I'm Taking an Indefinite Break

Hi everyone,

I'm sorry to announce that when I finally get around to completing my historical fantasy novel THE DARK AND THE SAPPHIRE (sequel to THE RED AND THE SCARLET), I will be taking an indefinite break from writing. This may mean for good, it may not, hence indefinite. I will probably still blog here, as I'm happy to share the loads of advice I've gathered and hunted down over nearly eight years of writing, but I myself will not be writing. This includes dropping my pursuit of getting published and continuing on my unfinished projects other than TDATS and a story my sister and I hope to get around to co-writing. Before y'all protest, there's a number of factors in my decision.


1. College

I simply don't have time for anything these days beyond occasionally decompressing with my friends in the library or over a movie, and that usually involves homework anyway. I'm projected to have close to twenty credits every semester except when student teaching, and y'all who have student taught know how much time that leaves you. I tried to reboot my writing habits (I went from writing a thousand words a day to maybe ten words a month) with Camp NaNoWriMo, but it's just not working. I ended up losing sleep trying to catch up with the word count goal. I'm too busy.

2. Lack of Interest

I've written nine novels, queried three, and out of them all, THE RED AND THE SCARLET is the finest thing I've ever written. Normally, every time you write something new, it becomes the finest thing you've ever written, but my recent works, though polished and possibly more advanced technically, are just not working for me at all and do not have the depth and development of TRATS. Knowing my limits, I doubt I'll be able to top the TRATS and TDATS duology. As it is, I'm struggling to keep the end of TDATS up to par with the rest of the work. That said, I've been querying TRATS and though it fits the market beautifully (diversity, female POC lead, historical fantasy in a non-European setting, upper YA, siblings and pirates and revolution and politics and slow-burning romance), I essentially have been told the same thing about fifty times: "This is amazing, but I don't want it. But don't give up on it! I KNOW someone else will love it!"

Unfortunately, despite the gatekeepers' promises, no one else wants it.

I've revised TRATS and edited the heck out of it according to people's advice, and I dare not go further trying to groom it for the market. It's as marketable as anything (I always get plenty of favorites in pitch contests and plenty of requests), and I've combed it over a span of three years now for what exactly is wrong with it, and I've found my answer: nothing. It's just not my time to get published, apparently, or it may be that it's just not in my future at all. As hard as it is, especially with people encouraging me that I'm destined to get published, it's time to come to grips with the reality that it's just not happening.

That said, it's exciting seeing everyone who has helped me out and vice versa get picked up by agents and publishers. A good deal, if not all, of my #YayYA friends, fellow contest entrants, and pitch swappers have signed deals, and I'll gladly stand on the sidelines to offer feedback and wave pompoms for those of you still looking for a bite. Personally, though, for me, it's time to hang up the towel. I do still have a couple queries out there in the blue, and if I was to suddenly get an offer on TRATS, I'd undoubtedly pick up the pen again, but otherwise I am not planning on continuing to query.

3. Next Stage

Yes, yes, I know, I'm young. But I think this moving on is just an unfortunate part of growing up. I've been writing in chapter form since I was 5 and hoping to get published almost just as long, but there's a difference between being an excellent teen writer in a world of excellent adult writers and getting attention for that and then being another adult writer in a overcrowded market. It's kind of like going from being the most top-notch student at your high school to being just another scholarship winner at your college full of other former best-in-their-school kids. Sometimes being a prodigy doesn't mean success later in life, and it seems this is the direction my talent in writing is going.



That all said, I just want to make a couple things clear :)

1. No, I'm not considering self-publishing 

2. I will still be blogging on both of my blogs

3. I will still hold #YayYAs in the future

4. I'm still happy to read your work before you sub to contests/agents

5. I'm immensely grateful to everyone to put their time and effort into me and my work and trying to help me. Your efforts were not in vain. They just helped in ways unrelated to publishing (I now have a wonderful community of online friends!)

Thanks everyone, again! If you have questions, I'm happy to answer.

Happy Writing! I'll enjoy hearing about how you all are progressing with your own writing journey.

Mine is seemingly drawing to a close.

Why We Don't Need Any More Loner Characters... Especially in YA

 Ah, the loner. The lone ranger, the self-appointed outcast, the dark and brooding mysterious scavenger-warrior who wanders and waits for their time to come and more oft than not, refuses assistance except perhaps from one trusted friend. Such figures fill literature and film, and we recognize them immediately. Aragorn, Gandalf, Han Solo, Yoda, Halt, Batman, James Bond, Rey, Captain Jack Sparrow, the list could go on. Antagonists frequently fit into this category as well. Protagonist or antagonist, the point is, this character archetype frequents writing. While I used to find such a character appealing to read and to write, I'm now a little more cautious to use them in my work and in recommending using them to other writers. Why? In this social day and age, I would say the loner who chooses to be a loner is no longer a romantic ideal that readers, especially teen readers, find appealing.

I was watching The Maze Runner film last night for the first time and was trying to figure out what made the main character, Thomas, so different from other YA blockbuster stars. He is a type of outcast in the Maze, as he turns out to be the Special Snowflake and the other resent him for it, but it wasn't the same. Eventually, I laid my finger on it. In the past, I have said I preferred Maze Runner to Hunger Games because in Hunger Games, it's starving teen against starving teen, but in Maze Runner, it's Pack of Survivors against the Outside World. There's a brotherhood, a lack of individualism and a focus on friendship that Maze Runner has that its competitors lack. Instead of Me, it's Us. And Thomas, with a lot of help from Newt and his other friends, pushes for this group dynamic. He tries to bring the Gladers together, as opposed to fighting on his rebellious lonesome. Now some might argue that other Loner characters such as Katniss do bring people together, but what's lacking is a social friendship dynamic.

I think we need more characters like Thomas, who strive for interactive relationships with those around them, than loners in fiction, especially YA. We live in a social world where we interact constantly. Characters who find that unattractive and would rather live in an empty world without friends (except one or two friends they choose, which basically makes them social jerks [#sorrynotsorry]) are not as relatable. I know this for a fact because in my own work, The Red and the Scarlet, all of my betas found my main character Fyr, who starts out as one of these Loners, unrelatable and annoying, even, and gravitated toward my more social supporting characters. But as the story progresses and Fyr starts to reach out to those around her in an attempt to befriend people out of empathy as opposed to self-interest, my betas started rooting hard for her. For teens especially, the character reaching for friendship (whether successfully or unsuccessfully) as opposed to choosing to shut themselves out is more relatable.

You're Writing the Wrong Thing

"I'm writing what I want. I don't care about the market."

I've heard this about six times in the past four days. Normally, I love hearing this. Normally, it comes from people discovering themselves in their writing. But these past six times were not the same. No, these past six times, I actually cringed at the words. Because these people were answering to my comment that their genre was swamped. And not just that, but because these people are not writing what they want. no, they are merely writing what they've read.


I, too, used to do this. I have a couple novels that are basically Star Wars and Lord of the Rings fan fiction from way back when to prove it. Whenever someone compares their work to Extremely Famous Author, I grimace. Because I know the Almighty Publishing Gatekeepers aren't going to care. They're going to eye-roll the same way older kids eye-roll when their little siblings funny their funny or mimic their fingerpaintings. Because older siblings know that copycat little siblings aren't copying because they love them: rather, the copycat little siblings are hoping to gain the same recognition the original received. And whether it's your motive or not, the Almighty Publishing Gatekeepers will think the same thing when you base your work on the style of an Extremely Famous Author. Because they know that's not you, and there's enough people who've already imitated Extremely Famous Author and failed. Harsh, I know. And it's most likely not your intention to imitate your favorite authors. But you are. And you know why?


You're not writing according to you. You're writing according to someone else. There's a fine line between influence and imitation, and I'm afraid you've unintentionally crossed that line.

You're writing their style. You're writing their story.

Don't.

It's no different when a girl imitates a celebrity. Or a musician borrows themes from another song.

Write with your style. Write your story.

You have your own voice, your own creativity, and your own story that is unique in every way from every other author's. Find it. Grasp it. It takes time. Years, even. It will require you to shelf pages and pages of effort. But it'll be worth it. I promise, because I know from experience, and most writers will, especially the Extremely Famous Ones.


You can do it. I promise it'll be hard, but it'll be brilliant.

Newbery Review: Rifles for Watie by Harold Keith (1958 Medal Winner)

As most of you know, I live in Oklahoma. My family and I were driving in the surrounding region one day, and I suddenly found myself wishing there were more non-cowboy and Indian and non-Dust Bowl historical books based in Oklahoma, Kansas, and the like.

And not long afterward, I finally picked up Rifles for Watie at the library.


Jefferson Davis Bussey, sixteen-year-old and farmer's son, leaves his home in Kansas to join the volunteer Union Army. We follow Jeff through his training, his first whiff of the gunpowder, and his introduction to the beautiful Cherokee (and stubbornly Confederate) girl Lucy. But when an especially assigned mission goes awry, Jeff finds himself stuck among the notorious Stand Watie's Confederate raiding party, masquerading the gray uniform and discovering terrible information: someone from his own Union detachment is smuggling rifles to Watie.

At first, the book is slow-moving for modern eyes, but trust me and read on past the first act. Things quickly pick up from a trudging march into the color and vibrancy of an Oscar-worthy film. The author, Mr. Keith, spent ten years researching for this story, interviewing Civil War veterans and traveling to the places where his characters, both real and fictional, fired upon each other, drank Yankee and Confederate coffee, and bonded in brotherly friendship. We get a detailed tour of the lives of the era's Native Americans, and a glimpse into the lives of African-Americans. We experience the goodness and the wickedness of both armies. There's action and history and comedy and tragedy and even romance. This book is the historical package deal, and one of the most accurate, detailed, and unique pieces of children's fiction that's out there.

