John's book reviews and story insights

[John]

We have a thread dedicated to answering the question, "What are you reading?". Started way back in 2008, it's been one of our most popular and resilient off-topic threads, with its latest post coming just days ago. This thread is a great means of passing along reading recommendations. For this thread, though, I'd like to go a little deeper by providing more fleshed-out reviews and, most importantly, dissecting what makes these stories tick (or not).

I was a big reader when I was a kid, but I fell out of the habit in my college years. Actually, it wasn't just reading that fell to the wayside. To be honest, almost all of my absorption of culture disappeared for a spell when I went to college. Isn't that odd? It seems completely contrary to what you'd expect, yet for me, that's how it worked. Slowly but surely, though, I began to reenter the culture pool. Television, theatre, movies, museums, current events... but narrative fiction lagged behind. Finally, two years ago, I began reading again. Since then, I've been making up for lost time, voraciously consuming whatever I can get my hands on.

In the interest of spreading my rekindled passion for reading, I'm going to begin providing capsule reviews of books I've read since my love affair with writing was renewed in summer of 2009. But there's more to this exercise than just sharing my opinions. I want to determine why I reacted to the book in the way that I did. I want to see if I can pinpoint what it is precisely that draws me to or repels me from a book. It's easy to say, "I liked it," or, "It wasn't for me," but it's harder to isolate what really makes a story sink or swim. I believe that putting into words what exactly it is about a story that affects me (or fails to affect me) may improve my own writing, and after rekindling my love of reading, I think I'd like become a better writer myself. Maybe there will come a day when I can give something back after drawing so much enjoyment from those who tell great tales. First, some notes about how I'll be grading and my personal reading tastes:

• I am reviewing books in the order in which I read them, starting with Agincourt, the book that rebooted my reading habit two years ago. I intend to eventually review 20 books in all. This will probably take months to accomplish. I will post new reviews as I find time, and I welcome your thoughts on each review.
• I'm choosing to focus solely on fiction. One reason is that fiction is what we write here in the PEBA, so I feel reviewing what makes great (and not so great) fiction is most applicable to our circumstances. Another reason is that including non-fiction books would make for just too many reviews to write!
• I am an apologetic genre fan. I'm cognizant of the disrespect genre fiction receives from many critics. I realize that I'll always be viewed as a "lowbrow reader" as long as I embrace genre fiction over literary fiction. I'd like to say that "looking down the nose attitude" doesn't get to me, but I'd be lying. I sometimes feel like I should be more drawn to literary fiction. Fortunately, I quickly realize the ridiculousness of that guilt (and I'm not the only one). "Be true to thine own self," they say. Mine own self is a genre fan. The critics will simply have to forgive me and my knuckle-dragging brethren.
• In the past, I considered myself an "easy grader". Generally speaking, I liked most of what I read/watched/viewed. But as I've become more interested in the process of creating art, I've found myself becoming more critical of art. Consequentially, you're going to notice that I don't give shining grades to a number of these books. In fact, I might seem downright hard on some of them. This is not going to be a "nothing but winners" list; I have bones to pick in many cases, and pick them I shall.
• You may ask, "If you weren't liking a book, why did you finish it? Why not just drop it an move to something else?" Good question. The answer ties into what I'm trying to accomplish with this thread, which is to improve my writing. I believe that only consuming the best of the best is not conducive to learning to write well. It's critical that we be critical, and that means slogging through the not-so-good to figure out why we don't like it. What are the story's missteps? Am I replicating those missteps in my own writing? More than once, I've found that, yes, I am. So reading the not-so-good can be just as instructive as the great... maybe more so, actually.
• Finally, although I've titled this thread "John's book reviews and story insights", I do not mind if you choose to post your own reviews here. I ask that if you do choose to post a review in this thread, however, that you adhere to the format I am using. That means both using my review layout format (copy and paste from a quote of my first review to get a template of this format) and providing a moderately fleshed-out review with a focus on verbalizing why the story did or didn't resonate with you and what you learned from your reading experience.

[John]

Agincourt: A Novel

by Bernard Cornwell

Genre: Historical fiction / War
Pages: 464
Date read: July 2009

So here it is: the book that restarted my love affair with reading. Prepare for a glowing review, yes? Actually, prepare to be surprised. As you'll find out, I was relatively ambivalent towards Agincourt. You may wonder how this middling reading experience spurred so much more reading. I suppose that the love of reading was always there; it was just lying dormant and unused for a long, long time. While Agincourt didn't completely fire my imagination, it provided a spark, and one spark was all that was needed to get my passion burning once more.

A good question would be why I picked up Agincourt in the first place. It had been years since I read for pleasure, after all, so why now, and why this book? The motivation was provided by news that the book was to be made into a movie. I had recently resumed my love affair with film, actually, after a similarly long break from the theater. By 2009, I was reengaged enough that I was seeking out film news. I found myself intrigued by the description of Agincourt, and before I knew it, I had busted out my much-neglected library card and ordered a copy. By the way, Michael Mann has recently been attached to direct the film version of Agincourt, though he has a lot of potential films on his plate. Whether he'll actually choose it as his next project is unknown at this time.

