The Last Guardian by Eoin Colfer

Artemis has recovered from his Atlantis Complex but all is not well. When Opal takes drastic measures to bust out of prison, she sends the world – both fairy and human – into a technological stand-still.

With Opal at large and more dangerous than ever, she has one objective – to kill all humans and become the Queen of the People. Unleashing the souls of fairy warriors, buried on the Fowl Estate, Opal has an army at her disposal – an army possessing every living body on the grounds...as well as some dead.

Can Artemis, Holly and Butler save the human race from Opal’s terror? The stakes are higher than ever. Will Artemis’ cunning be his triumph? Anything short of brilliant may prove fatal.

The Last Guardian takes place primarily at Fowl Manor, giving the series a full circle feeling, with some nice mirrored symmetry to the first book.

The crux of this book for me was, like the others, the characters. In the midst of all of Colfer’s plotting and cleverness, the way he writes and develops his characters is why I loved this series and they were what held strongest for me in The Last Guardian.

The inciting incident of this book has some of the highest stakes yet, with Opal at her most cunning and vindictive. I was able to read some sample chapters from the beginning of the book – first on Net Galley and then a few more from a sampler at Book Expo America – which left me in a cruel desperation. Thanks to the world of digital books, by midnight of the release date I was listening to Nathaniel Parker read me the final instalment.

I was glad that I listened to the final book on audio, since that was how I experienced all the others. Parker lives up to his excellence. The only peculiar thing I noticed was that Chix Verbal’s accent seemed to have changed.

For me what cinched the book was the end. There was so much tension and emotional investment that I was shaking in anticipation. How would everything play out? What would happen to my beloved characters? I am particularly attached to Artemis, Holly Butler and – yes – even Opal. She’s fabulous.

I’m not a stickler for happy endings but I do desire a satisfactory one, whatever the requirements for that may be. Colfer definitely delivered and he left me itching to re-experience the series all over again.

I know that the Artemis Fowl books are ones I will be returning to again and again but in the meantime I will turn my attention to some of Colfer’s stand-alone novels.

In accordance with the FTC, Quill Café would like to disclose that the reviewer purchased this book. The opinions expressed are hers alone and no monetary compensation was offered to her by the author or publisher. Cover art is copyright of Hyperion Books and is used solely as an aide to the review.

Putting the 'no' in Nomance

I'm a romantic at heart... I know, I know. You're all surprised. It's not a weakness I like to advertise (you never know who's reading... *shifty eyes*)

But I really hate romance when it's in novels where it's used as a secondary plot device. And when I say 'hate' I mean I loathe it with such a red hot intensity that it greatly lessens the chance I'll enjoy the book.

But what did those poor novels do to me? I'm sure recently you've seen a novel blurb that goes something like this:

Amanda Moonshine always knew she was different. From the time she was a child, little diamonds would materialize in piles underneath her whenever she smiled. And though it saved her family from dirty debt collectors, in the end they found out about her power and killed her mother. And so she's been hiding in secret for ten years, scared of this horrible curse that keeps her cleaning and organizing like you wouldn't believe.

But then she meets Stanley Preston Uppercrust III, and everything changes-

BOO. First off, why is her development as a character and a protagonist or hero (i.e., someone who is unique and wonderful enough for the reader to care about) dependent on a boy? Can't we explore the trials and tribulations of magic smile diamonds without tacking a trite romance onto it?

I read a lot of predictable romances and love them. But when I mean 'predictable' I mean that the genre is actually romance, so I know that two people are going to be hooking up and by the end they'll live happily ever after. And that's okay because I'm reading the book for exactly that reason. But I'm annoyed by books that claim to be fantasy or paranormal or action or espionage but introduce a romance that takes over the plot. I don't want to read about Amanda Moonshine and Stanley Preston kissing and touching and resisting because their love is wrong in an action book; I want to see Amanda smile, fashion a diamond into a point and then use it to stab someone in the eye.

Of course, there are novels that mix plot and romance masterfully. So maybe it's not the romance. Maybe I'm just sick of books that think romance can make anything better, or that romance is required. It doesn't, and it's not. Just for once I'd like to read a book that doesn't have romance in it; where I can read through without some dark haired, fair eyed bad boy being introduced and me rolling my eyes thinking, 'yep, they're gonna end up doing the tongue tango' while the narrative tries to persuade me that it's never going to happen. Pfft. Please, I can see alllll the signs.

So what do you think? Romance as an additional plot point? Yay or nay?

The Burden of Color Pt. 2

For a long time, I didn't include photos of myself on my blog or my twitter accounts; I know a lot of people who don't, and they all do it for their own reasons. Sometimes it's because they don't like the shape of their nose or their eyes; maybe the content they write could get them in trouble with their job or their family, so they choose to stay anonymous. And that's perfectly fine; what bothers me is why I realized I did it:

Because I'm black, and I didn't want my writing to be affected by people's perception of my color.

This directly relates to my previous post on the same subject, where I mentioned that not only are  minority groups underrepresented in fiction, they're also often pigeonholed in separate sections in bookstores. Because I've always lived in a predominately black area, the bookstores and libraries I've lived in over the years have always had "African-American Literature" sections, which feature books and authors that can't be found otherwise. So if you're not specifically looking for a 'chocolate' book, you'd never end up reading one. In contrast, I never specifically go looking for vanilla books either, but I always end up reading them... because white authors can get displays in just about any place in the store, and they'll be known by the genre, not the color: science-fiction, poetry, fantasy, romance... NOT white science-fiction or white fantasy.

Subconsciously, I've always feared that when/if I publish a novel, my work will end up segregated. All a book seller would have to do is look at my press photo, and that would be the end of it. Publishers don't get to choose where bookstores/libraries display their books, and if one executive realized I was black, they wouldn't have to know anything else about my book; they'd just slip it on the black shelf and go on with their lives, easy peasy. No big deal.

But to me it is a big deal, because I don't write BLACK books - I write books with people who just happen to be black, or white, etc. My characters don't gather in a circle wearing kenté cloth, chanting in Swahilii and celebrating Kwanzaa, not that it should matter if they did. I mean, the "black" section seems to suggest that other races can't relate with books by black people, and that's not true. So what is the section for, except sweeping everything in a corner so readers have a harder time finding it? Why not have a universal romance or fantasy section instead?

Most of my characters, honestly, aren't even black. The main characters in the novel I'm writing currently are white and Hispanic. So not only would getting into the black section be offensive, it would be inaccurate. Anyone actually wanting to read about black people would pick it up and say, "what the heck is this crap?" So for the longest time I thought it'd be better to not describe my physical traits at all, and, sadly, hope people assumed I was made of cotton instead. But that feels like I'd be giving them permission to put me in the corner, and that's so not flying with me.

So I guess the best way for all of us to address this problem is to not put up with it. Hey black people... you want to write a romance about two teens from Armenia? DO it. You're white as snow but you keep dreaming about this one Korean character from Virginia? Let him out! There's nothing wrong with writing what you know, but don't be afraid to explore new perspectives. Then all the publishers will get confused and have no choice but to put us all in the same spot. A girl can dream.

How do you deal with discrimination related to the way you look? How has it affected your goals in life?

Should You Post Your Writing Online?

It used to cost an arm and a leg to share your writing with someone long-distance. Now, with the aide of the internet, all it takes is some general knowledge.

Very little time and energy is spent uploading your writing to the internet. Once posted, it is available to be read online by whomever can gain access t it. Yes, it is a simple enough task to post your writing online but the question remains, 'Should you do it?'

That is a question which evokes many opinions:

'Posting your writing online will hinder your chances at being professionally published.'

'Is it good way to gain feedback from readers and improve.'

'It's a gateway to embarrassment and ridicule.'

'Unforeseen opportunities might come of it.'

Questions beget contemplation.

I'll admit to being slightly paranoid about posting my writing online...but it's not as though I've never done it. Back when I was a youngling, I tried my hand at writing Harry Potter fan fiction. Cringing? So am I. Despite my obvious butchering of the magical world and the characters in it, I was motivated to write more frequently.

At the end of '09, I joined the deviantART literary community, where Quill Café first came into existence. There, I posted several short stories and even slaughtered the odd poem. This was the first time I really put my writing out there for people to read and critique, though I'll admit I received more immediate and helpful advice when I was chatting with a group, all of us giving feedback on each other's work.

'Wait if you post something online, doesn't that mean it can't be published?'

Ah, the ultimate question of the aspiring professional. Yes, if you post your poem online then you can no longer give a publisher "first publishing rights" which are pretty darn necessary most of the time.

'Most of the time?'

Yes, while there is the odd writing competition that will allow you to submit previously published work, there are also a few circumstances where authors have uploaded their writing online, only to later have it professionally published.

These days the most famous example is the erotic 50 Shades trilogy. I've not read E.L. James' books - and have no desire to - but the story behind their publication is fascinating.

50 Shades began as a Twilight fan fiction, with the title 'Master of the Universe', posting it on fanfic sites and then later on the author's own website. Not only did she manage to have her story professionally published after already being available online but she'd already secured herself a massive following. Impressive.

James isn't the only one to prove that fan fiction isn't just an amateur flight of fancy. Emma Michaels informed me that the author Nancy Holder began writing fan fiction for Buffy, only later to have her work published in the Buffy novel series.

Another tale of a novel posted online that then gained professional representation is the soon-to-be-published 'Throne of Glass' by Sarah J. Maas. Unlike James, Maas' work was not fan fiction based but original, posted on Fiction Press. Like 50 Shades, it had a different title - 'Queen of Glass' - and gained an avid readership.

While these stories are inspirational, it is important to remember that they are the exception to the rule. Posting a complete work of fiction - such as a novel - online is something to take into great consideration if you want to be published professionally.

'What about posting your writing where only certain people can access it?'

This is an interesting thought. There are plenty of people who share their writing on LiveJournal, Blogger, Google Docs, Facebook but keep their settings private, choosing whom to show it to. This seems like an excellent scheme but for the more paranoid folks - like myself - it comes with the nagging question, 'Just how private is this?'

The answer to that boggles down to your comfort and trust in the security of your chosen platform and the people you're sharing with. It's akin to emailing your writing to someone else. Plenty of us will remember the fiasco that was 'Midnight Sun', where several chapters of Meyer's first draft were leaked onto the internet.

Ultimately, it boils down to your ambitions, priorities and how skittish you are. Posting your writing online can open you up to new opportunities and growth but it could also scar you. It's like posting nude shots of your baby on the internet. Sure, it seems cute now but it might come back to haunt the kid in future.

Do you post any of your writing online?

The Burden of Color

I have a confession, dear readers: I'm made out of chocolate.

Well, okay, not really. But if I were a character in a novel and the author took the time to describe my skin color, they'd probably use the word chocolate. Or maybe cinnamon... Anyway, my skin is brown, but saying "black" or "of African descent" would be too obvious, I guess, even though describing skin color with foods has become a handy cliché that makes certain people feel like racist cannibals.

Although we've certainly come a long way, race is still a touchy subject for a lot of people, and that's no different in the world of publishing. Statistically, people of color don't get published nearly as often as whites, and when they do, the book covers sometimes prominently feature Caucasians - even if the book itself does not. No, it's probably not a conscious decision on the part of the publishers or the book designers or whoever else determines what makes it to the shelves or not (for the low rates of published minority authors, anyway - the whitewashing of book covers is totally their fault), but it's still very hard to support the notion that people are color blind, even if we'd like to think that we are. 

Take me, for example. I read a lot of books in a whole lot of genres and styles. I have bought so many books over the years that I've probably demolished a whole forest, and because of that I've been well acquainted with the layouts of bookstores and libraries. And in a lot of them, there's usually an "African American literature" section, despite the fact that I've never seen an Asian American or a Native American shelf. Every time I see those signs, I cringe. It gives the impression that only black people want to read books about black people or by black authors when obviously that's not true. I mean, I've never tossed a book aside just because the main characters was white. Good writing is good writing.

But at the same time, when I read a book and find a minority character where I wasn't expecting one, it makes me happy, like I've found the needle in a haystack. Unless the author specifically says otherwise, I automatically assume all characters are white, and I think that's because after all my years of reading, 99.9% of the time that's true. So why would I consciously avoid the "chocolate" section, then? It's hard to say. Sometimes I think it's because I don't want to perpetuate the stupid segregation of books, but other times I think it's because I'd only wander into that area and read a chocolate book because I felt obligated to. I've had some people actually scold me for avoiding the African American literature section, because I should have some special loyalty to authors simply because they have a similar heritage.

It's a delicate balance, I suppose - choosing between the desire to read only what is interesting and the desire to make the effort to read something out of duty. But a book is a book is a book, and if I had my way, chocolate and vanilla and olive and cinnamon books would be in a big vat of sweetness for everyone to enjoy without having to do something so superficial as put a label on it. So yes, when someone recommends a great book that just happens to feature people of color, I'll be more than happy to give it a try. But it irritates me when someone hands me a book regardless of genre or quality and says, "Here - you're black, she's black, black power. You'll love it."

I'll never reject a book simply based on the color of its characters or its author - but I won't accept a book simply because of color, either. To do otherwise would be disrespectful to people of all food groups.

*Want help finding great books with diversity? Try Reading in Color. To help fight whitewashing on book covers, check out Readers Against Whitewashing on Facebook and view this comprehensive article at The Rumpus.

Shiny New Idea Syndrome

Have you ever found the perfect project to work on, only to become immersed in it for a while and then enamoured by something different?

My problem in a nut shell is that I am so antsy to get everything done that I get nothing done. That novel I told myself I would work on? Well, I have another one that’s itching to be written. That vow to work more on short stories? It’s just been pushed aside for a new –found interest in writing lyrics.

Some people who deal with this like to say that they are “A.D.D. with their writing.” However, unless you actually have attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactive disorder, that’s just all-round inaccurate. There is in fact a correct term for what I and many other writers suffer from: Shiny New Idea Syndrome or S.N.I.S.

Having S.N.I.S. is not a curse. In fact, I have come to realise that plenty of writers struggle with forming ideas at all. To be in a position where you have the luxury – nay, the temptation – to choose is a great one. The difficulty is in how you handle that situation.

It would be easy to say that you should forbid yourself from working on anything other than a certain project for a set period of time – and that does factor into the solution – but to keep yourself from writing something that begs to be written is a travesty. Thus, what is to be done?

1. Do set a period of time to work on a project. Get the first draft of a short story written in a week. Set aside a month to focus on a revision of your novel. Decide which time of day you can set aside to write and stick to it, making sure you butt does not leave that chair except for emergencies, e.g. natural disasters and toilet breaks.

2. Make sure you have a decent writing space. Sort out your desk and shut yourself away in your room for a while or go to the library and settle yourself there for an afternoon. Closing yourself off to write may seem like a lonely business but it is actually exhilarating to submerge yourself in the world of your writing. Did I mention productive?

3. If you have the urge to write something other than the project you have devoted your time to, do it. You don’t want to be kicking yourself later because you had an excellent idea for another story or song and you forbade yourself to write it down. That’s just nonsensical. However, once you are done with the urgency, put it aside for later and go back to the project at hand. Do not allow it to usurp all your attention.

Those are my three basic steps to overcoming S.N.I.S. They may not seem like much but they are the essential foundation to getting things done when you have a wandering mind.

Do you suffer from S.N.I.S. at all? What helps you to stick with one project until the end?

Getting Paid to Read Novels

...That's basically what an editor at a publishing company does. Sounds like a cushy job, no? When I think of it even now, it makes me foam at the mouth. Getting paid a salary so I can sit at my desk and read fiction all day? Waitwhat? That sounds like it should be illegal or something, like the moment you walk into the bank to cash your first paycheck, the Fun Police will jump out, tackle you to the ground and beat you with a nightstick while that guy from Cheaters crouches over you and says, "you didn't think adult life would be that easy, did you?"

But apparently there actually are people who go to work every day and enjoy it! Fancy that! And for writers and book lovers all across the world, a career as an editor just might be that job.

