Curse the Dawn by Karen Chance
Monday April 27, 2009
Curse the Dawn is the fourth book in the Cassandra (Cassie) Palmer series by Karen Chance (after Touch the Dark, Claimed by Shadow, and Embrace the Night). The series focuses on clairvoyant-turned-Pythia Cassie Palmer, the world’s foremost clairvoyant (whose powers are intermittent) who can also manipulate time and space (albeit clumsily with hilarious results). The other major characters include smooth and seductive vampire senator Mircea and shoot-first-ask-questions-later battle mage and all-around mystery man, Pritkin. I’ll be very spoiler-lite and talk mostly about the series as a whole, I think.
This is a series I can’t stop reading for the simple reason that the characters are engaging. The plots are very all-over-the-place, the descriptions of scenes and images are often hard to understand or a little clunky, the diction and language are inconsistent and a little annoying, but Chance has done something some well- and tightly-written fantasies have failed to do for me: she has utterly and truly engaged my interest with what happens to her characters, even the most insignificant ones.
Unlike the other series in the genre I’ve read, Chance is willing to do some crazy things to her characters. And I’m not talking “dangerous” things or “complicated” things — I mean crazy crazy things with hilarious results. Like swapping bodies. Like compromising situations involving time travel, famous historical events, and mage conspiracies that turn things on their heads. I really enjoy those moments. This series is much more light-hearted and comedic than the other series, definitely full of self-referential tongue-in-cheek moments that make me giggle. Sometimes a good giggle is a lot more effective to me than a good moment of action or a good dramatic moment. Not saying I don’t get plenty of enjoyment out of series with little humor, but it’s a different kind. If I could satisfy all of my reading tastes and desires with a single book or series, forever, then I wouldn’t be the wide-ranging voracious [fantasy] reader that I am. The Cassie Palmer series fills a gap, satisfies a need/desire for me, and perhaps that’s why I keep reading it. No other series has such a clunky, goofy, naggy, whiney, amusing heroine who interacts with such interesting main male characters. (Pritkin is my personal favorite; I suppose that means I am a Cassie/Pritkin shipper? Dare I say it? I never usually go for the vamp when there’s a choice, and Mircea is no exception. Crazy battle mages for the win!)
Midnight’s Daughter, an off-shoot novel to the Cassie Palmer series, was not a necessary read before Curse the Dawn but because I’d read it, I had a more enriching experience, I think, because the action in that novel sort of bisected this one (off-screen) a bit. Also, Cassie sees a photo — or several — of Dorina, the main character introduced in Midnight’s Daughter, and having read Midnight’s Daughter I understood the ironic context of Cassie seeing the photo. Without that knowledge Cassie’s suspicions and jealousy wouldn’t have been as amusing. But reading that novel wasn’t necessarily necessary to the series, but considering they’re set in the same world at the same time I have a feeling that Chance is shaping things up to coincide between books. There’s a huge conflict she’s building toward and between the two series, she’ll be able to show two different sides of it (the fey side, and the vampire/mage side). I’m also assuming there will be character crossover, as there was already some crossover with Mircea in Midnight’s Daughter.
All in all I enjoyed this book. Books 3 and 4 of this series were much better than 1 and 2; based on that I can’t wait for more. If you enjoy urban fantasy and humor, with a little dash o’ crazy thrown in, this is a fun series for that and you may as well dive right into it, starting with the beginning.
Midnight’s Daughter by Karen Chance
Sunday February 1, 2009
If you’ve read the Cassandra Palmer series, definitely check out Midnight’s Daughter.
I’ve read the Cassandra Palmer series to date — three books, the fourth is coming out in April 2009 — and when launching into this novel, I was glad I had. Karen Chance definitely made me feel as if I needed to have not only read all three of those books but also the short story in the anthology On the Prowl (which I have read), too, to really get an appreciation for the story’s situation. That said, that’s not necessarily a bad thing on her part — plenty of authors love confusing me with that sort of thing, so she’s not alone! — but I still felt a little annoyed because it didn’t really mention that anywhere on the book before I’d started reading it. So yes, having read those helps, but in retrospect they weren’t entirely necessary, as her vampires and the magic system is fairly basic and works off of a lot of canon lore (her vampires have all the usual strengths & weaknesses, plus levels of mastery that yield interesting results).
