Friday, December 19, 2014

Review: The Astronomer Who Met The North Wind

The Astronomer Who Met The North Wind by Kate Hall. Book Smugglers Publishing, 2014. Review copy from publisher. Short story.

The Plot: The Astronomer Who Met the North Wind, a short story, is part of the Fairytale Retellings series being published by Book Smugglers Publishing. As you've probably guessed from the title, it's a retelling of The Princess Who Met the North Wind.

An astronomer and his wife have a daughter, Minka. Minka's parents go on scientific expeditions; during one, when Minka is six, her mother gets ill and dies.

Afterwords, her father is very protective of her, including his insistence that Minka not become an astronomer.

When Minka turns twelve, her father gets her the types of gifts he thinks a girl would want and should want.

Needless to say, they are not the types of things one girl -- his girl -- his daughter, Minka -- wants.

Minka decides to prove him wrong, and gets some help from the North Wind.

The Good: All the good things! First, I adore the Book Smugglers so was eager to read one of the short stories they were publishing. Second, I adore fairytale retellings and reinventions. Third, I love short stories in part because it's so nice to be able to sit down and finish a story in one seating.

Of course, none of those things are what makes this particular short story a terrific story. What makes The Astronomer Who Met the North Wind fabulous is the writing. Here is Minka, following the disappointing birthday gifts: "Minka leaned on her windowsill and wiped her eyes.  Her stomach churned, bitter, and even when she heard her father call her name softly through the door, she let her angry silence answer for her."

The North Wind comes along, and both tempts and encourages Minka to leave her home, alone, at night, into the dark and the cold, in order to find a mystery comet before her father does.

Even for a short story that is a retelling, I don't want to spoil it. Let's just say, that the North Wind is not what he appears to be. And that Minka has to find her own strength and courage to move forward.

What I can say, without spoiling, is that I liked Minka's desire to be an astronomer and that it was shown to be complicated. Even before her mother's death, she's described as a girl who loves geometry and solving puzzles; a gift of a telescope from her father helps her in the days after her mother's death. Her father's not wanting her to be an astronomer is based, in part, in not believing a child really knows what she wants to do with her life, and also in that it's not appropriate for a young girl, but also, just as importantly, in not wanting to lose his daughter. That all these things are shown, so that the father is never portrayed as a villain, and are shown in so few words, is one reason why I love short stories.

Kate Hall knows how to use words, and more importantly, knows how to make them count.

One last word, one last confession: the North Wind was scary.







Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Review: Brown Girl Dreaming

Brown Girl Dreaming by Jacqueline Woodson. Nancy Paulsen Books, published by the Penguin Books. 2014. Reviewed from ARC.

The Plot: Woodson uses poetry to tell the story of her childhood, growing up in the 1960s and 1970s. She was born in Ohio; moved to South Carolina; and later to New York City. It's a story of Woodson growing up, and learning more about the world around her, and learning how to process that world using words and stories.

The Good: First, yes, this book is wonderful. Perfect. Amazing. I was so, so happy to see it selected as the National Book Award Winner for Young People's Literature. I mean, there is so much out there that already establishes this as terrific, what do I have to add to the conversation?

Brown Girl Dreaming starts with Woodson's birth in 1963:

I am born in Ohio but
the stories of South Carolina already run
like rivers
through my veins.

Brown Girl Dreaming is a look at what shapes one girl, born in Ohio in 1963, following her childhood until about fifth grade. And so on one level, the "obvious" level, it's a book aimed at those who are the child-Woodson's age.

It's also about a young African American girl in the 1960s and 1970s, living both in the South and the North, and her many worlds: the world of immediate family of mother and siblings, the bigger world of grandparents and aunts and uncles, the world of friends and school, and then civil rights and what that meant, or didn't mean. And all those things, while being told by a child, are things that readers of all ages are interested in.

For Brown Girl Dreaming, the age of the protagonist doesn't dictate the age of the reader; rather, the interests of the reader make this book open and of interest to readers of all ages.

So, people like myself -- born just three years after Woodson -- are potential readers. As are older readers who lived during that time. Just because, hey, I also remember watching The Big Blue Marble and singing along to the theme song, even if I did it from New Jersey.

The poetry may make it more accessible for some readers, but that doesn't mean it's easy or simple. Teen readers do like to read about teens -- but it's not the only thing they like to read about. Despite Woodson's age during the time of Brown Girl Dreaming, the things she lives through, her experiences, her world is bigger than her age. A parent's divorce; a move; a new sibling; a sick brother; learning about the world through books; and civil rights; all of this, all of what is in Brown Girl Dreaming, are of interest to all ages. I'd even argue that older readers -- older than ten, anyway -- will get more out of Brown Girl Dreaming because they will understand the references and the emotions in a way that younger readers cannot.

And, finally, selfishly, I don't want this to be it. I want the books that take Woodson further along her journey: Brown Teen Dreaming, Brown Woman Dreaming -- just to suggest a couple of possible titles.

Of course, this is a Favorite Book Read in 2014.



Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Monday, December 15, 2014

Howdy, Teen Librarian Toolbox Readers!

This past week, I was honored to be included in Teen Librarian Toolbox's 12 Blogs of 2014!

They say some lovely things about me and my blog, starting with "Liz Burns’ blog is one that I can always count on for it’s insight, pointed opinions balanced with diplomacy, and palpable love for her subject matter."

What a lovely holiday present!

So, hello to those readers who found their way from Teen Librarian Toolbox; and Tea Cozy readers, please add Teen Librarian Toolbox to your blog reading!




Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Tuesday, December 09, 2014

Over at SLJ: The YALSA YA Lit Symposium 2014

Over at School Library Journal, I have an article up: Five Things to Love about the YALSA YA Lit Symposium.

Can you guess the five things?

One is the opportunity to present. This year, I was on a panel -- and here's a photo of me on the panel looking oh so serious. Thanks to @meghuntwilson for the photo.



Also pictured: E.M. Kokie (Personal Effects, Candlewick, 2012); Swati Avasthi (Chasing Shadows, Knopf, 2012), Steven Brezenoff (Guy in Real Life, Balzer & Bray, 2014) and E.M. Kokie (Personal Effects, Candlewick, 2012); along with Andrew Karre, editorial director at Lerner Publishing Group. Not pictured, the moderator Blythe Woolston (Black Helicopters, Candlewick, 2013).

Anyway, go over and read the whole thing and let me know what you think!


Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Sunday, December 07, 2014

Peter Pan, the Original Bad Boyfriend

I love Peter Pan.

I remember watching the televised Mary Martin version as a child; the first Broadway show my grandparents took me to see was the 1979 revival of the Broadway show.



I watched those as a child and saw magic of Peter Pan as a child: the wonder, the adventure, the fear and avoidance of what growing up would mean. That Peter was played by a woman barely registered in terms of text or subtext.

Growing older, growing up, meant learning more about Peter Pan and J.M. Barrie, the man who invented him. I'm not going to get into that -- there is plenty out there about it. While the origins, inspiration, and evolution of Peter Pan are fascinating right now I'm writing more about viewer response, and one viewer in particular: me.

I love Peter Pan. Watching it as a child was magical. And I got it: Wendy and the boys went, had adventures, and when they had had enough, they went home.

I want to give a nod to three subsequent versions of Peter Pan I adored:

Hook (1991), which said that growing up doesn't mean losing touch with one's childhood. Traditionally, Peter Pan views growing up as either/or, with growing up a putting away and forgetting of "childish" things. Hook said that becoming an adult can be a good thing, but it doesn't mean a rejection and forgetting of childhood and that Peter doing so wasn't healthy. It was just as unhealthy as rejecting adulthood.

Peter Pan (2003), which gave us an age-appropriate boy, Jeremy Sumpter (born 1989) playing Peter Pan. This meant that when Pan said he was a child who hadn't grown up, the viewer saw an actual child. The other children were also played by children of the right ages for the text; Rachel Hurd-Wood was born in 1990. It captured the magic of Peter, the desire for adventure, and kept it child-centered. It's practically perfect.

As a lover of Once Upon a Time (TV series), I have to also mention their version of Peter Pan. Robbie Kay (born 1995) played Pan in 2013. Pan was played by an older teenager, and Kay clearly wasn't an adult but he also wasn't a child. This take -- spoilers -- was perhaps the darkest one yet, in which Peter Pan was not a child who refused to grow up but rather an adult who refused to remain a grown up. Once that adult was offered the chance to become a child again, he not only took it, he was willing to kill to stay a child. For this version, being a child was not about being "innocent" but was about refusing responsibility.

As an adult, how I view Peter and Wendy is more complex. The recent TV version, NBC Peter Pan LIVE, got me thinking about Peter Pan and childhood and how we view that, and I'm not sure if they intended it to be that way. Except for the roles of Michael and John, all the actors were adults. Wendy, Peter, the Lost Boys: all grown ups. Seeing adults say the lines about being a child, pretending, not growing up, just made me really think about those lines and what was, or wasn't going in the play.

As I think about it, I realize that the hero is, and always has been, Wendy -- it is Wendy who goes on the adventure to Neverland, it is Wendy who is faced with the conflict of her "let's pretend" being challenged by those around her as not good enough, it is Wendy who realizes that playing by someone else's rules gets tiring, and let's just all go home now, OK? It is Wendy who later realizes she cannot deny that same pretending to her own daughter, just because Wendy herself is older and wiser.

Because of the age of the play, much of Wendy's choices are presented in some very old-fashioned ways, and many of us watching wished mightily for a feminist retelling of Peter Pan. But as I write this up, and with the acknowledgement that the play is over 100 years old -- really, what's so wrong with wanting to play house or play school, as Wendy does? She also wants Peter's version of adventures, but what is so wrong with her manner of pretending, and why won't the boys play along with her? The problem is not in Wendy's desires, but it's in Peter's denial to recognize her dreams as being as valid as his own, and wanting to keep Wendy in a box of "mother." That's not just because the play is old -- it's because Peter is a child and that's how children think. Only their own dreams matter; other people exist only in the child's own reality. (Ask any child who is shocked to see a teacher in a store, outside of school.)

Part of the problem is that it is Wendy's adventure in Peter's world. Emily Asher-Perrin has a brilliant analysis of Peter, and how Peter himself is hardly a hero, in Peter Pan's "Greatest Pretend" is Heroism at Tor. As she explains, "Here’s the thing about Neverland—it is Peter’s playhouse. He is like the guy who owns the casino; the house always wins and he is the house. Everything in Neverland is set up so that it caters directly to his whims." Most children, myself included, would not pick up on that because the whims of children can be so similar so it's not obvious to younger viewers that this is Peter's playhouse, not any child's playhouse.

That it is Peter's playhouse, and all those his playthings, is part of the problem with Tiger Lily. Tiger Lily -- that's another area where much has been written. Two recent articles on that: at Why 'Fix' Tiger Lily? Why Not Just Let Her Go? by Dr. Adrienne Keene, posted at Indian Country; and #NotYourTigerLily: Nine Months Later and They Still Don't Get The Point by Johnnie Jae, posted at Native News.

