Disclaimer: This review is actually fairly pointless. If you love Scott Pilgrim, you're guaranteed to get this book regardless of what I say. If you dislike Scott Pilgrim, the final volume certainly won't change your mind.
That effectively renders a review moot, save for spoilers, and I try to avoid those. This review is purposely vague, in fact. :/
------------------------------
The long-awaited sixth and final volume of the Scott Pilgrim series does not disappoint. At all. In fact, if "Awesome" was infinity and "Disappointing" was negative infinity, this book would go through negative infinity on the way to infinity. At least twice.
For the uninitiated: Scott Pilgrim is a Canadian graphic novel series combining social drama with kung-fu action, videogame tropes, and the most bizarre sense of humor this side of dadaism.
The final volume is the darkest in the series. I think this is the first time a character has actually bled, rather than suffering cartoony bludgeoning. Copiously, at that. However, rather than decreasing the amount of humor and deliberately making the conclusion darker and edgier, O'Malley manages to work humor into even the most gruesome impalement. This impressive balancing act is entertaining most of the time, though there are a couple instances where it comes across as jarring or inappropriate.
O'Malley's art has improved over the six volumes as well, to the point where I can now tell the characters apart. Seriously, that was a problem I had in the first couple volumes. D:
There are several scenes of extreme beauty in this volume as well as a couple scenes of horrific events, and O'Malley could've managed none of them at the beginning of his career.
The ending is one of the most satisfying I've ever read, and cleverly wraps up several loose ends that had left readers puzzled. The only downside is that it isn't different enough to entice skeptics to the series, but if you dislike Scott Pilgrim, you're probably not very important anyway. :P
Rating: 4.7/5
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
"Outliers", Malcolm Gladwell--Full Review
Malcolm Gladwell has debunked the American Dream. At least, he’s tried. Gladwell, who also wrote “Blink” and “Tipping Point,” isn’t nearly as in-depth or convincing as he could be.
The thrust of the first half of “Outliers” is that people who occupy societal positions far beyond the norm achieved them less through innate talent and more by being in the right place and at the right time. Thus, no one, regardless of their talent or effort, is truly “self-made.”
Gladwell has some impressive examples to support this. He takes a list of the 75 richest people throughout history and points out that a disproportionate number of them (14) lived in the 19th century. As it turns out, all these people were born between 1831 and 1840. Age-wise, these people, such as J. P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie, were perfectly poised to take advantage of the economic revolution of the 1860s and 1870s.
Unfortunately, Gladwell provides no other evidence on par with this. He is positing that this pattern occurs throughout humanity, yet applies only one worldwide example to his research. He cites a great a many studies--and has a well-annotated bibliography to boot—but none of them deal with more than 1000 people. When proposing something that affects six billion people, small numbers do not prove anything. It should be noted that the studies support his arguments admirably, though. They simply do not cover enough people to be certain whether the pattern holds throughout the world.
The second half of the book deals with cultural legacy. It attempts to explain, among other things, why the airline Air Korea had so many crashes, and why Asians are so good at math. In these chapters, Gladwell’s research is much more clear-cut, although his writing occasionally brushes past possible alternative explanations. For example, he explains how the composition of Chinese number words allows Chinese-speakers to think much more quickly about math problems. However, he neglects to address the case of Chinese who were raised in an English-speaking country and learned English simultaneously.
Gladwell’s highly personal and fast-flowing prose tends to lend weight to his arguments through sheer personality, which makes the book much more enjoyable to read. He fails to conclusively prove a great many of his postulations, but in the grand scheme of things, that doesn’t detract from the book as much as it would seem. His intention is to “transform the way we understand success” (quote from inside flap) and fascinating anecdotes he provides do just that.
Bottom Line: Read it if you’re a sociology major or interested in the concept. An entertaining read, but be sure to not take it as cold hard fact.
Rating: 3.2/5
The thrust of the first half of “Outliers” is that people who occupy societal positions far beyond the norm achieved them less through innate talent and more by being in the right place and at the right time. Thus, no one, regardless of their talent or effort, is truly “self-made.”
Gladwell has some impressive examples to support this. He takes a list of the 75 richest people throughout history and points out that a disproportionate number of them (14) lived in the 19th century. As it turns out, all these people were born between 1831 and 1840. Age-wise, these people, such as J. P. Morgan and Andrew Carnegie, were perfectly poised to take advantage of the economic revolution of the 1860s and 1870s.
Unfortunately, Gladwell provides no other evidence on par with this. He is positing that this pattern occurs throughout humanity, yet applies only one worldwide example to his research. He cites a great a many studies--and has a well-annotated bibliography to boot—but none of them deal with more than 1000 people. When proposing something that affects six billion people, small numbers do not prove anything. It should be noted that the studies support his arguments admirably, though. They simply do not cover enough people to be certain whether the pattern holds throughout the world.
The second half of the book deals with cultural legacy. It attempts to explain, among other things, why the airline Air Korea had so many crashes, and why Asians are so good at math. In these chapters, Gladwell’s research is much more clear-cut, although his writing occasionally brushes past possible alternative explanations. For example, he explains how the composition of Chinese number words allows Chinese-speakers to think much more quickly about math problems. However, he neglects to address the case of Chinese who were raised in an English-speaking country and learned English simultaneously.
Gladwell’s highly personal and fast-flowing prose tends to lend weight to his arguments through sheer personality, which makes the book much more enjoyable to read. He fails to conclusively prove a great many of his postulations, but in the grand scheme of things, that doesn’t detract from the book as much as it would seem. His intention is to “transform the way we understand success” (quote from inside flap) and fascinating anecdotes he provides do just that.
Bottom Line: Read it if you’re a sociology major or interested in the concept. An entertaining read, but be sure to not take it as cold hard fact.
Rating: 3.2/5
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
"wtf", Peter Lerangis--Thoughts
For the record, a "Full Review" is harder to write. I have to form a solid opinion and condense it. Here, I can kinda go off the beaten path and have vague opinions~
So, wtf. Colloquially, "what the fuck", in case you didn't know.
First thing I noticed was that the teaser on the back bears very little resemblance to the actual plot. Rather annoying, to the say the least.
Second thing I noticed, this book is written from six different viewpoints, separated by chapters. Normally this grates on me, but for some reason it didn't this time around. The story centers on three kids trying to sell what they think are drugs and how the situation pretty much goes to hell as other people get involved.
It's kinda like "Things Fall Apart" (Achebe) but with drugs and the mob, set in present day NYC. Also much shorter. :P
I doubt the novel breaks 250 pages, which is pretty disappointing given the potential contortions of the plot. Sure, everything is resolved neatly, but it *could* have stretched on for another couple hundred pages with some serious drama and romance.
As it is, all the conflict is resolved by a single car crash and the reader gets nice little one-paragraph ever-afters* for the six main characters.
So. This book is actually pretty fun to read from a schadenfreude angle, as you watch things go to hell in a handbasket and back again, but I definitely wouldn't make it my primary book at any time.
*My term for the "where are they now?" blurbs that the author sometimes provides for characters at the end of a book. The Septimus Heap series is particularly good at them.
So, wtf. Colloquially, "what the fuck", in case you didn't know.
First thing I noticed was that the teaser on the back bears very little resemblance to the actual plot. Rather annoying, to the say the least.
Second thing I noticed, this book is written from six different viewpoints, separated by chapters. Normally this grates on me, but for some reason it didn't this time around. The story centers on three kids trying to sell what they think are drugs and how the situation pretty much goes to hell as other people get involved.
It's kinda like "Things Fall Apart" (Achebe) but with drugs and the mob, set in present day NYC. Also much shorter. :P
I doubt the novel breaks 250 pages, which is pretty disappointing given the potential contortions of the plot. Sure, everything is resolved neatly, but it *could* have stretched on for another couple hundred pages with some serious drama and romance.
As it is, all the conflict is resolved by a single car crash and the reader gets nice little one-paragraph ever-afters* for the six main characters.
So. This book is actually pretty fun to read from a schadenfreude angle, as you watch things go to hell in a handbasket and back again, but I definitely wouldn't make it my primary book at any time.
*My term for the "where are they now?" blurbs that the author sometimes provides for characters at the end of a book. The Septimus Heap series is particularly good at them.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
"Will Grayson, Will Grayson"--Full Review
(Left, David Levithan, Right, John Green)
The not-at-all-illegitimate lovechild of John Green ("Looking for Alaska") and David Levithan ("Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist"), "Will Grayson, Will Grayson" is a delightful read, albeit a bit angsty.
The premise is simple enough. Two teens, both named Will Grayson, both different flavors of troubled, one straight, one gay. The book is not about their meeting, or their interaction, but their residue. The life of each Will Grayson intersects and subsequently gives something to the other.
The book is told in chapters that alternate between Green's Will Grayson and Levithan's will grayson. The difference in the writing is definitely noticeable, but actually isn't that jarring. The differences highlight the different worldviews of the two Will Graysons. One is more uptight with perfect grammar and punctuation while the other is apathetic, not capitalizing anything and frequently relating real life in the manner of a chatlog.
The only downside to this book is that it's about ANGST of various types. Some people enjoy reading that, and others find it overwrought. I personally thought it wasn't over-the-top, but I can definitely understand how it'd put some people off. The gay (lowercase) will grayson in particular is almost whiny at times.
The ending, while certainly moving, seemed a touch contrived and broke my suspension of disbelief. But it could've been much, much worse. Plus it was unexpected. Always a good thing in an ending.
Anyway, I'm not gonna give this the "Everybody Should Read This" designation I gave "Alaska", but it is certainly a good book. If you're into troubled teens, go grab it.
3.87/5
...3.87 specifically because it's my blog and I will use bizarre decimal point ratings if I want to. :P
----Edit-----
Thanks to my awesome friend Zephy (aka Heather, see her blog here) we have photographs from a book signing the authors did in DC. :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)