
And you don't need a lot of character development when you have fantastic entertaining characters to begin with, as Jack does. Though, admittedly, they are static and somewhat stereotypical, they are also individualized. Even the minor characters stand out, quirky and fun, and you care or at least have an opinion ("he deserved to lose his head") about nearly all of them. I really enjoyed seeing a relatively new face in Jack himself, played adorably by Nicholas Hoult. And Ian McShane and Ewan McGregor give fun, heartfelt, memorable performances as the king and the head guard in charge of the princess's safety. They have the best lines.
Jack is rated PG-13. A fair amount of people die, some rather gruesomely eaten by giants, but nothing is very graphic. There are probably some middle-schoolers who would absolutely love it, but I, personally, wouldn't take younger kids.
(Minor SPOILER alert!) Jack certainly has its over-the-top moments (like falling with a giant beanstalk and landing safely, or the princess coming out of her tent with perfect curls literally ten seconds after looking like she'd just ridden aforementioned falling beanstalk a mile to the ground), but the moments fit in fairytale land without making the movie completely implausible for those of us who like things a little more real. It's a solid fairytale movie without the singing or overabundance of cheap jokes that many lighter, bubblier fairytale movies have. Comparing it to other fairytales adapted for the screen, it's not nearly as serious as Snow White and the Huntsman, but it's not as ridiculous as Ella Enchanted (which I enjoyed anyway, back in the day) or Mirror, Mirror. There's a happy middle that evokes childhood memories of listening sleepily to your parents reading grand adventures. Incidentally, but perhaps not accidentally, that's exactly how Jack the Giant Slayer begins, with children listening to tall tales. And if you go see Jack, just sit back, become a kid again, and enjoy the telling.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Divergent Series
Divergent
Divergent has been popping up on my radar for some time now. It's the first in a young adult series, by Veronica Roth, that is still ongoing, and it seems to be fairly popular. I'd seen the cover so many times, I could almost have convinced myself I'd read it, just because it's the kind of book I love and how could I have missed it? But I did miss it...until now. And I'm so glad I finally found out why this book won't go away. It shouldn't go away. It's good. It's epic. I'm not sure it would translate to a movie as well as, say, The Hunger Games (though the film rights have been sold), but it's that kind of a compelling read, written in the same first person present tense as The Hunger Games, and also dystopian, but a whole different kind of story. I really hate when books compare themselves to The Hunger Games, and as I like to say, the next Hunger Games will be something as completely different as that was from Twilight when it appeared, so I guess that rules Divergent out (being similar because of genre only). But it really shouldn't. Divergent is different and fascinating, with edgy, strong characters and strong themes that delve into emotion, or the lack thereof, and what it means to be a decent human in a world where humanity is compartmentalized. In particular, this novel explores what it means to be selfless versus brave.
Beatrice belongs to one of five factions (named for five virtues) who live in a future version of Chicago. Her faction is Abnegation (the virtue of selflessness), but that might soon change. At the age of 16, Beatrice must choose the faction she will live in the rest of her life. Most stay with the faction they've always known, especially since changing factions usually means saying good-bye to family forever. "Faction before family." However, Beatrice doesn't feel like she belongs there. The aptitude tests can help her decide what she's best suited for, but Beatrice's test results just confuse the issue. She has always admired the Dauntless (the virtue of bravery), but is she brave enough to jump off moving trains, fight mismatched opponents in hand-to-hand combat, and defy death itself? Then there's Candor (the virtue of honesty), Amity (the virtue of peacefulness), and Erudite (the virtue of intelligence). It's a world where each faction focuses it's passions on one narrow emotion and contributes to one aspect of society in order to better create a world of peace. But all perfect worlds, as time muddies memory, eventually unravel, the best intentions turning toward selfish pursuit. And when Beatrice stumbles upon a secret worth her very life, she realizes the system has already begun to break.
I love when I discover a book that proves fiction can be edgy without being trashy. This one is very clean (just some kissing on a bed, which I'd never recommend or let my kids do, but which is tame compared to most stuff). It helps that the book doesn't have to get its kicks from, or hinge on, its romance. The romance is slowly incorporated, and the focus remains equally spread among all the other plot points. There's also no love triangle. I don't necessarily mind love triangles, but they are overused as a source of conflict in young adult novels. This book has enough conflict without that.
