How I Define a "Good" Book

My computer died on Thursday (for the fourth time in five months) so I've spent most of the weekend reading. I read 11 books from Wednesday to Sunday. That's a lot in such a short time even for me. And it was a wide range of books and authors. Nine of the books were ones I hadn't read before and they were, for the most part, alright. There was a series of four books I read that was really good, but none of the books I read are my new favorite. Which got me thinking about how I decide a book is one of my favorites. What is it about a book that makes it better than others?

It's the feeling I have when the book is over. That's the first clue. I have one of two responses when I finish a book. The first is "Oh, that's the end. Well that was a good book. It was enjoyable. Now, what else do I have that I can read?" I feel indifferent at the end (or on rare occasions, I absolutely hated the book and never want to see it again). The second response is "It's over. It's over? But what now? Maybe I should read it again. No, I have other things to read. But none like this so I should read this again. Well, I could try reading this but it's not quite right. Neither is this. Hmm maybe I have a movie that's similar?" THAT is the response I'm looking for.

When I finish a truly good book, I feel like something is missing but I also feel complete. It's a paradox, an oxymoron, and a simply beautiful feeling. I can look back on the book and I know it is something that I could read a hundred times and never get tired of.

The funny thing is, almost all my favorite books are ones that I had to force myself to read at first. They are either written at a different time so I have to adjust to the language, or they start slow and  I have to tell myself it will be worth it if I just keep reading. It's still that way. Of my 10 favorite books, only 2 are ones that I can pick up and start reading with no trouble. And both of those are marketed as children's books (Harry Potter and The Chronicles of Narnia). The other 8 are all books from a different time period or are a little slow at the beginning (The Lord of the Rings, Pride & Prejudice, Jane Eyre, The Blue Sword, Life of Pi, Jurassic Park, Island of the Blue Dolphins, and World War Z).

All 10 of my favorite books evoke that feeling of loss and completion. It's a bittersweet feeling and I honestly do consider reading the book again immediately after I've finished it. It's amazing I read as many new books as I do instead of just rereading all of my favorites. At least for the books with movie adaptations (good ones, that is) I have some way of relieving the feeling.

But it's not just the end result. I should be able to look back at a book that I really liked and pick it apart. I liked this, I didn't like that, this quote was amazing, I cried here. Something in the book produced the feelings I have at the end and I should be able to pinpoint it. And then I use that to find other works that are similar. For me, reading is an enjoyable experience. It's an escape, a way to relax, and a way to dream. I get lost in a truly good book and have to reconnect with reality. That's why I read. That's what I'm looking for in a good book.

Sunshine

One of my favorite books, The Blue Sword, was written by Robin McKinley. For a while, it was the only book of hers that I had read but I've slowly started reading more of her works. The latest book I read by her is Sunshine. It won the Mythopoeic Fantasy Award for Adult Literature in 2004, which gives me even more reason to love the book.

The story takes place in a world very much like ours but with one minor change: there are zombies, vampires, weres of many different animals, succubi and demons. Collectively, they are called Others. The story is set after the Voodoo Wars, which were between humans and the Others. Magic plays a big part in the story and there are many bad spots, or places where black magic thrives.

The main character is a young woman whose name is Rae but is nicknamed Sunshine. She is a baker at her stepfather's coffee shop. One evening she heads out to her family's old cabin by the lake and is abducted by vampires. This changes her life. She is chained to the wall in a ballroom but she is not the only prisoner. A vampire named Constantine is also being held and she's supposed to be a treat for him. Sunshine manages to escape by turning the knife she hid in her bra into a key. She also frees Con and they leave together, in the daytime. Sunshine is able to keep Con from bursting into flames from the sun if they are touching.

The rest of the book takes place over the next six months. Sunshine has to explain why she was missing without saying it was vampires and without mentioning that she freed a vampire. She and Con have formed a bond that could threaten both their lives if anyone from SOF (Special Others Forces) found out. Sunshine has to deal with her magical heritage and the knowledge that there are more partbloods (part human-part demon) around her than she originally thought.

The novel was very good. I love McKinley's works and her style of writing. Sunshine was a little different, as it was from Sunshine's point of view and was very honest and open. It gave the whole situation a touch of reality: this is how someone really feels when their world is stripped away from them. Like most of McKinley's other works, the book was a little slow at the beginning. But once it took off, it just kept going. McKinley frequently creates new worlds or worlds that look like ours but with a slight difference, and her books usually start right in the middle. As the story goes, she'll explain things here or there to catch you up. Sometimes this makes things really confusing but that was not the case here. I found everything easy to follow and understand.

