Review: Love Letters to the Dead

When I picked up Ava Dellaira's Love Letter's to the Dead, a book that came to me through recommendations on Amazon, I was intrigued.  The epistolary form isn't a type of novel I come across all too often - in fact, I can count the number of them I've read on one hand.  While I enjoyed the wonderfully poignant book, and thought initially it was a great idea for a novel, I confess I was disappointed by the similarity of the plot to Stephen Chbosky's The Perks of Being a Wallflower.  In truth, while there were small differences between the family lives of Dellaira's main character, Laurel, and Chbosky's Charlie, by the end of the book I felt like the only real difference was the fact that the two characters were of separate genders. 

Although this coming-of-age story does bear similarities to the earlier high school set novel of Dellaira's mentor, perhaps those do not matter.  Perhaps the existence of Dellaira's novel is still important.  Reading it, I felt the exploration of sexual abuse was perhaps more in depth than in Chbosky's Perks and that the book would be informative and helpful to any teenagers who might find themselves or know someone in a similar situation.  With a female protagonist too, the book speaks well to young girls. 

The idea of the novel, Laurel writing letters to dead celebrities, was what first convinced me to make the purchase.  I felt there was a lot of potential for comedy as well as more sincere interactions.  While there was perhaps little humour in the letters, I enjoyed them nonetheless.  The choice of celebrities was diverse to an extent, but maybe a little too old for the teenage audience who may not be familiar with Johnny Cash, Judy Garland and their peers.  

Overall, this was a heartfelt - and heart-wrenching - exploration of grief and coping mechanisms which despite the melancholy plot was a tremendous read.  Perhaps it lacked the development of writing style that Chbosky's Charlie goes through in the course of The Perks of Being a Wallflower, but that didn't lessen its impact. 

Review: The Book of Life

It's been an age since my last review, I know.  But I finally found the time to read The Book of Life by Deborah Harkness.  The third book in Harkness’ All Souls Trilogy was one that I had eagerly awaited for the best part of a year, and on the whole it certainly did not disappoint.  I know the title makes it sound a bit philosophical; I can assure you, though there is a strong focus on origins and morals, humanity and belonging, the book is anything but.  As the third in a series, I should probably expand a little on the trilogy as a whole.  The series begins with A Discovery of Witches, and as the title suggests, it’s clearly fantastical in genre.  But, as the trilogy has gone on and developed, I feel as though it is less securely seated in that genre, and actually falls into three different categories simultaneously.  While the books are set (primarily) in modern day, the past is featured prominently in the books.  The heroine of the trilogy, witch Diana Bishop, is a historian and scholar who therefore provides much of the focus on history and helps introduce the books as historical novels.  The third genre, romance, comes to the fore much more in the second novel, Shadow of Night, and in the subsequent book.

Obviously, featuring supernatural beings, with a romance between a vampire and a non-vampire to boot, the All Souls Trilogy bears a remarkable resemblance to The Twilight Saga.  During the first two books, this wasn’t very bothersome – the differences between the two series were big enough that I didn’t actually notice how similar Harkness’ work was until I began reading The Book of Life.  While plot-wise the main similarities are limited to the romance between the series protagonists, Matthew de Clairmont (a vampire) and Diana Bishop, and the difficulties that come with different creatures living side-by-side (the wolf pack and the Cullens, anyone?), I did notice that Harkness also had a love triangle much like Edward, Bella and Jacob – no clues as to which unlucky characters are involved in the relationship in the All Souls Trilogy though.  For many in the generation of Twilight readers, I’m sure this has been a common theme they have come across in various works.  I find I’m a little bit fed up of love triangles if I’m honest.  Luckily, the love triangle in The Book of Life doesn’t form as much of the plot of the All Souls Trilogy as it does in Stephanie Meyer’s books.

