How to be Happy?

The Geography of Bliss

Eric Weiner

Stephanie gave me this for Christmas, saying it was quite interesting ~ and the reason that she shows her location on Facebook as Iceland. Weiner claims to be a largely unhappy person, so considers himself perfect for conducting an investigation into happiness, specifically how the country one inhabits affects one's happiness. I suppose i like the idea; the writing was a little cuter than i care for usually; not enough to put me off reading the book, but perhaps enough to slow me down before picking up another by Weiner. The actual research ~ the book itself is largely anecdotal ~ is interesting, fascinating, one might almost say, as one's location and culture do seem to have some effect on happiness. In particular, monocultural places seem to be happier than multicultural, which is information that large swathes of the liberal West would do well to know and appreciate. Still, some of the responsibility must lie with the individual person, and Weiner seems to accept this, embrace it even, as he finds that his happiness level doesn't seem to change much no matter where he is nor how his circumstances vary.

Five books; two reviews

Nine Princes in Amber

The Guns of Avalon

The Sign of the Unicorn

Roger Zelazny

I stayed with Chen and Tony for the weekend, and while she was showing me her books Chen and i talked a bit about this series, how i encouraged her to start it one time when she was bored, how i had read it with Kathy White back in the summer of 1980 on the Oyster River farm, how it is so good and easy to read. I remembered the opening lines of Nine Princes, or thought i did, and opened it to take a look, and i was hooked, again.

It is surely a sign of a classic that i can remember the first time i read this series, the events surrounding that reading, when and where i bought the books, as well as the appearance of the first ones i read and the set i bought ~ which is, sadly, a part of the huge collection we have “temporarily” left in the US ~ and at least one other time i read the whole thing. I have, on at least one occasion, gone on to reading more, beyond the original five, which Zelazny added some years later, but did not find them of the same compelling quality; i know, for example, that i have read more, but i don't remember how many, nor am i certain where i got them, nor when (those two are close to the same, libraries depending on geography and personal history for me), nor anything about them other than a certain disappointment. That lack of compulsion, the relative loss of memory about the sequels, tends to show me that the subsequent books are of a lower quality; understandable, as the originals are so high, but disappointing nonetheless.

So, looking at the opening lines, as i say, i was immediately drawn in, as i suspected, if i am honest, i would be. The books read so quickly that i really had no difficulty in racing through them, finishing three of the five in the fortyeight hours or so i was in Cardiff. As well as the conversations, the walk to the city, the music we listened to, the films we watched. What is it, then, which makes these so easy to read? Part of it has to be the plot, which is fairly simple, but quite compelling; who doesn't understand family strife, the desire to change situation or circumstances, and the struggle to better ourselves? Another part is clearly the language; Zelazny is not prone to complex grammar or sentences, nor is his vocabulary awkward or specialised, which makes the whole easy going. The characters, too, are a part of the attraction, as it is possible to see truth in all of them, their interactions, their different facets. Overall, whatever the reasons, this is a series i love, and it was delightful to be able to renew acquaintanceship with it again.

The Hand of Oberon

The Courts of Chaos

Roger Zelazny

Visiting Chenowyth again, so reading more of her collection of Zelazny's Amber Chronicles, finishing them, in fact, and liking them in just the same measure and way as i have previously. I have always found certain portions of the novels a bit too florid, confusing, ultimately pointless, for my taste. Zelazny has Corwin, his narrator give several descriptions of what he calls hell-rides, and he describes Chaos on one or two occasions as well; to my mind they are unnecessary and distracting ~ to be perfectly honest, i often skip them altogether, leaving me a slight feeling of guilt ~ and more about showing that Zelazny is more than just a story-teller, that he can write exciting prose too. There are more of these passages in the final book, The Courts of Chaos, than in any of the others, and ~ coincidence? probably not ~ it is the weakest book. Not actually weak, though; the whole pentology is excellent, despite one or two untied loose ends which are probably because the whole is so complex that there simply would have been too much to pull everything together and answer every single question properly. Or maybe Zelazny just missed some. I just wish that the later books lived up to these five.

Surreal

The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake

Aimee Bender

Judging by the picture on the front cover (a young girl holding some lemons) and Jodi Picoult's name endorsing it, i assumed when Abi lent it to me that this was going to be a (female oriented) juvenile such as she and Bailey used to read. Now, having finished, i'm not sure. Not sure at all, in fact, what category or genre it might fit into: There are elements of that juvenile (the protagonist/narrator is female and, for a large portion of the book, prepubescent or adolescent), to be sure; there are also pointers towards the adult (not least the themes of broken people and relationships); not only that, but also a strong current of the surreal which doesn't really aid in genre-assignment but certainly adds to the interest of the book. 

The first element of surrealism encountered is the ability of the narrator to taste the emotions of a cook in their products. Actually, it might be fairer to say, the inability of her not to taste their truest emotions and desires in anything they make. As interesting as this sounds, it is for her the most awful ability, as she does not have a happy home life and, in particular, her mother (chief cook) is lonely and sad to begin with, then guilty over an affair later. There are other surreal elements, not least the knack that her brother has of completely disappearing, at first for a few minutes while babysitting, later for days or weeks at a time. 

I'm glad i have read it, mostly for the oddity; the portrayal of characters is good, particularly the relationship, such as it is, between the narrator and her brother's best friend, which is perhaps the realest portion of the book.

Oh. Yes!

Full disclosure:  I had some small part in helping to prepare this book for publication.

Warrior of the Ages
S.R. Karfelt

Why should you read Warrior of the Ages?  Great story; well defined characters who are easy to like (love); an unusual idea of immortality (dying some thirty times a millennium); an easy, flowing narrative style.

Why not read it?  I've given it thought, and for the reader of fiction, especially speculative fiction (a rather wide genre), i can only think of one reason:  There is a religious element, in that some form of non-corporeal beings form a part of the structure of the book.  On the one hand, this might be enough to turn some off; on the other, it's only religious in the sense that A Bear Called Paddington is ursine.  In other words, that's no reason not to read the thing.

To be perfectly honest, i love this book; and i am not shy about spelling out the flaws of books i read and review (see others of my reviews ~ this one ~ or ~ that one ~ for proof).

A Mixed Review

Joshua's Key

H. Brading

Rather funny that two books i finish within consecutive days are both ones i have complex reactions to. There are a number of things to be said about Joshua's Key, the question is, where to start? Perhaps, in this case, with the greatest strength of the book, its plot. Something over five hundred pages long, it is filled with the action and development of a strong plot. While there is never any true doubt that good will triumph (the result of the opposite being the entire destruction of the world Brading has created), the threat to that triumph is strong and, while it lasts, well developed.

In addition to the plot, another strength is the characters; they are numerous and varied, from wizards to aquatic men with gills and webbed feet to, perhaps her greatest thought, nurturers who whisper to plants and encourage them to grow usefully. The world itself is quite an invention also, stretching from a land beneath the sea to the Garden of Eden. Each of these, plot, characters, world, is a reason for a positive element to the complex reaction Joshua's Key has evoked in me.

There is, however, a negative element provoked by other aspects of the book. The first thing i think of in this regard is something i have actually written about previously in reaction to reading this very book, some months ago, and it is very annoying to me, and that is the use of punctuation ~ or misuse, to be exact. Consistently, for example, Brading writes “tree's” when she means the plural of “tree”; i could give many other examples of the same or a similar errors with apostrophes. Clearly the book lacked a good, strong copy edit before it was published ~ or, if it had one, the copy editor was not worth his salt. There is no denying that i am a pedant and many errors i notice and am frustrated by would not be a problem for the average reader; nevertheless, the level of errors here is sufficient that, i have to think, even normal people (non-pedants) would be annoyed.  (I should not that i have written previously about this issue in Joshua's Key, at the other end of this link.)

The bigger issue, though, than the misuse of punctuation is another prepublication lack. I mentioned above the quality of the plot; unfortunately that quality is marred, for me, by a need for an editor to go through and reorganise and smooth out parts of it. Brading tells an excellent story, but she allows her reader to get muddled by whose story she is telling, at points, or how they link together, at other points. The problem arises, i think, because an author knows his story intimately, so is less able to see any weaknesses or quirks in the flow; it is the editor's job to point these out, maybe make suggestions as to corrections, and not allow the thing to go further until the story flows and is as strong as it can be.

