Where I come to Praise this Edition of Julius Caesar

Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

[See reread thoughts below]
Catching up on all the Shakespeare I never read, I was a little surprised to realize I never read or studied Julius Caesar in any college class or on my own to teach in high school. I kinda thought I had, but nope--this was definitely the first time through the whole thing, despite so many lines being familiar.

And just because I want to, I'm reviewing this as if it's a random play come to hand by an unknown author. Seen that way--I give this 4/5 stars.

A modern reader can dip into this play pretty well, IMO, understanding it well enough to follow the story without maybe keeping all the characters straight. And it's reasonably entertaining that way. Seeing men of renown trying to decide if it's better to commit murder than let a populist undermine their republican institutions and destroy generations of custom and tradition to become a tyrant is brilliant. You think, if you don't know the actual history, that maybe it will work out. The people will see that they are defenders of the Law even if they break the small "l" law to uphold it, since no one else was going to save them. Not the courts, amirite?

The murder comes surprisingly early in the narrative. We get the public reaction in the middle, and then we turn to the resulting war in the end. I miss seeing the part where Brutus and Cassius end up in Greece with their own armies--how'd they do that? Suddenly, without benefit of that explanation, we're somewhere near Philippi, and four armies are ready to face off. Cassius and Brutus are angry and then they're not, which I didn't understand and I haven't researched to have it explained, and they're facing Antony and Octavius, who aren't exactly seeing eye to eye either.

I'd like to see the fighting scenes on the stage, see how it works, because it doesn't sound very satisfying. A natural effect of producing such stories on a literal stage is that you can't get an actual army together (like you can in a movie) so most of the important stuff must happen offstage, with somebody narrating what they're seeing or what has just passed. It feels less immediate, but you can see why it must be that way.

Shakespeare has Cassius commit suicide when he mistakenly believes his friend has been captured, and then his friend follows him. I kinda hate that. Cassius really did commit suicide, though, however it happened, which makes it pretty anticlimactic when Brutus does the same thing. In real life, apparently, Cassius and Brutus each killed themselves after different battles near Philippi, and all Shakespeare did was bring them closer in time. Either way, it's not great drama to have the main characters just tap out at the end. Real life sucks.

I kinda wonder if Elizabethan audiences thought their own government was closer to the Roman Republic of old or the Roman Empire that came after. Did they see the parliament of that day as a sort of modern senate with republican pretensions? Or did they view their sovereign as a tyrant who ruled without much public pressure to counterbalance their power?

Which team were they rooting for? That's what I wonder.

Mostly fun to read. Not too long. Some memorable lines, even if you're not reading for that purpose. Antony's speech is very clever; it took a good writer to make that work the way it did. The ending disappoints a bit, kinda petering out, but overall it's still entertaining after all these years.

On reread:
Specifically, I was gifted the "No Fear Shakespeare" copy of Julius Caesar, so I reread it to see if I had a different experience. I still am comfortable with a 4--meaning 4/5 for modern-day reading fun among Shakespeare-curious readers, not for historical significance or excellence--but I definitely enjoyed it more. Most of the contours of the story are clear enough for a decent reader plowing through it without helps, and some scenes yielded nothing new, but there were scenes that I realized I got a lot more out of with the modern translation by the side. I still absolutely recommend, for those interested, that you read both versions (in either order, as you prefer) to hear how it was put as well as getting the full meaning of it. Some speeches that meant very little to me in the original now made much more sense, connecting major scenes better. The hardest thing is sentences full of words we still use in modern English, but all used in an unfamiliar way, and "No Fear" fixes the unwitting errors one might make on those parts. So, full recommendation: read Shakespeare in the "No Fear" editions. Very much worth it. Even reading the new with the old, seemingly twice as much reading, seems to take no more time, because you don't have to labor over passages. Super useful. (5 stars for the edition.)

View all my reviews

Where Prince Otto Drops the Ball

Prince Otto by Robert Louis Stevenson
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Not a very entertaining book, unfortunately.

I started as a fan of Robert Louis Stevenson. I read Treasure Island and was surprised at how entertaining it was. And I rather liked Kidnapped. But I hated The Master of Ballentrae, and found nothing to admire in Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde. I thought I would. I kinda thought I was gonna like this, and for a minute I did, but everything I hoped for fell apart.

Prince Otto is the ruler of a small (like Lichtenstein) princedom in what we have to guess is Germany now. I thought it was set earlier, but it is apparently meant to be late 19th century (when it was written). He is a lazy ruler who likes to hunt and avoid work. The story starts with him hunting and then slipping away from his people. He crosses the border to another small country, where he isn't recognized, and he gets the unvarnished version of how he appears to his people and their neighbors. It isn't all surprising, but it does wake him up a bit. It seems like he wants to do better.

