User Profile

I'm always on the lookout for random detective novels, especially those that have some interesting aspect that I haven't seen before. This one is interesting because it is set during the 1920s-1930s of the Soviet Union, and part of it includes some of the internal struggles that a person undergoes as they recognise that the party apparatchiks and leaders were not actually engaging with the plans that they claimed would've supported every Soviet citizen (unfortunately a police officer, though his position appears to change over the course of the book).

It's an uncommon setting and structure, and I really like that part of the problem that comes up over and over again is how Vasya's own bosses and "subordinates" (they are in name only) continually impede his ability to investigate the case he's working on in multiple ways (removing evidence, accidentally destroying it, sending him somewhere else, and trying to scare him out of researching something.

I will say that the solution isn't... satisfactory to me? Mostly because it's barely choreographed and feels like it comes out of nowhere; there was some choreographing, but considering where my attention was focused for most of the novel? I wouldn't have even thought of that as being the answer; it makes sense, but I guess the author wanted readers to feel like Vasya did when he learned who the killer was.

As a story, I really liked it and did find it very intriguing. As a detective story, I felt like I was missing being able to solve the clues as the book went (and that's the part of detective stories I love; I want to participate in the puzzle).

This is yet another book where I've read it primarily from the perspective of a person looking for resources to support students' learning of English, and this is yet another book where I've found it was written... as if it was meant to be an educational book that "doesn't feel" like an educational book (except it does). Then, I look up the publisher where the book resides, and I keep finding them to be educational publishers (or closely related to educational publishers).

This is not an inherent problem except that these books are highly formulaic and repeat the exact same basic structures over and over. These structures aren't used to do anything except create recognisable patterns; they almost never utilise any other storytelling mechanic that could impart information and often just silently and indirectly teach children the "proper" way to give or receive information.

As for the story, it's... okay. There are aspects that I'm not comfortable with (minimising sexual harassment/assault, which does happen in one area where Zeus pins a woman to the ground and then asks for a kiss) while also glossing over aspects of the stories in order to mostly sanitise them beyond the 'common knowledge' aspects.

That's the other issue; it's all just the most common things, with no attempts to go beyond that. That's usually another tell that a book is part of an 'educational' series that is designed to be educational (even without seeing all the glossaries in the back). And again, I don't have problems with books being educational or prompting learning, but books designed for the explicit purpose of being used in an educational setting definitely seem to lack an audience to write for (or rather, that audience is usually "educational publishers" instead of anyone who should learn from it).

One of the things I like about this story is its structure, which isn't a super common way of writing children's books. It's written in the format of multiple letters from the same little girl (Lydia Grace). First, she writes to her Uncle Jim prior to moving in with him while her father looks for work during 1935; second, she writes mostly to her grandmother (but also her parents) while living with her uncle.

I kind of think this format could be used more and provide interesting narratives for kids to read. None of the letters come across forced; they feel very much like something a child would say.

Because my purpose was to read it to see how it'd work as recommendations for students learning English, a lot of my focus will be on how it succeeds in that manner. Personally, this book comes off like it was written to meet the requirements of a 'reading recovery' course or as part of a set of books meant to be used alongside 'leveled reading'. Or maybe more like something intended for a 'reading workshop' (which sounds like a good idea, but actually has a lot of flawed teaching around literacy in the curriculum that's been promoted via Lucy Calkins and her adherents).

That is to say: The story is trite. It's overly predictable (even for someone in the target audience of 9-13), and the narrative is completely lacking in anything that will pull someone in to engage them. I say that it's not good even for its target audience because it mirrors the same stories that my students often complain about when their teachers hand them explicitly labeled leveled readers from publishers like Oxford, Pearson, and Usborne (the latter of which does actually publish engaging materials when they aren't focusing on "being educational," ironically).

With the way it reads, this book is very much one of those that was intended as part of those "educational" 'leveled readers', even though it has a lot of vocabularly that kids might struggle with ('brewski', which wasn't even common slang for a beer in 2011 in most English-speaking countries—they might've done well to use 'brew', which would've been more educational and closer to accurate for Ancient Greece); it includes things that are incomplete and presumes a lower level of intelligence on the part of their readers (the 'old Greek speak for' sections are very much in this vein).

Another tell that this is designed for one of those previously mentioned reading curricula is that the end has a "Discussion" section, which is hyper-common among leveled readers and also workshop-intended books. (Not to mention, the questions are always tedious and don't even really engage the reader with the content of the book except on an incredibly superficial level.)

Personally, there are some weird vibes that I get from this book that make me want to look into the author a bit more. And the publisher, though that might be more complex than the author.

Side note: The Underworld wasn't hot, so why the reference to Christian Hell for people who weren't?

Not that it's inappropriate, but I find it odd that mentions of beer are fine but other alcohol (like wine or spirits) is off-limits. It's very peculiar.

Also weird to use 'brewski'. Didn't that shift out of the language at some point? Or are we all weird 90s and early 2000s frat boys?

This isn't funny as a pun because it doesn't even apply to Cerberus who is anything but an underdog? It doesn't even work as amusing irony because Hades knows who Cerberus is.

Unexpected 'beer' reference, which is kind of funny because every other time? It's really been like they've been trying to ensure that the two have been tied to "child-friendly" things.

-groan- No, that doesn't need to happen. This is modern fiction; they could organise however they want.

N... no?

Though it is interesting because my understanding has always been reversed (nectar is a food, and ambrosia is a drink), but actually... Both can be correct.

In Homer, ambrosia was the food and nectar was the drink; in Alcman, nectar is the food and in Sappho's work, ambrosia is the drink.

But I highly doubt either were cake-like or apple juicey, and this just feels like undermining kids' interaction with the world around them. (Not even for the sake of a joke, but for the sake of keeping them innocent of something.)

And this repetitive used of "old Greek speak" is making me wonder if this was a series of books commissioned out of a need to have "easy to read" books rather than just... writing books that were interesting. It's a huge tell for me because these kinds of 'jokes' are often used as a "we know this word is above you, so we're going to give you synonyms in the text and not footnotes" sort of thing... Which bothers me a lot now, but I've never met kids who like when books do this? Not to say there aren't any, but the complaints I often get if this is something a kid comes across? Is that it's condescending.

... Which makes me want to look more into Capstone Press.

And if it's not a book written for that purpose, then it's a whole entire failure for this writer to understand her audience.

Ughhh, I really am not fond of these sorts of things? I know it's a joke, but again. It's not even a funny one, and it also just undermines any characterisation that could happen? Though, it seems like the author doesn't really like anyone she's writing about at this particular moment, lol.

This is such a regional thing that I don't even understand why it's a pun that was chosen. It's... not even funny? Just say recliner and don't make people try to remember La-Z-Boy is a thing (if it didn't take them a few moments to even realise it was a pun on a regional company of furniture makers).

I feel like the author missed a trick where they should've used 'they' over 'he', since it's a three-headed dog. Which is just more interesting to show wider grammatical usage rather than a statement on anything.