As Asher-Perrin concludes at her article at Tor, "as Barrie states, Pan will always come back to steal our runaways and lost boys, and will continue to do so as long as children are “Innocent and heartless.” The genius of Pan’s tale, is that innocence does not automatically denote goodness. Instead, it makes a child’s lack of experience a very frightening thing after all."

These things happening to children, by children, as in the 2003 version, make sense. Peter played by a child has it make sense, even if the child has lived years and years as Peter has. As adults, we recognized that children are, well, children, and excuse or understand.

Now, suddenly, have adults say those lines? Do that pretend? Refuse to grow up?

The NBC version is no longer a brilliant and honest look at childhood and growing up; instead, it is a look at those adults who avoid growing up, even as they physically grow and mature, and it shows that this resistance to adulthood is not charming - it's creepy as hell. Holding onto childhood and avoiding responsibility or making decisions is neither innocence nor goodness. It's creepy.

And that creepiness? Is why yes, I still love Peter Pan. Because it gives one thing to the child viewer and another to the adult viewer. Because it's willing to say that children and childhood aren't perfect; and are not something to idealize. Growing up is not a bad thing; refusing to do so, fighting against it, isn't a good thing.










Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Wednesday, December 03, 2014

Princess Shaming

In which I say why princesses aren't evil role models and cry about the Slate article about how programming parents are scared of dolls.



There is nothing wrong -- absolutely nothing wrong -- with your young child liking princesses. Any princess.

I get annoyed at the gendering of toys and books -- Legos and science are for boys, feelings and dress up are for girls -- but that is because Legos and science and feelings and dress up are for any child, boy or girl, and problematic messages are sent by calling one "boy" and one "girl."

Princesses (especially pink sparkly princesses) can be problematic not because they are pink sparkly princesses but because what it means to be a princess, to want to be a princess, and how society views that, along with misunderstandings about the nature of play and imagination (and I'd add, that goes for children, teens, and grown ups.)

I'm not the first person to talk about princesses, what they mean, what they don't mean, and the depth and substance that is needed for the "princess talk." To be honest, looking for posts and articles reveal mostly "oh no" reactions. But I want to explore more what it means when we engage in "princess shaming," and here are a few good articles to look at before I get into my own thoughts. (Also, if you know of other posts about this, please share in the comments. I thought I'd read a librarian post about play and princesses and I can't find it.)

Meg Cabot summed it up beautifully in this 2010 post about the Disney film Tangled: "I think it would be a shame for parents not to let [their daughters] have [princesses] just because they don’t believe in “the princess thing.” Because the princess thing is amazing. It’s about standing up for what you believe in, protecting the people you love, and never letting the bad guys win. It’s about rescuing yourself, and yet risking your heart when you meet someone who seems worth giving it to."

In 2013, author Emily Kate Johnston wrote In Which I Talk About Princesses (and go read the whole thing): "I’m more than a little disturbed by the current trend of trying to raise girls without princesses. . . .  it suggests that princesses have no inherent value, save as commodities in love and marriage, and that’s just the result of too-casual interpretation of their stories. Okay, okay: it’s also the result of Disney marketing, which is kind of awful a lot of the time. But in the past few years, even Disney has become much more self-aware (not always in terms of merchandise. That remains depressing. And also not a little bit racist. But in terms of the story), and shutting down their contributions to the genre isn’t fair either."

And while it's long, these posts by Zoe Chavet at the Mary Sue also deconstruct the types of princesses out there: the Princess Type, Part One and Part Two. Read the whole thing, but I'll include the conclusion: "I said at the beginning that I wanted to see characters that encourage the tenents of feminism, instead of diminishing them for the sake of Hollywood politics. Allowance for choice, and not a declaration of a singular, preferable type, is one thing that modern feminism is really about. The more (and more kinds) of female characters that we see, the healthier our own estimation of ourselves and our capabilities. There’s room for the princess, for the tomboy with a crown, and everyone else, too. Women, young and grown, are looking for themselves in the media they watch. We should give them something more to look at."

I get the immediate reaction to what we'll call the "pink princess" and the horror of marketing. And I also get not wanting to limit children's play and choices based on their gender.

That said, part of not wanting to limit includes letting the child have a choice -- even if that choice is not the one that the parent views as correct.

And when the only correct choices for girls are those that have been coded "boy," or the "tomboys", that's wrong. Feminism and equality are not about "girls are as good as boys because boys are the gold standard." It's not about saying "being a CEO is better than being a stay at home parent with six kids, because men are CEOs and power and money." It's not just about choice. It's about not saying that by default "boy" is better; "boy" is the norm; "boy" is the standard; "boy" is the default." And that is one of the messages that is sent by labeling books and toys "boy" or "girl"

A girl choosing pink princess is a valid choice. Because it is play, it is a child defining for herself what it means to be a princess. We still live in a world where the main players in films and movies and books are male, and if there is a female in a film there is only one.

So the first thing that princess culture does is it gives a girl a world where she, as a female, takes center stage. She is the main character, the lead, with the men providing supporting roles. There is no need for the child playing princess to imagine herself as Henry Potter's secret twin sister Henrietta to make herself the hero: the princess is already the hero.

And as for choosing pink -- dress up is fun, for all kids. If someone wants dresses and feathers and satin, why the heck not? Fancy dress or sweatpants, it's a child's choice. Wearing a dress doesn't stop a child from being active and doing things. It just means they are wearing a dress while doing so.