And as far as vampire novels go, it wasn't a cheesy romance or some sort of erotic thriller. The Others were handled very well and the vampires were not appealing. Sunshine frequently thought about how awkward Con was and how different he was from humans. She never saw him as blindingly attractive and I'm honestly not sure she ever thought he was attractive. I actually have a quote describing the antagonist, a master vampire who is not physically seen until the very end of the book. What I like about the following quote is how disgusting McKinley makes him sound.

“I said that monster doesn’t cover it. There is no word for a several-hundred-year-old vampire who has performed every available wickedness over and over till he has to invent unavailable ones because he’d worn the others out. His flesh was not flesh; it was a viscous ooze, held together by malice. His voice was a manifestation of malignancy, for he had no tongue, no larynx; his eyes were the purest imagination of evil: flawless in a way that flesh could never be.” 

There are two other quotes that I want to leave you with. The first is a rather charming description of what you feel like after killing several vampires. Again, it's disgusting but I love the imagery that McKinley uses.

“I wish I could forget how it feels, your hair stuck to your skull with blood, foul blood running gummily down inside your clothes, invading your privacy, your decency, your humanity, till it chafes you with every breath, every movement, the tug of it as it dries on your skin feeling like some kind of snare. Blood in your mouth, that you cannot spit the vile taste of away.”

And the last quote. I love the contrast that McKinley creates between opposites. I love that such a surprising element is possible, as I myself love lying in the sun. And I just love the last line. 

“The hierarchies of magic handling are no particular study of mine. But your particular affinity is for sunlight: your element, as it were. It is usually one of the standard four: earth, air, water, fire. Sometimes it is metal, sometimes wood. I have never heard of one for sunlight before, but there are—are tests for these things. Yours is neither fire nor air, but a bit of both, and something else. While I was doing the tests and coming up nowhere, I thought of sunlight because of all the days I have seen you lying in the sun like a cat or a dog—I have only ever seen you truly relaxed like that, lying motionless in sunlight. And you told me once about the year you were ill, when you lived in a basement flat, and how you cured yourself by lying in front of the sunny windows when you moved upstairs. I thought of your nickname—how I myself had relied on your nickname to tell me the real truth about you, after the vampire visited you….As for your—let us call it counteraffinity: your counteraffinity may be for vampires. I have never heard of this either, but I do know it is often a magic handler with a principal affinity for water who can cross a desert most easily; a handler with a principal affinity for air who can hold her breath the longest, someone with an affinity for earth who flies most easily. It is the strength of the element in you that makes you more able to resist—and simultaneously embrace—its opposite. You are not consumed by the dark because you are full of light.”

Mythopoeia

In my last post I mentioned a little-known genre of literature called mythopoeia. Since I doubt many of you have ever heard of mythopoeia, I thought I would educate you. We'll start with the definition: mythopoeia is when an author creates his own mythology using elements and archetypes found in traditional mythology.

So what does that mean? Everyone has heard of the Greek gods (Zeus, Athena, Poseidon, Hades, Aphrodite) and most people know that there were Egyptian, Norse, and Hindu gods, along with many others. The stories about these gods and the mortals whose lives were influenced by them are traditional mythology. In ancient times, myths were used to explain things that people could not understand or rationalize, such as why the seasons changed or where people went after they died. With the Scientific Revolution, a rational, reasonable, scientific answer was discovered for many of the questions that mythology tried to answer. Because of this, mythology lost most of its importance.

But it did not die out completely. Some authors began taking the elements found in traditional mythology and adapting them to create their own form of mythology. This became known as mythopoeia. And now we get to my favorite part about mythopoeia. Guess who popularized the term? J. R. R. Tolkien. He was part of a marvelous little group called the Inklings. The group was comprised of mainly Oxford professors, and they met on a regular basis to discuss literature. One of the places they frequently met was the pub The Eagle and Child, which has a section dedicated to the Inklings. The other notable member who is directly involved in mythopoeia was C. S. Lewis.

The topic of myth-making was first brought up in a discussion between Lewis and Tolkien. In order to defend his stance on myth-making, Tolkien wrote a poem, titled Mythopoeia, and gave it to Lewis. This poem is what started everything.

