U-Pick: Most Endearing Animal Sidekick?

Here's how this feature works: each week I'll post a categorical superlative (e.g. "most sadistic villain" "crankiest father figure" "protagonist you would most like to slap some sense into" etc.) and list a few choices of characters from YA books in a poll. You get to pick! The poll will run for a week, and then in the following post I'll update with the name of the winning character. 

Last time the title of YA character Most Likely to End Up in Prison was up for grabs, and I am pleased to announce that the winner is...

...Rose from Vampire Academy!

Apparently she is just too impulsive for her own good.

This time around, the question is: who is the Most Endearing Animal Sidekick in YA?

There are lots of choices here, so vote below! (If the book is part of a series, I've just listed the series name. You can decide which book you want to base your vote on.) There's also an option for a write-in vote if your pick isn't listed. If that's the case, please choose "other" and then leave the character's name and book title in the comments :)

Rants & Raves: You LIED to Me?

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!

Suppose I was telling you a story. Suppose I said,

"Once upon a time, there lived a young girl with hair black as coal, skin white as snow, and lips red as apples. She lived with a wicked step-mother who happened to be queen of all the land, and one day the step-mother discovered that her step-daughter had surpassed her in beauty. So the step-mother sent her huntsman to rip out the young girl's heart. But instead the huntsman let her go, and the young girl ran away and stumbled onto a small dwelling where there lived seven vertically-challenged men." 

And then I asked you to tell me what fairy tale this was.

Well, naturally, you'd respond, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves," right?

And then suppose I went, "Hah! I lied. This isn't about a young girl with hair black as coal who finds herself keeping house for seven small men. No! It's actually about a young girl with hair bright as gold, who finds herself falling asleep in a house belonging to three bears. Fooled you!"

You'd be a little annoyed, wouldn't you? You might say, "That wasn't a fair guessing-game, you gave me all the wrong information! That doesn't count! You cheated."

Yeah, you'd be right. I totally cheated. And that's how I feel every time an author pulls a similar stunt with the narrative of their story.

This is one reason unreliable narrators are so difficult to pull off. Because to the reader, it feels like a deception, perhaps even a betrayal. Readers take what they're told at face value most of the time. I've heard it described kind of like an unwritten contract between the reader and the storyteller: you're going to tell me something fantastical, and I'm going to go along with it. You can't immerse yourself in the story if you're questioning the truth of every word on the page.

So when all of a sudden, the writer informs you that, Whoops! Actually that's not at all what happened, it can feel as though your trust in them has been violated. You think to yourself, "Well if they lied to me before, what's to say they won't do it again? How much of what they're telling me is the truth, and how much is just more lies?"

And really, that's no way to go about reading a story.

I find unreliable narrators particularly odious when they are used in mysteries. Because in mysteries, the whole point is for the reader to try to solve it, to piece together the puzzle before the characters do. And how can you possibly do that if the narrator is withholding information from you (or worse, giving you false information)? Say you're told that the protagonist is going to be interrogating a suspect and you know this will lead to a very important clue...and then the protagonist doesn't mention the outcome of this interrogation. All they'll say is, "I'd learned something that took my breath away. And now I knew where to place the blame." You'd be a little ticked off, wouldn't you?

The way I see it, this is just not playing fair. It's sort of a quick-and-dirty method of stringing the reader along so that when the big reveal happens, they'll be surprised.

Well, OF COURSE they'll be surprised. You didn't give them enough information to have them be anything other than surprised! (And annoyed, frustrated, and just about ready to throw in the towel, but I digress.) I'd say this is a very poor use of the unreliable narrator technique. It's a way to cover up sloppy mystery writing, and frankly, it's a bit of an insult to a reader's intelligence. Good mysteries are difficult to guess because the clues are so clever or well-hidden, not because you've flat-out lied to the reader or conveniently "forgotten" to mention something.

A distinction should certainly be drawn between playing on a reader's assumptions — which is perfectly acceptable, and indeed can be a very crafty way of fooling the reader — and outright lying to them (either by giving false information or by omission). And there are certain circumstances where unreliable narration can be used to good effect. It may be very important in revealing something about a character's personality or mental health (for instance, in All You Never Wanted by Adele Griffin or Holding On To Zoe by George Ella Lyon.)

But using it as a plot device to keep the reader turning the pages? In my opinion, it's a cheap trick.

Rely on your writing talent to create a diverting, suspenseful, twisty read. Don't rely on a technique that will only try the reader's patience. You might just find that they run out of it before they finish the book.

In which case, your "big reveal" will all be for nothing, anyway. Meanwhile, your reader will be reacting like this:



Tell me truthfully, now: is that really what you want?

 

Waiting on Wednesday: The Symptoms of My Insanity and Ink

Waiting on Wednesday is hosted by Jill at Breaking the Spine and features books that we just can't wait to get our hands on!

The theme of this week's WoW picks appears to be books with illustrated covers (a rare breed in YA!):

The Symptoms of My Insanity by Mindy Raf

Goodreads' description: 

"A laugh-out-loud, bittersweet debut full of wit, wisdom, heart, and a hilarious, unforgettable heroine.

When you’re a hypochondriac, there are a million different things that could be wrong with you, but for Izzy, focusing on what could be wrong might be keeping her from dealing with what’s really wrong.

I almost raised my hand, but what would I say? “Mr. Bayer, may I please be excused? I’m not totally positive, but I think I might have cancer.” No way. Then everyone at school would know, and they would treat me differently, and I would be known as “Izzy, that poor girl who diagnosed herself with breast cancer during biology.”

But Izzy’s sense of humor can only get her so far when suddenly her best friend appears to have undergone a personality transplant, her mother’s health takes a turn for the worse, and her beautiful maybe-boyfriend is going all hot and cold. Izzy thinks she’s preparing for the worst-case scenario, but when the worst-case scenario actually hits, it’s a different story altogether—and there’s no tidy list of symptoms to help her through the insanity."

I have the feeling Izzy and I would get along awesomely, just from this description! Her sense of humour sounds like just my style :)

Ink by Amanda Sun

Goodreads' description:

"I looked down at the paper, still touching the tip of my shoe. I reached for it, flipping the page over to look.

Scrawls of ink outlined a drawing of a girl lying on a bench.

A sick feeling started to twist in my stomach, like motion sickness.

And then the girl in the drawing turned her head, and her inky eyes glared straight into mine.

On the heels of a family tragedy, the last thing Katie Greene wants to do is move halfway across the world. Stuck with her aunt in Shizuoka, Japan, Katie feels lost. Alone. She doesn’t know the language, she can barely hold a pair of chopsticks, and she can’t seem to get the hang of taking her shoes off whenever she enters a building.

Then there’s gorgeous but aloof Tomohiro, star of the school’s kendo team. How did he really get the scar on his arm? Katie isn’t prepared for the answer. But when she sees the things he draws start moving, there’s no denying the truth: Tomo has a connection to the ancient gods of Japan, and being near Katie is causing his abilities to spiral out of control. If the wrong people notice, they'll both be targets.

Katie never wanted to move to Japan—now she may not make it out of the country alive."

I suspect this one will bring back many memories of Japan (both fond and not-so-fond!) for me. And I'm interested to see how the Japanese mythology is incorporated into the story.

What books are you waiting for?

Secret Letters: A Panoramic Review

"Inquisitive and observant, Dora dreams of escaping her aristocratic country life to solve mysteries alongside Sherlock Holmes. So when she learns that the legendary detective might be her biological father, Dora jumps on the opportunity to travel to London and enlist his help in solving the mystery of her cousin's ransomed love letters. But Dora arrives in London to devastating news: Sherlock Holmes is dead. Her dreams dashed, Dora is left to rely on her wits--and the assistance of an attractive yet enigmatic young detective--to save her cousin's reputation and help rescue a kidnapped heiress along the way. 

Steeped in Victorian atmosphere and intrigue, this gripping novel heralds the arrival of a fresh new voice in young adult literature." (from Goodreads)

Secret Letters by Leah Scheier
 
My reaction: 

I had a lot of issues with Secret Letters, but it was still an enjoyable, entertaining enough read. 

To start off with, you have to take the whole book with a grain (or perhaps several) of salt. The entire premise is somewhat far-fetched; even the idea that Dora would be assisting on a mystery case requires a suspension of disbelief. She's so overconfident in her abilities, especially in the first half of the story, and really manages to bungle things up sometimes. There was more than one occasion where I'd go, "Dora, you idiot! Why are you doing this???" in my head. This makes for some very cringe-worthy scenes where you're embarrassed for her because you know she's doing or saying something stupid and it's not going to end well. (During some of these I was quite tempted to skip ahead rather than sit there thinking, "Oh no, she didn't just say that...")

There were also some moments that just seemed too preposterous to be believable. For instance, some of the climactic scenes took on a comedic tone at times that I didn't feel was really appropriate. I wanted to be submerged in this dramatic setting, and instead the villains would be chuckling! Or there'd be people pointing guns all over the place and it just seemed farcical instead of full of tension, and I'd be going, "I just don't buy this, it's too ridiculous."

I will acknowledge that Dora did grow on me as the story progressed. Thankfully, I think she learns a bit of humility by the end (helped along by Peter Cartwright, who is only too willing to help her realize she can make mistakes), so that was good to see. I like that she was able to recognize her failings (to some extent, anyway). And she certainly doesn't lack curiosity or chutzpah. However, I thought — for a book set in 1891 — that she sounded a little too modern-minded; a bit much was made of the fact that she didn't do what everyone expected of her. It was kind of like these points were being thrust in the reader's face, as though to say, "You'll like Dora, because she's spunky and she doesn't conform to societal standards, and she enjoys solving mysteries just like her dad!"

In terms of side characters, some of them weren't very well fleshed-out at all, and I had trouble keeping track of the details — who was who, who knew what, who was related to whom, etc. Also, I found the characterization inconsistent at times. Peter has wild mood swings and is very unpredictable; in one scene, he'll be overly protective, in the next he'll be joking around. It's difficult to know how he's going to react to something. I liked him when he was teasing, but other times he seemed to be a completely different person, showing off his moody, broody side. I'm not sure if that's just his personality or if it's a reflection of the writing quality. Then there's Agatha, who is a young, pregnant girl who gives off a bit of a "lost sheep" sort of vibe. Towards the end, though, she starts sounding much older, saying things that don't seem authentic for her age and character.
 

Best aspect: the interactions between Cartwright and Dora, which were pretty darn adorable sometimes. They've got the whole bickering-but-secretly-we-kind-of-like-each-other thing going on. It didn't reach the level of "romance" but there were certainly hints in that direction. Cartwright was probably my favourite character — he gets most of the amusing lines!

I also really liked the personal stories of Cartwright and Dora that we find out towards the end, and thought they were handled quite sensitively and effectively.

If I could change something... I'd make the mystery itself a whole lot easier to follow. While I appreciate the fact that it wasn't easy to guess in its entirety, it ended up being very convoluted. I got mixed up in all of the details and forgot what the characters were actually trying to solve. When it comes to mysteries, a nudge from the author in one direction or another is often helpful, even if it turns out to be a red herring (as is frequently the case). Instead, I was mired down in all the complexities. 

This confusion was compounded by a writing technique the author employed a few times (especially towards the end, during the climactic scenes) in which information is conveniently withheld from the reader for a while, resulting in something like the "unreliable narrator" device. I find this incredibly frustrating, especially considering this book is written in 1st-person POV. In other words, we should be on the same page as the narrator — and in some scenes I was most definitely not. More than once the reader is not told ahead of time what the plan is, and then the characters go somewhere or do something and you have no idea what their motivations or intentions are. For instance, at one point several of the characters, including Dora, end up in the cemetery for no apparent good reason, and I was left going, "Why are they in the cemetery??? I DON'T UNDERSTAND." (To be perfectly fair, I'm not sure Dora really knew exactly why everyone was hanging out in the cemetery either, but unlike me, she didn't seem particularly concerned about that fact.) Sure, we find out later what they're doing there, but for several pages the reader is left in the dark! If you're going to confuse the reader, fine — but make sure the narrator is confused too. Otherwise it makes for this odd disconnect between the narrator's reaction and the reader's. 

