Book Review: Iron Widow by Xiran Jay Zhao

"Perks of refusing to play by the rules: you don't have to chose between the boy who'd torture a man to death with you and the boy who'd welcome you back with pastries after."

I've been looking forward to reading this since I watched Xiran's videos on historical accuracy (or lack thereof) in the various Mulan films. And now that I'm finished, I'm chomping at the bit to read the sequel, Heavenly Tyrant. I went straight to Amazon to look for it only to see the listing as "temporaily out of stock," which was annoying. Then I noticed the publication date is next April. C'mon Amazon, it's not "out of stock" if it hasn't been published yet. Still... darn.

Anyway, the actual review.

"I dream about walking on daggers every night, you know....It feels like a nightmare, but I think it's just your life."

Is this the far future, or is it so far in the past that the history has been forgotten? I love a setting that makes you question which it is. For sake of this review, we'll say it takes place in China in the distant future.

200 years ago, the alien Hunduns took over the Zhou province. They are insect-like, and their carpaces can be reworked into armor. Humans have learned how to work this material into giant battle robots called Chrysalises. Due to the need for a balance between yin and yang qi, these battle suits require two pilots - one male and one female - to control them. But... for some reason, the female pilots - called Concubine Pilots - rarely survive a battle.

Wu Zetian was born into this world: a world where boys are valued much more highly than girls, a world where girls are essentially sold - either in marriage or to the army, a world where submission and footbinding* are standard.

*Be warned, you will learn a lot about foot binding and it's not for the faint of heart.

Zetian's sister is sold to the army, in hopes her pay will help finance their brother's wedding. But when she dies before even piloting a mission, Zetian takes it upon herself to avenge her sister's death.

Things do not go according to plan - or maybe they go better than planned. She has to contend with her sister's killer, mysogeny from every corner, getting assigned to pilot with an actual convicted murderer, and the unexpected arrival of her would-be suitor from back home. "You can't shoot me! I'm rich!" Oh, Yizhi...

Layers of secrets are unraveled and Zetian finds allies in unexpected places... and betrayal from those she counted friends. She is beaten down and beaten down and beaten down, but she rises harder and stronger - a true Iron Widow.

(By the way, did I mention this is a very loose retelling of the story of the ONLY female emperor in Chinese history? Long live Wu Zetian.)

I LOVED this book. It was the best book I've read in a while - and I've read a lot of good ones recently. (In fact, this is the best of three "teenage girls fighting the evil empire" books I've read in pretty quick succession.) With that said, though, it's not for the faint of heart. There is murder, battle, trorture, near-rape (and implied offscreen rape of minor characters), cataclismic damage to a city, and mental and physical familial abuse, including society-santioned breaking and regular re-breaking of young girls' feet. Yikes. It very closely skirts the line of what would be too much for YA (in fact, the afterword states that this is a toned-down version from an earlier draft that would very much not be YA.) But that's the stuff I love. It is also full of the fantastically sarcastic and witty humor I've come to expect from Xiran Jay Zhao's YouTube videos. You should look them up - they are hilarious (and educational!)

---

Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

The Toymaker's Apprentice: A Holiday Treat

So... I wanted to make this post earlier. (Heck, I wanted to finish the book on Christmas, but it ended up being the 27th.)

When I checked out Flygirl, by Sherri L. Smith, I noticed that she had a book entitled The Toymaker's Apprentice. From the seven-headed, seven-crowned mouse on the cover, I knew it was about/based on The Nutcracker. For those of you that may not know, I was in The Nutcracker four times as a kid. The full ballet is one of my very favorite pieces of music EVER. Y'all... I had to read this book.

Now, first of all, I want to say that this book is based on a 200 year old novella and a 120 year old ballet, so if I spoil the ending for you, well, that's on you ; )

The Toymaker's Apprentice is the story of Stefan Drosselmeyer, the second cousin of clockmaker Christian Drosselmeyer (who is THE Drosselmeyer from the ballet). Stefan longs for something more than his role as his father's apprentice. His father, Zacharias, is a traditionalist. Carved wooden toys - not clockwork or automatons - are what Zacharias Drosselmeyer encourages. But, reeling from the death of his mother, and the sudden appearance of his enigmatic cousin, Christian, Stefan is hit by revelation after revelation. Christian was banished from his royal appointment! Christian has been charged with curing a cursed princess! The only cure is a possibly-mythical, impossible to crack nut! Christian is being pursued by spies! The spies are mice! And they can talk! The mice kidnap Stefan's father!

Christian, Stefan, and Christian's jailer and friend, the astronomer Samir, set off for far-off Boldavia, to save a princess, rescue Zacharias, and defeat a revolution of mice.

Meanwhile, in Boldavia, the Queen of Mice has given birth to... a son? Seven sons? She refers to them in the plural but, to the shock of her subjects, her newborn has one body and seven heads. Famed rat scholar, Ernst Liszt, has been hired to tutor the... princes?... and even he is very uncertain about the queen's plans for her offspring. She names her sons for famous human conquerors, in hopes this will serve as portentous to their future, and her eventual goal of conquering the humans.

The chapters alternate between Stefan's, Ernst's, and eventually the mouse prince's points of view. Of the seven heads, the central one, Arthur, becomes the dominant personality of his brothers. Gentle Arthur, who wishes to be a scholar, but also wishes to live up to his mother's expectations that he and his brothers will be warriors, strikes up an unlikely friendship with the imprisoned Zacharias. Together, they bond over Zacharias's love for the son he misses - how Arthur wishes he had a parent who cares like this! Arthur's friendship and encouragement helps Zacharias continue the work his captors have designated for him.

