The Best Book I Read This Month: The Haunting of Maddy Clare by Simone St. James

I went to the library on Saturday, looking for short books that would help me make up some ground on my Goodreads Challenge--where I was 10 books behind. I picked up a Stephen King novella, knowing it would be a quick read, and The Haunting of Maddy Clare. I chose The Haunting because it was a) relatively short and b) set in post-World War I England, one of my favorite settings. I read the King novella first and started The Haunting of Maddy Clare Sunday afternoon. It swept me away. I stayed up late Sunday night reading it and made sure I got up early enough Monday morning to finish it before I started work.

My library had the book classified as horror, but I didn't find it all that scary. (Perhaps a tolerance I've developed as a lifelong Stephen King reader?) Yes, there is a ghost--a rather violent one--but the story was more like a mystery, driven by the pursuit of answers to two questions: Who was Maddy Clare? What happened to her?

And Maddy doesn't do the only haunting in the story. World War I is just as vivid a specter, having left both physical and psychological scars on the two male leads, scars that inform their interactions with each other, with Maddy Clare, and with the main character: Sarah Piper.  And, as is fitting for an England where war has decimated the male population, the story is populated by female characters, with the men often playing supporting roles.

Ultimately, it was the interaction among the three "ghost hunters"--Sarah, Alistair, and Matthew--that drew me in, grabbed me, and held my attention. This is certainly not a story for the faint of heart, but Susanna Kearsley's cover blurb was accurate: it was spellbinding.

The Best Book I Read This Month: Stiletto by Daniel O'Malley

I'm not a big reader of fantasy. When I do read it, my tastes run toward the low-brow. The more snark and sarcasm, the better. (Dresden Files, about a wizard whose chief powers are sarcasm and finding trouble, is a favorite.) This month's book choice--Stiletto by Daniel O'Malley--fits that bill to a T.

Stiletto is a sequel and truly, it's best to read the first book before picking up this one. I was introduced to the first book, The Rook, via a short-lived virtual book club. I giggled my way through it. It was snarky and sarcastic and ridiculous and outrageous. Stiletto was the same. Maybe even more ridiculous and outrageous, if that's possible. If you like books grounded in reality, this is probably not a series for you. (Reality is a very distant, perhaps long-lost, cousin to the events in these books.) Also worth noting: the humor in both books is very dry (not surprising, given that the author is Australian and the books are set in Great Britain). Dry humor is absolutely my cup of tea, but it's not for everyone.

At the center of the series is a secret British organization called the Checquy. The Checquy is basically a supernatural police force. Its members have supernatural powers, and it is responsible for managing any supernatural occurrences on British soil. The Rook focuses on a Checquy officer named Myfanwy (rhymes with Tiffany) Thomas. Thomas also plays a key role in Stiletto, but Stiletto's focus is on a lower-level Checquy operative and a young woman whose loyalties are not entirely clear.

Both books are long. (Stiletto clocks in at 580 pages.) But they are light reads. There is plenty of action and humor to keep the pages turning. I don't know if O'Malley has another book planned for this series, but I hope so. I could use another book that gives me the giggles.

The Best Book I Read This Month: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare by James Shapiro

It was a slow reading month--I only made it through 2 1/2 books, far below my usual one book per week average. Fortunately, it was a good month for nonfiction. The best book I read--and completed--this month was something that's been sitting on my TBR shelf for ages: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare: 1599 by James Shapiro.

What I loved about this book was that it took an historical approach to Shakespeare's work--a stark contrast to the literary approach I'm used to. In school, we always read Shakespeare's plays in isolation, as works of literature. We analyzed his use of language, his development of characters and plot, his use of symbolism.

Shapiro does very little of that. Instead, he places Shakespeare's work in historical context. He walks us through the year 1599, when Shakespeare wrote and his troupe performed Julius Caesar, Henry V, As You Like It, and Hamlet. Shapiro organized the book so that we follow the seasons, and with each season there is a new play to explore. Each play is discussed in the context of what was happening in Elizabethan England at the time. This is not William Shakespeare, Literary Master; it's William Shakespeare, Political Commentator--and I find that approach far more interesting and convincing than the literary analysis I learned in school. Shapiro notes, for example, how England's Irish troubles influenced Henry V; how assassination attempts--real and rumored--on Elizabeth influenced Julius Caesar; how an act of plagiarism influenced As You Like It; and how England's recent religious history found its way into Hamlet.