Basically, Midnight’s Daughter was all right, but then again, I’m the first to admit I’m both easy going about saying I enjoy a ton of books while having ridiculously high standards for books that go that next step from enjoyment to adoration. (Or obsession.) I wasn’t obsessed with this book, but you know, that’s quite all right. I didn’t race through it — honestly, some of her language tripped me up a little and I had to reread things to be sure I was getting the meaning, and still wasn’t entirely sure I’d gotten it — but I definitely was grabbed by the plot and characters. Louis-Cesare is Mmm, of course — I was wondering if he’d get his own book when he featured so prominently in the Cassandra Palmer books – and Dory was a fun character, if a little abrasive with a voice that didn’t really match her character. (Would a 500 year old half-vampire — dhampir – really speak like that? Really? Oh, first person narration when it’s not quite there.) But I sort of loved Radu (teehee) and the whole thing with the “Dracula” family? The brothers, Dory’s place in it, the history, I have to admit, it kept me interested.
Having gotten used to Karen Chance’s style, I can’t say I wasn’t expecting the way a lot of this book was going to unfold. Her unpredictable plots are predictable in a strange and amusing way. I like the way she’s imagined the Fey (proper creepy/pretty Fey, yes! None of this cutesy crap) and I definitely am a fan of any series that has battle mages and people who are half-things and therefore have to deal with crazy family or genetic issues that result. (More Claire! More Claire!) Plus, I have to admire a writer who just plows forward with world-building and drops detail without getting heavy-handed with the explanation — she doesn’t really explain about magic or they Fey the way she might, the way other authors have, and I like that. She left the end open enough for a sequel or sequels and I admit, I’ll check them out.
So yes, Midnight’s Daughter was quirky, fun, random, and it definitely helps to have read Karen Chance’s other books, but it was still enjoyable.
Breaking Dawn by Stephenie Meyer
Tuesday September 16, 2008
Reading the day away hurts the brain.
I just finished Breaking Dawn. Gasp. I’m still on hold for it from the library… which I should go cancel. My friend lent me her friend’s copy — haha — and so I devoured that between last night and this morning (while managing, might I add, to get a full night’s sleep). I’ve got an awful lot to say on it but in the interests of spoilers, I won’t say it all here.
I suppose I liked it. Some parts of it I somewhat hated. Some I said “Finally!” about. Overall, I think I am “bleh” about it.
Actually I think I would have preferred Books 2 and 3 to be a heck of a lot shorter and sweeter and this book to be tidier, and then just, you know, have that. Or, well, maybe Book 1 shorter, too. I think they’re just awfully long and filled with lots of stuff that doesn’t need to be there. Efficiency of language and all of that. It would have been an excellent trilogy. If the POV had been different I would have liked it more, too. I grew to dislike the first person the longer the series went on as Meyer seemed to have more and more trouble keeping a rein on her writing style to keep it within the bounds of the perspective she chose… I mean, she even switches perspectives (at the end of 3 and a part of 4) and that’s just… not… well, I just didn’t like it. Write it in third person if you can’t contain it in one, I think. I’ve read some really, really successful first persons that play up on the inherent tunnel-vision-ness of the first person POV by which Meyer kept seeming stifled. Or be more consistent in the POV switches. I’ve read successful chapter-switching first person POV novels, and those are great if a bit complicated when done well. Oh, well.
I’m going to go spoiler lite and speak in (annoying) generalities for the rest of this, but as a general warning, stop reading if you don’t want any surprises spoiled.
I liked Bella’s character a heck of a lot more in Book 4. But that’s also because she changed significantly (which I incidentally didn’t like; if Bella in Book 4 was the only Bella, it would have been great. But I’ll get into that later.) The change wasn’t a gradual thing, like it should have been. I didn’t like the sudden, sharp shift in personality. It made sense given what happened — I doubt Meyer could have done it differently and had it still be convincing without reworking some of the plot or timeline, at least — but I didn’t like how weak Bella’s personality was all along, leading to this. Book 2 Bella is a miserable nuisance. Book 3 is all… oy. Better but still not ideal. She’s more authentically teenagerish in Book 3, though. I get that she’s not a modern heroine, she’s a throwback to the nineteenth century’s gothic heroine period (has Meyer read any of those early nineteenth century gothic novels? Did she expect any of her teenaged readers to have read them?) and maybe a bit of Austen. (The man-must-save-me-from-my-circumstances Austen, not the strong-willed, self-determined woman Austen; I don’t believe Bella had Elizabeth’s Bennett’s fire. Maybe something of Anne Elliot’s moping. Actually, some of that, yes, I see that. But probably only because I’m throwing Anne onto a Book 2/3 Bella and seeing if it might stick. It might.) Anyway.
