![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
osprey_archerReading: Sense and Sensibility. Or at least I will be, when I finish Why Lenin? Why Stalin? Why Gorbachev? for class.
Planning to Read: The Dreaming Place, by Charles de Lint. I've never read a Charles de Lint book before, and this one's short, and some people say he's very good. Although he also seems to have a crowd of detractors, so hmm.
Reviewing: Caroline B. Cooney's Time Traveler Quartet. It's quintessential teenage romance. Modern-day Annie Lockwood travels back in time to the late Victorian age and meets Strat, the love of her life, and the two of them spend three books (the fourth book in the quartet concerns Strat’s little sister, Devonny) being tragically not together because of the cruelties of Time.
You can count me among the five teenage girls in America who were dead unimpressed.
First, there’s the fact that Strat is not a person, he’s a checklist of Romantic Hero traits. He’s tall, dark, handsome, rich, gentlemanly, totally and madly in love with Annie after knowing her for about five minutes, and otherwise devoid of distinguishing characteristics. He’s even called by a short form of his last name—Stratton—in classic romantic hero tradition.
He also has an almost-fiancee who he doesn’t love, Harriet, who he’s expected to marry because they’ve known each other forever and she’s very rich. In most romances a blocking character like Harriet would be someone dreadful, but here (thankfully) Harriet is kind and clever. She exceeds Annie in compassion and strength of character (Annie is nice but flighty)—exceeds her in every way, in fact, except looks. Harriet is horse-faced, while Annie is a beauty.
Strat’s transfer of his affections to Annie, therefore, makes him look awfully shallow. It’s hard to root for a romance between two beautiful yet insubstantial people, whose love seems to be rooted in…well…it’s not clear, really. They have nothing in common but being vastly pretty.
It’s especially exasperating because I know from Cooney’s other books that she can write interesting and developed characters. She even has some here—Harriet, and Strat’s little sister Devonny who is stubborn, vain, headstrong, and generally a lot of fun (her book, Prisoner of Time, is the best in the quartet by far). But character depth isn’t allowed to touch the two main characters, who would benefit greatly.
The villains are even more two-dimensional, especially Walker Walkley, the main bad guy in the first two books. Two-dimensional villains don’t necessarily ruin a story. (Sauron, anyone?) Two-dimensional villains who twirl their mustaches even in their own heads do.
The character problems are quite bad enough to sink the books on their own, and the story isn’t supported by anything else. The plotting and setting are thin, the period voice non-existent, the attempts at social critique lame; all the books’ energy is sacrificed to the romance.
Planning to Read: The Dreaming Place, by Charles de Lint. I've never read a Charles de Lint book before, and this one's short, and some people say he's very good. Although he also seems to have a crowd of detractors, so hmm.
Reviewing: Caroline B. Cooney's Time Traveler Quartet. It's quintessential teenage romance. Modern-day Annie Lockwood travels back in time to the late Victorian age and meets Strat, the love of her life, and the two of them spend three books (the fourth book in the quartet concerns Strat’s little sister, Devonny) being tragically not together because of the cruelties of Time.
You can count me among the five teenage girls in America who were dead unimpressed.
First, there’s the fact that Strat is not a person, he’s a checklist of Romantic Hero traits. He’s tall, dark, handsome, rich, gentlemanly, totally and madly in love with Annie after knowing her for about five minutes, and otherwise devoid of distinguishing characteristics. He’s even called by a short form of his last name—Stratton—in classic romantic hero tradition.
He also has an almost-fiancee who he doesn’t love, Harriet, who he’s expected to marry because they’ve known each other forever and she’s very rich. In most romances a blocking character like Harriet would be someone dreadful, but here (thankfully) Harriet is kind and clever. She exceeds Annie in compassion and strength of character (Annie is nice but flighty)—exceeds her in every way, in fact, except looks. Harriet is horse-faced, while Annie is a beauty.
Strat’s transfer of his affections to Annie, therefore, makes him look awfully shallow. It’s hard to root for a romance between two beautiful yet insubstantial people, whose love seems to be rooted in…well…it’s not clear, really. They have nothing in common but being vastly pretty.
It’s especially exasperating because I know from Cooney’s other books that she can write interesting and developed characters. She even has some here—Harriet, and Strat’s little sister Devonny who is stubborn, vain, headstrong, and generally a lot of fun (her book, Prisoner of Time, is the best in the quartet by far). But character depth isn’t allowed to touch the two main characters, who would benefit greatly.
The villains are even more two-dimensional, especially Walker Walkley, the main bad guy in the first two books. Two-dimensional villains don’t necessarily ruin a story. (Sauron, anyone?) Two-dimensional villains who twirl their mustaches even in their own heads do.
The character problems are quite bad enough to sink the books on their own, and the story isn’t supported by anything else. The plotting and setting are thin, the period voice non-existent, the attempts at social critique lame; all the books’ energy is sacrificed to the romance.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-05-10 03:00 am (UTC)And you're studying about the good ol' USSR, eh? It's all so crazy and interesting. Hope you're enjoying it!
P.S. I'm really liking your LJ. I would comment more, but it usually takes me too long to craft the perfect response, and then I get sidetracked/overwhelmed/tired. But I do like what you post. :-)
no subject
Date: 2008-05-10 09:58 pm (UTC)I'm glad you're enjoying the LJ. Don't worry about making the response perfect--I really am more forgiving of error than that review would suggest.
*pokes gently* You should post more. I have no idea what to read next now that I'm done with Sunshine!
no subject
Date: 2008-05-11 10:38 pm (UTC)P.S. Thanks for the poke! ;-)