Of course, I went into this story know what the ending was going to be... how it HAD to be, given the source material. And yet... I kept wondering, kept asking, how does Arthur go from sweet scholar to dreaded Mouse King, sworn enemy of the Nutcracker? How can Stefan defeat a city filled with countless mice out for revenge? And the answers... oh, the answers. I love a good tragedy. I can't tell you the last time I've read such a sympathetic and tragic villain as Sherri L. Smith's Mouse King. And the final interaction between the Mouse King and the Nutcracker, between Arthur and Stefan - two BOYS who love their parent and would do anything for them. Glorious. A real Christmas treat.

Read this book if you are a fan of: The Nutcracker; Young Adult or Middle Grade fantasy or adventure (like Terry Pratchett's YA novels? This is for you); Harry Potter; The Ranger's Apprentice series; The Colossus Rises, by Peter Lerangis; coming of age stories; steampunk (I mean... this is more clockwork punk, but I don't think that counts as a genre...; The Larklight series; retellings of classics/fairy tales; historical fiction; talking animals...seriously, y'all I could make a whole readers' advisory list.

---

Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

Review: Flygirl by Sherri L. Smith

"Hold fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is a broken-winged bird that cannot fly." Langston Hughes

Ida wants to fly. Ida yearns to fly. Flying reminds Ida of her deceased father, who taught her. But Ida is a woman. In 1941. Oh, yeah - she's also Black. The thing is... Ida's father's side of the family is mixed. She inherited his very fair skin. She has "good hair." When she dresses a certain way, walks and talks a certain way - and avoids her darker family members and friends - she can pass for white.

Honestly, if timing had been different, if the War hadn't started, if her older brother hadn't enlisted as a medic... If her younger brother hadn't found an article about how the army was putting together a group of female pilots (the Women's Army Service Pilots, or WASP), Ida would have just continued what she was doing - scrimping and rationing, cleaning houses, collecting scraps for the War Effort - indefinitely. But not only does she itch to fly, she also itches to do something, anything, to help bring her brother home sooner. So, doctoring her father's pilot license and borrowing a nice hat and fur, she joins the WASP.

I had been curious about both the WASP in general, and this book specifically, since I read Orleans by the same author several years ago. Somehow it got forgotten, pushed to the side. But after Out of Darkness, I wanted to read another historical novel about someone outside my own experience... and this one immediately resurfaced in my mind.

It was a good read, an interesting peek into both the life of a Black woman at the time, and any woman in the army during WWII. Actually, I should say, civilian women among military men. The WASP were not militarized until the Carter administration, and as such, the ladies are treated as the lowest of the low - interlopers, unworthy, given all the planes and tasks that the men don't want to deal with. Made to bunk in poorly thrown-together rooms on the base, or to stay in boarding houses off-base. Asked to show their worth by flying an experimental plane dubbed the "Widowmaker" when no man wants to touch it because of all the problems and accidents it's had so far. Some of the men don't think women should be there, don't think they should be flying. Others discount their instincts or their careful checking of equipment.

In addition, Ida has to deal with the added stress of "passing" - of hiding her true self and heritage, as not only are Black women not allowed in the WASP, but her basic training takes place deep in Texas where a Black woman caught passing will find herself in immediate danger. Though, interestingly enough, Ida isn't the only one dealing with prejudices. She immediately takes to two other bunkmates, becoming fast friends, and the three of them are referred to as a "carny," a "hick," and a Jew.

I enjoyed the book, and I enjoyed learning about the challenges these ladies faced. The pacing wasn't what I would have expected for a wartime novel about a woman hiding her identity, but it was a good read with important themes. I felt the ending just sort of... happened. It wasn't terribly climactic and became more about Ida's thoughts and which of her relationships had changed. Though, a big message of the book is about that transition of early adulthood - you grow apart from your childhood friends. You wonder if your fate lies with your family or with your dreams and skills. Should you pursue your dreams, no matter what, or should you do what others expect of you?

But don't worry, just because Flygirl didn't take off for me the way I expected doesn't mean I'm done with Sherri. I've already moved on to another book of hers, The Toymaker's Apprentice. And I'm loving it so far.

Out of Darkness, Out of the Library

I posted a brief little tidbit about this on my Facebook page a week or two before Banned Books Week. There was a school board meeting in Texas (because they always seem to be in Texas) where a mom went on and on about Out of Darkness, a book in the school library that had a reference to anal sex. The rant went viral, and multiple schools in the district ended up pulling the book off shelves. (For those of you keeping track at home, that means the book was successfully banned.)

It is worth noting that, like many controversial Young Adult Books, Out of Darkness is a Printz Honor book.

Recently, I was contacted by the publicist for Ashley Hope Perez, the author of Out of Darkness, asking if I'd be willing to write a blog post about Perez's response to the controversy. She sent me a YouTube video and I have to say, I love the author's attitude - a perfect blend of snark and passion.

Having watched the video and looked into the book a little more, I now plan to read it. Who's with me?

See more about Ashley and her works here.

Dr. Seuss II: Scandalous Boogaloo!

Ok, so everyone knows Dr. Seuss drew weird pictures.  The people didn’t look real.  The animals didn’t look real (has he ever SEEN a horse?  His horses are terrifying…).  He has all kind of made-up animals, and people that look like maybe they’re animals.

Dr. Seuss occasionally shows up on banned and challenged lists because people decided that some of his books (“Hop on Pop” and “The Cat in the Hat”) promote misbehavior in children.  (Though, if you’ve read either Pop or Cat, you know Pop tells his kids “you must never hop on Pop” and the fish turns out to be right about not letting the Cat into the house while Mother is out.)

A few months ago, though, Dr. Seuss came under fire not for encouraging misbehavior, but for “racist” depictions in some of his books. Word came out that some of his early books would no longer be published.

At first there was a hue and cry about cancel culture… but it turns out that Dr. Seuss’s estate chose to pull six books from publication, rather than an announcement coming from a school system that they would no longer use ANY Dr. Seuss books.

