Coffee Klatch

I just finished up a run of some very good books, tops among them Devil in a Blue Dress by Walter Mosley. This is my first Walter Mosley book and I loved the old southern, African-American voice. My mom's family is from East Texas and the expressions and tones are all what I grew up with, which shows that a lot of dialog does transcend race. Anyway, the mystery was pretty good, nothing greatly suspenseful, but the character of Easy Rawlins is unforgettable. From Amazon:

The year is 1948, and black war veteran "Easy" Rawlings has just lost his job and is hard up for a mortgage payment. Along comes DeWitt Albright, a violent white man with a simple job for Easy: find the woman wearing a blue dress in a particular photograph. Easy makes his way to the steamy black jazz clubs of Los Angeles and discovers he's not the only one interested in the mysterious lady. Soon murder litters the trail, and the Los Angeles police become curious about Easy's whereabouts. The steamy, gritty life in Watts is the backdrop for this fine mystery, which is filled with exceptionally crafted characters, detailed atmosphere, and a compelling story line. Strongly recommended for most mystery collections.

One of the things that really hit me was the sense of injustice that Easy has to deal with. It's done in a very matter-of-fact way that makes the reader hurt for the main character. It's definitely a violent world that he runs in. High recommended.

First off, I should say that I've yet to read The Romanov Prophecy, but it's definitely on my list, because Dee also raved about it. So if the two of you loved it, I know I will, too. (And Dee finally read The Rule of Four, which Kathleen and I both enjoyed, and chatted about earlier). Right now, I'm still reading (as in listening to on audiobook) THE CURIOUS INCIDENT OF THE DOG IN THE NIGHTTIME, and I'm thoroughly enjoying it. Unfortunately, my husband is off work during July, which means we've been in the car a lot together, which means I can't listen to it b/c he doesn't want to come in mid-way through the story. I need to think of a roadtrip to take by myself ...

At any rate, prior to Curious Incident, I listened to GODS IN ALABAMA by Joshilyn Jackson. Loved it! Fresh and fun with a heroine who was likeable even while having some, shall we say, rough edges to her personality. The descriptions of Alabama made me feel like I was there, and even though I usually figure out the mystery aspect of books early on, this one really did get me in the end. I really can't recommend it enough. (Also, I have to give mega-kudos to the audio book narrator. Wonderful reader!)

I also recently read Harlen Coben's TELL NO ONE (really, really enjoyed it) and am in fact now reading NO SECOND CHANCE. With my broad experience of two books by Coben, I can authoritatively say that I love the way his characters think. Both the protagonists have strong opinions and great senses of humor. I also love the way that his books (again, the 2 I've read) are a relatively small world. Evil invades the life of your neighbor kind of thing. Don't get me wrong, I love Clancy-esque type, wide-ranging suspense, but I REALLY love the intimate suspense books. The kind that make you think, damn. That could happen to me. It's that everyman quality that I'm thinking makes Coben's books so popular.

Also read recently: J.D. Robb's Origin in Death. (Thumbs up!) I'll probably blog on the In Death series soon, too. Definitely blog-worth!

Addendum: I started this post a few days ago and got side-tracked. I've now finished THE CURIOUS INCIDENT, so KO and I will do our back and forth thing soon. Stay tuned!

Well, I read BBW sometime ago, and don't remember a thing, so I suppose that says something. It's definitely not my favorite Patterson. I'm looking forward to reading London Bridges, his new one, but he's not an author I run out to the bookstore to buy on the first day it comes out. Not anymore.

I just finished The Romanov Prophecy by Steve Berry, which I really enjoyed. I've been to St. Petersburg a couple of times, and love Russian culture, (pre-Communist). From Amazon, here's the synopsis:

Ekaterinburg, Russia: July 16, 1918. Ten months have passed since Nicholas II’s reign was cut short by revolutionaries. Tonight, the White Army advances on the town where the Tsar and his family are being held captive by the Bolsheviks. Nicholas dares to hope for salvation. Instead, the Romanovs are coldly and methodically executed.

Moscow: Present Day. Atlanta lawyer Miles Lord, fluent in Russian and well versed in the country’s history, is thrilled to be in Moscow on the eve of such a momentous event. After the fall of Communism and a succession of weak governments, the Russian people have voted to bring back the monarchy. The new tsar will be chosen from the distant relatives of Nicholas II by a specially appointed commission, and Miles’ job is to perform a background check on the Tsarist candidate favored by a powerful group of Western businessmen. But research quickly becomes the least of Miles’ concerns when he is nearly killed by gunmen on a city plaza.

