Sapphire Blue: A Snapshot

Sapphire Blue by Kerstin Gier

"Gwen’s life has been a rollercoaster since she discovered she was the Ruby, the final member of the secret time-traveling Circle of Twelve. In between searching through history for the other time-travelers and asking for a bit of their blood (gross!), she’s been trying to figure out what all the mysteries and prophecies surrounding the Circle really mean.

 

At least Gwen has plenty of help. Her best friend Lesley follows every lead diligently on the Internet. James the ghost teaches Gwen how to fit in at an eighteenth century party. And Xemerius, the gargoyle demon who has been following Gwen since he caught her kissing Gideon in a church, offers advice on everything. Oh, yes. And of course there is Gideon, the Diamond. One minute he’s very warm indeed; the next he’s freezing cold. Gwen’s not sure what’s going on there, but she’s pretty much destined to find out." (from Goodreads)

The subject: a girl trying to juggle a time-travel mystery, a hot-and-cold romance, a snooty cousin and a snarky gargoyle.

The setting: present-day Britain, along with a whole slew of different times and places!

Shutter speed: Slower than I would have liked, all things considered. Not a lot actually happens in this one — I would've liked more action, fight scenes and dramatic tension. I thought it dragged a little, it seemed like there wasn't that much momentum pushing it forward.

What's in the background? The comic relief provided by the gargoyle. He was quite funny, and although his jokes did get kind of tiresome partway through, he definitely added some levity to the book. Overall he was just an enjoyable character!

Also, Gwen gets to wear some really awesome dresses.

Zoom in on: Great-aunt Maddy! We didn't see her very much in this one, which is a shame because she can be humorous.

Anything out of focus?  I kept losing track of the next step as they jumped around from one century to another — the whole time-travel angle definitely complicates matters. I found myself thinking things like, "Does this person know that this will happen in the future?" (Then again, I suppose that is a necessary evil of just about any time-travel story.) They don't really get that much further in terms of figuring out how everything fits together and what the 'ultimate destiny' is. This is the type of series where each book serves as part of a larger story arc, rather than having any sort of internally contained one.

It's definitely more about the relationship between Gwen and Gideon, which – while really cute – I also found frustrating. They have so much trouble with communication and they're always keeping secrets from each other. Gideon is particularly moody in this one, although he does have some reasons.

Ready? Say... Time travel, gargoyles and teen angst, oh my!

Click! 3.5 shooting stars. Some things frustrated me, but I still enjoyed it quite a bit and whipped through it in a day. All the same, at the end I was left feeling dissatisfied, as it didn't feel like much had been solved or accomplished.  

Just a couple suggestions: I think it'd be a good idea to re-read the first book before starting this one if it's been a while, since Sapphire Blue drops you into it head-first and you're going to be lost about what's going on if you haven't (I skimmed Ruby Red beforehand and it's good I did!) Also, although I read this as an e-book I suspect it might be more helpful to read a physical copy, because it's difficult to remember all the characters' names and connections without flipping back to check the family trees.

Disclaimer: I received this as an e-book for review from the publisher.

Kiss, Marry, Kill: the Divergent series

Here's how it works: you take a book, choose 3 guy characters from the book, and then the other person has to pick one to kiss, one to marry, and one to kill.

It's been so long since I had one of these! This time around, you'll have to choose between a few guys from the Divergent series (you can decide if you want to base your choice on Divergent and/or Insurgent, where applicable).


The choices:

1.) Caleb

2.) Eric

3.) Al

So...who do you kiss, who do you marry, and who do you kill? (No, Four is not an option :P)

And as always, if you'd like to do your own, feel free to mention it in the comments or leave a link to your post there :)

Also, what do you guys think of the Allegiant cover that was revealed recently???

Never Let Me Go: A Panoramic Review (Adult)

"From the acclaimed author of The Remains of the Day and When We Were Orphans, a moving new novel that subtly reimagines our world and time in a haunting story of friendship and love.

As a child, Kathy – now thirty-one years old – lived at Hailsham, a private school in the scenic English countryside where the children were sheltered from the outside world, brought up to believe that they were special and that their well-being was crucial not only for themselves but for the society they would eventually enter. Kathy had long ago put this idyllic past behind her, but when two of her Hailsham friends come back into her life, she stops resisting the pull of memory.

And so, as her friendship with Ruth is rekindled, and as the feelings that long ago fueled her adolescent crush on Tommy begin to deepen into love, Kathy recalls their years at Hailsham. She describes happy scenes of boys and girls growing up together, unperturbed – even comforted – by their isolation. But she describes other scenes as well: of discord and misunderstanding that hint at a dark secret behind Hailsham’s nurturing facade. With the dawning clarity of hindsight, the three friends are compelled to face the truth about their childhood–and about their lives now.

