And the Soldiers Sang

And The Soldiers Sang. J. Patrick Lewis. Illustrated by Gary Kelley. 2011. Creative Editions. 32 pages.

In September, three hundred gangly innocents shipped out by Channel steamer from Southampton to Boulogne. Then, wedged in by heat, sweat, and stink, we rode for hours by cattle car at cattle speed, wheels click-clacking across France. The train hissed to a stop, and its slatted doors flew open. We marched ten miles through Belgium to the Western Front--a planet away from Cardiff, Wales, and the meadows of my youth.

Is it a picture book? Is it a graphic novel? I'm not sure I have the answer to that. If it is a picture book, it is one of those 'for older readers.' This short book is powerfully descriptive. In just thirty or so pages, readers get the chance to imagine what war was like. It was not pretty.  (The war in question is World War I.)

This is a fictional account of the war. The war is seen through the eyes of one young man who participated in the 'Christmas truce' of 1914. If you're expecting a happy, happy book, this isn't for you. It's more realistic than that, more honest than that. It's an interesting contrast really, seeing those moments of war and moments of peace so close together. I think this is a book that invites you to think.

This is my first book for the War Through the Generations Challenge.

Read And the Soldiers Sang:
  • If you love stories that are told just as much through art--illustration--as words/text.
  • If you are interested in war stories.
  • If you are interested in World War I.
  • If you are looking for bittersweet Christmas stories. 

© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Death At Wentwater Court

Death at Wentwater Court. Carola Dunn. 1994. Kensington. 254 pages.

"He'll come to a bad end, mark my words, and she won't lift a finger to stop him. It's the little ones I'm worried about." The stout lady heaved a sigh, her old-fashioned mantle, a hideous yellowish green, billowing about her. "Four already and another due any day now."
Daisy Dalrymple was constantly amazed at the way total strangers insisted on regaling her with their life stories, their marital misfortunes, or their children's misdeeds. Not that she objected. One day she was going to write a novel, and then every hint of human experience might come in handy.

I found Death at Wentwater Court a pleasantly cozy read. Was it the best mystery ever? Probably not. But it was an enjoyable way to spend an afternoon. What I liked best about this mystery was the heroine. I just really enjoyed getting to know Daisy Dalrymple. And this novel--the first in a series--made me want to spend more time with her. I liked her personality, her character. And I also liked her love interest, Alec Fletcher, the inspector of the crime(s). Their conversations were quite fun! For those that like the lightest touches of romance with their mysteries, I think this one won't disappoint. I also enjoyed the setting of this one--England in the 1920s.

So Daisy Dalrymple is a journalist and photographer. She has come to Wentwater Court to write an article and take some lovely photographs. She is just getting to know the family--for better or worse, just beginning to make some observations about their personal lives--their troubles--when the worst happens. One of their guests is murdered. The murder isn't obvious, the body is found in such a way that it looks like an accident. But Daisy and her camera discover the truth....that a crime has been committed. What isn't obvious--to Daisy--is who did it.

Can Alec and Daisy solve this one?

Read Death at Wentwater Court
  • If you enjoy cozy mysteries
  • If you enjoy mysteries set in Britain
  • If you enjoy reading Dorothy Sayers and Agatha Christie
  • If you enjoy historical mysteries
  • If you're looking for a very light, very quick read

© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

The Maid of Fairbourne Hall

The Maid of Fairbourne Hall. Julie Klassen. 2012. Bethany House. 416 pages.

London
August 1815
He is reading my letters now too...
Margaret Elinor Macy sat at her dressing table, heart pounding. Her face in the looking glass shone pale beneath curly dark hair, her light blue eyes anxious. She glanced from her reflection to the letter in her hand. The seal had been pried open and unsuccessfully re-pressed. Her mother's new husband had obviously begun checking her post--perhaps fearful the next invitation she received would not be to a ball but rather to take refuge in another house, out of reach and out from under his power. 


Did I love it? Yes. I'm not sure I would say that I loved, loved, loved it. But I definitely loved it. It was a good, clean historical romance set during one of my favorite, favorite time periods--the regency. The heroine, Margaret Macy, is determined to escape her new stepfather's influence. He wants her to marry his nephew. They're both after her inheritance which she'll receive on her next birthday. The nephew is determined to do whatever it takes to get her to marry him. So she flees her home--with her maid, Joan. (Joan was fired for 'stealing.' She was innocent.) Determined to find a hiding place, a place she can be safe from harassment until her birthday, she becomes a maid. She just happens to become a maid at the home of one of her former suitors. She didn't marry Nathaniel Upchurch--the former suitor--because she was more attracted to his older brother, Lewis. (Lewis did flirt with her, but then again, he'll flirt with just about any girl once or twice. It never means what the woman thinks it means.) She is wearing a disguise, and she does barely have contact with the family. But. Still she's curious. Will either brother recognize her now? Now that she's emptying chamber pots and such?! And if they do recognize her, will they help her?

