Thus Concludes 2012: A Very British Reading Year

Well, 2012 ends today.  It's hard to believe; each year seems to pass more and more quickly.  It must be my age.  Anyway, I read more in 2012 than the past five years combined-  72 works in all.  Being honest, though, a few works were hardly lengthy- some could even be read in under an hour, the most notable examples being the Magna Carta, a selection of Shakespearean sonnets, and Rime of the Ancient Mariner.  There was a healthy dose of graphic novels and ghost stories, too- always quick reads.  So, don't think that I reeled off 72 War and Peace-like tomes.  Still, I am pleased with my achievement.  In fact, so pleased I need to take a tangent here.

------------------
TANGENT
------------------ 
72 books in one year.  Sounds like a lot, doesn't it?  But, it's really not.  Let's look at the math.
366 days in 2012/72 books equals about 1 book every 5 days.  I don't know the average pages per book- but let's say it's 350.  350 pages/book * (1 book/5 days) = 70 pages/day. I think I read about 1 page per minute, so that means 70 minutes a day reading.  Sound like a lot?  Well, how much time do you spend on the Internet or watching television each day?  Not to mention I can read on the bus to work (10-20 pages, generally, on the bus each direction).  So, while it may sound impressive, it's quite achievable. 
------------------
END TANGENT
------------------

As you'd expect, the vast majority of my reads- 63- were from my British reading list.  Here were my
Top 10 British books of the year:
Excalibur by Bernard Cornwell.  (the third book of the Warlord trilogy)
The Man Who Was Thursday: A Nightmare by G.K. Chesterton
A Study in Scarlet by Arthur Conan Doyle
Watchmen by Alan Moore
The ABC Murders by Agatha Christie
Murder in Retrospect by Agatha Christie
The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson
Your Mind Matters by John Stott
Animal Farm by George Orwell
The Crusades by Thomas Asbridge

Not every selection was peachy, though.  Here are 3 of my biggest disappointments (note that they're all from centuries ago):
Historia Brittonum by Nennius
The Ecclesiastical History of the English People by Bede
The History of the Kings of Britain by Geoffrey of Monmouth

I love doing this British reading list "thing"- I highly recommend it, especially to those who find themselves living in the British Isles.  It's heightened my understanding and enjoyment of the overseas experience.  I have struggled, though, with keeping to the original intent.  At first, my British list was intended to give me a wide sampling of the famous British tomes from every genre.  I find myself, however, turning it into a list of every book by a Brit I ever want to read.  Thus, the number of books on the list swells easily- and then I have to do some pruning to keep it tenable.  I read one book, and discover five more in the same genre that I want to explore.  It's fun, but bad for keeping goals realizable.  I need to learn to stay on target.

It wasn't all about the Brits this year.  On the non-British side, I thoroughly enjoyed:
The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter by Seth Grahame-Smith

While I enjoyed the journey, 2013 will see me reading fewer works.  72 is unsustainable- my goal is no more than 36 works in 2013.  Yes, it's odd to have a "maximum" goal in this area, but I've found I can turn the most worthy pursuit into an unhealthy obsession, so things must be done.

Happy reading in 2013!

Every Living Thing (James Herriot)

After a few clunkers, I wanted to end 2012 on a high note, so I turned to a reliable source: James Herriot.  Every Living Thing is the fifth and final story collection the vet/author produced about his life working with animals (and their eccentric owners) in the Yorkshire Dales.  This time, we're in the 1950s- television has just become a common household item, Herriot's kids are growing, and there are plenty of medical advances in the field- but it's the same old Yorkshire.  

Like the other collections, this one is full of heartwarming and amusing tales.  Herriot's contentment and enjoyment of his life is contagious- he's one of those authors that just makes you feel blessed to live on this good earth, even when (as was frequently the case with him) you have your arm in a cow's rectum.  I'd recommend any of his works, especially to animal lovers or those fortunate enough to live in Yorkshire.

If you've read any of Herriot's works and do live in northern England, I'd recommend checking out Skeldale House, the home where Herriot worked and lived for a time.  Located in Thirsk (Herriot's "Darrowby"- he always changed the names of the towns in his works), it helps you visualize a variety of scenes put forth in James' literature. Oh, and regarding changing the names of towns- his oft-mentioned "Brawton" is none other than Harrogate, so keep that in mind when you read.

My only disappointment here was that it ended.  I thought, as his final collection, that it would conclude with an overall look back on his life, but it appears to end right in the '50s or '60s, which means memorable deeds of the last few decades of his practice was never committed to paper (or, at least, published).  Or, perhaps, some of the tales do cover the later period, and he just never makes mention of it.  It was written in 1992; Herriot died just three years later.  He lived 78 years, and appeared thankful for each moment.  I wish we all lived like that.

Rating: A

Brave New World (Aldous Huxley)

I was blessed with many books for Christmas, and in keeping with my "minimization" goals, that means I have to clean out my shelves and make room for the new.  One casualty is Brave New World by Huxley.  A great work, it pains me to get rid of it, but such is life.  I read it a few years ago, so my memory isn't 100%, but I wanted to give a quick review before I got rid of it.

In Brave New World, we see a future where, essentially, everyone's drugged to be happy.  Technology is god- and the people praise "Ford" for his breakthroughs in this arena.  Any form of attachment is discouraged, as attachment can cause pain down the road, and so frivolous, uncommitted living is highly encouraged.  Techniques have been developed to minimize the effect of aging (though people are still mortal), and anyone thinking sad thoughts is given (what I call) happy pills.  Oh, but here's the thing- without sorrow, there's no joy, either.  Life's just a series of events designed to keep people in an almost catatonic state of happiness.  Don't question, don't think, just be happy.  Are they really free?  I think not.

Several characters in the story exist outside of this bubble, and age normally, as well as experience all of life's ups and downs like we do today.  One of them issues this classic line: "I don't want comfort.  I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness.  I want sin."  The basic point of the book is that true freedom, and true life, entails both the good and bad, and if you take one, you take the other.

I loved this book- and the scary thing is, though it was penned 80 years ago, it's almost coming true in our society today.  A variety of drugs exist to help people through sadness and, while that's not always bad, it is (in my opinion) over-used.  Will the future hold something similar for us?  I hope not.

Rating: A+

Dabbling in the Mediocre

My readings of the last few days have been frustrating.  I've hit on several consecutive mediocre works, and decided to read selections from each- 25-33% of each work- rather than feel pressured to read them all cover to cover.  As such, I won't give in-depth review on each, but just a one-liner on the work and what I think of it:

West Highland Tales (Fitzroy Maclean)
A collection of tales from the Highlands of Scotland, the tales are told without much flourish, and are marginally interesting at best.

Rating: C-

Ghostly Tales and Sinister Stories of Old Edinburgh (Alan J. Wilson, Des Brogan, and Frank McGrail)
A few interesting tales mixed with boring or downright stupid ones.

Rating: C-

Idylls of the King (Alfred, Lord Tennyson, with art by Gustave Dore)

Ack!  I really wanted to like this, but call me uneducated- I just can't stand unrhymed verse.  A retelling of the King Arthur legends, Tennyson has skill, but it's just not for me.  The art by Dore, on the other hand, is outstanding; he's one of my favorites.  Note that this particular work is abridged; only selections from Idylls were taken.  Still, I couldn't take much more than 25% of it.

Rating (verse): C-
Rating (art): A+

Politically Correct Old Testament Stories (Robert Martin Walker)

The title sums this one up nicely- this is a collection of Old Testament stories modified to be politically correct for the modern age.  The intent, of course, is to be humorous.  Does it succeed?  Kinda.  This book is, at times, amusing, but gets repetitive (and annoying) quickly.  Words like "womyn," "_____-enhanced", and "_____-gifted" are used so frequently it makes it hard to slog through this slim, 86-page volume.  Perhaps that's the point- that if you go "fully PC" you get really annoying, really quickly- but I think it could have been done a bit better.