There is, of course, bloody war violence, some drunken behavior, abuse toward slaves, and the book's reading level is rather advanced, so it is more of a Young Adult novel than a Middle Grade. But nevertheless it comes highly recommended.



Rating: Five stars

Recommended reading age: clean enough for 12+ but will probably appeal most to 15+

Favorite characters: Jeff, Noah, Lucy

Content for parents: Battle action, civilians are looted, execution is discussed, no language except for a couple instances of the n-word, kissing, bullying, some drunken behavior, some stereotypical dialogue


For more Marvelous Middle Grade Reviews, check out Shannon Messenger's blog here!

Copying the Masters: J.R.R. Tolkien

I'm starting a new blog series that will most likely be sporadic and biased, about famous authors and where you should and shouldn't emulate them (especially in the current market) in your writing.

Today, we're going to look at a name that shows up on just about every writer's list of favorite authors, J.R.R. Tolkien. Undoubtedly, he has solidified the way modern fantasy is approached, written and read today. I doubt that as he sat reading samples to his Inkling friends, with C.S. Lewis pushing him to do better and Hugo Dyson swearing every time another elf showed up, that mild-mannered Tolkien had any idea that his thousands of pages of ten years of effort were developing into what fantasy author Susan Cooper calls "a passionate worldwide cult."


A quote from Tolkien on critics:

"Some who have read the book (Lord of the Rings)... have found it boring, absurd, or contemptible, and I have no cause to complain, since I have similar opinions of their works, or the kinds of writing they evidently prefer."

Some facts about Tolkien:

1. His first contribution to the Middle Earth universe was the poem The Voyage of Earendel the Evening Star, which for all practical purposes was a mythological fanfiction piece inspired by the "Crist" poem of Cynewulf. He was 22, and Lord of the Rings was not published for another forty years.

2. Tolkien was, in our sophisticated modern terminology, a pantser. An example of this is evident in that originally, Faramir was only supposed to show up at the Forbidden Pool and then never again. Well, that didn't happen, and aren't we glad!

3. His lifework, The Silmarillion, was published posthumously. Tolkien's goal was to create an entire new mythology.


This last point is a big reason why many writers who claim to emulate Tolkien really should not.

Tolkien did not have big movie effects and pretty heroes and complicated world building for the sake of complicated world building in mind. He did not have big political purposes. There were no sparkly Pinspiration boards or cosplay attempts. What there was, was a slow-working, dedicated man in a room full of loose leaf paper and pipe smoke painstakingly inking out, in his beautiful archaic handwriting, alternate versions of a work requested by his publisher. And with The Silmarillion, he was writing what he wanted to, which was an entire new mythological cycle inspired by the Finnish Kalevala.

For one of my projects, which is nothing like Lord of the Rings, I started delving into ancient Irish mythology, and I suddenly found myself looking at Tolkien's work from his own point of view. While paging through the Ulster and Fianna cycles, I understood better his goal of creating his own, new mythological cycle. It both raised my appreciation for his brilliance, but also distanced me from him as a writerly role model.


Here are some areas where it's probably not a good idea to emulate Tolkien:


1. Prose

Tolkien's narrative prose is inconsistent. It swings from beautiful/powerful to unfortunately purple to 1950s British newspaper to old children's bedtime story to The Cattle Raid of Cooley, sometimes all on the same page, but overall has that embellished stuffiness one finds in Baroque music, academic papers, and, well, ancient mythological texts written by Catholic monks. So if one takes away the inconsistency, his prose is actually quite brilliant for his work, especially in The Silmarillion, but it's probably not wise for you to imitate it yourself.

2. Dialogue 

Once again, if you look at Tolkien's dialogue and compare it to ancient mythological cycles, it's on spot. But for novels, no. Too much of that mix of grit, flowers, and fed information with All The Capitalized Names and Places.

3. Language

Are you a linguist? No? Tolkien was, and one of the greatest that ever lived. But you are, ten to one, not. Feel free to create your own language if you really wish, but most likely it'll come out as a inconsistent, weird blend of Sort Of Celtic Sounding Words, C-3P0, and American (looking at you, Christopher Paolini).

4. Race Based morality 

I'm not so much talking about orcs as I am Haradrim and Easterlings vs. Rohan and Gondor, and not even White People vs. Not White People so much as unreality. Even in the ancient mythology Tolkien loved so much, alliance lines were never so cut and dry. This is more of a World War mentality that once resonated with audiences, but is just unrealistic. The Human Bad Guys in Tolkien's work often have no explained reason for their alliance with the Enemy other than that their entire race is, for some unknown reason, allied with Him. I punched Paolini earlier, but he did try to mix this up in his own work.

