2010 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2010?

The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake by Aimee Bender

OR

Once We Were Brothers by Ronald H. Balson

OR

The Kitchen House by Kathleen Grissom

OR

Wench by Dolen Perkins-Valdez

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : Merry Wives of Windsor

And we're back with some more Shakespeare, and look at me go, posting my recap within a month of reading the play! Merry Wives of Windsor has been my favorite play by the Bard in many a year. It was a true comedy, and even though a lot of critics say it's Shakespeare's worst play, I loved it. What can I say? I'm a simple girl, and I like what I like. The Merry Wives had me grinning from ear to ear. It's full of scheming, trickery, and women getting the best of a bunch of silly men, and I was here for every word of it.

We open on a bunch of men talking about a bunch of stuff and, boiling it all down to what's actually important, we learn that 1) Page has a daughter named Anne whom he's ready to marry off to a guy named Slender, and 2) that there's some guy named Falstaff running around who's a lowdown, good-for-nothing. 

Then we meet a Welsh parson who is determined to help Slender woo and win Anne. And let me just tell you, everyone else seems to care more about Slender marrying Anne than Slender himself cares. At one point, when he's supposed to be wooing her, Anne straight up asks him if he even likes her, and he's just like, "Yeah, you're as good as any other woman, I guess." And when she presses him on if he even wants to marry her, he continues with, "I actually don't really care, but your dad and my uncle think it's a good idea so why not?" He's hilariously unconcerned about his future marital bliss. 

But back to the Welsh parson. We find out that Anne has another suitor, a one Doctor Caius, and he is not happy that the parson is trying to help Slender court his ladylove and he's ready to fight him over it. So he challenges him to a duel. 

The parson! Not Slender, who is his actual rival for Anne's hand in marriage. This is basically just Shakespeare's device to get these two guys with funny accents on the stage together for more comedy. (The doctor is French.) We also learn that Doctor Caius is Anne's mother's choice for a husband for her daughter. 

Are you confused yet? Anne's dad wants her to marry Slender (who couldn't care less what woman he ends up with), her mom wants her to marry the French doctor (who very passionately wants to marry Anne), and Anne herself wants to marry some guy named Fenton (who blew through a fortune so neither of the parents like him which, honestly, seems justified). 

While all this is going on, the lowdown, good-for-nothing Falstaff arrives in town, broke as a joke, and ready to seduce the titular merry wives, Mistress Page and Mistress Ford, to get his filthy paws on their husbands' money. So he decides to send them pretty much identical love letters to try to get in their pants. He then tells a couple of his underlings to go deliver the letters but they're all, "We're not your do-boys, loser" even though, as far as I can tell, that's exactly what they've been up to this point. I guess they're sick of Falstaff though so they go and tell Page and Ford exactly what Falstaff is up to. 

Page laughs it off, but Ford gets insanely jealous and comes up with a whole big plan to disguise himself and befriend Falstaff so he can keep tabs on the whole situation. Oh and this plan involves him paying Falstaff to seduce his wife so that then Ford himself will be able to seduce her too?? It's Shakespeare, guys, what did you expect?

Little does Falstaff know, Mrs. Page and Mrs. Ford are besties so, of course, they immediately show each other these outrageous letters and, after they get over the audacity of this clown to send them the same letter, they realize they are going to have a lot of fun messing with Falstaff. 

So Mrs. Ford sends Falstaff a letter telling him to come to her house while her husband is away and we're off to the races. 

Falstaff brags to Ford (who he thinks is some guy named "Brook") how easy it was to seduce Mrs. Ford and tells him he's about to go to her house right now. Ford, naturally, is in a total rage over this and gives Falstaff a short head start but then heads for home himself to catch his wife in the act. 

They're all playing right into the merry wives' hands. 

So Falstaff shows up at the Fords' home but before he can really get anywhere with Mrs. Ford, Mrs. Page runs in yelling, "Your husband is coming, your husband is coming!" The women stuff Falstaff into the dirty laundry and have the servants carry him out right under Ford's nose and dump him in the river where he nearly drowns. 

Chalk one up for the merry wives. 

The wives at this point realize that their husbands are obviously wise to Falstaff's intentions and decide to have even more fun with this. 

Falstaff, humiliated, swears off Mrs. Ford and Mrs. Page, but a quick letter with some sweet nothings that the wives' cooked up has him right back in the game and he's immediately bragging to Brook (aka Ford) that he was just about to get it on with Mrs. Ford when her husband showed up and he escaped in the laundry basket. To which Ford is fuming over his wife's deceitfulness and loudly castigating Page for being such a naive idiot for not suspecting his wife of questionable behavior since women plainly can't be trusted. 

The second time Falstaff trots off to the Fords' house, the merry wives dress him up as a fat old lady that Ford hates and has forbidden to come in his house so that when Ford shows up to once again catch his wife cheating, he beats Falstaff black and blue thinking he's the fat witch that was banned from the house.  

Brilliant. Chalk another one up for the merry wives. 

At this point, they let their husbands in on the joke. Page gets a good laugh, and Ford is properly cowed, apologizes to his wife, and proclaims his unflinching faith in her from then on. Then they all, along with various other characters that I haven't given much attention to in this recap, come up with one final plan to humiliate Falstaff. 

Mrs. Ford writes him one last letter asking him to dress up as Herne the hunter with big antlers growing out of his head and meet her by a tree at midnight. Then they dress up all the kids in town as fairies and instruct them to pinch Falstaff and burn him with torches when he shows up. 

