The Dark Knight Returns

My second favorite tool for finding new things to read is Amazon.com. I just hop on, go to the page of a book I love, and check out the "Customers Who Bought this Also Bought" section. It's a goldmine of good stuff that I know is going to be similar to things I already like. Second only to V for Vendetta on Amazon's Watchmen page was The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller. Though I was initially skeptical to read a graphic novel based on more traditional comic book characters, this book proved to be a superbly written glimpse into psychology of heroism, and how that psychology can become as much a liability as an asset when the flesh becomes weaker than the spirit.

Set in a rapidly deteriorating Gotham that has been without Batman's influence for ten years, TDKR follows Bruce Wayne as he struggles to control the personae of the Batman inside of him. Unlike modern interpretations on the Batman story, TDKR looks at Batman almost as a separate entity that exists within Bruce Wayne, one that he initially fights against and ultimately succumbs to. Batman doesn't choose to come out of retirement because the city needs Batman, but because Bruce Wayne needs Batman. It's as if Wayne is a junkie, and Batman is his drug of choice. This book simply portrays Wayne having a relapse after ten years of sobriety.

An example of the epic full-page frames
that abound in TDKR.

The psychological implications of Batman coming out of retirement are augmented by the unavoidable fact that he's old. Bruce Wayne is in his late fifties, and though his return to action seems as unlikely as Rocky Balboa's, it really works. Rather than glossing over his age, the novel uses it as a central theme. Batman is constantly aware that he's slower, has less stamina, and isn't nearly as invincible as he used to be. Yet despite his awareness of his mortality, he has to keep fighting. He realizes that he's on a self-destructive course, but he doesn't even want to change his trajectory.

But just because this graphic novel deals with serious issues of personal psychology and aging, don't think that it's not a Batman book at heart. We've still got Robin shouting out cheesy one-liners, ridiculous villains in masks and face-paint, impossible gadgets that are so improbable they're cool, and of course the unflappable butler who remains unfazed regardless of how beat up Bruce Wayne is when he comes home in the morning. Though I expected these elements of the absurd to distract from the novel, they ended up giving it a sense of flavor and flair that lent a whimsical quality to an otherwise dark book. I wouldn't change a thing about it.

Although novels based on comic books aren't for everybody, I feel that people who are fans of the Batman films or comics would really enjoy reading this book. In a general sense graphic novels allow readers to embrace their inner child while still consuming media that is meaningful and complex. TDKR easily fits the bill. It has enough sense of wonder and fantasy to keep anyone enjoyably engaged, but also provides some serious commentaries on the psychology of aging and the need to feel useful. If you like Batman stuff, definitely read this book. It's easily as good as any Batman movie, and is worlds better than most of them. Beyond that, though, it's just a dang good book in its own right.

Score: 9/10
Read this book if: You like Batman, graphic novels, or want to read a story about aging that has cool pictures too.
Don't read this book if: You think comics are just for kids (but you'll be missing out).

Great Expectations

The title of this celebrated Dickens novel not only describes the state of the main character for much of the book, but also describes my feelings towards the novel when I began to read it. I had heard much praise in favor of Great Expectations, and had owned the book for years before my Dickens class finally got me to read it. One of my most trusted literary counselors mentioned that it was both his favorite Dickens novel, and the most critically esteemed. I should have learned ages ago, however, that high expectations are the seeds of disappointment, and tragically this was once again the case. The story of young Pip's fortuitous rise to wealth and status did little to hold my interest, and in the end my great expectations led me to little more that a great sense of relief when the book was finished.

