The Warrior Heir by Cinda Williams Chima

Jack seems to be a normal boy in a small town in Ohio. Little does he know that he is from a long, long line of wizards and warriors called the Weir who have been feuding since the days of pre-Tudor England. After unearthing a legendary sword from an ancestor's grave, Jack is apprenticed to Leander Hastings so he can learn how to defend himself from Weir who will, no doubt, try to kill him. When these plans don't turn out as expected, Jack must participate in an ancient battle to save the day.

On the surface, The Warrior Heir seems like just another young adult fantasy novel that was published to capitalize on the genre's recent popularity. The novel has many elements of other, popular young adult novels: apprenticeships, young heroes, and fantastic elements intertwined with the real world. Despite that, The Warrior Heir is an exciting, well-written adventure that will keep you flipping pages.

Overall, I was pleasantly surprised by this book. When I started reading it, I was a little confused, and I noticed it has a great deal in common with the Percy Jackson series, yet it didn't take long for these worries to subside and for me to get hooked. The Warrior Heir is a solid debut novel with amazing craftsmanship. It's a very easy read and moves at a good pace. The details and characters may be somewhat lacking, especially compared to Percy Jackson, but the premise was intriguing and will definitely delight any young fantasy lover.

I most enjoyed the fact that the novel based its mythology around an event that actually took place in history: the British War of the Roses, where the Lancasters (Red Roses) fought the Yorks (White Roses) for control of the English throne. I'm a complete Tudor/British history nerd, so I was drooling over the historic discussion of the war and how it is still being fought between the Red and White Roses.

Even though Chima's Warrior Heir isn't perfect, it's great for a light read between other novels. Chima seems like the kind of author who has great progression with every novel she writes.

The Shack by William P. Young

The Christian community today desperately needs a literary talent to convey the Christian faith in a compelling way such as C. S. Lewis or John Bunyan did for previous generations. Unfortunately Wm. Paul Young is not that man. I would normally spend more time discussing the literary quality, but I would rather focus on the theological content. Unfortunately from that standpoint the book is simply dreadful - and on so many levels that it is difficult to know where to begin.

What Young attempts is rather audacious. He presumes to put words in the mouth of God - not mere snippets that relate commonly accepted proverbial truths but whole chapters of dialogue in which God tries enlighten a modern day Job (whose name is Mack) who has experienced an awful tragedy (his young daughter has been abducted and murdered by a sexual predator) regarding the mysterious ways of God. In short, Young attempts to answer Job-like questions - something God Himself refused to do for Job in the Bible - by putting his own speculations into the book's dialogue as Mack has weekend long encounter with God in the very shack where his daughter was murdered.

The result is rather predictable and disappointing. The god of The Shack looks far more like a wish-fulfillment of a postmodern western intellectual than the God revealed in the pages of the Bible. Politically correct sensitivities are duly observed as the trinity revealed in the Shack appears to Mack as `Papa,' a "large beaming African American woman," (p. 82) `Jesus' a Jewish carpenter and `Sarayu' a spirit-like Asian female. Other left wing sensitivities emerge. `Papa' is clearly anti-gun holding Mack's at arm's length between two fingers while disposing of it (pp. 84, 88) and religiously active patriotic Christians are portrayed as sincere but sadly misguided (p. 181). Careful readers will note too that `Jesus' informs Mack that "Marriage is not an institution. It is a relationship.... I don't create institutions; that's an occupation for those who want to play God." (p. 179) Of course, if marriage is not an institution, then we are not bound by the rules of the one who instituted it and if relationship is its essence then logically it would seem that any type of relationship would qualify. Whether he intended it or not, Young's depiction lends itself to our culture's attempt to redefine marriage. Whatever else may be said of the god of The Shack, she is up to date - which also means that she will soon be out of date.

More importantly, Sarayu, in true postmodern fashion, is careful to inform Mack that relationships are never about exercising the will to power over others (p. 106). Indeed, `Papa' is reticent to impose her will on anyone, repeatedly insisting to Mack that he is free to do whatever he likes (pp. 89,182) and that she will proceed on his "terms and time." (p. 83) In fact, The Shack god takes offense when Mack asks what she expects of him (p. 201). The idea that God might have expectations is even treated as an insult. If this is the same God who spoke through the Old Testament prophets (who had just a few expectations of his people and let them know it) or of the Apostles (who commanded all men everywhere to repent in Acts 17:30) then he has undergone a radical transformation over the centuries. The Shack `Jesus' goes so far as to inform Mack that it would be contrary to love if he were to force his will on him (p. 145) - again, a stark contrast to the Jesus of the Gospels who had no such qualms saying, "If you love me you will obey what I command." (John 14:15) In fact, biblical love is defined bluntly in terms of obedience. "This is love for God: to obey his commands" (I John 5:3; cf I John 2:3-5). But Sarayu insists that Mack has no rules to follow, is under no law and has no responsibility or expectations (p. 203). In fact, she assures Mack that "I've never placed an expectation on you or anyone else... And beyond that, because I have no expectations, you never disappoint me." (p. 206) Such an all-affirming god may soothe the self-esteem of postmoderns but she bears little resemblance to the God who spoke through Jeremiah or John the Baptist.