Diabolical.

Meanwhile, Page has instructed Slender to steal away with Anne (who will be dressed in white) during all the confusion and marry her. But Mrs. Page has also instructed the French doctor to do the same thing (but she says Anne will be dressed in green). And Anne and Fenton have made their own plan to run away during the frenzy and elope. (I'm not sure what color Anne actually wore and that bothers me a little.)

So after the plan has been carried out and the mayhem dies down, Slender shows back up saying he ended up with some boy dressed in white and the doctor says the same thing about a boy dressed in green, and then Anne and Fenton arrive all glowing and triumphant. Everyone has a good laugh, the Pages' congratulate their daughter for marrying the man she actually loves, and even Falstaff takes the joke on the chin and they all go off to have a meal together. 

I mean, is that not funny? As far as I'm concerned, that's a good time at the theater, and I would go to a live production of Merry Wives of Windsor any day of the week. The critics can say whatever they want; I thought this play was hysterical. 

2009 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2009?

The 100 Year Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared by Jonas Jonasson

OR

Let the Great World Spin by Colum McCann

OR

Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel

OR

Notes from the Dog by Gary Paulsen

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : As I Lay Dying

A few weeks ago, I recapped my first Hemingway and now I've also tackled my first Faulkner, and you guys, I have to say: I haven't been particularly impressed with the Jazz Age bunch.  

Way back in 2018, I read The Great Gatsby for the first time and I remember thinking, "Really? This is the book we're all lauding as one of the best offerings of the 20th century? Really??" And then I found Hemingway painful. And now Faulkner who by the end of the novel I just kept thinking, "What a pretentious prig." 

(Why am I even comparing these three authors? They were contemporaries being born in 1896, 1897, and 1899, respectively, and they are all three often lauded as some of the greatest American writers of the 20th century. Faulkner and Hemingway both won the Nobel Prize in Literature, and Fitzgerald was nominated for it twice.)

But getting back to the pretentious prig. Faulkner himself bragged that he wrote As I Lay Dying "in six weeks, without changing a word" (not true) and that he "set out deliberately to write a tour-de-force." He claimed: "Before I ever put pen to paper and set down the first words, I knew what the last word would be...Before I began I said, I am going to write a book by which, at a pinch, I can stand or fall if I never touch ink again." Oh brother. If having a total disregard for punctuation and not finishing sentences is what it takes to make a great writer, then why do we even care about education? Honestly, why? 

But I digress. All my ranting aside, I liked Faulkner the best, and As I Lay Dying is one of the most unique pieces of literature I've ever read. (But hear me loud and clear: I am not equating uniqueness with inherent goodness. Different doesn't automatically mean better.) Stream-of-consciousness is not my favorite writing technique and Faulkner was one of the pioneers of it. 

As I Lay Dying—originally published in 1930, in case I haven't mentioned it—is basically the story of Addie Bundren's death and her rural family's subsequent quest to carry her body to its final resting place in her hometown of Jefferson, Mississippi, a request she made of them before she died. The book is written from multiple points of view—no less than fifteen!—and each "chapter" (if you can even call them chapters) are narrated by different people, including a couple by Addie herself after her demise. The main characters are the Bundrens, obviously: Addie's husband Anse, and her five children, Cash, Darl, Jewel, Dewey Dell, and Vardaman. Darl probably has the most of the 59 "chapters". It's a chaotic, dark, sometimes funny, a lot of times disturbing novel. Vardaman thinks his mom is a fish. Dewey Dell is stressing over an unwanted pregnancy and trying to obtain an abortion. Addie's body isn't embalmed so the stench the Bundrens take with them everywhere is a constant topic. Anse steals from his children. Cash's leg gets broken and they try to make a cast for it out of concrete. Darl starts a fire and gets taken away to an insane asylum. I cannot over-emphasize what a strange, tragic book this is. 

How do I wrap up a review like this? I will never read As I Lay Dying again. And I wouldn't really recommend it either. But I haven't stopped thinking about it. I'll definitely read more Faulkner. But it will be a few years before I pick him up again. 

How do you feel about stream-of-consciousness writing? Do you like Faulkner, Hemingway, or Fitzgerald? And which one do you like best?

2008 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2008?

Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout

OR

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : Living Life Backward

"Life is gift, not gain."

If I could sum up my takeaway from Living Life Backward in one sentence, that would be it. And in my mind, I kind of chant it like the sharks in Finding Nemo talking about fish. 

Living Life Backward is David Gibson's 2017 treatise on the book of Ecclesiastes. Cody read this a few years back, and when I asked him to recommend a couple of books for my book list last year, this was the first one he pulled off the shelf. I did actually start it in November, but it got put on hold while I poured all my reading energy into finishing David Copperfield before the end of the year. And then it got put on hold again while I focused on our first book club book The Reason for God. (I usually don't like to have more than one non-fiction book going at once.) But I finally picked it back up and finished it the second week of February. 