Suddenly Miles is racing across continents, shadowed by nefarious henchmen. At first, his only question is why people are pursuing him. But after a strange conversation with a mysterious Russian, who steers Miles toward the writings of Rasputin, he becomes desperate to know more–most important, what really happened to the family of Russia’s last tsar?

His only companion is Akilina Petrov, a Russian circus performer sympathetic to his struggle, and his only guide is a cryptic message from Rasputin that implies that the bloody night of so long ago is not the last chapter in the Romanovs’ story . . . and that someone might even have survived the massacre. The prophecy’s implications are earth-shattering–not only for the future of the tsar and mother Russia, but also for Miles himself.

I thought it was a fun read. Not quite the page-turner of La Da Vinci, but a fun Russian tale. I noticed that his latest book is about The Vatican rather than Russia. Sigh. Riding the Gravy Train....

Also, I'm in the middle of reading Wacky Chicks by Simon Doonan. I'll post more when I'm finished, but I have to say, it's three circles and a snap. Mr. Donnan, who is the creative director for Barney's, as well as a writer, has as much a flair for le bon mot, as he does for windows. I don't think the women are nearly as interesting as the author, though. However, I'm only 1/3 of the way, though, so I'll reserve final judgment until I'm done.

Happy 4th, ya'll!

But first, a commentary: because trying to schedule Kathleen and I reading a book at the same time is like trying to schedule all 3 of our kids sitting down and being quiet at the same time, we finally decided that if we really wanted to have a blog where we talk about books, that the talking part was key. So now we're hoping that we've read some of the same (and we'll still pick a book at intervals to do our old Q&A format), but mostly, we're gonna Ramble About Stuff We've Read. So sit back and enjoy the ramble.

I'm starting: First of all, I should caveat this by saying that a lot of the books I read are "read" in audiobook format. I got totally addicted to audiobooks back when I commuted 60 miles each way from Redlands, California to Newport Beach. For those of you unfamiliar with California traffic, that translated into about 4 hours on the road each day. I burned through a lot of audiobooks!

At any rate, Books on Tape ceased renting books a few years ago and put all their old rentals on sale, and I bought about 47 billion audiobooks (okay, about twenty, but it seemed like more) and I've been going through them. Considering my commute is now about 7 minutes each way to and from C's day care, it takes a lot longer to get through the books! Two of the books I bought and just got around to listening to (fortunately, I had road trips in there to Dallas and San Antonio, so the story went faster) were James Patterson's The Big, Bad Wolf and Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child's Brimstone. Kathleen, I'm pretty sure you've read BBW. Have you read Brimstone?

Big Bad Wolf, first. Definitely not my fav among the Alex Cross book's I've read. Maybe part of the problem is that I've read them out of order (the last Alex Cross book I read, Alex had just gotten together with the principal of his kid's school). I wish I could put my finger on it, but it just seemed like a very even keel sort of book, when I wanted TONS of suspense. I also think Patterson had quite a task having Alex be NEW at the FBI, have the book be realistic about what tasks he'd have, and still have him be "the man." I did really like the premise of a chat room where The Evil Ones gather to talk about their dastardly deeds. But that wasn't enough to make me love the book.

Possibly I’m overly frustrated because I really like Cross and I really wanted to like this book more. The one I listened to next, I loved. And since this entry is way too long already, I think I'll leave the next one for later. It, by the way, was Gods in Alabama and that book TOTALLY made my fab book list. Gods in Alabama rocked, in my opinion. So come back and I'll embellish :)

(Soon to be blathered on about: Gods In Alabama, Brimstone, Harlen Coben's Tell No One).

Bye for now!

Well, well, well. Amazing, but true, we're actually doing another book in a semi-reasonable period of time. Wow! (Can I just say that I'm liking this writing-full-time-thing? Without the day job, I actually have time to read! Yay! Whoo-hoo! Hurray!!!)

Ahem.