Curious, I checked out “If I Ran the Zoo” from our library.  I had a vague recollection from my time as a children’s librarian that this one had some Asian caricatures in it.  And upon re-reading it, it turns out it does – as well as “Persian,” Russian, and African.  The African ones, to my eye, are the ones that immediately jump out as the most bothersome, followed by the Asian ones.  But, with that said, 1. I was looking for them (I think it’s possible small children might not be as aware as, again, all Seuss’s illustrations are funky-looking people), and 2. It was first published in 1950. 

And while, yes, I agree that illustrations from 1950 that were considered fine then can be considered bothersome or racist now, but, y’all, it was 71 years ago.  (Oh my god, y’all, 1950 was 71 years ago…)  We’ve moved on.  We’ve improved.  Dr. Seuss’s estate has moved on – in recognizing that these illustrations are no longer appropriate and in deciding to cease publication, they are stepping in and saying, “OK, we’re better than this.”

They aren’t telling you not to read it. They’re saying “we feel weird continuing to publish these.” And that’s OK.

Banned Book Week Day 7: Don't Judge a Book By its Challenge

One of the things that we frequently find to be the case with banned and challenged books is that people get up in arms about a book they haven’t read - “I heard that book is… Someone told me that book’s about…” But then it turns out that someone else you know and trust (maybe know and trust better than that friend-of-a-friend, or that rant on that Facebook group you’re a member of) has read the book and thinks it’s fine - great, even.

In some ways, I find that similar to certain dog breeds that have a stigma or reputation for being aggressive… but then it turns out someone you know and trust has a big, goofy, loveable 80 pound lap dog who wouldn’t hurt a fly (well, maybe lick them to death…).

So what do you do? You expand your horizons. You do your research. You visit that dog shelter or check out a copy of that banned book. And you find a new friend.

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2019/9/25/banned-books-displays-i-have-loved-part-1

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2019/9/28/the-challenge-doesnt-end-today

Banned Books Week Day 5: You Can't...

As some of you have gathered from some of the posts I've made here, I really enjoyed making displays for the libraries I've worked for.  Banned Books week was kind of like Christmas - we started planning Banned Books Weeks displays months out.

The first year that I worked at Kennesaw State University, we were doing a "caution tape" them (common for Banned Books Week) with "graffiti" in the student computer lab.  Being relatively new in that position, I hadn't been sure what my role would be in helping with or planning that display, so I sort of followed some of the ideas that had been done the previous year, when we got to actually implementing. 

One of the new things I did do that year was to put together some "you can't" reading lists.  We printed them out on brightly-colored paper and put them on a table at the entrance to the computer lab.  These lists included "You can't write that" (frequently challenged authors), "You can't read that" (frequently challenged classics), and "You can't say that" (books frequently challenged due to language - profanity, racist, and/or sexual language).  "You can't read that" was our most popular list, with almost twice as many copies taken as the other two lists combined.

You can see the lists and some of our "graffiti" below.

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Banned Books Week Day 3: Separating the Art from the Artist

Have you ever read a book, seen a movie, heard a song you really enjoyed, that really resonated with you... and then found out something less-than-savory about the creator?

Jason and I have been watching Lovecraft Country recently.  In the first episode the main character, who is black, is walking along with an older black lady after they were stranded when their bus broke down and only the white passengers were provided with alternate transportation.  The other passenger mentions that she saw him reading while they were on the bus and asks him what his book was about.  He tells her he was reading A Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Burroughs, and goes on to describe the beginning of the book - a former Confederate officer is lost in the desert and stumbles upon a portal to Mars.

"Wait... a Confederate officer?" She asks.

"Ex-Confederate," he clarifies. 

She scoffs "once a Confederate, always a Confederate."

He shrugs, and admits that he can separate the character from his origin and enjoy the story.

Lovecraft Country takes place in the 1950's, and so far all the episodes are dripping with period accurate racism and misogyny.  (It's a very good, show, don't get me wrong, but it's not Hairspray.)  Some of the characters in the show are fans of H.P. Lovecraft; others remind them that he was racist.

And, while I'm not trying to excuse racism, antisemitism, xenophobia, or anything else that Lovecraft is commonly accused of, I am saying that he is a product of his time.  Casual racism, antisemitism, xenophobia, misogyny, and a whole host of other bothersome things were commonplace and unremarkable in the early 20th century.  Many authors of classics would fall into those same categories if we examined them closely.  How many older books have you read with "tricky" Jews, "lazy" or overly-servile blacks, "untrustworthy" immigrants (Irish, Italian, Mexican, whatever), "barbaric" middle-easterners, and delicate wilting violet heroines who need a big strong man to save them?

Dickens had Fagan; Shakespeare had Shylock and Othello (or specifically, the “malignant and a turbaned Turk” that Othello called a “circumcisèd dog,” and killed).

I'm not saying we should ignore the prejudices of the past... but I'm also saying that we should not completely disregard an author (or, more specifically, their works) if there is merit once we look past the author's shortcomings.  This is 2020, and I'd like to think we're more inclusive as a society now than in 1920, and 1820, and 1620.

And what are we writing today?  Who are today's paragons who will be seen as problematic in 20, 50, 100 years?

An example of how viewpoints can change, even within a lifetime, would be J. K Rowling. 

In the late 1990's when the Harry Potter books first came out, her books were frequently challenged for sorcery and witchcraft.  (Which, really, is like challenging Sir Cumference and the Dragon of Pi for use of geometry.)  A few years later, when filming one of the later films (I want to say Half-Blood Prince) there was a big to do about J. K. Rowling announcing that Dumbledore was gay.  Some people were in an uproar, announcing that she was promoting "the gay agenda" in addition to witchcraft.  Others hailed her as progressive - the wise mentor character is gay!  How fabulous!  And now... it's almost as though things have come full circle. 