Agincourt tells the story of the famous eponymous battle, where the invading English led by a zealous King Henry V, found themselves on the muddy fields of Agincourt, France on October 25, 1415. There is great debate about just how badly the French forces outnumbered the English. Some say the difference was in the range of six Frenchmen for every one English, although modern estimates tend to be more conservative, with some suggesting the difference may have been no larger than 4:3.

Of course, great tales grow in the telling, and the Battle of Agincourt is indeed a great tale. On that rain-soaked field, the French learned that greater numbers were no match for the power of the English longbow. First, the French cavalry charged with the intent of breaking the archers, but because of the forest rearing up on each side of the battlefield, they were forced to gallop "straight up the gut"... and through a quagmire of mud. This gave the English time to rain arrows down. The fleeing cavalry trampled the approaching French knights, and those that made it past the fear-crazed horses got stuck on the bodies of their fallen comrades while more arrows came in. Then the archers advanced with hatchets and swords. You'd think that the armored French knights would have an advantage, but they were slowed both by the weight of their armor and the muddy terrain. When the battle ended, the English had triumphed over a larger force (far larger, if the legends are to be believed).

We view the battle and events preceding it through the eyes of Nick Hook, an English archer. Cornwell attempts to give Hook a compelling... errr, "hook" by making him haunted by his failure to protect a young girl from rape and murder at the hands of a dirty priest during an assault on a community of supposed heretics. Hook is marked for death by the priest, but he escapes and becomes a mercenary. He fights for Burgundy in a losing battle against the French and barely escapes the fate of his fellow archers: torture and death at the hands of the French. During his escape, he rescues a nun from rape by the French, thus succeeding where he earlier failed. This nun becomes Hook's lover and accompanies him back to England, where his heroics earn him a spot in King Henry's planned campaign into France. Thus Hook becomes embroiled in one of history's most famous battles. We know the English win, but how does it turn out for Hook himself? Is he still standing when the sun sets on October 25, 1415?

Although Hook is given an arc - he failed in his first attempt to save a girl before later getting a second chance - it's not quite enough to draw me in. Maybe it's because the arc wraps up in the first half of the story and the second half is a more straightforward retelling of the French campaign through Hook's eyes. Maybe it's because Hook himself is a bit wooden. There's nothing really memorable about him, and we don't get much of a clue as to why it's so important to him to save these girls (beyond the assumption that it's "the right thing to do", of course). My failure to connect with Hook dulled the impact of the story, especially the first half, which focuses on Hook's exploits before he joins King Henry's army. However, Cornwell's fabulously researched account of the campaign into France does a decent job of rescuing Agincourt from tedium. This battle really does make for a good story, even if the character we're seeing it through isn't the most exciting guy in the world. It's enough for me to recommend it to history buffs; just understand that the character drama falls flat.

John's rating: 5 out of 10
Recommended for: History buffs who don't need character drama interfering with true events

What I Learned
First, I learned that history provides fertile ground for fascinating stories. This was my very first foray into the historical fiction genre. While Hook's journey may not have inspired me, my eyes were opened to the possibilities for telling a great story set amongst true events. I could further begin to imagine how an author could use history as a jumping off point to tell a gripping yet wholly fictional story, a thought that would be confirmed when I later read Dan Simmons's The Terror. Second, I was alerted to the importance of character development. When Agincourt succeeds, it does so on the natural strength of the story of this famous battle. If Hook's personal story had been half as compelling as real life events, Agincourt would have been a 10. Alas, Hook is a wooden character (appropriate, since he starts the story as a forester), and his mini-arc resonated little with me. Thus I learned that three-dimensional characters separate good stories from great ones. But most importantly, I relearned that I love to read. Despite the fact that Agincourt was only a so-so experience, I found myself desiring to dive back into the world of books. And that's just what I did...

[John]

World War Z

by Max Brooks

Genre: Science fiction / Zombie horror
Pages: 352
Date read: August 2009

You'll recall from my previous review that it was a rekindling of my love affair with the movies which reignited my passion for reading. I learned that Agincourt had been optioned for a possible movie version and was intrigued enough by the description of the story that I decided to pick up the book. Well, almost the same thing occurred with World War Z; the description of the potential movie version got me curious. Regarding that movie version, Brad Pitt was set to star and Marc Forster (Quantum of Solace) was to direct. A script was written by J. Michael Straczynski (Babylon 5, Changeling), but the project lay dormant for a couple of years before writer Matthew Michael Carnahan was brought on to rework Straczynski's script. Filming is now underway, and Brad Pitt is even making news for actually saving zombies rather than killing them. There's been controversy over the movie's break for the book's story, though. The film will be released on December 21, 2012

But we're not here to talk about the movie; we're interested in the book. And we should be interested, because World War Z is one fine, thought-provoking book. While it may seem strange to describe a book about something as "silly" as zombies as "thought-provoking", give World War Z a chance and you'll learn it goes much deeper than decaying corpses munching on brains.

World War Z's hook is that the zombie apocalypse isn't about to begin, as it is in most zombie tales, nor is it in progress, as it is in pretty much all other zombie tales. In World War Z, the zombie apocalypse has already occurred. In fact, it's been over for 10 years. That's right: Humans already beat back the zombies! And no, the zombies don't make a surprise return.