Okay. Back to the book. In today's episode of Coffee Klatch, we find Kathleen and Julie discussing The Rule of Four by Ian Caldwell & Dustin Thomason. Right off the bat, I have to say that I was impressed by the author bio. These guys are not only smart, but they've been best friends forever and started the book back in 1998. I just thought that was cool. The story is told in first person from the point of view of a Princeton senior (Tom) whose father devoted his life to trying to unlock the secrets of a book called the HYPNEROTOMACHIA POLIPHILI, a real book and apparently one of the most enigmatic books ever published. Now Tom and his friend Paul are focusing on the book, and as Paul comes close to solving the puzzle, people suddenly start dying. What's the book's secret? And who will kill for it?

Overall, I thought the book (Rule of Four, not the Hypnerotomachia, that is) was just wonderful. The plot was fabulous fun and was both "smart" and yet easy to follow.

Unlike the "lectures" of the Da Vinci Code (a book that I also enjoyed) I think the backstory historical bits were woven in much more seamlessly. In DVC, we'd be pulled out of the story so that Langdon could recall a lecture he'd given to a student. Here, the historical contexts and lectures seemed much more integrated into the plot as a whole.

What do you think Kathleen? You read both books, too. Did you have the same reaction?

Kathleen: I read the Da Vinci Code and enjoyed it. I thought it was a thrill-a-minute and a fascinating premise I had not read much on the conspiracy theories behind the Holy Grail before, so it was all new territory. However, I was very much reading DVC as an "author" with an analytical eye. I never got so deeply into the book that I turned my internal editor off. With Rule of Four, the editor just got blown out of the water. I really loved the book, the literary feel of it, and the way that history became such a part of the plot. Also, the college aspects felt very real. I didn't go to Princeton, but had a close friend who did, and while reading the book, I remembered her stories about the supper clubs. Took me back several years. I didn't have the same problem you did with DVC, Julie, but I did think the backstory in Rule of Four was woven in quite seamlessly.

And like I said, I thought it was "literary." At the same time it was very commercial. Did you have that impression, too?

Julie: Actually, yes, I did. The book was undoubtedly commercial, but it had a certain "feel" about it in the writing. I was struck by it often, but most at the end of chapters and scenes. At one point, Tom compares the passage of time to an air brush painting. Another chapter end with "The generational clock ground out another revolution, and timed turned friends to strangers. Francesco Colonna, who kept the key that wound the watch, must have thought his secret safe." I just think the use of language is excellent.

Interestingly, I noticed one thing going back to look for that quote (I was actually looking for another comment on friendship that I couldn't easily find). Specifically, I noticed that the authors mixed up the chapter hooks. Where one might end on a thoughtful note such as above, another would end on action. It was either a wonderfully executed technique or the friends wrote different chapters and one is more literary than the other!

Actually, that raises a question for you. Do you think you could do that? Write a book with a friend?

Kathleen:Write a fully-fledged chapter by chapter book with friends? Well, I've thought about that before and realized that no, I couldn't do that (I don't think), but I think it'd be really fun to write an anthology for instance. I'm amazed at writing teams and wonder how they break up the work. You write a chapter, I write a chapter? Or do they have assigned POV's? I don't know, I think it's an interesting concept.

I read an interview where the authors were working on a new book, but didn't indicate that it would be a sequel, although I would hazard a guess that at the very least it's in the same vein. They started writing Rule of Four in 1998, and I have no idea how long it took them to finish and sell it, so it sounds like they took a few years to write the book. I'm curious how long the next one will take. I always wonder about writers who spend a long time on Book 1. Will Book 2 take as long? Will Book 2 be as good? Just musing….

There's an actual book entitled the Hypnerotomachia, but apparently there is a real controversy about the author of said work. Also, there are actual codes buried in the book, which I think is very fascinating. The idea of writing a book is hard enough, without having an ulterior meaning. So, Julie, now that we've praised it, what do you find wrong with it?

Julie: Not much, actually. For the most part I devoured it, totally turning off the internal editor. Only two things really stand out, and in the grand scheme, they're pretty minor. One, while Paul and Tom were pretty well fleshed out, I thought the other two friends (whose names I've now forgotten, which sorta illustrates my point; Gil and Charlie, maybe?) weren't nearly as tightly drawn. However, since the story is from Tom's point of view, and they weren't as "key" to the book part of the story, this lack of depth wasn't terribly bothersome except for one point. There's a reference in the book to a fight/disagreement between C and G, yet we never got to see it or fully understand what went on. That bugged me.

My other point was that I wasn't in the least bit surprised about the "who done it" aspect of the book. I read so much in the mystery and suspense genre, however, that I'm very rarely surprised, so that's really not much of a criticism either.

