July Reading (2 of 4): LRK and CSL

[ase]

Locked Rooms (Laurie R. King): In all my griping about plausibility and suspension of disbelief, it's easy to forget is how fun the Holmes/Russell books are. Deep? Reflective? Heck no. On the other hand, feng shui as a tool for finding lost boxes and car chases through San Francisco. I'm glad I had an inkling that Mary was going to be absolved of all guilt in her family's deaths, because huge retcons are much easier to take when you know they're coming. Intellectually, I think LRK's cheating - la la la, crushing family guilt which is a major factor, la la la, let's retcon and relieve that guilt eight books later - but she's found a very fun way in which to cheat. Dashing about SF and having family angst in expensive venues is fun, right? Also, King's never played fair with Russell; her attempts to work in her chosen field have been subordinated to Holmes' antics with depressing regularity. I've been irritated by this since A Letter of Mary, when this theologically revolutionary document is set aside in favor of a whodunit. I tend to mistake the Russell/Holmes novels for something much more significant and thoughtful than the author seems to be aiming for. But sometimes frivolous and thoughtless is fun, like when you include Dashiell Hammett as a significant secondary character. Should I know Rick Garcia? I vaguely associate the name with the rock scene, but I'm reasonably sure that's Jerry Garcia.

Someday, there may be WWII!Russell books. Scary thought. And that's as profound as I'm going to get. (7.13)

Four Loves (C. S. Lewis): Nonfiction. Lewis examines several categories of human interaction - affection, friendship, romantic love, charity - with an eye to their similarities to and impediment of relationship with the Divine. Several years ago I saw the book mentioned in someone's attempt to clarify character relationships and decided I wanted to try reading it. Stalled three pages in on someone else's copious underlining and my complete incomprehension of Lewis' central thesis. I think my personal history with God (or rather, the complete lack thereof) continues to explain most of my difficulties with this book, a state of events that says more about me than about Lewis' thoughtful and reasonably readable work. Lewis' control of his words, sentences, paragraphs and chapters awes me, since I can't consistently start and end livejournal entries where I intend to. (7.16)

Posted and backdated August 4th, 2005

Comments

[ase.livejournal.com]

Why Jonathan? The fandomlet is full of kiddies named for Russell's parents

Aha. (There's a fandomlet? Beyond the, like, three people I know online who get excited when a new Russell book comes out? Cool.) I can understand where the Russell ficcers are coming from. In a lot of fandoms it woiuld probably be cheating a bit, and be associated with Really Cute Offspring Antics, but in the Russellverse (there's got to be a better name) it follows a little more logically from the characterization. YMMV, obviously.

Random, isn't it?

Just a bit. Assigning universe characteristics to characters from other works (Miles Vorkosigan the Gryffindor, etc) is something everyone does a bit of, but plotting crossovers usually doesn't follow. My brain is seizing up around the time Holmes is forced to deal with actual divine presences influencing his investigation. (Because there's got to be an investigation - right?) If you manage to write it, I'd love to see it - it sounds like something out of ithurtsmybrain. Which occasionally comes up with Crazy, Yet Good Fic.