I have no proof of it, but it is my suspicion that the story began as a series of bed-time stories which developed and grew into this huge novel. In mine opinion each of the flaws i have found can be explained by this origin and development as, for example, if the recipient of the story forgets a character it is easy for them to ask the story-teller quickly. The large plot is explained by the ability of the story-teller nightly to expand on what has happened, is happening, and, again, benefits from the intimate relationship between teller and listener. The occasional jumpiness of the episodes is explained by the necessity of nightly breaks and restarting the story after reminding the child what had happened. The huge character list is a result of not needing to work to the physical constraints of the space of a book, but having the time and luxury to expand and expound organically and as the demands of the story seem to require. None of these are fatal flaws, of necessity, to my mind, but they each lead to a build-up of annoyances and frustrations which made the book increasingly difficult to read, so much so that it has taken me several months to read what could have been done (by me, at least) in no more than one or even less.

I mentioned copy problems earlier; having been peripherally involved recently with the independent publication of a friend's book, i suspect that the manuscript was not submitted to a beta reader, nor to an external editor, which has proven to be a mistake. I think either, or both, would have caught and suggested corrections to many of the issues i have perceived as flaws (structural, grammatical, and typographical). In the end, my mixed response comes down on the “good book” side, but not heavily; i would, however, more than likely read another by the same author based on the name on the jacket, which is my criterion of success, especially if it had been through a stronger editing process. Brading clearly has great imagination, she merely needs additional prepublication discipline to tame it and make her creation fully accessible.

Happy to be pushed

Mystic River

Dennis Lehane

Abi ranted and raved about Dennis Lehane until i felt i had to read one of his books to see what she had enjoyed. And i am glad i did: By my severe but simple criterion, i would call this a successful book.

Lehane is a skilful producer of characters he is able to make the reader like; his murder victim, for a start, was more than just a bland entity to be killed, and i felt particularly sorry for her though i knew from before she was introduced that she was destined for a sticky end. Also the beginning of the book, taking place some twenty years before the main action, was an interesting touch; many authors have important events in the pasts of their characters, but they do not always make them such a complete part of the plot. Here the fact that Dave got into the car and Sean and Jimmy did not was essential, given totemic significance maybe, by the actual telling of the story, although Lehane, as is the wont of mystery writers, kept secrets to himself until he felt like revealing them.

The end of a the book was a little surprising ~ not the solution, well, that was a surprise as well, nicely done ~ but in the end a character i had grown to like (though he was becoming more and more fearsome) eventually essentially decides to ignore the forces of good and law in the city and run or rule his own neighbourhood himself; it was a bit like watching Vito Corleone become the Godfather, and not the ending i had wanted for him. Part of what makes a good author is the ability to be both predictable and surprising.

Playing with Early Reviewers'

It’s Game Time Somewhere

Tim Forbes

A month and a half since i’ve finished a book! Surely a record for me ~ and not one i would care to surpass ever again.

This was an Early Reviewers’ book, and one which i enjoyed, albeit not one i probably would have picked up of mine own accord. Sports is not something which particularly interests me, to participate in, to watch, or to read about. I can, obviously, do all three, and have done, in the past: Most especially playing at school or, less frequently, with friends (football, rugby, cricket, hockey, softball, among others) and watching ice hockey in Canada. Usually it is merely chance, though, that brings me a book on sport, and that chance this time has done me a favour, as Forbes is quite interesting in his quest to spend a year watching different sports.

He is a man of about the same age as me, who has a mid-life crisis by way of suddenly realising that his chosen field of labour ~ specifically chosen for its pleasure potential, as he left finance to work in golf tournament promotion ~ no longer holds joy for him; he begins to wonder if he has the capacity to enjoy sport, any sport, any more, or if working in it has drained it for him. Similar, i suppose, to what might happen if i had left retail to work in publishing then, after some years, discovered i no longer read nor missed it. This quest which he gives himself, watching 100 games in fifty sports in a year, is his attempt to discover if he has entirely lost the enjoyment ability, or if he can recapture it.

For much of the year, it seems, his quest is not very successful, as he is shown over and over that professional sports has little to offer, and is intent on making money in any way it possibly can. This he calls the Monster. Apparently later in the year, however, certainly later in the book, Forbes starts to undergo a change, driven by the sports he is compelled to watch in order to complete the quest under the original terms ~ there not being fifty professional sports available to watch he has to go to some lengths to find amateur games and finds some he had never run across before. During this latter portion, he is given several experiences which renew his faith in sport, cover or remove the bad taste left by the Monster, and help him to understand that those who participate in a sport purely for the love of it have a great advantage over those who have other motivations. In the end the moral is fairly predictable, not entirely believable, but worth the time put in to it.

