User Profile

Wanted to watch the movie, read the book first - first for both. Liked the book more than the film - but liked them both.

Our story within a story starts with the author in the 1970s finding a curious artifact in a graveyard, along with some interesting folks who would turn up earlier in the timeline. The history is good and connecting those dots helped drive the narrative. I love the foreshadowing of Starling on the first few pages. We know the ending from the beginning, so the suspense comes from the how. The sympathetic characters also carry the reader, along with a bit of humor. Apparently the author enjoyed the character of Liam Devlin enough to return to him a decade later, and this story enough to write a sort-of sequel.

The film version starred Michael Caine and Donald Sutherland among others. It did not start with the prequel, so the film audience could think the plan might work. Many of the intricacies of character are lost in the film, along with a few subplots. Bobby Shafto becomes a bumbling Pitts played by Larry Hagman, almost entirely comical. This was John Sturges' last film, and Caine has stated it wasn't edited effectively. Jenny Agutter is excellent as the strong female character Molly Prior.

The original conclusion of a trilogy (two additional books were added decades later), this returns to what made this fantasy story unique - I rate this higher than the first book.

The first three books were written 40 years ago, and strong female characters help them feel more recent. Gil, who gets into a well written sword fight in this novel, may be a representation of the author, both graduate students of history.

In the first book, there is a fair amount of "new here, how does it compare to California". The second book had very little of that. Discovery of some of the mechanisms behind the keep, along with a prototype "flame thrower" are the closest we get to technology. At one point in this book, Gil dives in and finds solutions with research!

Other characters have some interesting growth as well, and the overall story comes to a conclusion. This was a hard book to put down. Was the resolution perfect? No, it was pretty fast and some reviewers have wondered at the ease of it. Were there other flaws? While mentioned multiple times, Gil's connection with Inglorion the Wizard isn't shown any other way. Do any of these flaws bring down the rating? No. This is one of the best stories I have read this year, and I would rate the series 4 stars, despite my feelings about the middle book.

Two additional books were published 13 years later, and four further novelettes another 20 years after that through Amazon and Smashwords. I'll probably read some or all of these, but after a pause to let the original trilogy sink in.

In just the sixth novel in the overall series, the ambitious author takes on the bard.

In this second book of the Witches series, he adds two more to make up a Shakespearean triumvirate, and brings back other lovable characters like Death and the Librarian. I hope the cat makes an appearance in a future novel also - tough guy there.

And yet... there was a lot to put into this work. Half again as many pages as the previous witches book, this is not the longest Discworld book I've read - but it felt like it. Blame jet lag, perhaps. A goodly amount of humor, but at times it felt like pages were spent setting up a one-off reference. The Disc theatre was one example.

So in comparison, I found this really good, but not as good as the previous in the series (Equal Rites) and not as good as the best of the City Watch books. Still looking forward to reading more Discworld!

Dystopian and depressing as hell, but that was the authors' intention. Strong female main character. Glad I read it, but it is not without flaws.

This worst-case scenario of America is all too believable, which makes this even scarier. Realistic depiction of characters thrust into a situation they must survive. Really drives home the longing and dread for those lost or left behind.

The dystopian world here is a little too black and white. It is hard to believe all of California would act as Sanctuary, and that no other states would join (with the exception of hints at the end). The authors laid out a pattern of lies, rampant weather problems and an environmentally hostile future - but there are no challenges to that, and no resolution. The only other countries mentioned are those where the immigrants are from - situations that are worse. Some of these problems could be intentional -writing only from the perspective of a 15 year old girl.

A detective novel (and the start of a series) set 150 years ago in New Zealand. I liked the history and the characters.

The plot touches on misogyny and racism, and it's good to see the main characters free of these prejudices. I read this as an audiobook, and the reader did a good job with the accents. The characters I liked most were the two sidekicks.

The ending, a setup for the return of the villain, felt pretty forced. The story is a little slow to start, and the characters don't have a lot of growth in this book. Perhaps the series will be better.

The author spent a lot of time in New Zealand; the place and history are well represented here. Clearly she had a plan for the characters, because the first three books of the series were all released in 2018, with a fourth book following in 2020. I plan to read another in the near future.

Detailed discussion of tolerance doctrine, comparing and contrasting Hobbes, Locke, and Roger Williams, whose idea of "Meer Civility" is borrowed for the title.

These three philosophers developed their doctrines at a time of frequent verbal religious strife, both between Protestants and Catholics and outside to other faiths. In summary, Hobbes mostly pushed for silence and Locke through legislation, though those views changed over his lifetime. Williams was more in between these two, suggesting that thicker skins were better, and distinguishing between true compromise and mere civility. The conclusion of the book notes that America has generally more freedom of speech and fewer laws related to insults than other societies.

The author teaches political theory at Oxford, and unfortunately this reads more like a textbook than an accessible work of non-fiction. Sentences are long and dense - here is one example from the conclusion:
"Even if one rejects Williams' mere civility, along with the Hobbesian and Lockean alternative, as intolerant or repressive, it is important to remember that all of these positions arose out of a serious and sustained engagement with a truth that modern commentators too often seem determined to overlook."

It took me more than two months to finish this book, and that wasn't time spent in studied contemplation. I chose this book as a follow up to a Williams biography and history read recently. 2½ stars out of 5.