Then there is the argument that princess is all about the prince. My counter arguments to that are: today, not so much. Even then, I'd bet the play surrounding being a princess isn't so "get me a man" heavy as the narratives they play around. And if you're so against that narrative, I'd ask you a favor, Instead of speaking up against princesses, the next time someone puts their girl baby next to a boy baby and sees them playing together and exclaims, "oh, her first boyfriend!" -- speak up against THAT. Because frankly I'm more annoyed at how often an adult says this about two young children playing together, and how that sets up children to believe that relationships are to be primarily dating even when they are six months old.

Why today's rant? Well, I've been meaning to talk about how princess play isn't the end of the world for a while now. And I also urge those who are concerned to ask the actual child what it is they like about princesses, the stories, and reading about them -- you may be very surprised at how children are subverting tropes and viewing story in a way you, an adult, did not. Conversations instead of assumptions.

But the real push was a father's lament that his daughter wants princess stuff and that's just icky.

I know that people don't get to pick their headlines but here it is: The Princess Trap. Our Daughter is Getting Into Dolls and Dress Up. What Are Programmer Parents To Do?

Problem Number One: the belief (expected to be universal) that princesses, dolls, and dress up are less than programming and other good science stuff.

Problem Number Two: The subheading is "is it really too much to ask for unisex toys?" I agree with a hundred percent. Combined with the actual headline, this translates to asking for "boy toys" that aren't labelled as such. This is not so much asking for unisex toys as saying that the "girl toys" the daughter wants aren't good enough. Second class. Boy toys, that's the ticket! But with the recognition that "boy toys" is a ridiculous concept so they should be unisex. Which I agree with. But guess what? Dolls and dress up, also unisex.

Problem Number Three: "When my 4-year-old told me the other day that she was “ready for princesses,” part of me died. Not just because the day had finally arrived when that virulent meme had infected her, but also because of how utterly powerless I was to contain it. Let me be clear: These weren’t progressive princesses like Adventure Time’s Lumpy Space Princess and Doctor Princess (that’s just her last name)." Translation: there is a right way and wrong way to be female and the child is picking the wrong way. And of course, the books are all wrong because they don't have enough "exemplary, idiosyncratic female role models."

As a quick aside, I'm sure someone out there is already putting together the booklist for him to show him the error of his book shopping ways. But as I said above: there is no one right way to be a girl.

Problem Number Four: "Getting more women into science and technology fields: Where’s the silver bullet?" Because STEM is better than anything else! Confession: I fell for this bullshit in the 1980s, and instead of doing what I wanted (English! Arts!) I first went into science (computer science) and then law (like the boys, it's serious!) before I realized that choice is doing what I want, not being one of the women to break into fields because I was being told by people like this guy that such a choice was the only right choice.

No, I won't go sentence by sentence through the rest of the article.

Oh, maybe I will.

Problem Number Five: "It’s not that dress-up and dolls are inherently terrible, just that an exclusive focus on stereotypical-girl interests severely limits the scope of unstructured play, which is so important to creative development. When we visit the shop, we try to minimize our involuntary sighs, but our child notices when we get more excited about the boys’ side. Not that she’s realized it’s the boys aisle—because it’s not. It’s a kids aisle." Um. Yeah. First, I'm right there with him: it should be toys. Not girl aisles and boy aisles. But I do wonder..are those the signs? Or, with parents who are more excited about one side, is it the parents' interpretation? And how is dress up not unstructured play that adds to creative development? Note the title and subtitle are accurate: girls = girls, boys = unisex.

Problem Number Six: Legos. Go, read the whole thing. Yes, Lego and it's marketing is problematic, no arguments. But kids play with things for different reasons. When I was a kid there were just Legos, no sets, and we put them together how we wanted, not according to a box set of directions. The gender stuff Lego has done is a problem, but it's equally a problem to look at the so-called "girl Lego" and see it lesser than. Easier to put together? Not the question. The question is, does the kid want something that is easy or hard to put together? Do they want the final product or the process?

Oh god the dollhouse passage. Dollhouses. I can't even. I have to stop now because I'm thinking maybe the daughter wants pink princesses as an act of rebellion.

So, long essay short:

Princesses? Not a bad thing. Find out what it is about the princess that makes your kid want to read about her and be her; find out what your kid thinks it means to play princess.

And stop already with the explicit and implicit message that boys are unisex, girls are girls, and girls are lesser.

So, what are your thoughts? And any good articles to share?












Thanks to @BicAndMoleskin for the title of this post

Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Monday, December 01, 2014

Giving Tuesday -- YALSA

Tomorrow is Giving Tuesday!



From the Giving Tuesday website: "On Tuesday, December 2, 2014, charities, families, businesses, community centers, and students around the world will come together for one common purpose: to celebrate generosity and to give. It’s a simple idea. Just find a way for your family, your community, your company or your organization to come together to give something more. Then tell everyone you can about how you are giving. Join us and be a part of a global celebration of a new tradition of generosity."

YALSA is participating, for the third year in a row. From the YALSA blog: "This year will be YALSA’s third year in participating, and the Financial Advancement Committee’s (FAC) goal is to raise at least $4000 to send four...yes FOUR...YALSA members to National Library Legislative Day in Spring 2015." More details are at the YALSA blog.

And to cut to the chase, how to give? Again, from the YALSA blog: "YALSA has made it so easy this year!  Not only can you log onto the ala.org and donate the traditional way, but now you can text to donate! All you have to do is text ALA TEENALA to this number: 41518 to make a $10 donation to YALSA. It couldn’t be easier!"

If you want to find out more about donating to YALSA, the Give to YALSA website has information about how to donate, what YALSA does with the donations, etc.