The whole plot of Book 4 was sort of, well, unsurprising. I guessed every leg of it a few hundred pages before it occurred, and when it did, I was still shocked that I was right, because when I’d made those predictions to myself, I said, “Wouldn’t that be hilariously ironic? Because that would make this book long! And look how long it is!” And it happened. And I was… bitter? Annoyed that I figured it all out? For one of the predictions I actually thought to myself, “Too bad it’s going to turn out in Way A, because Way B would totally make things crazy! If that were to happen, then this and this and this could happen… But Way A is totally going to happen so there’s no use in further speculation.” And guess what. Way B happened. My speculation was correct. I was shocked because I had never thought Meyer would… do that. I do personally love figuring out the plot of books but… but… there were no surprises. None. Even the swooping-in-at-the-last-minute moment at the end was unsurprising. I was sort of “Sigh.” I suppose not every author can pull a fast one on me. I love it when they do, though.
But really, was I expecting this book to be amazing? No. I was expecting it to be just on the wrong side of tolerable. I am surprised that it was better than tolerable. Enjoyable, diverting. Fun. Was it because Meyer finally embraced more fantasy than she had ever used? Probably. She took risks and ran with them, trusting we’d follow. I think in doing so she lost some readers, those who followed her books for the love story and not the fantasy. (Though if they survived the werewolf revelation, I am surprised to think that they wouldn’t be able to survive anything. Vampires are one thing; shape-shifting can be something else entirely, but what came in Book 4 is no more shocking, really, than anything else — fantasy-wise. It was shocking for other reasons, which I can get into at another time.) And I was surprised too that I was in the vampire camp so firmly from Book 1. I am so often in the werewolf/shifter camp that I was surprised when Book 3 came down to it, forcing me to ally with Edward or Jacob, that I was unhesitatingly Edward.
And so anti-Bella. Really, I was fed up with her by the end of Book 3. The choice, ugh. Maybe I was more irritated with the marketing? Maybe. I am glad she was redeemed in part in Book 4 but in doing so she really wasn’t Bella. I mean, I can’t name it precisely. I think I felt condescension toward Bella in Books 2 and 3. The vast majority of my female friends and acquaintances are stronger women, plain and simple, than Bella was. I’m talking strength of character, of purpose, of will. You can’t feel so “meh” about a character for so long and then immediately cheer with her and enjoy her without stopping and thinking, “Wait. This is not the same character.” The changes she went through were abrupt and rough and told to me (ugh, telling versus showing) and I don’t think Meyer convinced me of why Bella changed except for the excuse of the new balances of power. She spends so much time on really strange moments and details but not enough time, space on the page, on this change of Bella’s that is so unbelievably crucial to the plot. I mean, if my life with the man of my dreams shifted that abruptly for the same reason tomorrow, my personality would not change that much in a few days and I can say that with absolute certainty. I know my loyalties and heart would change and grow appropriately, but I would not suddenly become a different person. Change takes time that Meyers did not make me feel I was living through with Bella emotionally. Additionally Meyer made it seem like Bella’s character jumped from 18 to 35, from self-conscious to ferociously self-assured, and I’m supposed to believe that easily, just like that. I don’t think so. She changed Bella too falsely, too rapidly, given what had transpired so recently in book time, in Books 2 and 3. If the change had been gradual, from the start of the series to the end of it, I would have bought it. But Bella was so eighteen years old in Book 3. Devil’s Advocate: I realize the events of the first half of Breaking Dawn were so earth-shattering, so life-altering that Bella really does have to change. But Meyer failed to convince me of the emotion, of the grounded-in-reality-truth of that change from Character A to Character B.
Other writers have done it and blown me away. To use a few fantasy examples from other authors whose books could be classified as “coming of age” or “young adult”: Robin McKinley’s Deerskin does it shockingly well. Heart-breakingly well. Lissar changes completely while retaining her sense of self and I believe every moment of it because of how grounded in raw emotion and power her experiences are. McKinley’s Aerin in The Hero and the Crown has a similar forged-in-the-fires-of-hell life-changing experience, and she changes because of it, too. I mean, hell, one of the best character changes ever has to be Frodo’s in The Lord of the Rings. Harrowing experiences over approximately the same time frame as Bella’s (actually Bella’s is more, I believe) and he is irrevocably altered in a gut-wrenching, proud, and really profound way. (Robin Hobb’s Malta in her Liveship Traders Trilogy is another character who changes sharply and realistically, as is Fitz in the Farseer and Tawny Man trilogies, though his change is over the course of years.) Bella’s change didn’t hit me like that at all. It didn’t feel real.