The poem was written in 1931. In 1937, The Hobbit was first published and shortly after Tolkien began writing the sequel, The Lord of the Rings. Lewis began writing The Chronicles of Narnia in 1949. And Tolkien's greatest mythopoeic work, The Silmarillion, was published posthumously by Christopher Tolkien in 1977. These are some of the greatest and most popular mythopoeic works. Other works include Star Wars, some comic book characters such as Superman, parts of Harry Potter, and parts of the TV show Battlestar Galactica. As I mentioned previously, the series Rose of the Prophet is mythopoeic as well. Other authors who commonly write mythopoeic works are Neil Gaiman and Robin McKinley.

These authors and works all have noticeable aspects of traditional mythology. Lewis' series is clearly heavily based on Christianity. Tolkien uses Christianity as well as Irish, German, and some Finnish mythology. Not every mythopoeic work has to have a pantheon of gods but many of them do; the gods are a big part of mythology and very easy to transfer. Some mythopoeic works reuse mythological creatures. while others focus more on the important hero's journey. Several mythopoeic works follow the model of the creation myth and depict the creation of the mythopoeic world. One of the most important parts of mythopoeia is the feeling you get when you read one of the works. It's supposed to be fantastical and amazing, and create a sense of wonder. Traditional mythology often had a hidden or obvious message, and mythopoeia is the same way. Think about the things that Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter have taught people, the values and lessons that so many have learned from those stories. That is just as big a part of mythopoeia as the world that the author creates.

Those created worlds are what first drew me to mythopoeia. I love Lord of the Rings, and I am torn between love and hate when it comes to Tolkien. He created such a beautiful world in Middle-Earth, with its own people, history and languages. But it kind of sickens me that he did all that. He's such an over-achiever. Who writes two and a half complete languages and creates an entire history for a world that isn't even real? Tolkien, that's who, and I hate him for it. But I love him for it just as much. I love him so much that I based my entire Senior presentation on mythopoeia just so that I could talk about Tolkien and how brilliant he is (I'm an English Lit major).

There is even a whole society dedicated to mythopoeia. It's called the Mythopoeic Society and is based at Michigan State University. They have Mythopoeic Awards for books and authors that are considered outstanding works of fantasy and myth. There is a scholarly journal as well as a monthly bulletin that talk about different mythopoeic works. I'm kind of in love and would seriously consider becoming a lifetime member if I had an extra $500 laying around.

What I've said here is only a brief overview of what mythopoeia is. And I really can't even begin to describe what the genre means to me. It's such a beautiful thing and so creative. To end, I'll leave you with this excerpt from Tolkien's poem Mythopoeia:

Though all the crannies of the world we filled

with Elves and Goblins, though we dared to build

Gods and their houses out of dark and light,

and sowed the seeds of dragons, 'twas our right

(used or misused). The right has not decayed.

We make still by the law in which we're made.

Rose of the Prophet

My favorite literary genre is fantasy. I love being swept up in a story of another world, with different rules, customs and people. My absolute favorite series is The Lord of the Rings but there are a few others that I quite enjoy as well. One of those is the Rose of the Prophet trilogy. The books were co-authored by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman and were published from 1988-1989. It is a story of romance, treachery, magic and mystery. I have read the trilogy three or four times now, and each time I fall even more in love. The last time I was reading the books, I was struggling not to laugh out loud.

The series takes place on the world Sularin, which is ruled by a group of 20 gods. The 20 gods make up a single, central god called Sul. When the gods are in accord, the world is balanced. But, as so often happens when there are so many who desire power, the gods fight and chaos occurs. Not all of the gods are major characters in the series; only 5 are featured heavily. And the gods are rarely seen. Instead, their agents appear to the humans. The Immortals are generally either angel,s djinns, 'efreets, or imps. And they are probably the funniest part of the series. The djinn are conniving and mischievous and get into all kinds of trouble. They are the comedic relief in the books, which is good because the books can get dark.

The series starts with two nomadic tribes being told by their god, Akhran, that the children of the Sheiks must marry. During the ceremony, the bride is tied up and gagged and the groom is drunk. Clearly, the marriage is off to a good start. The two tribes are constantly at odds. Zohra's tribe is comprised of sheep-herders and Khardan's tribe breeds horses. Zohra's tribe is also ashamed of her because she is stubborn and "manly". She goes so far as to stab Khardan on their wedding night. If any couple needed counseling, it is Zohra and Khardan. But they are wonderful. Even though they do nothing but fight, they still have a connection. We only see hints of tenderness between them, and even at the end they are fighting about where they will live. The biggest sign that there is something more to their relationship happens when Zohra refuses to sleep with Khardan's blood brother, Auda ibn Jad. He propositions her, saying that he wants a son before he dies. But she refuses and ibn Jad tells Khardan she will bear many sons of the man she loves.