Edited to add: If donating online, there are a few ways to direct your YALSA donation. I checked with YALSA about which one to select, and they said "The Friends option will go towards funding the Legislative Day stipends."


Image from Giving Tuesday website

Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

Review: A Little Something Different

A Little Something Different : Fourteen Viewpoints, One Love Story by Sandy Hall. Swoon Reads, an imprint of Feiwel and Friends. 2014. Review copy from publisher.

The Plot: Lea and Gabe meet in creative writing class. It's going to take more than sharing a college class to get these two together, even though they sit side by side.

What's keeping them apart? And what will it take to get them together? Well, Lea and Gabe won't tell you, but their friends, family, and others around them, from the bus drive to the waitress, will.

The Good: I just loved the narrative device of fourteen people (including those who don't like Lea and Gabe, as well as a squirrel and a bench) telling the romance of Lea and Gabe.

I loved this -- both because I've always been a fan of large casts and multiple viewpoints, and because it strengthens this particular story. While we don't see what Lea sees or Gabe sees, we see what those around them do, and it's like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. We see more of their world than they do.

Admittedly, fourteen voices is a lot to keep track of, as a reader, even when some are as unique as 'Squirrel!" The book design helps make this easier for those who, unlike me, don't keep a notebook with a running list of characters as they read. Instead of simply saying "Casey" or "Danny" or "Bob," it always says "Casey (Gabe's friend)" or "Danny (Lea's friend)" or "Bob (a bus driver)". It's just that little bit extra to help keep track of who is who.

I've written before (both when talking about New Adult and just in general) that when I was in high school I looked for books set in college out of curiosity about what college would be like; and when I was in college, I wanted books with a college setting to reflect the reality I was living. A Little Something Different meets that reading need, because it's not just about Lea and Gabe's slow road to romance; it's also about the things, small and big, that make up college life: parties, cafeteria food, overlapping friends, ordering take-out.

I would call this New Adult; but -- in part because of who is telling the story, and because it does take a while for Lea and Gabe together -- this isn't a sexytimes romance. What it is a sweet, funny glimpse into the lives of Lea and Gabe and those around them. This is more for those whose search for New Adult is more about setting than romance -- but the romance is so great! It's just not a hot and heavy romance, it's a slow burn of missed opportunities by two of the shyest people on the planet.

Another thing I liked about A Little Something Different is how Hall wove in diversity into the narrative. For example, Lea's friend Danny is gay; the creative writing professor is a woman married to another woman; Lea is Chinese-American. Gabe had been in a car accident the year before, and it -- and the physical after effects of the accident -- are something he doesn't easily share (it's a bit of a spoiler even saying that here), and those things have an effect on how he interacts with others and how others see him.

Note: Sandy Hall is a fellow New Jersey librarian.

Other reviews: Wondrous Reads reviews; Good Books & Good Wine

Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Monday, November 10, 2014

YALSA YA Lit Symposium 2014

This Thursday I will be heading out to the 2014 YALSA YA Lit Symposium in Austin, Texas!











Part of the reason I will be there is because I'll be presenting. I'm part of a panel, Whose Reality Gets Written?, on Sunday, 10:30am-12:00pm. Panelists are Svati Avasthi, Steve Brezenoff, Elizabeth Burns, E. M. Kokie, Andrew Karre, Blythe Woolston.





The full description: "The formula for YA fiction is no secret: Wrap a load of dysfunction in a layer of bleak despair and spice it up with little romantic angst. Problem is, that formula is a fantasy. Writers, editors, and readers are all making personal, particular choices. This panel will tackle these questions: Are certain realities over-represented? Are others under-represented? If so, why are some privileged while others are neglected? Does YA entail a different set of responsibilities than "adult" fiction? Who defines those responsibilities? Does narrow focus on a particular "here and now" doom books to irrelevance or rapid obsolescence?"





The hashtag, for those talking about this online, is #yalit14.





I haven't made up my mind about what programs I'll be attending, because they all look good.





I'll have some free time in Austin on Friday and Sunday afternoon. So, any suggestions for a first-time visitor in Austin?





And any dining recommendations?





I hope to see you there!










Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Wednesday, November 05, 2014

Review: The Fall

The Fall by Bethany Griffin. Greenwillow Books, an imprint of HarperCollins. 2014.

The Plot: A retelling of The Fall of the House of Usher by Edgar Allan Poe.

The Good: Did you not see what I said? A retelling! Of The Fall of the House of Usher!

OK, it's true that not every retelling or re-imaging is done well. And it's also true that there are many ways to revisit a story. So you need more from me, to let you know that this one is well worth the read.

The Fall is an emotional, character driven retelling, making the doomed Madeline Usher the main character.

It is Madeline telling the story, and it is fragmented. Madeline at eighteen, trapped, buried alive; Madeline at nine, when her family is strange but still together and alive. The story jumps back and forth in time, ending, as it began, with Madeline at eighteen. Along the way, the reader, along with Madeline, learns of the curse of the Ushers -- a curse on both the physical house and the bloodline. A curse that allows the family to continue, yes, but attacks each generation, physically and mentally attacking family members. They remain rich and well off and with a grand house -- but they are doomed and the house is decaying, as the family decays. As Madeline decays.

And let me say how much I loved that the telling is non-linear, because it makes the reader as unsure as Madeline is, as unaware of what is really going on. Doubting and believing, uncertain and sure.

And what is really going on? Madeline and her family are cursed, of course. Along with Madeline, the reader learn about the origins of the curse, and how it touches each generation, with hints of abuse and madness and incest, and how it twists and turns the people living in the house.

Or, maybe not.

One thing I liked about The Fall, and I hope I'm not alone in this, is that it may all be in Madeline's head. That she may be mad, yes, but not because of a curse. That Madeline sees things and interprets things because of both her own madness, but also because those around her are convinced there is a curse so she chooses to see the world, and herself, as victims of that curse. That some things may be things she made up, or she believes because her parents believed and she's been isolated with no one to balance anything.

Or, maybe yes, and there's a curse and even when Madeline seems mad it's the proper reaction to the situation she is in.

Another thing I liked was that The Fall doesn't veer far from Poe's story. OK, I admit, I haven't read the story in years and years. So I'm going more on memory of the story and the Vincent Price movie. But The Fall kept the focus tight: Madeline, her twin brother Roderick, his friend from school. There are also doctors treating Madeline and that may be new but if it is, it makes sense and it kept the story and plot tight.

And, finally, The Fall stays within the confines and setting of the original story, which was written in 1839. A year is never given, but there are coaches and servants and the time period is clearly "long ago" and "not now." What I love is how this setting is shown and created without much detail. Ask each reader of The Fall to sketch the house and its gardens and rooms, and each drawing will be different from each other. Madeline is telling the story and she is showing us her emotional truth. I love that Griffin trusts us, the reader, to not need those extra bits and doesn't give into the temptation of unneeded details.

And yes . . .  I do plan on rereading The Fall of the House of Usher! So I'll revisit this review once I've done so.

Assorted links: Guest Post by Bethany Griffin at Uncorked Thoughts, talking Gender; review at The Book Smugglers; review at Wondrous Reads; review at Bookish.




 Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Friday, October 31, 2014

Review: How We Fall

How We Fall by Kate Brauning. Merit Press. 2014. Reviewed from ARC.

The Plot:  Jackie's feelings for Marcus are intense, but she tries to hide it. Oh, they flirt, and yes, there are stolen kisses. So why can't they just both admit that it's more than flirtation, why not go on a real date?

Jackie's afraid, afraid of what people will think. Marcus is her cousin. And, to make matters more sensitive, or at least Jackie more sensitive to what people will think, their families share one home. They live under the same roof.

Jackie has few people she can trust or turn to. Her older sister is at college; her parents wouldn't understand, or worse, would over react. Her best friend, Ellie, has disappeared and it's beginning to look like Ellie didn't run away but was kidnapped, or worse.

Breaking up with Marcus, or, rather, stopping things, doesn't help. Her feelings don't just go away, and seeing him with a new girl, Sylvia, makes things worse. So Jackie tries seeing someone new, Will.

Jackie begins to pore over all emails and messages from Ellie, hoping to figure out what happened to Ellie. And she's surprised when a name turns up in an old email: Sylvia. Could Marcus's new friend have a connection to Ellie and her disappearance?

The Good: How We Fall looks at love and lust and desire. Jackie knows full well what other people are going to think about her and Marcus being together, and I'm sure there are readers who won't be able to get over the first cousin romance. As Jackie points out, though, it's not illegal; and at most, it means that in some states they wouldn't be able to marry. There was something so sweet, and heart-breaking, to have Jackie both trying to deny her feelings and love for Marcus, while doing searches to find colleges in states where marriage is possible. Add to it that Jackie is keeping her emotions and thoughts so close, from fear, that she hasn't shared this with Marcus.

Jackie's attraction to and love for Marcus is clear, and while the story is told from Jackie's point of view, it also becomes clear that what he feels for Jackie is true. On one level, How We Fall is, simply, about star-crossed lovers.

The star-crossed is made more complicated by the unique housing situation. About two or three years earlier (Jackie is now 16, Marcus a year older), the two families decided, for several reasons, to combine households and move in together. For Jackie and her older sister, that meant moving from California to rural Missouri. Her father, a lawyer, now does legal consulting from home; her mother works at the library. Her uncle works in a lawn and garden shop and her aunt takes care of the home, which also involves a working farm.

To use Jackie's words to describe her aunt and uncle: "Uncle Ward's opinions were a junk drawer combination of conservative family values, generous interpretations of self-restraint and normalcy, and questionable ideas Aunt Shelly found on the internet." Ward and Shelly have six children, ranging from twin toddlers to Marcus, the eldest.

The families share a home -- this isn't sharing land, or a building. It's using the same kitchen, the same living spaces, and trying to balance their values. It's not always easy; you can tell that sometimes Jackie's mother (Ward's sister) is biting her tongue about Shelley's judgments and rules. (Let's just say that Shelley isn't a fan of TV or movies while Jackie is looking to major in film in college.) Jackie has also gone from youngest child of two to an eldest child helping not only with chores, and selling their farm produce, and helping in the gardens and with the animals, but also babysitting her younger cousins.

Still, the families make it work. They are happy and functional; but it's also a financial decision. They are living a lifestyle, and in a home, that requires four adults working. But, to be honest, working "less", with a better quality of life, if that makes sense. Look at the father: he can return to law, but he's happier being a consultant. Jackie's mother is happy working at the library, but if the families split, she'd need to get a better paying job. I really loved that this book included this non-typical living argument, and that the arrangement works. And, I also think that more and more readers are going to identify with teens in home situations that are non-traditional.

As you can tell, the love story and the setting is what really captured my attention. There is also a mystery going on, the mystery of Ellie's disappearance, and I liked how this was handled. Jackie is not Veronica Mars; her friend lurks in the background, something that Ellie thinks about but, especially at first, doesn't obsess over. It's as time goes by, and it turns into a murder investigation, and Marcus's new girlfriend is revealed to have a link, that Jackie finds herself actively trying to learn more about Ellie's life to figure out what happened.