I enjoyed this one. I did. I really thought it was great fun. A good, light romance with interesting characters. (There's even a poet pirate.)

Read The Maid of Fairbourne Hall
  • If you're a fan of Julie Klassen. If you enjoyed--or loved--any of her previous novels--Lady of Milkweed Manor, The Apothecary's Daughter, The Silent Governess, The Girl in the Gatehouse--then chances are good The Maid of Fairbourne Hall will NOT disappoint.
  • If you're a fan of Regency romances (like Georgette Heyer, etc.)
  • If you're a fan of clean historical romances
  • If you're a fan of inspirational and/or Christian romances (of the historical variety)
  • If you enjoy romances where the heroine wears a disguise

© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Library Loot: First Trip in January

New Loot:

The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson
Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
The Peach Keeper by Sarah Addison Allen
The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan
The American Heiress by Daisy Goodwin
The Door Into Summer by Robert Heinlein
Shine: An Anthology of Near-future Optimistic Science Fiction
A Finders-keepers Place by Ann Haywood Leal
The Moorchild by Eloise McGraw
Bud, Not Buddy by Christopher Paul Curtis
Rasco and the rats of  NIMH by Jane Leslie Conly
Dominic by William Steig
Abel's Island by William Steig


Leftover Loot:

Double Star by Robert A. Heinlein
The Deception at Lyme by Carrie Bebris
Alanna the First Adventure by Tamora Pierce
Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, translated and adapted by Peter Ackroyd
Caleb's Crossing by Geraldine Brooks
Fire Watch by Connie Willis
Only Time Will Tell by Jeffrey Archer
The Healer's Apprentice by Melanie Dickerson
From the Land of the Moon by Milena Agus; translated from the Italian by Ann Goldstein
Company of Liars by Karen Maitland
The Decameron by Giovanni Boccaccio; translated by Guido Waldman

Library Loot is a weekly event co-hosted by Claire and Marg that encourages bloggers to share the books they’ve checked out from the library. If you’d like to participate, just write up your post-feel free to steal the button-and link it using the Mr. Linky any time during the week. And of course check out what other participants are getting from their libraries


© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

David Copperfield

David Copperfield. Charles Dickens. 1850. 877 pages.

Whether I shall turn out to be the hero of my own life, or whether that station will be held by anybody else, these pages must show.

I wasn't always a fan of Charles Dickens. I wasn't always fond of his writing style--his descriptions, his quirky characters. (Then again, the first few experiences were with the same book--Great Expectations.)  But that began to change last fall when I read Bleak House. And since my re-introduction to him--as an adult--I've since come to LOVE him, really, really love him.

How did I feel about David Copperfield? Well....I definitely liked the novel. I did. There were times I loved it. There were times I didn't love it quite so much. I must admit that there were times I felt David Copperfield (the character) was just STUPID. I mean, completely oblivious and not in touch with reality. Like he was incapable of processing the whole truth even when it was right in front of him. But then there were other times when I actually began to like him. And even when I wasn't exactly "liking" him, the novel was still an interesting read. I wasn't bored. I wasn't tempted to give it up. There were too many characters that I cared about, too many stories that had me hooked.

I know I've said this before. But. I just ADORE the way Dickens writes his characters. I love seeing such a wide, wide, wide variety of characters. I love their oddness, their quirkiness. I love the fact that there's always a few to love, a few to like, a few to hate. Dickens was truly great at writing despicable characters. Like Uriah Heep. Like Edward Murdstone and his sister. Dicken's characters--even his heroes and heroines--have weaknesses.

