laceblade | A Great and Terrible Beauty; Rebel Angels

A Great and Terrible Beauty and Rebel Angels are the first two books in a trilogy by Libba Bray that centers on 16-year-old Gemma Doyle. Gemma has spent the first sixteen years of her life in India with her family, but after her mother is killed, Gemma is sent away to boarding school in England. Once there, she must face the cliques of teenage girls as well as the visions that plague her - ones she can't control.

I have mixed feelings about these books. On the one hand, there are so many things (fantasy! feminism! subverting societal norms! victorian era!) that make me want to love these novels. And yet, I think it's Bray's writing style that makes me feel like someone is holding down the trigger on an automatic weapon, and just....BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM. I feel like I would love these novels a lot more if some of the descriptions were longer. I don't want characters to have an epiphany that only lasts for one sentence. When I read the recap of Book 1 at the beginning of Book 2, I spent most of it going, "Huh....yeah, I guess that did happen, but I just wasn't all that impressed by the magnitude of that plot point when it happened."

Part of why I feel like her writing style doesn't sit well with me is because she tackles so much, all at once. Normally, this is preferred by me - I don't like books that only focus on one or two themes. I think it's just the way that nothing is ever teased out as fully as it could be that makes me uncomfortable. Off the top of my head, the novels deal with self-mutiliation, incestuous rape, classism, racism, the transition from childhood to womanhood, FEMINISM LIEK WHOA, magic, parallel worlds, issues with authority, high school cliques, romantic love, the Chosen One trope, uncountable references to other Victorian novels and poetry, Greek mythology, and secret age-old societies.

In addition, the characters are so often breaking societal norms of the Victorian era that putting the magic/fantasy elements aside, the novels are pretty unrealistic. Side characters never seem to react as completely as they should, and consequences never seem fully appropriate (I'm thinking here of Gemma's excursion to the opium den in Book 2 - not much discussion given to the WTFness of that at all!). Additionally, it seems to me like all of the characters speak as though they were born in the 1980s. I understand that it's hard to find the appropriate voice for characters living more than a century ago, but it was pretty jarring.

I feel like I'm only reading the series for Kartik, although I would like to see Ann grow up as well. Gemma did a lot of maturing in Book 2, and the climax/resolution of that novel was much better than Book 1.

I still want to read the last book, although I'm not quite sure how I'm going to accomplish that. I got the first book off of Bookmooch, and the second one through the library. However, the third book is released tomorrow (or three days ago, at our Barnes & Noble!) and while I don't like the series enough to spend $18 on the hardcover edition of the final volume, the series is so popular that there are already 40+ holds on it at the library. I guess I'll be waiting for a while ~~unless I go to Borders and Barnes & Noble and read while drinking hot chocolate. Actually....that sounds like a really good idea.~~

Incidentally! Libba Bray does have a LiveJournal, and you can read it here:

libba_bray

Also,

oyceter has review of both novels here.

Writing book reviews makes me realize that I do not write very eloquent book reviews. Maybe I should stick to just manga. Thoughts?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

In addition, the characters are so often breaking societal norms of the Victorian era that putting the magic/fantasy elements aside, the novels are pretty unrealistic.

Hey, have you ever read Madeleine Robins' Sarah Tolerance books? I saw her speak on a panel once & she said that she tries to stick to the restrictions her characters would face, except maybe she gives them 1% more freedom or something (I forget the quote, it was like 4 years ago). I love those books (there are 2 out so far) a lot. They're not fantasy--they're historical mystery-type things--but v. v. good.

I read A Great & Terrible Beauty & it just left me completely cold. I can't even remember why now!

Also, I like your reviews, of all stripes!

Edited 2007-12-25 21:41 (UTC)

I have not read them! But perhaps I should try them? Even if it's not fantasy, historical novels do sometimes tickle my fancy. I did like Anne Perry's stuff (what little I've read).

And thank you for the compliment!

Oh--I think I meant period mysteries, not historicals... b/c they don't really deal w/famous people (iirc they pop up now & again, but not as the real main stars). Is that the right term? I dunno. Anyway, yeah. They are good stuff.

Hmmm, I'm not sure if there is a difference between period and historical novels. I don't think there has to be someone famous for it to be called historical, ie, I always considered the American Girl books to be historical, and they're fictional. Of course, I could have been using the term "historical" too broadly all along! D:

I like your book review! It's great! Especially because I *tried* to read the first novel, and just could not get through it. Something about it sat wrong with me--probably the writing style, as you say.

Regarding too many issues: I have the same complaint about a couple of other YA novels, Hero and A Northern Light. You can't do a topic justice when you've got 18 other things going on. Hero dealt with a coming out story, all kinds of superhero tropes, a busy and talented kid with a lot of things on his plate, a romance, daddy issues, an absent mother, death, etc etc!! It was ridiculous. Compare that kind of thing to the YA of Shannon Hale, or Tamora Pierce's later books, or Cynthia Voigt, all of whom take on limited issues and explore them really well.

Thank you!

And yeah. Although I generally like it when multiple kinds of shit are going down at once, it's hard to do it well. And yeah - like you, the books that tackle issues that I actually like tend to focus on a narrower range.

Agreed. I think a book that tackles many issues has to simply be longer, and more deftly handled. I've seen it done better in non-YA books.

Reading this thread (& your previous book review about the YA book that threw in everything), I almost want to ask "how many issues is too many?" Not that I really expect either of you to give me a precise answer (5! But only if the book is 300+ pages!)! But I was thinking about how so many issues intertwine, & I think in a lot of fiction that seems to deal w/a lot of issues, to put in multiple issues just renders them all more realistic. (I know neither of you were saying that books just have to focus on ONE; the conversation just made me think of how many is too many, kind of an impossible question!)

For example, Lois-Ann Yamanaka's novels, which take place in working-class Hawaii, typically deal w/racism & classism (b/c one reinforces the other), family problems, & occasionally a gay character or two. Among other things. But to me it seems to work, b/c it makes sense to me that if you're affected by one of these issues, you're more likely to be affected by another (I vaguely remember reading research when I was in grad school that pointed out that financial problems in a family could be a risk factor for domestic violence--not that rich ppl don't have DV, obviously! But just that stress factors in). Maybe Yamanaka just does it well (or maybe we just have different reading tastes :). I ought to go read that YA novel you wrote about, but you made it sound so awful I don't know if I can bear it. Hehehe.

I can't remember more specifically why I wasn't impressed by A Great & Terrible Beauty (& iirc, I think I read it before I started my book blog, which means no evidence of my thoughts!), but I wonder if I was tired of issues being thrown in willy-nilly w/o enough time to explore them, w/o being able to put that annoyance into words (probably I just thought, "These girls! Their lives are WAY TOO MELODRAMATIC" or something eloquent like that ;).

(Hi, really long comment!!)

Well, like you acknowledge, it's hard to put a number on it. And like I said in my post and sort of in my comment, I usually *like* shows/books that tackle multiple issues at the same time, but only when it's done well. For example, my favorite TV show of all time is The West Wing, which often had multiple related and unrelated plot threads going on at the same time. But it worked, and I loved it.

I'm not sure what it is about Bray that doesn't quite gel. Part of it is definitely that there are never consequences for things the girls do and say, but I think also because she'll toss things in, like racism, and just never really go quite as deep as I'd like her to.

I think that if you wait to be eloquent before posting, you'll be stuck. I'd much rather hear what you think about a book, personally.

This is true! If I always waited to be eloquent before I posted, I probably never would, bwahaha.

I *highly* recommend Peg Kerr's _The Wild Swans_ (it's not about China, it just shares the same title). It tells two stories at the same time--one, a retelling of a fairly tale, the other a realistic fiction taking place in the 80s. It's done both beautifully and skillfully, and it's the kind of work that transforms you as a person. Go. Read!

You people! I already have a huge "To-read" stack at the foot of my bed! In fact....there are two stacks!

*sigh*

Yes, so much potential for awesome, bogged down by THE AWFUL WRITING STYLE.

Why do so many books meet this tragic fate?

AND WHY CAN'T WE STOP READING THEM?

A Great and Terrible Beauty; Rebel Angels

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject