Collected Miscellany

It is hard to believe all of the ink spilled over the release of the final installment of Harry Potter. Allow me to spill a few pixels too. While I was reading the penultimate book and watching the British Open millions of fans were lining up to get the book, furiously reading it to find out what happened, and then discussing it with family and friends. I, however, was studiously avoiding anything that might give away the ending or key events.

Monday night I was able to complete the final chapter in the saga and yesterday and today I read quite a bit of commentary online. Yesterday, I jotted down some thoughts on the series as a whole. Today, I offer my thoughts on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

The big question has to be: was it worth the wait? I have to say yes. It was a thrilling and moving conclusion to a wonderful series. Was it perfect? Not surprisingly, no. I am sure almost every fan had something they wish was different or some aspect of the book they didn’t understand. Critics can go on at some length about nits they would like to pick, etc. See the Slate book club or Ross Douthat for an example. As with all of the last four books I think it could have been edited in such a way that the writing was tighter and the plot smoother, but obviously the publisher was not interested in this strategy. I found it suspenseful and enjoyable. A few complaints, however, along with what I liked are listed below.

Continue reading →

So. I have finally finished book seven: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. In fact, over the last couple of weeks I re-read the first six books in the series in order to have everything fresh in my mind for the conclusion in book seven. Below I offer some thoughts about the series as a whole before tackling a review of Deathly Hallows in a separate post.

I consider myself in a sort of middle position on the whole Pottermania phenomenon. Despite having taken the time to read, and re-read, the entire series, I haven’t been a particularly zealous Potter fan. As the series has played out I haven’t scourged the internet seeking clues to hidden meanings or key plot developments of soon to be released books (or joined chat rooms connecting with other fans to engage in such speculation). I haven’t developed complex theories about the stories or characters; or attempted to make predictions about what would happen to them in the final book. The seventh book was the only book I purchased on the day it was released.

But neither have I joined in the frequent sneering criticism of the book’s style, or quality of writing, nor have I rejected the books as theologically dangerous, or tempting, for children. The first can often contain valid criticisms but are really beside the point and the second is preposterous over-reaction revealing a lack of subtlety and common sense.

As a fan of children’s and young adult fantasy literature I simply enjoyed reading the books. (Well, not all of them. I didn’t enjoy The Order of the Phoenix very much the first time around. I still think it is the weakest book of the series, but it makes up for it somewhat with a strong conclusion.) I am not particularly obsessive about it, I just find this sort of thing interesting and wanted to find out what the whole hoopla was about.

And I think anyone who tries to deny Rowling’s amazing accomplishment is being snobby, petty, or both. She has created an alternate universe that readers love to lose themselves in. This universe is complex and interesting and full of characters readers care about. To pull off a seven book series of this nature – particular under the pressure and microscope of the worldwide phenomenon – is an amazing feat. I am confident that people will be reading Harry Potter for years to come.

Continue reading →

Trying desperately to finish the first six Harry Potter books before Saturday I have neglected posting some interesting links and information. Since it appears I will fail to finish the books anyway, I might as well clear out my email and share these links.

– Writers will want to be sure to check out the The Warren Adler Short Story Contest . The 2007 Contest Theme is New York City

Born-and-bred, out-of-towner, tourist for a day, or just longing and dreaming to visit, you’ve got a story about New York, some moment or snapshot you feel evokes this mad, exciting city and the fascinating people at its core.

Maybe you’ve already written it and have it buried deep in your desk drawer or in the bowels of your hard drive. Or maybe it’s still bouncing around your head, waiting for that chance bolt to strike you.

Try telling it in no more than 2,500 words and you might share it with the world.

– In conjunction with the release of (Not that You Asked): Rants, Exploits, and Obsessions Steve Almond is also having a contest:

In Steve Almond’s latest book, (Not that You Asked), Almond shares his rants, exploits, and obsessions about everything from why he hates Oprah’s Book Club to why he loves Vonnegut to what he thinks about being a first-time dad (whether you asked for it or not). Now, we are asking you for your own rants, exploits, and obsessions!

For more info on the contest see the unofficial rules for instructions and the official rules for the technicalities.

Here is how Steve describes how the book came together:
Seeing as how the format of Not That You Asked is somewhat unique in structure, how did the book itself and the content within evolve?

SA: By “unique in structure” I take it you mean “complete mess.” The book began life as a proposed biography of Kurt Vonnegut, whom I’d worshipped during high school and college. It was my Corporate Masters at Random House who suggested a book of essays. I was immediately suspicious, fearful that I’d be sent off to Toledo and told to write about the Amazing Bearded Fat Lady at the State Fair. (I have enough Bearded Fat Ladies in my life as it is.) So I told these Corporate Masters, I says to them: “Listen, I’m not really an essayist. I’m more a writer of depressing, pornographic short stories. Are you sure you want to me do this?” And they said, “Yes.” And I said, “I only write essays about the stuff that obsesses me.” And they said, “Fine.” And I said, “Okay, look. I want to believe you. But I’m a pathetic, anxiety ridden wretch. Meaning, I don’t really believe you, because you’re a bunch of Corporate Masters and it’s pretty much your job to hornswoggle pathetic, anxiety-ridden writers. So what I’m going to do is send you some of my essays and you can tell me if this is what you had in mind.” So that’s what I did. And their response was, “Looks dandy.” So I finally got it through my thick skull that they actually weren’t pulling an elaborate April Fools gag and signed on the dotted line. The manuscript I turned in had about twenty essays, many of them shorter pieces. My editor, Julia “Please Stop Being a Pathetic Wretch” Cheiffitz, suggested I cut some of these, and write a few more long pieces, which I did, after the standard period of aggrieved grumbling. This is a very long answer that I hope makes perfectly clear why the book is a complete mess. I deserve all the blame. Then again, I’m not sure readers care so much about organization. In the end, they just want good stories, a laugh, something to remind them how deeply embarrassed we all are, all the time.

Continue reading →

In reading various accounts and response to the contretemps surrounding Alan Wolfe’s essay on Russell Kirk, I recently came across an intelligent and thought provoking response by R.R. Reno at First Things. I found Reno’s discussion of ordered liberty and his comparing and contrasting the views of Hobbes and Kirk insightful:

Leaving aside the snide tone, Wolfe is correct to note that “everything Kirk says about religion and the social order is breathtakingly unoriginal.” Like so many before him, Kirk thought religion a crucial pillar of a healthy society. But Wolfe is quite wrong when his ends his observation by saying that Kirk is conventional, “except for the remark that without religion we would be in a constant state of war. Given the fact that so many wars have been fought over religion, there is no disputing the creativity of that observation.” Wolfe needs to be careful with his clever, superior lines. Was Hobbes an obvious idiot for saying that without the absolute power of the sovereign we would experience the war of all against all? But wait–don’t sovereigns launch most wars?

I don’t think you need to be a terribly subtle thinker to see that neither Hobbes nor Kirk is a fool. In fact, there is an important similarity between the two that Wolfe’s dismissive review fails to recognize and explore. Both Hobbes and Kirk view the power that imposes order as necessary to control base human impulses and to minimize their destructiveness. But there is also a very important difference. Hobbes saw human beings as pleasure-seeking and pain-avoiding machines; as a consequence, order could only be imposed externally and harshly by the Leviathan. In contrast, Kirk viewed us as complicated spiritual, social, and physical beings. We can fear God and develop self-disciplining inhibitions that allow us to bring order to our lives, and, as a consequence, we can become free, cooperative agents in a democratic process that shapes society into a moral order capable of perpetuating self-disciplined, free social actors. This is the deep anthropological insight of the conservative ideal of ordered liberty.

I am still slogging through the Harry Potter tomes as fast as I can – four down two to go – but I just realized that there is going to be a problem with me trying to read the seventh book as soon as I get it.

This weekend is the British Open! Rather than reading, I will be spending every morning watching golf. I am not sure there is a big overlap between the legion of Harry Potter fans and those who love to watch golf, but it is a problem for me.

But not really a very big one. I am not going to be the first to read or review the last Potter book so it won’t mean a great deal if I do so the next week rather than the very day it comes out.

Plus, I am not sure I am going to finish reading all six book before getting to the finale. Man, these last couple of books are thick! I have been enjoying them, however, and will try to offer some thoughts on my re-reading when I get the chance.

Michael Jecks’ ninth book in his medieval murder series, The Traitor of St. Giles, is the best yet. The first few books in the series were a little long on detail and short on plot, but that has been remedied in the last few books in the series.

Here is a brief summary of the plot from the book’s website:

It is 1321 and the King’s favourite, Hugh Despenser, is corruptly using his position to steal lands and wealth from other lords. His rapacity has divided the nation and civil war looms.

In Tiverton rape and murder have unsettled the folk preparing for St Giles’ feast. Philip Dyne has confessed and claimed sanctuary in St Peter’s church, but he must leave the country. If he doesn’t, he’ll be declared an outlaw, his life forfeit.

Sir Baldwin Furnshill, Keeper of the King’s Peace, and his friend, Bailiff Simon Puttock, arrive at Lord Hugh de Courtenay’s castle at Tiverton for the feast. When a messenger arrives calling for the Coroner, Baldwin and Simon accompany him to view the body of Sir Gilbert of Carlisle, Despenser’s ambassador to Lord Hugh. Not far off lies a second corpse: the decapitated figure of Dyne. The Coroner is satisfied that Dyne killed the knight and was then murdered: Dyne was an outlaw, so he doesn’t merit the law’s attention, but Sir Baldwin feels too many questions are left unanswered. How could a weak, unarmed peasant kill a trained warrior? And if he did, what happened to Sir Gilbert’s horse – and his money?

When Baldwin and Simon are themselves viciously attacked, they know that there must be another explanation. A more sinister enemy is at large, someone with a powerful motive to kill. But there are so many suspects …

Although the plot has many twists and turns and Jecks tries to keep you guessing about who the murderer is, I think it was a little easy to figure out the murderer by the middle of the book. Despite this, Jecks has increasingly written more interesting books with better plot lines and better character development – this shows when you compare the first book (The Last Templar) with this one.

Jecks balances the right amount of background information with the plot. He gives just enough background information to interest you, but not too much to bore you. In the earlier books, I think the plot got lost amongst the details of the time period. Don’t get me wrong, I think historical accuracy is good, but I think that can overpower the plot of the book if there is too much of it.

I think you will enjoy The Traitor of St. Giles.