There is also Jackie's own new boyfriend, Will. One of the reasons I like Will is he ends up being such a good, understanding guy. Seriously, whether in real life or a book, when a person is confronted with a situation when they can be cruel or they can be kind -- when they can be judgmental or understanding -- when they be angry and lash out,or listen and be a friend? And they choose kind? It just makes my day; it reaffirms that people are good. And that was Will. Someone who is good.

Also, Will is cute. I said that How We Fall is also about desire, and that's true of Jackie and Marcus and Jackie and Will. Jackie is trying to figure out what she wants, and what she feels, and what is love, and what is love -- and it's a bit messy, made messier but the awkwardness of the situation and her thinking she is protecting everyone by not admitting to her feelings for Marcus. And then here is Will and yes he's fun to kiss cause he's older and hot and even with all this he is just such a good guy. And I love that this book shows the complexity of feeling, emotion, and desire that a teen girl feels.



Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Review: Gracefully Grayson

Gracefully Grayson by Ami Polonsky. Hyperion, an imprint of Disney Book Group. 2014. Reviewed from ARC.

The Plot: Grayson Sender is twelve years old.

Grayson is lonely, even surrounded by classmates, even at home, living with cousins, an aunt and uncle.

Grayson is lonely in part because of Grayson's parents death years ago, leading to Grayson being the odd child out at home.

Grayson is lonely because Grayson cannot connect with others because Grayson is hiding the most important part of who Grayson is.

In Gracefully Grayson, Grayson gradually gains trust and friends until Grayson can reveal the truth: that Grayson is a girl inside. Grayson is a transgender girl.

The Good: I'll be honest Grayson broke my heart, because of how lonely she is. Of how unable to connect with those around her.

At school, Grayson tries out for the play and takes her first step towards her true self by asking to play the part of a girl. One of the happy-tear moments I had was -- spoilers -- when the cast welcomed Grayson, became her friend, treated her like they'd treat anyone else.

Then there were the sad-tears of those who bullied Grayson, and of Grayson's aunt who believes that Grayson is in part causing the problems by not continuing to hide her truth.

And I cried at all the things Grayson did, in hiding. Doodling pictures of girls, but doing it in such a way that people wouldn't know. "If you draw a a triangle with a circle resting on the top point, nobody will be able to tell that it's a girl in a dress. To add hair, draw kind of a semicircle on top. If you do this, you'll be safe, because it looks like you're just doodling shapes."

Loving glitter pens and being prepared with lies to explain why she has the purple and pink ones.

Wearing a sweatband to pretend it's a hairband.

Pretending basketball pants and a t-shirt are somehow a gown, with the wide pants a full skirt.

And how important it is to Grayson, to anyone, to have their own truth by the truth others see. That it's harmful, the years and the lies of pretending to be something other than who she is.

At the end of Gracefully Grayson, someone tells Grayson that "I know it may feel like there are people who are against you, but I want you to remember that most people in the world are good. Look for the people who extend a hand to you. And when they do take it." This, in a nutshell, sums up the book. There are people against Grayson, for various reasons. But there are just as many good people in Grayson's world.

And the question left to the reader is this: is the reader one of the good ones? Does the reader extend a hand to those around them?

I'm making this one of my Favorite Books of 2014, because it is such a beautiful book and Grayson is such an endearing twelve year old.

Links: author interview at Diversity in YA; Bookfabulous Review; Robert Bittner Review at Gay YA;



Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Review: Crossover

The Crossover by Kwame Alexander. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 2014. Reviewed from ARC.

The Plot: Twelve year old twin brothers, Josh and Jordan Bell, are basketball players just like their father. And just like their father, they are GOOD.

Josh loves basketball and words; he is the one telling the story, in a sequence of poems organized by sections as if it were a basketball game, starting with Warm Up, moving on to First Quarter, and ultimately ending with Overtime. His father loves music, giving Josh the nickname Filthy McNasty after a favorite song.

His twin, Jordan, is JB, and loves basketball and betting.

The Crossover takes the twins through a basketball season, ending with an important game. And while this is a book about basketball and basketball players, it is also a story about brothers, a father and sons, a family. The two brothers complement each other on the court, a great pair leading their Junior High team to victory after victory. Their parents are loving but strict, with complications because their mother is also their Assistant Principal; their father, who played professional basketball, is a stay at home father who coaches his sons. And then there is a new girl in school, who Josh likes but before he can say a word, it's his brother who is dating her.

The Good: I'm on a roll of reading good books lately!

I loved Josh, his poetry, his love for his dad, his brother, basketball, words. Oh and his hair: he's proud of his locks, just like his dad wore when he played, and conflict with his brother starts when Josh loses a bet to JB -- a bet that allows JB to cut one of those locks off. There is also competition and jealousy, but those feelings are hidden deep inside Josh, only coming out in full force when JB begins dating. The feelings are so hidden, and the parents are so into reinforcing the brother bond, that these emotions are ones that Josh has a hard time understanding. Their father pushes both sons to be good basketball players, but he's individually pushing them: there is no setting one brother against the other.

If I talk more about the twins' father, it's because of the strong basketball bond between the father and sons. The father stopped playing years ago, explaining to his sons that he saved his money and is happy being with them full-time. As the twins learn, it's a bit more complicated than that: an injury ended their father's career. Health issues continue to plague the family; there's a history of hypertension, and their father has a huge distrust of doctors and hospitals so refuses to see one. (And yes there is foreshadowing there.)