Shapiro certainly doesn't ignore Shakespeare's use of language or exploration of character. He integrates discussion of both into his historical exploration of Shakespeare's work, which I think gives more credence to his interpretations because they are not presented in isolation. (As an aside, one of my gripes with the literary analysis I had to do in school was the question of how we were supposed to know what was in an author's mind when a particular scene was written. I mean, maybe the curtains are red because that's the author's favorite color, not because the author intended to create a symbol of blood!)

At any rate, Shapiro's book is definitely one that should be on any Shakespeare fan's shelf.

Note: Clicking on the book cover will take you to the book's Amazon page.

The Best Book I Read This Month: To The Bright Edge of the World by Eowyn Ivey

Eowyn Ivey is becoming one of my favorite writers. I was swept away by her novel The Snow Child and her latest, To the Bright Edge of the World, was equally transporting. Alaska is the center of these stories--its landscape, climate, and ruggedness as much a character in the stories as the people. And both books have dashes of magic and unexplained mysteries, which add color and dimension to the stories. They are, I think, fine examples of magical realism.

To the Bright Edge of the World actually tells three stories: two historical and one modern. All three stories revolve around an 1885 expedition into the Alaskan wilderness, and all are told through diary entries and letters written by the explorer leading the expedition, the wife he left behind, one of the members of the expedition, the explorer's descendant, and the curator of the Alaskan museum who receives the explorer's papers. It sounds like a vast cast of characters--and it is--but they are well described and easy to keep straight.

It did take me a while to find the book's rhythm, though, to become accustomed to the jumping back and forth among the story lines. My biggest struggle was with the two historical story lines, which occur a few months apart but are told as if they are parallel.

Once I found that rhythm, however, I got lost in the story. When I was reading, I literally forgot where I was and what time it was. I found the historical story lines more captivating: the explorer trying to navigate and understand the strange land in which found himself and his wife, trying to navigate being an independent woman in a time and place where such initiative was actively discouraged.

The edition I read included photographs, many of Alaska in the nineteenth century and others that related to the story. They were just as fascinating as the text.

While the book was inspired by a real-life Alaskan expedition, Ivey is clearly telling her own story here--one that is engaging and captivating. It held my attention for all of its 400+ pages, and it was worth every stolen moment I took to read it.

BONUS RECOMMENDATION

If you like mysteries, I cannot recommend Ausma Zehanat Khan's Esa Khattak series enough. It's a new series--the third book just came out--but it's become a favorite. Khattak is a detective with Toronto's Community Policing division, tasked with liaising with the Muslim community and solving crimes connected to that community. He's a quiet, somewhat brooding hero, a man trying to balance his Muslim faith and the demands of his job. The first book, The Unquiet Dead, centers on the Bosnian war. The second, The Language of Secrets, has Khattak racing to stop a homegrown terrorist attack. I had originally borrowed Unquiet Dead from the library but bought a copy for myself before I was halfway through. Now I've cleared a space on my shelves for the series as it grows.

Note: Clicking on a book's cover will take you to the book's Amazon page.

The Best Book I Read This Month: Lady Cop Makes Trouble by Amy Stewart

Confession: nothing I read this month knocked my socks off as much as The Quartet did last month. It's not that I read anything bad (although The Dead Tracks by Tim Weaver came close); just that I didn't read anything spectacular.

My favorite read, though, was Lady Cop Makes Trouble by Amy Stewart. Lady Cop is historical fiction, the second in a series about Constance Kopp, the first female deputy sheriff in New Jersey. I adored the first book in the series--Girl Waits With Gun. It touched on serious issues, but with a light touch and a sense of humor. There was something almost "Keystone Cops" about it.

I had high hopes for the sequel. In some ways, Lady Cop was as good as Girl. The characters of Constance and the sheriff, for example, were satisfying. They grew with the story. The mystery was well-plotted with appropriate twists and turns. The supporting cast--the minor characters--added color to the story and depth to the story's world.

The characters of Constance's sisters were not as satisfying. Norma and Fleurette were fun in the first book, but by the end of this one, they grated and annoyed. Each sister is unique and colorful. However, they stayed in their lanes, rigidly. They reminded me very much of George and Bess in the old Nancy Drew books. The tomboy and the girly-girl, the same in every book, the same strengths, the same flaws, no growth as people or characters. Constance's sisters felt just like that. While their lives in this book had broadened since Book 1, it didn't seem like they'd changed as a result of those wider experiences. And while Lady Cop had the same light touch as Girl, it lacked the "Keystone Cops" humor of its prequel. I missed that.

That said, I do enjoy this series, and I will read the next one.  This book might be the "sophomore slump," but it was still an enjoyable read.

Note: Clicking on the book cover will take you to the book's Amazon page.