Also, the full explanation for the mystery wasn't particularly satisfying either — it felt like several different secrets got connected together in a really implausible way, instead of having been thought out well at the beginning. The blackmailing storyline, which is one of the main reasons Dora goes to London in the first place, ends up taking a spot on the sidelines; I thought this was a shame since I would have liked to have gotten more of Adelaide's story, particularly about her (somewhat troubling, from the sound of it) relationship with her husband.

If you haven't read it: you're not missing that much. But sure, if you like books set in the Victorian era and couples who bicker, and you don't mind being unclear about what's going on at any given time, you might enjoy Secret Letters.

If you have read it: were you as confused as I was in trying to follow the plot?

Just one more thing I want to mention: It doesn't surprise me that this is a debut novel. It's pretty easy to read and some of the dialogue is quite charming, but overall the writing style is a little amateur-ish. Tell-tale signs like cliched expressions, overly dramatic metaphors, and an odd 3rd-person perspective that occasionally sneaks in there all point to the fact that this book could have used more editing, or — to be frank — a stronger, more experienced writer. Hopefully that will come with time and practice, and the next in the series (I'm assuming there will be one...) will have a higher quality of writing.

Quote: 

"Oh, and if, by chance, I haven't yet returned," he added with a little smile, "please try to wait for me in the study, or on the sofa, like a normal girl. Not beneath my bed, or inside the chimney, or hanging like a kitten from the curtains. Please."

 

Final verdict: 3 shooting stars. 

Disclaimer: I received this book for review from the publisher.

This book counts towards my goal for the Debut Author reading challenge.
 

 

The Space Between Us: A Close-Up Review

"From the author of Virtuosity, a novel about two sisters and the secrets they tell, the secrets they keep—and the secret that could tear them apart.Amelia is used to being upstaged by her charismatic younger sister, Charly. She doesn’t mind, mostly, that it always falls to her to cover for Charly’s crazy, impulsive antics. But one night, Charly’s thoughtlessness goes way too far, and she lands both sisters in serious trouble.
 
Amelia’s not sure she can forgive Charly this time, and not sure she wants to . . . but forgiveness is beside the point. Because Charly is also hiding a terrible secret, and the truth just might tear them apart forever." (from Goodreads)

The Space Between Us by Jessica Martinez
 

*Note: I've whited out the most major spoilery bits, but there are some general mild spoilers in this review.

Characters:

Amelia: I had trouble liking Amelia at some points because of her dismissive, condescending attitude towards Charly. While she does change her attitude partway through — and I have to respect her for trying to be more positive and treat her sister better — I feel like it shouldn't have taken knowledge of a certain fact to get Amelia to realize she'd been treating Charly badly (spoiler, highlight to read: the fact that Charly was date-raped changes Amelia's perspective, but I feel like she shouldn't have had the attitude she did towards Charly even if it had all played out the way Amelia had initially thought, without any instance of date rape). Amelia's behaviour towards Charly wasn't helping anything — not Charly, and not Amelia's mental/emotional health either. All it was doing was creating a negative environment and relationship between the two girls.

However, Amelia actually acknowledges that she'd gotten into the pattern of nasty behaviour towards Charly and that it was difficult to get out of the habit of making fun of her. I thought this was quite realistic — perhaps not something a lot of people would recognize or admit, but something that's very true of human behaviour (old habits die hard and all that). Also, I enjoyed Amelia's sarcastic attitude in some ways. Yes, she's pretty bitter about everything at the beginning, and she slowly mellows out (Ezra helps with that), but it was fun to hear her take on things. I kind of had to admire her for being so self-contained and self-reliant; she wasn't afraid to tell people what she thought, and she ate lunch by herself in the library and didn't care.

Charly: Even though Amelia was far from perfect, I preferred her to Charly. Charly just didn't seem like the kind of person I'd like very much — she's pretty self-centered (although really, Amelia is too) and shallow. We don't get to know her that well, though, and our perspective is admittedly biased since Amelia is the narrator, and so we see Charly through a negative lens through most of the book. I wish we'd been shown more of their relationship both before the book starts (i.e. through flashbacks) as well as once it gets patched up (spoiler: there's one scene where they basically make amends, and then we really don't see much more of them together. It just seemed like a "quick fix" sort of resolution.) The full explanation for Charly's situation makes it easier for us to feel sorry for her, yes, but I never felt that bad for her because she seemed rather annoying through most of the book.


