How to use this Page

Anne of Windy Poplars. L.M. Montgomery. 1936. 288 pages. [Source: Bought]

First sentence:  DEAREST: Isn't that an address! Did you ever hear anything so delicious? Windy Poplars is the name of my new home and I love it. I also love Spook's Lane, which has no legal existence. It should be Trent Street but it is never called Trent Street except on the rare occasions when it is mentioned in the Weekly Courier . . . and then people look at each other and say, 'Where on earth is that?' Spook's Lane it is . . . although for what reason I cannot tell you. I have already asked Rebecca Dew about it, but all she can say is that it has always been Spook's Lane and there was some old yarn years ago of its being haunted. But she has never seen anything worse-looking than herself in it. 

Premise/plot: Anne and Gilbert are engaged at last! But Gilbert still has three years of school to go, and, so Anne finds herself a job as principal of a school in Summerside. Anne of Windy Poplars gives us an intimate look at those three years. Much of the book provides glimpses into the letters Anne writes Gilbert. But there are some traditional chapters as well.

My thoughts: Anne of Windy Poplars is such a delightful (late) addition to the Anne series by L.M. Montgomery. I love, love, love it. Even if Gilbert himself is absent. (We only see her letters to him, never his letters to her.)

This book showcases what Montgomery does BEST: bring her characters to life. It doesn't seem to matter if we spend two paragraphs with a character or two chapters. I CARE about every character she introduces.

Some of the characters we meet in this one: Aunt Kate, Aunt Chatty, Rebecca Dew, Dusty Miller (cats count as characters, right?!), Little Elizabeth, Nora Nelson, Jim Wilcox, Esme Taylor, Dr. Lennox Carter, Cyrus Taylor, Teddy Armstrong, Lewis Allen, Katherine Brooke, Mrs. Adoniram Gibson and Pauline, Cousin Ernestine Bugle, Jarvis Morrow, Dovie Westcott, Frank Westcott.



© 2016 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Add a Comment

Death in the Tunnel. Miles Burton. 1936/2016. Poisoned Pen Press. 232 pages. [Source: Review copy]

Though I may not have loved, loved, loved Death in the Tunnel by Miles Burton, I did find it a thoroughly enjoyable read. The murder in this murder mystery happens early on--in the first few page. And this murder occurs on a train--in a train tunnel. Two men set about solving this mystery, Desmond Merrion (who has his own series, this is #13) and Inspector Arnold (from Scotland Yard). The victim is a businessman, Sir Wilfred Saxonby. The murder was made to look like a suicide--a gun with the victim's initials are found in his compartment. Nothing was stolen from his body, from his wallet. His compartment was locked. But there are several reasons why this suicide theory doesn't sit right with Merrion and Arnold. Can they sift through the dozens of clues to find the murderer? Can they agree upon a believable motive for the crime?

Death in the Tunnel is certainly not a character-driven novel. I would say that character development is kept to a bare minimum. But the abundance of clues and the way that they are shared with readers, keeps one reading to see who did it.

The novel was first published in 1936. It has recently been republished. I am glad to see more golden-age mystery novels being brought back into print. This is one of my favorite genres.

© 2016 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Add a Comment

The Case of the Stuttering Bishop. (Perry Mason #9) Erle Stanley Gardner. 1936. 189 pages. [Source: Bought]

I love watching Perry Mason. I do. It's one of my favorite shows. Do I love reading about Perry Mason as much as watching Perry Mason? Maybe not quite as much. But I certainly enjoy it. I find them easy and satisfying. The Case of the Stuttering Bishop is one of the better ones I've read. It was adapted for the show's second season--which explains why it felt so very familiar while I was reading it.

The book opens with a bishop going to Perry Mason for advice. What Perry and Della find most disturbing about this visit is the fact that this bishop from Australia stutters. His stuttering leads them to believe that he may not be who he claims to be, that the whole case he's presented them with may be filled with lies. Curious they are, no doubt, which is why they get Paul Drake on the case.

Clues come out with each chapter, the story unfolds bit by bit. Perry Mason, Della, and Paul work together to try to find out the real story, to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth. I won't go into any of the details or specifics here. Details in reviews spoil mysteries often.

If you enjoy watching Perry Mason, chances are you'll enjoy reading this one.


© 2015 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Add a Comment

Winterbound. Margery Williams Bianco. 1936/2014. Dover. 234 pages. [Source: Bought]

Did I love Winterbound the same way I loved Margery Williams' Velveteen Rabbit. NO! I want to be honest about that from the start. Winterbound is not nearly as charming and lovely and wonderful as The Velveteen Rabbit. But with the right expectations, Winterbound could work for some readers.

Winterbound is about four siblings living on their own in a rented house in rural New England with both parents away. The father is an archaeologist,  if I'm remembering correctly. He'll be gone for a year or two. The mother's absence is more sudden. She goes to take care of a sick relative in New Mexico.  The family--three girls, one boy--were raised in the city. This is their first time 'experiencing' country life. This is also their first time being independent. The two oldest are nearly-grown--upper teens. Kay. Garry (short for Margaret). Caroline. Martin.

Is the book about anything? Yes and no.

It is a coming-of-age story for both Kay and Garry, in a way. Both are learning who they are as individuals: what they like, love, want, need, etc. Both are thinking ahead, thinking about the future: who they want to be, what they want their lives to look like, how they plan to earn money, etc. I think it's good to approach this one as an "Am I ready to be an adult?" book.

It is a book about family and friendship. All of the siblings make friends within the community. And, of course, there's always their relationships with each other. The sections when they're spending time with their best friends are always enjoyable. Plenty of storytelling.

It is a book about rural life, seasons, and nature. When you see the title don't think LONG WINTER, that isn't fair to this book at all. This book isn't so much about winter, as it is about all the seasons. Yes, the four face a difficult week or two when they're isolated because of too much snowfall, a blizzard perhaps. But that's just a tiny part of the book as a whole. It's just as much about all four seasons.

It is a slower-paced book, I admit. Not every book has to be action-packed and full of adventure and drama. But I wouldn't say that nothing happens. The focus is on the ordinary.

© 2015 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Add a Comment

The Talisman Ring. Georgette Heyer. 1936/2009. Sourcebooks. 316 pages.

It can be easy to forget just how much you enjoyed a particular Heyer romance when you've read so many. The Talisman Ring is certainly enjoyable and quite satisfying...even if it doesn't necessarily stay as fresh in one's memory as being a favorite-favorite. I enjoyed the two romances in this one. But above all, I enjoyed the dramatic, suspenseful mystery! It reminded me a bit of the promise of Northanger Abbey, except in this case, there was actually plenty of adventure and danger and mystery!

One of the heroines, Eustacie, is quite fun because she is so over-the-top silly and dramatic. She CRAVES romantic adventures and dangers--the stuff of novels. While she's willing to settle, to a certain degree, for a marriage of convenience, she really, truly wants a soul mate just as imaginative and expressive as she is. She wants to be made much of, she wants to be adored, she wants to be rescued, she wants to feel like life is one thrill after another. Her grandfather wants her to marry one cousin, Tristam Shield, one of the heroes of the novel; but these two just do not suit one another! They would drive each other crazy if the marriage actually took place! But Eustacie is determined to run away--in the middle of the night. And oh the adventure she stumbles into that night, SMUGGLERS. How perfect, how romantic. One of the smugglers turns out to be another cousin, Ludovic, a man who had to flee England several years earlier because he's suspected of murder....

And that's just the start!

A scene between Eustacie and Tristam:

“You would more probably have gone to the guillotine,' replied Sir Tristram, depressingly matter of fact.
'Yes, that is quite true,' agreed Eustacie. 'We used to talk of it, my cousin Henriette and I. We made up our minds we should be entirely brave, not crying, of course, but perhaps a little pale, in a proud way. Henriette wished to go to the guillotine en grande tenue, but that was only because she had a court dress of yellow satin which she thought became her much better than it did really. For me, I think one should wear white to the guillotine if one is quite young, and not carry anything except perhaps a handkerchief. Do you not agree?'
'I don't think it signifies what you wear if you are on your way to the scaffold,' replied Sir Tristram, quite unappreciative of the picture his cousin was dwelling on with such evident admiration.
She looked at him in surprise. 'Don't you? But consider! You would be very sorry for a young girl in a tumbril, dressed all in white, pale, but quite unafraid, and not attending to the canaille at all, but--'
'I should be very sorry for anyone in a tumbril, whatever their age or sex or apparel,' interrupted Sir Tristram.
'You would be more sorry for a young girl--all alone, and perhaps bound,' said Eustacie positively.
'You wouldn't be all alone. There would be a great many other people in the tumbril with you,' said Sir Tristram.
Eustacie eyed him with considerable displeasure. 'In my tumbril there would not have been a great many other people,' she said.” 