In Living Life Backward, Gibson systematically works through the entire book of Ecclesiastes. It's easy to view Ecclesiastes through a pretty depressing lens. Some translations open with "Everything is meaningless." But Gibson's argument is that the wisdom we can derive from the book of Ecclesiastes actually frees us up to live lives that are ultimately more happy and fulfilling. The only thing we can be absolutely certain of in this life is that death comes for us all. Though we don't know when or how, we know that at some point, every one of us will die. Everything else in this life, from our perspective, is uncertain. One of the things Gibson says in his book really struck me: that we like to live as if the one thing that's certain—death—will never come, while all the things that are actually uncertain are certain for us. We spend our lives trying to figure out unknowable things, and pretend like we aren't going to die. Obviously, this sets us up for a very unsatisfying life because, like we all know deep down, we do all die. Gibson and the writer of Ecclesiastes point out that living life in light of the end—living life backward, if you will—informs our day-to-day living. 

So "life is gift, not gain"...what is that? If we live our lives constantly striving to gain more, more, more; then ultimately we will come to the end feeling like everything was meaningless. I mean, he who dies with the most toys...still dies. What were we working so hard for? Everything that we acquire can't go with us when we die and most of us will be forgotten after we're gone. But if we view life as a gift from God, we can enjoy what He's given us and not only that, we're supposed to enjoy what He gives us. By enjoying this life, we're actually fulfilling God's purpose. When I'm not afraid to die, when I live my life with open hands and a peaceful heart, people around me have to wonder, what does she know that I don't? 

I'm probably making this sound super-trite and overly clichéd, but Gibson's book was a breath of fresh air. It was a timely reminder. And it did really help me understand Ecclesiastes better. There are things in that book that can seem contradictory, but Gibson does an excellent job of breaking it all down. Don't let my cheesy review put you off. Living Life Backward is a book I highly recommend and one that I would definitely read again.

2007 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2007?

Summer at Tiffany by Marjorie Hart

OR

Fieldwork by Mischa Berlinski

OR

On Chesil Beach by Ian McEwan

OR

Sarah's Key by Tatiana de Rosnay

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : A Farewell to Arms

Well, I've got my first Hemingway under my belt and it was, as Rory Gilmore warned us way back in 2002, painful. And I don't mean that in a good way.

A Farewell to Arms was Hemingway's second novel and first bestseller. Published in 1929, it is considered by many to be the premier American war novel of World War I, and it cemented Hemingway's status as one of the great American writers of the 20th century. 

A first person narrative set during the Italian campaign of World War I, A Farewell to Arms tells the story of American Frederic Henry's time serving as a lieutenant in the ambulance corps of the Italian army and his passionate affair with an English nurse called Catherine Barkley. The novel is divided into five different "books" and, in my opinion, it was a complete slog up until almost the very end of the third book, but then the last hundred pages or so were completely unputdownable. But like in a I-can't-look-away-from-this-absolute-trainwreck kind of way. Much of Hemingway's work was autobiographical in nature, and he drew on his own experiences living as an expat and serving in the Italian campaigns of World War I to write A Farewell to Arms. The inspiration for Catherine Barkley was drawn from his first love, Agnes von Kurowsky, who ultimately spurned him in real life. And apparently ruined him forever. Her literary counterpart meets a pretty bleak end. 

I don't know, you guys. I can see the value in A Farewell to Arms for its true-to-life portrayal of the First World War and the Italian campaigns. There were glimmers of brilliance in there. I mean, who am I to poo-poo one of the "great American writers of the 20th century" and the 1954 winner of the Nobel Prize in Literature? But Hemingway's sparse style just wasn't my bag. While A Farewell to Arms wasn't sexually explicit, it felt crass to me, and Hemingway's dialogue is the thing of my nightmares. If more than two people were having a conversation, Heaven help you figure out who was saying what. His ending—which he famously rewrote some forty-odd times before landing on the one he chose—left me cold. Ultimately: not a book I'd read again and also not one I'd recommend. 

However, I have struck a bargain with my friend Jon—a literary exchange, if you will—wherein for every Hemingway I read, he will read a novel by Jane Austen. Jon has Mark Twain levels of hatred for Austen based on reading like one chapter of Persuasion over ten years ago. Given my recent discovery of my distaste for Hemingway's writing, this seems like a fair deal, and given that Jon has yet to even start one of my homegirl's most excellent works, I think I'm safe from Hemingway for a couple of years at least. 

What's your take on Ernest Hemingway or any of the "great" 20th century American writers in general?

2006 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2006?

The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield

OR

How To Be Popular by Meg Cabot

OR

Same Kind of Different As Me by Ron Hall & Denver Moore

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : The Borrowed Life of Frederick Fife

The second book chosen for our book club to read this year was this 2024 debut by Australian author Anna Johnston: The Borrowed Life of Frederick Fife. 

And what a gem! I loved this hilarious, heartfelt novel from the first word to the last. Johnston did not miss a single step in her debut, and I've already put her upcoming release on my amazon wishlist and requested that my library buy a copy even though it's not coming out till August. 

In the first chapter, we learn that 82 year old Fred has just been evicted from his home and is taking a walk along the river to find a little snatch of peace while he tries to figure out what he's going to do. In an insane turn of events that involves his uncanny doppelgänger floating away down the river, Fred finds himself being loaded into a van and taken to a nursing home where he's fed the best meal he's had in months and tucked away into a warm bed. Despite his earnest attempts to correct the mistake, Fred can't seem to make anyone believe that he isn't Bernard Greer and decides maybe it won't be so bad to "borrow" this stranger's life since he won't be needing it any more. 

While you might think you'd have to suspend disbelief to such a degree that this story couldn't possibly be enjoyable, I think Johnston actually pulls it off. She does such a wonderful job of spinning a yarn that seems like it could—believe it or not—be plausible despite how absurd it sounds on the surface. Frederick Fife is a kinder, sunnier Ove who, instead of being adopted by the people around him against his will, adopts all the people around him himself to create his new found family. I loved it so much. 