Getting more and more spoiler-ific here, I thought the events and moments in the series were certainly enough to have moved Bella to discover that sort of power of character on her own but Meyer made Bella’s humanity such a handicap, made being a vampire so perfect and desirable, it’s so hard to compare it. I don’t know how I feel about humanity being a handicap. How being painted as utterly frail and breakable and not… well, in any other way, is any way… relatable? I mean, we are breakable, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen humans painted that way in a fantasy series with supernatural characters. Humans are so much more than that. But then again, her vampires are so human — she doesn’t make them very different — I suppose I can see why she would malign humanity so much when her vampires are that unrealistically cool. In a way, that’s one thing I profoundly do not enjoy about the series. Bella cannot embrace herself as who she is, she has to become someone else — something not entirely human — to finally love herself. I don’t know how that settles with me. The analogy is imperfect, of course, to real life — as all fantasy should be imperfect, not one for one, analogies to real life — but even so. It’s discomfiting.
I sit uneasy with a message that in order to be able to love and be proud of yourself have to both find someone else to complete you and to fundamentally change (in essence, your genetics) in the process.
But of course, cynics will say that about any kind of all-consuming love, or that lots of life-changing events seriously alter the people they happen to. I’ve been asked to my face why I need Bryan to love, cherish, and marry me, when I have to sacrifice my single, individual self to become the us that comprises us? And it is a sacrifice to become an us. You are no longer your own entity in a couple. You are who you become together. You can change and grow and become wiser together. But… I’m also still irrevocably myself. Bumbling faults and all. Gah. It’s such a web of tangled thoughts, that. I could discuss that for a long time.
There are a lot of aspects of the book I’d want to discuss more but in the interests of remaining vague, I won’t. You can talk to me about it, if you like.
I suppose that’s how I think of the Twilight Saga. It’s good, it’s fun; it has its moments of utterly asinine melodrama that make me want to cry with frustration, and it has its moments of beautiful, really adorable romance. It also is pretty good with action and politics; its characters are varied, intriguing, and engrossing. I was without a doubt constantly engaged with the book. Will I buy the series and read it again and again like I do many others? No. It just wasn’t worth it. But I am glad I have read it.
From Dead to Worse by Charlaine Harris
Wednesday September 10, 2008
I just finished From Dead to Worse by Charlaine Harris, the most recent installment in her Southern Vampire Series about Sookie Stackhouse. The book itself was very interesting. Harris is at the point in the series where she can — and did — spend an entire book on already existing plotlines. Drawing them out, concluding them, adding new twists to perpetuate some, picking up some old ones to dust off and reinvigorate… it’s not often a series has the ability to do that. But it was good, even if it didn’t follow the typical format of a Sookie Stackhouse (or plain old urban fantasy adventure) novel. It’s also a relief in a way that she didn’t clog the book with a whole huge new plot (though there was a decently large new plot that was satisfying) and then sideline the already sidelined subplots again. I’m glad they got dealt with.
It’s interesting in another way too; now that the series is an HBO television series (True Blood), it’ll be interesting to see where HBO takes it. They can, with very subtle editing, probably do the entire series as written and do well with it. (Hurricane Katrina comes into it and is important to the plot in a peripheral way, but they can probably work around that.) Or, they may choose to take the characters and run with them into new territory. But it’ll be some time before they’ll have some serious decisions to make. For one, the series deviates from small-towns and vampires to larger issues and more supernatural types, and unless that’s handled in the manner with which they have started handling the supernatural stuff (with tact and seriousness) then it could be easily botched. But I doubt HBO will do the series wrong. I wonder how long they think it might last? Until the actors’ paychecks and lives no longer make it seem realistic to keep going? Because there are eight books so far and if season one of the series is maybe one or two books….