It is true that the New Testament does tell us that we are no longer under the Law of Moses, but it also insists that we are "not free from God's law but (are) under Christ's law." (I Cor. 9:21) And while it is certainly true that we cannot earn God's favor by keeping rules, it is simply false to say that God has no rules or expectations of His people. A much more accurate representation is to say that when we are transformed by God's grace, we become a people who desire to do his will, his commands are no longer `burdensome" (I John 5:3) because His law is "written on our hearts." (Jer. 31:33) This kind of careless theology is dangerous in a culture that is all too eager to cast off any and all restraints and justify its autonomy.

It should not surprise us then to find that `hierarchy' and `authority' are bad words to the god of The Shack. "Once you have a hierarchy you need rules to protect and administer it, and then you need law and enforcement of the rules, and you end up with some kind of chain of command or a system of order that destroys relationship rather than promotes it. You rarely see or experience relationship apart from power. Hierarchy imposes laws and rules and you end up missing the wonder of relationship that we intended for you." So the `Jesus' of The Shack informs us (pp. 122-3). But they are words that are hard to reconcile with the real Jesus of the Bible who was not embarrassed to speak in hierarchical terms of his relationship with the Father: "the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father commands." (John 14:31) Unlike the biblical Trinity (I Cor. 11:3), there is no hierarchy among the members of The Shack's trinity who find such a concept incomprehensible (pp. 121-122, 124). In a perfect world, we are told, "there would be no need for hierarchy." (p. 124) Again, this flies in the face of the biblical depiction of the perfect world God created in the garden of Eden where He commanded Adam and Eve not to take of the fruit of the tree of life. In fact, the fall in Scripture is portrayed as a violation of the hierarchical order that God had established. And paradise in Scripture is only restored when "every knee will bow and ever tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." (Phil. 2:10-11) It all sounds rather `hierarchical' to me.

This is no small error but one that goes to the very heart of true biblical faith. Salvation occurs when the heart of an individual is brought back into loving submission to its proper Master. C.S. Lewis captured the beauty of that concept well when he said that "Equality is a quantitative term and therefore love often knows nothing of it. Authority exercised with humility and obedience accepted with delight are the very lines along which our spirits live." (Weight of Glory, p. 170) But The Shack is so enamored with postmodern fads that it cannot perceive even the most basic spiritual realities. Significantly, the biblical metaphors for God are all authority figures to whom submission is appropriate and necessary: Father, Shepherd, King, Judge, etc. It is certainly not coincidental that the god of the Shack is portrayed in far more effeminate terms.

Since authority is jettisoned as unworthy of God, the concept of sin likewise is all but absent. How can we violate the will of a God who has no expectations and is never disappointed? The book speaks much of `brokenness' and of `horrendous and destructive choices' (p. 190) but little about human rebellion and wickedness - even though the story revolves around a horrific crime. The Bible tells us plainly that God "hates" and "abhors" wicked men and judges them accordingly (Ps 5:5-6; 11:5-6; Prov. 3:32-33). Sinners may come to experience the grace of God, but not because they are lovable but in spite of the fact that they are not, because of the sheer greatness of God's love, not our inherent value or worth (II Kings 17:15). Only one human has ever been truly worthy of God's love and that is Jesus. God's grace is dispensed freely to unworthy sinners only by virtue of the fact that they are in the Beloved One (Eph 1:6). But the god of the Shack repeatedly informs Mack that she is `especially fond of' everyone (pp. 118-119) and that as humans, we are "deserving of respect for what you inherently are..." (p. 190) "Guilt'll never help you find freedom in me" she tells Mack (p. 187) nor does she "do humiliation, or guilt, or condemnation." (p. 223) She certainly doesn't "need to punish people for sin" (p. 120 - the only reference to sin that I can remember in the book). In contrast, the God of the Bible, though "slow to anger...will not leave the guilty unpunished." (Nahum 1:3) He is a god who "will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction...." (II Thess. 1:8-9)