A tale of deceptive simplicity, Never Let Me Go slowly reveals an extraordinary emotional depth and resonance – and takes its place among Kazuo Ishiguro’s finest work." (from Goodreads)

Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro

***SPOILER ALERT: It's pretty much impossible to discuss this book in any depth without spoiling, so be prepared for general spoilers about the book's premise in this review.

My reaction: A warning right off the bat – this is a book that makes you think. It's also rather bleak and depressing. So if you aren't a fan of either of those factors, you might want to choose some other reading material.

The dystopian/alternate-reality premise of Never Let Me Go is really just sort of a jumping-off point for exploring a girl's coming-of-age in a bit of a different light, because she's a "donor" (i.e. a clone). So yes, it touches on how life would be different for people who are donors, but it also touches on some topics that are very universal. Most of the book is very slow-moving, and the focus is not so much on the dystopian nature of the society as it is a chronicle of Kathy's life up until the present (skipping a number of years in between). As this is told from Kathy's perspective as a grown woman, going over her memories, it's written in quite a conversational, rambling sort of style. In the grand scheme of things, the story moves forward in a logical, chronological fashion, but within each time frame, Kathy jumps backward and forward a bit. This makes things a little confusing to follow if you're trying to map everything out in sequential order, but to the author's credit, Kathy does manage to strike up a rapport of sorts with the reader.

It's also at least partially an explanation for how she and the other Hailsham students ended up in this situation without rebelling. Spoilers, highlight to read: Still, I did find it rather unbelievable that no one makes any escape attempts in this book. The donors all seem so complacent and docile with their status as spare parts; yes, this is thanks to the brainwashing happening, but you'd think there would have been some rebellion attempt dredged up. As for the ending, I found it unsatisfying – it didn't feel full and complete enough for me.

Generally, the characters are well drawn. I found Kathy easy to relate to, with a sympathetic voice. She makes mistakes, but she's someone you can root for. I didn't feel like I had such a good grasp of Tommy's mindset, but his character stands out in a couple ways. He's a little unpredictable in how he'll react to something, and he's thoughtful and reflective (even as a teenage guy). Unfortunately, we don't get enough of Miss Emily or Madame to really understand their characters. Miss Lucy has promise — ostensibly she's the closest one to a "rebel" in here — so it was disappointing that she remains on the sidelines through the first part of the book, and then is absent entirely in the latter part.

The relationship between Kathy and Ruth is quite fascinating. Ruth is very complicated, and for most of the book I didn't like her. She is manipulative, selfish, self-absorbed, and cares way too much about what other people think of her. She always has to be the center of attention, and she enjoys being in control, pulling the strings of the puppets around her. Towards the end, it seems like she somewhat redeems herself, or at least acknowledges how in the wrong she was, and it did make me soften towards her a little. She has her good moments, but a lot of the time she is a pretty sorry excuse for a friend. Kathy's not perfect either — she can be purposefully mean sometimes as well — but Ruth was deliberately spiteful and cruel on multiple occasions. It was practically her default. 

 
Best aspect: the neat questions and concepts this book raises. There's a lot in here about the innocence of children, and individuals who have been raised in a very sheltered manner and effectively brainwashed, in how they approach the world. Most of the donors in this book are very naive in some ways, and they don't really question things a lot — and even if they do, they don't really know what society is like outside of the bubble of Hailsham, or even the bubble of their donor community once they move on from Hailsham. I think there's a good deal of psychology at play, in how the donors are educated about their function in society. The adults in charge introduce this idea very slowly and gradually throughout the donors' lives, giving them a little bit more information as they get older, so they don't really understand what they're being told each time. Since they don't question it, though, it has time to sink into their general consciousness, and become part of the general knowledge base that they then draw on. 

Never Let Me Go also brings up an excellent question: is it better to be brought up in ignorance and be happy, not knowing that you're going to die much earlier than most people because you were created to be spare body parts for others to use? Or would it be better for the donors to be told at a much earlier age exactly what's going to happen to them, and take away that innocent happiness of childhood because they know they're going to die? Personally I feel like the truth would be more important, but it's an interesting, debatable sort of conundrum.

If I could change something... I'd give the relationship between Kathy and Tommy more emotional heft. Although I definitely thought there was potential there, and I could see they shared a similarity in world view – sort of like "kindred spirits" – I never felt the romantic pull between them. Spoilers: they were initially just friends, and while there were very subtle hints it never amounted to anything until much later. When it finally did, they just skipped everything else and went right to sex; it seemed like a very abrupt transition, and we don't really get to see how they feel about each other once they are in that relationship. (Granted, we do see that they are emotionally drawn to each other throughout their years at Hailsham.)

