The Mysterious Affair at Styles- Agatha Christie

                                                                

Author: Agatha Christie | Title: The Mysterious Affair at Styles | Genre: Mystery

Publication Date: October 1920 | Number of Pages: 296 | Series: Hercule Poirot Mysteries (#1)

Geographical Setting: Essex, England | Time Period: Summer of 1917

Plot Summary: 

Arthur Hastings, wounded captain and aspiring amateur detective, is invited to Emily Inglethorp’s estate while he is on leave. After introductions (and many suspicious conversations about poisons), Mrs. Inglethorp mysteriously dies of a heart attack- or was she poisoned? Enter Hercule Poirot- an eccentric, arrogant, and brilliant ex-police detective. As Poirot digs through the last hours of Inglethorp's life, Hastings is convinced that signs point to her widower, but is he as guilty as he seems?

Characteristics for Mystery:

Private/Police/Amateur Detective- Poirot is an ex-police detective who now works as a private detective. His characterization is much more like a private detective, as he is a “self-reliant loner who operate[s] independently” (Saricks 59). Hastings is an amateur detective, which, like private detectives, “can devote all their time to a single case” (59). 

Characterization- Hastings (the protagonist) and Poirot (the detective) are both dedicated to this case "whether they're paid or not, whether they're on the job or off" (54). Saricks also adds that "Captain Hastings ably aided Hercule Poirot in a number of his investigations" (54). While Hastings is the narrator (and arguably the protagonist), he provides a balance against Poirot as a novice to his expert.

Pacing- Like Saricks warned, "the investigative details... necessarily slow the story and make all of them progress at a more leisurely pace" (57). While many clues are found, ample time is taken to deliberate over them.

Series- This is the first of 39 Poirot mysteries (according to Agatha Christie's website). While series is not unique to the mystery genre, Saricks listed it as the first thing fans expect (62).

 https://www.agathachristie.com/stories?format=novel&character=hercule-poirot&sorting=yearFirstReleased

Read-alikes:

Nonfiction-

Poisons: from Hemlock to Botox to the Killer Bean of Calabar (Peter Macinnis)

If I Die—(Michael Fleeman)

Arsenic and Clam Chowder: Murder in Gilded Age New York (James D. Livingston)

 Did she kill him?: a Victorian tale of deception, adultery, and arsenic (Kate Colquhoun)

Fiction-

Unnatural Death (Dorothy L. Sayers)

The Sweetness at the Bottom of the Pie (Alan Bradley)

Missing Joseph (Elizabeth George)

The Hunting Party (Lucy Foley)

Suddenly at His Residence (Christianna Brand)

Similar Authors: Louise Penny, M.C. Beaton, Ngiao Marsh, Emma Lathen

Week Seven Prompt Response

Are hoax memoirs still worth reading? Barnes and Noble seems to think they are, but I doubt that any store would say a title they carried wasn't worth it. A better question might be “what is the value of hoax memoirs?”, to which this article would probably say somewhere between $8.99 and $16.32. I'd say that these books aren't memoirs, and the second this is exposed these books lose all value. Readers can't get the same benefits that they would from nonfiction, and the books often translate badly into fiction. If a reader is looking for sensationalism, they can find bigger scandals in books intended as fiction. If they are looking for insights into history, social issues, or the human condition, they're better off with real nonfiction. 

A bigger problem with false memoirs (and what especially bothered me about this article) is that they tend to gravitate towards serious societal issues and end up negatively impacting the conversation. The books B&N listed covered (respectively) sexual abuse, addiction, prisoner abuse, addiction (again), Nazis, and racism. There is no way to lie about these topics in a way that creates progress on any of these issues. Stories like Go Ask Alice or A Million Little Pieces end up sensationalizing and/or contributing to stigmas surrounding addiction. Ones like The Awful Disclosures, Papillon, or Odd Man Out that lie about (or exaggerate) larger social issues like sexual abuse, prisoner abuse, or racism trivializes factual accounts by contributing to the fallacy that if one person is exaggerating, anyone/everyone could be. Furthermore, these appropriated narratives take focus and resources away from actual victims.