Another surprising element of The Borrowed Life of Frederick Fife that endeared me even more to this sweet novel was that I saw myself in Fred. I mentioned in one of my recent reviews that it's hard to find a novel where the protagonist is childless and content. In The Borrowed Life, Fred and his late wife very much wanted to have children but were unable to grow their family. While this was one of the harder elements of this narrative to read about (and let me just give a trigger warning for miscarriage), I felt such a kinship with this character who kept a sunny outlook and had such a beautiful and fulfilling marriage with his partner. I didn't expect the story I'd see myself in to be that of a lonely male octogenarian, but I'm so glad I found it.

Finally, I have to continue my applause for Johnston's brilliant debut by saying that I didn't see the twists coming. I certainly haven't read every book on the planet, but The Borrowed Life of Frederick Fife felt wholly original and fresh to me, and I stayed up way past my bedtime finishing this one. 

Two enthusiastic thumbs up from this reader, and I'm so looking forward to Anna Johnston's sophomore novel—coming in August!

2002 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2002?

Geisha, A Life by Mineko Iwasaki

OR

Three Junes by Julia Glass

OR

Lay That Trumpet In Our Hands by Susan Carol McCarthy

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : Coriolanus

It's February which means it's time for some Shakespeare, but before I pick up Merry Wives of Windsor which is the comedy on the docket for 2026, I've got to get Coriolanus done and dusted. So today, let's talk about one of old Billy the Bard's last tragedies and then hopefully we'll be back in a few weeks to talk about his Merry Wives. 

Coriolanus is basically about this guy Caius Marcius who's just kindof this mid Roman. He has money and he thinks the plebeians are a total waste of space, but he's also not really in a position of power either. He's hotheaded and bloodthirsty and a complete snob. 

So the Volscians are trying to overthrow Rome led by Tullus Aufidius (whom Marcius deems a worthy adversary by the way, because why even fight if it's not going to be a good fight) and Marcius leads a troop of soldiers into the city of Corioles and completely wrecks it. The Romans basically hoist him on their shoulders and take him back to Rome singing Hail the Conquering Hero and Rome names him Coriolanus for his total devastation of this city. So from now on, I'll refer to him as "Coriolanus". 

Meanwhile, I should mention that his mom Volumnia, who has this very creepy reverse-Oedipal thing going on, has been sitting back at home with Coriolanus' wife and kid waxing on about how she hopes the battle is bloody and that her son is victorious but, you know, with some wounds to make it more dramatic and hot. It's weird. His wife Virgilia is like, "I mean, I hope he wins too, but we want him to be okay, right?" To which Volumnia is all, "The bloodier the better." Like I said, weird.

So Coriolanus is back and being honored by all the powerful people and his mom is all, "Here's your chance to move up politically." But Coriolanus hates this idea because it involves putting himself on display and basically begging for votes from the plebes. Who, as I mentioned, he considers to be a waste of space. But he's a momma's boy so he does what his mother tells him and we have a whole scene of him showing off his battle scars (literally) to the commoners and trying not to absolutely blow his top while his friend Menenius (the only person in the whole play who is actually a reasonable and likable human being) is trying to get him to keep it together and not to lose it on these citizens. 

He ends up getting the people's support—almost not—but before he can even take his place as a consul, these two other guys, Brutus and Sicinius who have hated him from the beginning, stir the people up into a riot against him. Honestly, I can't really blame the people because Coriolanus is such a stuck-up jerk—definitely not Prom King material—but why Brutus and Sicinius care so much is a little beyond me. Jealous losers.

At this point, Coriolanus finally loses his barely controlled temper and not only does he rip the Romans a new one, he goes off to such an extent that he gets himself banished. He comes back with the very mature, "NO, I BANISH ROME FROM MY PRESENCE." Good one, bro. 

So what does he do? He goes to Tullus Aufidius (his mortal enemy, remember?) and says he wants to wreck Rome now and will T.A. help him do it? Because that seems like a reasonable response and nothing could possibly go wrong with this plan, right?

T.A. says sure, let's go right now. 

So Coriolanus is now marching against Rome and the Romans are in a panic because for all his faults, we've already established that Coriolanus can kick some serious butt in a fight. So all his friends are going to him trying to talk him out of this madness. But obviously, he's not hearing any of it. So the Romans are like, "Get his mom." 

I mean, good move. 

So Volumnia goes to her son, taking Virgilia and Coriolanus' son with her, and they have this whole back and forth where Coriolanus is basically all, "There is nothing you can say that will keep me from burning Rome to the ground." And even his kid is like, "If you do this, my entire goal in life will be to grow up and fight you myself." Which Coriolanus doesn't really seem to care about, but his mom finally talks him out of it (momma's boy, remember?) and Coriolanus succeeds in making peace between the Romans and the Volscians. 

So now the Romans and the Volscians are loving him and old T.A. is not happy about it. Coriolanus returns to the Volscian capital and obviously there's a big to-do, but T.A.'s buddies aren't having any of it and publicly assassinate Coriolanus. 

I mean, he kindof had it coming. I know this is supposed to be a tragedy but are we sad about this?