Ezra: he was pretty awesome. He's got a good sense of humor and he's funny — he gets a lot of great lines — but he cares about Amelia too, and the way he tries to win her over is sweet. He presents an interesting mix of geekiness and self-confidence (two attributes you don't see being paired together that often!) Ezra is not without his own issues and flaws, though; he's somewhat guarded, and doesn't like to share information about himself, which really irritates Amelia. It seemed like his family had a lot of issues, but that these issues were being used as more of a plot device, or perhaps a device to explain his character, rather than existing in and of themselves. I feel like we should have seen more of his mother or brother, instead of hearing about them offhand as part of an explanation for Ezra's behaviour.

The romance reminded me of Anna and the French Kiss in style — enjoyable banter between the characters, a sweet progression of the relationship, and a few dollops of drama.

Premise/plot:

The Space Between Us takes a cliched and generic premise (pastor's daughter gets pregnant) and then makes it significantly better with one simple change — the fact that Amelia and Charly go to Canada. All right, I'm Canadian, so I'm a little biased, but let's face it: Canada gets short shrift in the YA department. We're just north of the U.S. but for some reason it's oh so much more glamorous to set a novel in New York or California than Toronto or B.C.

But lo and behold, Amelia and Charly pack their bags and head for...Banff, of all places! I say "of all places" because it's not the first location in Canada I would have imagined choosing to stay for an indeterminate period of time. Banff is a tourist hot spot for the skiing, but not much else. And as the sisters soon find out, it's cold there. (Um, it's Alberta. In the mountains. Of course it's cold.)

So basically, the funny comments and jokes alluding to all things Canadiana (food, customs, weather, etc.) were fantastic. Seeing it from an American perspective was quite amusing at times (Amelia hates some aspects of Canada!) And happily, it was clear that the author understands the cross-border dialogue that occurs. Jessica Martinez has lived in both Canada and the U.S. and obviously gets both sides of the coin.

Moreover, I'm very happy to see Canada getting featured in a book published in the mainstream North American market. Usually we're lucky to even get one or two mentions in a story — generally something along the lines of, "He's escaping to Canada" or "that frozen wasteland to the north" — so it was really cool that almost all of The Space Between Us was set in Canada. I would love to see this more often in YA, where I get a lot of the references and it feels like it means something more to me because it's set in my country.

The teen pregnancy plotline didn't do much for me, and doesn't stand out amongst all the similar stories out there. Spoilers: the storyline involving the date rape wasn't explored enough in my opinion. However, Martinez does touch on the important point of women who are date-raped thinking they are at fault, and feeling buried with guilt and shame even though logically they know that's not the case. I wish we'd seen more of Charly herself, coming into her own. But Amelia's romance with Ezra is cute — I adored the scene where Amelia gets mild hypothermia and heads into the library where, of course, Ezra is working — and I liked how the book ended for the two of them. We're given a glimpse into the near future for Amelia and Ezra and it looks promising.

There's also a small subplot involving a guy back home (Will) that never really gets resolved; the whole thing seemed complicated and unnecessary. Amelia could have had enough sister envy issues on her plate without dragging Will into it. Either that or something more should have happened back in Florida to bring in the characters (like Savannah and Will) that we saw at the beginning, rather than having them just stay on the sidelines.

Writing style:

The writing style is a little bland, but quite relatable and realistic. Martinez has a good ear for dialogue between teens; her characters can have emotional conversations with each other and still remain authentic.

Final verdict: 3.5 shooting stars. While the central premise is hardly fresh, Jessica Martinez skilfully capitalizes on her knowledge of Canada-U.S. differences to provide a good dose of humor, and also demonstrates some astute perceptiveness of human emotions and reactions through Amelia's and Charly's characters and situations.

Disclaimer: I received this as an ARC for review from the author.
 
This book counts towards my goals for the Just Contemporary reading challenge and the Sophomore reading challenge.