Edgy and clean are not the only things the book has going for it. It offers a fascinating world and setting with vivid, vibrant storytelling. I will confess, I was a tad skeptical when I realized the book's dystopian setting revolves around five factions based on five virtues. They aren't even the type of virtues you'd expect a society to naturally divide itself into. I was, like, how can you make that interesting? But it works, and I think it works in part because of the characters. The story is narrated by a strong central female character, who is a good role model for readers but also a very cool heroine: an independent thinker and the very opposite of the damsel in distress. The book also explores family relationships and ethics, asking and partially answering some hefty moral questions. This is my kind of story: fully entertaining but also full of the right kind of message.
Not everyone can write a book like that. Though I've found surprising gems in the secular (as opposed to Christian) market, and though I prefer to read secular young adult fiction (partly because I think the preachiness of a novel diminishes its entertainment and value as purely good storytelling), I'm always looking for a book that balances the two perfectly: an amazingly good story with a subtle backbone, holding the story together with a piece of Truth. I shouldn't have been surprised when I saw first thing in the acknowledgments a thank you to God. It's just so rare that an author can write a book I like and not leave a clue (other than the subtle moral bent of the story) that she's a Christian. Just to clarify, this is not a book written for the Christian market. The difference is that the value shows through without the preachiness.
So, after loving the book and then, icing on the cake, discovering the author's worldview, I was very excited about her and went snooping around a bit on her website. She's young, 24, and worked on Divergent in college. She claims to be a Christian, and from what I can tell (since I've only looked at a little of her blog), she is truly. You can read a little bit about some of her beliefs here. This especially excites me because I love seeing Christian authors in the secular market. We need to be there!
Insurgent
Since I am a latecomer to this series, I was fortunate to have a second book waiting to be read after I finished Divergent. Book 2, Insurgent, is fascinating in a bit of a different way than the first (the newness of the concept has worn off, after all), but for me, it worked perfectly to finish one and then start the other because Insurgent literally picks up where Divergent leaves off, no time lapse or anything. I don't want to spoil the plot of Divergent, so I won't say exactly what the sequel is about. The title kind of speaks for itself. One of the interesting things about Insurgent is that we get to see more of each of the different factions and what life is like in each. In Insurgent, Beatrice (known as Tris) is dealing with the fallout of some terrible choices she had to make, so there's some internal conflict, which begins to leak into her interactions with others, particularly her boyfriend, adding to the already extensive external conflicts of a cracking world.
Insurgent tackles a few more big moral questions and also touches lightly and briefly on the subject of God. There is one scene, in particular, that just struck me with its absolute Truth but that could have easily been missed or misunderstood by those who don't share the author's beliefs in God. It contains a simple statement, almost too vague for a Christian, but I thought it was spot-on. Basically, the author, through Tris, declares that whatever happens after we die has nothing to do with us, or at least with our trying. Isn't that the fundamental difference between Christianity and any other belief system? The world believes we have to earn heaven, and Christianity says it is a gift.
I kind of saw the end of Insurgent coming, and it wasn't as big a cliffhanger as I would have liked. However, the third book of the series has a lot of potential to work with, and whether or not you guess the end of Insurgent does not make the book any less of a good one. The whole setting is different from the first, and some might like it less for that. But I think that helps keep Insurgent from being just a repeat of everything we might have loved in the first book. It stands on its own two feet.
According to Veronica Roth's website, her third book comes out in the fall, October 22nd! Too bad I raced through the first two and now have to wait! (Hint, hint to my family, it will be at the top of my birthday wish list this year.) Four stars for each of the books in this series, and bravo to one of my new fiction heroes: Veronica Roth!