Anyway in other news I was really productive today and I look forward to more productivity tomorrow! Yay! I also need to hit up the library and return the large stack of books I’ve read lately and pick up Renegade’s Magic by Robin Hobb to start Reading Attempt #2. (#1 ended with me returning it because I couldn’t get into it easily and it came due. I was devouring other series at the time, too, which contributed to that.) I wonder how Hobb will end that trilogy…
The end of my summer reading…
Tuesday September 9, 2008
It’s been a while since I’ve really written and there’s no simple explanation for it. I just haven’t remembered. But that’s not to say that things haven’t been happening or I haven’t been reading. Actually in the intervening time between since when I last really wrote and now I finished King’s Shield, I read the MacCarrick brothers trilogy by Kresley Cole (If you Dare, If you Desire, If you Deceive), read Dream-Chaser and Acheron by Sherrilyn Kenyon, and even watched the premiere of HBO’s True Blood, based on Charlaine Harris’s Southern Vampire Series novels. All of which were excellent.
So to begin, King’s Shield was marvelous. Absolutely stunningly good. I devoured it and loved every moment. I can’t wait until it comes out in paperback so I can add it to the permanent collection. (I’d buy it now but I am finicky about series all being in the same format… same with Jim Butcher’s Codex Alera. I bought all of the ones currently in paperback because I love them but I can’t buy Captain’s Fury until it comes out in paperback and I also can’t buy Princep’s Fury the moment it comes out because I need them all to match… Oh, OCD.) Back to King’s Shield, I can’t believe it was so good. Series, especially epic fantasy series, tend to drag on forever. The Wheel of Time, the Sword of Truth… each book moved at a snail’s pace, introducing more subplots rather than resolving the main plot and original subplots it introduced at the start. As one reviewer said about this series, Sherwood Smith dares to resolve subplots. And major plots! But all along she’s throwing things in and stirring the pot and biding her time until WHAM! New plot, new stuff, same characters, shivery thrills all around. I can’t wait for the fourth book now… but it’s going to be so different from the other books. Not that it’s an offshoot but really, it’s going to be interesting to see where all of the plots she “ended” or temporarily resolved will play out in the fourth book as more stuff happens. Because this world is too rich for it to be over yet. Or anytime soon. But with books this good I’m always going to want more…
I read Kresley Cole’s trilogy in and around my classic devouring of Sherrilyn Kenyon’s books. Kresley Cole is so talented compared to Sherrilyn Kenyon. And that talent is evident in so many aspects of her writing. Kenyon has a taste for fantasy and the ability to write but her fiction at this point feels so serialized and predictable (not that I don’t devour them) whereas Kresley Cole throws genuinely strange and amazingly unique characters together and runs with them. She really does make her male heroes sexy but flawed, whereas Kenyon just says they’re flawed, shows them as being mean but perfect, then runs with their inevitable character change. (Except for Acheron. I’ll get there.) Cole’s books are also really love stories and heroic adventures that just happen to have some raunchy scenes. Kenyon’s books are, well, blatant in a sort of almost rude and glaring way at times. Yes, he’s attracted to her right off but do we need the visual of an instant bulge in the pants? Cole goes deeper. Why is he attracted? How so? What particulars? Is it that sneaky smile she makes that shows she’s up to no good, when despite all appearances she looks all prim and proper? It’s adorable and really well-done. Sigh. Maybe it’s because of the recent juxaposition of these novels that I’ve seen their contrasts so vividly. If I haven’t read a Kenyon book in a while it seems great. If I haven’t read a Cole book in a while, any real honesty and intimacy between characters can seem to take forever. (She builds it up, generally, slowly.) But together it seemed so obvious that I prefer Cole’s books.
The MacCarrick brothers books additionally were astounding as much as for their historical settings and the depth to which Cole had clearly researched and built up their individually unique worlds (1850s Andorra, Paris, London, Scotland…), and she really made me feel comfortable in those worlds. Her characters too were vibrantly different. Whereas with Kenyon, except for Tabitha in the Dark-Hunter series, pretty much every main character woman is identical to anyone else. They have so much of the same characteristics they don’t really feel different. Artemis is really well characterized but she’s also not so much a main character as a canonical staple. Acheron, though, is different… so consistent and so incredibly real… until the second half of his book. Then he becomes so much like Zarek and Kyrian and all of her “best” heroes that I’m constantly surprised it’s Acheron we’re talking about. In that regard it was somewhat disappointing. (Also, the “modern” part of the book felt rushed and forced compared to the beautiful, gripping, emotionally raw first part. That part was truly well-done and will stay with me.)
That all being said though, I still enjoyed Dream-Chaser and Acheron. I’m still going to read the subsequent books. She’s got the knack of addicting me. Now while I won’t actually buy these books (though I’m debating getting Acheron when it comes to paperback because it really was unusually good for a Kenyon book, and the first half of it was extraordinary and the latter… while imperfect still was as good or better than a typical Dark-Hunter series book) I still enjoy them. And I am glad I do. I might be high-minded but I really do enjoy a good serialized read now and again.
Oh, and regarding the post I posted while in the middle of Acheron, I was right about the choice of love interest for the modern part. I’d sort of had a whoppingly large suspicion when I read the book in which she was introduced though I was a bit skeptical at first because of who she is. I’d thought for a while it had to be someone else until that got debunked enough for me to bet that if she chose that woman I’d stop reading those books forever. So I am glad Kenyon chose whom she did.
True Blood. Ah, HBO. You never can disappoint me. I don’t think it’s possible. That show was amazing. The way they showed Sookie’s telepathy — as a constant source of distraction and irritation — versus the silence around Bill as a sublime relief… it’s so good. They also foreshadowed or just plain old introduced every major character in the first book (or two) and I’m so excited. All of the characters seem awesome and well-cast, and except for Tara Thornton (whom they changed, a lot) the series is true to the books. Really accurately so. Thus I am so excited. If that was only episode one… If you haven’t seen it, watch it… if you don’t have HBO, rent it when it comes to DVD or ask someone to tape it. Really. It’s so good!
Also, Mad Men was and continues to be excellent this season. I’m looking forward to the Emmys!
Romance novels & Twilight ranting
Tuesday July 22, 2008
I’ve read three books lately: Walk on the Wild Side by Christine Warren, and A Hunger Like No Other and No Rest For the Wicked by Kresley Cole. (The titles. I KNOW. Oy.) They’re all three legitimate romance novels and I’m a bit embarrassed to say I really enjoyed them. You get past the gratuitous “generous curves” and “intense arousal” descriptions and, well, the plots are good and the characters fun and well-drawn. I probably liked Cole’s better, but only because it’s a new world with new supernatural rules and I really liked them. (I was a little bit like, “Valkyrie?! Awesome!!”) They actually reminded me a lot of Sherrilyn Kenyon’s Dark-Hunter books, but in a way that Kenyon’s books can be a bit kitschy and a little, well, full of themselves, Cole’s were sort of pure adrenaline. The Dark-Hunter plots are not as thick as Cole’s plots were (though the thinner plots probably help keep the series moving forward at its ridiculous rate of perpetuation) and Kenyon’s are a lot more predictable. Lots of stuff goes on in Cole’s books apart from the romance. (Yay for actual, really awesome world building and creative fantasy! Kenyon only gets bonus points for every fourth or so book; a few are re-reads for me, the others, um, not so much. And that’s what I judge a book by — it’s re-read-able-ness.) And the romance aspect is a lot more complicated than in Kenyon’s. (The girls don’t give it up right away. Yay!) The men all being 6′5″ and well-muscled, though? If that’s how it is across the genre… I suppose I will have to deal with their lack of handsome male protagonists who stand at a normal height. Sigh. (Then again, I suppose most women don’t read romance novels to see normal men described in vigorous detail, eh?)
Whoa, parenthetical commentary much? Sorry. Eh. Um.
(Tangent: Acheron comes out next month. So. Frickin’. Excited. I never said I wasn’t a Sherrilyn Kenyon fan…)
It’s funny. I know I’ll never write romance but I do enjoy reading it (so long as it’s paranormal romance; even in the romance genre I need genre to keep me interested). Sometimes when I’m reading regular fantasy, though — for an adult audience — I do wish there was a bit more than, like, a chaste kiss going on. Or, like, “and then they had sex, and it was amazing.” I mean, movies tend to have more than chaste kisses going on, for Pete’s sake, when it matters. (Granted I’m only all for any romantic stuff if it fits in the plot. Gratuitious sex scenes need not be added for me, thanks.) Bitten by Kelley Armstrong is a good example, actually: more than chaste kisses but it’s not the plot’s focus, though those scenes are integral to the plot’s development in terms of the characters’ developments and emotion. In Bitten, Armstrong just basically makes the intimate scenes as descriptive as any other scene — it’s just another scene. But every scene in that book matters. Strolling through downtown Toronto on a business lunch break, running through a thick forest as a wolf, discovering a dead body half-buried under a bridge… And I appreciate the novel because of that. Her scenes also have really good pithy descriptions and are full of action, and none of the wonky romance language. (Sometimes the vocabulary in a romance novel has me rolling my eyes or laughing — like, really? Really? You used that adjective and adverb combination? Really? Whenever things fit stereotypes, I laugh.)