Earlier this year, Rowling got into, well, a row (to use the British) online with none other than Daniel Radcliffe about whether or not transgender women were "really" women.  A large number of her fans and followers, who had seen the books as so accepting, so inclusive, such a fantastic allegory for transformation, becoming who you truly are, found that their hero, their paragon, had fallen and her pedestal was crumbling.

Many people started saying "J. K. Rowling didn't write this world, this universe that I so identify with - Daniel Radcliffe did!  Hermione did!  Someone else, anyone else!"  And, while I am not defending her comments, I think it's a shame to try and excise the author from the work.

J.K. Rowling is 55 years old.  Many of her fans who are upset are in their 30's, 20's, maybe even teens.  I'm not saying "older generations don't get it,"... but when I first started reading Harry Potter in 2000, I didn't know a lot of gay people (or, rather maybe didn't know a lot of people who had come out).  Not only did I not know anyone who was transgender, I didn't know such a thing existed.  (Yes, I was sheltered.)  That was 20 years ago. 

Now I know enough about the LGBTQ+ world, spectrum, color wheel to know that I really don't know a lot about it.  And that's OK - I'm open to knowing more, I'm open to learning and letting people be who they want to be.  And, I also know that as a 38-year-old white woman writing in 2020 that there may be things that I write that my daughter's generation, or her children's generation read and think, "Oh, god, why would she say this?  What a horrible person!"  I hope not, but I know that society moves on, and grows, and changes, so who am I to say what will be acceptable in the year 2120?

But, back to Lovecraft.  I guess the point of what I am trying to say is this: if you find the world of Lovecraft intriguing, read it, and don't worry about the author.  If you find John Carter's post-Civil War adventures on Mars thrilling, read them, and don't worry about his background.  If you love Harry Potter, for goodness's sakes, put on your house scarf and wave your wand and don't worry about J.K's tweets.  Just read what you want, and enjoy yourself.  Don't let an author take their world away from you.

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Banned Books Week Day 1: Background

As happens now that I’m not working at a library anymore, Banned Books Week kind of snuck up on me again this year. I do have some ideas for new posts this year, which will come later this week. I’ll also link back to some of my favorite posts of years pasts.

But for today, enjoy reading up on some background of Banned Books Week, as well as the list of the top 10 banned books of 2019:

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/banned

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Library Displays I Have Loved, Part 4

Some of you may have seen on my personal Facebook page that I shared a memory of a library display this week. I've also been thinking about this one a lot recently.

When I worked for Kennesaw State University Library a few years ago, one of my tasks was making displays for the library on the Marietta campus. Sometimes these were just selections of books based around a theme, and sometimes they were more informative displays with facts, information, or trivia.

Each year, the university did a "year of" where they selected a country whose culture they would focus on for activities, lectures, etc. One of the years I was there was the Year of Russia. Needless to say, as a Russian minor in college, I was brimming with ideas for this particular display case. In fact, my last display that I put together for the Year of Russia display case was a Black History Month tie in.

Many people are not aware, but Aleksandr Pushkin, one of Russia's most famous and most beloved authors, was of African descent. I've been thinking about Pushkin a lot lately, partly because of the interestingly ethnic casting in The Great (a show in Hulu about Catherine the Great). (More on that to follow in another post.) So, ladies and gentlemen, without further ado, I give you my Pushkin display:

A Character of His Own

I don't often read non-fiction, and even more rarely do I read personal non-fiction, like memoirs and autobiographies. Right now I'm reading The View From the Cheap Seats, which is a collection of essays and speeches by Neil Gaiman. Technically, I guess it's not a memoir, but many of his essays and speeches are autobiographical.

What I'm really enjoying about this book - aside from the fact that I like his style and his humor - is that Neil's stories about himself as a child or young man make him sound almost like a character in one of his books. He relates the tale of the "feral child raised by patient librarians" in more than one of these essays. He tells of the time that he and his friends encountered a Playboy-style magazine at the age of eight and he was much less interested in the fact that there were "naked ladies" in the magazine than he was by the fact that one of these was a magician's assistant. In the same essay, he discusses how he was called into the principal's office for repeating a joke he heard with the f-word in it and when asked what other four-letter words he knew genuinely assumed this to be some kind of vocabulary test and started naming every word he could think of with only four letters in it.

His descriptions of real people as characters he could have written extends to other authors he has made friends with. He relates Diana Wynne Jones's comically bad luck at travel and the time that he was with her when a door fell off their airplane (fortunately, before take off). He describes the first time he met Terry Pratchett. This was during a time at which both of them were still trying to figure out how to make their way in the world of writing, including each of them seeking out what Gaiman terms a "Proper Author Hat." Neil confesses he eventually gave up and bought a black leather jacket instead, while Terry finally found a hat that has become his signature look.

I'm maybe about half-way through the book and am looking forward to the real characters I have still yet to meet, including Gaiman's wife, Amanda Palmer. I discovered Amanda Palmer's music around the same time I discovered Neil's writing. The first song of hers that I latched onto is about a girl who creates a "coin-operated boy" because she has no luck with real men. The music video with its white-faced makeup, striped tights, and somewhat steam-punk aesthetic were right up 22-ish-year-old me's alley.

I actually don't remember what the first thing I read by Neil Gaiman was. But I think if you had told me 15 years ago that he was going to marry the singer who wrote "Coin-Operated Boy" I would have said, "well, yeah. Obviously."

What's in a Name: Act III

I was once at a workshop where the speaker talked about how it can be difficult to pick out names for your characters. "I know people who have taken longer to name their characters than their kids!" he proclaimed. There was a lot of laughter and understanding nods.

