Meh.

I like young adult fiction in general. It tends to be lightweight and easy to read, and it's usually pretty entertaining to boot.

Scott Westerfeld's Ugliesmeets two of those criteria: it's lightweight and easy to read. But it's not so much with the entertaining.

Oh, it starts off well enough. Tally, the main character, lives in a post-apocalyptic future where everything is just peachy. People learned from the mistakes of the "Rusties," the generations of the past that cut down too many trees and used too much raw material to build cities and basically robbed the land blind. So we've got the Environmental Message coming through loud and clear.

Then there's also the fact that in this society, your life is divided into neat little stages: you are born and grow up with your parents as a "Littlie" in the suburbs until age 12, at which point you become an "Ugly" and are shipped off to Uglyville. When you turn 16, you receive an operation that turns you into a "Pretty," and you get to party all day every day in New Pretty Town. As you age, you'll have another operation when you are a "Middle Pretty" and choose a career, and eventually, when you're really old, you'll become a "Crumbly" and move to Crumblyville. It's just the way it's done, and everyone's happy with it.

Almost everyone, of course. There has to be some drama, right? The central question is, then, why do we have to look/act/think/be like everyone else? What about our individual faces/thoughts/bodies/actions? So then we've got the Everyone Is Beautiful In Their Own Way Message (also known as the I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, And Doggone It, People Like Me Message).

Both of these messages are fine, really. But my goodness, could they be any more obvious? I think not. Even for the teen set, for whom this book is intended, I think it's a bit overly didactic.

I could forgive that, though, if it reached any kind of conclusion. It doesn't. It's the cheapest way ever to get people to read your sequels: don't end. At all. No kidding---by the time this book "ends"--and I use that term very loosely--not one single complication that has been brought up throughout the story has been resolved. Not. One. This made me feel like all 425 pages had been The Longest Setup Ever for the next book, and I think that's a cheap trick.

In the end, I just didn't care enough about anyone to make me want to continue--and I'd had enough Very Important Messages. Maybe you'll feel differently.

Shameless self-promotion

I know, I know. No post forever and then this? Shameless self-promotion? Disgusting!

It's true, and I apologize. But I'll continue with the shamelessness anyway.

Not long ago, I wrote this post about the University of Utah Singers, so I don't need to go into all that background again. Instead, I'll get right to it and explain that Carol of Joy is our newest album--the first one I am on!--and I'm very excited about it.

This is a Christmas CD and features every kind of carol you can imagine, from the traditional "Ding Dong, Merrily on High" to the show choir-esque "Need a Little Christmas" to the ward choir-y "Were You There" to the brand new (and beautiful) title track "Carol of Joy." I know it's not even Thanksgiving yet and believe me, I'm a staunch believer in no Christmas music until after that November holiday. But I also think it's stupid to buy new Christmas albums and give them on Christmas day, because then you don't get all the joy of listening to them leading up to Christmas.

So yes, I want to sell you this CD. I want you to buy it. I want you to buy multiple copies (*grin*), because as I stated in that other post, I do get credit toward helping me pay for tour. But I'm also all about full disclosure, so let me tell you the down sides of this album.

"Lo, How a Rose E'er Blooming" is absolutely the weakest cut on this album. The balance is ridiculously bad, and some high soprano (whose name shall not be mentioned on this blog, EVER) took it as a personal challenge to make the last note, uh, shall we say, featured. It's a pity, because the arrangement is really quite stunning. The Rutter carol "Mary's Lullaby" features that same soprano when she refuses to breathe with the rest of the choir. Yeah. "What Sweeter Music Can We Bring?" is also not...great. And there are some (legitimate) solo moments on "'Round the Glory Manger" that I don't particularly care for.

But that's, what, four tracks out of 23? Those are some pretty good odds that you'll find more to like here than dislike. "Sing We Now of Christmas" is my absolute favorite, and "El Rorro" is pretty good, too. And the words to "In Silent Night" are really, really nice.

Overall, I think it's worth having, and I'm not just sayin' that. So if you'd like to buy one, or two, or five hundred, let me know! You can order via the link above (where there is also a special sale going on--all three U of U Singers Christmas albums for $35)--if you do this, be sure to list my name as your referral--or you can order directly through me.

Happy (early) holidays, and Merry (early) Christmas, and thus ends this edition of Shameless Self-Promotion.

P.S. You can listen to a few samples here.

*swoon*

In the spirit of unfairly compartmentalizing people, allow me to tell you that you will fit into one of the following categories. In order of most to least shameful:

1. You have never even heard of Brian Stokes Mitchell.

2. You hadn't heard of him until recently, because, say, you went to a Tabernacle Choir concert where he was performing, and now you really like him.

3. You knew who he was years ago and have been singing his praises forever.

I refuse to admit the existence of a fourth category (which, incidentally, would be the most shameful of all, and would therefore be labeled as zero): you don't like Brian Stokes Mitchell. For shame.

If you are in category one, you most certainly need to get yourself into category two, and work your way into category three. Even if you're in category three, you might only know him because of his Broadway work (Ragtime, Kiss Me, Kate, Man of La Mancha...I could go on). And his Broadway work is fantastic. But you really need to check out his debut solo CD.

Almost all of the songs on this CD are indeed showtunes, but they're performed as if they're all jazz tunes. "Something's Coming," from West Side Story, is a fusion of Spanish dance and jazz--I defy you to listen and not tap your feet. I don't really care for Sondheim as a general rule, but I could listen to Brian Stokes Mitchell sing "Being Alive" forever. And my favorite tune on the album isn't a showtune at all: "Life is Sweet" is the peppiest, swingy-est, scatty-est jazz number ever, and you'll have to push "repeat." It's that good.

Brian Stokes Mitchell can sing anything, I swear. His voice is amazingly rich and so very expressive. (Hence the reason that the paring of him and Audra McDonald in Ragtime is so great--but that's for another post.) It will make you all melty inside. Even if you think you don't like jazz or showtunes, this album will change your mind. Do yourself a huge favor and pick it up. Because you can't have mine. It's autographed! Swoon, indeed.

Music to Be Busy By

Whew! It's been a crazy month (and it ain't over yet)--hence the complete dearth of posts. I've been spending very little time at home and quite a bit of time in my car, where this CD has been living.

I'll be up front with you: I sing with the University of Utah Singers. You may think this fact makes me a little biased. (It probably does.) But I did not belong to the group when they recorded A Jubilant Song, so you have to believe me when I tell you that this CD is fantastic.

This entirely acappella CD was recorded shortly after the Singers won the grand prize in what amounts to the World Series of choral singing. (Nerd heaven!) They were at the top of their game, and if they sound a little vocally tired in a few tracks, we can hardly blame them---it was the very end of a month-long tour during which they sang around 40 pieces with pretty severe regularity. But these little hiccups are so rare that you probably won't even notice them as you revel in the absolutely gorgeous sounds on this album.

Since the music on this CD ranges from the incredibly difficult (like "Rytmus" and "Psalm 96") to the astoundingly beautiful (like "Pilgrims' Hymn") to folk songs and spirituals (Moses Hogan makes an appearance) to the super eclectic (like Asian folk music), I am not ashamed to use the cliche saying that there really is something for everyone here.

You can listen to samples at the link above, and purchase from that site as well. And a shameless plug for me: should you decide to buy that CD (or any of the other six currently available, or the new Christmas CD being released at the end of October, please mention my name. We're going on tour in the spring and I get $10 of every $15 sale deposited directly to my tour account. Hooray for fundraising!

I promise, though, even if I didn't get money off the sale, I'd recommend this album. It's really, really good. Now, if you'll pardon me, I think I have to go drive somewhere...

*insert clever pop culture reference here*

I shall tell you a story.

One day, I was watching TV and left the room for a moment. When I came back, TV Announcer Guy said: Next: the series premiere of Gilmore Girls. Curious, I stayed tuned. For seven years.

If you don't know, Gilmore Girls was a series on the WB about a mother and daughter, the quirky town they live in, and the ridiculously good looking man who keeps them in coffee. It's a show about relationships, but it's also very, very funny--that is, when it's not making you angry (season seven, I'm looking at you).

(Incidentally, don't judge the show by season seven. They had new writers that year after the original creator/writer left in a huff and wrote them into a corner, because she's apparently twelve years old. Season seven was bad. But the first--well, the first five seasons are just great. Season six is a little...questionable.)

The show is full of pop culture references. You won't get them all. (If you do, you might need to get out more.) So watch it with someone--because the ones you miss, they'll get, and vice versa. And the ones you both miss? Well, it's educational.

I know they talk fast. That's part of why I like it. Don't tell me it's not realistic. I don't care.

I'm feeling pressure to be extremely witty and relevant in this post because of the subject material, and I'm aware that I'm failing miserably. I guess that's my cue to go watch more Gilmore Girls and brush up on my witty speed referencing. Wanna come over?

High Noon

EDITOR: Hey, Stephenie. Thanks for coming in. I just finished Breaking Dawn.

SM: Oh, great! How'd you like it?

EDITOR: Pretty good. Much more plot than the previous three. Good work!

SM: Thanks, I was trying to actually have a storyline this time.

EDITOR: It shows. I also like how you divided the book into chunks. Gives us a chance to get into someone else's head for a while, see from a different perspective.

SM: Thanks.

EDITOR: I think we need to name these chunks, though. A good title can help so much, don't you agree?

SM: Er...yes...

EDITOR: A good title can tantalize, hint--not give too much away but still really give readers an idea of what's to come. I have some great title ideas for you.

SM: Okay! That'd be pretty helpful, I guess. Shoot.

EDITOR: All right. The first part--wait for it, this is sheer genius--I think you should call the first part "Bella Likes Sex."

SM: What?

EDITOR: "Bella Likes Sex." Isn't it perfect?

SM: Um, don't you think it's a little, uh, on the nose?

EDITOR: But that's what's so great about it! Readers know exactly what they're getting, but not too much. I mean, they don't know who Bella likes sex with.

SM: I think I'll just stick with calling it "Bella."

EDITOR: Well, your loss. Okay, part two. Part two is a little trickier. I'm toying with two options here. Let me run the first one by you: "Jacob Hates Vampires."

SM: A bit obvious for a title, isn't it?

EDITOR: Well, really, Stephenie, what else have you given me to work with here?

SM: There's more to Jacob than his hatred of vampires. Can't you do something with that?

EDITOR: Of course you're right. That leads me to my second title choice, if you don't like the first one--

SM: Yes, please.

EDITOR: Okay: "Jacob is a Jerk."

SM: What??

EDITOR: Come on, Stephenie. You've got to admit that you've written one of the most unlikable characters ever. And considering that we're actually supposed to like him anyway, this is quite a feat.

SM: I disagree. And I think there are a lot of fans that would disagree as well.

EDITOR: Really? How could they? I mean, Jacob is a character who is so full of self-reflection, which you'd think would unearth so much depth. But really, he never has any kind of self-realization. He's shallow and angst-ridden and basically, well, a jerk. Hence the title.

SM: Well, wouldn't you be? Angst-ridden and all that. Considering all he's been through.

EDITOR: Oh, probably. But I hope I'd grow, and not because of some obvious plot-contrivance, but naturally.

SM: Plot-contrivance?

EDITOR: Oh, yeah, sorry. Minor nit-picky detail there. It bothered me when Jacob--

SM: I wrote it, you don't need to tell me.

EDITOR: True. Plus, you can see it coming a mile away.

SM: Hmph.

EDITOR: Well, we obviously have some differences of opinion over part two. But I'm sure we can agree about part three.

SM: Yeah, we'll see.

EDITOR: Now, you can see I'm an advocate for those short, sound-byte titles. But part three doesn't lend itself to that easily.

SM: No?

EDITOR: No. A lot of stuff happens in part three! I mean, a lot!

SM: Thank you?

EDITOR: Indeed! Nice job, really.

SM: So, what's the problem?

EDITOR: Well, my title idea is kind of a mouthful.

SM: Let's hear it.

EDITOR: Okay. "Lots of Stuff Happens, and Then It Gets Predictable and Cheesy. (P.S. Bella Likes Sex.)"

SM: Bella does like sex. I'll give you that one. But "predictable" and "cheesy"?

EDITOR: C'mon, Steph. Think.

SM: "Cheesy"...yeah, you're right. But it's a romance at heart, gimme a break. It always has been, from the beginning.

EDITOR: Okay, I'll cave on that. But predictable, you gotta admit it's predictable.

SM: No, I don't!

EDITOR: My secretary read your manuscript and promised me that there was a great twist in it, that I'd never see where it was going. Did I, uh, did I get a different copy?

SM: No...

EDITOR: Then I'm sticking with predictable.

SM: *sigh* Can we go to press anyway?

EDITOR: Sure. You write really well! I mean that. I look forward to your next book!

Hindsight is 20/20

In retrospect, the subtitle should've given it away.

When I stumbled across My Name is Willin Borders a couple of weeks ago, I was so excited. After all, I'm a huge Shakespeare nerd. And the book is by Jess Winfield, one of the founding members of the Reduced Shakespeare Company, whose roaringly funny Complete Works is, well, roaringly funny.

My Name is Will is, well, not so much.

Okay, so the subtitle is "A Novel of Sex, Drugs, and Shakespeare." How was I to know that instead of the subtle (and not-so-subtle) innuendo performed with such hilarity by the RSC, this book would be pretty much pornographic? How could I have anticipated that a man who wrote a script full of such clever pop culture references would write a novel filled with almost painfully self-aware references and Shakespearean quotes that practically scream, "Look at me! I'm trying to be clever!"

I kept hoping this book would get better. But it doesn't. In fact, it never even seems to reach any kind of...I can't find a word that doesn't seem sexual in the context of this filthy, filthy book. It never comes together. (That's as benign as I can get. Sorry.)

It left me feeling empty and dirty and sad. It could've been great. But it was pretty much the complete opposite. Don't waste your time even reading the dust jacket.