Despite the semblance to The Twilight Saga, as novels aimed at adults rather than teenagers, the All Souls Trilogy is much subtler in dealing with the typical ‘dark fantasy’ issues that come from love between two people who aren’t from the same species.  Over the course of the three books, this occurs alongside other storylines, the most important of which are finding and understanding an historical manuscript known as Ashmole 782 and helping Diana to use her magic.  Because these other plots form such a large part of the narrative, the angst-love issues are much less overbearing, leaving what romance remains as quite charming. With my main criticism taken care of, let’s take a look at my biggest praise: the clever way Deborah Harkness has woven history into her novels.

Historian, Diana Bishop, studies medieval alchemical texts.  That alone is quite an unusual theme in the majority of fantasy novels, or at least in those that I have read.  What's more though, is that the alchemical principles Harkness' protagonist studies and explains, are actually integral to the plot of the trilogy as well as creating the interesting world us readers find ourselves in.  The importance of these scientific, alchemical details are seem to be an influential factor in the design of the book jackets.  Even the British cover of The Book of Life resembles a DNA helix.  As amazing as these covers look (even if I am more partial to the British ones that I have in my collection), remember not to judge a book by its cover.  Harkness' trilogy is far more than an account of alchemical procedures.

SPOILER ALERT

One of the things I really enjoyed through the series as a whole was how it almost felt timeless.  Although the main events of Shadow of Night are thoroughly dated due to Diana and Matthew's trip into the 1500s, the parts of the trilogy that take place in modern day feel like they could have taken place five years ago or in five years time.  The fact that Diana Bishop has the ability to timewalk, leaving readers wondering what other times she may eventually take a tour through - the future, perhaps? - only adds to this feeling, along with the numerous settings throughout the trilogy.  Courcelles-de-Touraine (France), Oxford (UK), New Haven (Connecticut, USA), London (UK), Prague (Czech Republic), Venice (Italy) and Madison (Wisconsin, USA) are just a few of the stand-out places Diana and Matthew visit, keeping the novels fresh and exciting, with a host of different characters and atmospheres.  Sept-Tours (the castle at Courelles-de-Touraine) and the use of old educational institutions such as Oxford University and Yale University help to base the trilogy in the past, bringing a sense of elegance and exclusivity.

A second surprise was Harkness' incredibly forward thinking, featuring gay relationships, depicted in non-stereotypical ways.

On the whole, Harkness' trilogy feels sophisticated, a perfect amalgamation of various themes and issues.  I've not read widely in the dark fantasy genre, but The Book of Life certainly feels more light-hearted than the books I am familiar with.  This series is one that would most likely appeal to any fans of Twilight, the House of Night books or the Night World series, with which it is certainly comparable.

Review: Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D

Given the small break in the airing of Joss Whedon's new TV show due to the coverage of the Winter Olympics, I thought now was the perfect time to look back and evaluate the series so far. When I first heard that a series set in the universe of Marvel's Avengers Assemble was soon to be hitting our TV screens, I was more than excited, particularly when news was released that Mr Whedon would be helming the project. This wouldn't come as a surprise to anybody who knows me away from the internet - I'm a renowned obsessive nerd when it comes to anything remotely superhero-ish, or when it comes to the work of Joss Whedon.

The first few episodes of Whedon's new project obviously aimed to set the scene. We had the use of Clark Gregg (and fellow Avengers Assemble-alum, Cobie Smulders reprising her role as Agent Maria Hill), to tie the series into the Avengers-verse and other Marvel films where the old-fashioned SHIELD agent has appeared, but there were also a host of other characters to be introduced. Whedon handled the introduction of tough-as-nails field agents Grant Ward (played by Brett Dalton) and Melinda May (brought to life by Ming-Na Wen, who is best known for giving the voice to Disney's Mulan and for her part in NBC's E.R.) and scientific geniuses Jemma Simmons (a.k.a. British actress Elizabeth Henstridge) and Leo Fitz (portrayed by Scot Iain De Caestecker) collectively and fondly known as FitzSimmons well, though at the very beginning of the series, each of these characters felt a little like well-seasoned stereotypes. As the series has gone on, this has become less apparent where the backgrounds of these characters, in particular that of the strict and stony Ward, have been explored and the audience has begun to see the multi-faceted aspects of each character. Outsider Skye has been the loose cannon of the series, the character who was blatantly going to cause some rifts in the team and shake things up a little. Again, although this has been obvious since the show began it's run; the episodes have still been enjoyable. Perhaps, though, the under-astounding characterisations of the agency's new operatives can account for the large dip in audience viewing statistics between the airing of the Pilot and the second episode of the season 0-8-4.