The (human) character I liked least, and I'm not sure if this was Dicken's intent, was probably Dora. And the chapters where David was smitten (to put it nicely) with her and courting her were probably the most painful to read. Simply because Dora seemed so very, very silly and ridiculous. Should I have more sympathy for her than I do? Should I see past her silly vainness, her selfishness, her childishness?
One thing troubled me much, after we had fallen into this quiet train. It was, that Dora seemed by one consent to be regarded like a pretty toy or plaything. My aunt, with whom she gradually became familiar, always called her Little Blossom; and the pleasure of Miss Lavinia's life was to wait upon her, curl her hair, make ornaments for her, and treat her like a pet child. It was very odd to me; but they all seemed to treat Dora, in her degree, much as Dora treated Jip in his.
I made up my mind to speak to Dora about this; and one day whereon we were out walking (for we were licensed by Miss Lavinia, after a while, to go out walking by ourselves), I said to her that I wished she could get them to behave towards her differently.
'Because, you know, my darling,' I remonstrated, 'you are not a child.'
'There!' said Dora. 'Now you're going to be cross!'
'Cross, my love?'
'I am sure they're very kind to me,' said Dora, 'and I am very happy.'
'Well! But, my dearest life' said I, 'You might be very happy, and yet treated rationally.' (604)
I did NOT care for Jip, by the way.

There was another thing I could have wished; namely, that Jip had never been encouraged to walk about the table-cloth during dinner. I began to think there was something disorderly in his being there at all, even if he had not been in the habit of putting his foot in the salt or the melted butter. (641)

Anyway, David Copperfield is a long novel, but it is a deliciously long novel. I happen to like it more than Little Dorrit but less than Our Mutual Friend. I'm definitely glad I read it. I definitely enjoyed meeting some of these characters.

More of my favorite quotes:

'Gentlemen,' returned Mr. Micawber, 'do with me as you will! I am a straw upon the surface of the deep, and am tossed in all directions by the elephants--I beg your pardon; I should have said elements.' (708)

'Things are changed in this office, Miss Trotwood, since I was an umble clerk, and held your pony; ain't they?' said Uriah, with his sickliest smile. 'But I am not changed, Miss Trotwood.' "Well, sir,' returned my aunt, 'to tell you the truth, I think you are pretty constant to the promise of your youth if that's any satisfaction to you.' (746)

I have often remarked--I suppose everyone has--that one's going away from a familiar place, would seem to be the signal for change in it. (820)
Read David Copperfield
  • If you are a fan of Charles Dickens
  • If you are a fan of other bearded Victorians--Anthony Trollope, Wilkie Collins, etc.
  • If you like detailed stories, rich in description and dialogue
  • If you like keeping up with tons of characters: some quite fun and quirky, some that make you want to boo and hiss, some that you just love and adore.
  • If you like reading long books with substance
  • If you enjoyed the movie adaptation of David Copperfield and are looking for more to enjoy...

© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

To Say Nothing of the Dog

To Say Nothing of the Dog. Connie Willis. 1998. Bantam (Random House). 495 pages.

There were five of us--Carruthers and the new recruit and myself, and Mr. Spivens and the verger. It was late afternoon on November the fifteenth, and we were in what was left of Coventry Cathedral, looking for the bishop's bird stump. Or at any rate I was. 

I gushed about To Say Nothing of the Dog the first time I read it. I did. And I'll probably gush this time too. Because some books are just that good. And if ever a book deserves to be read--if ever an author deserves to be read--it is Connie Willis and her time travel novels. Is To Say Nothing of the Dog a sequel to Doomsday Book? Well....not exactly. The two can be read separately, read in ANY order. (I read To Say Nothing of the Dog first.) Both books share the same world--the same futuristic time-traveling world. There are two characters in To Say Nothing of the Dog that were first introduced in Doomsday Book, Mr. James Dunworthy and Finch. But. For the most part, To Say Nothing of the Dog is a great standalone novel.

Ned Henry narrates the novel. And he does a great job. When we first meet him, he's suffering from time-lag. He's spent too much time--of late--jumping through time. He's not alone. There is someone doing her very, very best to drive EVERYONE in his department crazy. Lady Schrapnell is a woman on a mission--a RICH woman on a mission. And she won't take no for an answer. If Lady Schrapnell volunteers you for a job, well, you stay volunteered until the job is done to her satisfaction. And what does Lady Schrapnell want most of all? The bishop's bird stump. Her project is the rebuilding of Coventry Cathedral--a cathedral destroyed/damaged during World War II. And she HAS to know if the bishop's bird stump was still in the church during the raid. She needs to know if it should be replicated as part of the 'restoration.' So Ned Henry is just one of dozens looking IN THE PAST for the answers as to what happened to the bishop's bird stump.

But that 'mission' becomes almost secondary....when it is 'discovered' that there's been an incongruity. At first they think it's simple, it's easily fixed. One of the time travelers interfered when she shouldn't. But. They'll just send another time traveler to fix that interference, and things should go smoothly. But since the time traveler they send is Ned Henry, since he's suffering from exhaustion and time-lag, since he barely heard his instructions, since he jumped into the Net to avoid being discovered by an angry Lady Schrapnell, nothing is simple. What Ned Henry soon realizes is that his arrival in June 1888 has changed things. His arrival has kept two people from meeting (and subsequently falling in love and marrying), and that's just the start.