I have some reservations about the book, partly Forbes' style (which is perhaps a little overly humorous and casual for my taste), as well as quirks of the digitalisation which left the second of every double “f” capitalised (you have no idea how tired i got of reading “ofF” or variations thereof), and put in paragraph breaks where none were needed or expected. I'm not certain i'd read another based purely on Forbes' name ~ perhaps if it were a subject i wanted to learn more about, which would leave most sports out ~ so i cannot sincerely call the book a success by my criterion. On the other hand, certainly not a complete failure, either, as many of his descriptions of events, places, and people, are well done (by no means did i intend to imply above that his style is appalling, just not entirely to my taste), and he is clearly knowledgeable about his subject.

The Last Frontier

Alistair MacLean

One of MacLean's earlier books, and perhaps stronger for being that. The action depends more on character and plans than coincidence or deus ex machina, which is more satisfying than some of his later books' plots. The characters are his usual types, almost superhuman, a man who drinks ridiculous quantities of alcohol without being affected, men who are willing to die but, generally do not have to; interestingly, there is a woman who functions as a romantic interest for the protagonist, which is fairly unusual for MacLean ~ perhaps he needed to put her in to further the plot, which her presence does do a few times, so overcame his usual reluctance for romance which might slow down the action.

Curiously, for a man who was concerned about keeping the action going, there is quite a large amount of moralising or philosophising in the novel, largely in the mouth of one character; certainly the character who expresses the opinions, which are essentially those which say all men are brothers and must learn to live together, is a man who is in a position to speak with authority: He had been a partisan during the Second World War, successfully and violently fighting the Russians in Ukraine, then ending up as an anti-government actor in post-War Hungary, helping his fellows to escape the torture and inhumanity of the Communist government. Unfortunately, i found that the philosophy slowed down the action at a point when really it should have been racing towards the end. Still, it seems to me that MacLean was willing to take this action because this character seems to speak for him, and he believed it essential that the world think about his points.

As mentioned above, the book takes place in Hungary; as it was released in 1959, it seems likely that it was inspired (some of the action makes this clear also) by the events of the Hungarian Revolution and its awful oppression by the USSR, and fairly clearly MacLean was so horrified by these actions that he found it necessary to use his available pulpit to publish his opinion of the Cold War.

History, Times Two

Washington and the American Revolution

Esmond Wright

I still don't have the almost instinctive grasp of American history that i find in myself over the British variety; i suppose this is because the one was not put into my brain through stories, books, classes, while i was young enough to take it in without realising it, whereas the other most certainly was. Influenced, i suppose, by my many years of living in the United States, i feel strongly that this lack of grasp is a weakness in me, though i am well aware that the average American probably doesn't know as much of their own history as do i, and it is a weakness i am always willing to correct; Wright's book was the latest venture in that direction.

I have learned some, though of course the outlines were familiar to me previously, of both Washington's biography and the course of the Revolution ~ as well as some of its causes; more, though, i have taken pleasure in the quality of the writing, which is never preachy, nor overly rhetorical, but simple and easy to follow (i only recall one name i had to chase down for a previous reference, despite taking some weeks to read the book), clear and good prose. I shall, which i don't often do with history, see if i can find more of Wright's writings to pursue.

Courage: Eight Portraits

Gordon Brown

I was a little disappointed in this book, i have to confess. I could not help comparing it, even unconsciously, with JFK's Portraits of Courage, which comparison must have been in the back of Brown's mind when he conceived of and produced the work; and i am not sure that the comparison is to Brown's benefit.

Kennedy's book has its drawbacks or weaknesses, not least the suspicion that it was largely written by someone else, but it was and is an enjoyable book; though this one is, i would suspect, more completely “All my own work!” than Kennedy's, Brown does not have a sparkling prose style. A highly successful Chancellor, in part because he had the earned reputation of being able to destroy his detractors in Parliament or the press, the iron fist style is not so useful in writing what was surely conceived as a collection of popular biographies. Writing for the public, one does not want to bludgeon one's readers into appreciation; that way lies an ever diminishing audience.

