Matt W Cook

Have you ever enjoyed a book that you knew was crappy?

I’m not really an admirer of Dan Brown. His books are all kinda similar, he doesn’t seem to push himself and his work never rises very high above entertaining. He’s not a particularly special writer. But whenever I pick up one of his books I manage to finish it in a day or two. I’m reading fast and enjoying myself, all the while thinking, “well…this isn’t really all that good.”

And then there’s L.M. Montgomery. I’ve said before that Anne of Green Gables is my favorite book. It’s not that long, but it took me quite some time to finish. Not because it was hard. Just because, to be honest, it didn’t catch my interest. It wasn’t flashy or exciting. It was good, yes. It was profound and deep and full of characters who were fully alive and settings that leaped off the page and begged you to come into them. But it wasn’t a ‘page-turner.’ It took work to read. Dan Brown books don’t take any work.

Sometimes poorly written books (and poorly made movies [Alien vs. Predator]) are fun. And sometimes masterpieces are hard to digest. Anne of Green Gables may be my favorite book. But it’s probably not the book I enjoyed the most. I may have enjoyed Deception Point. But I don’t respect it.

The really good books often seem hard to digest. Or, hard to digest if you want to understand them in their fullness. There isn’t much fullness to Dan Brown of Frank Peretti, so they are easy and fun to read. But You don’t remember books like that for very long. They don’t impact you.

var addthis_pub=”4a0af351783743a8″;

This is second-hand unless you’re reading it at http://www.theilliteratescribe.com

I generally read two books at once. Never more and rarely less. A fiction and a non-fiction. This week I finished both G.K. Chesterton’s Orthodoxy and Branden Sanderson’s Hero of Ages. Both blew my mind. And I can’t really talk about either without (a) stumbling over my mediocre vocabulary or (b) giving amazing things away. Some I’m not going to talk about them.

Last night I picked up my next two books. The non-fiction is Paul Davies’ About Time: Einstein’s Unfinished Revolution. It’s borrowed from a friend and looks promising. The fiction is the much-anticipated Anne of Avonlea by the brilliant L.M. Montgomery.

You know what the neat thing is about Montgomery? She breaks the rules and looks good while doing it. For example, any novice writer will be able to tell you that it’s always better to show rather than tell. Here’s an example:

We walked into the room, angry.

Is not nearly as powerful as:

He stomped into the room, face red and hair disheveled. “I’m pissed!” he yelled, finger jabbing at his wife.”

You should always show.

But Montgomery doesn’t. She likes to tell. Which is funny, because when she does show, she shows like a star. Her descriptions of the places in PEI make you want to go there. But sometimes she’ll just tell you what’s going on. And when she does, she does it well.

I realized, just in the first five chapters of Anne of Avonlea that there really is not hard rule on showing and telling. You really need to be able to do both well, if you are going to write. Sometimes a skilled tell carries a lot more meaning and power than a bulky show.

Anyway, Montgomery rocks my face off, as she always has. Read her. Seriously. Especially if you’re into epic fantasy novels like I am. Montgomery provides a taste of an entirely different kind of fiction and storytelling. Check her out.

var addthis_pub=”4a0af351783743a8″;

This is second-hand unless you’re reading it at http://www.theilliteratescribe.com