E. Lockhart: Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks, The
You might think the world doesn't need any more boarding school novels, but if you haven't read this one then you're wrong, wrong, wrong. E. Lockhart has surpassed herself with this fable of a girl coming into her own and challenging the boy's club at her prep school -- while falling in love with its members at the same time. Lockhart never simplifies or skirts gender issues and power dynamics, and lets Frankie be realistic instead of a treatise disguised as a character. The sly omniscient narrator tells the story perfectly, and leaves hope that maybe one girl can change the world. More novels as funny and true and perfect as this one, please.
Kathi Appelt: The Underneath
Appelt's first novel is a beautiful, magical fantasy for younger readers that will instantly become a classic. Seriously. I can imagine this book being in classrooms right alongside Charlotte's Web in a hundred years. The writing is poetic in the good way, and there's a lamia. Children are going to absolutely fall in love with Appelt's equally kind and brutal universe, where love conquers most, and it can take millenia to come to your senses.
Jincy Willett: The Writing Class
With her second novel, Willett matches the perfect pitch and execution of her brilliant short stories. Every writer will want to read this novel--very little wincing is involved, but expect a great deal of laughter. C and I found ourselves reading pieces aloud, after howling provoked the "what's so funny?" question. As with any good writing workshop or class, the characters become more appealing as you get to know them, and ultimately what she has pulled off is a satisfying mystery, and a satisfying exploration of humanity. Amy Gallup is a character to remember.
Karen Joy Fowler: Wit's End
A new novel by Karen Fowler really is something to be excited about, unlike many of the writers for whom such praise gets bandied about. (If you're smirking because you think you know something about her work from the title--not the book--The Jane Austen Book Club, please go sit in the corner and read any of her novels. You're welcome.) This is an unmystery-like mystery, concerned not so much with dead bodies--though there are plenty--as with the mysteries of healing and the heart, politics and people. How is it that a writer gets a lens on the present that's as revealing as the one she employs in historical fiction? Now that's a mystery. Highly recommended.
Steve Erickson: Zeroville
Steve Erickson novels are often like dreams, or revelations, or discovered artifacts, or written just for you. Zeroville's no different, although it is perhaps the most readily graspable example of his work to date. The Rosetta Stone is there; the secret decoder ring is a film projector. The dizzying Hollywood confidential stylings will make your inner film geek happy, but the uncovering of a truly mythic cinematic story--since cinema has existed forever--of sacrifice and redemption is even more memorable. See also: this review.
Ursula Dubosarsky: The Red Shoe (Neal Porter Books)
Set in Sydney during WWII, this wonderful novel travels between the view from inside each of three sisters. Dubosarsky perfectly captures the differences that come from being the younger, older, or middle child. Perfectly conjuring the period, and yet creating a completely accessible story, the narrative contrasts chapters focusing on the family with interstitials from the Sydney newspapers of the time, stories of polio, the H-bomb, and a defecting Russian spy (who happens to be in hiding next door). Nothing here is heavy-handed. Everything is perfectly balanced. It's a beautiful, beautiful novel. See my full take here.
Hi Gwenda,
Yes, I would have run the Smiley review, but not unedited. Nor did Mike Schaffer run it unedited. But I think we may have to quibble as to the sense of "editing" in this case. One reads through a review to make sure there are no grammatical glitches and no gaps in the information provided, questions raised, but left unanswered, etc.
But the reviewer's opinion of a given book is the reviewer's opinion, no more, no less. I ran many reviews that I didn't particularly agree with because that was what the reviewer thought and I had to respect that, not insist that the change a view to suit me - which would lose you a lot of reviewers pretty fast.
It is not the role of a book-review editor to protect an author from a negative review. Actually, I think this review, given the response it has generated, may benefit the book.
Best,
F
Posted by:Frank Wilson | April 08, 2008 at 07:47 PM
Hey Frank -- No, I get what you're saying, and agree with your point. (Guess I should have included the parenthetical that said so after all.) I was talking about the more intrusive type of editing, not cleaning little things up. I don't think that anyone believes that professional editors don't read reviews before they run them and I'd like to think that editors do something different than copy editors.
So in this case, the review says more about Smiley than it does about the book, and I think that kind of review can be enjoyable in a certain way for those of us who actually read book reviews. So I see no reason why an editor would send it back or refuse to run it, though I suppose I also wonder if it wasn't Jane Smiley, would it be sent back for revision. Eh, maybe, or at least some clarifying here and there, but possibly that's as it should be too. Part of what makes it enjoyable in that certain way is that Smiley's sitting high enough up the ivory tower that watching her slip off barely feels like schadenfreude at all.
Posted by:Gwenda | April 08, 2008 at 08:16 PM
Hi Gwenda --
So we are on the same page. I don't think being Jane Smiley would keep you from having an editor raise questions that needed to be asked - I certainly wouldn't hesitate, and I know Mike Schaffer wouldn't. One little secret about book-review editors, though: We tend to find people to review who don't need much of the nuts-and-bolts editing. We just don't have the time to deal with writers who need a heavy edit.
Posted by:Frank Wilson | April 08, 2008 at 09:01 PM
Yep -- and sure. The book review editors I've worked with have been great, and I don't think I've had much more than a couple of copy desk queries and the like. I suspect Ed might disagree with us about the need for stronger editing of certain reviews, but that's why we love him. :)
Posted by:Gwenda | April 09, 2008 at 06:21 AM
I haven't picked up a Stephen King book in years but that well-deserved shot makes me want to go buy his entire ouevre. What can I say? I like the smiting of the holier-than-thous.
Posted by:Brian F. | April 10, 2008 at 10:53 AM