When he returns to the capital, he interrupts a cabinet meeting he was never invited to. His prime minister and his wife and others are planning a war against one of their neighbors (which he has just discovered) and without addressing the secret openly he tries to intervene in his own country's affairs. In part, they are doing it to prevent the country from rising up to declare itself a republic; in part, they are staging a coup for the reasons people always do that. So he presses and they push back; he tries harder, they try harder, mocking him. His wife's betrayal wounds him most, and he believes she is also unfaithful to him. Eventually, he realizes he looks a fool and ends the meeting. He looks for an ally in an old teacher, who supports him at first in taking back the reins, but later convinces him he's fooling himself. He has no leadership qualities, no strength of character, no way to come back from the useless prince that he has been.

Here I still hoped he would do something great. That would be a cool novel. But he collapses. All he can do is go along with the coup and make no fuss. He decides opposing it would be beneath his dignity. He has a chance at some intrigue with a countess who is on the edge of the conspiracy and would help him oppose it, but he gives that up.

The end of the novel is nowhere near where I guessed it would go. It is called a romance, which can either mean just a 19th century adventure novel or a kissing book, and I think he was referring to the latter. Apparently he had started this as a play, and in that form it might have made more sense. Here, though, it becomes a strange animal, with an uneven tone and unappealing lovers.

Disappointing. Unsatisfying. Even worse, the way he talks is deeply disturbing to me. (He keeps lamenting his weakness and unfitness in a way that is just icky. Pull it together, man!)

I would have liked the novel it promised--the one where he comes back, figures out what is going on, uses ingenuity and bravery to set things on the right track, maybe even puts his country on course for democracy, and earns the respect of his people. It doesn't do none of that stuff.

There are some good passages, a few things to enjoy, so I give it a hopeful 3 stars. But I recommend you read Treasure Island instead and never mind so much about this one.

View all my reviews

Where Ana and Din Face a Brilliant Villain

A Drop of Corruption by Robert Jackson Bennett
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This is an excellent book. As good as, in some ways better than, the first book. That's unusual, isn't it? All five stars.

This is both a fantasy and a mystery, a combination that I love. It's such a cool world, with a whole civilization imagined in a place where godzilla-type monsters emerge each year, bringing both destruction and innovation. After they trample some fantasy cities, the bodies of these behemoths give the people--via their blood and tissues--some pretty magical stuff, mostly for medicine but also for modifying people's abilities in a wide variety of ways. But the reagents and chemicals and final products are also very dangerous, as in this novel, and can be used to kill in ways big and small. A spate of murders involving these products and endangering the essential trade and transportation of them brings Ana and Din to a border kingdom, where they must stop the killings and prevent an act of terrorism.

Besides our two protagonists, there are a bunch of new (minor) characters, the locals involved in the current mystery, and all are original and full of personality in a way that breathes real life into the novel. Well, both novels. And the puzzle nature of the crimes tickles your brain, if you're into such things. Ana tends to give tiny hints of foreshadowing as she closes in on the answers, and I find that very fun to work out.

Also, lots of great action. Our POV dude, Din, is a very capable officer in the field of justice, and sometimes a bit naive or simple, but he isn't made into a bumbler. He is generally reliable without being a Sherlock--that's Ana's role--but he also gets to take part in action at times--like Watson with his gun--and that's pretty satisfying. I like characters that are round and complex and limited in ways, but not goofy or prone to stupid errors. Of course, Ana is very limited as well; she keeps her eyes covered and prefers to solve her mysteries from home, like Nero Wolf or something, because she gets overwhelmed and exhausted if she's out too much. So while they're far from being Superman, or Supersherlock, both being human in many ways, they make a good team, and together are formidable. The author has found a good balance.

This story is quite long, about 450 pages, which is probably close to the median length for fantasy, but I did not feel any lagging anywhere in this novel. I have a couple other fantasies I'm in the middle of, stalled in, and though I like them enough to finish they definitely lag. So I appreciate the pace of this one, and the many elements making it so entertaining. Very fun. Highly recommended.

View all my reviews

Where Maribella Gets a Deal on a Cool Bookstore

The Bookshop and the Barbarian by Morgan Stang
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is only my second cozy fantasy, and I enjoyed it, though it is a little derivative. Honestly, it follows the pattern of Legends and Lattes quite closely, which is kind of weird--that is the only other cozy fantasy I've ever read--but it didn't take away from me enjoying the book. (Both are sapphic love stories centered around taking over a small business in a quirky fantasy town and gradually winning over the locals. Pretty similar.) It was original in other ways, though. 4 stars.