5. Pseudo-Medieval Arthurian Worldbuilding

Before you decide you want to set your story in "medieval" times like Tolkien (he called it a pseudo-Celtic beauty that people idealized about, and denied that was what he wanted), actually research the medieval era. Pick any century and you will see quickly that it's quite different from your Renaissance Faire. Women were blacksmiths and men wore stockings and Catholicism ruled with an iron fist of superstitious terror. The culture was bawdy and dirty and sick. I find a lot of Tolkienites who want to write their own Lord of the Rings fall into this trap, when he himself wasn't aiming for it at all.


But here are some areas where it is a good idea to emulate Tolkien:

1. Go back to the originals

Like I said earlier, I started researching ancient Irish mythology and was blown away by it. In some ways it was terrible and in other ways it was amazingly inspiring and in other ways all I could think was, "This has got to be better than any action movie, ever." There were flying ships in fog and five-year-olds killing giant dogs with toy balls and top-notch schools for warriors run by women where you had to spear fight underwater and on tightropes. Instead of looking at past fantasy novels for inspiration, go back to pre-Arthurian mythology. Go back to raw imagination before the laws of the market controlled it. I'm not saying write Percy Jackson or Thor, but definitely give it a shot.

2. Write what you love

Tolkien wrote what he loved, and look what happened! Though it may be often misunderstood, as we've already established, the point still stands: Tolkien and his work are icons.

3. Create iconic new ways to change the way people look at fantasy

Tolkien's elves, ents, dark lords, and dwarves, though in some ways lifted from ancient mythological equivalents (see? Another reason to check out old mythology), revolutionized fantasy, especially the high and fair elves and the terrifying dark lords, which now are a staple to most popular epics. Create iconic images that stick with and inspire people.

4. Build from your world with what you love

Lewis and Tolkien once agreed that they needed to write books that had the sorts of things they enjoyed in them. Anyone can see that the Hobbits are like happy, contented English people. Tolkien's characters smoke, read old manuscripts and elegant poetry, speak fancy languages, enjoy good intelligent company in simplistic settings, and hate giant spiders. When you fill your story's universe with what you love, you can bring your readers to love it, too, in their own way.

5. Be patient, take your time, and do what you have to do

In a writerly world of Twitter pitch contests where every second counts, and where we try to write XXX words in XXX hours with the Write or Die app, we often get so wrapped up in trying to meet goals and deadlines that we forget to take the time and craft our story carefully. Tolkien took ten years on Lord of the Rings and his entire life on The Silmarillion. I'm not saying you have to take that long, but if Tolkien had gone with some of his earlier versions of LOTR, Eowyn would be dead, Aragorn would be a hobbit, and the Ring wouldn't have been The One. And he did this while giving three times more lectures than his contract called for, raising a family, and writing other academic work. If anything, Tolkien should make us ashamed if we complain about first world problems preventing us from getting our five hundred words down for the day, or if we show a lack of dedication.

6. Find honest CPs, but take their advice with a grain of salt

Tolkien had his Inklings, and as aforementioned they were not afraid to express themselves. But even then, obviously, Tolkien didn't always listen to what they had to say. When working with CPs, always put your story before their feedback, but feedback is crucial to creating a polished and complete MS.


So there we have it. In conclusion, Tolkien was a genius when it came to his writing, but we have to look at his writing for what it was supposed to be, and for what it is: an attempt to create an entirely new mythological cycle. The amount of effort he put into his work and his world is mind-blowing. And instead of borrowing from his work, we should follow his footsteps and create our own.


In the next Copying the Masters post, we'll be looking at the one and only Jane Austen.


Thoughts or comments? Feel free to share!

Top Ten Favorite Sidekick Characters in Literature

The sidekick, the best friend, the wingman, the support system, the foil. More oft than not, we love them even more than we love the hero.

Here's a list of my top ten literary favorite sidekicks. Drum roll, please!

10. Chuck (The Maze Runner)

While Newt and Minho tend to top the list of the fandom's favorite characters (and of course), no one can deny that when they were total jerks upon Thomas' arrival to the Maze. Chuck, on the other hand, despite their age difference and there being nothing in it for him except more work, takes it upon himself to basically adopt Thomas and put up with his angsty and angry disorientation. Slightly cynical, a mild-mannered prankster, and loyal to the end, I think what I admired most about Chuck was he was way more patient with Thomas than I would have been.

9. Butler (Artermis Fowl)

You know, to work for a nasty twelve-year-old criminal mastermind, follow through on his shenanigans, and save his skin constantly, you really have to have a sense of loyalty. Between this and his mere appearance, Butler is the personification of "Don't mess." As the series progresses, Artemis learns to appreciate his body guard as more than just a tough-looking accessory and disaster clean-up crew.

8. Snowy (The Adventures of Tintin)

Snowy, or Milou in the original French, is more than just the animal half of a classic boy-and-his-dog-duo. Part comic relief, part snarky, realist commentator on his friend's escapades, and part annoying little brother with fur and paws, with his weakness for bones and whisky, Snowy does more than fill the role of supporting character: he practically completes Tintin, in a canine, Dr. Watson sort of way.

 

7. Falkor the Luckdragon (The Neverending Story)

Okay, forget the dog puppet from the movie and read the book. Falkor is awesome. He can swim through the air, blow blue fire, has pearly scales, can sleep while he flies, and sing like a bell chorus. He cheers everyone but isn't afraid to tell it like it is when Bastian and Atreyu screw things up when they lose it emotionally. He risks his life multiple times to save people who'd otherwise quit on him.

6. The Raggant (100 cupboards)

Flying. Baby. Rhino.

Stuck-up pompous magical flying baby rhino.

Need I say more?

5. Dr. Watson (Sherlock Holmes)

Ah, Dr. Watson, the patient, uncomplaining best friend of Sherlock Holmes, and the quintessential wingman of all literature. Your typical British gentleman and exceptionally intelligent (though not as observant as Holmes), Watson puts up with Holmes' eccentricities, vanity, and sharp comments to be the foil Britain's greatest detective needs.

4. Bean (Ender's Game)

Bean is not like most sidekicks. At first, he's sassy and self-focused, more interested in topping and beating Ender than backing him up. He's not even a friend for a while, unlike the more altruistic and forgiving Alai. But Bean proves indispensable to Ender for two reasons: 1. He shows Ender his weaknesses and 2. is the only classmate who can think on his level. Forever destined to be sub-commander, Bean eventually and willingly takes the back seat in begrudging friendship with Ender, which eventually blossoms into mutual undying respect, and the greatest command duo their school was able to produce.

3. Reepicheep (Narnia)

Swashbuckling, valiant, and the model of chivalry itself, it's impossible to not love Reep. His undying faith in the old magic often leaves him the wiser among the Narnians, despite his pompous vanity and height difference.

2. Sam (Lord of the Rings)

"I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you!"

Need I say more?

1. Passepartout (Around the World in Eighty Days)

If your eccentric boss (who fired your predecessor for heating his shaving water a few degrees too warm) told you, the same night he hired you, that you had fifteen minutes to pack and leave for a trip around the entire world in the steam era, what would you do?

Well, in Passepartout's case, he goes obediently albeit muttering under his breath, and in my opinion, becomes the book's real hero.

As French as Dr. Watson is English, Passepartout is the life of the party in comparison with his robotic master, often getting himself into comical trouble (whether with opium, Japanese circuses, or angry Buddhist monks), but also proves himself humbly heroic. He, not Mr. Fogg, saves Aouda, an entire trainload of Americans, and eventually the entire endeavor.

Some of you might be surprised that I put Sam at #2, behind Passepartout. The main reason is, while I love Sam, Passepartout is more three-dimensional in my humble opinion. Maybe I'll write a blogpost sometime on character development in the classics (SPOILER: Tolstoy wins).


Some runner-ups in no particular order:

Iko, Cinder

Clarence, Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

Cassiopea, Momo

Farid, Inkheart

Saphira, Eragon


Tell me! Who are your favorite side kick characters? Would you change this list, and why? Anyone you think I left off?

Why Boromir is the Most Underrated Lord of the Rings Character Out of the Fellowship

"I hate Boromir."

"Boromir is such a jerk."

I've had a number of fellow LOTR-junky fans tell me this. My extremely professional response is something along the lines of, "Dude, Boromir is awesome."

Now, I must admit that I disliked Boromir immensely the first time I read/watched Fellowship of the Ring. I'm probably not the only one who felt a little sorry for him only after he died and the story introduced us to the all-around-amazing and heartbroken Faramir. But when I stopped looking at Boromir as a reader/movie viewer and more like a writer, comparing him to the other members of the Fellowship, I suddenly found more reason to appreciate the genius of his character.

Boromir may be, besides Sam, the most developed of all the Fellowship members, despite his brief page/screen time. Lord of the Rings has a morally ambiguous cast, and can lack psychological depth in the narrative. Not so with Boromir.

Boromir is depicted by Tolkien as an embodiment of sheer determination. In the book, half of his 110

league trip to Rivendell from Minas Tirith was on foot after losing his horse in a river crossing. Tolkien himself admitted once that his narrative brushed over Boromir's drive.

He is also one of the most practical of the Fellowship. To me, this is ironic. You have an experienced Ranger, a Wizard, a dwarf with no small heritage, and an elf prince. But Boromir, the rich guy from a dying Ivory Tower-esque city full of ceremony-obsessed Men, is the only one who thinks of bringing firewood with them on their death climb up Caradhras.

Putting these details aside, the most fascinating part of Boromir's personality is this: like Fëanor in The Silmarillion, he is a hero with the wrong faults.

Tolkien despised pride, manipulation of power/authority, and individuals who looked for reward. These characteristics are almost universally found in literary villains. But Tolkien flipped things around, and gave Boromir these faults. The result? A very different, much more complicated type of anti-hero.

The definition of anti-hero is a protagonist who lacks the idealistic qualities of heroism, especially morality and unselfish courage. Basically, Han Solo, the great stereotype for all anti-heroes.

But Boromir is more than that. It's not that he lacks the qualities of heroism. Quite the opposite.

He has the qualities of a hero and the faults of a villain.

Most heroic characters have faults that are considered "acceptable" in literature, especially lying, poor self-esteem, a hot temper, clumsiness, and shyness. Rarely do they have more "villainous" weaknesses, such as vanity, pride, self-interest, and gain-searching. Tolkien, who formed so many molds for the SFF universe, breaks his own mold of atypical heroes and villains in proud, vain but tragically heroic Boromir.

However, unlike the other Tolkien characters with this development, such as Fëanor (who is described as having so much pride that his wisdom became foolish), Boromir ultimately redeems himself.

On an interesting side note, Boromir's brother Faramir's personal downfall is not his faults, but his qualities (commitment, loyalty, selflessness, and pity).

In the rather morally black and white world of Middle Earth, Boromir doesn't blur lines as much as give the overtly fairy-tale traditional Fellowship a dose of unconventional development.

Newbery Review: Maniac Magee by Jerry Spinelli (1991 Medal Winner)

"The history of a kid is one part fact, two parts legend, and three parts snowball."

This is only one of many favorite lines out of Jerry Spinelli's classic Maniac Magee. In an era where kids want the entertainment steroids of racing comedic moneymakers, I found Maniac's underrated story, often passed on the shelves, to be a masterfully captured snippet of what childhood used to be.

The author sits the reader down to tell them the story of "the legend of Two Mills." Supposedly, one day some kid with flapping sneaker soles entered the racially-divided town (a fictional setting based on Norristown, Pennsylvania), and became known as Maniac Magee. How? Oh, just by running the rail, getting the Beale kids to stop coloring on everything, skipping school, hitting home runs off of bully McNab, untangling the local pizza parlor's famous knot, and by kissing a bull (actually a baby buffalo... details). But most of all, people remember Maniac for showing them that there was no big difference between East and West other than what difference they wanted to make.

I love this book. I read it a few years back when I first started thinking about going through the Newberys, shortly after I moved to Oklahoma. As a native of Maniac's part of the planet, it warmed me to see names like Conshohocken, King of Prussia, and Valley Forge, and to hear references to Butterscotch Krimpets, minor league baseball, and just general Pennsylvanian culture. Every time I read Maniac Magee, it's a trip home. Obviously, this won't connect the same way to most readers, but to me it was a personal bonus to an already-great story.

Now, don't be fooled by the title. Maniac Magee is not a galloping read. It's not as fast as, say, the Lego Movie or Maze Runner in the least. It jogs along, but with its strong voice and ability to bring you back to your own childhood days, it holds attention. Yes, it's episodic, and yes, it's sometimes a little hard to believe, but that's the whole point. This is a legend we're reading about, right? :D

Spinelli's greatest achievement, though, is his ability to make his political statements without actually making them. By this, I mean that while other Newbery winners often present their political and moral ideas in an adult to child way, this story processes the consequences of racism right alongside its main character. He's also not afraid to show the resentment of the East Enders and their own discrimination towards Maniac, nor show the unhappy state of the so-called "white trash" life.

This could make for a weighty read. But it doesn't. We see everything through Maniac's eyes, and mostly, he just doesn't understand why things are the way they are. And eventually, through his so-called "legendary" antics, which he pulls off kindly and without being a jerk in the least, the rest of Two Mills doesn't either.

All this to say, I highly recommend this book. It's a relatively short read, and I'd love to see it make a comeback in popularity.


Rating: Five stars

Recommended reading age: 10+

Favorite characters: Amanda and Maniac

Content for parents: some slight bathroom humor, some "bad" kids are described as smokers and drinkers, another kid (more dramatically than anything else) wishes he were dead.


For more Marvelous Middle Grade Reviews, check out Shannon's blog here. 

Newbery Review: Kira-Kira by Cynthia Kadohata (2005 Medal Winner)

I remember seeing this book for the first time when I was about eight years old, at a Borders in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, while digging around for discount copies of the Ramona books. But I didn't read it until last November. The cover struck me as beautiful and ethereal, yet sweetly sad, and that is exactly what Kira-Kira turned out to be. Kira-Kira means beautiful in Japanese, and the story lives up dazzlingly well to its title.

Sisters Katie and Lynn move with their parents to Georgia, hoping that their parents’ new jobs at a chicken processing plant will allow the family to purchase their own house. Lynn always helped Katie see the bright side of life, but as she gets older and eventually becomes deathly ill, the sisters grow distant, to Katie’s chagrin.

My favorite thing about the book was its voice. The narrative matures along with Katie as she grows from six to twelve, and sees more dreadful and wonderful things. Katie talks with the reader openly about her worries for her overworked parents and her childish dreams of her imaginary future husband.

The one thing that caught me off guard was the amount of time the book spanned: close to six years, all blended together and left me somewhat clueless at times as to how old the characters were at the exact moment, or if the scene was one of a handful of frequent flashbacks.

Also, some elements were not exactly middle-grade. These were nothing extreme, but the whole book has a very mature, melancholy tone, full of personal suffering. While I related, I don’t know if I would recommend this book to someone under twelve.

On the flip side, though, I would read this book every day of the week and twice on Saturdays as opposed to picking up other more recent and more blockbuster "sick-lit" YAs for an hour. Kira-Kira is gentle, genuine, and isn't emotionally dramatized or romanticized. The only word I have that can summarize the beauty of its narrative is its own title: kira-kira.

Rating: Four stars

Favorite character: Katie

Recommended age: 12+

Content notes for parents: a few instances of “d---“ and “h---.” One lady exclaims a warped version of “s---" and a very young Katie asks her father what the word means. He responds in Japanese, but the reader doesn't see this. Someone vandalizes a car, and the process of butchering and determining the gender of chickens is described briefly, without too much detail. Katie wonders how her baby brother came into existence. Some smoking.

For more Marvelous Middle Grade reviews, check out Shannon's blog here.

Newbery Review: The Westing Game by Ellen Raskin (1979 Medal Winner)

Ah, The Westing Game. I first read this short read, one of my favorites to this day, in seventh grade. When I went for standardized testing in eighth grade, it was recommended to we who were being tested to bring a book to read on breaks. I think there were at least six out of fifteen of us who had brought different editions of The Westing Game, compact, black, and decorated with chess pieces. Of course this led to laughs and a book discussion, where we all came to the same conclusion:

Ellen Raskin must've been some sort of wizard to write this story.

I still wonder that today, to be honest.

In The Westing Game, sixteen mismatched and unlikely heirs are selected and roped into renting at Sam Westing's Sunset Towers apartments. While there, they discover Sam Westing's will, which cannot be unlocked unless the heirs solve a puzzle based on America the Beautiful, together.

My favorite part of The Westing Game, and many of my fellow fans agree with me on this, is the characterization. The leading cast is massive, considering not only the sixteen heirs but also their families, with each of the characters getting a relatively equal share of page time. It isn't until later in the story that it becomes obvious that Turtle is the main character. Ms. Raskin was ahead of her times with her characters, as well. Her cast's diversity in race, situation, and especially personality is presented flawlessly and without politics.

Also, the plot is full of twists and unexpected turns. I understand this is the case because Ms. Raskin was a pantser (someone who sits down and writes as opposed to plotting the story out) when it came to writing her stories. As far as I'm concerned, pantsing a mystery is a gutsy thing to do, and she pulls it off, stretching your brain but not breaking it with Westing's puzzles. You do have to look twice towards the ending to grasp the entire concept, as Ms. Raskin won't spoonfeed her readers the answers to the questions she created.

Therefore, in a lot of ways The Westing Game is the perfect read for smart middle schoolers and junior high-ers like the kids I met at standardized test. Turtle is the only character under high school age in the entire book, but nevertheless, Ms. Raskin doesn't talk down to her readers. As another reviewer put it (I'm paraphrasing), "Most people write for the kid inside the adult. She writes for the adult inside the kid."

And that couldn't be more accurate.


Rating: Five stars

Recommended reading age: 12+

Favorite character: Chris

Content for parents: someone sets off bombs, possibilities as to how Sam Westing was murdered are speculated, it is suggested a background character committed suicide.


For more Marvelous Middle Grade Reviews, visit Shannon's blog here.

Newbery Review: Crispin: The Cross of Lead by Avi (2003 Medal Winner)

Crispin was a fascinating read. I often got frustrated with other medieval kidlit because the main characters and their ideals would fit better in a public school classroom than in the world they were supposed to be a part of, but not Crispin. He is through and through a child of the middle ages in his thinking, and the world in which his story unravels is so realistic, it rejuvenates one's interest in the exhausted setting of medieval England. In fact, Avi almost makes medieval England a new world, one entirely different from the medieval England in your typical MG knights-in-armor story.

Crispin is an illegitimate teenage serf in Edward I's plague-ridden kingdom. He soon finds himself inexplicably wanted by his lord, and has to run. He is taken as a serf by Bear, a colorful, gruff, and oversized street entertainer. But while working with slavish loyalty for Bear, Crispin discovers his master has dark connections to the undercurrents of rebellion whispering beneath relative, dictatorial-held peace.

