A Literary Homage to Science Fiction

Last week, I finished reading Felix de Palma's novel The Map of Time. I really think that this book is perfect for summer - it's long, it's elegantly written, but still an easy read, without being effortless.

Look! I'm the cover & I'm shiny & delicious!

The Map of Time is separated into 3 sections. Each section introduces some new characters, and sections two and three reveal different sides to characters who have already been introduced. There are two characters who play a prominent role in all 3 sections: Gilliam Murray, a fictional character of the author's device, and H. G. Wells, the actual science fiction writer.

This book was interesting, and really looks at the idea of time, and how the concept of time influences society. How would the world be different if it were possible to more properly comprehend the fourth dimension and "travel" through time?

The novel is set in the late 19th century, and is worded and intended to be read with that time period in mind. When reading, one becomes entrenched in a world that is more proper, in a world full of possibilities, despite the fact that this time period has already occurred, and therefore, it shouldn't be full of possibilities, at all.

I really enjoyed this novel. It's technically a translation, from Spanish into English, but the manner in which it is written reads as though it was written in English. The writing flows. I mentioned in a previous blog post that this book is perfect for summer - it's not what I would call "fluffy" writing, but it is enjoyable, and a fairly quick read, while still having enough intellectual meat to chew over.

I did have one problem with this novel: it's obvious infatuation with H.G. Wells. Sometimes, I felt as though the novel's entire structure was fabricated around the premise of paying homage to H.G. Wells. This adoration went so far as to lead to the denigration of other famed writers of the time period, including one of my personal faves, Henry James.

Other than that slight irksome recurrence, this novel is definitely worth reading. It's well written, it's intelligent, it's slightly nerdy, but in a mostly enjoyable way.

Stephenie Meyer Spells Her Name Wrong AND Rips Off Popular Stories

Though I watched the first season of True Blood almost a year ago, I didn't get around to reading Charlaine Harris' Dead Until Dark until this week. For those who have been woefully ignorant thus far that True Blood has a literary predecessor, the popular television show is based on the popular "Sookie Stackhouse" book series.

(On a random side note, I like this cover so much better than the original cover art.)

The series is told from the point of view of a telepathic waitress named Sookie Stackhouse, and the strange way things unfold when a vampire openly moves into the small Southern town where she lives.

Yet the reason I'm blogging about it is because it felt really, really familiar. Not just because I had already seen the first season of the television show. It felt familiar because I had already read Stephenie (seriously, what's with the spelling?) Meyer's Twilight.

Both novels have a primary character who can read minds. Both novels have vampire characters who gleam. Both novels have, as protagonist, a beautiful young girl. In both novels, the beautiful female protagonist has two supernatural suitors, one of whom is a vampire, the other of whom is a shapeshifter.

I know I've touched on this issue previously, but those are a lot of similarities between two bestselling book series. You've got to wonder if Stephenie Meyer's "dream" coincided with reading a certain book by Charlaine Harris.

Having read both books, I prefer Dead Until Dark. It's got all of the fun, addicting romantic stuff that's in Twilight (in a more realistic fashion, thank God), but has sex and violence aplenty. I've heard creepy stuff about sex being in the young adult series further down the road. Harris' series is more mature from the beginning.

I wouldn't say that Dead Until Dark is amazing, or a must-read. It's entertaining. It's got its' pros and cons.

I would say that it's disappointing that one of the biggest "pros" in Stephenie Meyer's favor - creativity - has proven to be nothing more than a dilution of the already popular ideas of a better writer.

And reading Dead Until Dark brought a question to the forefront of my mind: when does the number of similarities between two works of art become too great for the differences to matter?