One thing I really liked about The Crossover is that it's a book about two typical kids -- readers will see themselves in Josh as he struggles with his love for his brother but also his jealousy; with wanting to play basketball; enjoying being good at something; practicing to become better. Having a father who is loving and caring; a mother who is also kind and loving but knows when to be strict. Parents who value their sons' education as much as their basketball skills. It's a story played out in towns and cities everywhere.

Another Favorite Book Read in 2014!

Other reviews: The New York Times review; Stacked; Clear Eyes, Full Shelves; Bookshelves of Doom.







Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy

Monday, October 20, 2014

Yes, I Am Afraid

Daily, I do certain things that in the book reviewing world are acts of courage.

I use my own name.

While I omit specifics about my work and family and home, I don't make up alternate facts to create a public persona that will offer me more protection.

I use my own photograph, which means I am recognized in public.


I use my own mailing address with publishers and agents and other professional contacts.

Part of this is because I wanted to use what I do here, online, professionally, for writing and professional activities and programs and workshops.

Part of this is because of cost: being on a tight budget means that I don't want to add the cost of a PO box, plus depending on how something is sent means that a PO box isn't always the answer.

But it means, of course, I'm exposed. My own "it happened to me!" stories are much less than what others have experienced. I'll say it wasn't an author or publisher; it was people who, basically, didn't like what I had to say online and then -- . Well. I'm sitting here, still worried, trying to figure out how to phrase what happened and share it in a way where I feel safe. And, I can't. Trust me: on a scale of 1 to 10, it was probably a 2 at most. No threats; nothing like that. Rather, it was about making me aware that a person could reach through my public online persona to my real life world. That I was vulnerable. Even for something that low on the scale, knowing it's that low on the scale of what happens to others, I'm afraid. I'm afraid that it will start up again, from writing this post.

But those things didn't stop me from writing. Or posting. Or presenting.

And when I read Kathleen Hale writing about tracking down the real-life world and home of a book blogger, of stepping over that line of reviewer/author -- the line of reviewer/reader, even, crossing the line of "this is something you're doing on the internet" to "here I am at your house, calling your work, SHARING YOUR PUBLIC INFORMATION ON AN INTERNATIONAL NEWSPAPER WITH NO CHANGES TO YOUR INFORMATION SO ANYONE CAN DO WHAT I JUST DID" --

Well.

I felt sick to my stomach, for the person who is now being doubly victimized, first by what Hale did, and now by a newspaper upping that exposure by 1000. I feel sick to my stomach for myself and other bloggers who are being told by this, by the people embracing or championing what Hale did, that "hey, we can find out where you live and where you work and anything else we want and intimidate the hell out of you and try to use your personal hobby as something that will have consequences other than online disagreement."

Even for someone like me -- who has leveraged blogging for some professional benefits, doing presentations and programs and workshops and writing -- the blogging remains personal. Done at my home, on my own time. Unlike, say, an author like Hale who is getting paid for her writing. And while I have friends and blogging colleagues, I am much more alone than someone who has publicists, agents, editors, etc. like Hale. There are no layers of protection for bloggers.

Reviewing, whether it's on a blog or GoodReads or whatever, is very much about an individual and the book. It can run the gamut from pure reader response to deep, footnoted criticism. One thing I love about reading bloggers and book blogs is that one blogger can encompass that whole range -- sometimes in the same review, but other times it changes depending on the book. Reading these posts and reviews requires the reader to understand that "review" covers a lot of different things -- and that people read and use those reviews for a bunch of different reasons. I read them to see different opinions of books I've read; to find what to read next; to enjoy a blogger's writing style; to have a laugh.

And, of course, what's going on at blogs and websites and social media is beyond reviews. It's discussing other things that are book and publishing related, from what is happening with Amazon to self-publishing to book banning to advances to diversity and on and on and on. All of those are areas that, well, can lead to disagreements of opinions. And that's fine. I love having good conversations online about things.

But here's the thing: no one is making you read anything. You don't like a style, format, tone? Don't read that person. The answer is not to track them down in their real life to tell them that.

You disagree with what was said? As an author, that's what your real-life friends and non-public avenues of communication are for. The answer is not to track them down in real life to tell them you think they're wrong.

Even as another reader -- there's a level of conversation that can be had online. But even then? No one owes you a conversation; no one owes you to "listen" to you, especially if you are talking under the belief that "if someone listens to me, that means they will end up agreeing with me." They especially don't owe that to you in real life so again: the answer is not to track them down in real life.

For anyone -- authors or just general readers -- to go from disagreement in comments or tweets to reaching into the blogger's life is just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. As I said, what happened to me was so much less than what Hale has done -- hell, now I'm going to mark it down to a 1 when I think of what Hale did and continued to do, with this article using real names -- and yet it left a mark. I can't imagine how bad it is for that person Hale went after, for daring to not like Hale's book.





**********************************

If you're wondering what the heck I'm talking about, I'm not giving her any more clicks. Google Kathleen Hale, you'll find it soon enough.

That said, I will link to two responses and one roundup I find very valuable:

Dear Author: On the Importance of Pseudonymous Activity - because part of Hale's justification for what she did is that the reviewer in question chose not to use her real name online.

Smart Bitches, On the Choices of Kathleen Hale - because everything Hale did was her choice.

Kathleen Hale has written other essays. It's a bit interesting to see how much she does or doesn't share online, yet it still doesn't justify what she did to that blogger, both by stalking her and by then sharing all that via a newspaper article.

So, what about you? Have you had a negative experience with someone reading your blog? Do you think Hale sharing her story is going to change how people write or how much they share online?






Amazon Affiliate. If you click from here to Amazon and buy something, I receive a percentage of the purchase price.

© Elizabeth Burns of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy
Share on Tumblr

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails