librarianreadseverything:

There are a multitude of reasons that students recommend a specific book. Frequently the plot speaks to them, the message is important, it’s a great theme, or some variation. Less often because it brings back a certain memory, i.e. their father read it to them when they were a child, their mother gave them the book, etc. When I grab a book from the list, I usually try not to look at why the person recommended it, so I can get a fresh sense of the book. But in certain circumstances, I look at what the student said beforehand.
I preface my review because I did just that for this book. I have never read Anne of Green Gables, nor any of the sequels, and this book seemed like the recommendation wasn’t going to be “it’s got a great plot.” What the student noted were the lush descriptions of the scenery, and the simplicity of the stories and the peacefulness.
With those pieces in mind, I absolutely agree. I mean, I’m not going to pick up Anne of Green Gables, or in this case, Anne’s House of Dreams, because I’m going on vacation and need something for the plane. Or I want something while I’m on-line at the store. But this book makes it easy to read. When you open it up, L.M. Montgomery presents a slowed-down version of the world. Anne and her husband are enjoying their new home, sitting back and sipping tea with their neighbors. As a reader, your heart isn’t pumping fast through the thriller. You don’t have to turn on all the lights for a horror. And you’re not learning new things about faraway lands or faraway times. You’re just easing into a comfortable pair of slippers and a soft chair and letting the breeze trickle through the windows. Anne’s House of Dreams will lull you safely into a softer, gentler spot. 
The book doesn’t pretend to be any more than it is - a place to go when you want to hit the “pause” button on life.

librarianreadseverything:

There are a multitude of reasons that students recommend a specific book. Frequently the plot speaks to them, the message is important, it’s a great theme, or some variation. Less often because it brings back a certain memory, i.e. their father read it to them when they were a child, their mother gave them the book, etc. When I grab a book from the list, I usually try not to look at why the person recommended it, so I can get a fresh sense of the book. But in certain circumstances, I look at what the student said beforehand.

I preface my review because I did just that for this book. I have never read Anne of Green Gables, nor any of the sequels, and this book seemed like the recommendation wasn’t going to be “it’s got a great plot.” What the student noted were the lush descriptions of the scenery, and the simplicity of the stories and the peacefulness.

With those pieces in mind, I absolutely agree. I mean, I’m not going to pick up Anne of Green Gables, or in this case, Anne’s House of Dreams, because I’m going on vacation and need something for the plane. Or I want something while I’m on-line at the store. But this book makes it easy to read. When you open it up, L.M. Montgomery presents a slowed-down version of the world. Anne and her husband are enjoying their new home, sitting back and sipping tea with their neighbors. As a reader, your heart isn’t pumping fast through the thriller. You don’t have to turn on all the lights for a horror. And you’re not learning new things about faraway lands or faraway times. You’re just easing into a comfortable pair of slippers and a soft chair and letting the breeze trickle through the windows. Anne’s House of Dreams will lull you safely into a softer, gentler spot. 

The book doesn’t pretend to be any more than it is - a place to go when you want to hit the “pause” button on life.

Reblogged from librarianreadseverything

librarianreadseverything:

You’ve got your old gods - Odin, Ibis, a bunch of others I can’t remember. And they’re brought to America by the people who believed in them. Then you’ve got your new gods - television, media, the Internet. For reasons that I didn’t really catch, they’re going to fight. Okay, so I really like the idea of gods being brought to America by those who believe in them. And I like the idea that Odin and Loki need blood and chaos to live on (though why those particular two, I’m not really sure.) But pretty much the entire rest of the book I’m not really following. What’s with the buffalo headed person? And the thunderbirds and eagle stones? And was Lakeside just a story within the story, or was it necessary to the overall plot?
I don’t know, this is the second Neil Gaiman book I’ve read (Good Omens being the other) and I was not bowled over by either one. Gonna put it in the stack with Dr. Who titled, “Things Tumblr Reveres, That I Just Don’t Get.” The book has a cool concept, but I think Gaiman was smoking too much mescaline when he wrote the book.

librarianreadseverything:

You’ve got your old gods - Odin, Ibis, a bunch of others I can’t remember. And they’re brought to America by the people who believed in them. Then you’ve got your new gods - television, media, the Internet. For reasons that I didn’t really catch, they’re going to fight. Okay, so I really like the idea of gods being brought to America by those who believe in them. And I like the idea that Odin and Loki need blood and chaos to live on (though why those particular two, I’m not really sure.) But pretty much the entire rest of the book I’m not really following. What’s with the buffalo headed person? And the thunderbirds and eagle stones? And was Lakeside just a story within the story, or was it necessary to the overall plot?

I don’t know, this is the second Neil Gaiman book I’ve read (Good Omens being the other) and I was not bowled over by either one. Gonna put it in the stack with Dr. Who titled, “Things Tumblr Reveres, That I Just Don’t Get.” The book has a cool concept, but I think Gaiman was smoking too much mescaline when he wrote the book.

Reblogged from librarianreadseverything

librarianreadseverything:

I don’t know, these stories hinted at something deeper, but I just could never seem to grasp it. I tend to read so much on the surface of a novel, that I frequently miss the depth. Normally that’s fine, but I really felt as if there was more there to be captured, and because of both the short story nature as well as my own surface reading, I never felt satisfied.

librarianreadseverything:

I don’t know, these stories hinted at something deeper, but I just could never seem to grasp it. I tend to read so much on the surface of a novel, that I frequently miss the depth. Normally that’s fine, but I really felt as if there was more there to be captured, and because of both the short story nature as well as my own surface reading, I never felt satisfied.

Reblogged from librarianreadseverything

librarianreadseverything:

Frey’s work, while controversial for its “liberties” with the truth, still holds some of its power. Having read this with the full knowledge of the deception in mind, I was able to look at the book less as the true blow-by-blow account of one man’s ascent out of addiction, and more as a story of that same ascent. Taking away the factuality of the work I didn’t feel took much away from it’s overall strength. The work is still strong and in-your-face, and Frey doesn’t hold back for the delicacy of the reader. It takes a strong constitution to make it through some of the passages, but I think the book is better for it.

librarianreadseverything:

Frey’s work, while controversial for its “liberties” with the truth, still holds some of its power. Having read this with the full knowledge of the deception in mind, I was able to look at the book less as the true blow-by-blow account of one man’s ascent out of addiction, and more as a story of that same ascent. Taking away the factuality of the work I didn’t feel took much away from it’s overall strength. The work is still strong and in-your-face, and Frey doesn’t hold back for the delicacy of the reader. It takes a strong constitution to make it through some of the passages, but I think the book is better for it.

Reblogged from librarianreadseverything

librarianreadseverything:

I liked this one better than The Fault In Our Stars, as I felt like the plot was less contrived. Almost everyone I know has lost someone when they were a teenager, most of the time in a car accident. So we can all identify with that sudden vanishing. For many of us, it’s the first time we’ve really lost someone close to us. It’s not your grandmother who was old from the day you were born. It was someone just like you, and for the first time, you feel that invincibility has been pierced. You are no longer a child, whose mom or dad will come and wipe away your tears and tell you a story about heaven. You’re the adult now. You have to navigate this death yourself, and make up your own story about the After. John Green does it well here. There’s no overwrought romance. No lifelong friendships. There’s just the sudden death of a friend, and the rest of us standing around wondering what the fuck just happened.

Nailed it.

librarianreadseverything:

I liked this one better than The Fault In Our Stars, as I felt like the plot was less contrived. Almost everyone I know has lost someone when they were a teenager, most of the time in a car accident. So we can all identify with that sudden vanishing. For many of us, it’s the first time we’ve really lost someone close to us. It’s not your grandmother who was old from the day you were born. It was someone just like you, and for the first time, you feel that invincibility has been pierced. You are no longer a child, whose mom or dad will come and wipe away your tears and tell you a story about heaven. You’re the adult now. You have to navigate this death yourself, and make up your own story about the After. 

John Green does it well here. There’s no overwrought romance. No lifelong friendships. There’s just the sudden death of a friend, and the rest of us standing around wondering what the fuck just happened.

Nailed it.

Reblogged from librarianreadseverything