But he isn't the only one in the past. He isn't the only time-traveler working to restore things. Verity Kindle. The beautiful Verity Kindle has a role to play as well....

I loved this one. I did. I just LOVED it. It's very different from Doomsday Book. It's a very funny book. Almost playful in a way. It's definitely science fiction. But if you like historical fiction OR mysteries, this one may appeal to you quite a bit!!! Especially if you're a fan of Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers. The more you love Hercule Poirot and Lord Peter Wimsey, well, the more you'll appreciate this one.
I think that's why I loved it EVEN MORE the second time around.

With my love of the Victorian period, my love of cozy mysteries, my love of historical fiction, my love of science fiction, To Say Nothing of the Dog, was just a perfect, perfect match for me. But. I don't think you have to love *all* those things to appreciate (and love) this one. I really don't.

2 Quotes About the bishop's bird stump:

"Perhaps it was removed for safekeeping," he said, looking at the windows. "Like the east windows."
"The bishop's bird stump?" I said incredulously. "Are you joking?"
"You're right," he said. "It isn't the sort of thing you'd want to keep from being blown up. Victorian art!" He shuddered. (7)

I must be getting light-headed from lack of sleep. No one, even badly shell-shocked, would steal it. Or buy it at a jumble sale. This was the bishop's bird stump. Even the munitions scrap iron drive would turn it down. Unless of course someone recognized its potential as a psychological weapon against the Nazis. (12)

About time-lag:

One of the first symptoms of time-lag is a tendency to maudlin sentimentality, like an Irishman in his cups or a Victorian poet cold-sober. (9)

And isn't this the truth:

There is nothing more helpful than shouted instructions, particularly incomprehensible ones. (153)

Verity Kindle on mystery novels:
"Of course they're usually about murder, not robbery, but they always take place in a country house like this, and the butler did it, at least for the first hundred mystery novels or so. Everyone's a suspect, and it's always the least likely person, and after the first hundred or so, the butler wasn't anymore--the least likely person, I mean--so they had to switch to unlikely criminals. You know, the harmless old lady or the vicar's devoted wife, that sort of thing, but it didn't take the reader long to catch on to that, and they had to resort to having the detective be the murderer, and the narrator, even though that had already been done in The Moonstone. The hero did it, only he didn't know it. He was sleepwalking, in his nightshirt, which was rather racy stuff for Victorian times, and the crime was always unbelievably complicated. In mystery novels. I mean, nobody ever ever just grabs the vase and runs, or shoots somebody in a fit of temper, and at the very end, when you think you've got it all figured out, there's one last plot-twist, and the crime's always very carefully thought out, with disguises and alibis and railway timetables and they have to include a diagram of the house in the frontispiece, showing everyone's bedroom and the library, which is where the body always is, and all the connecting doors, and even then you don't have a prayer of figuring it out, which is why they have to bring in a world-famous detective--"
"Who solves it with little gray cells?" I said.
"Yes. Hercule Poirot, that's Agatha Christie's detective, and he says it isn't at all necessary to go running about measuring footprints and picking up cigarette ends to solve mysteries like Sherlock Holmes. That's Arthur Conan Doyle's detective--"
"I know who Sherlock Holmes is." (205)


Well, it wasn't exactly the ending of an Agatha Christie mystery, with Hercule Poirot gathering everyone together in the drawing room to reveal the murderer and impress everyone with his astonishing deductive powers. And it definitely wasn't a Dorothy Sayers, with the detective hero saying to his heroine sidekick, "I say, we make a jolly good detectin' team. How about makin' the partnership permanent, eh, what?" and then proposing in Latin. (431)
Verity and Ned:

She peered at me. "It isn't fair, you know."
"What isn't?" I said warily.
"Your boater. It makes you look just like Lord Peter Wimsey, especially when you tilt it forward like that." (254)

"The first time I ever saw you, I thought, he looks just like Lord Peter Wimsey. You were wearing the boater and--no, that wasn't the first time," she said accusingly. "The first time was in Mr. Dunworthy's office, and you were all covered in soot. You were still adorable, though, even if your mouth was hanging open." (254)