Like I said, the thing that drew me most to this book was Crispin's realistic voice and character development. At first, he is timid, terrified of crossing anyone in authority or breaking his caste, and is full of Catholic superstition. To him, to rebel would be to turn the world on its head. And this world he lives in is gritty and grim. The streets are full of garbage, the rickety buildings are full of disguised debauchery, and the land is full of sickness.

This isn't to say the book is hopeless in its outlook. Quite the reverse. Rather, it paints a much more realistic picture of the era than your typical Disney-fied medievalism.

That being the case, the book is really more of a Young Adult book (13-18) than a Middle Grade (8-12). In fact, its sequel is shelved in the Upper Young Adult section at my library, and I agree. The sequel is even darker and bleaker (I have not read the third book because I cannot find it), so while I would feel comfortable recommending Crispin: The Cross of Lead to a middle grade reader who can handle the same variety of despair and suffering found in MG novels such as Where the Red Fern Grows or The Long Winter, I would hold back on the sequel for those under 13, and even on Crispin for sensitive young readers. Think of the mood as slightly lighter than The Book Thief, but with more external hope juxtaposed with a pessimistic main character.

Crispin does grow and develop talents, talents other than just the stereotypical reading ability, and learns to love life despite suffering in an almost Victor Hugo/Leo Tolstoy-type epiphany.

All this to say, this book left me darkly wowed and thoughtful. Anyone who rolls their eyes at "another medieval Europe story" should look twice and read this. Like I said earlier, it's like a new Medieval England, and yet it's the real one.

Favorite Character: Crispin

Recommended age: 13+

Content level for parents: Crispin sees a hanged man, someone's throat is slit, an animal is tortured, another person is impaled, historic use of the b-word in reference to Crispin.


For more Marvelous Middle Grade reviews, visit Shannon's blog here.

Why You Should Read Keeper of the Lost Cities by Shannon Messenger

Yay! It's Keeper of the Lost Cities Fandom Day! And in honor of one of my favorite MG series, I'm going to do the proper thing for a Fandom Day and fangirl a little. Well, actually, I'm just going to tell you why you should add KOTLC and its sequels (Neverseen coming out this fall!) to the top of your TBR list.

I first came across KOTLC at the library (fortunately for me about a week just before Exile was released) while philandering in the MG section and bumming that they were out of Artemis Fowl. Big thick MG with gorgeous cover about magic schools and girls who can hear other people's thoughts? Yes, please!

Keeper of the Lost Cities stars Sophie Foster, a 12-year-old high school senior who is hailed as a genius in her home city. But she has a secret: she can hear other people's thoughts. All the time. So when she meets a strange boy with the same so-called "gift," and he tells her that she's an elf from the lost  lands of vanished magical races, she's not sure whether she's just officially going crazy, or if she's actually part of an entire society that needs her help. Enrolled in the elves' top school, she proves herself a despised "special snowflake" there, too. But there might be more behind her seemingly unending abilities. Someone may have tampered with her powers, and for their own dark purposes...

Okay, so at first it probably sounds like it's a girl's version of Harry Potter minus the witchcraft. Girl is amazing, has connections with the possible bad guy, goes to magic school, etc. But it's a lot more than that.

This book did something that no other has for me. Every single page was interesting. Not one had me bored or drifting off, and yet it wasn't that exhausting, Maze Runner sort of being sucked in. Also, unlike most fantasy, things had a general cheerful mood. Sure, awful stuff happens, but there was always hope and support and sparkle.
I've heard some complaints that the characters acted more like teenagers than 12-year-olds (well, for one thing most of them are teenagers and not 12-year-olds), but this story brought me right back to being twelve. There were so many things I would've loved at that age, like hallways full of prize-carrying bubbles and flavored locker combinations and magical animals and talking mirrors and fancy clothes. I also was intrigued by Sophie's struggles with being the uber-special, super-extraordinary freak student.

And of course, as those in the fandom know, there's Dex, Fitz, Keefe, and Biana. Dex is sweet and technologically obsessed, Keefe is the undefeated master of snarkastic remarks, Biana is a refreshing reminder that girly-girls are awesome, too, and, well, as a adamant member of Team Fitz, I'd probably just say something biased about him. And the rest of the cast is large, well-rounded, and thoroughly entertaining.

Sometimes the series does get a little sugary, but that's coming from a big fan of N.D. Wilson's and James Dashner's hardcore mud and sludge and grime-coated, boy-oriented worlds. Sometimes things do get a little confusing, and you get annoyed with characters for running in circles, but needless to say, compared to most MG novels in its category, KOTLC stands out, and well-deservedly. I'd highly recommend it for any readers 10+, but especially for girls who want something more up their alley that's not super-princessy but not overly gritty and dark, either. That said, however, I've hooked a number of boys onto the series as well, for the same reasons I loved the book.

Oh, here's some fan art I drew awhile back (like, a year ago) while waiting for Everblaze to be released. And yes, fellow fans, Sophie is holding Pink Iggy.

Now I'm curious. Fellow KOTLC fans, which "team" are you on?