Browsing Category

Books

Books

Book roundup post to clear out the re-buy backlog and also new stuff

Picked up in paperback from B&N:

  • Cold Days, by Jim Butcher. The last released Dresden Files. Because I was waiting for this to hit mass market, so I could go ahead and finally pick it up. I love me some Dresden but not at $14.99 a pop for the ebook.
  • Chimes at Midnight, by Seanan McGuire. The latest Toby Daye. Because Seanan
  • Terminated, by Rachel Caine. Book 3 of her Revivalist series.

Picked up from Smashwords:

  • Finding Home, by M.M. Justus, a.k.a. userinfommegaera! Historical romance with a side helping of time travel. This is the third in her series, and she just released it. Check her out over here and tell her I sent you.

Picked up electronically from B&N:

  • Cold Days, by Jim Butcher. Because picking it up electronically too, now that the price has finally dropped.
  • Bone Crossed and Silver Borne, by Patricia Briggs. Books 4 and 5 of Briggs’ Mercy Thompson series. Re-buy electronically of books previously owned in print.

And, picked up electronically from Kobo, which were all electronic re-buys of books previously owned in print:

  • The Mystery of Grace and Muse and Reverie, by Charles de Lint.
  • Veil of Lies, by Jeri Westerson. Had grabbed this one before because it was described as medieval noir, and I liked the sound of that.

154 for the year.

Books

August is full of all the awesome books roundup post

Ebooks grabbed from Book View Cafe:

  • A Fatal Twist of Lemon and A Sprig of Blossomed Thorn, by Patrice Greenwood. First two books of a cozy mystery series oriented around a tea shop. Grabbed these because 1) I like tea! and 2) Book 1 was very favorably reviewed by Doranna Durgin on Goodreads. And I’m quite willing to follow her recommendations!
  • Dispossession and Light Errant, by Chaz Brenchley. Couple more books by the excellent Chaz Brenchley, ebook repubs of some of his backlist.
  • French Fried, by Chris Dolley. Humor/true crime, grabbed because I saw it while poking around the BVC site and I thought it sounded potentially charming and amusing.

And from Barnes and Noble:

  • Codex Born, by Jim C. Hines. Book 2 of his Libriomancer series, bought because urban fantasy with book-based magic! Also because I adore Jim’s books.
  • Possession, by Kat Richardson. Book 8 of the Greywalker series. Bought because, as previously mentioned, big fan of those books.
  • Blood of Tyrants, by Naomi Novik. Book 8 of the Temeraire series. Bought because BOOK 8 OF TEMERAIRE SERIES. 😀

144 for the year.

Books

Somewhere, the Emerson family is mourning

Oh, sadness. I just saw the news that Barbara Mertz, better known to the world as Barbara Michaels and Elizabeth Peters, has passed away.

This one hurts, folks. Ms. Mertz, as many of you know, was a huge formative influence on both my reading as an adolescent and my writing once I began to put stories together myself. She was my gold standard for how to create memorable, vivid leading characters, and especially, in the case of the Amelia Peabody series, how to make a married couple have a dynamic relationship over many, many novels.

I have every single one of her novels under both her pen names, and I’ve adored every one. Not only the Emersons (and oh god Ramses! And Nefret! And so, so many wonderful cats!), but also her Vicky Bliss series and her many wonderful standalone suspense/Gothic novels written as Barbara Michaels.

Many condolences to her family and loved ones, and to all of you who loved her novels as much I do.

ETA: Here’s another, longer story on her from CBS News.

ETA #2: CriminalElement.com has a post up about her passing, now.

Books

Quick book roundup post

Picked up from Kobo:

  • Wisp of a Thing and “Shall We Gather” by Alex Bledsoe. Second book of Bledsoe’s Tufa series, and a related short story as well. Grabbed these and promptly devoured them as soon as I finished The Hum and the Shiver.
  • Triptych by J.M. Frey. Grabbed this because she appears in the Doubleclicks’ new “Nothing to Prove” video, with a sign saying she has to use a gender-neutral name to get any respect as a writer–and she invoked Julie Czerneda. Who, as y’all know, is a holy name in SF as far as I’m concerned. So yeah, promptly found and grabbed her book!
  • The Magister’s Mask, Too Many Princes, and The Necromancer’s Bones by Deby Fredericks. I actually own all of these in trade paperback but was pleased to see them finally in electronic form. Deby Fredericks is a former leader of the Telgar Weyr club I used to be in, so yeah, had to support her with these purchases!

Picked up from Smashwords:

  • Seven Exalted Orders, by Deby Fredericks. See previous. Grabbed this one directly off of Smashwords rather than Kobo, to cut out the middle layer.

136 for the year.

Books

Tarzan, Jane, and books about them both

I’ve just finished Jane: The Woman Who Loved Tarzan by Robin Maxwell–her version of the Tarzan story, as told from Jane’s point of view. I didn’t fall in quite the same level of mad passionate love with it as I did The Hum and the Shiver, but nonetheless, I enjoyed the hell out of it. And as I’d planned to do when I finished it, I promptly then read the original Tarzan novel by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Tarzan of the Apes, since I’d never actually read a word of any of the original novels before.

Very interesting, comparing the two implementations of the story. The biggest differences with Maxwell’s version are of course with Jane herself–in Maxwell’s story, Jane is a much more active character. She’s a budding young scientist, not just a beautiful girl who’s there for Tarzan to love. The circumstance that get her and her father to Africa are much different, and once she’s there, she becomes the means through which Tarzan learns to communicate, and through which he learns about his own background. I definitely appreciated Jane being a woman of science, and the initial setup of Jane having to fight for a place in her father’s anatomy classes is fun. It’s clear that he’s overjoyed to have a daughter who follows in his footsteps, and he gets shit for working to get her admitted into the course, as well as for opting to take her to Africa in general–as you would expect for the time frame of the story.

Maxwell also bumped up the role of Tarzan’s mother, Lady Alice, in his background. In the original story she’s much more fragile, and in fact quietly snaps after she gives birth to him, believing herself back in England during the last year of her life. In Maxwell’s version, she’s a significantly sturdier character, actively working with her husband on their survival, which I appreciated as well.

And Maxwell has the story of how Kerchak’s tribe kills Tarzan’s parents be a much bigger deal. Tarzan-the-boy is a little older in her version when it happens, old enough to be traumatized by what he witnesses, and to block it out of his memory. But that also means that he’s old enough to retain dim memory of learning to talk from his parents, and that in turn plays into how Jane teaches him English later. And this also means that Kerchak as a character is a much bigger deal as well. Since Maxwell’s version of the story makes it clear that Kerchak and Kala’s species is sapient and a missing link between ape and human, they too are more active characters, and taking Kerchak down is a much more significant part of the story. Maxwell gives you actual dialogue for the Mangani, which is fun not only in contributing to the overall idea that yes, these are creatures with a language, but also to presenting the idea that Tarzan himself can handle the idea of words. He’s just not been introduced to English yet.

Overall I liked Maxwell’s version of that part of it all better–but one thing I did note with interest in the original is how Tarzan teaches himself to read from the books left behind in his parents’ house. So when the other main characters finally find him, he can leave them notes in English–but he can’t actually speak English, because he has no conception of how to vocalize the words he’s picked up out of the books. This makes for notable confusion on the part of the others, especially Jane, since they don’t initially realize that the strange jungle man who helps them is the same “Tarzan of the Apes” who keeps leaving them notes. It also amused me deeply that Burroughs had Tarzan learning to talk later thanks to a Frenchman, D’Arnot–which means of course that Tarzan’s first spoken language is French.

(D’Arnot appears in Maxwell’s story too, but in a much different capacity since Jane takes over the role of teaching Tarzan to communicate as well as civilized behavior in general. Maxwell’s D’Arnot is a more tragic figure.)

The other big thing that made me giggle about Burroughs’ story was how chock full of hammering you over the head with Tarzan’s awesomeness–and beauty!–it was. Jane swooning at his handsomeness was to be expected, but at least two of the male characters noted in their POVs his ‘handsome’ face, too. Even his own (unknown to anyone at the time, of course, but) cousin. SLASH GOGGLES ENGAGED!

I couldn’t read the Burroughs story without noting the problematic treatment of the native tribe that appears in it, as well as Tarzan’s behavior towards same. On the other hand, Maxwell swung a little bit too far in the opposite direction, with infodumps about how Jane was of course against the rampant colonialism that Britain and Europe were unleashing on the continent. That is of course much more appropriate for modern sensibilities, though I’d have appreciated Jane coming to those conclusions on camera, rather than just being told that she feels that way. The book did a great job of challenging her about what to do about studying the Mangani, so it would have been nice to see her similarly challenged about her perceptions of what was going on in Africa in general, especially since that plays a significant part of the entire other half of the plot. Much ado is made about Belgium’s atrocities in the Congo in particular, and that plays heavily into why Jane and her father wind up in Africa.

All in all, quite enjoyable to read them back to back. And for bonus amusement in the category Hysterical If You Know People Involved With Quebecois Music, I had to giggle and giggle at one particular exchange in Maxwell’s story, when Jane and Tarzan are continuing to learn to talk to each other:

Lost in pleasant memory now, Tarzan’s face grew animated. “Tarzan ee Jai zu, zu-vo.” He signed that the two little ones had grown big and strong. Now he was smiling broadly. “Tarzan ee Jai olo.”

I shook my head. “Olo?”

Tarzan grabbed me and made as if to wrestle…

This reads very, VERY differently if you’re accustomed to seeing the word “Olo” as the nickname for your favorite Quebecois fiddle player! Important translation note: do not confuse the Mangani verb with the French nickname. Unless you’re planning on wrestling a fiddle player!

Books

In which Anna speaks up for all types of books

I feel the need to make a clarification on my previous post, which is intended to be more about my general bemusement about not getting the “old book smell” thing rather than a statement about print vs. digital in general. And yet, I’ve already started getting comments from various folks about “I prefer print because…” or “I prefer digital because…” Not just “I prefer”, either. I’m getting words like “aversion” thrown around, too.

Because yes, this is a contentious topic. And trust me when I tell you, folks, that I’ve heard all the various arguments for people’s preferred reasons for reading in whatever format they prefer. Many of them I do indeed adhere to myself.

I like print because…

  • You don’t have to recharge a print book
  • You don’t have to go to the trouble of cracking the DRM
  • You can more safely read it in the bath (though I note I’ve actually dropped more print books than ereaders into the bath water)
  • You can read it when the power goes out
  • A well-designed book IS a thing of beauty and a joy forever
  • If I ever lose my ereader, I still have the backup print copies of books by my most admired authors (the people I buy in both formats)

And I like digital because…

  • It’s way easier for me to carry my ereader on a commute
  • I have lots more books at my disposal on the commute
  • I can immediately start a new book if I finish one partway through my lunch break or bus ride
  • Ebooks take up no shelf space and the number of them I own is limited only by the space on the device
  • There are some books I can in fact only get digitally, like all my fellow Carina authors’ books
  • It’s way easier for me to buy Quebec SF/F in digital form than it is to order the books from Quebec
  • I own so many print books already that I’m chronically out of shelf space, so I pretty much HAVE to buy digital right now

Notice here though how I say “I like…”, not “I prefer…” Because yes, I do like both formats. Both have their good points. Both have their bad points.

And I’d like to ask all of you out there, no matter which type of book you prefer, to be aware of how you present your preferences. I think I speak for digitally published authors everywhere when I say, for example, that it’s hurtful to hear someone say to you, “Well gosh, I’d love to read your book, but I only read real books.” As if that story you labored over for several years to get written, edited, accepted by a publisher, and then edited some more until it was fit to ship is somehow less worthy, less real, than books manifested in paper and ink.

I’m here to tell you, people, to the people that wrote those ebooks and to the people that enjoy reading them, those stories are every bit as real.

Likewise, digital advocates, be mindful of how you present yourselves too. It’s equally hurtful for people who love their books in physical form to hear “you’re behind the times” or “you’re stuck in the past” or “you’re being hurtful to the environment because your books are using paper” or whatever.

Those of you who know me well may recognize the similarity of this argument to ones I’ve put forth advocating against computer or phone evangelism, too. It’s the same principle, really.

Because what it boils down to is, people like what people like. You don’t have to explain it. You don’t have to defend it. Just remember, the feelings of the people who love print are every bit as real and valid as the feelings of the people who love digital, and vice versa.

And as I pointed out in the previous post, books themselves are powerful creators of emotion throughout our culture. Justifiably so.

On that, I think we can all agree!

Books

In which Anna does not get Old Book Smell

I had a lovely little discussion about this on Facebook over the weekend, so I’m pulling this up into its own post.

Time and time again, in the eternal print vs. digital debate on books, one of the arguments I see the pro-print folks put forth is that ebooks can never replace the smell of an old book for them. People describe how it’s a vanilla-like smell, or in some cases brown-sugar-like. It’s a real and measurable phenonemon; it’s been studied! And intellectually, I certainly understand why people connect with it so strongly. It’s also a real and measurable phenomenon that people develop emotional attachments to smells, and certainly, I very much understand how a treasured book creates an emotional attachment.

But the smell thing? That doesn’t happen with me. Mostly, when I smell an old book, I have to fight off the urge to sneeze. Old books smell like dust to me, not like vanilla or brown sugar. Dara tells me it doesn’t happen with her, either. It makes me wonder if there’s a genetic thing going on here, like how cilantro tastes like battery acid to Dara.

Because as far as I can tell, my sense of smell isn’t particularly impaired. There are lots of smells I find pleasurable: tasty things baking, the smell of the ocean, wood crackling in a fireplace, the rosemary-and-lavender blend I like to use in my bubble bath. I do not, however, tend to form emotional attachments to smells. So I’m lacking one of the big factors I see cited on the print side of print vs. digital.

One of the folks in my Facebook discussion said she always thought of Giles in an early episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, “I, Robot”:

Jenny Calendar: Honestly, what is it about them that bothers you so much?

Giles: The smell.

Jenny Calendar: Computers don’t smell, Rupert.

Giles: I know. Smell is the most powerful trigger to the memory there is. A certain flower, or a-a whiff of smoke can bring up experiences long forgotten. Books smell musty and-and-and rich. The knowledge gained from a computer is a – it, uh, it has no-no texture, no-no context. It’s-it’s there and then it’s gone. If it’s to last, then-then the getting of knowledge should be, uh, tangible, it should be, um, smelly.

Me, I always think of the Star Trek TOS series episode “Court Martial”:

Cogley: Books, young man, books. Thousands of them. If time wasn’t so important, I’d show you something. My library. Thousands of books.

Captain James T. Kirk: And what would be the point?

Cogley: This is where the law is. Not in that homogenized, pasteurized synthesizer.

With powerful quotes like this in our pop culture references, honestly, I can’t blame my fellow book aficiandos for being so passionate about books as physical objects. Our culture does value them, and rightly so–though I could also argue that it doesn’t value them nearly as much as it should.

For me, though, the value and emotional attachment is not in the physical object, no matter how good it smells.

For me, Cogley and Giles are wrong. It’s the content of the books, their knowledge, their stories, that create the emotional attachment for me.

That is, indeed, the entire point of a book.