So if the zombies are already beaten, uh... what the heck is this book about? I'll tell you first what it's not about: It's not about lots of gory zombie-killing action. If you're looking for visceral thrills, this is not the book for you. World War Z is truly a unique entry into the pantheon of zombie stories. Instead of focusing on the plight of individuals coping with zombies, World War Z spends far more time examining how governments respond to crises.

The story is told from the perspective of Brooks himself, albeit in the fictional role of a man commissioned by the United Nations to interview survivors of the Zombie War and present his collected report to the U.N. Postwar Commission. Brooks's interviewees do the majority of the storytelling, so in lieu of a strong protagonist, we're provided with a series of vignettes told from a multitude of different perspectives. This is certainly a unique way to tell a story. Brooks was apparently influenced by the oral narrative style of "The Good War": An Oral History of World War Two. The presentation method has it's benefits and drawbacks. The most obvious drawback is that our "hero" isn't heroic in any way; he's just an ordinary guy conducting interviews with the people who were in the thick of the action. That would seem to be a recipe for boredom, but Brooks's narration style choice succeeds in holding interest by allowing us to peep through a myriad of windows that each provide a limited view of an obviously vast picture that we're prevented from seeing in full (for instance, we never learn why the outbreak occurs because no interviewee has access to that information).

But Brooks's real triumph lies in the way that he weaves his views and critiques on differing forms of government and the dangers of isolationism into his story. The U.N. interviewer gathers stories from representatives of many nations, and we learn that each nation responded to the crisis quite differently, and in a way that reflected their government's worldview. In America, for instance, arrogance and isolationist policies prompt the government to downplay the scope of the danger for quite some time and to avoid reaching out for help to other nations. Unscrupulous corporations use public fear to generate massive profits by marketing worthless "zombie vaccines". When the threat can no longer be ignored, the military is ordered to make a televised stand in Yonkers, NY to boost citizens' morale. It goes... poorly. To its credit, the nation uses one of its greatest strengths - adaptability - to turn the tide. Most importantly, the U.S. regains its position of global leadership by convincing leaders of other nations to actively strike back at the zombies rather than adopting a "wait them out" strategy.

Other nations react in different ways, some of them quite radical in nature. South Africa, for instance, chooses to sacrifice the many to save the few by using large clusters of refugees as "zombie bait", giving people in designated "safe zones" time to organize and dig in. The strategy works, although the "humanity" of the approach is called into question. But is that just Monday morning quaterbacking? After all, South Africa emerged whole from the war. What would have happened if they had tried to save all their citizens, as the United States originally attempted (and failed) to do?

The story is littered with such intriguing tales of choices and consequences. Decisions have weight beyond, "Did it work?" People take actions in the heat of the moment, and it's left to others to decide after the fact if those decisions were proper. It makes one wonder how he would respond if faced with a crisis of this scope (if not this particular nature). Books that can turn the light on the reader and make him answer tough questions about himself have taken a big step towards success. Even though the lack of a strong protagonist does rob a bit of power from the story, I consider World War Z to be a success, indeed.

John's rating: 9 out of 10
Recommended for: Readers looking for a thought-provoking tale who aren't put off by a unique narrative style and aren't too snobby for zombies

What I Learned
First, I learned that having strong themes and sticking with those themes throughout your story is critical to maintaining interest. World War Z paints a richly detailed world. Brooks could have been satisfied with doing his world-building and then playing "Connect the Plot Dots". We would have gotten a colorful yarn that would have quickly been forgotten. Instead, Brooks makes World War Z memorable by having a clear vision of the themes he's trying to communicate (anti-isolationism, the importance of cooperation between nations, the need to sacrifice some for the greater good of all) and continuing to hammer them home. Second, I learned that you can keep those themes from getting dull by presenting them from multiple perspectives. Many stories tell their tales from the eyes of one protagonist. That can be limiting because we only see the world filtered through this one person's worldview, and unless that worldview changes over the course of the story, our view can become stagnant. By offering multiple views, you can make even multiple relations of the same event interesting because the reader is getting wildly varying perspectives that challenge their first impressions. Third, I learned that I do miss the presence of a strong protagonist. Call me a traditionalist, but the lack of a "leader of the action" was what caused me to dock World War Z one point. Had Brooks found a way to keep the varied perspectives while still providing us with a strong central character, I believe the story would have been a perfect 10.

[Neil Thomas]

World War Z is a fantastic book. The insights it takes from each individual experience throughout the entire conflict depicts the desperation and determination of the human race. When 'it' hits the fan, peoples true colors come out and you see it in both good in bad. Thanks for the review of one of my favorite books.

[John]

The Steel Remains

by Richard K. Morgan

Genre: Fantasy
Pages: 448 (paperback)
Date read: September 2009

Agincourt got me reading again. World War Z got me excited about reading again. Now, for the first time in years, I was actively seeking out new books. So far I had sampled historical and science fiction. I chose the fantasy genre as my next stop. My favorite books of all time remain J. R. R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings trilogy. So when I read a recommendation for The Steel Remains, I was excited to return to the land of fantasy. But the world of The Steel Remains ain't no Middle Earth...

Ringil is the "hero" of this story. Ringil is one tough-as-nails, foul-mouthed, violent, bad-tempered, world-weary mofo. Yes, we've pretty much hit every cliché for a fantasy anti-hero right there. But there is one thing about Ringil that is definitely not cliché: he's gay. I don't mean he's happy, 'cause he ain't. I mean he enjoys the company of other men. And stable boys. I mean he's as gay as the summer day is long. We're informed of this fact on the first page of the book, and Morgan goes to pains to make sure that we are reminded at every turn that, yes, Ringil is in fact still a homosexual.

Now I tread upon dangerous waters. To critique a book for featuring a gay hero opens the door for charges of homophobia. Nothing would upset me more because nothing could be further from the truth. There is nothing wrong with making a choice to feature a gay hero. Choosing a gay protagonist for a fantasy novel is certainly a unique angle. It could potentially serve as a bold character choice that challenges readers' preconceptions of what constitutes a hero while simultaneously giving the protagonist an additional hurdle to overcome (the stigma of his "aberrant" sexuality). It's a choice that could open narrative door and open readers' minds.

Unfortunately, Morgan achieves none of this potential. He seems far more interested in the shock value of a gay fantasy hero (*gasp!*). I wanted to see Morgan use this interesting choice to inform character decisions and development. I wanted to see Ringil challenging our preconceived notions about homosexuals (beyond, of course, that we don't expect them to be carrying humongous swords). Instead, Morgan wields his choice as a cudgel, bashing the reader over the head with reminders of how this book is different because it features a gay fantasy hero (*gasp!*). What should have been a fascinating reversal of expectation ends up feeling more like a cynical marketing ploy to garner the book attention for being "controversial".

That feeling is further reinforced by the lurid sexual descriptions. I would no more describe myself as a prude than I would a homophobe. But everything in its context. If I pay to see Rambo, then I'd better expect plenty of blood, guts, and a pumped-up hero turning his enemies into exploding blood sausages with a 50 caliber machine gun (WARNING: Video definitely NSFW!). But I wasn't expecting borderline pornographic description of sexual acts from The Steel Remains. I suppose in this case, I'm the one to blame. Had I done my research on Morgan, I would have learned that he is known for gritty noir science fiction like Altered Carbon that bear a reputation for being particularly vulgar. That's not a bad thing, necessarily, but it wasn't what I was prepared for. Consequentially, the graphic depiction of sexuality ended up contributing to my impression that Morgan was cynically selling his book on shock value.

Morgan might have felt compelled to do this because once you get past the "catch" of the protagonist, the copious use of foul language and graphic sexual depictions, the actual story of The Steel Remains is not a particularly interesting one. In fact, I find it difficult to recall it in full. Ringil was responsible for saving the world from a race of lizard men. The bloom went of the rose of his reputation due to his belligerent attitude and sexual orientation, which is frowned upon in Ringil's world much like it is in much of our own. Now a middle-aged Ringil is living in retirement, but when his high-bred mother appears asking for his help in rescuing a young relative of the family who has been sold into slavery, Ringil is coaxed into picking up his sword once again. His quest pits him against the Dwenda, otherworldly creatures with powers far beyond normal humans (though just as eager to jump into the sack with Ringil). It's fairly standard fantasy genre fare; no new trails being blazed here after the page one announcement of Ringil's sexual preferences.

There are a few nice touches here and there. I recall that the Dwenda had a particularly nasty way of dealing with humans who displeased them; they cut off their heads and grafted them to tree stumps, where they weep tears of sap. Certainly an evocative image, but hardly enough to save The Steel Remains. The title is intended to conjure images of fantasy heroes wielding cold steel weapons. The story certainly left me cold. This felt more like an exercise in marketing than an honest attempt at storytelling

John's rating: 1 out of 10
Recommended for: Readers who prefer shock value over plot and character development

What I Learned
Tell your story honestly. What does that mean, exactly? It means that you don't try to write what you think people want to read, and you don't try to write what you think will sell. You write the story that you find inside yourself, whatever it may be. In his memoir, On Writing, Stephen King likened the process of finding your story to an archeologist uncovering the buried bones of an ancient creature. As the bones are slowly, carefully excavated, the archeologist may be disappointed with what he's finding. Maybe he was hoping for a different kind of discovery. But it's not his job to make his find more appealing to the masses by rearranging the bones; it's his job to put the pieces together and report the truth of what he found. I felt Morgan was playing games with his readers, trying to manipulate them into spreading word of his book by using shock tactics in lieu of story development. That might win you some sales in the short-run, yes, but it also makes your story very forgettable and doesn't engender reader loyalty. I have forgotten much of my experience with The Steel Remains, and I certainly won't be picking up the sequel, The Cold Commands, when it's released on Oct. 11.

[Matt]

Stephen King likened the process of finding your story to an archeologist uncovering the buried bones of an ancient creature. As the bones are slowly, carefully excavated, the archeologist may be disappointed with what he's finding. Maybe he was hoping for a different kind of discovery. But it's not his job to make his find more appealing to the masses by rearranging the bones; it's his job to put the pieces together and report the truth of what he found.