Once Coriolanus is dead, T.A. all of a sudden gets a conscience and is all, "This is sad. I'm sorry. Let's give him a proper send-off." And they all pick up his body and carry him out. And that's the end. 

lol

Coriolanus was a very engaging play and I read it pretty quickly, but it was also a little confusing because I wasn't sure if I was supposed to like Coriolanus or not. As I said, no one in the play was remotely sufferable except for Menenius so whenever Menenius was giving a reasonable defense of Coriolanus, I was like, "okay, maybe he's not the worst guy ever" but then as soon as Coriolanus himself showed up I was like, "No I definitely hate that guy." So basically I'm a plebeian. Ha! What I'm coming to realize about Shakespeare (and maybe I've said this before) is that the only difference between his tragedies and his comedies are that everyone dies in the tragedies. Sometimes his comedies are very sad, and a lot of the time his tragedies are hilarious, but the difference is just whether or not people die. So when I pick up Shakespeare, I'm never sure what I'm going to get. And that's fun. 

2001 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2001?

Life of Pi by Yann Martel

OR

Peace Like a River by Leif Enger
OR

The Eyre Affair by Jasper Fforde

OR

A Voyage for Madmen by Peter Nichols

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here.

Let's Bust a Recap : Before We Were Yours

Okay, this book was extremely popular when it was published in 2017, and so many people recommended it to me. I read it last August, and maybe I'm the outlier here, but I did not like it.

Buckle up for a scathing review and possibly some spoilers, and if you're one of the ones who loved it and recommended it to me: sorry, not sorry. 

Lisa Wingate's 2017 New York Times bestseller Before We Were Yours is structured as a dual timeline, going back and forth between 1939 Memphis, Tennessee and present day Aiken, South Carolina. In 1939, we're following the story of Rill Foss who is desperately trying to keep her family together after she and her four younger siblings are kidnapped and taken to an orphanage. In the present day, we're following the story of Avery Stafford, a wealthy young lawyer from a prestigious old money Southern family with the perfect handsome fiancé to boot. A chance encounter with a confused elderly lady at a nursing home who mistakes Avery for someone else has her questioning her entire family history and sets her on "a path that will ultimately lead either to devastation or to redemption." And that's straight from the back-of-the-book blurb. Not dramatic at all.

This "historical fiction" novel (and yes, those quotes are dripping with sarcasm) is meant to highlight one of the most notorious scandals in our nation's recent history: that of Georgia Tann and the Tennessee Children's Home Society, a front for her black market adoptions which was operational from the 1920s to 1950. Tann trafficked literally thousands of children through the Home Society, and when I say the uterine cancer that took her life mere weeks before charges were brought against her was too good a death for her: I mean it. People have praised this book for bringing to light this "little known" part of history, but this scandal has been covered pretty extensively in books, podcasts, documentaries, TV, and even a movie. I'm not so sure we needed Lisa Wingate's novel. Her writing isn't bad, but she doesn't shy away from the horrific things that went down in Georgia Tann's organization including child abuse, child rape, and even child murder, and I felt sick the entire time I was reading this book. I kept waiting for a brilliant resolution to make all the misery worth it, but we never get one. 

And don't get me started on Avery's storyline. It felt like Wingate just wanted to write a Hallmark romance but have people take her seriously so she tangled it up with the most horrific scandal in our nation's history so she could get that "historical fiction" tag. While I did wonder where Rill would end up and that kept me turning the pages, there was nothing remotely mysterious about how Avery's story would turn out. You saw every beat of her dumping-her-perfect-family-approved-fiancé-for-the-laid-back-single-dad coming from a mile away. (Sorry for all the hypens.) 

Before We Were Yours has been compared to Orphan Train by readers and marketers alike, and, before I even knew that, I was definitely getting those vibes while I was reading. But compared with Christina Baker Kline's excellent novel, Wingate's Before We Were Yours felt manipulative and her manufactured happy ending fell incredibly flat for me. It wasn't the worst book I've ever read, but all things considered, it didn't add up to a good experience for me, and I wouldn't recommend this one. 

What book didn't live up to the hype for you?

2000 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 2000?

The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon

OR

The Thief Lord by Cornelia Funke

OR

Rachel's Tears by Beth Nimmo & Darrell Scott

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here. 

Let's Bust a Recap : The Reason for God

Here we are again, recapping my most recently finished book. Generally speaking, non-fiction doesn't stay with me as long as good fiction does so when I read a book like The Reason for God, I want to recap it right away before I forget everything I thought about it. There are always exceptions to this rule, of course, but those exceptions definitely don't apply to The Reason for God as it's a library book that I wasn't able to mark up and will be returning soon so I won't even have a physical copy to refer to when writing a blog post. This was the first book selected by my book club for 2026—yes, we're trying to resurrect our poor book club—which is why I went off-list so early in the year to check out a library book instead of reading one of the 700+ unread books that live in my house. 

Tim Keller was a very popular pastor and Christian apologist who founded Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City back in 1989 which has now grown to a congregation of over 5,000. In his 2008 book The Reason for God, he urges skeptics to wrestle with their doubts about Christianity and encourages believers and non-believers alike to "rise to the level of disagreement rather than simply denouncing one another." In the first half of his book, he attempts to dismantle seven common objections to Christianity. Then he writes an "Intermission" in which he sets the stage for the second half of his book, the second half being his reasons for believing Christianity. He ends with a heartfelt appeal to his readers to examine their own motives for belief or disbelief and offers them practical advice on how to begin a journey of faith for themselves. 