But wait, you say. Surely there's some sort of catch. Well, of course there is. You have to consider the fact that just because you're getting paid to read doesn't mean you'll necessary enjoy all of it. Some editors work in acquisitions, which means they actively pursue new authors and books to represent; that of course means you'll have to become well acquainted with the slush pile and all the terrible things it tends to attract, like vapid characters and the absence of plot.

That also means you'll need good social skills - you'll be expected to correspond with authors throughout the process of publishing their books, after all. That alone may be enough to discourage some introverts who fantasize about making money from home while never laying eyes on another person (save those weekly trips to the grocery store), but at the same time you'll be dealing with "writerly" people, and all of us know how lovely fellow book lovers tend to be.

Another then there's the copy editor - the one who meticulously combs the manuscripts for punctuation, grammar, and consistency. Those who failed high school English and still clench their fists at the mention of gerunds might not want to tread here... heck, I enjoy the work and I still grit my teeth every now and then, because let's face it, there are a lot of writers who don't give a crap about learning proper grammar. But as a copy editor you don't have that luxury - you have to know what's proper and know how to fix what's not. Then there's the conflict - see, writers generally don't like to be edited. It implies that they don't know how to write. You have to expect that and be willing to fight for the changes you make, but at the same time, you have to pick your battles wisely. Even though you deal primarily with books, you also deal with the people behind the books, so making enemies is probably not a good way to launch a long and stellar career.

Keep in mind that the copy editor and acquisition editor at a publishing company could be the same person; in other words, the terms aren't exclusive. Bigger companies may employ multiple people with the same job description, or employees might be expected to run errands or tackle other responsibilities during down time, or you might be hired on a freelance basis. That means taking the initiative to go beyond what is expected of you, and getting a lot of real-world experience. One advantage of being an editor - your job can't be replaced by a computer. In a high-tech world where jobs disappear into absurdity daily, that is a HUGE perk.

But being an editor isn't a cakewalk - the awesome things in life never are.

Aspiring Writer v.s. Aspiring Author

Hello, my name is Keri Payton and I am an aspiring author. Right now, I’m also an aspiring writer.

Wait, what’s the difference?

An aspiring writer is someone who aspires to write. An aspiring author is someone who aspires to be published.

Uhh...

Yes, they seem quite interchangeable. However, not everyone who writes wants to do it for a profession. Also, not everyone who aspires to write is, well, writing. The huge not-so-secret to being a writer is that writers…need to write. Astonishing, I know.

Whenever I see the term “aspiring writer” I cringe a little because if you aspire to be a writer, all you need to do is write. That is easier said than done. I’m suffering through a bout of sickness and procrastination at the moment. Or is procrastination my true sickness?

Not everyone wants to be a published author and that’s fine. However, being an aspiring writer for a prolonged period of time is unacceptable. It’s too easy to excuse ourselves and get caught up in our heads, either swimming in the ideal of what we wish to create or holding ourselves back because we fear we will not spill golden ink onto the page.

Aspiring writer, aspiring author, ink slinger, wordsmith… Which are you?

SilverFin by Charlie Higson

'Don't ever be a spy.'

James Bond is meant to be spending his holidays spending time with his aunt and ailing uncle - but his school days at Eton aren't easy to leave him. School bully George Hellebore lives nearby, along with his father, Lord Randolph Hellebore.

When a young boy disappears after fishing on Hellebore's land, James teams up with the honourable English bloke, Red. The two of them set out to discover what happened to the boy and what secrets Hellebore is operating.

Can James and Red uncover the truth? Something sinister is afoot.

I listened to this on audio and the only reason I did was because it was narrated by Nathaniel Parker. That being said, it was a bloody good book.

I was caught by the writing from the start. Like a fish hook caught in the skin, it is an uncomfortable ride. Plenty of action and suspense kept me riveted throughout, along with some excellent characterisation.

There are so many moments in 'SilverFin' where Higson could have taken the smooth and easy route (copped out) but this was some stunning plot work. He really knew how to grate the reader (or in my case, listener) and push the limits, always twisting things in ways I didn't expect.

I'll admit to being unfamiliar with the character of James Bond. I haven't read any of the books and I've scarcely seen any of the film adaptations. He's such a quintessential figure and thus in need of being well handled. While I can't compare (I shall have to look into reading some authentic Bond) Higson's skill is apparent.

Regardless of whether he is a true portrayal of the man Fleming wrote, Higson's Young Bond is a magnetic character. He's intuitive and brave, without being obnoxious or a ray of perfection. You'd think it would be hard to connect with this kid because it's obvious Higson couldn't off him. In spite of that, I still felt on edge with the suspense of the situations he was getting himself into.

George was a far more layered character than I anticipated. He had depth and a sympathetic nature without any of that "Oh, I'm a good boy sugar plum fairy in disguise" schtick. I always appreciate authors who don't screw you over with that front.

I'm disappointed to see that Parker only narrated the first three Young Bond novels, though he stuck around longer than with the Alex Rider books. On that note, those who have read and liked Horowitz's 'Stormbreaker' will certainly not want to miss out on 'SilverFin.'

Look forward to listening to the sequel, 'Blood Fever.'

In accordance with the FTC, Quill Café would like to disclose that the reviewer bought this book. The opinions expressed are hers alone and no monetary compensation was offered to her by the author or publisher. Cover art is copyright of Puffin and is used solely as an aide to the review.

The Imperfect are Shallow

What's that age old lesson? Oh yes, "Beauty is found within." No idea who came up with that schtick. I won't say it isn't true but I have noticed some hypocritical applications of it in fiction.

I've read enough books and seen enough television to know that you don't have to be the coolest or most attractive guy or girl to get the hot and popular guy or girl...but the guy or girl you want must be gorgeous. Yes, literature has shown me that I should accept my own imperfections but still idealize the physicality of men.

Ever seen a movie about a dorky but charming guy who ended up with a super fox? How 'bout a book where the heroine wasn't the prettiest but still caught the attentions of the boy with the gorgeous eyes and dimpled smile? The stunning double standards of this constant premise is a huge slap in the face. Classically attractive characters aren't shallow, characters with imperfect physical features are.

Let's give ourselves a round of applause for making readers feel better about the way they look and their own awkwardness, by living through quirky protagonists...and objectifying literary love interests everywhere.

Can anyone recommend me a book where Nervous Nate ends up with Blemished Bruce or Athletically-Challenged Anne? I can't be the only one who has noticed this paradigm.

You Are Required to Read This

There were plenty of books over the years that I was required to study for school. When I was young, they were read to my class by the teacher. When I was older, we were assigned certain chapters to read or just told to get stuck in and finish it ASAP. Great.

I never had a problem with being read to in class. Even if it was boring, it was equal to the days of Biology when the teacher would blow the dust off the VCR, turn off the lights and show us a film on a block television residing on a wheelie cart about insects . All I had to do was sit there with my eyes glazing over. It - was - awesome. No, what I had a problem with was what came after.

Tearing books apart chunk by chunk is fine (well, I'm not keen on it in the literal sense) but not when you're being told what to analyse. To me, it's akin to saying, 'Look at this beautiful rabbit; the way it twitches and leaps and lives. Glorious! Now, cut it open and we'll see how its innards work.' Isn't that appealing?

When I wrote about adapting books into films I mentioned how books I love being made into movies makes me nervous...but books I thought were so-so I'm keen to see as a flick. I feel the same way about studying books in school. I don't like the idea of children being forced to tear open a book I love and dissect it until the very thought of it repels them.

I'm one of those people who needs to be self-motivated. If someone tells me to do something, I switch off. I've never had to dissect a book or poem or play in school that I then went on to love because of that experience. If I read something in class and we discussed it briefly, there was a chance. Cutting it apart and being told what it meant? No. I'm sorry, 'Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening' but...I hate you.

Do you know what would be great for kids to analyse? Bad books and why they suck. Of course, "bad" buckles down to opinion but so does the reverse. Are teachers open to students talking about why they think certain books suck? Sure, it might just sound like the premise for pupils to be rebellious and rude but I wish I had learned and been able to discuss what makes writing better and worse past grammar. Particularly since my grammatical skills still aren't stellar.

In conclusion, I'd like to know what texts you were introduced to through schooling that you did come to love. Please share!