I’m Back!

I’ve been gone too long from this sad little blog… but I’m back, and motivated. Aren’t you glad? Didn’t you miss me? I know you did! So while I never intended this to be a blog about books, I’m thinking that has been the theme of it’s short existence so I might as well make it official.

On that note, I don’t know that I’ve ever told you my favorite book(s) – it’s a tie – of all time are The Great Gatsby and To Kill a Mockingbird. I read them both every two or three years. So today I found out I’m not alone in my thoughts on Gatsby. It’s nice to be validated.

In more book news, I received the second installment of books for Elle’s Reader’s Panel for this year. Like most of my friends who participated in the May panel with me, I didn’t enjoy any of the books they sent. So much so that I did not even send in my comments on them. Here’s to hoping that I like the recent installments more. They are:

Willing by Scott Spencer

All We Ever Wanted was Everything by Janelle Brown

Ellington Boulevard by Adam Langer

The Abstinence Teacher by Tom Perrotta (I think he wrote Little Children)

Certain Girls by Jennifer Weiner (I read this one for the May panel and was way disappointed)

You’ll certainly be hearing more about these in the coming weeks.

~WW

“Admirably nasty…”

So, I guess I got sidetracked for a few months… but I’m back, and I hope to make blogging here a pretty regular thing. I won’t commit to daily, yet, but we’ll see what happens (: I have had plenty of time to write lately, given that I’ve spent much of the last three-and-a-half months on the couch. But, then, spending that much time on your butt doesn’t really provide much material. Ha! (I guess I should explain that I slipped and fell on the ice in early December, broke a few bones in my leg and ankle and dislocated my ankle. I’ve had surgery and am now in physical therapy. I’m walking now, but very slowly.)

Not surprisingly, I did get a bunch of reading done, but not as much as I expected. And now that life is mostly back to normal, the reading has slowed tremendously. I just finished Sharp Objects by Gillian Flynn. I added it to my list a while ago when I read that Flynn is a fellow Chicagoan, but Stephen King moved it to the top of my list when I read what he had to say about the book:

To say this is a terrific debut novel is really too mild… I found myself dreading the last thirty pages or so but was helpless to stop turning them. Then, after the ligths were out, the story just stayed there in my head, coiled and hissing, like a snake in a cave. An admirably nasty piece of work, elevated by sharp writing and sharper insights.

“Admirably nasty…”??? With an endorsement like that from the King himself, how could I not read it??!! Of course, it was never available at the library, but I was lucky to come across it at the Newberry Library’s Mystery and More Book Sale last week (for $1, mind you!). It’s not a long read, especially compared to what I’ve been reading lately, and it goes by reallyreally fast. I really enjoyed it, and highly recommend it, but I don’t know that I was quite as enthusiastic as King… I think maybe my expectations were unreasonably high, though, after reading his comments as well as the other 15 or so comments printed on the inside cover.

Flynn really is an excellent writer and where many folks would have made the plot drag on and on, she kept to the point and stayed with the important stuff and moved everything right along – although not in the directions you might expect (which is a good thing!). Her characters are extreme, but she doesn’t take them to the point of being unbelievable. And, God, I just wanted to step in and help them!!! Ha! But, I’m just the reader, and I could only follow along page by page.

Isn’t that the best kind of book, though, really?

Who is Art Garfunkel, anyway?

Last week’s New Yorker had a little discussion about Art Garfunkel’s reading list, which he has been so kind as to post on the web for our viewing pleasure – and in chronological order no less (see: the Garfunkel Library). I have no idea why I find this to be such a great thing, but I’ve spent the better part of the evening perusing his lists, looking up books I’ve never heard of, and adding a few titles to my own “to read” list. Books say a lot about a person, and I feel like I’ve come to know Art a bit.

Maybe the appeal is that last year I was 29 and devoted to the year to what I cleverly called “The 29th Year Plan,” which consisted of “preparing myself for the Big 3-0.” As part of the Plan, I created my life list (a list that grows and grows and grows – looks like I have a busy life ahead of me!). One thing on my list was: “make more time to read and actually use that time to read.” Not something that should have to be put in writing, but I have been guilty in the past of making more time for a specific cause and then using it for something totally lame like catching up on laundry or watching On Demand movies. So, for 2008, I’m doing two book-related things: the 50 Books in One Year Challenge, and keeping a tally of all the books I read (including the date they are completed, and my rating (1-5, with 5 being best)).

According to the article, Garfunkel’s list has 1,023 books he has read since 1968, so he’s averaging about 25 books per year. Not too shabby. I’ve got a pretty good start on my 50 book goal for this year (where did the 50 book challenge start? I haven’t a clue… I stole the idea from someone who likely stole it from someone else!). Here’s my list so far:

1. Atonement by Ian McEwan (1/8/2008): 4/5

2. The Twins of Tribeca by Rachel Pine (1/10/08): 3/5

3. The Little Friend by Donna Tartt (1/17/2008): 2/5

4. Certain Girls by Jennifer Weiner (1/27/2008): 3.5/5

5. Wit’s End by Karen Joy Fowler (1/31/2008): 3/5

Up next: The Ten Year Nap by Meg Wolitzer

On a side note, it just occurred to me that although I obviously recognize Art Garfunkel’s name, I have no idea who he is. Ha! I associated the name with ‘Simon & Garfunkel,’ but I guess that could be a totally different Garfunkel… Off to Google to educate myself, which leads to the question I ask myself at least once day: What would I have done back in the ‘old days’ before Google had all the answers? Well, I guess I would have called a friend or my mom or something. No wonder we all feel so out-of-touch these days. Of course I’m sure they’ll be glad to know that Google saved them from a middle of the night questioning about Art Garfunkel (: