39. The Secret, Julie Garwood
I came home for a couple of days because Dana's still home and I had four days off, so why not. But I forgot the book I was going to bring (The Wedding, JG) but never fear, the Labuskes household has a plethora of good books to choose from :)
I hadn't read the Secret in a while, I've forgotten most of it, so that's always fun. It's good and has characters from other novels I've been reading, which I always enjoy.
Her characters are just so damn likable. Maybe to a fault. But still, you just can't help but adoring them!
Anyway, off to Philadelphia for NYE with the loves of my life <3
I hope 2010 brings me more wonderful books to read, and brings everyone joy and happiness.
Peace out 2009
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Reading is so addictive sometimes
38. Ransom, Julie Garwood
I hadn't read this one in a very long time, and only once so it was like reading a brand new book. Which I love. As i've said before, it's not necessarily because i love the particular book so much that i read it multiple times, but that I like the style. If my fav writers wrote a new book every week, i'd be reading only those.
Anyway, another classic garwood. I think i really like the ones set in medieval scotland. out of all her locales/settings/time periods i like these the best. Oh if only they still made fierce, loyal, courageous highland lairds today. that would be nice.
One more interesting thing to note, this book was 546 pages -- which breaks my 400 page rule (in which that's usually the ideal number of pages to tell a story with out it feeling like it's dragging) This however was superb in carrying the story along! I got into the read til you finish mode, which happens when i'm really into a book -- i love it. it's delightful.
til next time, happy readings
p.s. to future self and readers: it's 2 a.m. after I've just worked and finished reading and i used no grace or style when writing this, nor did i copy edit (or use upper case consistently.) Also I used really way too many times. please ignore :D
I hadn't read this one in a very long time, and only once so it was like reading a brand new book. Which I love. As i've said before, it's not necessarily because i love the particular book so much that i read it multiple times, but that I like the style. If my fav writers wrote a new book every week, i'd be reading only those.
Anyway, another classic garwood. I think i really like the ones set in medieval scotland. out of all her locales/settings/time periods i like these the best. Oh if only they still made fierce, loyal, courageous highland lairds today. that would be nice.
One more interesting thing to note, this book was 546 pages -- which breaks my 400 page rule (in which that's usually the ideal number of pages to tell a story with out it feeling like it's dragging) This however was superb in carrying the story along! I got into the read til you finish mode, which happens when i'm really into a book -- i love it. it's delightful.
til next time, happy readings
p.s. to future self and readers: it's 2 a.m. after I've just worked and finished reading and i used no grace or style when writing this, nor did i copy edit (or use upper case consistently.) Also I used really way too many times. please ignore :D
Friday, December 25, 2009
Christmas break, reading is essential
37. Shadow Music, Julie Garwood.
I started reading Castles before break, but it just wasn't holding my attention. I love Ms. Garwood, really, but sometimes her characters get repetitive. Then I went home, and we Labuskeses, we read. So I grabbed the nearest Garwood (a much chewed on copy of Shadow Music, from back when Keelie was a neurotic mess that hid under the bed -- oh waittt) and dived in. Classic Garwood. Set in Scotland. Fast-paced and cute. My only complaint is she's a little in love with the, not back story and not quite secondary characters, just I guess what's going on with everyone else in the book. For example, the hero and heroine don't even meet until 150 pages in. What the what?! lol.
This was her newest historical fiction (she came out with a contemporary one that was HORRIBLE I couldn't even finish it it was so bad -- she should stick with what she does best) and I've only read it once before, so I didn't remember some of it which is always fun :)
No new books for Xmas, but I did grab Ransom (JG) and Three Cups of Tea (which dane dane raves about) so maybe they're up next?
MERRY CHRISTMAS and happy readings! :D
I started reading Castles before break, but it just wasn't holding my attention. I love Ms. Garwood, really, but sometimes her characters get repetitive. Then I went home, and we Labuskeses, we read. So I grabbed the nearest Garwood (a much chewed on copy of Shadow Music, from back when Keelie was a neurotic mess that hid under the bed -- oh waittt) and dived in. Classic Garwood. Set in Scotland. Fast-paced and cute. My only complaint is she's a little in love with the, not back story and not quite secondary characters, just I guess what's going on with everyone else in the book. For example, the hero and heroine don't even meet until 150 pages in. What the what?! lol.
This was her newest historical fiction (she came out with a contemporary one that was HORRIBLE I couldn't even finish it it was so bad -- she should stick with what she does best) and I've only read it once before, so I didn't remember some of it which is always fun :)
No new books for Xmas, but I did grab Ransom (JG) and Three Cups of Tea (which dane dane raves about) so maybe they're up next?
MERRY CHRISTMAS and happy readings! :D
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Let me introduce Ms. Julie Garwood
36.Honor's Splendor, Julie Garwood
35. Lyon's Lady, Julie Garwood
So after reading JAK's book I discussed with mutti how strange it was that her historical novels are so much better than her contemporary ones. And then she brought up Julie Garwood, one of her all-time favorite historical writers. Like AQ/JAK she writes in both historical and contemporary (though uses her name for both, a point for rationality there.) Mutti ferverently believes that there is a huge disparity between the two. And while I don't have as strong of feelings on her contemporary novels, I agree.
Most writers have a mold they use for their hero/heorine. If you read enough of the same author you'll notice a pattern. The most obvious abuse of this is Nora (I do criticize her a lot don't I?) Julie Garwood is not an exception. Her (historical) heroines are always ridiculously courageous, demure when appropriate, skilled at something unusual and enchanting just to name a few characteristics. I do however think she varies these basics well enough that I never tire of reading her books in a row. Her characters are very loveable. And you kind of wish you had their hutzpah sometimes as well.
Something unusual she does is have the characters admit they love each other about 3/4 the way through at the latest. Most romances-centric novels wait til the end. But still her plots are intriguing enough to carry it along anyway.
Another thing that sets her apart is that she doesn't write in one historical time period. Most romance writers who set their characters in the past tend to stick to one time period. The most common being the Regency Era -- replete with rakes and misses and the ton. High society. The second most common is Scotland during the middle ages -- 1400s ish. Anyway they tend not to deviate. She sets hers throughout the ages, which is disconcerting at times only because it's unique.
Julie Garwood is a lovely writer. Both books sucked me in to the point I'v spent the last two days straight reading them -- or thinking about finishing them. I love that feeling. That excitement to pick up my book, the nagging desire at work for the clock to tick by quicker so I can get back to reading. That might make me a little silly. Oh well.
I've read both these books before, but it had been a while for Lyon's Lady. Enough that I'd forgotten most of the story. I read Honor's Splendor all the time because it's one of my favorites by her.
I get a lot of flak for rereading books -- yes i know there are a ton out there -- but I was thinking about that while rereading these. It's not necessarily that I enjoy reading the same book twice. Save for a few I don't usually crave a certain story, usually I just want that type of story. That type of writing. That type of character. Unfortunately writers don't pump out books like tv shows -- a new one every week. Usually they only come out with two a year. So, since I've been reading so voraciously for so long I've not only discovered the authors I like I've caught up on all their work. Hence the rereads.
Anyway enough blathering. Happy thanksgiving!
35. Lyon's Lady, Julie Garwood
So after reading JAK's book I discussed with mutti how strange it was that her historical novels are so much better than her contemporary ones. And then she brought up Julie Garwood, one of her all-time favorite historical writers. Like AQ/JAK she writes in both historical and contemporary (though uses her name for both, a point for rationality there.) Mutti ferverently believes that there is a huge disparity between the two. And while I don't have as strong of feelings on her contemporary novels, I agree.
Most writers have a mold they use for their hero/heorine. If you read enough of the same author you'll notice a pattern. The most obvious abuse of this is Nora (I do criticize her a lot don't I?) Julie Garwood is not an exception. Her (historical) heroines are always ridiculously courageous, demure when appropriate, skilled at something unusual and enchanting just to name a few characteristics. I do however think she varies these basics well enough that I never tire of reading her books in a row. Her characters are very loveable. And you kind of wish you had their hutzpah sometimes as well.
Something unusual she does is have the characters admit they love each other about 3/4 the way through at the latest. Most romances-centric novels wait til the end. But still her plots are intriguing enough to carry it along anyway.
Another thing that sets her apart is that she doesn't write in one historical time period. Most romance writers who set their characters in the past tend to stick to one time period. The most common being the Regency Era -- replete with rakes and misses and the ton. High society. The second most common is Scotland during the middle ages -- 1400s ish. Anyway they tend not to deviate. She sets hers throughout the ages, which is disconcerting at times only because it's unique.
Julie Garwood is a lovely writer. Both books sucked me in to the point I'v spent the last two days straight reading them -- or thinking about finishing them. I love that feeling. That excitement to pick up my book, the nagging desire at work for the clock to tick by quicker so I can get back to reading. That might make me a little silly. Oh well.
I've read both these books before, but it had been a while for Lyon's Lady. Enough that I'd forgotten most of the story. I read Honor's Splendor all the time because it's one of my favorites by her.
I get a lot of flak for rereading books -- yes i know there are a ton out there -- but I was thinking about that while rereading these. It's not necessarily that I enjoy reading the same book twice. Save for a few I don't usually crave a certain story, usually I just want that type of story. That type of writing. That type of character. Unfortunately writers don't pump out books like tv shows -- a new one every week. Usually they only come out with two a year. So, since I've been reading so voraciously for so long I've not only discovered the authors I like I've caught up on all their work. Hence the rereads.
Anyway enough blathering. Happy thanksgiving!
Sunday, November 22, 2009
A weird phenomenon
34. Running Hot, Jayne Ann Krentz
... well maybe phenomenon isn't the right word, but ... it is weird nevertheless. Some explanation: Jayne Ann Krentz is Amanda Quick's real name. Some writers are peculiar like that. I mean I understand the desire to have a nom de plume, but she only uses it for her historical novels. (Stranger still is Nora who has one yet her covers read NORA ROBERTS as jd robb -- I know, I know it's to sell more books, but then JUST go with nora. Anyway ...)
The actual weird thing is that I absolutely ADORE Amanda Quick's books. Can't get enough, I've read my favorites of her a million times and my less favorite of hers a hundred thousand. But Ms. Krentz, not so much. There's something about her style of writing for her contemporary novels that just ... feels stilted. It doesn't have the flow or charisma of her historical ones. I learned this a long time ago, when I had run out of Quick books to read. Imagine my joy when I stumbled upon this treasure trove of riches. Ten to 20 books I hadn't read. Well. Not so much. The only reason I tried this one was because I am a huge sucker for series. Like huge. I love nothing more than a good series. And this book was an Arcane Society novel. (See: http://365daysofbooks.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html) Not that it involved actual people from her other books, but it references them, which is almost as fun.
Don't ge me wrong. I still enjoyed it. One major promblem I had with it was the characters got together too quickly, there was no build -- you need a good build. Also I was mentally editing the sentences as I read, which I hate doing, and usually only do when there's word repetition, my major pet peeve. Anyway fun, quick read with decent writing. Only sometimes annoying. I'll probably read the other contemporary A.S. novels, but other than that I think I'll stick with Quick :)
Also delightfully funny conversation with mar today. I recently recommended she read Over the Edge (http://365daysofbooks.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html) SPOILERS AHEAD IF YOU PLAN ON READING ANY OF THE TROUBLE SHOOTERS SERIES:
Mar: wtf. starett goes and marries that preggo bimbo ... the end?!
Me (paraphrasing several txts): Sam and Alyssa get their own book, their arc is introduced in the first and builds over 6 books.
Mar: Christ. i have to read 6 books for them to be happy?
HAHAHAHHA this just perfectly embodies the would you enter when you start reading suz. She kills you, but the payoff is wonderful. :D
also i think i'm obviously going to read 40 books ... i think i'll up my goal to ... 52? to average out to one a week.
... well maybe phenomenon isn't the right word, but ... it is weird nevertheless. Some explanation: Jayne Ann Krentz is Amanda Quick's real name. Some writers are peculiar like that. I mean I understand the desire to have a nom de plume, but she only uses it for her historical novels. (Stranger still is Nora who has one yet her covers read NORA ROBERTS as jd robb -- I know, I know it's to sell more books, but then JUST go with nora. Anyway ...)
The actual weird thing is that I absolutely ADORE Amanda Quick's books. Can't get enough, I've read my favorites of her a million times and my less favorite of hers a hundred thousand. But Ms. Krentz, not so much. There's something about her style of writing for her contemporary novels that just ... feels stilted. It doesn't have the flow or charisma of her historical ones. I learned this a long time ago, when I had run out of Quick books to read. Imagine my joy when I stumbled upon this treasure trove of riches. Ten to 20 books I hadn't read. Well. Not so much. The only reason I tried this one was because I am a huge sucker for series. Like huge. I love nothing more than a good series. And this book was an Arcane Society novel. (See: http://365daysofbooks.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html) Not that it involved actual people from her other books, but it references them, which is almost as fun.
Don't ge me wrong. I still enjoyed it. One major promblem I had with it was the characters got together too quickly, there was no build -- you need a good build. Also I was mentally editing the sentences as I read, which I hate doing, and usually only do when there's word repetition, my major pet peeve. Anyway fun, quick read with decent writing. Only sometimes annoying. I'll probably read the other contemporary A.S. novels, but other than that I think I'll stick with Quick :)
Also delightfully funny conversation with mar today. I recently recommended she read Over the Edge (http://365daysofbooks.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html) SPOILERS AHEAD IF YOU PLAN ON READING ANY OF THE TROUBLE SHOOTERS SERIES:
Mar: wtf. starett goes and marries that preggo bimbo ... the end?!
Me (paraphrasing several txts): Sam and Alyssa get their own book, their arc is introduced in the first and builds over 6 books.
Mar: Christ. i have to read 6 books for them to be happy?
HAHAHAHHA this just perfectly embodies the would you enter when you start reading suz. She kills you, but the payoff is wonderful. :D
also i think i'm obviously going to read 40 books ... i think i'll up my goal to ... 52? to average out to one a week.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Suz again
33. Bodyguard, Suzanne Brockmann
Classic Brockmann. Early days Brockmann. Still wonderful :)
Classic Brockmann. Early days Brockmann. Still wonderful :)
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Hi I'm back
32. The Secret Diaries of Miss. Miranda Cheever, Julia Quinn
So indeed it has been a while since last I posted. That happens sometimes. I fall out of reading. It rarely happened in high school, but probably it happened more frequently in college. It wasn't that I didn't have time, I just didn't want to. Which, the first time it occurred, was so weird to me. I had never not wanted to read before. I realized soon I could rely on several books to bring me back; and so when I stopped reading and realized I stopped reading I'd grab one of these and it would kick start it for me.
Anyhooo, this wasn't an instance were I sought a trusted novel, I started with one I'd never read before. And of course, liked it very much. I usually do the first one back, because I remember the love of reading.
I have never so much related to a character before as in this novel. For example, she was an observer, she watched people. She dislikes idle chatter (if you've met me for longer than 5 minutes chances are I've asked you if you believe in soul mates or who you love) but most importantly she was unrequitedly in love with our hero. And I must say Miss. Julia nailed it. She must have been at some point, because people who haven't stare at you with confusion and wonder constantly why you just don't move on, for two years now thank you very much. A particular passage that struck a cord:
Miranda kept trying to convince herself that she didn't [love him]. That it had all been a schoolgirl crush. That she was in the habit of thinking herself in love with him. That's all it was. But then he would do something utterly loathsome, like smile, and all her hard work flew out the window, and she had to start anew. One day it would stick. One day she would wake up and realize it had been two days of sensible Nigelless thought. And then three ... and then four ...
sigh. anyway as I've said about unrequitted love, even if the person (our hero Nigel Turner) some how ends up with the heroine, it's probably going to be an uneven relationship. And while I think the end of this novel dragged a bit, I like that she explores this issue. That whole, I can love you enough for the both of us is crap. Your heart will just continue to break a little each day, if you get the ole i love spending time with you. So that was interesting until the completely unrealistic ending (SPOILER ALERT) of him proclaiming his love every second of the day.
So while I liked it (it was full of Julia's bouncy cutesy writing) and certainly related more to the character than almost any other that I've read, I didn't love it.
On a sidenote though, how great is reading? Reading is the only form of entertainment that I physcially react to the emotions, I feel pangs (usually when jealousy is evoked.) I feel like with movies and TV sometimes they make you cry because of the plot. Like someone who has terminal cancer falls in love with a bad boy who marries her before she dies. But you're so in the characters' heads in books. It's very wonderful.
Anyway hope it won't be another 2 months til my next post :D
So indeed it has been a while since last I posted. That happens sometimes. I fall out of reading. It rarely happened in high school, but probably it happened more frequently in college. It wasn't that I didn't have time, I just didn't want to. Which, the first time it occurred, was so weird to me. I had never not wanted to read before. I realized soon I could rely on several books to bring me back; and so when I stopped reading and realized I stopped reading I'd grab one of these and it would kick start it for me.
Anyhooo, this wasn't an instance were I sought a trusted novel, I started with one I'd never read before. And of course, liked it very much. I usually do the first one back, because I remember the love of reading.
I have never so much related to a character before as in this novel. For example, she was an observer, she watched people. She dislikes idle chatter (if you've met me for longer than 5 minutes chances are I've asked you if you believe in soul mates or who you love) but most importantly she was unrequitedly in love with our hero. And I must say Miss. Julia nailed it. She must have been at some point, because people who haven't stare at you with confusion and wonder constantly why you just don't move on, for two years now thank you very much. A particular passage that struck a cord:
Miranda kept trying to convince herself that she didn't [love him]. That it had all been a schoolgirl crush. That she was in the habit of thinking herself in love with him. That's all it was. But then he would do something utterly loathsome, like smile, and all her hard work flew out the window, and she had to start anew. One day it would stick. One day she would wake up and realize it had been two days of sensible Nigelless thought. And then three ... and then four ...
sigh. anyway as I've said about unrequitted love, even if the person (our hero Nigel Turner) some how ends up with the heroine, it's probably going to be an uneven relationship. And while I think the end of this novel dragged a bit, I like that she explores this issue. That whole, I can love you enough for the both of us is crap. Your heart will just continue to break a little each day, if you get the ole i love spending time with you. So that was interesting until the completely unrealistic ending (SPOILER ALERT) of him proclaiming his love every second of the day.
So while I liked it (it was full of Julia's bouncy cutesy writing) and certainly related more to the character than almost any other that I've read, I didn't love it.
On a sidenote though, how great is reading? Reading is the only form of entertainment that I physcially react to the emotions, I feel pangs (usually when jealousy is evoked.) I feel like with movies and TV sometimes they make you cry because of the plot. Like someone who has terminal cancer falls in love with a bad boy who marries her before she dies. But you're so in the characters' heads in books. It's very wonderful.
Anyway hope it won't be another 2 months til my next post :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