Touted as one of Dickens's most critically acclaimed novels, GE has been taught more frequently than any other Dickens novel (with the possible exception of the outstanding A Tale of Two Cities). The novel follows Pip, a young orphan who is raised by his older sister and blacksmith brother-in-law, from the poverty of his rural life on the marshes to his cosmopolitan existence in downtown London. Pip's rise in fortune is made possible by the aid of a mysterious benefactor who bankrolls Pip's gentlemanly aspirations in exchange for total anonymity. When informing Pip of his good fortune the enigmatic lawyer Jaggers states simply "he has great expectations." Pip, like any ordinary person, doesn't ask questions and takes the money. The rest of the novel examines the moral and psychological effects that Pip's newfound wealth have upon him, until his benefactor is ultimately revealed and the true nature of Pip's "expectations" becomes apparent. Though the story has all the hallmarks of the rags-to-riches type of stories that we tend to enjoy, the absence of any labor on Pip's part, as well as the total lack of wisdom with which he utilizes his wealth, leave the reader uninspired.

I had the good fortune to be reading this book for a class, and therefore I feel as though I was privileged with information and insights from classmates that made the reading process more interesting. But the truth is that I think Pip is a fool who behaves in an immature and irresponsible way throughout the entire novel. Two-thirds of the book is Pip running around ruining his own life and the lives of those around him. The novel's saving grace is in the cast of supporting characters. Jo Gargery, Pip's brother-in-law, friend, and mentor, is a model of morality, forgiveness, and charity. Other eccentric characters add moments of amusement and delight, such as the ruined Miss Havisham or the pleasantly duplicitous Wemmick. If you like good supporting characters who shine all the more brightly when compared to a particularly dreary main character, this book is for you.

In the midst of all my Pip bashing, however, I must pause to give Dickens some credit. As a narrator and main character Pip isn't very likable, however I have to admit that he seems a lot more relatable and realistic than most of Dickens's other main characters. Pip is a prodigal fool who deludes himself into acting like an idiotic jerk half the time, while the other half of his time is spent thinking about what a rotten person he is. Sadly, I think this is a very human thing. I've certainly had my Pip moments in life, and as an indictment and analysis of the power of the human mind to deceive itself GE is a pretty powerful work. However, I personally don't hugely enjoy being reminded of the flaws in my nature, so I didn't find these ruminations pleasant. Dickens deserves some props for diving into the deep and dirty of human nature, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

Of the three Dickens novels I've read over this past semester GE is probably my least favorite. There isn't much there to excite the imagination or inspire the human soul. The novel certainly offers some interesting insights into the nature of the gentleman, the morality of money, and the power of external influences over our individual natures, but none of these things necessarily contribute to a book I'd actually want to read. The characters within the novel are excellent, but Pip is so unlikeable for the majority of the novel that it becomes something of a chore to read long enough to enjoy the good stuff. I'm glad I can check this book off my list, but it's unfortunately going to be taking a place at the bottom of my Dickens pile.

Score: 7/10
Read this book if: You enjoy a book that deals with issues of Victorian psychology and social ideology, or if you like a strong cast of amusing secondary characters.
Don't read this book if: You prefer novels that have a strong central plot-line or a really likable main character, or your just looking to escape from reality for a little while.

V for Vendetta

Whenever I leave a movie theatre after watching a film based on a book my general though is "it was good, but the book was better." Now, however, in some odd reversal of fortunes, I find myself believing the inverse to be true. V for Vendetta is good, but the film is better.

I entered upon this read with extremely high hopes. My optimism was the result of two factors. First, V was written by Alan Moore, the man behind Watchmen. I seriously loved Watchmen, and was excited to read Moore's second-most famous graphic novel. Second, I'm a huge fan of the film adaptation of V for Vendetta, and have watched it every fifth of November since 2008. I believe that in approaching the novel with such high expectations I was actually sewing the seeds of my own disappointment. My two frames of reference were Watchmen and the film adaptation of V for Vendetta, and unfortunately I just didn't feel the novel was quite as good as either.

When compared with Watchmen, V seems to lack the complex delicacy and familiarity with which the political arguments are conveyed. Furthermore, though both written by Moore, the two books had different artists and colorists. Where Watchmen is vibrant and detailed, V looks pale and muted. As a result of the art I found I couldn't get sucked into V in the same way I could with Watchmen, since I was frequently losing the thread of the story because I couldn't make out what was happening to whom. The art wasn't bad by any stretch of the imagination, it just fell short of the spectacular drawing I'd become accustomed to in Watchmen.

It was a mistake from the outset to compare the book to the film. The two are radically different in plot, ideology, and execution. Perhaps if I'd read the book first I wouldn't have cared for the film, but being such a fan of the film I was disappointed when there were points of difference. And there are many points of difference. The film is a vibrant story with gorgeous cinematography and incredible dialogue. Although much of those elements are found in the novel, they feel watered down because there is simply so much more material there. The film seems as though it took the best elements of V for Vendetta, added even more good stuff, and then concentrated the whole formula. In comparison the novel feels rather plain. The other major difference between the book and the film is the maturity of the content. The film is certainly not for kids, but it's also a bit idealistic. The book, though, is dark, gritty, and seemingly hopeless. Furthermore, I have a difficult time accepting that anarchistic politics being espoused in the novel.

Overall V for Vendetta was sufficiently engaging for me to finish it fairly quickly, and it was a pleasant alternative to doing homework. However, all things considered I don't think I'll be recommending this book to many people. It is pretty well-written, pretty well-drawn, and pretty good. But there are so many books that are so much more than pretty good that it seems a waste to settle for anything less. Though the book contains occasional moments of sheer brilliance, in the end I was disappointed that the book didn't live up to my expectations, however unrealistic and unfair those expectations may have been.

Score: 6/10 (It was enjoyable, but just barely)
Read this book if: You find graphic novels interesting and don't have preconceptions about what this book might be like.
Don't read this book if: You like the film and are expecting a similar experience on the page, or you love your graphic novels to have vibrant and vivid illustrations.

N.B. I've received some criticism that my rating system is too soft, so for the last few reviews I've been a bit more liberal with the lower scores. For future reference, a 1 is a book that is basically all bad, a 5 is even parts that I liked/didn't like, and a 10 is a book where I love everything about it. So with this 6, I liked more than I didn't like, but there was still quite a bit that bugged me. You likely won't see many scores below 5 since I research the stuff I read to avoid lemons. This may not be the best system, but it's the one I'm gonna use anyway.

Watchmen

When Watchmen came on the scene in 1987 it was absolutely revolutionary. Here we have a graphic novel rooted in a forty year long tradition of superhero comics, that swiftly proceeds to deconstruct the genre until it is practically in ruins. Yet in the process of critiquing every superhero comic book that came before it, Watchmen created something new and wonderful: a beautifully written and illustrated graphic novel (complete with explosions, fights, and awesome gadgetry) that still offers deep and profound insights into human nature and political controversies.

As with much of the stuff I read, I discovered Watchmen from another book, the previously reviewed Eleanor and Park. The two main characters of E&P bond while reading Watchmen together, and the novel continues to reference Watchmen throughout, so I thought I'd give it a read. Little did I know that E&P was merely reflecting the greater light of Watchmen, as the moon reflects the sun. When I started reading Watchmen I almost immediately got absorbed into a dark and vivid alternate history where America has won the Vietnam War, possesses a huge tactical trump card over Russia, has abundant cheap energy, and is tearing itself apart at the seems.

The chronological events of Watchmen begin shortly after World War II, when police officers and retired soldiers choose to don masks and fight against corruption and vice within their communities. These masked adventurers are praised for their good deeds, and many of them enter the employ of the government. Eventually an accident involving experimentation with nuclear power creates the world's one and only true superhero, Dr. Manhattan, a blue baldy whose ability to control matter at the atomic level makes him all but omnipotent. In short, Dr. Manhattan changes everything. Technology leaps forward, long-term peace seems assured, and the world sits on a new frontier of prosperity. Yet in the absence of conflict and challenge apathy grips society, and spreads like a cancer throughout America. Corruption and rioting become rampant, the costumed adventurers are outlawed due to the Keene Act, and President Nixon uses Dr. Manhattan as political leverage to elevate himself to near-dictator status. From the moment of Dr. Manhattan's creation the timeline of the story begins gradually diverging from recorded history until the reader is left staring at a strange, and strangely familiar, alternate reality that is dark, chilling, and frighteningly close to the world we live in today.