The plot was interesting enough, and the characters are sympathetic. The minor characters are mostly whimsical and cartoonish--a goblin that sleeps in the bookshop window all day and a couple bookworms who read books all the time--but it's clever enough for that just to be funny. Though it's a simple story, there are friends and allies and celebrations and subplots as well as villains and conflicts and rumors of war, but all of it is intentionally pretty low-key. There are stakes, though, and matters to worry about, relationships that need tending, and hard times for some--not everything is happy. Mostly, though, it's quirky and clever and humorous. I like how the narrator speaks directly to the reader at times, giving the reader quizzes and foreshadowing or summing up developments. It's sort of a comic break, kind of like the sick boy and his grandfather in Princess Bride. I don't usually like those kinds of intrusions, but it worked here, IMO.

There are some good surprises toward the end and a satisfying conclusion, so the book is pretty evenly entertaining all the way through. Cozy fantasy is an odd mix of tropes, but I like it more than I thought I would, and I'll be reading a few more.

This one is recommended.

View all my reviews

Where the Author Lost Me

Against All Enemies by John Gilstrap
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

The longer I read it, the less I liked it, but it was entertaining enough to finish, so I'll give it a 3. Not good enough to read others by this author.

The plot was okay. A bunch of guys, led by a couple disgruntled military men, including one high up in the administration, organize a militia to kickstart a revolution to overthrow a government they see as feckless and corrupt. Training in a hidden corner in the mountains of Appalachia, no one really knows they're there. But connected to their training is some other violence, some assassinations and attempted assassinations, that come to the attention of our off-the-books team, leading them to their compound.

What don't I like? The book's overt politics feel like the author's politics, a feeling that grew as I read, and it gets icky. The Obama-era fictional liberal president is corrupt (imagine the time when conservative SEAL-type dudes cared about government corruption) and he is dismantling the military (always a complaint of the far right). The main character, Jonathan Graves, is committed to supporting the constitution, but he kinda agrees with what this random militia thinks, and he is too sympathetic to their cause. Also, since he is himself a vigilante, outside the law, he doesn't fully condemn what they do or what they want, even though he does take his team up against them. He definitely wishes he didn't have to, and does deep soul-searching afterwards. It felt like the author was conflicted, or thought his audience would be, and was lamp-shading the controversy. I was not sympathetic to this thought process at all.

Less overt but more annoying was the constant bickering and bantering that passes for communication among this crowd. They are always obnoxious to each other and always picking at one another. It's exhausting to listen to the constant ball-busting and bullying and joking insults. They keep showing us what it means to be tough, and basically it means being a jerk. All the time. Whenever someone stands up to them, posturing and talking tough, they admire the guy for having the nerve to oppose them--he's a jerk like me!--and that trope gets tiring really quick.

Additionally, we get intrusive mini-sermons from the characters or the narrator all the time, explaining how to be a tough guy, how to be a real man, how to carry yourself to earn the respect of other tough guys, how to manage a team, how to act in a dangerous situation, and it feels like the author inserting himself, describing the world he wishes we all lived in. (It's a lot like Yellowstone in that way, where we're taught how a real man works and fights and drinks and drives a truck, and although I find that particular aspect of the TV show annoying, I still watched it mostly with pleasure, because it had great conflicts and action. I don't mind if the author has a different world-view than me if he doesn't make it feel too much like his characters are wish-fulfillment.)

In the middle of the action, pretty much between firefights, there's a long pause in the action because one character hesitates when he should have acted, and despite the tension and the danger and the need to get going, the story stops while the characters deal with his failure. They rant about what he needs to say and what he needs to do to make up for his error and what it will take to trust him again. It's like a weird intervention where they confront him and force him to confess his error and explain how he won't do it again. It was--IMO--a creepy scene, and terrible pacing.

The action here is okay, but there was so much weirdness and tough-guy wish-fulfillment that it didn't sit well with me overall. I guess I had been feeling lucky, because I found another author in this genre (a genre I usually don't really like) that I really enjoyed, and thought maybe I was starting to understand it more. That's when I grabbed this book. I guess I was wrong. For now I'll just check out the ones I like when I want an action-thriller like this.

(I might as well name the author: Vince Flynn. Good author. So far I've liked his books.)

Other people loved this, btw. So who knows. But we might have read a different book.