I have done a lot of name research in my life. I own two name etymology books. Each longer story that I'm working on has lists and index cards full of name research - meanings, root words, etc. So now that it has come time for Jason and me to choose a name for our baby girl, I already have a lot in my mind as to what I like, what I don't like, meanings, and connotations.

When you're writing fiction, the sound and symbolism of a name can be important, but you can also get away with more in fiction that you can in real life:

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2018/4/15/whats-in-a-name

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2017/7/16/whats-in-the-spelling-of-a-name

Like an old Celtic name that no one can spell? Books often come with a pronunciation guide; your child's kindergarten class doesn't. Authors take care not to name to many of their characters Jon or Rob (unless they're George R R Martin); Jason and I both have been in many classes or work settings where we have been one of two or more people with the same name. Think a name sounds really bad-ass? Well that's all well and good, but if you name your kid Leonidas, he's gonna end up dying in a battle. (One of my university's founders, General Leonidas Polk, died at the Battle of Kennesaw.)

It's a lot to think about. Unlike naming a character, where if you decide later that it's not working, you just change it before publication, there comes a point where you're out of time on deciding on a name. (It may come as a surprise, but unless you're Nora Roberts or James Patterson, the amount of time between sitting down to begin a story and having said book published in much longer than pregnancy.) Plus, usually, you're the only one naming the character in your book. Most people naming a child are working with another person to choose a name (it's fortunate the Jason and I have similar tastes).

Jo, Laurie, Charles, J. K., and Neil

While I was driving home one beautiful afternoon last week, listening to the Little Women soundtrack, I remembered a scene from the movie. Jo is helping Laurie pack for college (Harvard, if I remember correctly) and laments that she can't fit his favorite Dickens volumes into the trunk he'll be taking with him.

"I won't be taking all of Dickens with me," he chides.

"Oh, of course not, you'll have much more important things to read," Jo snarks.

Until recently, it didn't occur to me that she wasn't just being sarcastic. I mean, she WAS being sarcastic, but not for the reason I had originally thought. Jo and Laurie share a love of Charles Dickens and Jo is worried that now that Laurie's going off to college without her that he'll move on. But what I hadn't realized was that I was looking at this scene without taking the time period into account.

Watching this scene without being grounded in the historical context, you kind of think, "well, Dickens is one of those 'important' authors you would be expected to read in college." But Little Women begins during the Civil War in the 1860's. Charles Dickens started publishing in 1836. He was still alive at the beginning of Little Women. While he was recognized as a great author in his lifetime, this isn't a case of a couple of nerds bonding over their shared love of the classics - this is two friends who enjoy the same popular author.

Imagine your friend is going off to college and you can't. Will he come back still a fan of J. K. Rowling or Neil Gaiman (just for purpose of popular, acclaimed authors who have been writing for 20-30 years)? Or will he come back having found new favorites among the classics, leaving you out of the loop?

August Update

Hello, readers!  I'm posting today, both because it's time for my monthly update, and because I won't have time this weekend.

As I mentioned in my July update, I'm going to be changing gears for a month or two.  Partly this is because I'm going to have a lot on my plate for the next month, and partly because I've gotten to a point with Wolf and Sheath where I just need to step away from it for a bit.

Late last week I wrapped up things with W and S, preparing to put it away for a while, and started rereading some of my short stories, partial stories, snippets, and ideas.  I had been thinking recently that after "The Cause of the Disturbance" and "The Wrong Kind of People," the two stories that I currently have out for submission, that I didn't really have anything else I could be submitting.  But after digging through and rereading a lot of my files, I've found that I have a lot more than I thought.

I've found that I have a lot of good quality, nearly complete stories - many of them from prompts and exercises - that it wouldn't take a whole lot of work to make them publishable.

So, while I may not have a lot of time in the upcoming month or so, I think I now have a good project that won't take as much direct focus as working on a single novel.  I am going to pick out a handful of those nearly-finished stories and figure out what needs to be done for them, where I might have good luck submitting, etc.  But, with that said, I won't be submitting all of them to 5,000 places at once.  

Instead, I will be taking the advice of Janisse Ray, an author who I recently heard speak, and chose five places to submit.  Then wait 'til I hear back.  And, honestly, doing it that way it'll be easier to keep track of what I have out, where I'm waiting to hear back from, etc.

And, of course, if and when I have success, I will share it here.

The Fraud Effect

When can you say that you're a writer?  

I went to a doctor's appointment this week.  The physician's assistant, making small talk, asked me what I do for fun. I hesitated for a moment and said, "Well... I write."
"Really?  What do you write?"
Another hesitation.  "Young adult fantasy."
"Oh, wow!  Where were you when I was growing up?!"
She asked me how I had gotten into it and I told her about National Novel Writing Month, and how I had three partial novels.  I didn't bring up my published short stories, but she also didn't ask me what I had published.  And when I say that, what I mean is that she did not seek out my publishing credits to determine if I'm "really" a writer.

As we were having the conversation, especially the early part if it, I wondered if I had "the right" to call myself a writer.  Sure, I've published four stories.  Sure, I have three novels partly written.  But is that enough?  I don't write every day (even though EVERY successful writer says you must).  While I have been published, those publications have been by literary magazines with relatively small circulations.  It's not like people know who I am; it's not like I'm famous.

But I recall reading recently about the Fraud Affect.  It's when you feel like you don't belong to a certain group, you're not good enough for a certain honor, even though your peers DO feel that you qualify.

I remember reading an article by Neil Gaiman about this.  He recounts a story of how he was at an event, as a guest speaker I think, and was standing in the back of the theatre with "another Neil."  They got to chatting about how it still felt weird to Neil Gaiman to be invited places to speak, how he still doesn't quite believe his own celebrity.  The other Neil said he understood, that often when speaking in public would think, "but I didn't do anything special - I just went where the air force sent me."  In his story, Neil Gaiman counters this with, "but you went to the moon!" - revealing that "the other Neil" was Neil Armstrong.