Whedon's biggest success though has been keeping the audience on tenterhooks. Not only has there been continuous mystery shrouding Coulson's survival after being stabbed by Loki (played by Tom Hiddleston) in Avengers Assemble, the secret of which was only just been revealed; but there is also secrecy surrounding SHIELD newcomer Skye and her origins, as well as the continued, yet faceless villain of the series, The Clairvoyant. All of these various storylines have been exceedingly well executed, and the majority of the show's audience have, I'm sure, been surprised by how they have unfolded.

AHOY, THERE BE SPOILERS AHEAD

In the most recently aired episode T.R.A.C.K.S, viewers have been left with yet another cliffhanger - the latest in a surprising number for a show that's still got almost half a season left to air. Is this just a ploy for Whedon and company to hang onto their fanbase and ensure we all keep watching, or is there deeper reasoning behind the attack on Skye? If it is a strategy to make sure we all tune in once the Winter Olympics are over, I have to say that Joss Whedon has been successful. However, in light of the revelation that the reason Skye has no surname, was put up for adoption and has no idea where she comes from, is because she is a 084 (an object of unknown origin), perhaps the attack on her has a more vital role to the running storyline of the season. Regardless of the purposes behind this writing, the episode was certainly dramatic and well-performed by all members of the cast.

Stunt-wise, I find no fault with Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, though it should be noted that martial-arts trained Wen performs most of these, while other members of the cast see little action. All the better for Agent May though. In Whedon's show, he has yet again created a gloriously bad-ass female in the male-dominated world of superheroes. The contrast between female characters, blunt and almost cold Melinda May, against hotheaded Skye and prim Jemma Simmons, highlights Joss Whedon's finesse in handling female characters and indeed characters in general. The Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D team have also created nuanced relationships between each and every character. In Coulson and Skye, we see hints of a father/daughter relationship, while there is obviously a deep, platonic friendship between Agent Phil and Melinda May. Conversely, Melinda May has been enjoying a sexual, no ties relationship with fellow field operative, Grant Ward, who also has rather flirtatious, tension-loaded encounters with Skye. FitzSimmons are adorable friends with such an obvious possibility for a romantic relationship that we wonder why they aren't already an item. Behind all of this though is a resounding feeling of companionship between all of the characters, shown clearly in the pranking and teasing sometimes going on in the background.

From the first announcement of Whedon's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D it was obvious that the show was going to be a great opportunity for cameo appearances and links with Marvel's films. Although we've yet to - and are unlikely to ever - have Robert Downey Jr. guest star in an episode, the audience are going to be treated to an appearance by Thor's Lady Sif (played by Jaime Alexander) and there has been an episode which dealt with the aftermath of the battle in London with the Dark Elves in Thor: The Dark World. Taking the audience to new places, with a different setting for every episode is perhaps one of the big successes of Whedon's new TV show, as every week the episode is exponentially different to the previous one. Perhaps, though, if ABC order a second season of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D we will be treated to even more crossovers with the wider Marvel universe.

With half a season left to air, there is plenty of potential for this TV show, and in no way can I see it ever becoming less enjoyable. It has been a new show I have definitely liked. My advice to people only just beginning the series, or just considering watching, is to persevere through the first few episodes in the knowledge that Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is safe in Joss Whedon's hands. However, if you've never liked Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Avengers Assemble, Firefly or indeed anything else that Whedon has done, don't expect to like this show.

Review: Bridget Jones Diary

Many months ago now, I dipped into my Student Loan to purchase myself a copy of Bridget Jones' Diary by Helen Fielding. Having seen both the films based off of Helen's books a number of times, I was sure I would very much enjoy reading about our favourite publisher/news reporter/singleton-turned-happy-in-love-gal, particularly as I was one of many fans to rejoice at the news that there was a third film in the works, and a new book soon to be hitting the shelves. As I write this I am almost finished with Fielding's second book in this series and contemplating whether I will be buying a copy of the third book, Mad About the Boy.