The worst part of this article, though, was the review of Helen Dale’s The Hand that Signed the Paper. This book completely fabricates a tale in which Nazis are “liberators” and the main characters happily join Nazi ranks. B&N stated explicitly that this book is completely false, and went on to say that many view this book as antisemitic (if the premise wasn’t enough of a sign). This book has no historical or factual basis and promotes the aggressors of one of the most horrendous crimes against humanity in modern history- what could possibly be the value of this book? I can’t fathom a reason why anyone would fabricate a sympathetic portrayal of Nazis (aside from propaganda), and I certainly cannot fathom how this book could have any literary or societal value.

Barnes and Noble argues that The Hand that Signed the Paper’s merits are that “if you take the book to be a complete work of fiction, it’s still a powerful historical story with some basis in reality, and a thought-provoking and often emotionally powerful read.” This personally feels like a reach, and it’s certainly filled with enough vague buzzwords to tell the reader nothing about the book’s content. This review is about as empty and purposeless as false memoirs themselves, and the looming $14.99 doesn’t make it more convincing. Furthermore, the article’s eagerness to promote a sympathetic portrayal of Nazis is a bad look for the company.  

Since so much of the hype around false memoirs is the hoax itself, we’d all be better off if we just read the exposé and left it at that.

Article in question: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/blog/5-hoax-memoirs-still-worth-reading/

Week Six Prompt Response

Just because Valentine’s Day is over doesn’t mean romance is dead. Yes, it’s time to put away Blind Date with a Book, but why not bring out our Bingo cards instead?

The romance genre has more than enough tropes and subgenres to fill out plenty of pre-made cards, and this way patrons can discover their new favorite niche. Furthermore, many of the categories can apply to books, movies, TV shows, graphic novels, etc., so it’s perfect for integrated advisory. If patrons have any trouble filling out boxes, advisory staff is there to help them out. Patrons can mark off squares as they read, watch, and listen, and when they get bingo (or blackout) they can get a prize.

Some category ideas: Scottish romance, “Duke” in the title, established relationship, love triangle, Amish romance, “foot pop” kiss, enemies to lovers, poetry, confession in the rain, forbidden love, historical romance- I could go on!

The Peach Keeper- Sarah Addison Allen

                                                              

Author: Sarah Addison Allen | Title: The Peach Keeper | Genre: Gentle Reads

Publication Date: March 22, 2011 | Number of Pages: 304

Geographical Setting: Walls of Water, North Carolina | Time Period: Modern Day

Plot Summary: Willa Jackson is trying make up for her ne’er-do-well past. Paxton Osgood is trying to leave her family’s expectations and start her own future. As the re-opening of the abandoned and possibly haunted Blue Ridge Madam looms closer, strange things are happening in Walls of Water, North Carolina. Willa and Paxton, as heirs-apparent to the Women’s Society Club, will have to rediscover their past- and perhaps find themselves along the way.

Characteristics for Gentle Reads:

Cleanliness- This book has little to no sex or profanity. There is allusion to and minor threat of violence, but no actual violence shown. Similarly, the story’s values are mostly old-fashioned.

Language/Style- Utilizing simple, homespun language, Allen creates a relaxed, domestic atmosphere. 
Tone- The book has an "optimistic, even comforting ethos" that leads to "comfort and Catharsis" (Saricks 195).

Setting- The story takes place in a small Southern town where everyone has known each other for generations.

Plot/Character- None of the stakes are especially high, which leads to a fairly leisurely-paced plot. The story's conclusion is "resolved and satisfying" and the characters end up "in balance with themselves, their lives, and each other" (Saricks 195.) The story is much more character-driven, and there is little to no "man vs. man"-style conflict. A main focus is the "character's arc of personal development," focusing on Willa and Paxton primarily and their respective love interests (Colin and Sebastian) secondarily (Saricks 194). Everyone knows each other and (mostly) gets along.