View all my reviews

Where Freyja Punches the Guy. Twice.

Slightly Scandalous by Mary Balogh
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

I'm pretty convinced Mary Balogh makes little bets with herself that she can make rough characters sympathetic and make unlikely couples somehow work. IMO, based on seven or eight books so far, she's batting 1000. But I thought she gave herself too hard a task this time.

Freyja Bedwyn is hard to make romantic. She's usually angry; she's combative; she's not terribly pretty; she's impatient; she's a tomboy; she's grouchy, and grumpy, and utterly opposed to sentimentality; and she is quite prone to violence. I mean, there's still a lot to work with: she is active and competitive and proud, and though she can be mean she can also be funny. Not content with that challenge, the author made her even more difficult than necessary for the first 200 or 250 pages. TBH, I wished she had given her softer edges well before that, make it a little easier for the reader to feel sympathy and connection, but she wanted to wait until the last minute...

Kinda the same with the MMC, Joshua Moore. He is framed as a a rogue, almost a cad, who is always laughing and calling Freyja "Sweetheart" in a (in my mind anyway) condescending and insulting way. I was not loving him. Then their meet cute was more weird than cute (he ran through her room at in inn trying to get away from an angry mob and she punched him in the nose). When they bump into each other in Bath later they continue their odd dance--he's joking and insincere; she's angry and aggressive. You can see how he could be right for her, because she would never go for a sweet, sincere, sedate kind of guy, nor would he like a mousy woman. But they remain badly matched almost all the way through, long after they get into one of those fake engagements. (Not my favorite trope.) Their attraction is similarly violent, but doesn't feel like it has legs. If you know what I mean.

What finally works, nearer the end than I would have liked, is that both reluctantly and accidentally reveal how kind and loving they actually can be. They meet each other's families, where they are shown to advantage. They're not softies, but they are good people. It turns out he isn't really a rogue, because he takes care of his cousins and other vulnerable folks, and she's not really a misanthrope, because she has a bunch of family that love her and she loves back. She likes that about him; he likes that about her. And they both like that they're still very highly charged, competitive people.

So, the author wins her bet. She pulls it off. They were both a little unsympathetic at first and their connection was unlikely, but I like them both at the end and feel like their romance makes good. I wasn't feeling it for more than half the book, though, and almost all the fun is in the second half. (IMO.) In any case, I'm sure lots of people will enjoy their battling at the beginning more than I did.

Recommended. Good series.

View all my reviews

Where Quentin Makes the Most of His Opportunity

Quentin Durward by Walter Scott
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I'm a huge Sir Walter Scott fan, and this one is right down the middle for me. Great book. All five stars.

Our main character is a Scot, but he's in France, finding a place (with the help of his uncle) in the Scottish Archers, a troop of Scots nobles who served Louis XI. In this period, the Duke of Burgundy was richer and more powerful than the king himself, and the story deals with their conflict.

Quentin is one of those somewhat naive but very earnest young gentlemen who make good impression on jaded old soldiers (or rulers). He's kidded a little by others, but he's well-liked and even respected, and even though he's brand new in his position, he's called in for doing the king a special service immediately. A pair of high-born women--a youth named Isabelle and her aunt--have run from Burgundy because Isabelle is being forced into a marriage she doesn't want, and take refuge with the king. This is embarrassing to him, because he knows he can't protect her. Louis choses to send Quentin with Isabelle and her aunt to Liege to take refuge with a bishop of that city, one of his relatives. But the king is planning to have them ambushed on the way so that she can be carried away by another nobleman who is helping Louis disrupt the city of Liege, trying to weaken his enemy, Burgundy. Louis gets his help with an uprising; De la Marck gets a pretty young wife.

On the way, Quentin falls in love with Isabelle, of course. He also uses his wits to discover the plan, letting him avoid the ambush. The king is frustrated that the young man he chose performed too well; Quentin is angry that the king he vowed to serve would set him up. There's tons of action and intrigue here, history and politics, and lots of great characters. The villains--a couple of Bohemians who work secretly for the king--are some of the most interesting. Scott always has a soft spot for dangerous people on the edge of society.

Near the end, there is a showdown between Burgundy and France, and then an awkward joint attack on Liege, where Quentin has a chance to win Isabelle's hand.

This is the quintessential medieval romance (or 19th century romance if you prefer, set in medieval times). Knights and castles, ladies and fools, battles and debates. It's all written in an elevated, kinda wordy style, but if you've read Scott before, you already know. I love it.

Recommended. :)

View all my reviews