(Audio)Book Talk: DEFENDING JACOB, by William Landay

Defending Jacob: A Novel
William Landay(Facebook) (Twitter)
Audiobook read by Grover Gardner
Bantam (2013), Paperback (ISBN 0345533666 / 9780345533661)
Fiction (genre: suspense/legal thriller), 448 pages
Source: Purchased audiobook (Blackstone Audio, 2012; Audible ASIN B0073OGZNM)

SGW at The Cue Card neatly summed up this novel very much as I would have, so I'm just going to quote her:

"Defending Jacob has all the elements of a riveting Presumed Innocent courtroom crime drama. It reminded me a bit of the 1987 Scott Turow classic mixed perhaps slightly with Lionel Shriver’s 2003 novel We Need to Talk About Kevin--it’s just a bit different and maybe not as intense."

Neither of those comparisons should be construed as an insult, in my opinion. I'm not a big genre-fiction reader, but when I have read genre, the legal thriller/"courtroom drama" has been one of my favorites, and Presumed Innocent is one of the best examples of it I know. And the brilliant, shocking We Need to Talk About Kevin was on my 2013 Books of the Year list.

The ...Kevin resemblance jumped out at me fairly quickly, and for one reason in particular: the mothers in both novels were able to see their sons as capable of committing horrible acts of violence, while the fathers downplayed or denied the possibility. Other than in tone, I didn't connect Defending Jacob with Presumed Innocent until very late in the story.

While listening to the audiobook, I had commented that the characters were annoying me, but I couldn't have articulated exactly why at the time. I realized later that it was because their interactions with each other were frequently so true to life--conversations where one person didn't really listen to the other, and behavior based on assumptions and lack of self-awareness--that they were just frustrating the devil out of me. I don't know whether I've ever told characters in an audiobook to "shut up and listen" more than I did during Defending Jacob, but I think that's a good indicator of how well-developed the human drama of this novel is.

I think author William Landay's choice to use Jacob's father Andy as the first-person narrator is effective for the emotional impact, but in other respects his role in the story feels dramatically contrived. For that reason, I think the novel might have worked better for me overall in third person and/or with at least one other perspective. That said, reading in first person can make an audiobook performance both more intimate and authoritative, and I thought Grover Gardner handled it extremely well.

Now for the twist: I realize I may be sounding fairly negative about this novel, but I don't mean to at all. Defending Jacob is a compelling blend of legal and family drama, and even if its characters did annoy me, I was eager to see how their story played out. The novel is a little overloaded in some respects--I felt like there didn't need to be quite so much Barber-family backstory to establish one of the central themes--and a bit underdeveloped in others, but it raises some big, thorny questions that would make it a great book-club pick.

Rating: Book, 3.5 of 5; Audio, 3.75 of 5

Other reviews, via the Book Blogs Search Engine

Book description, from the publisher’s website:

Andy Barber has been an assistant district attorney for two decades. He is respected. Admired in the courtroom. Happy at home with the loves of his life: his wife, Laurie, and their teenage son, Jacob.
Then Andy’s quiet suburb is stunned by a shocking crime: a young boy stabbed to death in a leafy park. And an even greater shock: The accused is Andy’s own son—shy, awkward, mysterious Jacob.
Andy believes in Jacob’s innocence. Any parent would. But the pressure mounts. Damning evidence. Doubt. A faltering marriage. The neighbors’ contempt. A murder trial that threatens to obliterate Andy’s family.
It is the ultimate test for any parent: How far would you go to protect your child? It is a test of devotion. A test of how well a parent can know a child. For Andy Barber, a man with an iron will and a dark secret, it is a test of guilt and innocence in the deepest sense.

From Chapter One:

"In April 2008, Neal Logiudice finally subpoenaed me to appear before the grand jury. By then it was too late. Too late for his case, certainly, but also too late for Logiudice. His reputation was already damaged beyond repair, and his career along with it. A prosecutor can limp along with a damaged reputation for a while, but his colleagues will watch him like wolves and eventually he will be forced out, for the good of the pack. I have seen it many times: an ADA is irreplaceable one day, forgotten the next.

"I have always had a soft spot for Neal Logiudice...With the best intentions, he smashed people's lives and never lost a minute of sleep over it. He only went after bad guys, after all. That is the Prosecutor's Fallacy-They are bad guys because I am prosecuting them-and Logiudice was not the first to be fooled by it, so I forgave him for being righteous. I even liked him. I rooted for him precisely because of his oddities, the unpronounceable name, the snaggled teeth-which any of his peers would have had straightened with expensive braces, paid for by Mummy and Daddy-even his naked ambition. I saw something in the guy. An air of sturdiness in the way he bore up under so much rejection, how he just took it and took it. He was obviously a working-class kid determined to get for himself what so many others had simply been handed. In that way, and only in that way, I suppose, he was just like me."

Read More

"I'll stir-fry you in my wok..."

...but that's a really weird way to prepare Italian food. (This week's Wordless Wednesday prompt was provided by Kim Tracy Prince and the Beastie Boys.)

Eataly, New York City, May 2011

An InLinkz Link-up

Read More

A Fan(girl)'s Notes: (Untimely) Thoughts on SHERLOCK, Series 3

(NOTE: I will make NO attempts to avoid possible spoilers for any previous season of Sherlock in the following discussion. If you're a spoilerphobe, please feel free to slip out now!)

(NOTE: This has been edited and republished to include some observations I inadvertently left out of the original post, and which have no impact on the preceding spoiler-policy disclaimer.)

We've become used to intervals of two or three years between installments in movie series, but with rare exceptions--there was that eighteen-month gap between the fourth and fifth seasons of Mad Men--we don't experience that sort of thing so much with television. And when a television series ends a season with a thoroughly mind-bending cliffhanger before it goes on that two-year break, we have lots of time to speculate and discuss what we think happened, and what we think will happen when it comes back. Our expectations may get just a little bit out of hand.

(via PBS.org: MASTERPIECE: Sherlock, Season 3)

Sherlock's return for its third season (or "series" in the original BBC language) was met with all the expectations that built up over its long absence among an audience that grew substantially (thanks to DVD, Netflix, and Hulu, not to mention Tumblr) while it was away. There was no way it was going to satisfy all of them.

Discussing the most recent three-episode season on the Firewall & Iceberg Podcast, Dan Fienberg commented,

"The writers manage to make the writing clever even if the plotting isn't clever. I felt like there was a lot of people trying to write witty dialogue and using witty dialogue to cover up for bad structure and bad plotting. And if you were willing to just sit back and go 'OK, I am enjoying watching these characters be smart and sparkling,' that's fine."

I was 99.5% willing to do exactly that. Series 3 of Sherlock seemed to be less warmly received by critics and professional TV viewers than its first two outings, but complaints from the general fandom were rare. And Series 3 clearly reflected an awareness of that fandom, along with an increased awareness of the show's own self-image. This could be off-putting to viewers who don't care for insider-y meta references; I'm not one of those viewers, and that was part of why I so thoroughly enjoyed this season.

That said, I will mention a few minor issues...

It may have been more apparent this season than it was during its first two--to people who watch both shows, at least--that Sherlock and Doctor Who have the same showrunner, Steven Moffat. Feinberg's observation--I'm not certain that it's a complaint, really--sounds like it could have been made about any number of episodes from the Eleventh Doctor/Moffat era. (In my observation, it usually is a complaint when it's said about Doctor Who.) I felt that the show was more fun to watch than ever, but on reflection, I'm not sure it hangs together quite as well as prior seasons.

Some of that is due to an overall plot problem--namely, this season's lack of a strong master villain. Series 2 was so well framed by the Sherlock/Moriarty conflict that the follow-up probably couldn't help but feel a little weak by comparison. The mysteries themselves just didn't seem as compelling.

And one of the previous season's mysteries still essentially remains one--we still don't know how Sherlock faked his death at the end of Series 2. The Series 3 premiere offered several possibilities, but never committed to any of them--and I actually thought that was a brilliant approach. As I said earlier, this season felt like it was made for the fans; this episode dramatized several very popular fan theories without ever answering the question...and any definite answer would have made some subgroup of fans unhappy, so entertaining many without aligning with any was a smart, if slippery, decision by co-creators Moffat and Mark Gatiss.

But if the stories seemed weaker, the character interactions and development were difficult to fault--and they're the main reason I love Sherlock. (Well, that and being a card-carrying Cumberbunny--h/t to Jennifer for the terminology!) As my husband has commented, the brilliant high-functioning sociopath Sherlock Holmes would be thoroughly unbearable real-life company, but as portrayed by (the glorious) Benedict Cumberbatch, Sherlock does seem to be developing a surprising degree of self-awareness of what a mess he really is; my favorite example was his assurance to the newlywed John and Mary Watson that they would be great parents, because they'd gotten plenty of experience with babies thanks to dealing with him. (Any degree of self-awareness from Sherlock is surprising, frankly.) In the absence of a "big bad" to engage Sherlock this season, there was more focus on Dr. John Watson and his relationships with his best friend and new wife, giving Martin Freeman plenty to do with the role--and he did it terrifically well.

I think I appreciated some of Sherlock's technical aspects more this most recent season than I have before. I've always liked the music (I'm looking for ringtones based on it, actually), but I was particularly struck by the cinematography and editing this time around. I enjoy looking at this show, and I think it has a very particular, and appealing, visual sensibility (which I should note seemed to display fewer onscreen text messages than it has previously). (This is apart from the previously-mentioned appeal of looking at Mr. Cumberbatch.)

My only remaining quibble with this show is that, imperfections and all, a three-episode season is just not enough Sherlock. It was all over too quickly, and I just hope we won't have to wait quite so long to see these characters again!

********************

The game is on--the first official Sherlock fan conventions are being planned in the US and Europe later this year. That's all the info currently available, but if you think you'd be at all interested in this, you might want to sign up for the sherlocked.com mailing list sooner rather than later. I've already done so.

Read More

What's On in the (Sunday) Salon, 2/23/2014

My Facebook friends may have seen my request for a Sunday Salon posting dispensation last week. I don't want to do that two weeks in a row, so...hey, I'm here! How are you doing this weekend?

What I'm reading

• in print

All my print reading these days is for review commitments--mostly for Shelf Awareness, but I do have three blog tours scheduled between now and early April. (I rarely do those any more, but it's hard to say no to Trish and Lisa sometimes!) I've briefly set aside Let's Talk About Love for something a little faster-moving, Deborah Feldman's memoir Exodus, a follow-up to Unorthodox--I haven't yet read the earlier book, but its chances for timely liberation from TBR Purgatory have probably improved significantly now.

• on audio

This past week was dedicated to catching up on podcasts, but I'm planning to start on a new audiobook tomorrow. I'm not sure what it will be yet, so we can all be surprised!

What I'm watching

I watched very little of the Olympics, and there hasn't been much else to watch the last couple of weeks--the DVR is pretty well cleaned out and caught up. That's about to change, I believe.

What I'm writing

I'm doing my best not to get too far behind on book reviews, and I'm still working on my season recap/reflection on Sherlock. Other than that--and for reasons discussed below--I'm starting to think this may be the season for photoblogging.

What caught my eye this week

• Becca has opened sign-ups for the second annual "Women's Lit Event" (to be held during March, Women's History Month) at Lost in Books.

• Sheila has long supported reading freedom with her annual Banned Books Week celebrations at Book Journey, but now it's personal:

"Recently I was asked if I would be interested in being a part of a new group of readers in the area that would preview books to see that they are appropriate for middle grade and teenage children. I liked the thought of that, I have done some of this proofing for friends in the past. As the information unfolded I discovered that this group would work at having books that they decided were deemed unsatisfactory for young eyes to be removed from the schools."

• "You Are a BIG DEAL." Alexandra Franzen presents a re-framing exercise:

"Instead of saying:
'Only six people read my blog.'
Try saying:
'Every time I write a blog post, I’m helping / inspiring / entertaining an intimate DINNER PARTY!'
"Instead of saying:
'Only fifty people read my blog.'
Try saying:
'Every time I write a blog post, I’m helping / inspiring / entertaining a packed COFFEE SHOP!'"

• But it doesn't have to be such a big deal to be a BIG DEAL--Andi offers five suggestions to make blogging simpler 

• "There's No Such Thing as a Real Reader" (Book Riot)

"All those things you might believe make someone a Real Reader — that they read the classics; that they treat their books as sacred objects; that they prefer print to digital; that they love to hunt for books — those are things you like. And that’s great. But why do you think you should get to define what it means to be a reader? 
"We all love stories. We might love stories published in different media, and we might show our love for them in different ways. But shouldn’t the important thing be the stories?"

What Else is New?

This part isn't really new--I'm pretty sure I've mentioned some of it already--but it is more specific. My appearances here--both on the blog generally, and in the Sunday Salon in particular--are about to become increasingly erratic.

March and April are my busiest months of the year at the day job, and I've been assigned to a couple of special project teams in addition to my normal audit-prep work. March has three family birthday weekends--my nephew's, my dad's, and mine--as well as the blog's seventh birthday, on March 16. (I intend to acknowledge of two of those birthdays here. You can probably guess which two.)

April brings...well, probably not showers, since California is in a major drought, but that means that not much worry that either the RenFaire or the LA Times Festival of Books will be rained out. (WonderCon is mostly indoors, rain or shine.) I skipped the Festival of Books last year, but this year I'm going with a special out-of-town book-blogger guest, so if you're up for a meetup that weekend, holler!

Gratuitous Photo of the Week

The Doctor has a TARDIS, right? But I suppose either of these could do in a pinch...
(As seen at Gallifrey One: 25 Glorious Years, February 14-16, 2014)

Read More

Book Talk: COINCIDENCE, by J.W. Ironmonger

Coincidence: A Novel
(previously published in the UK as The Coincidence Authority)
J.W. Ironmonger (Twitter)
Harper Perennial (2014), Paperback (ISBN 0062309897 / 9780062309891)
Fiction, 304 pages
Source: ARC from the publisher, via TLC Book Tours 



Visit the other stops on this TLC Book Tour for more

discussion of Coincidence. I received a copy of the book to facilitate this post, but was not otherwise compensated for participation in this blog tour.

Comments: I like this novel's original title, The Coincidence Authority, a little better than the title it's been given for its US publication. Coincidence sounds a bit...well, softer, more philosophical and meditative, and doesn't really prepare you as well for the fast-paced suspense tale that you'll actually find here. (The publisher's actual description, linked below, does a much better job of that.)

That said, I should note that Coincidence does hang on a central theme of philosophical debate: Is the world random? Do we truly have free will, or is what we do part of a predetermined plan? Are "coincidences" a product of a human need to ascribe meaning and connection to events, or do they have inherent meaning of their own?

The novel's original title refers to Dr. Thomas Post, an expert on coincidence--that is, an expert in applying the mathematical calculations to prove that most "coincidences" probably really aren't. But Azalea Lewis' life has had a string of tragic occurrences connected by their common dates--June 21, in years ending in 2. She needs Thomas to prove to her that there's no greater significance to them--because if they do mean something, her own death may be less than a year away.

The debate Coincidence poses, and which Thomas and Azalea engage in over and over again, is one that fascinates me, but it's the story that makes this book a fast and engrossing read. J.W. Ironmonger's narrative shifts between present and past, recounting Azalea's shocking past as it builds toward an outcome that Thomas may unable to prevent. I'm not that fast a reader these days, and by my standards, I blew through this novel--and I don't want to tell you too much more about that narrative, since I'd like you to go into this one pretty much unspoiled.

It can be challenging for plot and philosophy to coexist in fiction without getting in one another's way, but Ironmonger has pulled it off here. Coincidence has the makings of a great book-club pick--a story compelling enough to read, resting on ideas that are sure to fuel discussion.

Rating: 3.75 / 5

Book description, via the publisher's website:

What determines the course of our lives? Chance . . . or destiny?
On Midsummer's Day, 1982, three-year-old Azalea Ives is found alone at a seaside fairground.
One year later, her mother's body washes up on a beach—her link to Azalea unnoticed.
On Midsummer's Day, 1992, her adoptive parents are killed in a Ugandan rebel uprising; Azalea is narrowly rescued by a figure from her past.
Terrified that she, too, will meet her fate on Midsummer's Day, Azalea approaches Thomas Post, an expert in debunking coincidences. Azalea's past, he insists, is random—but as Midsummer's Day approaches, he worries that she may bring fate upon herself.

Opening lines:

"On Midsummer's Day 1982, when she was only three years old, the girl they called Azalea Ives was discovered alone and lost at a fairground in Devon. It was late in the evening, when children of her age should surely have been at home, tucked up in bed. She was held in the fairground manager's caravan for an hour, or even more, while appeals were made over loudspeakers. This was a traveling fair, and we can imagine what a faint impression the public address system might have made against the caterwauling of shrieking teens, the thundering of the waltzer, the hollering of hawkers and hucksters, and the pounding basslines of fairground music. By ten o'clock when the noise had subsided, and when most of the revelers had dispersed into the night, no one had come to claim the little girl."

Read More

WW: Black & White & A Little (TARDIS) Blue

Paul and I spent Valentine's weekend sharing the love of Doctor Who with fellow fans and friends (and a few stars) of the show at the annual Gallifrey One convention here in Los Angeles. Saturday was our "cosplay day." 

Disclosure: I made edits to comply with this week's Wordless Wednesday theme, "Black and White," but since this 50-year-old TV show was in black-and-white when it started, I think they're appropriate.

An InLinkz Link-up

Read More

Book Talk: ONE MORE THING, by B.J. Novak

One More Thing: Stories and Other Stories

B.J. Novak (Twitter)

Knopf (February 2014), Hardcover (ISBN 0385351836 / 9780385351836)

Fiction (short stories), 288 pages

A version of this review was previously published in Shelf Awareness for Readers (2/14/2014). Shelf Awareness provided me with a publisher-furnished galley to facilitate the review, and compensated me for the review they received and posted.

Actor/writer B.J. Novak (The Office) bucks the linked-short-stories trend in his first fiction collection, One More Thing: Stories and Other Stories, but that doesn't mean the pieces here have nothing that unites them. While they lack recurring characters or common narrative threads, they have a consistency in tone, a similar worldview, and--perhaps not surprisingly, given Novak's background as a comedic writer and performer--a shared sense of humor.

Some of One More Thing's strongest stories are driven by character. "One of These Days" reunites three college friends with a mission to "do something" about the fourth member of their old group; a young boy is puzzled when his parents won't let him claim the prize he wins from a cereal company in "Kellogg's"; "J.C. Audetat" finds that his poetry is best expressed in translating the words of other writers. Others stand out conceptually: the hare tells his side of the story in "The Rematch" with the tortoise, and love always wins "The Best Thing in the World Awards"...except for that one time.

Many of One More Thing's short stories are very short--several run only a few lines--and even the longest barely reach twenty pages. However, word count has little to do with what makes them work.

Novaks' writing is intelligent but doesn't feel like it's trying too hard to be clever, and I was struck by a touch of sweetness mixed into the funny--there's a sense of compassion toward its subjects that gives the funny lines unexpected depth. Quite frankly, I expected more snark, and I'm glad Novak confounded that expectation.

I'm not generally a short-fiction fan, but this was "potato-chip reading"--I kept thinking I'd have just a few, but then I'd dig further and further into this engaging, imaginative collection of stories that are difficult to read just one at a time.

Book description, from the publisher's website:

A boy wins a $100,000 prize in a box of Frosted Flakes—only to discover that claiming the winnings might unravel his family. A woman sets out to seduce motivational speaker Tony Robbins—turning for help to the famed motivator himself. A new arrival in Heaven, overwhelmed with options, procrastinates over a long-ago promise to visit his grandmother. We meet Sophia, the first artificially intelligent being capable of love, who falls for a man who might not be ready for it himself; a vengeance-minded hare, obsessed with scoring a rematch against the tortoise who ruined his life; and post-college friends who try to figure out how to host an intervention in the era of Facebook. Along the way, we learn why wearing a red T-shirt every day is the key to finding love, how February got its name, and why the stock market is sometimes just . . . down.

Finding inspiration in questions from the nature of perfection to the icing on carrot cake, One More Thing has at its heart the most human of phenomena: love, fear, hope, ambition, and the inner stirring for the one elusive element just that might make a person complete. Across a dazzling range of subjects, themes, tones, and narrative voices, the many pieces in this collection are like nothing else, but they have one thing in common: they share the playful humor, deep heart, sharp eye, inquisitive mind, and altogether electrifying spirit of a writer with a fierce devotion to the entertainment of the reader.

Read More

WW: (Puppy) Love

Puppy Love: Paul and Bellatrix, our "grand-dog," December 2013

Puppy Love 2: Bel and her "mom," Kate

An InLinkz Link-up

Read More

(Audio)Book Talk: GOING CLEAR, by Lawrence Wright

Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief

Lawrence Wright

Audiobook read by Morton Sellers
Vintage (November 2013), Paperback (ISBN 0385393040 / 9780385393041)
Nonfiction, 560 pages
Source: Purchased audiobook (Random House Audio, January 2013, ISBN 9780385393058; Audible ASIN B00AYLFLCM)

I've spent about 40% of my life in places where the Church of Scientology's presence is hard to ignore: the obvious one is here in Los Angeles, and the other one is Tampa Bay. (The fact I haven't lived there for over 25 years is probably why I'd forgotten that the organization's "spiritual headquarters" is in Clearwater, Florida.) But I work just a few blocks away from several Scientology centers in Hollywood, which makes it a lot harder to forget their presence here, and it's such a significant presence it seems important to understand it. Lawrence Wright's Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief was on a lot of best-nonfiction-of-2013 lists, so I decided I'd see what I could learn from it.

What I Learned, in bullet points:

• Scientology bears little resemblance to what most people think of as a "religion," despite an official (and controversial) determination from the IRS that it is one;
• The rigidity of Scientology's practices, its attitude toward dissenters, and the power of its dangerously charismatic leaders suggest that those who see it as more like a cult than a "church" may not be wrong;
• Scientology has a caste system of sorts which places entertainment-industry members at the top, catering to them with its "Celebrity Centers," and its own clergy somewhere near the bottom;
• The ongoing, long-term coursework required to progress "up the bridge" makes it quite costly to be a Scientologist;
• Some of the things Scientology teaches its members, particularly in the early stages, are surprisingly useful and sensible. The "surprise" comes because they resemble some of the ideas and practices of pyschology, which Scientology considers a thoroughly evil discipline. Scientology's origins in founder L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health and its antipathy to the mental-health profession are, to put it charitably, difficult to reconcile.

Going Clear's subtitle defines the book's structure. The first section pretty well covers "Everything you ever wanted to know about Scientology (and quite a lot you'd never have thought to ask)," and that begins with the rather colorful biography of its founder, the exceedingly prolific writer L. Ron Hubbard. Everything in Scientology's belief system comes directly from Hubbard's texts, some of which seem to be strongly influenced by his earlier science-fiction writing. That said, Hubbard grasped the human need for explanations and answers, and he devised some that have made sense to a huge number of people for over six decades.

Another thing Hubbard grasped was that Scientology's teachings could be particularly appealing to "artistic" types, and from early on, they were pitched toward a specific type of artist above all others--those in the Hollywood-based entertainment industry. A list of entertainers associated with Scientology would contain a lot of familiar names; you can Google them yourself, but you'll find Tom Cruise at the top of the list. For over a decade, Cruise has probably been the most-recognized Scientologist in the world, let alone in Hollywood, and he's prominently featured in the latter sections of Wright's book (along with numerous footnotes citing denials and "no comments" from his attorneys).

It's Wright's revelations regarding Scientology's "prison of belief" that made news when the book was originally published, particularly those concerning the "billion-year contracts" signed by members of its clergy, the Sea Org (often at very young ages), and the extreme, sometimes abusive conditions under which those members work. Many of his primary sources were once high-ranking executives within the Sea Org or other Scientology divisions. In some cases, their departures were more like escapes, and much of the information they've given the author was closely guarded by--and within--the church. Most of this material is made public for the first time in Going Clear...and much of it is may still remain unknown by current, committed church members, who will likely be directed to ignore or denounce the book (if they have access to it at all).

While these revelations are one of the main reasons to read Going Clear, they're also the source of my primary issue with it; pardon another church analogy, but I feel that Wright's preaching to the choir. The book's most likely readers are those who are already suspicious or skeptical about Scientology (and yes, I'd count myself among them); there's not much here that will dispel that, and a good amount that will reinforce it. That said, I was impressed with this as a piece of journalism. Wright had unusual access to Scientology insiders--departed and/or disaffected insiders, granted--but is able to relate their stories with an outsider's sense of perspective and a reporter's mandate to check with other sources (as documented by more of the previously-mentioned footnotes, frequently citing attorneys).

I was less impressed with Going Clear as a piece of writing than as reporting, and I didn't feel that the audiobook's narrator, Morton Sellers, brought much to the material--then again, this isn't material that lends itself to audio-performance embellishment very easily.

The story of the Church of Scientology isn't over; what Wright does here takes it out of Scientology's hands, exposes it more widely and broadly than perhaps ever before, and may change its future direction. I was fascinated, sometimes frightened, and occasionally flabbergasted by what I learned from Going Clear--it wasn't entirely satisfying reading, but I do think it's important reading.

Rating: Book, 3.75 of 5; Audio, 3.25 of 5

From the publisher's website:

A clear-sighted revelation, a deep penetration into the world of Scientology by the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of The Looming Tower, the now-classic study of al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attack. Based on more than two hundred personal interviews with current and former Scientologists—both famous and less well known—and years of archival research, Lawrence Wright uses his extraordinary investigative ability to uncover for us the inner workings of the Church of Scientology.

At the book’s center, two men whom Wright brings vividly to life, showing how they have made Scientology what it is today: The darkly brilliant science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, whose restless, expansive mind invented a new religion. And his successor, David Miscavige—tough and driven, with the unenviable task of preserving the church after the death of Hubbard.

We learn about Scientology’s complicated cosmology and special language. We see the ways in which the church pursues celebrities, such as Tom Cruise and John Travolta, and how such stars are used to advance the church’s goals. And we meet the young idealists who have joined the Sea Org, the church’s clergy, signing up with a billion-year contract.

In Going Clear, Wright examines what fundamentally makes a religion a religion, and whether Scientology is, in fact, deserving of this constitutional protection. Employing all his exceptional journalistic skills of observation, understanding, and shaping a story into a compelling narrative, Lawrence Wright has given us an evenhanded yet keenly incisive book that reveals the very essence of what makes Scientology the institution it is.

From Chapter One:

"London, Ontario, is a middling manufacturing town halfway between Toronto and Detroit, once known for its cigars and breweries. In a tribute to its famous namesake, London has its own Covent Garden, Piccadilly Street, and even a Thames River that forks around the modest, economically stressed downtown. The city, which sits in a humid basin, is remarked upon for its unpleasant weather. Summers are unusually hot, winters brutally cold, the springs and falls fine but fleeting. The most notable native son was the bandleader Guy Lombardo, who was honored in a local museum, until it closed for lack of visitors. London was a difficult place for an artist looking to find himself.

"Paul Haggis was twenty-one years old in 1975. He was walking toward a record store in downtown London when he encountered a fast-talking, long-haired young man with piercing eyes standing on the corner of Dundas and Waterloo Streets. There was something keen and strangely adamant in his manner. His name was Jim Logan. He pressed a book into Haggis’s hands. 'You have a mind,' Logan said. 'This is the owner’s manual.' Then he demanded, 'Give me two dollars.'

"The book was Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, by L. Ron Hubbard, which was published in 1950. By the time Logan pushed it on Haggis, the book had sold more than two million copies throughout the world. Haggis opened the book and saw a page stamped with the words 'Church of Scientology.'

“'Take me there,' he said to Logan."

Read More

Sunday Salon 2-9-2014: Gray & Grumpy Edition

It's gray, damp, and California-chilly this weekend; we've had some sorely-needed rain during the past few days. Between the moody weather and being at the midpoint of two busy and stressful weeks--and hoping I'm not getting sick!--I'm simultaneously tired and restless, and the combination of it all has me just a little grumpy and out-of-sorts this weekend.

What I'm reading

• in print

I've got three ARCs in various degrees of progress right now. Coincidence by J.W. Ironmonger is for a TLC Book Tour later this month, and the others are March review candidates for Shelf Awareness: Let's Talk About Love is an essay collection by Carl Wilson that considers artistic taste (via Cèline Dion), and Exodus is the follow-up to Deborah Feldman's memoir Unorthodox.

• on audio

On the recommendation of several trusted fellow bloggers, I started Defending Jacob by William Landay this week. It's reminding me of why, back when I read more genre fiction than I do now, l went for legal thrillers, and I'm finding they're a very audio-friendly form. I also find I'm frequently getting annoyed with the characters in this one, but I definitely want to know what happens to them.

What I'm watching

After holding out for nearly a week, we watched the third and final Sherlock episode of Series 3, and I'm quite sad not be watching that any more. What I'm not watching, unless I come across something accidentally: the Olympics.

What I'm writing

I have notes and thoughts on the aforementioned Series 3 of a certain British detective show, and I'll be working on pulling them into some coherent reflections as time and energy permit. Other than that, book reviews, and some journaling, this is not a big month for my wordy side.

What caught my eye this week:

"I don't care if you like reading Shakespeare, Stephanie (Meyer), Seuss, Steele or Sakey...all I care about is that you read and enjoy reading. You don't need to view any kind of reading as a 'guilty pleasure.' Because you know what? You're far more likely to take on books and authors who challenge you if you've established an overall love of reading first...and continue to nurture that love by making your experience mostly fun and not a chore. You'll make time for reading if it is enjoyable, you'll make excuses if it isn't." --"A Reading Philosophy" from Jen Forbus at Jen's Book Thoughts

Jen's post was partially inspired by "Teddy Roosevelt's 10 Rules for Reading" at Book Riot. Here's Number 6, with its Rioters' response:

"'Books are almost as individual as friends. There is no earthly use in laying down general laws about them. Some meet the needs of one person, and some of another; and each person should beware of the booklover’s besetting sin, of what Mr. Edgar Allan Poe calls "the mad pride of intellectuality," taking the shape of arrogant pity for the man who does not like the same kind of books.'

"There are no hard and fast rules, we all like different things, so stop bickering already. Also, don’t judge others about their book choices lest ye be judged. You know you have some book skeletons in your closet."

What Else is New?

February book recommendations from the Nerdy Special List are up at Pop Culture Nerd. I'm excited to be contributing to that every month!

I may not make it to the Salon next week since we'll be spending Valentine's weekend celebrating love of all things Doctor Who at the Gallifrey One con. We're looking forward to the fun, and the many possible Gratuitous Photo(s) of the Week(s) to come!

Gratuitous Photo of the Week

Opening night of the Winter 2014 edition of Expressing Motherhood at the Lillian Theater in Hollywood, California. If you're in the area, you still have several opportunities to see this wonderful show.

I'm planning to spend my Sunday with books, blogs, and television. What are you up to this weekend?

Read More

The Armchair BEA 2014 Recruitment Post

One of my proudest achievements as a book blogger is being part of the founding team of Armchair BEA, the virtual companion event to Book Expo America and the BEA Bloggers Conference, and seeing how it's grown and developed from its grassroots beginnings in a Twitter conversation in the weeks before BEA 2010.

But the bittersweet flip side to success is the amount of work required to sustain it. In order to sustain Armchair BEA into its fifth year and beyond, the team needs more hands and new ideas--we hope you'll consider giving us yours. 

The following is cross-posted with permission from Armchair BEA Central. There's a link to click at the end if you're interested in filling a role on the 2014 team. This year's event may have to be scaled back if we don't get as much help as we need.

Book Expo America 2014 is quickly approaching (May 29-31 to be exact), which means that Armchair BEA planning is currently underway. As our team has converged once again this year, we have come to discover that life is chaotic and sometimes takes precedence over our online lives. Many of our team members are stepping down this year or taking a step back from the event by serving in mentor roles*. If Armchair BEA 2014 is going to take place, we need new team members!

Five years ago, Armchair BEA started out as a small event thrown together by a team of bloggers that were not able to attend Book Expo America. Over the next four years, the event has grown to include hundreds of bloggers participating and hundreds of giveaways thanks to our amazing sponsors. It has been a very exciting four years, and we want to see the excitement continue.

This year will be the fifth annual Armchair BEA and we need your help to pull this event off. Here is a breakdown of what a full team would require, with job descriptions and the ideal number of people to fill each role:

• Sponsor Chair & Team (2-3): Solicit sponsors and coordinate list of prizes; works closely with Prize Team. 
• Participant Coordinator (1): Create and maintain registration document; post list of participants on the site. 
• Prize Team (2-3): Work with the Sponsor Team to assign and award daily prizes and special giveaways; draw winners and announce on site. 
• Agenda Coordinator (1): Daily Topics, Guest Articles, Special Announcements 
• Instagram Challenge Coordinator (1): Set daily themes, draw daily winners and send to Prize Team for announcement. 
• Social Media Coordinator (1-2): Maintain Twitter and Facebook accounts, answering questions and interacting with participants; organize Twitter parties; work with Prize Team for Twitter party giveaways. 
• Commenting Committee (2-3): Solicit commenting volunteers/cheerleaders; oversee commenting throughout the week of the event; draw commenting volunteers for daily giveaways (pass on to Prize Team). 
• International Committee (2-3): Must be outside of the US to bring in an international perspective - can include the assistance of finding international sponsors, writing guest articles to appear the week of the event, etc. 
• On-site Correspondents (2-3)--team members attending Book Expo America: Interact with sponsors and post special sponsors as needed; take pictures/video throughout the event and post on a daily basis; blogger interaction.

If you are interested in joining the team, please complete this form by February 15, 2014. We will be in contact with you shortly afterwards to discuss opportunities with you.

*Armchair BEA's founders, myself included, are all serving as "mentors" this year as we bring new members onto the event team.

Read More

WW: Wild(wood) Life

It's a "Wild Card" week for my Wordless Wednesday group, so it seems like the perfect time to get out in the wild and show you some of the scenery at our favorite place to hike, Wildwood Park.

At Wildwood Park (Thousand Oaks, California), January 2014

Read More

What's On in the (Sunday Salon), 2-2-2014

Dateline: Saturday evening, on the MacBook, at the kitchen desk, about to spend a quiet night at home by myself. (Well, maybe not that quiet--I do have iTunes cranked up right now.) Tall Paul is out for the evening, shooting photos at a "movie star gala" that you won't see on TV. I'll probably be spending the time after I finish this post reading, since I don't really know how to work all of our TV-related remotes. (I wish I were kidding.)

What I'm reading

• in print

Another week has gone by without cracking The Book Thief open again--at this rate, I'll do well to finish my "first book of the year" before the year is half-over! Having said that, I'll be bringing it with me to jury duty on Monday in hopes of getting a few hours of reading time then. This weekend, I'll be trying to finish an ARC of The Perfect Score Project, a parenting memoir/SAT guide (really) that publishes at the end of this month, and get it reviewed for Shelf Awareness.

• on audio

I finished Going Clear, aka "the Scientology epic," a few days ago, and am taking a few days to catch up on podcasts before I start another audiobook. I'll be trying to get my thoughts on this one written up over the next few days, but they may not show up here till next week.

What I'm watching

It's the BIG DAY of the BIG GAME--Puppy Bowl X!

That's my kind of football, folks. We've got it set up on the DVR in case we decide to join Bryan and his wife watching and tweeting Groundhog Day while it's on live--or if we're just not home or something. We usually make a point of getting out and about on Super Bowl Sunday--crowds tend to be pretty light--but my husband is nursing a cold, and after his Saturday-evening public obligation, we may be breaking that tradition this year.

Also, the third season of Sherlock ends tonight. (Insert sad face here.)

What I'm writing

As I mentioned in my "late edition" Sunday Salon post last week (the one that went up on Tuesday), I'll need to slow down the blogging for the next several weeks--probably through most of March, actually--due to various work and non-work prior commitments. There may be more lag time than usual between when I finish reading a book and when I post my "talk" about it, and I doubt I'll be talking about much besides books and whatever comes up in these mostly-weekly updates for a while.

What caught my eye this week

• "(O)ur personal blogs hold enormous value to the writer and the reader. Without readers, few bloggers have the wherewithal to keep writing regularly, and without blogs to read, readers become bored and moan that Feedly is empty...℗ersonal bloggers need their readers to keep interacting with them in the comment section and sharing their posts. When site statistics drop or comments stop being left, bloggers lose confidence."--"What Would Happen if Your Favourite Blog (or Website) Died?" by Melissa Ford on BlogHer
• "If your TBR is...not giving you more than it is taking from you, get rid of it. Go into each new book-choosing moment with an idea of what you want, and then pick up the book that feels right in the moment. Selecting books should be pleasurable. It should be exciting. It should promise you the thrill of discovery. It should not be about ticking boxes and satisfying arbitrary, self-imposed requirements. Goals for reading are good, and being mindful of the ways you’d like to expand your reading life is good. Forcing yourself to read books simply because you at some point in the past added them to a list is, well, kind of pointless."--"Throw Away Your TBR List: A Radical Reading (un)Plan", by Rebecca Joines Schinsky on Book Riot
• 5 reasons why Rebecca@Love At First Book loves her blogging community
• Andi's 15 ideas to break through the blogging blues

What Else is New?

Five years after it was launched, Armchair BEA is one the verge of some big changes in 2014--watch for news about that in various locations in the book-blogiverse, including this one, during the week ahead. Also this week (I think), look for the return of the "Nerdy Special List" at Pop Culture Nerd. I've been invited to be a contributor to this monthly column of new-book recommendations, but you'll have to check out the post when it goes live to see what I picked for February!

Gratuitous Photo of the Week

I was chosen at random during last week's Wednesday-morning #fabchat on Twitter as one of five participants to receive a dozen chocolate-dipped strawberries from Shari's Berries. They arrived on Friday evening. We're still working our way through the box.

Happy Game Day, and I hope you get the news you want from the Groundhog today!

Read More