Read-alikes:

Fiction-

Big Stone Gap (Adriana Trigiani)

The Book Charmer (Karen Hawkins)

Queen Bee Goes Home Again (Haywood Smith)

Similar Authors: Lauren Groff, Fannie Flagg, Alice Hoffman, Suzanne Palmieri

Nonfiction-

For fans of Willa’s coffee shop: Top 100 Coffee Recipes: a Cookbook for Coffee Lovers (Mary Vard)

For fans of the Women’s Society Club: The Red Hat Society (Sue Ellen Cooper)

For fans of the Peach Tree itself: Eat Your Yard! (Nan K. Chase)

Week Five Prompt Response

1) Different publications review different types of books and they allow different types of conversations. For example, Booklist will not publish negative reviews, while, as you have all seen, Kirkus has no problems with it. Ebook only books, which are increasingly popular (especially in the romance genre) see little to no reviews in professional publications unless they have a big name author, and then still it's usually only RT Reviews (formally Romantic Times) or other genre heavy publications. How does this affect collection development?

Every source having different rules and procedures is bound to make the collection development process disorienting. It’s hard to compare or get a comprehensive sense of a title with uneven coverage. It’s also hard to get a good sense of a title with only one review source as well, so it’s not exactly like acquisitions staff can avoid this issue. The ability to track down an even selection of titles with consistent reviews seems to take a great deal of effort and critical thought, and anything less will make a collection suffer (which seems incredibly unfair to acquisitions staff, the library, and its patrons).

Issues of omission, such as negative reviews with Booklist or ebook only titles, make it almost impossible to judge (let alone select) something for a collection. Reviews are supposed to be a tool to help inform readers about what’s out there (and whether it’s worth exploring), but how can they do that if they deliberately leave titles out? It’s almost impossible to collect everything (especially considering the size of the Internet), but purposeful omission will keep acquisition staff from making informed decisions.

2) Look over the [The Billionaire’s First Christmas] reviews - do you feel they are both reliable? How likely would you be to buy this book for your library?

Even though the reviews don’t seem to be very professional, I think that they give a good insight into what patrons may say about the book itself. I would want to look at more reviews to get a better sense of the book and stronger reliability, especially since there’s no guarantee that the two reviews are impartial (for example, the Amazon review could have been from a friend of the author). Since the book is free from Amazon, it wouldn’t be any cost to acquire. However, there seem to be many books similar to this, so it may set a precedent to get any book just because it’s free. Unless there is a known patron demand for this title or author, I would most likely skip this title.

3) How do the reviews make you feel about the possibility of adding Angela's Ashes to your collection?

The breadth of reviews speak to the title’s prestige more than the content. Sad and hopeful memoirs are a huge genre, and many people have strong connections to their content. However, I personally find it hard to distinguish one from the other based on pure summary. The fact that these four major reviewers were uniformly impressed (“extraordinary work in every way,” “a wonderful book; strongly recommended,” “expect demand…from word of mouth thereafter,” “a vivid, wonderfully readable memoir”) speaks strongly to the book’s virtues.

Frankly, even mixed reviews would have made me consider adding it to the collection (possibly sparking a conversation among patrons to the title’s merits). Since everyone seems to agree that this book is truly exceptional (and apparently also quite buzz-worthy), I wouldn’t hesitate to add it to the collection.

4) Do you think it’s fair that one type of book is reviewed to death and other types of books get little to no coverage? How does this affect a library’s collection? 

This is unfair to a degree. While books should have a fair chance at review, there are limited resources with which to do this. This is especially true with the rise in self-publishing- how can a source identify, let alone read and review, thousands of titles scattered across the internet? Many good (or even excellent) titles are definitely being ignored, and there should be a stronger effort to find, review, and acquire them. At a certain point, though, there may be a risk of information overload.

I am unsure how reader/patron interest (or potential interest) plays a role in what does or doesn’t get reviewed. If selection is skewed towards what people are more likely to read, this practice could be slightly (but only slightly) justifiable. At what point would that become a self-fulfilling prophecy, though?

This practice definitely hinders a library’s collection, as they are bound to miss out on great but overlooked titles. Depending on the library’s acquisitions budget, though, a smaller selection from which to choose may be a silver lining.

5) How do you feel about review sources that won't print negative content? Do you think that's appropriate?

Refusing to print negative content is a complicated but ultimately negative practice. It definitely becomes an issue if the source reviews all books. This can easily lead to misleading false praise. One could argue that if they only print reviews of “good” books, it allows the reader to only focus on positive titles and (especially in a library sense) know what to select more efficiently.

However, it also keeps the reader from being able to determine a title’s merits for themselves. For example, Kirkus’s review for Blood Crime outlined how ridiculous the book seemed, but many readers purposefully seek out “ridiculous” books for a light, fun read. At a certain point it just becomes self-censorship. Readers can always check another source, but at this point why not just go to the other source instead?

I definitely understand the pressure to not alienate anyone with negative reviews, but if there is a reasonable opportunity to give a full spectrum of reviews, everyone will benefit.

6) How do you feel about reviews for personal reading, and what are some of your favorite review sources?

(I do not have any acquisitions responsibilities at my workplace)

I almost never read reviews for personal reading. I try to know as little as possible about a title going in, mostly because I find that reviews (or even back-of-the-book synopses) skew my perception of the book. I end up going in with expectations that are completely different from what the book actually delivers and it throws me off mid-read. Everyone reads differently, though, and I can definitely see why other people may want to read reviews before diving into a new book.

I do like informal reviews (mostly word of mouth). The most formal review source I check is Goodreads, although I don’t use it very much. Friends, coworkers, patrons, and (occasionally) Tumblr make up most of my unofficial review sources.

Kirkus-Style Review

Title: A Confederacy of Dunces | Author: John Kennedy Toole
Pub Date: 1980 | Page Count: 404 | ISBN: 978-0-80-213020-4 | Publisher: Grove Weidenfeld

A dizzying, increasingly absurd romp around 1960s New Orleans, A Confederacy of Dunces follows the exploits of Ignatius J. Reilly through odd jobs, failed uprisings, and countless pilfered hot dogs.

Originally published twenty years posthumously, John Kennedy Toole attempts to wedge every social and cultural taboo into 400 pages, beginning with his debatably comedic and insufferable protagonist. Ignatius J. Reilly, a fussy, arrogant, incompetent ex-graduate student, finds himself experiencing his first consequence after indirectly causing his mother to wreck their car. She then insists he find a job to pay for the damage, requiring him to take intermittent pauses from composing his manifesto. This leads to a parade of terribly mismatched jobs, from file clerking at Levy Pants (“perhaps the most disreputable office that he had ever entered”- where he is fired for staging a failed revolt) to manning a hot dog cart (where he eats more hot dogs than he sells). These episodes are interspersed with scenes from the Night of Joy, a seedy, perpetually vacant “glorify cathouse.” Burma Jones, Night of Joy custodian and handyman, alternates between cursing his boss Lana Lee and attempting to sabotage her shady dealings. By the end of the book, these seemingly disjointed storylines converge in a way that would seem far-fetched if not for the book’s already bizarre nature. Dunces is equal parts character study and preposterous farce. Reilly defines this book through his misanthropic eccentricity, although his eccentricity is demonstrated almost entirely through his fatness (“fat bum” “fat white freak” “fat bastard” “Fatty Arbuckle” etc.). This portrayal is not only offensive to fat people, but his characterization itself is completely unhinged from anything in the real world. Then again, nothing in this book shares any semblance to the real world.