I find this part of the review interesting, and I think I might have to go read King's memoir. I find myself in a period where I am working through the story of Isabel and Rosa. Because as I'm working the story through in my head, I'm not just going forward in time, I'm also going back in time to figure out who they are and how they got there. It's not so much just that Isabel loves baseball and Rosa loves her daughter. That's a decent short story. But what I want to know is who they are, what makes them tick, how is their life experience unique. It's possible that there are reasons that some readers may not be comfortable with my characters. But I don't feel like it's my job to make someone comfortable with the characters. It's my job to tell you who they are, and let you decide. I see the potential for these characters to provoke thought that goes far beyond baseball.

More than anything though, your review has me looking for more time to write so I can get the story out of my head and onto paper.

[John]

More than anything though, your review has me looking for more time to write so I can get the story out of my head and onto paper.

If these reviews are having that effect, then the time put into them is completely justified. By all means, go pen that article.

[John]

Cell

by Stephen King

Genre: "Zombie" horror
Pages: 384
Date read: September 2009

My reading revival had hit an interesting stage. Agincourt was just so-so, but it provided enough spark to kindle a desire for more books. World War Z was a big win; it was just the think to turn that small fire into a burning blaze of interest. But then came The Steel Remains, a big bucket o' cold water to douse my rediscovered reading passion. I didn't want to lose the momentum I had been gaining, so I made two decisions. One, jump right back in with another book quick; don't wait for the disappointment of the last one to wear off or you may never get back on the horse. Two, go with a "sure thing".

Historically, Stephen King has been as close to a "sure thing" author for me as they come. I'm aware of King's less-than-stellar reputation in certain highbrow reading circles. He's considered a purveyor of cheap, tacky trash by some for building his reputation through the horror genre, considered to be the lowest form of genre fiction by some of those who look down upon genre fiction as a whole. His popularity isn't always a boon to his reputation. There are plenty who resent his mass-market appeal and point to it as a sign that King panders to the lowest common denominator. His prolific nature works against him, too; there are those who say that no one who churns out that many works can be writing quality material. And of course there is some truth to that; I'm sure King would be the first to admit that he's put out his share of duds.

I'm no expert literary critic, and I'm comfortable leaving the task of determining King's place amongst the pantheon of writers to those who feel their qualified for that task. All I know is that what J. R. R. Tolkien started, Stephen King cemented: my love of reading. Perhaps it's a commentary on my admittedly lowbrow tastes, but from the moment I read my first King novel (Christine) at age 7, I was hooked on his page-turning style. And when I discovered The Dark Tower series... well, I was hopelessly in love.

There are a lot of things I love about King's writing: how naturally his characters speak, his ability to paint scenes in vivid detail, and of course his willingness to delve into dark, dark places. But perhaps one of King's best skills is how well he plays the "What If?" game. The "What If?" game is simple enough. Let's say you're out at the supermarket like I was the other day (I try to avoid it, but every so often I have to go). While I'm shopping, I pass a lone man who is talking loudly, and seemingly right at men. Only as he passes do I realize he has a Bluetooth phone in his ear. Then I pass a woman who is alternating between talking on her cell and yelling at her kids to quiet down. On my way home, a driver who is talking on a cell phone doesn't see me in the crosswalk and nearly turns right into my bike. Most of us would let these random events pass by, but King is a keen observer of the world we live in. I'm guessing that he had his own similar experience at some point, and it prompted him to play the "What If?" game. In this case, the specific question he posed was, "What if ever last [expletive deleted] that walks around with a cell phone attached to their ear suddenly went crazy?" The answer to the question is Cell.

King wastes no time delving into this premise. The "pulse" strikes in the book's first chapter, rendering every person in the world who was using a cell phone at that particular moment an incomprehensible lunatic and sending them into a homicidal rage. The "phoners" begin killing every "normal" around them. They can't be reasoned with; in fact, they seem to have lost the ability to think for themselves. Over time, though, it becomes clear that someone or something is controlling the phoners' actions. With that revelation comes the horrifying discovery that groups of phoners can mentally compel normals to take whatever action their mysterious master desires. When our group of heroes are compelled to travel to a supposed cell-free zone that they suspect is to be the site of their execution, it sets up a showdown with the puppet master whom the normals have come to know as "The Raggedy Man".

A lesser author would have been satisfied with creating a cohesive narrative out of his self-posed hypothetical question. King goes further by interjecting heart into his story. The main protagonist, Clay, was in Boston when the pulse struck. His wife and son were home in Maine. Throughout the story, Clay doggedly attempt to get home, hoping against hope that his family is safe. Of course, getting from Boston to Maine is no mean feat when civilization has crumbled around you and there are insane killers everywhere you turn. But the addition of this motivation makes Clay's story much more compelling than if he was just trying to survive. King conveys Clay's love for his son so clearly. Paternal love is such a more powerful character motivator than personal survival. This is probably why I adore the movie Aliens so much. It would have been a neat movie if Ripley was just trying to survive, but by introducing Newt as Ripley's second chance at fulfilling her duties as a mother after drifting in hyper-sleep while her own daughter grew old and died, Aliens became a classic. Cell hits a similar note. The zombie-like phoners get the attention, but the story is really about the lengths a father will go to protect his child.