It’s a fine line for me, I suppose, the “sex scene” business in a book. And in YA Fiction, it’s an even finer line. Yes, some teenagers have sex, yes some abstain until college or marriage or what have you — but you see a very interesting sort of reflection of that reality in YA fantasy that makes it seem as polarized as I’ve made it sound. For the most part, I’ve seen, it’s sex or no sex. Kiss or all-the-way “and they had sex.” Fantasy is a reflection of our reality placed within a fantastic background. It stands to reason that all aspects of a teen’s reality should sort of make their way into a well-written novel, if there is a legitimate place for it. For teens, it’s not just sex or no sex. There’s a hell of a lot of confusing, angsty middle ground. And there’s so much drama associated with it, ripe for the novelizing. Rarely do I see teen novels — in the fantasy category, mind you — that actually make use of that middle ground when the need arises. It’s sort of an all-or-nothing thing, and that confuses me. (i.e. Right before the climax, or at the very end of the denouement, the characters either kiss or they do it.) For example, you have Tamora Pierce’s Trickster’s Choice/Trickster’s Queen with Aliane actually, well, having sex, and then Shannon Hale’s The Goose Girl’s Princess Isi being all, well, chaste in an utterly Princess-like fashion. Both characters are approximately the same age — seventeen to eighteen, ish — but that sort of polarity (and you’ll see more of what I mean if you’ve read those particular novels) is what I’m talking about. Admittedly, for Isi it fits her culture and character, but I was a little put out by Aliane’s sort of, well, what happened there. (Those aren’t my favorite Pierce books, and that’s one of the big reasons why.) It seemed sort of added.
For my books, my characters’ sexual activities (or complete lack thereof) are based on a wide combination of factors, just as any person’s sexual activities are. In what I write, as in reality, there are situations and characters who will and do experience the plenty, the lack, the good, the painful, the awkward, the embarrassing, the misunderstood. Et cetera. I’m not planning on purposefully including or not including anything unless it fits. And I both like/hate the pre-climax/end-of-denouement kiss/sex thing. I mean, you either need the bolstering before you go to battle or you get the reward once you’ve survived — it’s an overarching fantasy thing, not just YA. But in real life you have bumbling flirtation, awkward kissing, betrayed lovers, stuff that’s a heck of a lot more complex than just the pre-battle bolstering or post-battle reward.
This whole discussion brings me around in some ways to Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight Saga and its beating-around-the-bush with teens, sex, love, commitment, and marriage. (I won’t actually reveal the plots here but I do plan to get into it, so watch out.) Oy. I have and can go on and on and on about this. Bella is presented as a stereotypical (and in a lot, a lot of ways uninterestingly stereotypical) teenager. But she and Edward have nothing short of a ridiculously, unusually atypical relationship with its attenuating circumstances involving physical, well, involvement. Edward and Bella, for lack of a better way to say it, can’t get jiggy (cough, 1997, cough) — or, for that matter, even a little carried away — without consequences. Jacob throws a wrench into the chaste machine in his own way in book two (and by wrench I mean some repressed-hormone-tongue-action) and by the third book, it’s all a bunch of non-real confusing relationship-y stuff. How’s a normal girl supposed to look at that fantasy plot (admittedly involving werewolves and vampires but ultimately still about teenagers) and apply it as a mirror to her reality? (Believe me, if you’ve read these books, you’ll see what I mean; you’re probably hopelessly confused otherwise.)
So my biggest criticism with these books is mostly the fact that I have trouble reconciling Bella’s predicament with anything any normal teenager would face in her own reality. The choice between two different guys’ loves is one thing — unusual in and of itself outside of a Hollywood script; and Bella is still, by the third book, relatively unremarkable, mind you, despite Meyer’s failed attempts to prove otherwise — which makes the whole Bella / Edward / Jacob quandary even more complex. If Bella were a hero/heroine worthy of their adoration I would put this whole argument aside. Entirely. But she’s not. She’s just… well. As far as I can tell she is The Right Girl at the Right Time, and barring any Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix-like bombs (after-the-fact prophecies), I am not convinced she’s very special. Plus, the issues that arise when discussing anything involving teens and sex arise in an even more mature format here between Bella, Edward, and Jacob — sex, marriage, children, immortality versus mortality, even potential suicide! (Romeo and Juliet, gag a little) — and make Bella’s choice a bit, well, unreal.