Since sin is marginalized, the atoning work of Christ is downplayed as well. We are informed significantly by `Papa' that when Christ cried out on the cross `My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' he was actually never forsaken at all. He only "felt" abandoned. (p. 96) This subtly drains the cross of its meaning. It implies that Jesus was not actually taking the punishment for our sin which truly does alienate us from God and required that the Father turn His back on the Savior as He bore that sin on the cross. Instead, the meaning of the cross is reduced to Christ's own subjective spiritual growth - "He found his way through it to put himself completely in my hands. Oh what a moment that was!" says `Papa' (p. 96). When Mack asks specifically what the significance of Christ's death is, `Papa's' explanation says nothing of sin, or of God's wrath (Rom 1:18; Eph 2:3), or of the shedding of blood as an atonement in our place (pp. 191-193). The discussion predictably emphasizes reconciliation since that has to do with relationship and relationship is where its at among postmoderns. But there is no indication that our alienation is due to our real guilt - our violation of God's Law - i.e. - His expectations of us. The impression we get is that reconciliation is needed not because the holiness of God has been offended but because Mack is "really scared of emotions." (p. 192) In other words the barrier to relationship is not his guilt, but his own psychological frailty and fear that keeps himself from opening himself up to God's love.

Since sin and judgment are underplayed, conversion is not very important to the `Jesus' of The Shack either. Those who love Christ, we are told, come from every religious system that exists including Buddhists, Mormons and Muslims and `Jesus' has "no desire to make them Christian" though he does "want to join them in their transformation into sons and daughters of my Papa, into brothers and sisters, into my beloved." (p. 182) We are not told how to reconcile these seemingly contradictory statements. At one point, Sophia, a personification of wisdom whom Mack encounters, seems to imply that even the murderer of Mack's daughter is a child of God and exempt from judgment (pp. 161-2). Admittedly, the dialogue is somewhat cryptic but it implies that God is above condemning sinners. This is certainly a far cry from the clarity of Scripture which warns not to be deceived into thinking that the wicked will inherit the kingdom of God (I Cor 6:9). Sophia's words at best open us up to just that sort of deception.

In short, the god of The Shack is a god that is very comfortable and very human (even having accidents in the kitchen!) - Mack feels right at home in their company from the start. In contrast, every human-divine encounter recorded in the Bible leaves the human recipient trembling in awesome fear. This alone should alert the reader that something is seriously amiss in Young's presentation.

I have just scratched the surface regarding the errors that I encountered in this book but this review is too long already. I have tried to limit myself to the most egregious offenses. Time and space forbid me from addressing numerous problems with regard to his portrayal of the Trinity and the incarnation. Whatever merits the book may have are clearly overshadowed by these serious deficiencies.

Young's aim in trying to lead the reader into an encounter with the living God is admirable. And his portrayal is no doubt appealing to people of our generation. Many hearts will be stirred by his sympathetic identification with those suffering from pain and doubts arising from tragedy. But unfortunately the god that Mack meets in The Shack is not the God of the Bible. They are two very different gods and in the end we are forced to choose whether we will submit to the authority of the one true God on His terms as expressed in the very first of the ten commandments: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex 20:3) or cast our lot with appealing figment of Young's imagination.

The Temptation of the Night Jasmine by Lauren Willig

Inevitably in any popular series, sooner or later the writing gets stale- character arcs become unbelievable, plots are rehashed, or the reader can simply feel the writer's own weariness for the once beloved story lines. Not so for Lauren Willig! If anything, The Temptation of the Night Jasmine is the strongest book in the Pink Carnation series so far.

Framed once again by the research and relationship trials of graduate student Eloise Kelly, Night Jasmine opens after Eloise and her new beau Colin have been together for three months. A week long romantic getaway to Colin's home in Surrey (not to mention his library's inexhaustible cache of historical archives) leads Eloise to a new discovery in her study of the aristocratic spy, the Pink Carnation- a plot involving French spies (naturally), the betrayal of a king, and thee infamous Hellfire club.

Enter lady Charlotte Landsdowne and Robert, the Duke of Dovedale, the real stars of this carnation installment. Robert, newly home from a decade long stint in India, is on the trail of his mentor's murderer, but is unprepared for both the attraction he feels for the bookish Charlotte (a very, very distant cousin) and the very real forces at work in his friend's death.

Like the other Pink Carnation books, the mystery here is well plotted out and the excitement level high enough to keep the pages flying well into the night. The true strength lies within the romance of Robert and Charlotte, however. Both characters show very strong growth over the course of the book: Charlotte must deal with the realization that life is not quite like it is in books (which can be a good thing), and Robert has to grapple with not only his own dubious past, but that of his father. As you would expect, a happy ending lies in wait for these two, but not without a few bumps along the way. Even more so than past books, the reader will truly find themselves rooting for these two.

