Sunday, June 13, 2010

Review: The Curse of the Pharaohs (Amelia Peabody series #2) by Elizabeth Peters ★★★

The Curse of the Pharaohs (Amelia Peabody, #2)Description: The sun rides high over the British Empire, and the light still sparkles brightly in Amelia Peabody's eye as she returns for her second adventure in archaeology and romantic mystery as recounted in her lively journal. Sir Henry is striving to ensure no tomb has been overlooked by the previous expedition. Scarcely have the men started working when their spades uncover a series of steps cut into the rock. Then Sir Henry is found stiff and stark in his bed -- on his high brow, inscribed in what appears to be dried blood, is a crudely drawn uraeus serpent, the symbol of the divine pharoah. Instead of digging up the treasures of a lost age, it appears that Amelia and her friend are excavating a deadly curse.

My Review:
I'm really kind of torn on what to rate this one... On the one hand, it's Amelia and Emerson, and they are brilliant characters, but on the other hand, there was just something about this book that left me a little... wanting.

I really enjoyed the first book in the series, "The Crocodile on the Sandbank", and fell in love with both Amelia and Emerson in that book. Amelia was so smart, and strong and sure of herself, and her biting wit and force of will made her a creature to be reckoned with. Emerson is gruff and rude and pushy and misanthropic and generally thinks that all others besides himself are morons. But hey, Emerson, when you're right, you're right. Crocodile was fun and the mystery was engaging and it was a great start to what should be an amazing series.

But I felt a little let down by the second book, honestly. The writing was still fantastic, though after the beginning, not quite as funny as I'd have liked. The beginning was perfect in my opinion, and set the bar high. Perhaps that's why I feel a bit let down. The story was great, and reminiscent of some classic mysteries (OK, mainly just one, which I'll touch on in a bit), but I just wanted a little bit of the sparkle that Amelia had in the first book back, and it seemed that was missing for me.

This story takes place 5 years after the events of Crocodile. Emerson and Amelia are married, and now have a baby, Walter Peabody Emerson (nicknamed Ramses for his precociousness and resemblance to the ancient Pharaoh) who is, to put it bluntly, hell on wheels. He shares his parents' proclivity towards Egyptology and archaeology and has no qualms about digging in and getting dirty in the pursuit. Cute little bugger.

Emerson and Amelia are called in as experts to help excavate a new-found tomb after the previous leader of the excavation team died, under what imagination-prone Amelia thinks is suspicious circumstances, as his assistant has gone missing. A reporter, covering local archaeological events, has intimated that the Egyptian gods are displeased with the tomb being opened and desecrated, and has claimed that there is a curse at work. Naturally E&A have no compunctions about getting back to work, curse or no curse, after being in England for so long, away from their beloved Egypt.

I think that the 5 years between when the first book ended and the second book began had more of an effect than intended. Amelia seemed a little distant and cold and, I'll just put it out there, bitter at times. She's spent 5 years away from Egypt, and now has a son, but Amelia isn't the parenting type, really. She referred to little Ramses as "it" for a large portion of the book, and seemed to think of him not as a child but as an unknown creature completely separate from herself. In fact, later on in the story, she was more affectionate towards a cat than she was toward Ramses in the beginning of the story.

I say this simply because I think that she will grow to be more comfortable with the role of "mother" in later books. It's not something that comes naturally to her, being very calculating and precise as she is. She has high expectations of everyone that she comes into contact with, and heaven help them if they don't meet them, including her son. That's not to say that she doesn't love her son - she does, she just does it in her own way, and most assuredly does not mollycoddle him.

The only other mother in the bulk of the story, Madame Berengeria, is an example to make Amelia look like a candidate for World's Best Mother. MB likes to dress and act as different Egyptian queens reincarnated, has a fondness for brandy, and an overabundance of malicious dramatic urges. Her daughter, sweet and innocent Mary is hard put to live with her.

Emerson takes naturally to being a father, and encourages little Ramses in his thirst for knowledge, as any parent would, even going so far as to have debates regarding the nature and origin of fossils dug up in the back yard. Like I said, cute little bugger.

Emerson and Amelia's interaction throughout the story didn't have the same wit and charm that it had in Crocodile. He barked and she allowed it, sort of, in her own way. She still did whatever she felt that she needed to do, but in a decidedly less direct way than she had before her marriage. I can understand this, marriages were different things back then, but Amelia has always been herself and let nothing decide her actions for her. You could tell that Amelia absolutely adores her husband, and that she respects and admires him as well, chiefly because she's narrating the story herself. Likewise, we know that Emerson's gruffness and commanding attitude isn't how he really feels about her, because she interprets for him. But an outsider look in might see things very differently, and wonder how they could stand each other.

Speaking of outsiders, there's a rather larger cast of characters in this book than there was in Crocodile, and it took me a little while to get everyone straight in their roles. There are some definitely interesting characters here, and I wonder if we might be seeing more of them later on in the series.

