Julie again, writing as part of the CSFF Blog Tour. I have a review system you may (or may not) want to look at to see HOW I come up with my ratings and what I rate on, to try to be fair.
Book: Eye of the Sword by Karyn Henley (blog, Facebook)
Ridiculously simplified summary: 2nd in a series. A falsely-accused knight must prove his worth to his king, keep the love of his princess, save the kingdom from those who would destroy it, and find the harps that will restore the stairway to heaven, which will allow human-like angels, and departed human souls, to ascend.
Content: Now I know how ultra-conservative Christians must have felt when C.S. Lewis's Narnia series came out. (Talking beasts? Jesus is a lion? Gods? Children drinking wine????) Now, as I mentioned yesterday, I have no problem with Narnia, but the content of this book concerned me.
I did not read the first book in the series, Breath of Angel, so there may have been explanations there that someone who only read the second book missed.
Yesterday, I wrote at length about Henley's portrayal of angels so I won't go over that here.
Again, Henley is quite credentialed in the Christian market, so it could be I'm the one who's wrong. That said, this is marketed as a young adult book, but angels aside, there is a lot of content that I know my mother would not have wanted me reading as a teen.
The point-of-view character, Trevin, consistently senses the color of certain people's auras, an idea I've only heard linked to the New Age movement. He has a dark past--did he seek forgiveness from God in Book 1? In this one, he just has to learn to forgive himself. As an angel advises him, "The harshest judgments are often the ones we place on ourselves." That advice sounded secular to me; I think forgiving yourself is useless if you don't remember that God forgave you (provided you accepted Christ's gift).
An angel refers to God as "the Most High, father-mother of the universe." (Not saying that can't possibly in any sense be an accurate description of God, but I didn't feel like an aside in a Young Adult Fantasy was the place to bring that up as if it's undisputed.)
Even more upsetting to me is that God seemed utterly absent. In fairness, that's a problem one of the angels mentions, but it just made this book feel bleak and Godless to me. The angels can't get to heaven because three harps need to be assembled to form the stairway to heaven, and this must happen when the stars or planets align (which happens once every 200 years). The souls of the dead are herded into some sort of underworld because they can't get to heaven.
As a Christian, a very major portion of my faith is that God will make everything right after death. If there were any doubt that He for some reason couldn't (!!!) get us to heaven, harps or no harps, I don't know where my faith would be.
Then again, I didn't notice anyone praying, or even thinking God could or would intervene. Even the angels seem to have very little to do with Him.
Henley's website describes many non-Christian religions' views of angels, harps, and even World Trees, though if you look around, you can find what she believes. If I owned a bookstore, I wouldn't actually put this particular book in the Christian section.
Christian content is not officially incorporated into the numeric ratings, though obviously it does influence some of them.
Rating:
Compelling: 8 out of 10. When you see a two-page list of characters at the start, you know things are going to get complicated. Since this is book 2 in a series, I had trouble with the early parts, when Henley is is referencing things I didn't understand, or trying to explain things that had happened. The large cast, complicated family trees, etc. are likely standard for epic fantasy. Once I got to the point where the protagonist Trevin is accused of a Very Big Crime, however, it started to flow nicely.
There is a romantic thread, but this not a romance per se.
Characters: 7 out of 10. Most of the characters seemed likable enough, and Trevin's point-of-view was strong throughout. There was no one I really loved, though; the closest was the prince. With so many characters, some blended together for me. Besides the prince and his jester, the one standout character of the ones introduced in this book was Ollena, the female warrior. (Do fantasy series have a quota of at least one female knight per series? Mine and Maggie's might come up in book 4....)
Writing/editing: 8 out of 10. I didn't notice any typos. Again, some of the exposition got to be confusing, though I'm not sure the problem could have been handled much more eloquently. A few of the characters have affectations that border on obnoxious (i.e. Ollena seeming to constantly end her sentences with "hmm" in some stretches) or oft-repeated descriptions (Ollena consistently smells like sandalwood...strangely, I don't remember what the love interest Melaia smells like). There was at least one instance where a somewhat important event involving the silver net was kind of slipped into the middle of a long action paragraph, so reading through, I missed the significance and had to go back to it later--not a big deal but I think the editor could've worked to make it clearer. Overall, though, well-written.
I thought the ending was handled very, very well. It clearly indicates there's another book envisioned, yet it wraps up enough that I don't feel frustrated.
Plausibility/believability: 2 out of 5. I think I would have given this same rating had this not been a Christian book...I'd expect any book dealing with angels to at least have some serious reference to God, and preferably not have God sleeping/ignoring the world/otherwise incapacitated. If a non-Christian book showed angels getting married and/or having children with humans in a positive light, I'd be annoyed, too.
Positive: 2 out of 5. Relatively low body count and the book is about the right amount of "darkness" to be compelling but not disturb my sleep. I just had trouble with the portrayal of angels and the limitations on and absence of God.
Gut reaction: 2 out of 5. If not for the problems I had with the world portrayed, I think I would have really enjoyed this book. Henley's style is strong and she has some truly compelling storylines. This just wasn't the Christian book I anticipated.
Bonus points: 5 out of 5.
Total Rating: 3.4 out of 5 stars
Here are the other blog tour participants (late additions that weren't listed yesterday are in bold):
Thomas Fletcher Booher
Keanan Brand
Beckie Burnham
Jackie Castle
Brenda Castro
Jeff Chapman
Christine
Theresa Dunlap
Cynthia Dyer
Victor Gentile
Ryan Heart
Janeen Ippolito
Jason Joyner
Carol Keen
Emileigh Latham
Rebekah Loper
Shannon McDermott
Karen McSpadden
Meagan @ Blooming with Books
Rebecca LuElla Miller
Anna Mittower
Mirriam Neal
Nissa
Faye Oygard
Donita K. Paul
Nathan Reimer
Crista Richey
Chawna Schroeder
Kathleen Smith
Donna Swanson
Jessica Thomas
Steve Trower
Shane Werlinger
Phyllis Wheeler
*I received a copy of this book free from the publisher in exchange for this review.*
navigation
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Monday, August 20, 2012
Angels and Nephilim and other Biblical Beings in Fiction - CSFF Blog Tour
Julie here! This month, the CSFF Blog Tour is reviewing Karyn Henley's Eye of the Sword (blog, Facebook).
I'm not a fan of angels in fiction. In addition to the concern Henley expresses on her website about not wanting to go through God's middleman, I also notice the media tends to get angels wrong. No, I never thought that when a bell rings an angel gets its wings, but I was shocked in 7th or 8th grade to discover that no, angels are NOT actually dead people, but created beings.
There are a lot of things about angels in Eye of the Sword that I personally disagree with, despite Henley's extensive Christian work history. Full disclosure, I did not read the first book in the series, Breath of Angel, so it's possible some of these points were addressed there. However, in Eye of the Sword:
But I personally can't view angels with the same flexibility I give dragons. Angels are absolutely real, Biblical beings, not figurative portrayals. They are involved in human affairs, and are second to God. Even if we speculate that God created countless worlds (and I love to speculate about that), would the angels themselves be so drastically different in those other words?
Even allowing that angels might be different in other worlds, Eye of the Sword takes place in a world where the term "comain" is used for people who seem to basically fulfill the function of knights. I don't agree with everything Orson Scott Card has to say, but he (and I believe many others) argue that in fantasy, if you use a new term for an item, there should be a good reason for it. If someone's eating a fruit that looks a lot like an apple, and tastes a lot like an apple, and grows on trees that look like apple trees, and is made into pies that taste like apple pies, it's probably best to just call the fruit an apple.
So by that logic, I as reader assume that the so-called "angels" and "Nephilim" are supposed to be MORE similar to the real angels and Nephilim of our world, than the king-serving, sword-and-shield bearing, horse-riding "comains" are similar to the knights of old. And given that these angels and Nephilim do not at all match up to my expectations, I got alternately irritated and offended when reading about them.
Anyway, angels obviously fascinate a lot of people, and just a cursory look at Henley's website reveals how much they interest her. She has an engaging writing style and writes a good fantasy. I'm almost certain I would have really liked Eye of the Sword if the angels had been another race, aliens, or something besides "angels." That said, angels are so popular, I would imagine they helped the book sell.
So! What you think about fantasy portrayals of Biblical things like angels? I'll review the book tomorrow.
Here are the other blog tour participants:
Thomas Fletcher Booher
Keanan Brand
Beckie Burnham
Jackie Castle
Brenda Castro
Jeff Chapman
Christine
Theresa Dunlap
Cynthia Dyer
Victor Gentile
Ryan Heart
Janeen Ippolito
Jason Joyner
Carol Keen
Emileigh Latham
Rebekah Loper
Shannon McDermott
Karen McSpadden
Meagan @ Blooming with Books
Rebecca LuElla Miller
Anna Mittower
Mirriam Neal
Nissa
Faye Oygard
Nathan Reimer
Chawna Schroeder
Kathleen Smith
Donna Swanson
Jessica Thomas
Steve Trower
Shane Werlinger
Phyllis Wheeler
(I received a copy of this book free from the publisher in exchange for a review.)
I'm not a fan of angels in fiction. In addition to the concern Henley expresses on her website about not wanting to go through God's middleman, I also notice the media tends to get angels wrong. No, I never thought that when a bell rings an angel gets its wings, but I was shocked in 7th or 8th grade to discover that no, angels are NOT actually dead people, but created beings.
There are a lot of things about angels in Eye of the Sword that I personally disagree with, despite Henley's extensive Christian work history. Full disclosure, I did not read the first book in the series, Breath of Angel, so it's possible some of these points were addressed there. However, in Eye of the Sword:
- Humans and angels can have children, and the end result is Nephilim, who are neither giants nor bad. (See Genesis 6, where God is very angry, in close conjunction with the angels taking human women as wives. One explanation, though not the only one, is that God needed the flood to wipe out the half-breed Nephilim from the Earth.)
- Female angels can bear children of human men.
- Unless I read wrong, angels seem to be able to die as humans die.
- Outside of heaven, angels seem to consistently look like humans (aside from wings they hide under a cape).
- Many angels spend their time with humans, acting more or less like humans; I saw little evidence of them thinking about God and His affairs.
- Angels can't get to heaven if their stairway is missing.
But I personally can't view angels with the same flexibility I give dragons. Angels are absolutely real, Biblical beings, not figurative portrayals. They are involved in human affairs, and are second to God. Even if we speculate that God created countless worlds (and I love to speculate about that), would the angels themselves be so drastically different in those other words?
Even allowing that angels might be different in other worlds, Eye of the Sword takes place in a world where the term "comain" is used for people who seem to basically fulfill the function of knights. I don't agree with everything Orson Scott Card has to say, but he (and I believe many others) argue that in fantasy, if you use a new term for an item, there should be a good reason for it. If someone's eating a fruit that looks a lot like an apple, and tastes a lot like an apple, and grows on trees that look like apple trees, and is made into pies that taste like apple pies, it's probably best to just call the fruit an apple.
So by that logic, I as reader assume that the so-called "angels" and "Nephilim" are supposed to be MORE similar to the real angels and Nephilim of our world, than the king-serving, sword-and-shield bearing, horse-riding "comains" are similar to the knights of old. And given that these angels and Nephilim do not at all match up to my expectations, I got alternately irritated and offended when reading about them.
Anyway, angels obviously fascinate a lot of people, and just a cursory look at Henley's website reveals how much they interest her. She has an engaging writing style and writes a good fantasy. I'm almost certain I would have really liked Eye of the Sword if the angels had been another race, aliens, or something besides "angels." That said, angels are so popular, I would imagine they helped the book sell.
So! What you think about fantasy portrayals of Biblical things like angels? I'll review the book tomorrow.
Here are the other blog tour participants:
Thomas Fletcher Booher
Keanan Brand
Beckie Burnham
Jackie Castle
Brenda Castro
Jeff Chapman
Christine
Theresa Dunlap
Cynthia Dyer
Victor Gentile
Ryan Heart
Janeen Ippolito
Jason Joyner
Carol Keen
Emileigh Latham
Rebekah Loper
Shannon McDermott
Karen McSpadden
Meagan @ Blooming with Books
Rebecca LuElla Miller
Anna Mittower
Mirriam Neal
Nissa
Faye Oygard
Nathan Reimer
Chawna Schroeder
Kathleen Smith
Donna Swanson
Jessica Thomas
Steve Trower
Shane Werlinger
Phyllis Wheeler
(I received a copy of this book free from the publisher in exchange for a review.)
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Cotswold Cottage at Greenfield Village
Julie here. Cotswold Cottage is a limestone house from 1620s England, transported to Greenfield Village (part of the Henry Ford Museum) in Michigan.
It's rather uncomfortable and stark inside, but I imagine only a fairly wealthy person in Kinyn would live here. Unless they were near a quarry or something!
Close on one of the windows. 1806!
Even the shingles were interesting.
Here is another page on Cotswold Cottage.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Page 56 (Facebook status game, circa 2008)
Here’s a game that’s been around Facebook since at least 2008:
I thought I’d try it with the in-progress sequel to The Healer and the Pirate (tentative title: The Healer and the Bandits). I was a bit worried it would contain spoilers or something.
OK, I guess that fear was a bit unfounded.
Anyone want to play? You can use your work in progress or just the nearest book you have on hand.
Grab the closest book to you, go to page 56 and copy the 5th sentence as your status.
I thought I’d try it with the in-progress sequel to The Healer and the Pirate (tentative title: The Healer and the Bandits). I was a bit worried it would contain spoilers or something.
She just whinnied.
OK, I guess that fear was a bit unfounded.
Anyone want to play? You can use your work in progress or just the nearest book you have on hand.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
The Healer and the Irate #removeoneletterfilms
Maggie here. I’m not much of a Twitter user but once in awhile I will take a look at the trending topics list. Sometimes, there’s a good game going. Those can be fun to get lost in.
Like this weekend, people were taking films and removing one letter from the title. It’s quite interesting to see how much the meaning can be changed by removing or adding just a simple little letter.
Let’s take The Lord of the Rings for example. It can become The Lord of the Rigs and before you know it no more rings are involved but there’s some big guy in a truck named Frodo leading on a 9-truck expedition.
Like this weekend, people were taking films and removing one letter from the title. It’s quite interesting to see how much the meaning can be changed by removing or adding just a simple little letter.
Let’s take The Lord of the Rings for example. It can become The Lord of the Rigs and before you know it no more rings are involved but there’s some big guy in a truck named Frodo leading on a 9-truck expedition.
Julie: How you share is that someone uses a “hashtag” like
#removeoneletterfilms to mark their post as belonging to the “conversation.” Then you can look up that tag here and see what everyone else is saying! Parental guidance suggested but most the ones I saw were OK and even funny.
OK, yes, it’s silly, but sometimes it’s fun to be a little silly!
Maggie: Here are the ones Julie posted:
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
The Princess and the Fog #removeoneletterfilms
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
The Ion, the Witch and the Wardrobe #removeoneletterfilms
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
Price Caspian #removeoneletterfilms
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
The Voyage of the Dawn Trader #removeoneletterfilms
Then she got into Lord of the Rings mode:
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
Exciting story of sailors making friends. Fellowship of the Rig #removeoneletterfilms @MaggiePhillippi
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
Group seeks a grammatically-confusing landmark. The Two Tower #removeoneletterfilms @MaggiePhillippi#removeoneletterfilms
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
Thanksgiving day across the US. Return of the Kin #removeoneletterfilms @MaggiePhillippi
And this one made me smile:
Julie Bihn @juliebihn
Now 15% more piratey! Pirates o' the Caribbean #removeoneletterfilms
Tag-team! Julie again! I stole half of mine from Maggie because she said she wouldn’t do them. Lord of the Rings? All the ideas were hers; I just added some words. (Collaboration!)
I loved hers, though. Anyone who’s read the book or seen the movie knows why this is funny:
Maggie Phillippi @MaggiePhillippiAnn of Green Gables #removeoneletterfilms
And who can forget this touching Disney film?
Maggie Phillippi @MaggiePhillippiThe story of a dog looking for his lost sandwich. Blt #removeoneletterfilms @juliebihn
Maggie: I wanted to start a trending topic about removing one letter from TV shows. Because how funny would it be to have a show about FIENDS? Or anyone remember Scarecrow and Mrs. King? Turn it into Scarecrow and Ms. King and you cut that cast in half. Who knows? Maybe that’s what everyone will be doing next weekend.
Or maybe book titles. The Healer and the Irate. A story of a girl who heals anger.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
The Healer and the Pirate in Michigan
Julie here. So my mom and I recently visited the Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village, which were both wonderful! We stayed at the Best Western Greenfield Inn, a Victorian-styled hotel right off the freeway and just a few miles away from the local attractions.
It was a pleasant enough place, and providentially, we were placed near the front desk and also, their "lending library."
What is that book I see? Could it be?
That was nearly a month ago, so I'm not so sure that someone hasn't absconded with the author-autographed copy, but maybe it's still there!
| Some have called it a Barbie Castle. Fair enough. |
It was a pleasant enough place, and providentially, we were placed near the front desk and also, their "lending library."
What is that book I see? Could it be?
That was nearly a month ago, so I'm not so sure that someone hasn't absconded with the author-autographed copy, but maybe it's still there!
Monday, July 9, 2012
Short-Straw Bride by Karen Witemeyer
Hi! Maggie here. I am using this review system to base my rating on. I'm a fan of Karen Witemeyer so I thought I would share my thoughts on her recent release.
Synopsis from Amazon: No one steps on Archer land. Not if they value their life. But when Meredith Hayes overhears a lethal plot to burn the Archer brothers off their ranch, a twelve-year-old debt compels her to take the risk.
Fourteen years of constant vigilance hardens a man. Yet when Travis Archer confronts a female trespasser with the same vivid blue eyes as the courageous young girl he once aided, he can't bring himself to send her away. And when an act of sacrifice leaves her injured and her reputation in shreds, gratitude and guilt send him riding to her rescue once again.
Compelling: 10 out 10. I finished this book in one sitting. There wasn’t a dull moment. I enjoyed every minute spent learning about the Archer brothers and seeing the love between Travis and Meredith progress. There wasn’t a scene that dragged or a moment that didn’t fit.
Characters: 9 out 10. I adored all the Archers and Meredith too. Juggling five characters in a room at once is hard work but I applaud Karen Witemeyer. Each brother had a distinctive personality and I loved how they all interacted. I only knock it down to 9 because I could have done without Cassie. She was your typical beautiful girl whose smile charmed the socks off of anyone (even though I did appreciate her relationship with Meredith). If these characters make an appearance in the next book Witemeyer writes, I really hope it isn’t Cassie but Crockett Archer. Next to Travis, he was my favorite. I really want a story on him.
Writing/Editing: 9 out of 10. MINI SPOILER ALERT. I’m not even sure if this is worth knocking a point off but at the very end of the book... Travis has been hurt but either his excitement over the marriage bed overpowers any pain or the wound was forgotten about. I kept waiting for Meredith to tend to his wound but she never did. Despite that, I enjoy Witemeyer’s ability to weave a story. She definitely entertained me.
Plausibility/Believability: 3 out of 5. SPOILER ALERT. I only knock a few points down because I would think Meredith’s uncle would have pushed the issue of her marrying this evil crook for his money over forcing his beloved daughter on the evil crook. The uncle supposedly doesn’t believe all that is said about the evil man at first but I didn’t completely buy that as a valid excuse. However, I enjoyed the other aspects of the story so much I didn’t really care. And really, it probably wouldn’t distract anyone else.
Positive: 5 out of 5. Good conquers evil in the end and true love wins. I’d say it was pretty positive.
Gut reaction: 5 out of 5. This was definitely my kind of book. Full of wonderful dialog and just enough internal thoughts, I couldn’t put the book down.
Recommended for: Anyone who loves historical romance. Probably not for those who dislike the historical romance genre. If you’ve read and loved Witemeyer’s other books, you’ll more than likely love this one too.
My rating: * * * * *
Synopsis from Amazon: No one steps on Archer land. Not if they value their life. But when Meredith Hayes overhears a lethal plot to burn the Archer brothers off their ranch, a twelve-year-old debt compels her to take the risk.
Fourteen years of constant vigilance hardens a man. Yet when Travis Archer confronts a female trespasser with the same vivid blue eyes as the courageous young girl he once aided, he can't bring himself to send her away. And when an act of sacrifice leaves her injured and her reputation in shreds, gratitude and guilt send him riding to her rescue once again.
Compelling: 10 out 10. I finished this book in one sitting. There wasn’t a dull moment. I enjoyed every minute spent learning about the Archer brothers and seeing the love between Travis and Meredith progress. There wasn’t a scene that dragged or a moment that didn’t fit.
Characters: 9 out 10. I adored all the Archers and Meredith too. Juggling five characters in a room at once is hard work but I applaud Karen Witemeyer. Each brother had a distinctive personality and I loved how they all interacted. I only knock it down to 9 because I could have done without Cassie. She was your typical beautiful girl whose smile charmed the socks off of anyone (even though I did appreciate her relationship with Meredith). If these characters make an appearance in the next book Witemeyer writes, I really hope it isn’t Cassie but Crockett Archer. Next to Travis, he was my favorite. I really want a story on him.
Writing/Editing: 9 out of 10. MINI SPOILER ALERT. I’m not even sure if this is worth knocking a point off but at the very end of the book... Travis has been hurt but either his excitement over the marriage bed overpowers any pain or the wound was forgotten about. I kept waiting for Meredith to tend to his wound but she never did. Despite that, I enjoy Witemeyer’s ability to weave a story. She definitely entertained me.
Plausibility/Believability: 3 out of 5. SPOILER ALERT. I only knock a few points down because I would think Meredith’s uncle would have pushed the issue of her marrying this evil crook for his money over forcing his beloved daughter on the evil crook. The uncle supposedly doesn’t believe all that is said about the evil man at first but I didn’t completely buy that as a valid excuse. However, I enjoyed the other aspects of the story so much I didn’t really care. And really, it probably wouldn’t distract anyone else.
Positive: 5 out of 5. Good conquers evil in the end and true love wins. I’d say it was pretty positive.
Gut reaction: 5 out of 5. This was definitely my kind of book. Full of wonderful dialog and just enough internal thoughts, I couldn’t put the book down.
Recommended for: Anyone who loves historical romance. Probably not for those who dislike the historical romance genre. If you’ve read and loved Witemeyer’s other books, you’ll more than likely love this one too.
My rating: * * * * *
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