Divergent has been popping up on my radar for some time now. It's the first in a young adult series, by Veronica Roth, that is still ongoing, and it seems to be fairly popular. I'd seen the cover so many times, I could almost have convinced myself I'd read it, just because it's the kind of book I love and how could I have missed it? But I did miss it...until now. And I'm so glad I finally found out why this book won't go away. It shouldn't go away. It's good. It's epic. I'm not sure it would translate to a movie as well as, say, The Hunger Games (though the film rights have been sold), but it's that kind of a compelling read, written in the same first person present tense as The Hunger Games, and also dystopian, but a whole different kind of story. I really hate when books compare themselves to The Hunger Games, and as I like to say, the next Hunger Games will be something as completely different as that was from Twilight when it appeared, so I guess that rules Divergent out (being similar because of genre only). But it really shouldn't. Divergent is different and fascinating, with edgy, strong characters and strong themes that delve into emotion, or the lack thereof, and what it means to be a decent human in a world where humanity is compartmentalized. In particular, this novel explores what it means to be selfless versus brave.
Beatrice belongs to one of five factions (named for five virtues) who live in a future version of Chicago. Her faction is Abnegation (the virtue of selflessness), but that might soon change. At the age of 16, Beatrice must choose the faction she will live in the rest of her life. Most stay with the faction they've always known, especially since changing factions usually means saying good-bye to family forever. "Faction before family." However, Beatrice doesn't feel like she belongs there. The aptitude tests can help her decide what she's best suited for, but Beatrice's test results just confuse the issue. She has always admired the Dauntless (the virtue of bravery), but is she brave enough to jump off moving trains, fight mismatched opponents in hand-to-hand combat, and defy death itself? Then there's Candor (the virtue of honesty), Amity (the virtue of peacefulness), and Erudite (the virtue of intelligence). It's a world where each faction focuses it's passions on one narrow emotion and contributes to one aspect of society in order to better create a world of peace. But all perfect worlds, as time muddies memory, eventually unravel, the best intentions turning toward selfish pursuit. And when Beatrice stumbles upon a secret worth her very life, she realizes the system has already begun to break.
I love when I discover a book that proves fiction can be edgy without being trashy. This one is very clean (just some kissing on a bed, which I'd never recommend or let my kids do, but which is tame compared to most stuff). It helps that the book doesn't have to get its kicks from, or hinge on, its romance. The romance is slowly incorporated, and the focus remains equally spread among all the other plot points. There's also no love triangle. I don't necessarily mind love triangles, but they are overused as a source of conflict in young adult novels. This book has enough conflict without that.
Edgy and clean are not the only things the book has going for it. It offers a fascinating world and setting with vivid, vibrant storytelling. I will confess, I was a tad skeptical when I realized the book's dystopian setting revolves around five factions based on five virtues. They aren't even the type of virtues you'd expect a society to naturally divide itself into. I was, like, how can you make that interesting? But it works, and I think it works in part because of the characters. The story is narrated by a strong central female character, who is a good role model for readers but also a very cool heroine: an independent thinker and the very opposite of the damsel in distress. The book also explores family relationships and ethics, asking and partially answering some hefty moral questions. This is my kind of story: fully entertaining but also full of the right kind of message.
Not everyone can write a book like that. Though I've found surprising gems in the secular (as opposed to Christian) market, and though I prefer to read secular young adult fiction (partly because I think the preachiness of a novel diminishes its entertainment and value as purely good storytelling), I'm always looking for a book that balances the two perfectly: an amazingly good story with a subtle backbone, holding the story together with a piece of Truth. I shouldn't have been surprised when I saw first thing in the acknowledgments a thank you to God. It's just so rare that an author can write a book I like and not leave a clue (other than the subtle moral bent of the story) that she's a Christian. Just to clarify, this is not a book written for the Christian market. The difference is that the value shows through without the preachiness.
So, after loving the book and then, icing on the cake, discovering the author's worldview, I was very excited about her and went snooping around a bit on her website. She's young, 24, and worked on Divergent in college. She claims to be a Christian, and from what I can tell (since I've only looked at a little of her blog), she is truly. You can read a little bit about some of her beliefs here. This especially excites me because I love seeing Christian authors in the secular market. We need to be there!
Insurgent
Since I am a latecomer to this series, I was fortunate to have a second book waiting to be read after I finished Divergent. Book 2, Insurgent, is fascinating in a bit of a different way than the first (the newness of the concept has worn off, after all), but for me, it worked perfectly to finish one and then start the other because Insurgent literally picks up where Divergent leaves off, no time lapse or anything. I don't want to spoil the plot of Divergent, so I won't say exactly what the sequel is about. The title kind of speaks for itself. One of the interesting things about Insurgent is that we get to see more of each of the different factions and what life is like in each. In Insurgent, Beatrice (known as Tris) is dealing with the fallout of some terrible choices she had to make, so there's some internal conflict, which begins to leak into her interactions with others, particularly her boyfriend, adding to the already extensive external conflicts of a cracking world.
Insurgent tackles a few more big moral questions and also touches lightly and briefly on the subject of God. There is one scene, in particular, that just struck me with its absolute Truth but that could have easily been missed or misunderstood by those who don't share the author's beliefs in God. It contains a simple statement, almost too vague for a Christian, but I thought it was spot-on. Basically, the author, through Tris, declares that whatever happens after we die has nothing to do with us, or at least with our trying. Isn't that the fundamental difference between Christianity and any other belief system? The world believes we have to earn heaven, and Christianity says it is a gift.
I kind of saw the end of Insurgent coming, and it wasn't as big a cliffhanger as I would have liked. However, the third book of the series has a lot of potential to work with, and whether or not you guess the end of Insurgent does not make the book any less of a good one. The whole setting is different from the first, and some might like it less for that. But I think that helps keep Insurgent from being just a repeat of everything we might have loved in the first book. It stands on its own two feet.
According to Veronica Roth's website, her third book comes out in the fall, October 22nd! Too bad I raced through the first two and now have to wait! (Hint, hint to my family, it will be at the top of my birthday wish list this year.) Four stars for each of the books in this series, and bravo to one of my new fiction heroes: Veronica Roth!
Saturday, February 2, 2013
Mortal (The Books of Mortals #2)
If you read and loved The Circle Series by Ted Dekker, his newest Books of Mortals fantasy, co-written with Tosca Lee, is right up your alley. The series begins with Forbidden, reviewed previously HERE, and Mortal is the sequel. The third book, Sovereign, will be released this June. If you haven't read Forbidden and plan to, skip this review for now until you are caught up.
Mortal begins nine years after the events in Forbidden. Rom is now leader of the Keepers who have allied with the Nomads in a group numbering over a thousand brought to life through Jonathan's blood. They call themselves Mortals. The rest of the world is essentially dead, purged of all emotions except fear, which keeps them docile and obedient. In a few days, young Jonathan is set to come of age and take the throne to rule the world, but evil has been waiting for this moment to rise. Saric, supposed dead (truly dead) by the Mortals, is more alive than they could possibly guess. Through alchemy, he has devised a way to feel emotion, albeit a darker version than the Mortals experience, and he's amassed a loyal army from his own blood. The Mortals have dedicated themselves to serving Jonathan, in awe and thanks for the life he's given them, and all their efforts have been poured into preparing to live a life under his rule. But when Jonathan's succession to the throne is suddenly called into question and an army stands in the way of what should have been an easy transition, the Mortals are suddenly thrown into chaos. It doesn't help that their soon-to-be sovereign is reluctant to step into the spotlight and doesn't seem cut out to rule. In fact, the boy seems to have plans of his own...plans that could get him killed.
Ted Dekker's fantasy series are far different from his thrillers, and this one is perhaps even more different than his usual fare because it's co-written. Yet his fantasy series are very similar to each other. In some ways, The Books of Mortals seems like a repeat of The Circle Series. Both are somewhat allegorical, containing symbolic representations of similar Christian ideas. Both take place in a world that has fantastical elements (like superhuman power) but is actually our world at a different point in history. The story arcs of the two series are even similar: characters awaken to a new, vibrant life, but they rebel against any further change, and further change is always required. Thematically, as well, the stories are parallel. Further change comes through sacrifice and blood and appears, to those on the outside, to be unnecessary, even a regression. In fact, the only difference I see between the two series is the packaging of the plot itself, and to be honest, though The Books of Mortals series rests on an intriguing premise, The Circle Series is, as far as I'm able to compare the two with one yet unfinished, the more complex, interesting series. That's not to say The Books of Mortals isn't entertaining and insightful. But comparing the two, it seems like it's been done before, and done so well as to be a difficult act to follow.
As for Mortal itself, I didn't really get into the book until halfway through. It's not as punchy as a Dekker thriller. It takes its time setting the stage for the second half of the book. That's just how fantasy is, often, but since I'm normally grabbed pretty quickly by a Dekker book, I noticed the slow going even more than I might have. The second half of the book, however, is thrilling. The payoff begins. Everything unravels. The characters' lives get worse before they get better. It's the type of conflict that keeps you reading, and it's everything good storytelling should be. Not comparing it to the books of The Circle Series, it's a crazy ride by its own right in an intriguing world with edgy, conflicted characters who explore the deepest themes of life in the ultimate good versus evil plot.
For Ted Dekker, who often likes to blow your mind by making everything you thought you knew about God wilder and more uncomfortable, Mortal is not his strongest portrayal of Truth, though it's certainly full of the right stuff. For me, it was only a three-star read. But that doesn't mean I won't own and treasure this series, like I do most of his other books, because when it comes to Truth, Dekker hits it on the nail.
Mortal begins nine years after the events in Forbidden. Rom is now leader of the Keepers who have allied with the Nomads in a group numbering over a thousand brought to life through Jonathan's blood. They call themselves Mortals. The rest of the world is essentially dead, purged of all emotions except fear, which keeps them docile and obedient. In a few days, young Jonathan is set to come of age and take the throne to rule the world, but evil has been waiting for this moment to rise. Saric, supposed dead (truly dead) by the Mortals, is more alive than they could possibly guess. Through alchemy, he has devised a way to feel emotion, albeit a darker version than the Mortals experience, and he's amassed a loyal army from his own blood. The Mortals have dedicated themselves to serving Jonathan, in awe and thanks for the life he's given them, and all their efforts have been poured into preparing to live a life under his rule. But when Jonathan's succession to the throne is suddenly called into question and an army stands in the way of what should have been an easy transition, the Mortals are suddenly thrown into chaos. It doesn't help that their soon-to-be sovereign is reluctant to step into the spotlight and doesn't seem cut out to rule. In fact, the boy seems to have plans of his own...plans that could get him killed.
Ted Dekker's fantasy series are far different from his thrillers, and this one is perhaps even more different than his usual fare because it's co-written. Yet his fantasy series are very similar to each other. In some ways, The Books of Mortals seems like a repeat of The Circle Series. Both are somewhat allegorical, containing symbolic representations of similar Christian ideas. Both take place in a world that has fantastical elements (like superhuman power) but is actually our world at a different point in history. The story arcs of the two series are even similar: characters awaken to a new, vibrant life, but they rebel against any further change, and further change is always required. Thematically, as well, the stories are parallel. Further change comes through sacrifice and blood and appears, to those on the outside, to be unnecessary, even a regression. In fact, the only difference I see between the two series is the packaging of the plot itself, and to be honest, though The Books of Mortals series rests on an intriguing premise, The Circle Series is, as far as I'm able to compare the two with one yet unfinished, the more complex, interesting series. That's not to say The Books of Mortals isn't entertaining and insightful. But comparing the two, it seems like it's been done before, and done so well as to be a difficult act to follow.
As for Mortal itself, I didn't really get into the book until halfway through. It's not as punchy as a Dekker thriller. It takes its time setting the stage for the second half of the book. That's just how fantasy is, often, but since I'm normally grabbed pretty quickly by a Dekker book, I noticed the slow going even more than I might have. The second half of the book, however, is thrilling. The payoff begins. Everything unravels. The characters' lives get worse before they get better. It's the type of conflict that keeps you reading, and it's everything good storytelling should be. Not comparing it to the books of The Circle Series, it's a crazy ride by its own right in an intriguing world with edgy, conflicted characters who explore the deepest themes of life in the ultimate good versus evil plot.
For Ted Dekker, who often likes to blow your mind by making everything you thought you knew about God wilder and more uncomfortable, Mortal is not his strongest portrayal of Truth, though it's certainly full of the right stuff. For me, it was only a three-star read. But that doesn't mean I won't own and treasure this series, like I do most of his other books, because when it comes to Truth, Dekker hits it on the nail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)