Rambling, humorless, and needlessly edgy, the fact that this book won a Pulitzer is, in Ignatius’s words, “an egregious insult to good taste.”

Secret Shopper

Going into this assignment, I really wanted to make things as easy as possible for the reference librarian. I picked a time when the library was not busy and tried to prepare a pretty good idea of what I was looking for (a short, "typical" mystery). I expected the interaction to go similarly to how they go at my workplace- asking what the person is looking for, what they like about the genre, examples of similar titles, etc. The actual interaction ended up being very different.

The person I spoke to was very nice, but they did not ask any questions beyond "What kind of stuff do you like?" They admitted they didn't read many mysteries either, but tried to immediately make a recommendation instead of trying to determine what I was looking for. When I told them I'd read their recommendation, they noted that the third book in the series had recently come out but did not move to recommend it. They also asked the person next to them, who suggested checking the Bestseller Express shelf but did not make further suggestions.

During this point, the person helping me was looking through whatshouldireadnext.com, and I noticed that they could find similar titles by clicking the "Mystery & Detectives" or "Mystery & Thrillers" tags. They were saying that they couldn't find any mysteries, so I asked them if there was a tag they could click to check, to which they said there was not. They then found a mystery title (Magic for Liars by Sarah Gailey) that appeared to overlap with fantasy. This was not exactly the straightforward mystery I was looking for, and they went to pull it from the shelf instead of asking if that was close to what I had in mind. They offered to pull another specific book for me, but had trouble remembering the title or author. Judging from their synopsis, this book also seemed to stray from what I was looking for, so I declined when they asked if I wanted that one as well. Afterwards, they went back to the desk and the interaction ended.

I really want to give this person the benefit of the doubt, even though things didn't go very well. I think it was easy for them to assume that I'd be open to any mystery, since I said I didn't read a lot of them. I also think I could have spoken up more about my preferences. I was very worried about influencing the conversation and would probably have given unprompted information normally. I could have also influenced their perception of what I was looking for because I had read their first recommendation (although I failed to share that I hadn't enjoyed it). However, even with the best of intentions, this was an unsatisfactory experience by reader's advisory standards. If I was under the same circumstances, I would most likely not seek their advice again. In a normal situation, though, I would be much more comfortable asking for a recommendation (since I could be more specific).

Week Three Prompt Response

1  1)I am looking for a book by Laurell K. Hamilton. I just read the third book in the Anita Blake series and I can’t figure out which one comes next!

The Lunatic Cafe is the fourth book in the Anita Blake series. While Novelist lists series order under individual titles in their search results, fantasticfiction.com is an excellent resource for determining series order. By just looking up the author’s name, one can access every title the author’s ever written organized by series and numbered chronologically. It even adds the publication date in parentheses after the title.

2) What have I read recently? Well, I just finished this great book by Barbara Kingsolver, Prodigal Summer. I really liked the way it was written, you know, the way she used language. I wouldn't mind something a bit faster paced though.

Our Endless Numbered Days (Claire Fuller) is classified* as “Lyrical” like Prodigal Summer but with an "Intensifying" pace (“Intensifying” is only a “bit” faster paced, although there are also many well-written, “Fast-Paced” books as well). Prodigal Summer and Our Endless Numbered Days also had similar readalikes (such as Kristin Hannah). Many "Lush," "Lyrical," "Descriptive," and "Fast-Paced" books were either "Steamy" or "Violent," which didn't seem to fit the tone of Prodigal Summer. If the patron has no problem with a different tone/situation and just wants similar writing styles, I would recommend Jonathan Franzen's The Twenty-Seventh City as well.

3. I like reading books set in different countries. I just read one set in China, could you help me find one set in Japan? No, not modern – historical. I like it when the author describes it so much it feels like I was there!

The Pure Land (Alan Spence) is classified under "Descriptive," "Compelling," and "Sweeping.” While “Descriptive” should cover it, “Compelling” and “Sweeping” serve as “bonus” terms that help ensure that the reader feels part of the story. The Pure Land is also classified under both "Historical fiction" and "Biographical fiction." It is set in the Victorian era, although other time periods may be searched if this is inadequate. Additionally, while some of the book is set in Scotland (as the protagonist is Scottish), it is primarily set in Japan (where the protagonist moves). The protagonist’s relative newness to Japan should contribute to the reader’s immersion, as they can both experience a new place together.

4. I read this great mystery by Elizabeth George called Well-Schooled in Murder and I loved it. Then my dentist said that if I liked mysteries I would probably like John Sandford, but boy was he creepy I couldn't finish it! Do you have any suggestions?

A Great Deliverance (Elizabeth George) is the first book in the same series as Well-Schooled Murder, so it should be fairly similar (and not too creepy). The next after Well-Schooled Murder is A Suitable Vengeance, if the patron doesn't want to start from the beginning. It’s difficult to determine what the patron liked about Well-Schooled Murder (aside from it being a mystery that is not creepy), but other authors with similar descriptors (such as "Suspenseful," "Compelling," and "Intricately Plotted") without terms like "bleak" or "violent" include Michael Connelly and Robert Crais. Sample titles might include The Lincoln Lawyer or The Black Echo for Connelly and The Monkey’s Raincoat for Crais.

5. My husband has really gotten into zombies lately. He’s already read The Walking Dead and World War Z, is there anything else you can recommend?

I Am Legend (Richard Matheson) is a zombie classic. It’s listed as a readalike with World War Z, as both “describe human efforts to survive after a plague has created hoardes of undead.” Both titles also have film adaptations, which might be good pairings with The Walking Dead. However, since the creatures in I Am Legend could be zombies or vampires, I would also recommend The Living Dead, which has a selection of short stories from many authors (Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, etc.) which are all about zombies.

6. I love books that get turned into movies, especially literary ones. Can you recommend some? Nothing too old, maybe just those from the last 5 years or so.

The Song of Names (Norman Lebrecht), The Good Liar (Nicholas Searle), and Julieta (Alice Munro) were all published within the last five years, have movie adaptations, and are classified under “Literary Fiction” and “Books to Movies.” A Song of Names (starring Clive Owen, Tim Roth, and Catherine McCormack) and Julieta (starring Emma Suarez and Adriana Ugarte) appear to be “drama” stories, while The Good Liar (starring Helen Mirren and Ian McKellan) is more of a cross/double cross thriller. If TV adaptations are also acceptable, Alice Hoffman’s The Rules of Magic (which is a prequel to the popular “book to movie” Practical Magic) is due to be adapted into an HBO Max miniseries.

7. I love thrillers but I hate foul language and sex scenes. I want something clean and fast paced.

Mary Higgins Clark and Victoria Holt both appear to be “clean” and “Fast-Paced” thriller writers (although Victoria Holt tends to be more gothic and Mary Higgins Clark leans toward mysteries as well). A Cry In The Night (Mary Higgins Clark) and The Curse of the Kings (Victoria Holt) would be good starts, but there are also a number of Christian fiction authors who write thrillers (Ted Dekker, Frank E. Peretti, Terri Blackstock, etc.). While the author’s religion was not necessarily part of the criteria, Christian fiction authors seldom have profanity or sex scenes, which should make them a safe bet.

***

After these last few weeks, Novelist might be my new way of finding new books. Nothing I used before let me search by appeal terms, so this is a huge upgrade. I’ve used Goodreads before, but I usually go by personal or semi-personal recommendations (either from friends, patrons, coworkers, or social media). I like to look up books I’ve enjoyed on Goodreads and browse through the “similar titles” section to find new books. I also like to look through “shelves” people have placed those books on to see what individual users would compare them to. We also often get copies of Bookpage magazine at work, and although I don’t use it very often, I like to browse through the upcoming titles when I can.

---

*All book recommendations/classifications found through Novelist