Personally, I thought the first half of the book was pretty weak with chapters three (dismantling the argument that Christianity is a straitjacket) and seven (dismantling the argument that you can't take the Bible literally) being the exceptions. He makes some good points overall, but a lot of his arguments come across like the old playground taunt I know you are but what am I? If I was a skeptic, I have a hard time believing his defense would be particularly moving for me or even really give me much to think about. (But to be fair, I'm not a skeptic so I may be way off the mark.) The second half of the book in which he is giving reasons for Christianity is much stronger, although on the whole his arguments are very repetitive. He quotes other theologians a lot and to good effect...but in a way that makes me want to pick up their books instead of reading his. (Particularly the philosopher Alvin Plantinga whom I had never heard of and am making this my note to self to get my hands on one of his books.) C.S. Lewis has obviously been a huge influence in Keller's life—can't fault him for that; I'm right there with him—but if I was recommending a book to a skeptic of Christianity, I'd just go ahead and give them Lewis rather than Keller. I did really like how Keller referenced popular books, movies, and authors in making some of his points which, I think, makes The Reason for God more accessible to a 21st century audience. 

If you're reading this, I don't want you to think I'm being super critical of Keller's book. This is the first book by Keller I've ever read and after reading it, I'd be open to reading other books by him. This year, I'm reading through a daily devotional of selections from Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones' writings, and as I was nearing the end of Keller's book, I came to a selection in my devotional on Faith and Reason that helped me pinpoint why exactly Keller's book wasn't resonating with me. Lloyd-Jones states that faith is not a matter of reason. He goes on to explain that "our reason brings us to the point where we realize that reason is not enough, and at that point we have nothing to do but submit ourselves to...faith." While Keller certainly touches on this in The Reason for God, it's not a point that gets hammered home and it's a crucial point to make in writing a book like this one. 

Overall, maybe The Reason for God could be a really helpful book for someone who is honestly looking to engage with the claims made by Christianity but having a hard time swallowing them for one reason or another. It may be helpful for Christians to be able to hold their own positions with greater clarity and greater humility. But it also may not be. I appreciated how respectful Keller was in his writing to both camps and how he encourages thoughtful discussion. I'm glad I read it, and I'm interested to see what type of discussion it will spark in our book club. 

1996 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 1996?

The Color of Water by James McBride

OR

The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks

For more background on what this is all about, click here. 

To vote on Goodreads, click here. 

Let's Bust a Recap : A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears

The first book I read this year was A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears by Jules Feiffer, and yes it has jumped the line of other recaps I'm still planning to write someday for the sole reason that it is my sister's all-time favorite book, and it is one of my biggest missions in life to never disappoint her in any way. (We don't mind a run-on sentence around here, sorry if you're new.)

A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears was published in 1995 and it's basically the story of Roger, a prince who makes everyone laugh all the time. But not in a good way; more in like a we-can't-be-around-him-for-too-long-or-we-will-literally-die-laughing kind of way. In order to sober him up and make him into a worthy monarch, his father, King Whatchamacallit, recruits the help of J. Wellington Wizard to send Roger on a quest to accomplish the purpose. 

The book starts out very silly. I was mildly amused and there were certain things that put me in mind of my sister's sense of humor. (There was a line about ketchup in particular that made me think, "Did this book shape Sarah's entire personality?") Jules Feiffer's style reminded me a bit of Norton Juster's in The Phantom Tollbooth, just not as clever. But then I realized Feiffer illustrated The Phantom Tollbooth so maybe that's what actually triggered the comparison? Either way, the narrator is an absolute hoot, breaking the fourth wall constantly to explain the story and certain characters to his readers. After a couple chapters of silliness though, I was starting to wonder if we would really get anywhere or if I would even ultimately enjoy the book on the whole. I thought maybe the reason Sarah likes A Barrel of Laughs so much is more for the nostalgia since she's loved it since she was a kid and oh no, what if I have to lie to her about what I think?? because obviously disappointing her to tell her I thought it was ridiculous is not an option (see above). 

But I truly and honestly had nothing to worry about. Sarah's taste is not to be questioned. She is, after all, the one who finally convinced me to read Harry Potter. As Roger's quest went on and he learned to genuinely care for others and their well-being more than just laughing his way through life, I was impressed with the way Feiffer snuck profound truths about life into his book. Because sometimes, people you thought were your friends really do turn against you for no reason and make your life harder. And sometimes, our own deep-seated insecurities and anxieties really can be our worst enemies. We really do need help from others sometimes to tell us the truth and pull us out of the funk of our own making we've descended into. Some days we're soaring, and some days we're barely hanging on. Some days we're rescuing others, and some days we need the rescue. And most importantly, life rarely goes according to plan. It is our response to the life we actually find ourselves in—not the life itself—that will determine our happiness. 

What I'm saying is: A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears is a fantastic book. And now I need to buy my own copy because Sarah lent me hers to read. You should definitely read this book too. Come for the laughs, stay for the reminder that life isn't all bad and it's how you choose to look at it that can make the difference. 

1993 : My Life In Books

 Which book should I read for 1993?

The Shipping News by E. Annie Proulx

OR

The Giver by Lois Lowry

For more background on what this is all about, click here. 

To vote on Goodreads, click here. 

Let's Bust a Recap : David Copperfield

Um, you guys? I snapped this photo on a sunny fall day in November...of 2023.  

David Copperfield first made an appearance on my annual book lists in 2019 when I was trying out my first reading challenge. I put him in the category of a book published before you were born. (1850 for those wondering. A solid 137 years before I was born.) He then took up residency on my book lists in 2020, 2022, and 2023 at which point I did finally pick him up to start reading. In February. I was so determined to finally read this doorstop that year. But, if memory serves, I only got about ten chapters under my belt, and then left him largely ignored in my book cart for 2024. 

As you now know if you read my end-of-year recap on New Years Day, my secret goal for 2025 was to finish David Copperfield. And despite picking up the book several times throughout the year to try to start a streak of reading a chapter a day until I finished, I barely scraped by, finishing on the very last day of 2025 reading the final four chapters. I can only attribute my difficulty with David Copperfield to psychological warfare because it wasn't a particularly challenging novel to read. I enjoyed it every time I picked it up. But the sheer length (64 chapters, 877 pages) meant that every time I finished a chapter, it seemed like I hadn't made a lick of progress. And for whatever reason, that made it feel like a slog. On top of that, I wouldn't call David Copperfield a plot-driven novel so there was no big impetus to keep picking him up. I could pop in and out of old Trot's life story whenever I wanted and didn't feel any big drive to stick with him. I think by the time I got to December last year, I still had about half the book left to finish. Crazy.

David Copperfield is famously known as Charles Dickens' "favourite child" which is how he described it himself in his second preface to the completed novel. It just goes to show you there's no accounting for personal taste because of the three Dickens I've read, David Copperfield has been my least favorite. I loved Great Expectations and I was fully blown away by the masterful storytelling in A Tale of Two Cities. David Copperfield is the life story of the titular character who is telling us the story himself. The first chapter is literally titled "I am born" and we just go on from there as David recounts the death of his little mother, the harsh treatment he endures from his stepfather and stepfather's sister, running away to find his aunt Betsey Trotwood, the girls he falls in and out of love with, his friendships—ill-fated or otherwise, his rise to fame as an author, and so on and so forth. It's not what I'd call compelling, but it is known to be Dickens' most autobiographical work so it makes sense that Copperfield is his favorite. 

Dickens' greatest strength in David Copperfield (in this reader's opinion, anyway) is his character sketches. I can't tell you how much I loved, loved, loved Betsey Trotwood. Definitely a new all-time favorite literary character. I loathed Uriah Heep. I rooted for Mr. Peggotty. I admired Tommy Traddles. My heart went out to Martha and Little Em'ly. I wanted to smack the smug "respectability" off of Littimer and wring Steerforth's worthless neck. I couldn't roll my eyes hard enough at ridiculous Mr. Micawber or his wife. And poor little Dora. As far as I'm concerned, she and Doady deserved each other and Agnes really could have done better. I could go on but suffice it to say, Dickens is a master at giving us fully fleshed out characters who feel real and timeless 175 years later. 

As for David Copperfield himself—Davy, Trot, Doady; whatever you prefer to call him—he was a bit insufferable, very much like Victor Frankenstein. I don't know if it's the device of having the character narrate their own story that takes away a measure of their likability for me, but at times I was groaning for old Trot to just get on with it already or to grow up for Heavens' sake. Which he ultimately did, but with all of Dickens' colorful cast of characters, Davy himself was the one I could have done without. I'm not sure what that says about me, but there you have it. 

Just this past February (probably during one of my hapless attempts to get back on the Copperfield wagon), I stumbled across this 2024 Forbes article which, among other things, posits Dickens' ten greatest books and ranks them in order. I found that I had unknowingly started my own Dickens journey in the correct order (according to the article) and so I plan to keep working my way down that list in future. It may be a few years before I pick up another Dickens, but when I do, it'll be Oliver Twist which is what comes next on the list. (Although I may have to sneak A Christmas Carol in somewhere because it doesn't make the top ten since it's not a full-length novel and I've never actually read it. I know. The horror.)

All said, it feels good to finally close the loop on David Copperfield. He has without question shown up on more book lists than any other book I own and finishing him feels like a small kind of accomplishment. 

1992 : My Life In Books

Which book should I read for 1992?

All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy 

OR

 The Indispensable Calvin & Hobbes by Bill Watterson

For more background on what this is all about, click here.

To vote on Goodreads, click here. 

My Life In Books

Okay guys, I mentioned on Friday when I shared my 2026 book list that I have the next several years of book lists already mapped out. Well, today we're diving deep into my book nerd-dom and I'm going to tell you more than you ever wanted to know about my plans for reading in 2027. I know it's probably way too early for me to be talking about it, but the fact of the matter is: I need your input. And I wanted to give you plenty of time (a whole year!) to participate. So here we go. The unfortunate truth is...

Can you believe it? Because I'm trying not to. 2027 will be the year I achieve four decades of living. Hang on while I go throw up. I'm not one of those people who embraces aging. You won't catch me out here talking about how 40 is the new 20. 40 is 40 and I dread the new ways my body will find to rebel against me. 

Okay Drama Queen, but what does this have to do with your book lists and reading goals?

I'm so glad you asked. 

For many years now, I've thought it would be really cool to read a book from every year of my life. But how do I frame that? Do I make it an ongoing project? Or try to do it in a year? Do I choose best sellers? Or Pulitzer prize winners? Or the most popular book of each year? Suffice it to say, putting all the pieces together to make this idea happen seemed a tad overwhelming. But a few weeks ago, Modern Mrs Darcy asked about niche reading projects on her blog, and I got to thinking about this idea again. And because I have been thinking about a couple other goals I have for myself that I'd like to accomplish before turning 40—goals that are going to take some specific planning ahead if I want to achieve them—one of the pieces for this book project fell into place. The year I turn 40 will be the year I try to read a book from every year of my life so far. 

But how will you ever choose which books to read? 

Again, thanks for asking. Here's where we crank the nerdiness up another notch. I started to wonder if I already own books that have been published every year of my life. And could there possibly be some easier way to figure that out other than pulling every single book off my shelf to check the copyright? As it turns out: yes and yes. There is a way to sort your books on Goodreads by publication year. And since 2021, I've been pretty consistent about keeping my unread shelf updated over there. (And not that we need to dwell on this or anything but I'm sitting at over 700 unread books in our home library. I know.) So I popped over to Goodreads, sorted all my books by publication year, and just like that, I found out I not only have books from every single year of my life: I have options. 

Great, Hannah, so make your list and get on with it. Why are you telling us all this?

Right. This is my favorite part. As I started to compile my list, there were several years where the winner was obvious. I knew exactly which book I would read and there wasn't really any contest. But there were just as many years where I had no idea which book to choose. I want to read them all. And I thought to myself, "Self, how can we narrow this down and make it as fun as possible?" Light bulb. Have people vote. So I proceeded to create a Goodreads poll for every single year that I couldn't decide which book to read. I made them public on January 1st and I'm leaving them open until December 1st. 

Now, the one drawback to all this is that you do have to have a Goodreads account to see (or vote on) Goodreads polls. Goodreads is free and it's super easy to set up an account, but if you have no interest in doing that, I have another solution. I will also be posting a poll weekly on the blog until all the polls are available here too. If you have trouble commenting, never fear. I'll take your response by text or e-mail; heck, I'll take it by postcard or carrier pigeon if it comes to that. I would just love to get as many responses as possible. So—along with voting yourself—feel free to share this with anyone you think would have fun participating. 

There you have it. Is this fun and creative? Or ridiculous and insane? Will you vote? It's all I want for my birthday. 

If you have a Goodreads account and you want to vote now, click here.

If not, the first poll will go live this Thursday and like I said, if you have trouble commenting, don't hesitate to text or e-mail your response instead. It will make my day. 

2026 Book List

Well, look at us waking up in 2026 and making my end-of-year recap and 2026 book list posts back to back. Just like the good old days. Maybe this year I'll get back into some kind of blogging rhythm. 

(I wouldn't make any bets on that if I were you, but if we can't be optimistic at the beginning of a new year, when can we really?)

Listen you guys, I have like, my next four years of book lists mapped out. Ridiculous? Maybe, but I just have so many ideas for book lists and I can only put them into action one year at a time. This year's plan is to round up every book I ever put on a book list and make a new list out of all the ones I never got around to reading. Everything added up, that came out to twenty-one books, plus I added five more including the Shakespearean plays I want to read this year and, of course, a presidential biography. (Technically, the biography could be considered part of the round-up of books from past lists, but I'm not trying to put that kind of pressure on myself with the presidents. I know you probably don't care about this kind of nerdy minutiae or the inner workings of my mind, but this blog isn't just for you, okay? It's for me too.)

Anyways, when all is said and done, I have a starting list of twenty-six books for 2026, and you guys, I just realized it as I typed it out: 26 in '26! Truly a coincidence, but how serendipitous. 

Here's the stack:

Let's go through them one by one, shall we?

Walking with God Day by Day : Martyn Lloyd-Jones

President James Buchanan : Philip Shriver Klein

Merry Wives of Windsor : William Shakespeare

Titus Andronicus : William Shakespeare

A Barrel of Laughs, A Vale of Tears : Jules Feiffer

from my 2015 book list

When God Writes Your Life Story : Eric & Leslie Ludy

The Quiet Little Woman : Louisa May Alcott

The Red Badge of Courage : Stephen Crane

Adopted for Life : Russell Moore

from my 2019 book list

Crime and Punishment : Fyodor Dostoevsky

1984 : George Orwell

from my 2020 book list

The Age of Innocence : Edith Wharton

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland : Lewis Carroll

Through the Looking-Glass : Lewis Carroll

from my 2022 book list

Housekeeping : Marilynne Robinson

from my 2023 book list

The Case for a Creator : Lee Strobel

As I Lay Dying : William Faulkner

A Gentleman in Moscow : Amor Towles

Carry On, Jeeves : P.G. Wodehouse

The Chosen : Chaim Potok

The Starless Sea : Erin Morgenstern

A Red Herring Without Mustard : Alan Bradley

from my 2025 book list

Living Life Backward : David Gibson

Hannah Coulter : Wendell Berry

Brideshead Revisited : Evelyn Waugh

A Farewell to Arms : Ernest Hemingway

I'm really excited with how this list turned out, but it does feel a little daunting too. (Although can we all breathe a sigh of relief that David Copperfield didn't carry over into another new year?) With working full-time outside my home again, I've had to get really intentional with my reading time and there was definitely a period of adjustment with that, but I'm excited to tackle this list and finally check these books off my unread shelf. 

From our crazy hats to yours, here's to a very merry 2026. Let's read all the best books this year!

Are you optimistic about fresh resolutions at the beginning of a new year? Or is it just another day? Any books you're especially excited to get to this year? Would you like to read any from my list with me?