(no subject)

[swan_tower]

It is a very, very good thing that a month or two ago, when I actually had some spare time in which to read, I read a couple of good books and wrote up recommendations for them right away, to be used at later dates. Otherwise, I might have inaugurated my fifth year of recommendations by being late with the first one. (I very nearly was anyway.)

But the month isn't over yet, and I have something to recommend to you: Blood and Iron, by Elizabeth Bear (aka matociquala). Tasty urban faerie fantasy goodness.

In other news, I'm off to VeriCon, in the soon-to-be hellishly cold wilds of Boston. The high tomorrow is supposed to be 12. I may, in fact, die.

Comments

[ckd]

Yeah, I'm looking forward to Vericon, not so much looking forward to the walk home each night. Brr.

[(Anonymous)]

Having tried to read "Blood and Iron" a few weeks ago, I agree with your comment about it not always being clear what's going on. Perhaps this "quirk" can be attributed to Bear being a SF writer first? Some of the SF books I've read use terms and concepts that are common to the setting as if the reader should already know what they mean, and after a few chapters, we can usually piece it together.

Yes, Bear's prose is beautifully written—almost decadent. So I felt awful that I couldn't get into the story.

However, I would still encourage others to give her novel a try. Especially if they love Celtic myths and the Arthurian legends. (Maybe I'll have another go at reading it, too.)

C. Rooney

[swan-tower.livejournal.com]

Terms and concepts aren't what threw me; it was the opacity of character that kicked in from time to time.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, there's that fine line. I don't mind if one character keeps things from me or dances around something that will be revealed later. But if every character is doing that, it's really frustrating.