A further problem i found was that Brown tries to analyse what he means by “courage”, and i'm not sure that i followed him properly; either that or i just disagree with his definition. He seems to be using a definition different from the usual, and it appears that it is on occasion flexible to the point of not really meaning anything other than “something i admire”; the chapter on Cicely Saunders, for example, completely puzzles me, because i don't understand what about her or her actions was courageous: Admirable, certainly, needed, appropriate, difficult, each of these would be apposite adjectives, but courageous

I was ready to be pleased by Brown's choices of portrayers of courage, a modern continuation of JFK's book in some sense, and was pleased to see Mandela (obvious choice), Cavell (a uniquely British heroine), and Wallenberg (unbelievably heroic, and not well-known enough) on the cover. King and Kennedy (RFK, not his brother) and even Bonhoeffer i imagined were particular and personal choices for Brown. Saunders i knew nothing about, not even the name, so i had no opinion; i have to say, having read the book, i can only imagine that she is a personal hero of Brown's for some reason he feels unable to bring out, or she is a cultural hero i haven't heard of (not an uncommon thing), and he felt he couldn't miss her out, even though she doesn't fit the scheme.

All in all, not a successful book, by my criterion. Certainly, if i come across it, i am quite likely to read another book by Brown; it won't be on the basis of my pleasure in this one, though, so much as who he is.

I'm not a film critic, but...

Up

I find it rather difficult to decide what i want to say about Up in this review: I am glad i've seen it, as i like Pixar's work and am happy to see any of their films at least once ~ and there are still several i've not seen, though one less now; on the other hand, i found it curiously unsatisfying, much more so than any other Pixar film i've seen. I hope they haven't lost their touch, that this was simply an aberration or, as may be more likely, just something that did not work for me, however well it may have been received (i really have no idea of its reception, so that statement is simply guesswork).

So, to explore my reaction, i start with the thing which Pixar says is at the heart of every one of their films, story. I really found the story troubling, i have no other word for it. The first minute or so sets up the plot, an explorer returning to the wilds to redeem his name. The next five to ten minutes tell the lovely and touching story of a boy and his neighbour who grow up together in admiration of the explorer, with determination to follow in his footsteps; they appear to have a lovely romance, marry, and live happily together; like so many things in so many lives, their plans do not come to fruition, and she eventually dies, leaving him an apparently bitter old man. The rest of the film recounts how this man defies the world he lives in, is brought to a new humanity by a small boy, and discovers the feet of clay of his childhood hero, in the process attempting to fulfil the ambition he and his wife had always had. The problem that i have is that by far the nicest character in the film is killed off within the first ten minutes, and from that point on it seems a let-down.

There are also a number of plot points left unanswered that, under usual circumstances i don't think i would be bothered by but, with the big plot problem mentioned above, they bother me now. For example, how could the explorer possibly be still alive and so active as he is some fifty years, at least, after he left civilisation the second time? Is there some non-aging characteristic to the atmosphere in this lost world area? Has he discovered the fountain of youth? Whatever the answer, it ought to have played some part in the story. Another annoyance: How has the explorer managed to create devices which allow his dogs to talk? It's a nice conceit, but needs some kind of explanation. How does his device interpret what the dogs think? Why does the alpha dog talk with a foreign accent? Questions that are demanding to be answered because the story is not strong enough to hold mine attention.

To move on from the story, the quality of the rest of the production is, as always, very good. The animation is well done, though less realistic or believable than in some other of Pixar's films (i believe in Woody and Buzz, for example, because they appear real; the explorer is the only character here who has that same reality appearance, which makes the rest of them less believable, though not less visually enjoyable). The actors lending their voices to the production are well chosen and have given enjoyable performances. Always a pleasure to hear Cliff Claven's distinctive sound in one of these films. Production values, then, whatever exactly that phrase means, seem not to have been lost.

My only issue with the film is with the story ~ unfortunately, arguably, the most important feature about it. I wonder if this slip by Pixar has anything to do with the fact that they were bought by Disney, as opposed to merely having a distribution agreement with them, at some point before it was made. I have no reason to think that Disney would mess up Pixar's abilities; it is simply a guess based on timing and result (and, admittedly, the fact that like much of corporate America, Disney has a habit of steamrollering anything which does not fit its own “values”). Whatever the reason, though, i was disappointed by Up, and hope that the next film i watch from this studio will have a better focus on story.