Or, well, EMO. EMO EMO EMO EMO. All she’s missing is the black eyeliner and My Chemical Romance on repeat on iTunes.
Cough. Um. Yes. Moving on and circling back.
Fantasy is not unreal fiction. Fantasy holds a warped mirror to reality to better highlight issues, ideas, and characters through a fantastic lens, enabling an author certain storytelling freedoms. But ultimately fantasy, like any genre, is still rooted irrevocably in our reality and as such still needs to feel real. And I want — I really do — to feel like I’m in Bella’s shoes. But I can’t. By the end of that third book things have gone so far out of my own spectrum of understanding and experience that I cannot even really enjoy it anymore. That said, I know others do enjoy it — others not as flippin’ critical as myself, and I know I am critical — but I wonder just how many feel absolutely rivetedly connected to Bella and her CHOICE. Because really. Really? Who has that choice? Who can even symphathize enough with Bella to the degree to feel riveted by that choice? Evidently a heck of a lot of teenagers. And it makes me so confused. I am not that far out of my teens. Is this what teenagers think is hopelessly romantic? Is Meyers warping the romantic dreams of teenagers by hinting that this could happen to any average girl? It makes me wonder if she is. And if she is, it makes me wonder and worry a little about the elements on the table for discussion in these books — sex, marriage, children, immortality versus mortality, even potential suicide, as I said.
It’s not even that, per se. It’s also to do with Meyers’ inconsistency — though it may also be her attempt to display a teenager’s wide-ranging, ever-changing emotions and feelings and beliefs.
I wonder if these teenagers have read Jane Austen. (Talk about consistently chaste and lovely stuff. Ah, Austen.)
I’m getting really worked up about this!
So.
Let me pose a spoiler-filled scenario to myself, non-fantasy, and let me see if I can wrap my head around this. So let’s say Bella’s choice is not between a century-old vampire who looks 17 — Edward — and a Native American werewolf who really is 16 — Jacob. Rather it’s between a sensitive, handsome, book-loving, science guy who’s an expert in martial arts, but he has had a disease preventing him from being able to father children — let’s call him Sedward. Sedward wants to wait until marriage to have sex, and he’s promising a happy, un-divorce-able eternity together with him and his loving (but strange) family. In the other corner we have a 6′5″ football player with a love of motorcycles but with a surprising intellect and winsome smile — let’s call him Racob. Racob is perfectly healthy in the testicular sense. Racob is much younger and more immature than Sedward but he’s got that much in common with Bella, who’s more around Racob’s age. Bella’s dad loves Racob and is cooler to Sedward, but he wants Bella to be happy. Both boys are Bella’s type, in their own way, and she’s torn between her older, more persisting love with Sedward, whom she believes to be her soulmate, and her fiery, sudden passion for Racob, who is vociferously offering her the moment, contrasting with Sedward’s promise of eternity. See the quandary? Now, see, I’ve made the situation somewhat human. BUT. What girl is really going to have that choice — at eighteen, no less? For “Sedward” Bella would give up college, give up a normal life, but for “Racob” she would give up Sedward. And then there’s the whole sex thing. She can’t have sex with Sedward — gah, Edward, until marriage with him, as per his deal, at which point he’ll turn her. She wants to be turned Oh So Badly. Then there’s Jacob with his hot mouth (ugh) and muscle-y physique and his “but you can have my babies, Bella” ridiculousness — THEY ARE TEENAGERS, COUGH — and his hatred of Edward. Jacob’s a hell of a lot more immature than Edward.(Jacob cannot see that he too is a monster as Edward is, being a werewolf himself, whereas Edward is consistently The Bigger Man and is much more, well, frickin’ mature. Though he is a LOT older than he looks.)
So that’s the LONG — or the short, depending on whether or not you really believe that’s all I have to say on the matter, cough — of why I am so quasi-excited/not excited for Breaking Dawn. Because really. The book’s plot more or less revolves around Bella’s choice and such. And I hope to goodness she chooses Edward for my own sanity. And I’m shocked by that actually because I’m almost always in the “Have the werewolf babies!” camp. (Yes, it’s come up a few times across the genre. Yes, I am usually anti-vampire. Yes, werewolves are usually awesome.) But the way Meyer has characterized them… I mean, she characterizes them as a part-gang, part-football team, part-frat house. I can see the appeal to a teenager but really…? Really? Frick, REALLY!?
Obviously I have no opinion on the matter.
EDIT: Read my rant on Breaking Dawn here.
subscribe