"Lord Peter took a nap," she said. "Harriet watched him sleep, and that's when she knew she was in love with him."
She sat up again. "Of course, I knew it from the second page of Strong Poison, but it took two more books for Harriet to figure it out. She kept telling herself it was all just detecting and deciphering codes and solving mysteries together, but I knew she was in love with him. He proposed in Latin. Under a bridge. After they solved the mystery. You can't propose till after you've solved the mystery. That's a law in detective novels."
She sighed. "It's too bad. 'Placetne, magistra?' he said when he proposed, and then she said, 'Placet.' That's a fancy Oxford don way of saying yes. I had to look it up. I hate it when people use Latin and don't tell you what they mean..." (259)
Read To Say Nothing of the Dog
  • If you like science fiction
  • If you like Victorian literature or historical books (romances, mysteries, etc.) set in Victorian England
  • If you like to laugh
  • If you like reading about time travel
  • If you like Agatha Christie and Hercule Poirot
  • If you like Dorothy L. Sayers and Lord Peter Wimsey
  • If Strong Poison and Gaudy Night are among your favorite books
  • If you like your romances on the light side
  • If you like historical fiction
  • If you like cats
  • If you like well-developed characters
  • If you're looking for a book you don't want to put down...


© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Sunday Salon: Watching Jane

Have you seen the adaptation of Jane Eyre starring Orson Welles and Joan Fontaine? If you have, what did you think of it? Not only as an adaptation. But as a movie. I think it is important to distinguish between the two: you can have an entertaining movie that is charming and delightful but isn't all that faithful in the details of the original novel.

I liked this movie. I did. I really liked it. Is it a faithful adaptation of Charlotte Bronte's novel? Not exactly. It is an interpretation of the story, changes have been made for better or worse.

For example, Mr. Brocklehurst's role has been emphasized. And his villainy can't be missed. Not just in announcing Jane Eyre a liar. Not just as a strict disciplinarian. There's a scene in the movie where Helen Burns' hair is cut because it is curly--naturally curly. Brocklehurst feels that curly hair would encourage vanity--not only in Helen but in the other girls. To 'save her soul' it must be cut. Jane protests. And the result is Helen and Jane being forced to walk around outside in the rain carrying signs that say vain and rebellious. Helen becomes deathly ill as a result of her punishment. Mr. Brocklehurst's villainy was not balanced out by the presence of a kind teacher, Miss Maria Temple. The movie eliminates her role in Jane's life. Instead Brocklehurst's cruelty is balanced out by the fair judgment and tender kindness of a Dr. Rivers. (He's played by John Sutton.) (Mr. Brocklehurst video.)


I was tempted to call this adaptation of Jane Eyre natural. But that would take some explanation! Especially if you've seen it. You know that some of the scenes are OVER-THE-TOP dramatic, nothing natural to them. (I'm thinking especially of when Mr. Rochester is repeatedly telling Jane to say that she will marry him.)

So when the film isn't being super-dramatic, when it's not emphasizing the gothic, I feel there is something natural to the film. In its pacing. In its dialogue. In its character development. In its romance. The film is only 97 minutes long. Too short to hope to capture everything from the novel. But instead of feeling rushed, it feels complete. The abridged story stands perfectly on its own. There are no holes in the story or in the characters.

The romance. I thought it was very well done. I could see Mr. Rochester falling in love with Jane Eyre. And it was easy to see why he was drawn to her. Because the movie captured who Jane was. And I could see Jane Eyre falling in love with Mr. Rochester. So much of Edward's character is revealed through dialogue, so any time it's abridged there is a risk that the essentials will be lost. I didn't feel that to be the case here. Does Orson Welles capture ALL the essential elements of Mr. Rochester? I'm not sure that he does. I mean every adaptation tends to interpret his disposition a little differently. Is this Rochester too dramatic? I wouldn't say that. I mean one or two scenes come to mind that are a little over done. But then again, I think the same could be said of the more recent adaptations. (I'm thinking of Rochester reacting to Jane's leaving him after the big reveal in RAGE.) I happened to love how this Mr. Rochester reacted to Jane's goodbye.

All but the last twenty minutes of the film take place BEFORE the big reveal. At this point I thought Jane stumbling across her cousins and staying in hiding for months a bit unlikely. How could she even have time to get there, receive her inheritance, and return to Edward in such a short amount of time?! And I was right. It wasn't attempted. Instead the movie has Jane taking refuge somewhere else, somewhere perhaps a little unexpected at first. But the more I thought about it, the more the change worked for me. If you've seen this one, I'd be curious what you think of the changes!

Jane and Edward Meeting.
The ending.

© 2012 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews