I was introduced to Mira Grant’s books through the Hugo Awards. She (also under her legal namStoryline: 1/5 Characters: 2/5 Writing Style: 1/5 World: 1/5
I was introduced to Mira Grant’s books through the Hugo Awards. She (also under her legal name, Seanan McGuire) received five nominations for the award in 2013 alone. Some of those nominations were for shorter works – such as novellas and novelletes – and even some of the media-related categories the Hugo puts out, such as “Best Fancast” – for non-professional audio or periodicals devoted to science fiction and fantasy. My interest in the Hugo Award has always been in the novel however, and I first read her young adult zombie Newsflesh series. I did not think well of them. In fairness, I was not the target audience. I think she appeals most to those who have seen her in person, watched or listened to her interviews. She has a youthful, biting sense of humor that the irreverent will enjoy. And you can see that personality and humor in her books. Newsflesh – despite it being a young adult zombie book – did show some promise, a suggestion that the horrific futures she envisions were not only filled with thrilling events but were provocative to vicariously consider and experience. Those speculative elements were largely incidental, however, and I mostly found Newsflesh to be filled with adolescent posturing and melodramatic adventures. I wouldn’t have read Grant again had she not been nominated for the Hugo in 2014. I gave Grant another try. After all, authors change and grow.
Everything was worse. Everything was worse. It is also basically the same book written before. But we have characters that are even less qualified for the demands of the crisis, taking leading roles nonetheless. The future world is scarcely described, let alone envisioned. The medical science that is supposed to support our suspension of disbelief is hardly feigned. Grant knows that emotions belong in the story; she knows that there is a place for indignation, fear, and solace. But what readers get are repeated mentions that our main character is indignant, that they’re fearful, that they have found that solace. The lack of groundwork to support these feelings – to lead readers to vicariously experience those – is practically non-existent. Further, Grant either does not trust her readers to remember details or she herself did not keep track of how many times we had previously been reminded about a character’s quirk. It is a repetitive book with the banal reiterated for reasons never revealed or justified. All of this fills the pages as a not-very-mysterious mystery slowly, laboriously, and painfully is revealed. It neglects all speculation. There were places to explore familial bonds, identity, and the future of and implications of genetic engineering. But this is not speculative fiction. There are no steps taken to speak to weighty matters. The author did not even put forth the energy to find a reasonable stopping point before the final “To be continued…” ending.
This is a book that is supposed to be easy, mindless, and fun. Particularly if your idea of fun is feeling the self-righteous indignation of a young adult woman behaving like the newly adolescent. We’re not supposed to see her as a flawed character. We’re not supposed to abstract out and watch this from a distance. We’re supposed to be resentful along with the main character when her ignorance is treated as such, when her whims are not indulged, when her lack of experience is looked upon as naivete. We’re supposed to cheer when she has harsh things to say or is flippant with those condescending to her. There are readers that want to feel all this and want the process to be easy, mindless and fun. Fine; different tastes. Still, Grant could have taken the time to appeal to a broader audience. She could have worked on an interesting and complicated plot. She could have put forth some effort thinking about the sociological and personal implications of the events that happen to our main character. She could have taken seriously the fact that this book is written in the future and that there would be some differences worth detailing. Of course, those changes would have made it into the kind of book I like, not a Mira Grant book. And perhaps the elements I wanted to see would have ruined it for her steadfast fans.
I could see this being an aspiring author’s first draft of their first book and their needing some help working on plotting, worldbuilding, and character development. I could see this as a manuscript for a workshop. Grant doesn’t have that excuse though. The reality is actually much more unfortunate. This is a quickly produced, mass marketed, generic work that was hurried through while Grant had captured the attention of some of the science fiction, fantasy, and horror public. There’s no other explanation for how this book was nominated for a Hugo Award. It was really the person and personality of Seanan McGuire that was being nominated. That the book printed in that year was Parasitology was a coincidence. Much of the fault for this book surely lies with the publisher. This was not a book that was ready for the press, and they put quick profits ahead of reputation. So this goes as a serious black mark on the record of Orbit, Mira Grant, and Seanan McGuire....more
I wasn't a fan of the first two, but what little this series had going for it collapsed with Storyline: 1/5 Characters: 1/5 Writing Style: 2/5 World: 1/5
I wasn't a fan of the first two, but what little this series had going for it collapsed with the incessant, melodramatic adolescent posturing and the ludicrous government conspiracies involving astonishingly incompetent villains.
Lessons on bad storytelling organized while reading this conclusion to the trilogy:
Trust your readers with recollection. We don't have to be repeatedly reminded of a) how self-righteously independent your characters are b) the grave risk and danger of situations or c) technological details explained and described 100 times previously in the first two books.
Characters can exhibit tendencies other than uniformity or polar opposites. That is, it is acceptable for a character to be more than a) a flippant, testosterone-charged body of defensiveness or b) a source of drama because they start behaving exactly the opposite of their prior portrayal.
Villains really do have to justify their actions. They can be a) sadistic b) masochistic c) ignorant d) misguided e) greedy f) insane or g) egotistical. Sane villains purposefully engaging in knowingly unethical mass atrocities for the greater good are preposterous.