I loved this one; I just LOVED it. It's so delightful and fun! I am just loving my 2013 project of reading and rereading all of Georgette Heyer's romances in chronological order!

Read The Talisman Ring

• If you enjoyed Northanger Abbey
• If you enjoy historical romance with a good bit of mystery
• If you like drama, romance, mystery, adventure set in the 1790s
• If you enjoy Georgette Heyer

© 2013 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Display Comments Add a Comment

A Shilling for Candles. Josephine Tey. 1936. 240 pages.

First sentence: It was a little after seven on a summer morning, and William Potticary was taking his accustomed way over the short down grass of the cliff-top. Beyond his elbow, two hundred feet below, lay the Channel, very still and shining, like a milky opal.
A man discovers the body of an actress...and it is up to Inspector Grant to find her murderer.

This is the third Josephine Tey mystery novel I've read, and, it happens to be my least favorite. And I'm not even sure why I found it so disappointing. Inspector Grant has charmed me in the past, and I've appreciated the way he's gone about solving mysteries or crimes. In this one, he didn't seem to shine. In fact he seemed to disappear for chapters a time.  I don't know if I was just imagining that or if it  was really the case. There was just a great  disconnect in this one. I didn't find it satisfying at all.

I did love Daughter of Time. And I enjoyed The Man in the Queue.


© 2011 Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Add a Comment

Heyer, Georgette. 1936/2009. The Talisman Ring. Sourcebooks. 303 pages.

How to introduce this one? Think, think, think. I could mention that it has a heroine that reminds me of Catherine Morland of Northanger Abbey, Jane Austen fame. Because it does. Eustacie de Vauban is silly and impulsive and much too much into romantic novels with daring adventures and dashing, swoon-worthy heroes. She, like Catherine, has an over-active imagination. But, this book isn't her story alone. So maybe that wouldn't quite be fair.

The book opens with a dying old man, the family patriarch, Sylvester, calling his family together. He wants his granddaughter, Eustacie, whom he rescued from France before the revolution got started with all the guillotining, to be safely married. He wants his great-nephew (Sylvester is Tristam's great-uncle), Tristam Shield, to marry her. He decidedly does not want Basil "The Beau" Lavenham to be the man for the job. Though since Ludovic Lavenham's "death" there is really no one closer in the line to inherit his title and his lands. But is Ludovic really dead?

The more time Eustacie spends with Tristam, the more she knows that he is not the one for her. He is not adventurous. He is not romantic. He is not impressed with her storytelling and imagining. He is much too grounded in reality to ever be dashing and heroic. He's simply put not hero material. So Eustacie makes up her mind to run away. In the middle of the night. On horseback. What could be wrong with that?

Well, maybe just maybe as she's running away...she runs right into the middle of a pack of smugglers. Instead of being scared silly. She's in love with the notion. An adventure worthy of any real heroine! Fortunately for her, her kidnapper is none-other than her cousin Ludovic. He's a man already on the outs with the law--charged with a murder several years previous. But is he guilty of that crime?

Can Eustacie (and company) prove Ludovic's innocent of murder? Can they redeem his name, enable him to come out of hiding, and claim what is rightfully his?

This one is silly and fun. A pure delight. It's just comical.

© Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews

Display Comments Add a Comment

Below we have excerpted part of the introduction from the 40th anniversary edition of Robert Conquest’s The Great Terror: A Reassessment.  This book, the definitive work on Stalin’s purges, provides an eloquent chronicle of one of humanity’s most tragic events.  Robert Conquest is the author of some thirty books of history, biography, poetry, fiction, and criticism.  He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature, the British Academy, and the American Academy of Art and Sciences. He is at present a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

The Great Terror of 1936 to 1938 did not come out of the blue.  Like any other historical phenomenon, it had its roots in the past.  It would no doubt be misleading to argue that it followed inevitably from the nature of Soviet society and of the Communist Party.  It was itself a means of enforcing violent change upon that society and that party.  But all the same, it could not have been launched excpet against the extraordinarily idiosyncratic background of Bolshevik rule; and its special characteristics, some of them hardly credible to foreign minds, derive from a specific tradition.  The dominating ideas of the Stalin period, the evolution of the oppostionists, the very confession in the great show trials, can hardly be followed without considering not so mch the whole Soviet past as the development of the Party, the consolidation of the dictatorship, the movements of faction, the rise of individuals, and the emergence of extreme economic politics.

After his first stroke on 26 May 1922, Lenin, cut off to a certain degree from the immediacies of political life, contemplated the unexpected defects which had arisen in the revolution he had made.

He had already remarked, to he delegates to the Party’s Xth Congress in March 1921, “We have failed to convince the broad masses.”  He had felt obliged to excuse the low quality of many Party members: ‘No profound and popular movement in all history has taken place without its share of filth, without adventurers and rogues, without boastful and noisy elements…A ruling party inevitably attracts careerists.”  He had noted that the Soviet State had “many bureaucratic deformities,” speaking of “that same Russian apparatus…borrowed from Tsardom and only just covered with a Soviet veneer.”  And just before his stroke he had noted “the prevalence of personal spite and malice” in the committees charged with purging the Party.

Soon after his recovery from this first stroke, he was remarking, “We are living in a sea of ilegality,” and observing, “The Communist kernal lacks general culture”, the culture of the middle classes in Russia was “inconsiderable, wretched, but in any case greater than that of our responsible Communists.”  In the autumn he was criticizing carelessness and parasitism, and invented special phrases for the boasts and lies of the Communists: “Com-boasts and Com-lies.”

In his absence, his subordinates were acting more unacceptably than ever.  His criticisms had hithero been occasional reservations uttered in the intervals of busy political and governmental activity.  Now they became his main preoccupation.  He found that Stalin, to whom as General Secretary he had entrusted the Party machine in 1921, was hounding the Party in Georgia.  Stalin’s emissary, Ordzhonkidze, had even struck the Georgian Communist leader Kabanidze.  Lenin favored a policy of concilation in Georgia, where the population was solidy anti-Bolshevik and had only just lost its independence to a Red Army assault.  He took strong issue with Stalin.

It was at this time that he wrote his “Testament.”  In it he made it clear that in his view Stalin was, after Trotsky, “the most able” leader of the Central Committee; and he criticized him, not as he did Trotsky (for “too far-reaching self-confidence and a disposition to be too much attracted by the purely administrative side of affairs”), but only for having “concentrated an enormous power in his hands” which he was uncertain Stalin would always know how to use with “sufficient caution.”  A few days later, after Stalin had used obscene language and made threats to Lenin’s wife, Krupskaya, in connection with Lenin’s intervention in the Georgian affair, Lenin added a postscript to the Testament recommending Stalin’s removal from the General Secretaryship on the gournds of his rudeness and capriciousness- as being incompatible, however, only with that particular office.  On the whole, the reservations made about Trotsky must seem more serious when it comes to politics proper, and his “ability” to be an administrative executant rather more than a potential leader in his own right.  It is only fair to add that it was to Trotsky that Lenin turned in support in his last attempts to influence policy; but Trotsky failed to carry out Lenin’s wishes.

The Testament was concerned to avoid a split between Trotsky and Stalin.  The solution proposed- an increase in the size of the Central Committee- was futile.  In his last articles Lenin went on attack “bureaucratic misrule and willfulness,” spole of the condition of the State machine as “repugnant,” and concluded gloomily, “We lack sufficienct civilization to enable us to pass straight on to Socialism although we have the political requisities.”

“The political requisities…”- but these were precisely the activity of the Party and governmental leadership which he was condemming in practice.  Over the past years he had personally launched the system of rule by a centralized Party against- if necessary- all other social forces.  He had creaded the Bolsheviks, the new type of party, centralized and discilpline, in the first palce. He had preserved its identity in 1917, when before his arrival from exile the Bolshevik leaders had aligned themselves on a course of conciliation with the rest of the Revolution.  There seems little doubt that without him, the Social Democrats would have reunited and would have taken the normal position of such a movement in the State.  Instead, he had kept the Bolsheviks intact, and then sought and won sole power- again against much resistance from his own followers…

…In destroying the Deomcratic tendency within the Communist Party, Lenin in effect threw the game to the manipulators of the Party machine.  Henceforward, the appartus was to be first the most powerful and later the only force within the Party.  The answer to the question “Who will rule Russia?” became simply “Who will win a faction fight confined to a narrow section of the leadership?” Candidates for power had already shown their hands.  As Lenin lay in the twilight of the long decline from his last stroke, striving to correct all this, they were already at grips in the first round of the struggle which was to culminate in the Great Purge.

ShareThis

Add a Comment