Coming back to what I hinted at before... parts of this book really reminded me of Agatha Christie's novel "And Then There Were None". A large cast of characters who all are suspicious and who could all be the culprit are all gathered together in one area while deaths abound.

I don't mind this really, as long as the story comes together and makes sense. And of course, Amelia and Emerson solved the puzzle before too many had died, so it was more of a homage than a copy-cat, but it had the feel.

I did like the story, and the characters... My main gripe is just that little missing something in Amelia that she hopefully hasn't outgrown or cast off after casting off her singleness. I hope that it comes back in the next installment...

Saturday, June 12, 2010

Let's Go To The Hop!

I've done the 'hop a couple times, finding new blogs to follow, commenting on other people's blogs, but "unofficially" one might say, since I haven't done a proper post about it. Well that's all about to change, because I'm doing one now. :)

First though, if you're stopping by my blog for the first time, whether from the blog hop or otherwise, please check out the giveaway I'm offering for Diane Setterfield's novel The Thirteenth Tale. This is one of my favorite books, and if you like gothic style mysteries, you will like this one. The giveaway will be closed to entries on June 14th, so get them in soon if you're interested! Ok, enough with the shameless plugs, and on with the post!

So, here's the way the Blog Hop works, paraphrased a bit...
"The Book Blogger Hop is a place for book bloggers and readers to connect and find new book-related blogs  we may be missing out on! The Hop lasts Friday-Monday every week, so if you don't have time to Hop today, come back later and join the fun!"

So I would like to take this opportunity to mention a few of the cool blogs I've found hopping around... I haven't kept track of the ones I found before I decided to do a proper post, so I apologize that the blog name dropping will have to begin with this week's hop.

So, who did I hop in on?

If you're stopping in from the hop, leave me a note and if you like my blog, I hope you'll follow me!

Friday, June 11, 2010

Friday Flashback Review: The Gun Seller by Hugh Laurie ★★★★★

JG, The Introverted Reader herself, has created a brilliant new feature called "Friday Flashback". The object of which is to post an older review from another source (Goodreads, LibraryThing, Amazon, whatever) to your blog. As I've just started my blog, and I have quite a few reviews on Goodreads, this is a perfect solution for me.

So every Friday, look for a new/old review in this spot!

This week's Flashback is serving double duty. You might remember this book from my very first "On My Wishlist" post, and may be asking yourself, "Why is she talking about this book again?" Well, because I love it. Because I was surprised at how brilliant and relevant and witty and just downright amazing it was. Because it is WOEFULLY under-appreciated, and I want everyone else to love it as I do. "And just how much is that?" you ask? This much:


The Gun Seller The Gun Seller by Hugh Laurie
★★★★★(★)
I wish I could give this book 6 stars.

I love Hugh Laurie. I love his dry, sarcastic wit. I love his accent. I want to hump his leg for writing this book.

Yes. I really just said that.

I picked up this book BECAUSE I love Hugh Laurie, but I didn't really have high expectations. I thought it would be humorous, but not a book to really be taken seriously. I thought it would be a little bit like a parody of the espionage genre, like Johnny English or Spy Hard, etc. I was prepared for it to be silly, and a bit cartoonish, and funny. I was prepared for this to be a quick, mindless read that would have me peeing myself with laughter 4 pages out of 5.

What I was NOT prepared for, was for this book to not only be funny, but to be absolutely brilliant and relevant and amazing. I was not prepared for this book to blow my socks off and make me read it in dribs and drabs, as my friend would say, because I just didn't want it to end. I was not prepared for this book to end up being a favorite.

I cannot really express just how much I was impressed by this book. It exceeded every expectation I had. I'd think something was going to happen, and then what DID happen was about as far from what I would expect as possible, and be BETTER than what I wanted to happen.

I spent so much time writing down quotes, that I almost have a faithful reproduction of the book in little bits of paper and in my notebook. I seriously wish I could quote this entire book.

Let me just wipe the drool from my chin and then we'll continue... OK, I'm ready now.

Laurie's main character and narrator, Thomas Lang, is quite possibly one of the best characters I've ever read. Laurie doesn't waste a ton of time having Lang tell us about himself, we just climb onto his presumably broad, sturdy shoulders and strap ourselves in for the ride. And it's quite a ride, be sure of that.

It's been a long time since I've read about a character that I loved as much as Thomas Lang. He's human, he's fallible, he's whip smart, and he is sexy. But he's not perfect by any stretch... he just knows what he's good at, and to me, that is sexy.

Lang has an absolutely unique eye and voice, and the way that he described people, places, the world in general, had me snorting with laughter. But I don't want anyone to mistake me, because, while he sees things with a half-cocked eye, there are some definite serious issues in this book. Serious as in, we should take them seriously and actually THINK about them.

I don't want to go too much into the story and ruin it for the multitudes of people I plan on pushing this book on, so I won't say much. Just know that this book is absolutely as relevant today as it was 15 years ago when it was written, if not moreso.

I will end this review by saying two things:
1) Read. This. Book.
2) Read. This. Book.

View all my reviews >>

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Review: A Thousand Lies by D.W. St. John ★

A Thousand Lies This is the last of the catch-up "For Review" reviews. I was not in the best of moods after reading this book, and I was very underwhelmed by it. I'd hoped for something insightful and informative - this book was just a bunch of jaded opinions presented as fact. Skip this one. You won't regret missing it. On to the review...

I won this as a First Reads giveaway, and I was really excited to read it. I consider myself to be a forward thinking, open minded sort, and the thought of reading the "lies" that Americans must tell themselves in order to be "Good" Americans was interesting to me. I was interested in this because I was hoping that it would lend a little insight into the lies, a little background, a little justification.

This book provided none of that.

Now, before I go on into just what annoyed me about this book, if it can indeed be called that, as it is really more of a pamphlet, I would like to say that I am not rating this low because I disagree with many of the statements. This is not a knee-jerk 1 star.

This is a 1 star rating because it is an amateurish, poorly edited, poorly thought-out pamphlet full of statements with no context or explanation or supporting information at all.

It's like saying "Drunk drivers never kill innocent people." Sure, that's not a 100% true statement, but that doesn't mean it can never be true. It's just a statement. And without information to support it, it's transparent.

I had to read this book as if it was opposite day, and with every statement I asked myself "What is St. John trying to say?", and I could not tell you. There's no feeling of the author in this book, unless it's supposed to come through in the jaded sarcasm that just about drips off the page. It feels more like he sent out a survey to 1000 angry people, asked them to write down one thing that makes them angry, and then he compiled it into this book pamphlet and sent it to publish. This book pamphlet is supposed to "offend everybody", but I get the feeling that particular statement, along with many many others found within, is just something edgy to say.

Not to mention that this was riddled with spelling and grammatical errors. I had to read some of the statements three times before I could grasp what he was actually trying to say, because the sentence structure was so unweildy in some cases.

I can't recommend this one. If it had been better presented, and if it felt less like he was looking down on his readers, (Go look it up, indeed. Isn't that YOUR job, Mr. Author man? You can inspire a reader's willingness to learn without condescension or snarkiness and get much better results too) and if perhaps it had some context, this would be a much, much better book. As it is, no. It just doesn't work and it's an hour of my life I'd like back, please.

View all my reviews >>

Monday, June 7, 2010

It's Monday... What are you reading? (2)



As seen on Book Journey. In Sheila's words:

What Are You Reading, is where we gather to share what we have read this past week and what we plan to read this week. It is a great way to network with other bloggers, see some wonderful blogs, and put new titles on your reading list.

So here's what I'm "Currently Reading":

Description:
Victorian gentlewoman Amelia Peabody Emerson does not relish the joys of home and hearth. For while she and her husband, the renowned archaeologist Radcliffe Emerson, dutifully go about raising their young son, Ramses, Amelia dreams only of the dust and detritus of ancient civilizations. Providentially, a damsel in distress -- coupled with a promising archaeological site -- demands their immediate presence in Egypt. The damsel is Lady Baskerville, and the site is a tomb in Luxor recently discovered by Sir Henry Baskerville, who promptly died under bizarre circumstances. Amelia and Radcliffe arrive to find the camp in disarray, terrified workers, an eccentric group of guests...and a persistent rumor of a ghost on the grounds. Now the indomitable Amelia must battle evil forces determined to stand between her and her beloved antiquities and make her foray into the truth a most deadly affair...

This is the 2nd book in the Amelia Peabody series, and so far, I'm enjoying it immensely. Amelia is so unpredictable and strong and brilliant. She pulls absolutely ZERO punches, and has a fantastic dry sense of humor and razor sharp wit. I love her, and Emerson, and I must say that 65 pages in, little Ramses is edging his way to center stage too. This family just knows who they are, and there's no pretension. I love it, and I can't wait to see where it goes. :D

The other two books haven't changed, unfortunately! Still nominally "reading" Black House and Star Wars: Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina. Maybe I'll pencil in some time this week to squeeze in more of those.

Upcoming this week, I hope to read...

Description: In 1915, Sherlock Holmes is retired and quietly engaged in the study of honeybees in Sussex when a young woman literally stumbles into his lap on the Sussex downs. Fifteen years old, gawky, egotistical, and recently orphaned, the young Mary Russell displays an intellect to impress even Sherlock Holmes. Under his reluctant tutelage, this very modern twentieth-century woman proves a deft protégée, and a fitting partner for the Victorian detective. This first book of the Mary Russell–Sherlock Holmes mysteries is full of brilliant deduction, disguises, and danger.

This book has been recommended to me by... oh, at least 5 different people, so I figured that it was about time that I got around to reading it. Plus, I've had it out from the library for about a month now, and keep renewing it! Eeek! I hope that it's as good as everyone claims! :D

I think that's it for this week, with the two historical fiction books, Black House and maybe a short story or two from Mos Eisley, I think that should be enough to be getting on with! :P

See ya next Monday!