50 Book Challenge Part Five

Ontop - Not specifically on NLMG but in general:

"You say it is science fiction because part of its plot concerns something to do with science that we can't yet do."

It's not me saying it Look up "science fiction" in any dictionary.

"I think it is fiction and the science part is irrelevant to what the book is really about. That part doesn't matter to me"

If a story takes place during the Fall of Constantinople but wrong on every conceivable detail, would you say "You think it's historical fiction because it's about a time & place in history. I think it's just fiction, history part doesn't matter to me"?

Or would you think that the author could have at least researched his subject and made his story more or less consistent with known facts?

"loveliest family story about fraud and murder"

Wait... what?

1. Monster Love by Carol Topolski

Read this in one sitting today, and I haven't managed a book in a day for well over a year so I'm pleased. I think the Kindle cloud reader format was the main reason why though, because despite the fact that it was a very readable book, I don't rate it that highly.

I found the telepathic nature of the parents relationship implausible and therefore didn't like the last section of the book, it just stretched my willing suspension of disbelief too far. It was better from the beginning to middle, but even then, I never really felt truly interested by the parents, I didn't feel compelled to understand why they did it, and that's what I wanted to be made to feel. It was an easy read but unfulfilling.

Still reading The Girl With All The Gifts

Please all go and read Brat Farrar if you haven't yet. It's the loveliest family story about fraud and murder you'll ever read.

I've never even been tempted to read NLMG, even before all the debate on here. I always want to have an opinion but don't want to go so far as actually reading it.

Thanks, Cheerful. I'd forgotten about Miss Pym. Will look out for her!

I recommended Miss Pym Disposes to you - that's Josephine Tey.

I love Josephine Tey, but I'm not that fussed about her Inspector Grant ones. He's a bit dull for me - I like my Golden Age crime with heiresses and evil butlers and priceless jewels. I prefer the Teys where it's about ordinary people suddenly having to deal with the fact that someone they know has done something dreadful. Brat Farrar is my favourite of hers, but The Franchise Affair is also worth reading.

Bored of NLMG. Everytime we 'fight' about it on here I end up thinking that it's too dumb a book to warrant all the discussion.

Book 41
The Man in the Queue by Josephine Tey
Have I seen JT mentioned on here before? Never seen any before and then happened to spot two in the library, so grabbed them.

My first Tey. I quite enjoyed it – liked Inspector Grant and liked the way it was pretty obvious that it all looked too easy and that there were obviously going to be twists, but found the twist itself a bit daft and hated the way the author sometimes intruded, especially at the very end. A bit Enid Blyton overall. I’ll read the other since I've got it from the library but doubt I'll go out of my way to get more after that.

Thank you RMC and Chessie- I wonder what book that was from then?! Think it was a series about pre and post was aristo family with lots of cousins; howeverbit was somewhat trashy and I wondered why peeps keep raving about it! Will try the real Cazelets instead!

Btw am very much enjoying 15) the Hanging Shed by Gordon Ferris which was recommended on an earlier thread this year, I nearly didn't start it as I didn't realise it was historical (usually if I want to read post war detective fiction I will read something written in the 40s or 50s), but I am gripped so off to finish it right now!

I wasn't as wowed by The Hare With the Amber Eyes as I expected to be. I was a little bored, though some of the history is quite diverting. It is pretty short though.

Tarahumara thanks. Good to know it improves. Think I will leave it as my second best book at the moment. Loads is stuff going on here in RL so need something I can escape into without a fight. Won't abandon it though

I don't care enough about NLMG to want to argue endlessly about it, so won't write again on the subject, but, really, the book does make some kind of sense. It makes sense to me. I appreciate it doesn't make sense to you, but that doesn't stop it making sense to me - nor does it make me wrong. Other people on this thread and elsewhere have said it makes sense to them too. There are plenty of people who think Wuthering Heights is a good book so there is room for diversity of opinion in literature, as in all art.

You say it is science fiction because part of its plot concerns something to do with science that we can't yet do. I think it is fiction and the science part is irrelevant to what the book is really about. That part doesn't matter to me, but it matters intensely to you. That part does not invalidate the book at all to me, but it invalidates it completely to you. You think it is an odd and sad thing. I think it is compelling and thought-provoking.

I'm sure we've both read many hundreds of books and will probably agree on some of them and disagree on others. You're obviously as irritated by NLMG as I was recently by All The Light We Cannot See (for completely different reasons). We all have our own lines we cannot cross.

But the problem is not conforming to a genre. NLMG is SF, whether you think it is or not. Tgere is no preset formula to confirm to. It talks about a future when people are cloned for organs, just like the book Spares and the film The Island. The fact that there is no such technology (and as a result, society) at present clearly defines the book as SF. It is also arguably Dystopian, which is a sub-genre of SF.

As someone else said, it is "scienceless sci-fi" which is an odd and sad thing.

Regardless of whether or not you like or have previously read SF, you presumable require books to make sense. That means, if author intends to make all characters do strange stuff like go meekly to their deaths without a thought for escape or rebellion, he needs to do a minimum of worldbuilding. Or (for a non-SF book) if main character hates her children, there needs to be at least a little bit of exploration into why - rape? past trauma? psychosis?

It's not about conforming to a genre. It's about the story making some sort of sense.

RMC I was on this thread last year asking exactly the same question! I persevered with it and yes, I found that the pace picked up a bit when the narrative moved from Paris to Vienna. I ended up quite enjoying this.

The Hare with the Amber Eyes. Anyone read it? I have had it on my Kindle app on my phone it is my book to read when I have forgotten my current book! If that makes sense! Thing is I have had it a while now about 20% of the way through and finding it a bit up hill. Is it worth really concentrating on it? I.e. Making it my 'main book'? Does the pace pick up ? Help!

25. Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri.

I'm not normally a fan of short stories but I really enjoyed this collection by Lahiri. She is an American writer of Bengali origin and these stories focus on Indian/American characters (mainly second and third generations) and how they cope with their mixed cultural environment. A real treat to read; it's beautifully written. Simple stories of every day life which resonate.

54. Confetti Confidential by Holly McQueen

Mindless fluff about a woman setting up as a wedding planner. Very similar in tone to the Shopoholic series so if you like those you might like this. I found out when I'd finished it's the third in a trilogy but that didn't seem to matter.

Ontop agree completely with that. I tend to enjoy book based on character, plot and depth of writing etc. Whether they conform to a particular genre really doesn't worry me. And to be honest it's rare I get too hung up on a book I haven't enjoyed. Too many books, too little time to keep going over it.

I think that's probably the main issue here. I read all books as just books, not as genre books. I don't have particular expectations of crime or science fiction and wouldn't expect a writer to have to conform to any particular expectations when writing a novel. I wouldn't have thought of classifying NLMG as science fiction any more than I would have thought of classifying His Bloody Project as a crime/whodunnit. For me, the issue of organ rejection might cross my mind but it wouldn't bother me - I would assume in this fictitious world that that wasn't an issue. And I wouldn't expect the characters to tell me about it because in that book we have a blinkered and limited narrator.

On the other hand, in a book like Room, the illogicalities of the plot and of the character behaviours do irritate me. Or in a book like All the Light We Cannot See the terrible writing really irks me.

I think it's like Tanaqui says above - if an author tries to write in a genre w/o understanding what the expectations are, e.g. writes a whodunnit and fails to deliver who actually did it, just meanders off somewhere else, it can be an absolutely infuriating experience for a reader who has had certain expectations set up. A knowledgeable genre writer can subvert those expectatations by showing they're doing it deliberately, and that doesn't rattle in the same way ignorance does (and can be hugely entertaining, as in The Laundry Files).

I think what's happening with books like NLMG and possibly Station Eleven is that it's possible to read them through a literary fiction lens or a science fiction lens. Through a lit lens you see a decent narrative, characterisation etc, through a sci-fi lens you see shitty worldbuilding that drops you out of the story.

Incidentally, I agree with Ursula Le Guin who has said "“No writer can successfully use the ‘surface elements’ of a literary genre — far less its profound capacities — for a serious purpose, while despising it to the point of fearing identification with it”

She was referring to Margaret Atwood and Kazuo Ishiguro.

"Paddington - I don't discount it just because there are currently no talking bears in Notting Hill, but I enjoy thinking about what life would be like if a family did adopt one."

I'm a big SF reader and of course we don't discount SF books because there are currently no faster-than-light space travel, contact with alien species, transfer of human consciousness to other bodies, time travel, etc

The point is that in a good SF book that explores what would happen with technologies that don't (yet?) exist, the author must put together credible details in an internally consistent whole and convince the reader that the events described in the story are at the very least possible, if not probable. This is called worldbuilding and is essential in SF. It is what sets apart great books and great authors from silly ones.

Needless to say, Paddington is a children's bedtime story, not a SF book truly exploring the possibility of talking bear living with a family. As such, it is not held up to the same standards and does not have to convince the reader that such a story can possibly happen, in the way that the author describes.

NLMG is sadly closer to Paddington than a proper SF book written for adults, where the author would have at least made a decent effort at world building.

Like I said I read NLMG a very long time ago and it didn't provoke this debate within me. I don't read a lot of Sci Fi at all but I think I saw this book as in the dystopian fiction range. The feeling of absolute control stops the characters from rebelling. It had shades of the Handmaids Tale for me. The ending of the film version where she does shoot the Commander and end up living in caravan are just wrong! Interestingly I never thought of His Bloody Project as a detective novel. If anything I thought it was a clear Social Commentary / History novel.

Maybe that's true re not reading a great deal of true science fiction - I'm judging NLMG (which is by no means one of the best books I've ever read but I remember it, which means it was one of the good books I've read) as I would judge, say, Paddington - I don't discount it just because there are currently no talking bears in Notting Hill, but I enjoy thinking about what life would be like if a family did adopt one.

By the way, I really admire Le Guin.

No, that's not The Cazalets Tanaqui!