The other major character in the story is Mathew. He is a sorcerer who is disguised as a woman, an interesting case of mistaken identity. He is very timid in the beginning but learns to stand on his feet and stand up for himself and those around him. He is the one who teaches Zohra how to do more extensive magic. The nomadic tribes only practice woman's magic so the fact that Mathew can do magic is astonishing. But he teaches Zohra a lot. Together, Mathew, Zohra and Khardan save the nomadic tribes. They do not bring peace, per say, as the series ends with the tribes fighting among themselves. But the tribes are saved and the gods are in balance again so there is hope that everything will be alright soon.

If you love fantasy and are looking for something new to read, then I highly recommend the Rose of the Prophet trilogy. It's refreshing, funny, and romantic. And it's also a part of another genre of literature that I adore called mythopoeia, where an author creates his own mythology. These books are definitely a created mythology. There is a vast world with its own gods and social order to be found in this trilogy. It's a beautiful series and one you should definitely read.

Life: An Exploded Diagram

A few weeks ago I was at the library and I realized that one of the authors I really liked, Mal Peet, had a new book. It was called Life: An Exploded Diagram and it was set around the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis. At the time, I just picked the book up because it sounded good and Peet had written other books that I really enjoyed. But the book deals with a time when America and the Soviet Union were at a standstill over nuclear weapons, and currently, Russia is invading the Crimea. It's a little freaky that I would pick up a book that would have more in common with today than I had expected.

Although the book is set during the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis, it isn't actually about the Crisis. I had expected the book to be set in America and for the Crisis to play a major part. That's not exactly the case. The book is actually set in England, and is about two teenagers who are in love. Clem is the son of a working class man who works for Frankie's father, who is a wealthy landowner. The two meet and it's practically love at first sight. They have to hide their relationship from everyone, and the Cuban Missile Crisis adds a twist to the situation. I won't go into all the details; I don't believe in spoilers unless they are absolutely necessary and I do hope some of you will want to read the books I blog about so I don't want to give everything away. Let's just say that Clem and Frankie are your typical teenagers and want to expand their relationship. And what better time to do that than right before the world ends?

I really enjoyed the book. Peet writes in an odd manner. You expect the book to start with Clem and Frankie meeting but it doesn't. Instead, you are thoroughly introduced to Clem's grandmother, mother and father. It's actually really cool because Peet creates these complete characters with their own history and feelings. And although the climax of the story revolves around the Cuban Missile Crisis, the book takes place from World War I to 9/11. I love Peet's style of writing and his depth of detail.  I loved the way Clem thought as he was drawing Frankie, and the importance art played in his life. I also liked the role that cults played in the novel. Clem's grandmother is part of a cult that believes the world is going to end; the leader actually believes that he has predicted the date of the end of the world. This is a common occurrence in our world; the year 2012 was supposed to be the last, and there are constant predictions about when the world will end.

It was also interesting how Peet depicted President John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev. Americans view Kennedy as the hero, who prevented World War III and nuclear holocaust. But Peet touches upon Kennedy's affairs and his health issues, which I didn't even know existed. Instead of presenting Kennedy as a hero, Peet presents him as slightly comical and morally ambiguous. I found it refreshing because Kennedy was a man like anyone else and showing his faults makes him more realistic to me.

The book is a coming-of-age story. It's funny and witty, and I do recommend reading it. And to end, the following is a quote from the book that I really liked:

"The end of the world is almost as old as its beginning. In chapter one of Genesis, the first book of the Bible, God spends most of a week creating the earth and all that is in it; then a mere six pages later, He destroys it all in a flood, the only survivors being, of course, Noah and his family and their floating menagerie. So it's hardly surprising that for thousands of years people have been predicting another End. The Apocalypse. Armageddon. The Day of Judgement. Again. Nor is it unreasonable. Consider our brutal, bloody, and filthy history, our nasty habits. If there was ever a species that deserved purging from the surface of the planet, it is humanity. We are, or should be, a temporary infestation or infection, a smart virus awaiting its divine antidote."