So I guess it's OK, that maybe this is just something I have to get used to.  I am a writer.  I write.  I have published stories.  I am working on novels.  Therefore I can tell people, "I am a writer."

Why YA?

One of my coworkers, who is also a writer, and I were discussing this the other day.  There are some people, publishers, and groups who consider Young Adult (YA) to be a genre.  But Maria and I were talking about how that's really kind of silly; sure, YA is usually about a teenager and topics that teens are interested in, but aside from that, there are as many genres as there are in adult or children's literature.

Really, when you get down to it, YA is a rating.  It's a marketing tool.  It's a lot of things, but it's not a genre.

Before we get too far into discussing what YA isn't, maybe we should define what YA is.  And the problem is, there is not a universal definition.  "Young Adult" is defined as literature written for, about, and sometimes even by teenagers.  The main character falls into a certain age range (which I'll expound on in a moment), and deals with things of interest to teenagers, from finding yourself and coming of age, to more serious topics like bullying and first sexual encounters (which can include negative sexual experiences like assault and its aftermath).  Sometimes these books are edgy, intentionally pushing the envelope, and sometimes they're just girls or boys of a certain age chilling.  

You would think the term "teenager" is pretty straight-forward, but for terms of defining what qualifies as YA, it's not.  I used to work at a public library that defined YA as appropriate for 11-17-year-olds.  However, many publishers define YA as being appropriate for 13-18-year-olds.  There is a big maturity gap between 11 and 13, not to mention a legal gap between 17 and 18.  That's on top of the problem that even going with 13-17, that's still a big range of what may be appropriate or of interest.

And that's before you even touch on the YA holy grail - the series.  Take Harry Potter for example - in the first book, Harry is 11; in the last he is 17.  By the definition of the library system where I used to work, that is YA.  And yet, the first 3 books are classified as "juvenile" (5th grade and under), while the last 4 are in YA.  Partly, this is because the first few books are relatively light and things start to get darker, serious, and more mature at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban.  Similarly, the Rangers Apprentice series is split between J and YA, though if I recall, the main character is actually a few years older than Harry at the start of the series.  But then you have other (admittedly older) series that are all housed in 1 section or the other regardless of the broader age range.  The Little House books are held entirely in the juvenile section, despite the fact that Laura is 5 in the first book and the last book covers the early years of her marriage, from the age of 16 to 20.  Anne of Green Gables and its sequels, by comparison, are all housed in YA; Anne is 11 in the first book and her books also follow her into her marriage.  Really, if you want to get nit-picky about topics, the last couple Little House and Anne books should be classified as "New Adult."

"Well, now, wait, what's this 'New Adult' thing?" you might ask.  New Adult is a growing classification.  New Adult, from what little I've read, is geared at 18-25-year-olds, and deals with things like leaving home for college or a first job, first serious romantic relationship or the early years of a marriage, sometimes even dealing with the birth of a first child.  Because of the material and the age, this classification can also usually get away with more graphic sexuality than books aimed at high schoolers. (Not that there's intense sexuality or overly mature topics in either Little House or Anne, but 4th graders may have a hard time relating to Laura struggling with making jelly on her own for the first time, whereas older readers relate to the fact that they are having to cook, clean, and "keep house" without Mom to help out.) 

A big part of why I bring this topic up is that the 3 novels I'm working on are right on the edge of YA, teetering into adult or NA.  By straight age my novels could be classified as YA or NA - for some reason, I'm writing about 17- and 18-year-olds.  I'm also writing in a "period" where the characters are considered adults with responsibilities as young as 16 and 17.  But then there's also the fact that even though there are going to be some mature topics, these books aren't going to be edgy or overly graphic.

I have an acquaintance who writes, among other things, children's novels.  She says that the target audience of YA should be 1-2 years younger than the main character.  (Which I could argue with, given that there are an awful lot of adult readers who read YA, but from a marketing standpoint, I can see that.)  But by that argument, every book about an 18-year-old should be read by 16-year-olds; every book about an 11-year-old should be read by 9-year-olds, and I don't think that's always a straight correlation.

So, really, when I go to publish these books, I'm going to have a hard time if someone asks me flat out "are you marketing this as YA?"  But I guess I need to actually finish writing them before I worry about that.

You Had Me at "Virginia Dare"

We all have certain topics that if someone mentions it in conversation, puts out a movie about it, or publishes a book even tangentially related to it, we're there.  I have several: the last Romanovs, Joan of Arc, certain ancient Egyptian monarchs, the Salem Witch Trials, and the Black Death, to name a few (I have a lot).  Jason recently sent me a link to a board game he had seen that he didn't know much about, simply because it was about the Scarlet Pimpernel and he knows that's something I love.

One of the authors that I'll read pretty much anything by is Neil Gaiman.  A little while ago, I was searching Amazon for one of his books.  Down below that book's info, it has that little "people who bought this also bought" section and I started scrolling along to see if there was anything new or interesting I didn't already have on my (very long) "to read" list.  And what do you know, there was!  (Amazing how that happens...)  Up popped a book I hadn't heard of before (and as a Gaiman fan who worked in libraries for almost 10 years, that is saying something).  

It was a graphic novel that essentially boils down to the Marvel superheroes in the court of Elizabeth I.  (The actual title is Marvel, 1602.)  As a big fan of alternate history, genre blending, and just Elizabethan England in general, I was already very intrigued.  But then, as I read the summary, I came across a line about how the young Virginia Dare was traveling from Roanoke to the Queen's court.

Virginia. Freaking. Dare.