Watchmen's captivating first page.

Not only is the story profound and thought-provoking, the characters themselves are compelling. My personal favorite character is Rorschach, a masked adventurer who refused to retire when the U.S. government outlaws costumed vigilantes. Rorschach's dogged commitment to punishing evil represents an odd sort of morality that is both repellant and admirable. Other characters like Dan Dreiberg and Laurie Jupiter represent a fascinating commentary on the process of aging and maturing, and how much of ourselves is bound up in what we do.

There is so much that I could say about Watchmen, but I don't want to spoil one minute of this incredible graphic novel. This book was amazing. If you are a fan of superheroes, politics, history, human nature, good writing, or good art, then you will almost certainly enjoy this compelling and chilling vision of what might have been and, if we aren't careful, what may yet be.

Score: 10/10
Read this book if: You are a fan of comics or graphic novels in general, and in particular if you like political commentaries that also tackle deeper questions about the nature of morality and humanity.
Don't read this book if: You are averse to cartoon violence. Though not bad by modern standards of violence, Watchmen certainly doesn't shy away from the graphic side of graphic novels.

Bleak House

Charles Dickens' novel Bleak House is considered one of his most ambitious works, and is lauded by critics as one of his very best. BH falls squarely into the 4B category, a Big Boring British Book. It's about the effects of the corrupt and inefficient British legal system on the lives of those unfortunate enough to be suitors at court, and the efforts of one young woman named Esther to beat the system.

The characters are interesting, especially when you dig down to discover their more sinister motives, and the descriptions of London are evocative and powerful. Dickens makes the city appear to be one seething cesspool of fog, mud, rain, and misery, with the courts lying at the very center of it all. Esther, on the other hand, is the proposed cure for the ills of the courts, and proceeds to clean up various domestic spaces in her attempt to purify England from the legal blight it is under. There are some interesting side plots involving Esther's dubious parentage, a handsome doctor, and a particularly determined police investigator. These asides (which actually are extremely important to the plot) provide a nice distraction from the central story, but don't contribute enough fun to salvage the plot from its own ponderous weight.

As is typical with Dickens the writing is dense and wordy, and the novel hardly makes for casual reading. Even the most ambitious literary aficionados will find it difficult to slog through the nearly one thousand pages of text. However, if you have a good group that you can regularly discuss the novel with, and the guiding hand of someone intimately familiar with the text (preferably a PhD) then you may find the novel to be a rewarding read. Outside of the classroom setting, however, I just couldn't bring myself to recommend Bleak House to anyone. It's too long, too boring, and too inaccessible for all but the most devoted and erudite readers of Victorian Literature.

Score: 6/10 (I realize this is awfully low. Please note that I don't think this is in any way a bad book, it's just boring and not very fun. From a critical standpoint it's great).
Read this book if: You like really long works of fiction with fairly slow moving plots that examine legal corruption in Victorian London.
Don't read this book if: You primarily read books for entertainment, and if you don't like having to frequent the dictionary in order to understand a text.

Three Week Update
The further away I get from the actual reading of this novel, the more I think I liked it. At the time I wrote my initial review I was so overwhelmed with the sheer length of the thing that I allowed many of the delightful details and elements to escape my notice. However, now that the pain of reading has subsided I have had time to think about just how many delightful and interesting characters, plots, and events are contained within this (still unreasonably long) novel. There is mystery, intrigue, a great detective story side-plot, and loads of characters that are downright hilarious. If you can stand the length, this is a very rewarding read.
Revised Score: 8/10