Parlor reveal scenes can be nostalgic or a genre inside-joke but not a serious way to solve a mystery.
That whole wallowing in self-pity and self-doubt thing where you agonize over whether or not you made the right decision even though you know you did.....? Yeah, that is something people do for attention because they are insecure. That should not be a source of character depth or drama.
I'm obviously not the target audience for these books. I like thorough worldbuilding, enjoy lStoryline: 2/5 Characters: 2/5 Writing Style: 2/5 World: 2/5
I'm obviously not the target audience for these books. I like thorough worldbuilding, enjoy literary flourishes, and while reading I try to live in and take seriously the world the author created.
One of my biggest complaints about the book is that it is written from the perspective of someone who hasn't lived through the zombie apocalypse. Supposedly all of her main characters know nothing else. The telling is saturated with observations that would only be uttered or thought by someone living outside the Newsflesh world. For instance when the main character has to make a speedy escape from chasing zombies, he thinks about how he didn't even have time to put his seatbelt on. His seatbelt?! That's not going to be something going through the mind of our 20ish, danger-loving, post-Rising, adrenaline junky. The same thing goes for his remarks about being tough enough to sleep on a couch. Sleeping on a couch is "roughing it"! The book was filled with repeated cliches about "shooting first and asking later" or other such tough-guy musings that wouldn't have been thought by the characters inhabiting the world Grant created.
That world here was also a disappointment. One of the strongest aspects of the first in the series was the juxtaposition of a technologically advanced first-world with the zombie-infested post-apocalypse. Grant was lazy here and didn't develop that world further. In fact, the whole blogging aspect was even more dated than it was in the original, and we had to suffer through minidramas about overly-strict spam filters on email.
I was abashed at how closely Feed emulated the Scooby Doo villain reveal scene. In this one Grant tries to address that. I got the idea that she was trying to make fun of herself and the genre a little, but she also made a real effort to plug the plothole. The result was worse than the initial effort: the seriousness of the retcon kept Grant from making any claims of satire or metafictional intentions, but the incredible new plot developments pushed it to the level of really bad television writing.
There were a few positive elements. Grant tried to bring a little more science into the story. I liked the platonic relationship between brother and sister. Also, Mira Grant kept the excitement coming, and this was the easiest reading I've done since my last John Scalzi book (which, I think, is of similar quality).
This belongs to a genre - and I don't mean the zombie one. This is a young adult thriller that is supposed to be gossiped about and read en masse by high school and college students looking for something breezy, amusing, and self-congratulating. I'm far from that scene....more
I never got into the zombie craze, but it was with some anticipation that I started to read tStoryline: 2/5 Characters: 2/5 Writing Style: 2/5 World: 3/5
I never got into the zombie craze, but it was with some anticipation that I started to read this Hugo-nominated book zombie book. I also never got into the young adult book craze, and I hadn't realized this was intended for adolescent audiences.
On the positive side, this opened with an interesting premise: the zombie outbreak happened, but it wasn't an apocalypse. Zombie outbreaks rank in there with tornadoes, hurricanes, or automobile accidents; they're problems but life moves on. This provided Grant with a world ripe with opportunity to build in and showcase how the future would be changed. Also, as a thriller, the author knew when to stick in some excitement and danger to move the story along.
On the negative (and much weightier) side, this was a young adult book that reveled in all the cliches of that genre: young people sleuthing out secrets that professionals were unable to uncover, incompetent villains whom always let their prey escape, and incessant mentions of just how tired (or difficult or trying or taxing) their adventure made our heroic young adults. The writing style matched the flippant attitude of our youthful main characters. It (like flippant, youthful characters in real life) was amusing for a short time, but before long one is more annoyed than entertained. Additionally, I fear that the technological side to this story - the blogging world - while perhaps novel, is going to be dated in very short time.
This shares more in common with the old Scooby Doo television cartoons than it does most of the science fiction and fantasy I read. I rarely abandon a series once I've begun, but I would gladly jettison this one were it not for the fact that it would interfere with my challenge to read all the Hugo nominees. So I suppose I'll be back to the Newsflesh sequels with a small hope that they'll mature into something less glib. ...more
At the halfway point I was frustrated. I keep getting promised steampunk and Priest wasn't deStoryline: 2/5 Characters: 2/5 Writing Style: 3/5 World: 1/5
At the halfway point I was frustrated. I keep getting promised steampunk and Priest wasn't delivering. Priest gives us (view spoiler)[...more wheeled vehicles...tracer bullets...swamp boats...flashlights.... (hide spoiler)] Technology has repercussions, you can't just throw stuff out there haphazardly! I was looking forward to the change in scenery - moving away from Seattle and the transcontinental railway and on to the South - to New Orleans! The New Orleans that was delivered, however, read like it was written with a tourist brochure in hand (view spoiler)[ The obligatory stops and encounters with Jackson Square, St. Louis Cathedral, Cafe du Monde, and Marie Laveau (hide spoiler)]. It was like the Michael Bay Transformer movie where the famous tourist sites in the Middle East - the Pyramids, Petra - are right beside one another and coincidentally bear significance for the storyline.