For those of you who may not be familiar, a brief history lesson:
In 1587, the English founded a colony on the coast of Virginia (present day North Carolina), called Roanoke.  Shortly after its founding, Eleanore Dare, the daughter John White, one the founders, gave birth to a daughter and named her Virginia.  She was the first child of English parentage born in the New World.  Shortly after this, Virginia's grandfather and others returned to England for supplies, promising to return soon.  But there was this little thing called the Spanish Armada... England was at war with Spain and the return was delayed by about 3 years.  When White finally returned in 1590, the colony was abandoned (or worse).  The fort was in ruins; the only clue to the whereabouts of the colonists was the word "Croatoan" carved into a post.  When white had left, John had made an arrangement with his Eleanore - if they had to leave, she would make sure they left the name of where they had gone.  Croatoan was a nearby island.  White immediately set out in search of his family, but found that the island had been obliterated by a hurricane.  The Roanoke settlement went down in history as "the Lost Colony;" America's first unsolved mystery (and favorite fodder of many conspiracy theorists).

Fast forward approximatly 400 years...  
One summer when I was about 10, we went to the Outer Banks of North Carolina.  While we were there we watched an outdoor play about the Lost Colony.  My mom also bought me a book (gee, go figure) about the Legend of the White Doe.  One of the old tales about what happened to the colonists is that they sought refuge with a neighboring tribe of natives*.  Virginia grew up as one of the tribe and when she became a young woman, had 2 rival suitors for her hand. And, as these things tend to go, the suitor who was not chosen sought revenge: he was a powerful medicine man and turned her into a white doe, so that she would not be able to be with the man whom she had chosen over him.  It was one of those tragic love stories that I have always been so drawn to...

*There may be something to this, as the next round of settlers to the Virginia Outer Banks reported that in one tribe in the area it was not uncommon to encounter someone with blue eyes.

While I don't often hear or see things about the Lost Colony or Virginia Dare, it is always something that piques my curiosity.  So, once I saw this title and read the "back cover" summary, obviously it also had to go on my (increasingly long) "to read list.

Neil Gaiman.  Elizabethan superheroes.  Virginia Dare.  I mean, really, what more could I ask for in a story?
 

Chillin' with the Norse Gods

I haven't done a book review in a while.

(OK, so this isn't going to be an actual full-on review, partly because I haven't finished the book yet...)

I'm currently reading Norse Mythology by Neil Gaiman.  A couple things to know here:
-I really like Neil Gaiman.
-Neil Gaiman really likes Norse mythology.

I was really excited when I heard the book was coming out - I love his style.  Plus, since a lot of his books feature Norse mythological characters, and since Jason and I are interested in both the Norse/Vikings specifically, and mythology in general, I thought this would be really interesting to read.  I haven't been disappointed, though it's also not quite what I expected.

I also follow Neil Gaiman on Facebook.  A month or two ago (before I got the book), he made a post announcing that Norse Mythology had been nominated for a fantasy award (I don't remember which one now) and while he was honored to have been nominated, he was also somewhat amused, as he had marketed this book as non-fiction.

(Side note on non-fiction:  For several years, I worked in a library system that used the Dewey Decimal system, meaning that fiction and non-fiction are kept separate, as opposed to the Library of congress where you will find fictional pieces by an author next to reviews and criticism about that author's work.  It was always interesting to me to see what was housed in non-fiction that kind of hovered on the fiction/non-fiction line.  Many pieces of older literature - poetry, the Greek epics, Shakespeare - were housed in non-fiction, as were books of myths and fairy tales.) 

I recall having read in a book about the defining characteristics of different genres that fantasy is arguably the oldest genre - mythologies and fairy tales are the very oldest stories.  So to me, hearing that a non-fiction book about mythology had been nominated for a fantasy award didn't strike me as all that odd.

But then I started reading the book and it made even more sense why it was nominated for a fiction genre award rather than non-fiction.  Gaiman comes right out in his introduction and says that a lot of this book is based on his fond remembrances of reading Norse mythology as a kid (after having become interested due to the Thor comic books).  He states that he did some research but that a lot of this is revisiting tales he remembers; the book is not an in-depth anthropological examination.

Really the great thing (one of the great things) about this book is that it comes off as Personal Recollections of Hanging Out with the Norse Gods by Neil Gaiman.  As opposed to a lot of mythology books, that can actually be quite dry, because the author is either taking a heightened style, respectful approach, or because the author is merely presenting "this is the direct translation of these old rune and I myself have no interest or opinion on the story itself," Gaiman's retelling of these myths comes off as personal.  He's not afraid to be casual with the gods, giving us such gems as "'Shut up, Thor,' said Loki."

Part of why I picked up this book when I did (you, know, selecting it out of the massive tower of books that I got for Christmas) is that I just finished reading Gaiman's Odd and the Frost Giants.  It's a story about a kid who doesn't quite fit in with the rest of his Viking village.  He runs away and encounters 3 of the gods, who have been cursed into different shapes and need his help getting back to Asgard.  I was curious to see more tales about the characters I'd just read about, so I started in on Norse Mythology (even though I generally do not read the same author back-to-back unless I'm reading a series).

The gods in Mythology are given the same casual, familiar feel as they are in Odd.  It comes across less as "here is what the ancient peoples of Norway believed" and more, "So did I ever tell you about that time that Thor was just chilling and Loki played this really mean trick on him?"  Some stories feel almost like these are the antics of Neil's college buddies.  And I'm loving it.

Never Say Never

I recall a scene in The Mists of Avalon where Morgaine balks at the suggestion that one day she might do a specific act.  I don't recall now exactly how it was worded, or what it was (and whether it was killing or betraying someone).  Her mentor said, "do not name the well from which you will not drink."  And it turned out that, many years later, she had to do the thing that she had considered to be so heinous because she was put in a position where if she didn't many people would die.

Likewise (but much less seriously!) sometimes you have an author who states that the book they've just written is a one-off story and they won't write a sequel.  Or the author of the best-selling, smash hit, movie-spawning series that defined a generation states that the story arc is finished, that they won't write another story about Stevie McStevenson, because Stevie McStevenson is done at the end of Stevie McStevenson Saves the World.  But then that first author says, "well, y'know, I think I might have another story about this character."  And the second author announces that, "whattaya know, I'm releasing another story about Stevie McStevenson that takes place several years later."

And a lot of people's reactions on an author going back on their "I'm not writing another story about these people" statement is to accuse them of selling out, of doing it for the money.  And I'm sure there are cases where that is exactly what happened (and you can usually tell, because the sequel is sub-par).  But there are also some, I'm sure, where the author who has publicly announced that there is nothing more to say, suddenly has a revelation while driving, or in the shower, or any of those other random moments where inspiration comes, and they say, "Oh, my god - there IS another story to tell!"

Why do I bring this up?  I'm currently working on my oldest partial novel.  I started it in November of 2009 with the very definite "knowledge" that it was one story.  "Only ONE novel-length story will be told about Reyala," I told myself.  And for a long time I actually worried that this might be a detriment when I go to pitch The Wolf and the Sheath to a potential publisher, as it's pretty clearly Young Adult, but Young Adult series are the money-makers that publishers want.  "But, whatever," I thought, "if the story's good enough, someone will take a chance on it."  

But a month or two ago, an idea came to me.  Just a little idea in the shower.  Sure, Reyala's story arc is done at the end of Wolf and Sheath, but what about her brothers?  And just like pushing a pebble down a snowy hill in a cartoon, this idea picked up speed and, lo and behold, I have a basic plot outline for not one but two "sequels."  

I use sequels in quotes because they are not continuations of Reyala's story.  Reyala is the main character in The Wolf and the Sheath, but the ideas I have for the next stories focus on each of her younger brothers in turn.  She would be in each of them, but she's not the central focus.  Plus there may be a few years between W & S and the next sequel, and there would definitely be several years between the second and third story.  So maybe they're not sequels so much as companion pieces.  But, again, for 8 years I thought, pretty strongly, that there was only 1 story to tell here and now... we'll see if I do stop at 3.

On the Equality of Couples in Fiction

If you've been following this blog for a while, you've probably read my lamentations about the many problems that Bright Fire, one of my novels, has.  Some of these problems are obvious, and some of them are things where I know something isn't quite right but I'm not sure how so or what to do about it.

Recently, upon comparing Bright Fire to my 2 other partial novels (working titles are The Wolf and the Sheath, and Brinyor), I realized that one if the many issues is the imbalance of power between Bright Fire and her love interest.  This isn't to say that it's a bad relationship - it's just not very realistic right now.

Reading back on Wolf and Sheath and Brinyor, I realized that both of the main characters in those stories have a better balance of power with their love interests.  (Side note - none of these stories actually qualify as Romances, despite the presence of a couple and other romantic elements.  But the difference between romantic elements and Romance as a genre is a topic for a different post.)
  
Without giving a lot away (because I do intend to publish both), in Wolf and Sheath, while Reyala technically is of a higher station and has more political power than her love interest, he has his own special station and knowledge within another group, and they live in a place where her position doesn't remove her from "normal" people as much as it might in another time or place.  In Brinyor, Rigan and her love interest both have high positions within their respective communities, are very close in age, and have recently suffered similar losses.  One major problem with the relationship in Bright Fire is a big age gap, and the fact that he starts out as something of a mentor figure to Bright Fire.  I'm not saying it can't be done - it's a quasi-historical fantasy, a setting where a big age gap isn't as much of a problem as in a modern piece, for example - but it's also something that I may not be a good enough writer to make it work yet.  

And honestly, this revelation doesn't bother me as much as it might have a few years ago.  I recently read The Graveyard Book by Neil Gaiman.  It is a fantastic book that won the Hugo, Newbery, and Carnegie awards,  among others.  In the afterword, Gaiman admits that he had the idea when he was 25, but that when he sat down to write it for the first time, he realized that he was not yet a good enough writer to do the story justice.  Eventually, he did sit down and complete it.  This gives me hope.  This book that I have been so hung up on for the past several years, now I can take a breath and say, "Ok.  This is a good story.  This has the potential to be a great story.  I just need to give myself a little more time to figure it out."

But back to the couples...  After I realized that Bright Fire's relationship is potentially tricky, I sat down and looked at some of the other major ideas I have.  (By "major" I mean that I have the majority of the plot worked out in my head.)  There is always a balance.  The couples may not both be immediately obvious as equals, but there's always something - fame vs. maturity, political power vs. perceived power, political power vs. street smarts, etc. - that keeps the couple in balance.

Maybe this is something that I understand the importance of now that I am in a stable relationship and have been for over 6 years, and why I'm only just now recognizing the imbalance in Bright Fire.  (Though it's also interesting to note that I wrote the bulk of W&S when I was not in a relationship of any sort, and 2 years before I met the man I am now married to.)  I think this is something that is just important in fiction as in real life - the couple have to work together.  They have to have strengths to lend each other.  You can't have one leaning entirely on the other, just as you can't have them both be exactly the same.  The couple in Wolf and Sheath came to me very easily - oddly enough since that is the first novel I started writing.  The couple in Brinyor are also good and strong - once they finally get over themselves long enough to realize there's something between the two of them. : )

So it's a little odd to me that Bright Fire, the novel I started between W&S and Brinyor has, of all my stories, the most imbalanced couple*.  But that might also have a lot to do with where I was mentally the year that I started it.  

*Well, except for the one where someone gets killed, but that's also another subject for another blog...