Rating: C-

Batman, Noel (Lee Bermejo)

The story of Dickens' Christmas Carol, but featuring characters in the Batman universe?  Yes, please!  Batman, Noel is just that- a twist on the classic tale, with ol' Batty himself as . . . the scrooge!  He gets visits from 'spirits' of the past (Catwoman), present (Superman), and future (the Joker), which each play their part in showing him how far astray he's gone from his original days.  He is, indeed, the Dark Knight- but perhaps his decades-long fight against the underworld has made him just a little too dark, and it takes some frightful experiences to snap him back to reality. 

It's hard to cross classic stories like this into such an 'alien' universe, but overall, it's well done.  There are obvious liberties and interpretations taken to make the match fit, but it's forgivable.  Bermejo's art is top-notch; I think he's my favorite comic artist.  Each page is amazing- the details are everywhere, and the characters beautifully done.  The final produce is quite good, and well worth a read.  Like most graphic novels, it's a quick read, too- easily done in about an hour.

Merry Christmas, Gotham!

Rating: A

The Hobbit (An Unexpected Journey)

Can it be 11 years since Middle-Earth first ventured on the big screen?  In 2001, Peter Jackson released The Fellowship of the Ring, the first in the Lord of the Rings saga- a movie trilogy that went on to be wildly successful and extremely respected.  Fast forward to 2012, and at long last, we get the first Tolkien story in the saga- The Hobbit.  Why did it take so long?  The director changed a few times, and different studios owned the rights to make and distribute the movie, respectively, so it took a while to work out those squabbles.  But, finally, Jackson returned to helm the saga- and decided to break The Hobbit into three movies, the first of which was released a few weeks ago.  How did the first installment turn out?  Read on, my friend- read on!

I won't get into detailed plot review here; I'll just say that The Hobbit is a story of how Bilbo Baggins joined a small band of dwarves (and Gandalf the wizard) on their quest to reclaim their homeland (the Lonely Mountain- an ancient kingdom called Erebor) from the dragon Smaug.  On that journey, Bilbo encounters Gollum, and obtains (quite by accident) the one ring that gets his nephew Frodo into no small degree of excitement many years later in the Lord of the Rings.  This time around, since three movies are covering just one novel, Jackson throws in a lot of back-story, too, which is (I'm told) true to Tolkien's universe, but not necessarily discussed in the novel.  He's been criticized for that, but I think it's justified (more on that later).

As I watched the movie, I couldn't help but appreciate Jackson's plight.  He had a massive following from the first three movies, which raised expectations to wild heights.  Now, he had to go back and tell the "origin story" to an audience brimming with anticipation.  I think he did a good job- here are a few thoughts (in bullet form, for some reason):
- the movie has many similarities to The Fellowship of the Ring.  It features a grand, epic journey, starting from Bag End (the Baggins home), passing through woods, mountains, underground mines, and encountering many people (like dwarves, elves, orcs, goblins, giant eagles).  
- the movie is extremely epic.  Some say "melodramatic"- and that may be the more appropriate word- but I'll use the word epic.  Everything is epic- extremely grandiose.  At times, I confess, I thought it overdone, but as I look back on the original trilogy, it mirrors what was done there.  So, anybody complaining about that forgets that it's simply a continuation of style from the first three movies.
- some have complained about telling The Hobbit in three parts.  I can see two parts, easily- three might be a stretch, but time will tell.  It gives Jackson a chance to delve more into this amazing world, and visually present back story only mentioned (or implied) in the books.  The Lord of the Rings movies, by necessity, had to omit a large amount of material, so here Jackson gets a chance to include more of the story.  I, for one, enjoyed that, and I think fans of Middle-Earth will, too.
- critics have panned this movie, calling it sprawling, overdone, etc.  Are they justified?  In a sense, I understand, but I think The Hobbit suffers primarily from one thing: overblown expectations.  I saw it in the Star Wars prequels, in the final Batman movie (The Dark Knight Rises), and I see it here. When a director produces a movie (or several movies) that blow people away, people expect more, and more, and more.  If that same director then creates a movie of the same quality as the others, people are (for some reason) disappointed.
- here, Jackson has a problem- The Hobbit story clearly has less at stake than The Lord of the Rings.  In the latter, the fate of Middle-Earth is in the balance; in the former, a small band is trying to reclaim their home.  In a sense, I can see people being disappointed for this reason, but again, that's the story, so don't blame the director for that.

Conclusion: if you loved The Lord of the Rings movies, you'll like this one, too.  If you found the first three offerings overly dramatic, drawn-out, or boring, you'll feel the same about The Hobbit.

One final comment: a good review (which discusses much of the above in a better manner) can be found here.

Rating: A

The Town Below the Ground (Jan Andrew Henderson)

One of my many issues: when I travel, I frequently pick up books of local interest.  During a recent trip to Edinburgh, I was enchanted by the tour of the real Mary King's Close (highly recommended if you visit that city), and picked up a few books on the topic.  The Town Below the Ground tells the story of the lower levels of Edinburgh- now sealed off and underground, though initially at street level.  It's amazing how much "old city" is underneath the street of the modern town.  Endless chambers and narrow passageways still exist underground, and this book tells a bit of their story.

The book is a bit of a hodgepodge.  The first half is history, but a very quick overview.  It covers (among other things) the unique geography of the city, and how the steeply sloping hills (and lack of space due to overcrowding) led city designers to start burrowing into the hills on which Edinburgh is built, creating lots of "underground" homes.  It also discusses the bridges built between hills, to create a relatively level city, and the resulting decision to create chambers and dwellings underneath those bridges, creating a unique environment.

The second half is a collection of legends and reported hauntings related to the underground town.  Rather unrelated to the first section, it was interesting, but seemed a bit out of place.

This work had great potential, but failed to deliver on some fronts.  First, the history section isn't very in-depth; it's about the same amount as you receive on an hour tour of Mary King's Close.  Not bad, but disappointing- I was hoping for something more detailed and informative.  Second, the author is relatively free with the use of the term "underground."  Several places, she (I think it's a she) acknowledges that the chambers, initially, weren't underground, but either under bridges or built into the side of steep hills.  Over time, in some places these areas became underground, but they weren't always.  It's being a bit confusing and sensationalist implying that they always were- and that bothered me.  The real history is fascinating enough without hyperbole, and more clarity on the matter would have been appreciated.  Third, just a map or two of Edinburgh in the book would have been tremendously helpful.  The author throws around area names and street names assuming the reader is familiar- a simple map would have been nice.

While there were some shortcomings, this was an extremely fast and interesting read.  Any visitors to Edinburgh would probably enjoy their visit more if they read this book first.

Rating: B-

The Lord God Made Them All (James Herriot)

It's more of the same- and that's a good thing- from James Herriot.  The fourth collection of Herriot's adventures, The Lord God Made Them All, takes place (mostly) in the post-WWII period of Britain.  And, like the previous offerings, it's a wonderful recollection of Herriot's experiences as a vet in the Yorkshire Dales- the triumphs, the heartbreaks, and the laugh-out-loud situations he encountered regularly.

In this volume, Herriot recounts two trips he took- one over sea, tending sheep on their way to Russia, and one by air, taking cattle to Turkey- and both turn out to be high adventures.  Most of the rest of the stories are the "same old" Dales stories, but again, that's a good thing.  My personal favorite in this volume is the goat who ate 293 tomatoes in one afternoon and was none the worse for it.

All of Herriot's offerings are remarkably similar, both in style and quality- if you like one, you'll like them all.

Rating: A

The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (James Hogg)

Set in Scotland in the early 1700s, The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner features a man who has taken Calvinist doctrine to the extreme, with horrific consequences.  Calvinist teachings hold that a man is justified based not on man's works, but entirely on God's grace.  In the story, the main character takes that one step too far, and draws an erroneous conclusion: since our justification in Christ is complete, nothing we do can be thought of as wrong.  The man is then visited by a mysterious stranger (rather obviously Satan), who builds on this idea and puts him on the path of becoming a murderer "in the name of God."  He kills several people, to include his own brother.  His (unknowingly) Satanic dealings eventually destroy his life, and he ends up passing away shortly after some of his worst crimes.  He keeps a journal about his experiences, which is found on his corpse about a century later.

The author of Confessions learns this story and reconstructs it based on the journal.  He tells it in a novel way- first, he presents a reconstruction of the events; then, he presents the journal in its original form; finally, he tells the reader how he came by the journal in the first place.  As the introduction says, "The whole book is, in a sense, written backwards."

How was it?  Overall, I thought it was great.  I see elements in here similar to Crime and Punishment- this idea that maybe you can commit crimes for good reasons (though that never seems to work out for good, in either story).  I also saw a general gothic fiction undertone to the novel- the psychological terror of Satan's manipulations (and how the man twisted it to fit it into God's purposes, or what he thought were God's purposes) is top-notch.  Good stuff overall- an appropriate cautionary tale.

Though it was good, at times, it was a hard read for several reasons:
1) A knowledge of the history of the time period is certainly necessary for full understanding; the version I read includes many footnotes to aid comprehension.
2) Knowledge of Calvinist doctrine is also required; again, footnotes assist, but first-hand knowledge is better.
3) It's very hard to read when the author reproduces a conversation in "proper Scottish"- it may as well be another language (and, indeed, some of the footnotes 'translate' into something we understand).

Overall, I recommend this.  I'll end with a quote from the novel, that I feel perfectly captures the point:
"Religion is a sublime and glorious thing, the bonds of society on earth, and the connector of humanity with the Divine nature; but there is nothing so dangerous to man as the wresting of any of its principles, or forcing them beyond their due bounds: this is of all others the readiest way to destruction.  Neither is there anything so easily done.  There is not an error into which a man can fall which he may not press Scripture into his service as proof of the probity of . . ."

Rating: A-

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter

Having enjoyed the book immensely, I eagerly anticipated the movie Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter.  Did it meet expectations?  Sadly, no.

Let me back up and say, as a rule, that I don't need book adaptations to match the book exactly.  I understand the need to alter the story to fit the big screen.  That said, I was surprised by just how different the movie was from the book.  Many changes seemed absolutely needless.  Some changes to "ramp up the action" were understandable, but many others were not.  The action was good, and the casting was good, but overall I felt the movie was a shell of the book, which is sad, because the book was wonderful.  The typical experience holds true yet again- the book is better than the movie.  Would I have enjoyed this more had I watched the movie first?  I can't say- I suppose so- but if I were you, I'd devour the book and ignore the movie.

Rating: C

A Briefer History of Time (Stephen Hawking)

My British reading list contains three science selections, and I decided to finally tackle one.  Science interests me, but I find most texts in this area rather boring, so I wasn't looking forward to it.  I was pleasantly surprised.

A Briefer History of Time is a condensed and significantly revised version of Hawking's A Brief History of Time (published ~30 years ago).  The newer version is only slightly shorter, but updated to both appeal to a broader audience, and include major advances made in understanding in the past three decades.  It covers a range of topics, to include relativity, quantum physics, wormholes, time travel, and string theory.  It discusses each at an extremely high, non-technical level.  I'd be lying if I said I understood everything- but I did learn a bit from this.  It's a surprisingly fast read at ~150 pages, and an interesting "foundation" book if you're interested in these topics.  One surprising (to me) conclusion is that we have so many "holes" in our current theories- there are so many observations made that don't quite agree with our models.  There are lots of inexplicable things going on.  Will we ever understand them?  Will it matter if we do?  I don't know- but it's fun to think about.

One final comment here: the universe is a mighty weird place, yet amazingly beautiful.  The fact that life exists at all, or even inanimate things like the stars and planets, seems a miracle.  It's good to think about this as we learn more about some of the "guts" of our universe. 

Rating: B

A little bit of eloquence

Long have I bemoaned the degenerecy into which conversational English has fallen.  Where is the eloquence; where is the variety?  I yearn for the days of vibrant diatribe.  The English language has thousands of words at our disposal, yet we use so few.*  A poignant illustration of the problem: last year I overheard a colleague say "OMG."  Now, this colleague has a MBA, so it's reasonable to assume there's a level of education there, yet (apparently) this person thought it totally acceptable to "text" out loud.  Is that how far we've fallen?  Are we no longer capable of flowery discourse; of adroit elocution?  I could take the standard position and blame TV, video games, or Tennessee public schools, but I'm going to take the high road and blame Bruce.**

Literature, sadly, is no different.  Today's works don't hold a candle to the creative musings of the past.  Consider several examples taken from recent readings:

Boring: "Stop this nonsense."
Interesting: "Have done with this rhapsody of impertinence." - The Castle of Otranto (1764)

Boring: "He started snoring loudly."
Interesting: "He began, in truth, to sound a nasal bugle of no ordinary calibre." - The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (1824)

Boring: "His surname was Cruncher; his Christian name, Jerry."
Interesting: "His surname was Cruncher, and on the youthful occasion of his renouncing by proxy the works of darkness, in the easterly parish church of Houndsditch, he had received the added appellation of Jerry."- A Tale of Two Cities (1859)

See what I mean?  See?  We're so utterly lost in today's world.  What do we fear?  Why is it acceptable to say "sup" but somehow wrong to say "a very fine salutations to you, ho ho!"  It's as though pervasive use of multi-syllabic, interesting, and/or little-used words are counted as an unspoken detriment to our reputation.  Sheesh.  And they say we're getting better.  In 100 years we'll be grunting and pointing- if you don't believe me, listen in on two engineers talking some time.  The explosion of technology and communication methods has occurred, ironically, in conjunction with noticeable decrease in communication ability.  We now have more ways to talk, but fewer things to say- or, at least, fewer words to use during a typical verbal exchange.  Already I tire of my rant.  Peace out, fools.  Word up.

*probably- I'm too tired to research it.
**this one guy I work with.

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter (Seth Grahame-Smith)

The danger of doing anything excessively is that it can dull the senses.  For example, living in Europe, I've become somewhat immune to the beauty of cathedrals, due to the number I've visited.  Their elegance doesn't diminish with each new trip- just my appreciation of it.  Variety is the spice of life, so even the most stunning object can become mundane when frequently visited.  Reading is no different- I've read a lot of books this year, and many good ones, but I've rarely been blown away, perhaps due to the frequency of my readings.  My latest selection, however, knocked my socks off, and I never saw it coming.

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter is a highly unusual work.  Too fantastic to be historical fiction, yet too factual to be pure fiction, some have termed it "mashup" fiction.  It's basically a biography of Abraham Lincoln- his birth in Kentucky, formative years in Indiana and Illinois, presidency in later life- but with a serious twist: he hunts vampires.  Why?  Because his mother, sister, and others dear to him were killed by them.  Abe learns of vampires' existence by overhearing a conversation between his father and a vampire; he later learns that vampires exist in vast numbers all over the world, and that in America, there are essentially "good" and "bad" bloodsuckers.  One of the former befriends Abe, and teaches him the tricks of the vampire hunting trade, and informs him periodically of the location of the more notorious bad vamps.  Fueled by both passion over lost loved ones, and a desire for justice, Abe sets out to rid America of all of the monsters.  His avenging quests are inter-weaved with his true life story, so you end up learning a lot about him as you enjoy the obviously fantastic tale.

This work is of surprising quality- the 330 pages flew by.  It was vastly entertaining, and highly recommended.  A movie by the same name has been released; I have yet to view it, but it's now high on my list.     

