User Profile

I'm not one for swooning but that letter had my limbs feeling quite faint. What a moment. Loved it.

The book is a delight, Ann is a complex character packed full of doubts even as she exhibits the usual Austen heroine traits of good judgement, excellent decorum and refined taste. The characters around her are the classic mixture of good, bad, and hilariously horrible.

It doesn't tie everything off into a satisfying tight little package like Pride and Prejudice but that isn't the point of this book. The central plot is based around a decade old missed opportunity, add to that the unresolved economic situation, the character threads left hanging, the strange unexpected matches, and it becomes a novel about the randomness of life, the moments that are passed by or that happen to come together.

I rate that.

A strong DNF, I would be kind and give it two stars since the idea of having an intrinsic motivation is a nice idea, but the examples he gives are so wildly selective and innaccurate I can't forgive it.

He also includes a concept that was so dumb it might have melted my brain. He claims people in the past believed the world was flat so they didn't explore because they were scared of falling off the edge.

That's why they didn't explore.

Not because of a lack of sufficient naval technology. Not because of societies needing to reach a certain size to have the ability to fund and man risky exploratory missions. No.

The reason sailors didn't explore was because they were scared of falling off the edge of the map.

I can't.

I liked this book but I respected it more than I liked it.

This is an example of the kind of story that's worth having the plot spoiled beforehand, just so you can focus on what actually makes it good: the creeping tension and evocative setting.

It also didn't help that I spent a large chunk of the book being reminded of Iain Banks brilliant first novel The Wasp Factory. It's not a totally fair comparison because the two books have slightly different styles but still, I couldn't help it and this book was never going to come out on top in that match up.

After reading this I'm confident in saying most fantasy series would benefit from including one book where the characters become pirates for a bit.

Locke and Jean are still the beating heart of the series but the host of new characters manage to hold their own.

Not quite as tight as the first book, and it didn't add much new depth to the characters, but still a swashbuckling ride that never stops entertaining. The bold shift in style makes up for any small grumbles I might have.

Left me looking forward to book 3.

The stories in this reach a whole other level compared to the previous collection, the mysteries more complex and interesting, the adventures more entertaining, and featuring the introduction of some absolutely iconic characters in Mycroft and Moriarty.

This must be the definitive collection of Sherlock Holmes stories.

Biggest takeaway: Jane Austen is not a fan of children.

This is basically a rough draft of Pride and Prejudice. Inferior in most ways but can see how it would've been popular at release.

Found it weirdly judgemental, like Jane Austen hadn't yet learned to add nuance to her judgements, characters motives and actions are spelled out rather than shown.

Elinor is the one of the most fleshed out one dimensional character I've ever read. She's perfect and her only issues are dealing with a world that isn't ready for her perfection.

Loved every passage about a bachelor over 35 being tragically, desperately, over the hill.

A rip roaring, entertaining read. I loved the complete lack of focus on worldbuilding, nothing of the wider world is fleshed out, or plays a part in the story, instead it's all just a cool setting for a fun heist and revenge tale.

I will say the playful tone left me unprepared for the violence when it arrived, and there is no way that halfway through the book I would've expected the body count to reach what it does by the end. This tone discrepancy robs the dramatic moments of some of their emotional heft but it definitely keeps things thoroughly engaging.

If you're looking for a good old fashioned fun time with a book, this is a great option.

A fun remix/retelling of the Tempest, this isn't a book that will change the world but as a little piece to add to the rich mosaic of Shakespeare discourse it is a treat.

Plus Margaret Atwood sneaks in some Literature Studies 101, which is always a treat.

The first time I cried I was 27 years old so I have a real soft spot for coming-of-age stories about an emotionally challenged person trying their best to learn how to feel.

Never or seen this before, I liked it.

I'm not sure if it's a drama or a comedy. On the one hand you have the elegant and poetic journey of Prospero from betrayal, to revenge, to melancholy forgiveness. All the while potentially echoing the bard himself - who wrote this at the end of his career - reflecting on his own life and work.
On the other hand you have the dudebro comedy of Caliban and the lads getting plastered and hilariously failing at every step in their drunken attempt at a coup.

Good fun.

Well I can see why this is popular. When you so perfectly combine lifelong friendship and post-war Italy you can't miss.

Does everyone have the brilliant friend? The friend who you share a unique understanding of the world with that no one else seems to grasp? The friend that makes you feel both less and more than what you are?

That's nice to know, it's a friendship you don't see in literature enough.

Also, surely I'm not the only one that absolutely loved when Ferrante did that thing that some novels do, where it turns out the brilliant friend in the title wasn't who you expected. As the Elena of my duo, I appreciated the ego stroke.

Love a book that ends with some playful banter about the main character getting back into his cocaine habit.

This is the book that really locked in the Sherlock Holmes that we all know. A Study in Scarlet still treats him as a human, but this book turns him into a superhero. He loses some of his insecurity and as a result feels a little less real. Obviously this worked, the character revealed his franchise potential and we still talk about him to this day.

But it feels like there was a slightly different direction the character of Sherlock Holmes could have gone, somewhere a little rougher and more human, and that version would've been interesting to see too.

But hey, instead he became the most iconically Victorian comic book character ever.

I don't know if subconsciously I had heard these stories before, but the mystery in a lot of these mysteries didn't seem so mysterious.

If you remove "someone impersonating someone else" and "we know who did it and why, the only surprise is the specific details of the murder that you can only kind of guess at with the detail provided" then you rule out the vast majority of these stories.

But to be fair 'Scandal in Bohemia' was great, and I may be coming in with grandfathered expectations.