16. Catch 22, by Joseph Heller
In this book, basically everything is crazy and uses crazy logic (aka none at all) and the story itself is crazy. From the dead man in Yossarian's tent to the apples Orr puts in his cheeks to Catch-22 itself, absolutely nothing at all makes sense, which is kind of the point. Mostly the book was pretty hilarious. Reading the conversations and the constant circular logic and various kinds of irony was pretty entertaining. Once I figured out that the book wasn't supposed to make sense or follow any kind of chronological storytelling order, I enjoyed myself a lot more. Then I got to the end, and things got bad again. All the characters who were even vaguely redeemable died off or disappeared in one way or another, leaving behind sad people and generally finishing people's story lines with no sort of happy ending. In the meantime, all the completely awful, self-centered, idiotic, annoying characters were thriving, untouchable through their skewed logic and concentrated power. Things got a little better at the very end, but overall, I'm sorry Jill, but I did not really like the book. It's not that it wasn't written well or anything, but it takes a lot for me to like the kind of story where author kills off all the people I like :(
17. Wizards, edited by Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois
This book was actually a compilation of fantasy short stories that I read most of awhile ago but didn't get around to finishing. So, it didn't take too much to get the last hundred or so chapters out of the way. Most of the reason that I wanted to read this book was that Eoin Colfer had a short story in it. It was pretty funny :) Mostly, though, I felt like the stories were lacking. They're fantasy, so they have a lot of background to introduce most of the time, and I feel like most of them would have been better off expanded into full novels.With so little room, most of the stories could only focus on one thing, like background OR characterization OR moral, or something like that. The last one, Stonefather, for instance, had a really well developed world and plot. People in that world had the potential to become magic, possibly having control over water, or some kind of animal, or another element, like stone (hence the title). During the story, the main character discovers he has very powerful stone magic and uses it to end a longstanding feud between water and stone users (I'm too lazy to look up exactly what they were called...). This was one of the longer short stories, so it was better developed than most, but it still ended a bit abruptly and there wasn't much basis for the denouement- I feel like there was much basis for it, it was just thrown in there as a way to round it out.
I feel like a lot of it is mostly me, though. I like having the details given to me so that I know exactly what to expect and exactly what's going on. At the very least I want to finish out the story with the big plot points and mysteries having been revealed. A lot of the stories left the reader to fill in the gaps and ponder over the meaning, though, and I, unlike people like Anna Beth, am irritated by such ridiculousness.
In this book, basically everything is crazy and uses crazy logic (aka none at all) and the story itself is crazy. From the dead man in Yossarian's tent to the apples Orr puts in his cheeks to Catch-22 itself, absolutely nothing at all makes sense, which is kind of the point. Mostly the book was pretty hilarious. Reading the conversations and the constant circular logic and various kinds of irony was pretty entertaining. Once I figured out that the book wasn't supposed to make sense or follow any kind of chronological storytelling order, I enjoyed myself a lot more. Then I got to the end, and things got bad again. All the characters who were even vaguely redeemable died off or disappeared in one way or another, leaving behind sad people and generally finishing people's story lines with no sort of happy ending. In the meantime, all the completely awful, self-centered, idiotic, annoying characters were thriving, untouchable through their skewed logic and concentrated power. Things got a little better at the very end, but overall, I'm sorry Jill, but I did not really like the book. It's not that it wasn't written well or anything, but it takes a lot for me to like the kind of story where author kills off all the people I like :(
17. Wizards, edited by Jack Dann and Gardner Dozois
This book was actually a compilation of fantasy short stories that I read most of awhile ago but didn't get around to finishing. So, it didn't take too much to get the last hundred or so chapters out of the way. Most of the reason that I wanted to read this book was that Eoin Colfer had a short story in it. It was pretty funny :) Mostly, though, I felt like the stories were lacking. They're fantasy, so they have a lot of background to introduce most of the time, and I feel like most of them would have been better off expanded into full novels.With so little room, most of the stories could only focus on one thing, like background OR characterization OR moral, or something like that. The last one, Stonefather, for instance, had a really well developed world and plot. People in that world had the potential to become magic, possibly having control over water, or some kind of animal, or another element, like stone (hence the title). During the story, the main character discovers he has very powerful stone magic and uses it to end a longstanding feud between water and stone users (I'm too lazy to look up exactly what they were called...). This was one of the longer short stories, so it was better developed than most, but it still ended a bit abruptly and there wasn't much basis for the denouement- I feel like there was much basis for it, it was just thrown in there as a way to round it out.
I feel like a lot of it is mostly me, though. I like having the details given to me so that I know exactly what to expect and exactly what's going on. At the very least I want to finish out the story with the big plot points and mysteries having been revealed. A lot of the stories left the reader to fill in the gaps and ponder over the meaning, though, and I, unlike people like Anna Beth, am irritated by such ridiculousness.
RSS Feed
