Misery, by Stephen King

I really enjoyed this book, perhaps because it is about a writer and King gives many insights into the writing process as well as the life of a writer.  It wasn't as scary as I thought it might be but it was funnier.

The novel was plotted well with good pacing.  I enjoyed the metaphors such as the author's pain as pilings that were exposed by the tide being pulled by Annie as the moon.  I think one of the most enjoyable aspects was getting deep inside the character of the author and King did a good job of not interrupting the magic.

I saw the movie years ago and almost didn't read it because I didn't like the movie.  I'm sure glad I gave the book a chance--it's one of my favorites.

One for the Money, by Janet Evanovich

This was a by-the-numbers murder mystery reminiscent of Raymond Chandler, Mickey Spillane and Robert B. Parker, although the protagonist is a woman new to the job of being a bounty hunter.  It was an entertaining quick read but short on theme and character development.

Case Histories: A Novel, by Kate Atkinson

I read this book on Stephen King's recommendation:  "Not just the best novel I read this year [2004], but the best mystery of the decade. There are actually four mysteries, nesting like Russian dolls, and when they begin to fit together, I defy any reader not to feel a combination of delight and amazement. Case Histories is the literary equivalent of a triple axle. I read it once for pleasure and then again just to see how it was done. This is the kind of book you shove in people's faces, saying 'You gotta read this!'"

Based on the above, I went into this book with high expectations--maybe too high. The three stories did come together, but as far as I can tell, they weren't necessarily linked.  They were simply being investigated by the same private detective who was hired by someone involved in each of the three stories.  When the stories did overlap, it was coincidence and not the particular circumstances that drove them together.  I suppose the stories may have some common thematic elements, but without the stories being intertwined, it wasn't enough to impress this reader.

I was also disappointed in the writing.  Too much of the action was given as the remembrances of the characters.  And when action was given in real-time, the scene typically ended right when it was getting good.

I did have one good insight while reading the book:  a good way to write convincing women characters is to read women authors who write honestly.  Case Histories: A Novel did deliver in this last regard.

The Bone Collector, by Jeffery Deaver

Barely competent writing.  Scientific inaccuracies.  Thin, under-developed characters.  And unrealistic plot-twists.  That about sums up The Bone Collector by Jeffery Deaver.  (The incomplete sentences such as the ones above are sprinkled throughout the book.)

At least it was a quick read.

The Elements of Style, by Strunk and White

This was a very quick read and very useful.  It covered about thirty principles of good writing clearly and concisely.  The following are things I need to work on:

- Omit needless words (rule 13)
- Avoid a succession of loose sentences (rule 14)
- Use a variety of sentence types
- Place the emphatic words of a sentence at the end (rule 18)
- Avoid weak conjunctions like 'and' or 'but'
- Put statements in positive form (rule 12)

I got my version on the Kindle for only a dollar.  It seems to be quite an old version because they also recommended using hyphens in to-day and to-morrow!

On Writing, by Stephen King

Right after I finished The Stand, I started reading On Writing because I liked the former so much.  Unfortunately, reading the book on how King writes made me like The Stand less!  My problem is that King writes without knowing where he's going.  He starts with an interesting situation and then starts writing, a process he likens to uncovering a fossil.  I think to have a strong theme, you have to know the theme and the ending before you can start writing; the author's job is then to construct the events which lead up to the climax and demonstrate the theme.

King relates how he had a lot of trouble finishing The Stand because he wrote himself into a corner and didn't know how to get out of it.  He finally had a Eureka moment and it all came together.  Unfortunately, the book reads like that too--when the climax finally comes, it doesn't feel like the book was inevitably leading up to that final confrontation.

As for On Writing, I learned a lot from reading it, and I really appreciated King's honesty.  He highly recommended Strunk and White's Elements of Style and I read that next.

The Stand, by Stephen King

I liked The Stand.  It is the first book I've read by Stephen King, and I was surprised that he was such a good writer.  I liked the depth of the characters, the broad scope of the action, and the way King wrote so the reader felt he was in the story.  It was also fun to get inside the heads of his characters.

For me, The Stand was lacking when it came to theme, something about the danger or recklessness of applying technology to warfare.  Or maybe it was that all organized societies drift toward destructiveness, and so we shouldn't have organized societies?  Regardless, the book suffered as so many other well-written ones:  they don't culminate in a meaningful theme.