The book makes some shifts at the halfway point and improves in some areas. There is actually some legitimate steam punk technology, and there is the promise of some dirigible action! Freshly served with new gadgetry I start to ponder the implications, and I find that I can't reconcile activities and attitudes across the books. The technology in this one so greatly supersedes that of the first, but in Boneshaker the villain was supposedly some great inventor. Similarly, gasoline vehicles abound here in Ganymede when they appeared to have been highly specialized and valuable bits of machinery in Dreadnought. The same problems arise when one considers the zombie problem, I.... and then I stopped pondering and admitted this is not a book to ponder. It is not a book to consider. One isn't supposed to think or compare (beyond the direct and explicit overlaps between books in the series). This is a book (and series) about aesthetics. This book exists to provide costume ideas and artwork for steampunk hobbyists. It is supposed to be stylish, amusing, and good for ice-breakers at parties. So I've got to stop expecting something different; it excels at what it is - a zombie, steampunk, west-meets-south, alternate history, action adventure, airport novel. For some reason (even though I'm not a die-hard fan), I feel personally aggrieved that this is being marketed and heralded as the symbol of steampunk....more
My review of this work is definitely influenced by preconceptions. From the massively geared Storyline: 2/5 Characters: 1/5 Writing Style: 2/5 World: 2/5
My review of this work is definitely influenced by preconceptions. From the massively geared contraption depicted on the cover and the Seattle Times' "Cherie Priest is the high priestess of steampunk" endorsement, one could easily be lured into thinking this is a story about steam-powered technology come before its time and its staking a different trajectory through history. Oh how far I was misled.
This is a civil-war era travel adventure. There are a few steampunk embellishments - zephyrs and goggles - but the technological anachronism here is the introduction of the combustion engine in an earlier time period. This, too, is merely adornment as the book is not about the impact such technology has on the timeline. If the gasoline contraptions weren't present, it would have altered the story very little. The plotline is fairly simple: someone out east needs to get out west, and a catalog of the adventures en route. Priest is fairly good at what she does - doles out mini dramas spaced across each chapter to keep the story suspenseful and emotional. There is very little memorable here, however. There's no great point, no great story, no analysis, criticism, insight, or theory. It is a generic story with a few genre-specific trimmings for novelty. If Priest is the high-priestess of steampunk then the genre is in a poor state indeed.
I struggled in deciding whether this was a 1-star or a 2-star book. Thinking back, most of my 1-star designations were because the author did something exceedingly objectionable - the pacing was simply awful, the plot holes made everything else outlandish, the characters contradicted their own characterization - something unforgivably distracting to an already poorly-written book. Priest had no such striking flaws. Don't get me wrong, I do think there was much to dislike: the drama was forced, the main character was superhuman, and it was woefully lacking in originality. Most of it, however, could be pleasantly overlooked. To its credit, the vocabulary, sentence structure, and ideas are simplistic; and this was a breeze to read. Aside from the pervasive vulgar language, I would recommend this to late elementary school or middle school children. I think that is the most appropriate audience....more
What I liked: I've been more intrigued with the idea of steampunk than I have been with the aStoryline: 2/5 Characters: 2/5 Writing Style: 2/5 World: 4/5
What I liked: I've been more intrigued with the idea of steampunk than I have been with the actual writings I've read under that heading. I liked Boneshaker because it dropped all the elements of steampunk that I find distracting or annoying: the emphasis on Victorian mannerisms - morality and prudishness, in particular - casting famous personages in new circumstances or roles, and the jumbling of the British historical record. I was tremendously pleased to finally read an American steampunk novel. I liked that it didn't stray into the Wild West genre but instead went far West to situate itself in the gold rush. The alternate history world Priest creates is largely constituted by the technological inventions: zeppelins, massive mechanical devices, and the extensive use of steam power. There was just enough detail and description about the rest of the world (the non-technological side) to draw in and amuse the reader. I also appreciated the strong female character who understood herself as (and was appreciated as) something other than a sex-object.
What I didn't like: The book doesn't replace the above-mentioned gaps (Victorian morality, famous historical characters, British history) with anything substantive. There is no attempt at any sort of social commentary or tangle with philosophical or scientific questions. It is not even a story about the characters or about familial bonds. This is an extremely simple action-adventure placed into an alternate history where technological development and natural disaster proceeded differently. The writing, similarly, is extremely simple. Very little, in artistry or in substance, would have been lost had this been presented as a comic book or a video game instead of as a novel. In fact, the reading experience was very much like engaging with a video game story. The author attaches a note at the end of the book justifying her deviations from history. In essence, her defense is that she needed a background other than that which real history provided. This seemed a rather lame excuse given that it is an alternate history work. With more effort and some creativity she could have given a plausible reason to explain why her 1860s Seattle differed from the real one. The book as a whole would have benefited much more from additional attention to the world it was set in. As it was, this could just has easily been placed in Kansas City, New Orleans, or Richmond....more
Loading...