Let's see, anything else? I think that's about it. Kathleen, anything to add?

Kathleen: No, not at all. Any idea what we'll be reading next?

Julie: Jasper Fforde's The Eyre Affair. This is one I've been meaning to read (and even own), but just haven't gotten around to it. So I'm really excited.


Until next time!

Julie: Well, here we are after a short break (ahem) to talk about The Bad Beginning. This is one I read eons ago, loved, and read again since we'd said that we would discuss it for Coffee Klatch. The only thing is, now there's a movie coming out! Alas, instead of being ahead of the curve, now we're behind it. Bummer man. (Though I must say I really want to see the movie, from the trailer it looks awesome).

But to get this started, I have to say I love this series. Or, at least, I love up to where I've read so far, which is only the first 3 or so books. (I have through 9 on my shelf, and will be reading them soon.)

I was trying to figure out what it is about them that is so captivating, and although I think it's really pretty cool the way the stories aren't locked into the whole happily ever after thing, I think for me it's the style. I love the voice the narrator uses. A sort of talking to the camera thing (this goes way back w/ me; Ferris Bueller is a favorite in my house!) And the authorial asides are an absolute hoot. I particular love: "Violet found their situation lamentably deplorable, a phrase which here means 'it was not at all enjoyable.'"

So, Kathleen, what did you think of the book? And, um, since I didn't bother, wanna give us a quick plot summary, too?

Kathleen:

The story is about three children, Violet, Klaus, and the baby Sunny who suddenly find themselves orphaned and in the custody of nefarious Count Olaf, who is willing to put them through a Series of Unfortunate Events in order to get his hands on their wealth. I have to say, I love the series, too, although I've only read the first book; however, my daughter has read up to Book 8. Julie, you're right. It's the narrator that makes the stories so much fun. Without that voice, the series would not be nearly as popular, because the plots are certainly nothing new. And I have a minor disagreement, because I'm actually not looking forward to the movie because I think there are certain books that are better books, and even though I know my children will drag me to this one, I'm dreading it, because what if it's bad? Do you ever have that feeling that you don't want to see the movie because the book was just too good? Anywhoo, that's a personal hang-up…. So, the thing I loved about the book besides the author's voice, was the way he described his characters. Here's a quote when he's talking about Violet, the oldest:
"Violet had a real knack for inventing and building strange devices, so her brain was often filled with images of pulleys, levers, and gears, and she never wanted to be distracted by something as trivial as her hair." I love this. You know, he could have said that she was practical and enjoyed inventing things, but instead he uses this nice piece of description and it's so much more fun.

So, what did you think of the plot, Julie? You've read up to book 3. If you tell me the others are better, I'll go scrounge up Book 2 right away!

Julie: You know what, you're right. About the movie thing, I mean. There are lots of times when they really, really, really should have left the book alone (the live-action version of How the Grinch Stole Christmas leaps to mind, and though I didn't see The Cat and the Hat, I'm risking a guess that it fits into that category, too). There are, however, times when I think the movie is just as good (and, dare I say it? Sometimes even better) than the book. Or at least it adds another layer/dimension/look at the characters. And there are times when the book is great (or not) and the movie is great. I haven't read the book that The Ring is based on (as an example) but I think the movie is one of the horror genre's best. And I think Carrie and The Shawshank Redemption are fab examples of movies that do total justice to their literary counterparts. (And it's not just that horror or Stephen King that translates well. There are a lot of Stephen King stinker movies out there.) And, at the risk of getting totally off topic here, I'm trying to think of other examples. Um, The Firm translated really well. And, hey, I think the Harry Potter films were excellent. Sure, I wouldn't want to just see the movie, but having read the book, being sucked into that world just added a whole 'nother level of enjoyment.

And (sorry, this is what happens when you start me talking movies) there are the major duds not based on Dr. Suess; you are so right about that. V.I. Warshowski (spelling??) and Fletch are primo examples. (Oh, but three other good book renditions just jumped to mind; not necessarily better, but just good and classics in their own right: The Godfather, The Princess Bride, and The Exorcist.) Voila. I rest my case.