Rating: A+

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance

One of my admittedly guilty pleasures is enjoying bad movies solely because they feature flaming skeletons.  Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance is one such movie.  Was there a good plot?  No!  Decent character development?  Absolutely not!  Horrible theology and cheesy dialogue?  Heck yes!  So, what was redeeming about this?  It has a flaming skeleton riding a motorcycle.

I enjoyed the first Ghost Rider movie more (though it suffered from much the same problems); it had a bit of back-story and development, at least.  This one was notably worse, though there were some nice colors and scenery.  Random trivia: this is "kind of" a reboot of the franchise, though it featured the same actor (Nicolas Cage) as the first movie.  Everyone else was different, to include filming style- this time around, it was a bit choppy.  This film was also darker and grittier. 

It'd fail over all, but the flaming skeleton gives this a:

Rating: C-

Ivanhoe (Sir Walter Scott)

Ivanhoe, by Sir Walter Scott, is a tale much loved.  It concerns Wilfred, a Saxon Knight returning from the Third Crusade, and his quest to claim his lands (taken by the Normans) and his love, the Lady Rowena, who is under the care of his father Cedric.  Prince John, with designs on the throne while Richard I is away on Crusade, factors heavily in the tale, as does the Lion Heart himself.  Robin Hood plays a large part, as does the evil Templar Knight Brian Bois-de-Guilbert, along with Isaac & Rebecca of York, Jews much disdained in Christian England.

I've read that Scott invented, or at least reinvented, the historical fiction genre, so his depictions are supposed to be reasonably accurate.  They have shortcomings, but aren't too bad.  It's interesting (in a sad way) to see how poorly Jews were treated by Christians in this era, and how Saxons viewed the conquering Normans in Medieval England.

I have very mixed feelings about this work.  The prose is excellent- more eloquent than modern times, without being as difficult as Dickens.  Scott begins each chapter with a poem pulled from different sources, which I loved, but sometimes gave away what would happen.  The plot is good.  The characters, too, were wonderful.  My favorites were Cedric's jester, Wamba, who displayed an unusual amount of wit for a 'fool,' and Friar Tuck, Robin Hood's friar.  A lot of good stuff was to be found here.  Still, that said, something was off here, and I had a hard time figuring out what.  I think, in the end, the plot was delivered in a way that failed to build suspense.  The identity of Robin Hood & King Richard are not immediately revealed to the reader, but it's pretty obvious, so it wasn't a shocker when you found out the truth.  Some fights were described in a very anti-climactic way, and Scott would "pull out" of the story, and say things like "let the reader understand, that what I'm about to elaborate is in every way conceivable as having happened in this period."  I felt as though I had trouble immersing myself in this world, being often "pulled out" and reminded that I'm reading a recollection.  So, this is a work I wanted to give an A, or even A+, but in light of these things, I'll have to settle for something a little lower.

In the end, Scott is a good author, and I hope to read more in the future.   And, as a final thought, here is my favorite poem that fronted one chapter:

The hottest horse will oft be cool,
The dullest will show fire;
The friar will often play the fool,
The fool will play the friar

So true!

Rating: A-

The Turn of the Screw (Henry James)

The Turn of the Screw is considered to be among the best ghost stories ever written.  It concerns a governess, charged with the care of two orphaned children in an old manor home, as their guardian (an Uncle) lives elsewhere.  The governess sees two ghosts on the premises, at various times, who she subsequently discovers are previous employees of said Uncle, both now deceased, who (it's implied) committed great acts of evil while in the house, perhaps even with the children the governess is hired to educate.  I'll say no more, for fear of spoiling the ending.

This work certainly succeeds in keeping the reader in suspense- I made the mistake of reading it late at night, and my wife's unexpected entrance into the room almost sent me through the roof.  It was haunting, disturbing, and, in the end, a bit mystifying- the conclusion left the reader in suspense.  Perhaps that was the point, though I would have preferred more closure.  The prose was, at times, difficult to read; save for that, the work is highly worthwhile- for those interested in the macabre.

Rating: A