So, the verdict- if you loved the previous Pink Carnation books, definitely pick up The Temptation of the Night Jasmine! You will not regret it. If you're new to the series, I recommend starting at the beginning (with The Secret History of the Pink Carnation) so you'll be fully in the loop when secondary characters appear as well as up to speed on the framing romance of Colin and Eloise.

Magician: Apprentice by Raymond E. Feist

It has been said that 'there are no more original ideas being formulated in the world,' and I feel this in a sense may be true. It is easy to see the unorginality in the film industry with companies continually 'remaking' or 'remastering' old classic movies. BUT, I do not believe this applies to Fiest's books.

David Gemmell, in an author's interview, once stated that he felt his fans deserved something more than the traditional elves and goblins. While I make no attempt to disparage Gemmell's work, occasionally one feels the need for such stories. Indeed, many authors seem to think as Gemmell does, that elves and goblins are the rule and books of the more realistic type are the exception. In trying to prevent a stereotype of fantasy work, these authors have overcompensated, leaving genuine, simple, Tolkeinesque fantasy in a minority. The key to Feist's success is that he manages to create a realistic world in the style of this stereotype. As he says himself in the Foreward to the revised edition, all he set out to do with Magician: Apprentice was to create a 'ripping good yarn,' and this he does.

The story itself is both simple and complex. On one level the town of Crydee, on the edge of the kingdom of isles, is deemed an ideal spot for invasion by aliens who can move from planet to planet by virtue of magical rifts. Because this is a frontier town it is near settlements of elves and dwarves, thus bringing those into the fray. However, this book, as indeed the entire series, seems to pan out like a soap opera, as we become familiar with the lives of a whole range of minor and major characters. Like a good soap opera (if that's not a dichotomy), Feist is not afraid to kill off major characters, no matter how popular. Like The Godfather, the pace of Magician: Apprentice is "legato rather than staccato," and this gives Feist the luxury of demonstrating his characters rather than having to explain them. Indeed, many fantasy novels become so obsessed with a 'higher purpose' that often they lose a sense of the personalities involved, whereas Feist gives views ranging from the lowliest peasant to the king.

In many ways this novel is microcosm of the series that was to follow it. The convuluted plot, the importance attached to characters, even if they are engaged elsewhere away from the main plotline.

But the novel is not perfect. Feist can be heavy handed, making explicit that which should be implicit. For instance, characters frequently call on 'Ruthia,' and on each occasion Feist feels the need to identify her as the goddess of luck, when this is quite clear from thecontext.

Nonetheless, this is without doubt on excellent book, and one which I would highly recommend.

Bringing Down the House by Ben Mezrich

Bringing Down the House by Ben mezrich is just one of those books; when you read the first few pages, you get hooked. It starts with Kevin, the main character, in a casino playing blackjack. He looks for his spotter and catches a signal. The spotter puts her hand through her hair, and this means one thing: get out of the casino, and fast. The book soon slows down, and starts at the beginning. After he gives all the background knowledge, Mezrich gets into all kinds of different plots and subplots. The main plot is obviously, how long they can last in Vegas without being caught, but a very intriguing subplot is the constant brewing of anger among kevin against Fisher and Martinez. Mezrich smoothly transfers his writing from an exciting win of $10,000, to a club at the Palms. It's this smooth writing style that makes the book seem so life-like. Mezrich portrays himself in the book and one of Kevin's friends and just wanting to get information to write this book. As he pops in every few chapters, all the people he interviewed thought his research was to write another card-counting book. It was, but not as they expected. I believe this part of the book is important because it shows how Mezrich tried to create a different book. He not only made the book entertaining, but he showed the reality of it. He showed that you should never dig yourself too deep, and that even the best get taken down. There was a slight weakness to the book. The book is repetitive. Usually a little repetitiveness is good; this just had a little too much. Overall it was a brilliantly written, twisty plotted book.

P.S., I Love You by Cecelia Ahern

This debut novel by Cecelia Ahern has won the hearts of thousands across the world and has earned this young author a few awards and a lot of recognition. It has been turned into a film and to be perfectly honest, this is one of the only books I have read where I prefer the film, having read the book once, watched the film...well, never mind how many times! Now I am going to compare the book and the movie to get my point across with this review as I seem to be one of the only people to loathe this book with a passion, and I want to give valid reasons rather just state and not elaborate.

After watching this film, I eagerly purchased the book, excited beyond belief that I would get more time with some beautiful people that had such an impact on my emotional state, and shocked that I had not found these friends earlier...man was I wrong. P.S., I Love You follows the story of Gerry and Holly...well, actually just Holly. Supposedly soul mates, it follows Holly in the aftermath of Gerry's sudden and shocking death and how he tries to help her through her grief by sending her letters, and how she attempts to rebuild her life and move on. The only reason I finished this book was because I wanted to see Gerry and thought that he would be the redeeming feature and sadly he makes an appearance only twice in this book. You do feel the impact of his sad death throughout, but actual evidence of the love story is lacking. You are just expected to believe that they were madly in love without any real proof that they were. The more I read, the more whiny Holly became and to be perfectly honest by the end of the book, I was so angry and disappointed with her that I felt it was no wonder Gerry died- I could hardly stand her and I at least got to get away from her when I wanted to. Horrible to say, but it's the truth.

Having said all that, the writing was good, but not great, and you can tell that this is the author's first novel. Some plot lines I felt were not necessary and detracted from the main point she was trying to make. Like I said, Holly whined for most of the book and didn't seem to want to try and help herself. Some of the events did not make sense to me, some of the plots were irrelevant, and most of the characters were annoying. The only character I found myself liking was Holly's elder brother (who we are not really supposed to like 'til the end) and the only time the book grabbed my attention and seemed to improve was two-thirds of the way through and was a minor storyline which only lasted for a few pages. With the exception of Holly's brothers, the characters all felt two dimensional and lacked depth and definition. Disappointing.

In the movie, you get to see before and after life with Gerry and life without, and it is linked in such a way that you are left wanting more. The movie as they go through the trials and tribulations of life. The script writers got rid of a lot of stuff that didn't help the story and edited where necessary (i.e. Holly's million siblings in the book were narrowed down to one) and the movie actually made sense of her thoughts and actions (i.e. in the book, Holly's parents are together but in the movie her insecurities are answered because her father had run off). To me, this made perfect sense. I also really loved Gerry. He is dead from the first few minutes but you can clearly see why they got together and their love is obvious. You can see how she progresses emotionally as Gerry's anniversary approaches and it is done in such a light and comical way that as much as I wanted to cry throughout most of the movie, I found myself laughing at their antics and rejoicing in their love. I also felt that the author could not have liked Holly very much, and by that I mean that an awful lot of bad stuff happened to the poor kid just when life for her was starting to improve and then we would be thrust back into the doom and gloom.

In summary, I found the book to be dull and lifeless in comparison with the movie which struck a chord with me and clearly displayed the emotions that the book should have evoked. The story had so much promise and such potential that i was more than disappointed with it, and actually found myself editing and changing aspects of the book that I did not like in my head whilst I trudged through. I get that her husband just died, I get that she is in a lot of pain and I felt sorry for her, I really did--what an awful situation and one I hope never to go through, but really, why would I want to read an entire book about this with no hope of a happy ending? It's just miserable, really.

I am surprised I finished it, and surprised that she found a publisher. I think she should fire her editors personally because they did her no favors allowing her to publish what feel like a first draft. Having said that, I do wonder if getting published was really because of her talent or in fact because her dad was/is the Irish Prime Minister, and if her success is because she genuinely deserves it or she is riding on her father's coat-tails. Whatever the reason, I don't think I will be reading her books again.

Do yourself a favor, watch the movie. Or if you must read the book, read it and don't watch the movie. Guaranteed, you will only like one and not the other. I have not heard of anyone who liked both. At least the movie can be watched and finished within two hours.

The Call of the Wild by Jack London

Jack London's The Call of the Wild is much more than what could be considered a children's book. It is a unique and harsh depiction of the bitter realities of life in the Yukon during the days of the gold rush. Told from the perspective of the half-wolf Buck, The Call of the Wild allows readers to intimately experience the trials of life in the wild.

The relativity short novel, around ninety pages, begins with the kidnapping of Buck from a well-to-do family in Southern California and his subsequent arrival in Oregon and final move into Alaska as he is sold and re-sold. Buck initially misses his old life, but as he quickly learns the laws that make up his new world he becomes a fast learner and revels in the daily warfare and struggle for survival. He soon becomes on of the most legendary sled dogs in the region, drawing admiring and jealous looks from anyone who doesn't own him. While Buck is faithful to his final owner, John Thornton, to the very last, he cannot resist the call to join his wolf brothers in the wild.

London's unique premise of telling the story from Buck's point of view offers a remarkably different reading experience from other books that offer a similar perspective- perhaps since this is not just a children's book. There are harsh and bitter realities presented in The Call of the Wild that make it much more of an adult book. London's writing is journalistic at times, simple and straight-forward, mixed with a surprisingly lyrical bent at other times. It is an interesting combination that works well for the story that is being told.