I should probably say that I'm assuming that anyone who happens to read this has not been living under a rock for the last fifteen years and therefore has at least some idea of what this series is about. If not, have no fear (Zorro is here and he can quickly bring you up to speed).

Bridget Jones is your average 30 year old woman. Living in London and working as an assistant at a publishing house, Bridget begins a diary that recounts her woes and misfortunes through her career, relationships and unsuccessful dieting attempts.

Now that that small summary is out of the way, let's dig deeper...

Beginning the first book - having bought myself the omnibus edition which also included Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason - I was delighted to find that the film adaptation had stayed so close to the original work of Helen Fielding. Despite not watching the film for a few years, I could easily recognise portions of dialogue which were exactly the same, making me love the films that much more. As an avid reader, films, or indeed tv shows for that matter, that stay very true to their origins satisfy me more than a large serving of chocolate sponge pudding and chocolate custard, which is saying something since I've been craving that particular dessert since the start of Spring term.

Moving on from my own eating habits, let's have a look at Bridget's. In today's size-pressured society, low self-esteem and body confidence is something I'm sure we can all relate to. Bridget's struggle with her weight and diet is both comforting and relatable. I can assure you, that although I may only have just turned twenty a few months back, I found I could picture myself in Bridget's shoes very clearly and have to commend Helen Fielding for her creation of a character that although fundamentally unique, can also be recognised within ourselves.

What's more, although we are loathe to admit it, we all make rather stupid mistakes sometimes or say things which are deemed particularly 'blonde'. Bridget also embodies this trait, perhaps more spectacularly than some of us, which makes the books all the more enjoyable. One particular incident which was not part of the film adaptation of Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason springs to mind here.

SPOILER ALERT

Whilst trying to advance with her career, Bridget briefly delves into the world of newspaper reporting and interviewing. I was pleasantly surprised by the part that Colin Firth plays in the second book of Helen Fielding's series, being Bridget's first - and last - celebrity interviewee in an embarrassingly awkward meeting in which Bridget repeatedly wants to know more about that scene in Pride and Prejudice. Despite the awkwardness, the write up - a complete, unedited transcript of the recording - published in the Independent is highly amusing, and all the more so since it is something that was left out of the film script, or perhaps later cut during editing.

In terms of the modern spin on Pride and Prejudice, it's artfully done in my opinion. The comparisons between Mr Darcy and everyone's favourite boyfriend of Bridget's, Mark Darcy, and those of Mr Wickham and womaniser Daniel Cleaver are subtle unless one is looking outright for their similarities. If you're completely engrossed in the story and in the characters, it's possible to overlook the inspiration for the story, particularly as Bridget Jones represents a different kind of heroine than Elizabeth Bennett.

All in all both books have been enjoyable to read, with many such moments. My only qualm with both of Fielding's books is that they are not the kind of literature one can pick up and read all day when it's pouring with rain and you're shut inside. Unfortunately, the diary format begins to feel a bit too repetitive after an hour or so, and the books become something that you pick up every few days and peruse more casually. However, if that's the kind of reader you are, then Bridget Jones Diary and Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason are perfect for you. If you have seen either of the film adaptations for these books, I would instantly recommend them, regardless of whether you even enjoyed the movies simply because films and books will always be different. If you liked the films, you're bound to enjoy the books as they are fundamentally the same. However, if you did not enjoy the movies, say because they're mushy chick-flicks, the books do have a different feel, as they are more character-intensive.

Does this mean that I - or indeed you too - should return to the world of Bridget Jones and continue her story with Mad About the Boy?

As a large Mark Darcy fan, I'm not sure I personally will be able to cope with his absence in Helen Fielding's third Bridget Jones book. However, if you've enjoyed the first two offerings of this series, I see no reason why you shouldn't enjoy the third - unless you're like me, of course, and are far too emotionally attached to believe Mark Darcy could ever die and widow Bridget.