Cell is not a classic like Aliens, however. Some missteps here and there bring it down a few notches. In particular, the ending seemed a little too easily resolved. I wouldn't go so far as to call it an outright deus ex machina, but the heroes had sure been painted into a corner and I didn't completely buy the viability of their solution. There were parts that dragged, as well. King is prolific both in books published and page count. The latter is a luxury provided to the successful author, and King occasionally abuses this privilege with unnecessary scenes (as anyone who has read both the regular and uncut version of The Stand can attest to). Still, the underlying "What If?" hypothetical behind Cell is a fascinating one, and by layering humanity on top of a pulp plot, King elevates Cell to a level of high quality.

John's rating: 7 out of 10
Recommended for: Anyone who has ever been ticked off by habitual cell phone users, or anyone who just likes a good story

What I Learned
Do you feel like writing but find yourself at a loss for a topic? Play the "What If?" game. Get out a piece of paper and challenge yourself to write at least 10 separate sentences, each one beginning with the words, "What if...". Draw upon thoughts and observations you experience during your daily life. Let's say you were just walking at the park. Did you notice that people you passed on the path avoided eye contact with you? "What if... making eye contact with another adult rendered each observer passionately in love with the other for 24 hours?" How would this affect marital relationships? How would people get around in the world if they had to avoid accidental (if temporary) lust from accidental eye contact? Or did you get bitten by a mosquito while you were out and develop a really nasty bump on your skin? "What if... the bite of a mosquito gives a man amazing powers that he decides to use to fight crime, a plan made difficult by the fact that every person who sees him feels an uncontrollable desire to swat him to death?" Hey, the reason I said to write 10 "What if..." hypotheticals is because, invariably, some of them are going to suck... like that last one.

[Borealis]

I've been an avid King fan since I was a Freshmen in high school and read the copy of Carrie my mom had on the coffee table while I had the chicken pox. Then she read to us Salem's Lot... What a mom! I've read the Dark Tower series a couple of times and the older ones more than that, but I have to say that Cell was one of my least favorite of all his stories. I think part of what turned me off on this story was the premise seemed so forced and contrived.

[John]

Yeah, I can understand where you're coming from, Michael. Cell does take it's cue from a pretty simplistic "What If?" scenario. It's certainly lacks the complex world-building of The Dark Tower series. Really deep, meaty books like The Dark Tower are always going to be my favorite, but I still think there's a place for books like this, where simply posed questions serve as a jumping off point for narrative, and I do think King elevated what would otherwise be a very plain story into something better than average by placing a focus on paternal love and protection. Whether Cell is good or not, we can probably agree that in the hands of many other authors, Cell would be a lesser work than it is. King tends to find a way to maximize his simple premises.

[Coqui]

I'll be honest, I lost interest in The Dark Tower series after the first couple of books. That put me off on reading King for a couple of decades, probably. I just picked up Bag of Bones on a whim a few months ago and loved it. I appreciated how King conveyed the love interest without resorting to sex; it surprised me.

[Borealis]

I'll be honest, I lost interest in The Dark Tower series after the first couple of books. That put me off on reading King for a couple of decades, probably. I just picked up Bag of Bones on a whim a few months ago and loved it. I appreciated how King conveyed the love interest without resorting to sex; it surprised me.

Now that the entire series has been written, put aside some time... say a year, and read them all together. They are amazingly well crafted stories - each with merits on their own, but together show the evolution of character and relationships that could never be explored in a single novel.

My personal favorites? Book 4: Wizard and Glass, and Book 5: The Wolves of the Calla

[John]

I'll be honest, I lost interest in The Dark Tower series after the first couple of books. That put me off on reading King for a couple of decades, probably. I just picked up Bag of Bones on a whim a few months ago and loved it. I appreciated how King conveyed the love interest without resorting to sex; it surprised me.

Now that the entire series has been written, put aside some time... say a year, and read them all together. They are amazingly well crafted stories - each with merits on their own, but together show the evolution of character and relationships that could never be explored in a single novel.

My personal favorites? Book 4: Wizard and Glass, and Book 5: The Wolves of the Calla

I agree with Michael. The first book in the series is very slow. I enjoyed it, but I can completely understand why others wouldn't. It doesn't seem to be leading anywhere, so if you're not into King and his writing style (which I am), it's going to leave you flat. But the deeper story really picks up in the second book (The Drawing of the Three), and Michael is right: Wizard and Glass and especially Wolves of the Calla are the pinnacle of the series. My only caution is that, like with any grand, sprawling work, endings are tough, and I don't think King came close to sticking the ending of this series. Books six and seven (Song of Susannah and The Dark Tower) are letdowns after the fabulous books that came before them. Still, the journey is worthwhile.

I should also mention that there is an eighth book in the series, The Wind Through the Keyhole, set to be released in spring of 2012. It's set between books four and five. Being that those are my favorite books in the series, I'll be eagerly looking forward to reading it.

[John]

The Terror

by Dan Simmons

Genre: Historical fiction / horror
Pages: 784
Date read: October 2009

The Terror marked an evolution in my book reading revival. Up until now, I was relying on recommendations or past history to determine what I read next. Agincourt and World War Z caught my notice because they were optioned by movie studios. The Steel Remains was a bit of a departure, a recommendation from website io9.com, but I was still being told what to read. Picking up Cell was all about Stephen King's reputation as my favorite author. But I knew nothing about Dan Simmons when I walked into Barnes & Noble while waiting to see Inception. All I knew is that I was enjoying Cell and I wanted to prep another book while I still had time to read; the PEBA busy season was approaching and I would soon be short on free time. What made The Terror catch my eye? Simple: that beautiful cover. It instantly intrigued me. The description indicated a historical fiction story with a horror twist. I enjoyed the historical nature of Agincourt and I'm a horror story lover, so I decided to take the plunge.

The historical background for The Terror is the 1845 British Arctic expedition commanded by Sir John Franklin. I picked up Agincourt knowing the history behind the famous battle from which the book takes its name, but I knew nothing of the history behind this voyage. If you like a good, mysterious yarn with a touch of the macabre, I urge you to read up on this fascinating expedition. Franklin was seeking the fabled Northwest Passage. What he and his men found was a horrible freezing death, but not all at once, and not nearly so simple as just freezing - recent studies indicate that these men were trapped in the Arctic for years and resorted to cannibalism before their end.

The expedition set out in two ships: HMS Erebus (captained by Franklin) and HMS Terror (captained by Francis Crozier). Franklin is celebrated as a hero by many in Britain - he even has a statue in his hometown proclaiming "Sir John Franklin – Discoverer of the North West Passage" (untrue, of course). In The Terror, though, Franklin is portrayed as an ineffectual buffoon. Crozier takes center stage in Simmons's imagining, and the party desperately needs his leadership skills. As if these Godforsaken men didn't have enough to contend with, Simmons tosses another force of nature their way... an unnatural beast called "Tuunbaq" (or "uurngait"). The Tuunbaq hunts the crew even as they succumb to the elements and dwindling, poisoned food supply.

Just as in real life, the crew of Erebus and Terror eventually abandon their ships and strike out across the ice, hoping to walk far enough south to be picked up by a whaling vessel. That was a hard enough journey in real life. The characters in The Terror must further contend with the Tuunbaq stalking them. Of course, history tells us how this story ends. Everyone dies... or do they?

It's interesting for me to read the reviews of The Terror. It receives a great deal of criticism for being ponderously long, and at 784 pages, you certainly need to set aside some time for this puppy. But I have to say that Simmons made the time I invested into his story a pleasure from start to finish. I was completely engrossed in The Terror from start to finish. The first great choice Simmons made was constructing his novel around such a great historical story. For most of us, the fate of Erebus and Terror and their crew is just a footnote, but what a story! History is littered with such "footnotes" that can serve as fertile ground for leaps of imagination like the one taken by Simmons. The author's research is impeccably detailed; all of the latest facts and theories about the fate of the expedition are included.

Both The Terror and Agincourt use fascinating historical stories to build their fiction around, but two things make The Terror stand out over Agincourt. The first is that, unlike Bernard Cornwell, Simmons bothers to populate his story with interesting characters. Crozier is a fascinating man. He's clearly the most qualified to lead the expedition, but he's held back by forces both external (his Irish heritage, a problem for the real life Crozier, too) and internal (his penchant for alcohol). Crozier must overcome these challenges, and become the leader Franklin fails to be, and figure out how to get the crew out of a seemingly impossible situation, and deal with attacks from a mysterious arctic monster. That's a lot of challenges to throw at a character, but challenges make for interesting narrative. Secondary characters like Ice Master Thomas Blanky, who is the only one to encounter and escape the Tuunbaq (not once but twice), and the wise Captain of the Foretop Harry Peglar also distinguish themselves and carve a place in your memory. And while the monstrous Tuunbaq might be termed the story's antagonist, you really hate the vile Cornelius Hickey, whose twisted words poison the hearts of the crew.

The second distinguishing factor for The Terror is that it marries genre fiction with historical fiction. Now this is my cup o' tea! Much like the Battle of Agincourt, the story of the search for the Northwest Passage would have been plenty entertaining all by itself, certainly good enough to earn at least an average grade. The introduction of the Tuunbaq as an inventive additional challenge for the crew really makes this work soar, though. You've got the compelling historical fiction of the men trying to survive on the ships in freezing conditions and with little to eat. Before that can get old, Simmons throws a curveball with a Tuunbaq attack. Mixing these two elements up keeps the action riveting throughout. And riveted throughout I was. This was a story I couldn't put down. It was also the book that cemented it: I was back in love with reading, and there was no falling out now.

John's rating: 10 out of 10
Recommended for: Anyone who loves at least one of historical tales, fantastical tales, horrific tales, or tales of courage and survival against all odds

What I Learned
This book really opened my eyes to the possibilities opened by the crossing of historical and genre fiction. As I mentioned in my Agincourt review, I'm new to the historical fiction genre at this point. Agincourt showed me that tales of interesting historical events can carry an otherwise weak story. The Terror showed me that adding genre twists and colorful characters facing stacking challenges makes for top-notch reading. History is so ripe for fictional inspiration, and you don't even need to directly tell a story about the historical event that's inspiring you. The next time you're searching for a story topic, try running a search on "famous historical events", "great battles", "survival against all odds", "lost expedition", or something similar. Review your results and pick the story you find most interesting. What draws you to it? What makes it compelling? Can you create your own narrative that's completely unrelated to this historical event yet uses the same elements that make the story of that event compelling? If I were to begin a major writing project, this is the jumping off point I would choose to start with: pick a fascinating true story, mix it with my favorite genre elements, and let my research and imagination carry me where they will.

[John]

Song of Kali

by Dan Simmons

Genre: Horror
Pages: 320
Date read: January 2010

After being dazzled by The Terror, I sought out another Dan Simmons novel just as soon as PEBA busy season abated long enough to allow me some reading time. I discovered that Simmons had an extremely varied catalog of works representing several different genres. The Terror was a horror story and I didn't want to stray too far from that rousing success on my first branch-out with Simmons, so I elected to try Song of Kali.

Unfortunately, lightning didn't strike twice. Song of Kali cannot hold a candle to The Terror. Perhaps this is a case of an author maturing as he develops (Song of Kali was Simmons's first book, written in 1985, while The Terror was his 16th book and came out in 2007), but I didn't find the former nearly as enjoyable as the latter. Part of that may be due to the varied and interesting cast of characters in The Terror versus the dull, one-note lead of Song of Kali: Robert Luzcak. Luzcak is a bland protagonist, and Simmons does him no favors in that regard. The author starts by giving Luzcak a dull job and background: a northeastern poet and intellectual. Yawn.

Now this doesn't have to be the kiss of death, but if you're going to saddle your lead with such a milquetoast setup, you had better make him develop into something more exciting over the course of the story. Simmons seems to understand the need for this development. Luzcak arrives in Calcutta, India in search of lost poetry from an elusive, brilliant Indian poet known as M. Das, but Luzcak's life gets shaken up when his wife is threatened and his infant child abducted. This turn forces Luzcak to engage in an active goal (seeking his child) instead of a passive one (endlessly meeting with people to learn more about M. Das and this poetry). Sadly, it comes too late in the book to save us from tedium. Luzcak spends far too much of this book as a boring character engaged in boring activities.

Simmons goes to great lengths to paint Calcutta as the darkest pit of Hell on Earth. There are countless descriptions of how dark, miserable and wretched the city and its denizens are. The oppressive heat, the squalor, the abject poverty, the social injustice; Simmons spares us none of this. He certainly paints a vivid picture of the city. In fact, I would go so far as to say that Calcutta is the most interesting "character" in the book - certainly more interesting than the painfully dull Luczak. There is a dark heart pulsating in Simmons's version of Calcutta. I don't know if his description of the city is accurate or not; I do know that after reading Song of Kali, Calcutta is not at the top of my travel itinerary.

And yet, it's interesting that I found the desolate Arctic a much more foreboding setting than Calcutta. This is probably a taste issue more than any flaw in Simmons's writing. Simmons certainly did an admirable job building a darkness around Calcutta, and the city is rife with possibilities for terror (seedy people everywhere, dark sewers housing dark secrets, etc.). It's not so much that Simmons failed to imbue Calcutta with life; it's more that he did a truly outstanding job turning the dull, featureless Arctic into an environment just as terrifying as the black heart of India.

Luczak ultimately faces a supernatural terror, but I didn't find that "terror" to be especially terrifying. Luczak himself is just such a boring (and unlikeable, if the truth be told - the man is kind of helpless and prone to temper tantrums) character that I didn't find myself rooting for him, anyway. Thus, Song of Kali failed to really capture my imagination. It's not a terrible book by any means. If you are looking for pointers on how to turn a location into a "character" through vivid description, you could do far worse than Song of Kali. But if you're looking for an exciting horror story featuring a dynamic protagonist, look elsewhere

John's rating: 2 out of 10
Recommended for: People who want their negative preconceptions of India reinforced; northeastern poets holding out hope for a dose of excitement in their life

What I Learned
First, make your protagonist interesting. Saddling him/her with a dull profession and background means you're going to face additional challenges. By no means is it a "kiss of death" to do this. Not every hero has to be the dashing and scruffy-looking Han Solo, galacticly-famous smuggler; you absolutely can craft an interesting tale around an initially dull protagonist. But to succeed in this task, you're going to have to emphasize placing your character into extreme situations that pushes him/her into making exciting choices. We need to see this dull, staid protagonist develop into a person of action - think Bilbo in The Hobbit. Second, make your setting a character by describing it vividly. Some settings are made to be extremely evocative by their authors, so much so that they take on a character of their own. The means of doing this are as varied as the means for making memorable character (Simmons's Calcutta is memorable for being so dreary, for instance). By making the location a character, you're making your story that much more interesting. Now the protagonist has another consideration to deal with beyond his antagonist; he's dealing with his environment, as well. Multiple challenges make a story more interesting.