Also, I wish we'd seen more of the outside society. I find it a little unbelievable that once the donors left the school, they didn't find out more about how the real world works and how people who are not donors function. It just seems like they're blind for so unbelievably long! I wish we'd seen more of the general society's reaction to these donors, just more of the "regular" people's perspectives. It's quite a communal mental bubble the donors live in.

If you haven't read it: and you like books in the vein of Brave New World or The Handmaid's Tale, then you might want to give this one a try. You shouldn't go into it expecting an action-packed dystopian fight-against-the-system sort of read, but rather a woman recalling her story growing up as a clone in this society. 
 

If you have read it: were you also left wondering who took a certain item of Kathy's? (Spoiler: the tape! Who stole it???)

Just one more thing I want to mention: I liked the idea of Norfolk being this place of lost things; it's a thread running throughout, this hopeful, innocent idea that you can find the things you lose in life in Norfolk.

Final verdict: 4 shooting stars. While Never Let Me Go is not a feel-good book by any stretch of the imagination, I enjoyed it in a way. It's depressing, sad, and frankly left me feeling a little hollow — but it is well-written. Questions are brought up without being in-your-face about it, and without shoving an obvious message down the reader's throat.

April "New Adult" Challenge Reviews – Link Them Up Here!

That's right, time again for participants in the "New Adult" reading challenge to share their NA reviews! If you have reviews from April, here's your chance to link them up. And if you have not yet signed up for the NA Challenge but want to participate, don't stress: you can still sign up here :)

Rants & Raves: Yes, I *Am* Stingy With My 5-Star Ratings

This is a feature that appears sporadically on the blog, whenever I have a bookish issue I need to rant or rave about. Feel free to comment with your thoughts!

*Note: this post was inspired/influenced by any number of discussions other bloggers have had about ratings, and in particular Steph Su Reads's posts here and here.

You may have noticed I don't give 5-star ratings very often. In fact, it is quite a rare occurrence for me. But I know some authors find 3 or 3.5 star reviews disappointing, so I thought I'd explain my thought processes regarding ratings.

To start with: I may not hand out 5 stars like they're going out of style, but I am even less generous with 1-star ratings. In fact, I've never given a book just 1 star on this blog. I think I'd have to be actively appalled/offended/disgusted/horrified by its content in order for that to happen. Usually I can find some redeeming quality in a book, even if overall I didn't enjoy it, and that will bump up the rating.

I guess I see the distribution of book quality kind of like a normal distribution.

You're bound to get a few pretty crummy, poorly written books, on the low end — say, 2 and 2.5 stars in my rating system.

Ones that make me look like this.

You're bound to get a few absolutely fantastic, blew-me-away books on the high end — 4.5 and 5 stars.

Ones that make me look like this.

And then you've got the majority of the books in-between: not bad, but not the best book you've ever read. Those are the 3 and 3.5 and 4-star books.

Bloggers differ in how they approach rating a book. Some people are fine with giving a 5-star rating even if they found several aspects to criticize. Some might only give 5 stars to books that have the "re-readability factor." Personally, for me to give 5 stars to a book, it has to wow me. Maybe it's tackled an issue in a completely original way. Perhaps it's a stand-out example of a story within a certain sub-genre. Maybe there is absolutely nothing I can think of that would improve the novel.

Because let's face it: if I went around giving 5 stars to loads of books, the 5-star rating would quickly lose its impact. It wouldn't be that extra star beyond the (still very good) 4-star rating. And I think I would soon start having trouble distinguishing between what qualifies as a 4-star read vs. a 5-star one.

5 Stars: Outstanding! Buy it!

Not every book stands out enough to be "outstanding".

Interestingly, for me a 5-star rating does not always correspond to a belongs-on-my-favourites-shelf book. Sometimes, but not inevitably. I think there are likely plenty of books I consider my favourites that would get 4 or 4.5 stars, and perhaps even a few books I would "objectively" give 5 stars that aren't among my favourites. So just because I give a book 4 stars doesn't mean I didn't truly enjoy it! It just means there wasn't that "it factor" (for lack of a better term) to elevate it to 5 stars.

I'd also like to point out that books I gave (or would have given) 5 stars when I first started this blog are not necessarily ones I would now give the same rating. I was a lot less particular and critical a reader back in 2010! This doesn't mean I don't still love those books. I just suspect that were I to read them again, examining them critically, I'd probably catch sight of more flaws or areas that could be improved.

The Goose Girl and Crown Duel are a couple that might fall into this category...although it's impossible to tell, since I suspect my view of them will be forever tinted with nostalgic affection!

In conclusion: 5 stars is not my default rating. Authors, your book has to earn it. And because I do read so critically, I keep that 5-star rating in reserve for the ones that strike me as the most exceptional. Kind of like giving out the "class valedictorian" award. So if your book's gotten a 3 or 3.5 or 4-star rating from me, there's no need to worry — you may not be that one kid in the class getting the elusive 100%, but you're still bringing home good grades.