That being said, I hope this series lands squarely in the good side of the film/book karmic accounting slot. It would be a shame to mess up such fabulous books. And, from the trailer at least, the filmic translation really does look awesome. (The cast is stellar and the director also did The Lost Boys, which I think is an excellent flick and has the best last-line-in-a-movie ever, in my opinion. Here's a page w/ more info for the curious: http://www.lemonysnicket.com/movie.html

But, ahem, you probably want me to answer the actual book question, eh? Yes, yes, yes!!! You must read on. And unfortunately, I can't tell you too much w/o spoilers, but I will say the books pull no punches. You meet nice people, who are nice to our (clever and resourceful) kids, and yet (gasp!) they don't survive to the next book! It's enough to make a romance author nuts!!

So, you have a kid who's devouring the books (my child is, alas, at the age where, like Sunny, she might literally devour the books). What do you think the appeal is to kids? I mean, don't kids like a happy ending? Or is that just an adult thing? (As in, Please, please, please give me a happy ending? I have mortgage and car payments and potty training to deal with. I neeeeeeeeeed a happy ending!!!)

So, the appeal???

Kathleen: So I'm going to have to pull out Book 2, aren't I? Well, as soon as I finish these series of unfortunate events that we authors like to call revisions…, which segues (NOT) into the happy ending question… I have an opinion. The kids do manage to triumph, sorta, over Olaf, if not over their surroundings. So, playing psychiatrist here, I think it mirrors the frustration that kids have, with the same minimal control over their surroundings. In a lot of kid books, the kids are doing exotic things that are outside the boundaries of what real children are able to do in the adult world. But in the Series of Unfortunate Events, they have boundaries as well. I don't know. Maybe kids just don't like happy endings, but I don't think so.

I got the answer from an actual kid expert (i.e my daughter) and she said that "happy endings get boring." Very depressing. Actually, I've heard the author refer to his books as gothics, so I wonder if there is a whole new generation of readers being raised on the gothic novel? Probably not, but if there is a resurgence in the gothic novel in about 10 years, you heard it here first.

And now I've got to ask what your favorite part was. I think my favorite part was the ending, where they revealed how Violet gets out of the marriage to Count Olaf (and I'm sorry if that's a huge spoiler, but let me state it here that no, in the children's book, the 14 year old girl is not forced into marriage with the 40 year old man). The solution was so completely bizarre, but then the narrator explained it away, and by the end of the looooonnnnng explanation you completely forgot that the solution was bizarre. I think I'm going to try that in my books some time…. Julie, what was your favorite part?

Julie: Well, I actually liked that bit, too, and for similar reasons. Mine being the itty bitty digs at lawyers J And, I really loved the authorial voice popping in at the near-end telling you to shut the book now if you wanted a happy ending because, hey, it was just going to get worse.

And you know what? Speaking of authorial series of unfortunate events, we should probably wrap this up get on with revisions and synopsis drafting. So, overall rating? I give it an enthusiastic thumbs-up. Or, to keep with the coffee theme, five lattes. Kathleen? Your rating?

Kathleen:

I'm stingier with my lattes. Four and a half here. But it's a great book, and I promise I'm digging out Book 2 just to see what horrible fates will befall the poor orphans next. So, what are we doing next?

Julie: Good question. How about something from the world of thrillers? You're already reading The Rule of Four. Wanna dish about it next, uh, time?

Kathleen: Perfect! You're on.

Kathleen: Hey, Julie, has it been only a month? Wow, time sure does fly. I guess it's time to sit down and discuss this month's pick, Nice, by Jen Sacks. You know, the book was titled so appropriately, because Nice was, well, Nice… Nice is the story of a woman who, unable to break up with men, kills them instead and in the process of her murderous love-life hooks up with a true, professional hit man and falls in love. Julie, what did you think?

Julie: Why, yes, Kathleen. It's only been a month. (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). Never let it be said that procrastination does not come easily to either of us!! Great summary of the book ... and it was exactly that concept that drew me in in the first place. I can't recall where I came across this book originally (probably the table at Barnes & Noble ... I always get drawn in by that table!) but the premise absolutely slayed me. (Pun entirely intended).

Kathleen: I really loved the concept of this book, but I felt like the execution of Grace wasn't quite, up to snuff, so to speak. I think the author did a much better job with Sam. Pulling off a character who is so nice that she must kill the men in her life, well, that's not a simple task, and I felt like Grace wasn't as textured as she needed to be to make that aspect believable. Sam was great. I was right there with him.

Julie: You know, while reading it, I think I would've said the same thing, but I finished it a few weeks before you did and now, looking back, Grace is much more in my head than Sam. I'm not entirely sure what that says about me, but I think something about the way the author got into Grace's head worked for me. We should probably mention that the book was done in first person, in a she-said/he-said way with each chapter alternating narrators and, for the most part, overlapping events from their different perspectives.

So, why do you think the author wrote this book?

Kathleen: I think the author had a really bad date and you know, the whole idea went from there. I've certainly had some instances where a quick bump off the pier would have satisfied me nicely. Julie, what do you think?

Julie: You reminded me that the bump off the pier murder really bugged me. I mean, the premise is she's murdering these guys. But how terribly inconvenient should one just get injured. And a little hip nudge into a river doesn't seem very ... well ... certain, you know? (Yes, I watch way too much Law & Order).




Is there a message here?


Kathleen: Yes, I think the author wanted to scare off all future dates. I mean, if you were a guy would you want to date her? It'd be tough.

Julie: Maybe she has a secret wish to marry an assassin?


What's your favorite line?

Kathleen: My favorite paragraph is in the middle of the book, in the beginning of the relationship between Sam and Grace:

Here's Grace, talking herself out of liking him: "Stop it. Be sensible, Grace, he's not perfect. He's far from perfect. In fact, there's something really, really wrong with him. But there is with me, too. It's not like I can forget that. Would he be so interested in me if I hadn't killed three men?"

I think that one paragraph summed up what is so cool about the book (and mind you, I really do enjoy twisted characters).

Julie: Okay, now you're going to make me work. (JK takes a break to flip through the book....) Here we go. I like this b/c I think it summed up Grace's personality. One thing I really liked that the author did was nail that sort of feminine "good girl" thing where you keep your mouth shut and all this vile stuff just sort of grows and grows. So the line I liked was (this comes after she has lousy sex b/c she can't bring herself to tell the guy what she wants): "The key to good sex, as I once heard on a television morning show, is communication. I just wish I could do that without actually talking."

Most liked moment?


Kathleen: This one is hard because the book just didn't blow me away. I mean, there wasn't any one place that just whacked me over the head… Yeah, yeah, I'll shut up. Julie?

Julie: Actually, I really liked the mental image I got at the very beginning when she's sort of astounded she's killed the first guy and she's trying to decide what to do, and so she uses the time to sort through her box of lipsticks.

Most disliked moment?

Kathleen: This one is easier. She pulls a surprise near the end of the book that I TOTALLY didn't buy. It made a nice James Pattersonian type twist to the plot, but it was just that moment when the crocodile comes from the ceiling (if you've read some of the writing craft books, you know what I mean here), and you're staring at it with one eye and thinking, "Now how did that happen?" Anyway, I'm not going to give it away because it'd just be too, too, too much a spoiler, but still, that moment -- and you'll know it when you get there -- is my most disliked moment. Julie?

Julie: I know the one you mean, and that was mine, too! Although I half-expected it for reasons I can't say without creating MAJOR spoilers!

Should everyone read this book?

Kathleen: Well, if there's absolutely no way in the world that you can identify with a professional killer and a somewhat socio-pathic socialite, then probably not. However, Ms. Sacks did a nice job with the concept and Sam, I must say, she really nailed (hehe, so did Grace). Julie?

Julie: I agree. And I think she got Grace, too, though I'm a little easier on authors here than you are, I think. Grace is harder to identify with (since she's running around killing guys which, presumably, most of us don't do) but I really did love the concept of a woman who just *can't* hurt the guy's feelings, so ....

Kathleen: You know, I'm really wishy-washy here. I did love the concept, but I felt like it was missing something. I'm not sure what it would take to pull off a love story between two killers, but I do think it's possible, however, I have to admire Ms. Sacks for attempting such a feat and doing such a nice job with it. Julie, what about you?

Julie: Well, I'm gonna split the vote and give her a thumbs-up. I LOVED the concept. And I know what you mean by missing something (there were times when I would have liked the pace to be picked up), but even so, I was pulled into the story and had a lot of fun with it, and I really liked Grace even while really disliking her and wanting to whap her on the head and say "just tell these poor guys!!!" So, all in all, I give it a thumbs-up. And I really liked Sam


The wrap up!

Kathleen: So, Julie, what's up for uh, next time we do this?

Julie: Lemony Snicket's The Bad Beginning. Release your inner put-upon child!! Should be much fun!


See you next month at the coffee klatch. And remember, you can never read too many good books, but you can drink too much coffee.

# posted by Julie Kenner (0) comments : 11:32 AM