Violent Artsy

I went to see Only God Forgives tonight. I have a problem with it; I don't know whether it was a violent film that attempted to be artsy, or an artsy film that happened to be violent. I'm leaning towards the latter.

If you want to see a film with an easy-to-follow sequence of scenes, this isn't the film for you. If, however, you just want to look at Ryan Gosling's face for a while, then by all means head to your local cinema. Just be warned: pretty boy Gosling doesn't stay pretty. He also doesn't say very much, which certainly detracts from the idea of him as an actor. We put it much more simply: he was hired to be a model in the film, hired for his face, and that's what they spent a lot of time showing on-screen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing the guy, and I'm not dissing the film, but there wasn't an awful lot of expression on his face - or anyone else's unless they were being stabbed or cut to pieces - and the sequence of scenes made it difficult to tell what happened, and what didn't happen. While we're willing to accept the stabbings and the shootings, we struggle with the karaoke (a word I'm unsure of the spelling of, and cannot at the moment do a spell check - deal with my guess!). I think the fact that one of the songs sung came without any sound from the guy's mouth. He was miming a song in a foreign language, and we didn't even get the subtitles.

All that said, it was an enjoyable film. If you're into that sort of thing.

For me, it brought back memories of English class. We had a particular name for film's like Only God Forgives; we called them Michael Films, so called because the lecturer, Michael, seemed to make it his goal to show us the most bizarre and/or mentally scarring films he could possibly fit into vague genre definitions. I'm still caught up over which film was more damaging to my psyche: Oldboy, Blue Velvet, or Spanking the Monkey.

This particular brand of film, however weird, almost always manages to do something: it gets me thinking.

Tonight, I ended up thinking about a book I plan on writing, and how other books I'm planning on writing seem to all fit into one vaguely described universe. It's interesting how that happened, and while I'm not sure I know which elements of stories will actually fall together neatly, I know I've got some new ideas for the utilization.

That's the fun thing about cinema night. I don't always pick the film - actually, I rarely do - and so I'm exposed to a lot of different types of cinema. Comedies, horrors, actions, violent-artsies and artsy-violents, thrown into a mixture along with films for children, superhero films and the occasional fantasy. Cinema night, and film classes, are central to my life. In the space of a couple of hours, I can see the world through the eyes of another, however disturbed and crazy a world that might be. Stories are told, lives are lived, people are cut open by sharp swords, and it makes my brain whir with excitement at the potential for stories in the future.

Day 13: Surprise!

Every day when I wake up, I check my Amazon sales. It's become a habit, since the free promo days ran earlier in the year and Planning Before Writing actually began to sell. It's gotten to the point where if it sells even a couple of copies overnight, it'll reach a Top 100 position in a sub-category most of the time. In seeing that it had, in fact, done that, I went to the Amazon page to see where it ranked. I didn't expect much.

I expected, much less, to see a review there from May that hadn't been there when I saw the review from June. When I received the June review, a 3-Star review (which isn't bad), I wasn't exactly over the moon. I think I was mainly put down by the star-rating, because I didn't see how it was justified. But then, I was being a bit biased. But it was the only review visible. I literally could not see another review on the page. There was only one.

This morning, two.

I looked at the second. I read the date. I got confused. Then I completely ignored the fact that Amazon hid a review from me for two months to look at the star-rating. The reviewer thought that the ideas in the book were so worth reading that she gave it 5 stars. 5!

I was shocked. I wanted to happy dance all over the house. My brain was too tired to process that sort of movement, though, so I just let myself get giddy. I pretty much stayed that way all day. It was an awesome surprise to wake up to. It was a justification of the work I put into the book, and the sort of mind-set I was in when I wrote it; I was in Teacher Mode, and I knew what I was talking about. I had to, during class, for the sake of my pupils, and for those four weeks that carried through into my writing. And someone acknowledged that something I wrote had some value beyond just the price-tag.

See, that's the thing about reviews. A good review doesn't just say "I was willing to spend to the money to buy this book". It also says "I think this book is worth reading", and sometimes you might even add "Buy this book, even if you're put off by the price". My book is only 99 cent USD, so I'm not sure that really applies in my case, but you get the point - a good review says something about the value of the content, not just about the price of the book as an object or file.

So, that was awesome.

I was then able to arrange to get to go see a play starring one of my very bestest friends in the whole wide world, the ever-lovely Clara McQuaid. She was the lead in my first play-to-the-stage The Rest is Silence, she ran Drama Soc last year (and happened to be chosen by two directors to be leads in two productions during the year) and in the short space of time that I've known her, she's managed to go from being nervous she couldn't do a character justice to having her first professional job as a stage actor. And, well, that's just brilliant. I didn't think, after seeing her in The Rest is Silence, that I could ever be more proud of her, but I was wrong.

I've got the play to look forward to during the week, tickets already bought. It's looking to be a fantastic show (and lots of people are talking about it!).

Oh, and as for the writing... 1,000 words done tonight, but I intend on staying up a bit longer to keep working. Just as soon as I grab more tea.

Review - The Great Gatsby

Back when I was in first year of college and infinitesimally younger, our lecturer put F Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby on our course for us to read. Now, I do my best with college reading material, but there's something about being told to read a book but there being no obligation to read the book that just puts me off it entirely. I tried to read the book, and failed miserably. Then John Green decided people should read it, and suddenly I had an interest. I think that says more about my willingness to follow up on a recommendation of a book than it does about my interest in college.

Anyway, by far the biggest highlight of the reading of the book - aside from finally doing what I'd set out to do before, and failed - was to discuss the book with John Green. He made a video talking about the first chapter, and I seized upon the opportunity to answer his question about Gatsby's 'American Dream'. More on that at the end of the post in a "spoiler" zone. Until then: the review!

So, what did you think of the book when you finally got around to reading it?
I was honestly and pleasantly surprised by how funny it was. I think a major problem with the great classics in literature is that many of them are portrayed as exactly that: great and classic. Classic implies age, and age reminds us of our grandparents laughing at stories that are only funny to them and no one else. But this, while being a "classic" was nothing at all like that. The humour was full of wit and intelligence that seemed like a product of the great modern minds, not just in books but on television in talk shows and the like (Stephen Fry immediately comes to mind.)

Beyond that, there was also a great story to fill a relatively short book. There were characters of varying complexity, scenes of places that, while being dated, felt right when I read them and relationships that were imagined perfectly. It was an old book, yes, but a story that can still be read today. (In fairness to it, actually, it's not even ninety years old. If I'm half as interesting at that age I'd be delighted! If I aged as slowly as the book, too, even better.)

What's your favourite aspect of this book?
I don't know whether this is because John Green recommended it or whether I just noticed it, but I like how there was a clear comparison between The Great Gatsby and Paper Towns; in each book, the characters all mis-imagined people expertly, so that Gatsby was a whole number of different things and only some of that true, like Margo was a different person according to everyone else. How we imagine people complexly and how we get it wrong is by far one of the most interesting messages that I can take from the book (both of them, actually). It's a book that can teach us a lot about not only fiction but the people who surround us, too.

Who would you recommend this book to?
If you like John Green, this is a good book to pick up next. The humour is similar (if a little older) and the style of writing is different, but the messages in the book are familiar and worth picking up. For lovers of American literature, for people who like to read the classics, for people considering studying English in university and for people who love good stories and/or strong messages in books, this is for you. It's a fantastic book and once you get into it you'll fall in love with it. Unfortunately, it's only nine chapters long, so it'll be a short lived romance. Some of the best ones always are.

The "spoiler" section, featuring the comments on The Great Gatsby

I apologise for turning all English-student on you, but this is actually what I said in the comments section of John's video. I'm such an incredible nerd sometimes.
 

Me: It seems to me that the continuing search for wealth and monetary success is surrounded not only in a growing sadness, but in a mixed sense of morality (seen clearly in Tom's mistress in New York). Daisy and Tom are rich, young and good looking, they have a beautiful little girl, and neither one is happy. Combine that observation with the snobbery about East and West Egg and we see that all they value in the Great American Dream is wealth and not the happy lives meant to go with it.

John: I agree with everything you say here: Somehow we've managed to divorce success from happiness, which leads to a larger question: Is being happy the goal of being alive? Or is there some greater goal? And is the greater goal served by the ambition to wealth and luxury? (I think this is not such a clear-cut question, and I think Gatsby explores the question in all its complexity.)

Me: I think we can imagine that Gatsby's American Dream changes throughout the novel. He's achieved what he first set out to do - getting wealth by any, even scrupulous, means - only to find that he wants to be happy. He hopes to use his wealth to get the girl he loves. Maybe one of his greatest flaws is not realising that he can have happiness in being honest (demonstrated by his friendship with Carraway) rather than trying to prove his worth by the value of his house.

And with that, I bid you adieu. I have a website to work on and articles to write for The Phantom Zone.

Review - Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Life

A while ago, there was a film called Scott Pilgrim Vs the World. It starred Michael Cera, it was hilarious and it made me want to read the graphic novels that it was based on. I didn't know then that I would enjoy them so much, or that the six graphic novels were made into one film - that was kind of a bummer, because I really wanted to up my dosage of Pilgrim. Still, I've only read one of the graphic novels, so I have five more to keep me amused. As always, start with volume one: Scott Pilgrim's Precious Little Life.

It's in these pages that we first encounter Scott, his Rating (note: I will probably end up giving everyone I know a Rating if I get really, really bored) of Awesome and the two girls he dates: Knives Chou and Ramona Flowers. And, you know, the League of Evil Exes. They're sort of the bad guys. Basically, if he doesn't defeat Ramona's seven evil exes, he can't date her. And by defeat, I mean in a battle to the death. And they're weeeiiird.

What did you think of the graphic novel?
I don't think the word hilarious even does it justice. I would have to give it a rating of Awesome for being so funny, easy to read and bringing me back to the days when I would play computer games all day (wait... I still do that...). Also, seeing as Scott lives with his gay friend who owns everything of value in their apartment, it makes me feel better about my current living situation (the smallest room in the house, living with my parents... my windows froze over on the inside on Christmas morning!)

Also, the series is set in the magical land of Canadia. Love it!

How do the characters compare to others you've encountered?
Scott is unlike anyone I've ever read about. He's hopeless at relationships, mostly clueless, but he plays bass and can kick just about anyone's butt. Ramona reminds me of Margo Roth Spiegelman, except she's somehow cooler. Also, she skates through an interspace highway. That's awesome.

How does the book compare to everything else...ever?
Considering its size, it packs a mighty punch. Yes, there are mighty works of literature that speak a whole lot more about wider subjects, but nothing quite tells a love story in video game format via graphic novel like the Scott Pilgrim books. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever seen a book like these ones. And I work in a bookshop.

What did you think of the film adaptation?
Based on my reading of volume one, I can say easily that the film sticks fairly closely to the books. Most of the same lines are used, the actors cast look remarkably like the drawings and they deliver the comedy and the heart of the graphic novels perfectly! As far as adaptations go, it was one of the best I've ever seen (and I've done modules in college where we look at the original text and compare it to the adaptation!). As a film by itself, it was still brilliant. Neither of my brothers read the graphic novels and they still loved the film. It has its own unique, quirky charm that you just don't get in most films. And I go to the cinema almost every week, so I'm fairly sure of myself when I make that claim!

Who would you recommend this too?
People who like graphic novels are obviously the first people I would suggest this to if they haven't already read it. Aside from that, teenagers and young adults who like a good laugh when they're reading will enjoy this if they can get over the fact that it's a comic. Anyone who enjoyed the film is bound to like the book, too. It's an easy read, not too long and given they're only published in paperback, it's fairly cheap, too!

What's next?
Well, I have to write twenty three thousand words over the next four days, so I won't have a new review until next week. I do have books lined up to review, though, so there shouldn't be many/any delays in getting it online. If you're wondering what the writing is all about, it's Camp NaNoWriMo. I stopped writing for a while, so now I have to play catch up to finish the challenge. I'll be writing this book at a fast pace until it's finished, too, so people who are used to seeing me online a lot may not have the pleasure of my company. Or the displeasure... let's be fair, not everyone likes me (of those, most just don't know me very well). So, until next time (hopefully my victory blog post on Sunday!), happy reading!

Review - Thirteen Little Blue Envelopes

Remember Maureen Johnson? She's that author I quoted in my last review who said hilarious things. Up until recently, I referred to her as 'my favourite author whose books I hadn't read.' Not anymore. I took a risk (admittedly, a very low risk...) at buying one of her books, Thirteen Little Blue Envelopes, at the end of May, and I read it very recently. What can I say? I was missing out.

What did you think of the book?
First of all: I loved the concept of the story. I don't have a mad aunt who sends me all around the world with very little instructions to guide me along the way, and rules that stop me bringing guide books, money or anything else that might be useful going across continents and oceans. Second of all: I loved the characters. Ginny was a great protagonist. She was friendly, she was funny and best of all: she was ridiculously bad at being a popular girl stereotype and everyone still liked her. I loved the ensemble of new and weird people entering her life, the mad little ideas her aunt had, the opportunistic letters and the feeling of everything needing to work out for Ginny, from a reader's perspective.

How does it compare to other books you've read?
If I am being perfectly honest - which I aim to be in my reviews - the only other books close to this one that I've read are those by John Green (er...all of his novels that hit the shelves) and The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Johnson wrote a book that was much more light-hearted than Green does. This isn't to say either one of them is better than the other; rather, the happy feelings you get from Johnson's book are marred by much less sadness (especially when you compare it to Looking For Alaska, which made me an awful lot more.) Yes, you read that bracket right: more.

More? What do you mean more?
Let's be clear: a book that is only filled with happiness, with laughter, with strange people, can be good, but not great. To be great, the book has to inspire a lot more emotions from the spectrum. I laughed a lot while reading this book, but it does have its sad moments. On top of that, you really want Ginny to succeed in whatever she thinks her quest is. Oddly, you don't necessarily want her to ever go home, even when she first arrives scared and lonely in London. This would ruin the story, but aside from that you just want her to keep following through with the quest her aunt sent her on.

What was your favourite quirky moment?
My experience of Maureen Johnson is that she's a little bit quirky. If you saw her commentary on the Royal Wedding, or if you looked at my last review, or if you follow her on Twitter, you'll know this is definitely an understatement. So, I'll attempt to keep this spoiler free, but I definitely have to say that the play she made up for the book is definitely one of my favourite quirky moments in the book. Maybe not the best play in the world, but definitely good for what it is.

Who would you recommend this book to?
If you like young adult literature, the works of John Green and/or travel fiction, this is a good for you. It's funny, heart-warming and that little bit of delightful that every reader needs every once in a while. The characters are likeable, weird and interesting, the plot equally so. I couldn't put it down.

What next?
Well, I have another Maureen Johnson book to read, but not quite yet. Next week we've got another triple-set of reviews (compensating for the lack of reviews this summer) and I've got to write a helluva lot of fiction. Also, I think I want to travel everywhere now. Thanks Maureen, my bank account and job will love you for this... I may have to postpone it for a little while. And I don't think I'll be following Ginny's aunt's rules - I need money and guidebooks and stuff when I'm going anywhere. (Seriously, I once got lost on the way home, but that's a tale for another day...)

Review - Writing A Children's Book

I picked up this book, Writing A Children's Book by Pamela Cleaver, way back when I started working in the bookshop. We’d ordered it in especially for our Reference section, and I just bought it straight out. I didn’t read it. The sticker on the back says it came into three and a half years ago. So, bear that in mind, then also bear in mind that the original publication of this book was in 2001. This is an old book (as far as books go, yes, this is old). This book will be filled with inconsistencies in how we do things these days. It uses words like Postcard instead of Email. And it has a couple of errors in it that some wonderfully helpful YA authors helped me deal with. The corrections are at the bottom of the review, so you don’t get caught out.

What did you think of the book?

Okay, two things: it was easy to read (I got through it in a day... a day I was also in work for six hours with only a half hour break for eating!) and it did contain lots of helpful advice on writing fiction for children. It went through the basics of what different stories there were to be told (genres, etc) and it warned against a number of different things when submitting (like looking at the current market and thinking it has to be the same... or avoiding the market completely and thinking you’re revolutionising it; My book is so much better than every other book on the shelves at the minute, even the stuff you commissioned. That’s a big NO. If you take anything from this book it’s that you should read more. I advise checking out my reviews, which split Kids books up into categories – you might not have heard of some of them.) In saying both of those things, I will also advise you to check out the corrections department at the end of this review to make sure you don’t do the very, very stupid things Cleaver advises. 2001 or not, she was just wrong, and it almost spoiled the book. Twice.

Have you found the book useful?

Like all books I read about writing, it has given me an idea. Or three. So, yes, I found it useful. I have yet to actually write anything on these ideas (I’m still waiting for a way to start them to work its way to the front of my brain, which is currently on backlog with various other types of fiction), but the book has given me a way of sorting through the ideas easily enough. And, in researching the faults in the book (one in particular), I have a better idea of how to plan these books properly. The tips Cleaver gives are actually quite useful, and not just for children’s books (just especially for them.)

C

Who would you recommend this book to?

The obvious target market is the large group of people who think they want to write for children because it’s clearly so easy. Let’s smash that illusion right now, shall we? It’s not easy. It’s damn-well difficult. Picture books, despite their size are hard to write. YA books, despite being closely related to the more advanced books in the adult section (i.e. general fiction, Sci-Fi, Fantasy and occasionally Crime Fiction), are even harder to write than their adult counterparts, because they have to limit themselves to the maturity of the audience and, if they’re really daring, try to teach the reader something without being preachy (think John Green and every one of this books!) and entertain without being too creepy (think Twilight, minus Stephenie Meyer making a guest appearance as Bella Swan and the 120 year old stalker looking at the minor...)

As well as that, though, anyone who wants to write any sort of fiction can benefit from this. Nowadays, many adults are reading books from the children’s section without realising it such as Twilight, The Hunger Games and His Dark Materials, to name but a few. Getting to grips with how stories are aimed at different ages and interests can help with developing ideas for different markets in the adult world.

Now, what were those dreaded corrections?

Cleaver makes two big mistakes that I saw: one on the word count of teen fiction, and one on submitting to publishers/agents. Nevermind the outdated use of the word ‘postcard’, we’re talking stuff that will really change the way you use this book. And this is bad change, we’re talking about.

My problem, in tweet form: What's the average length of a YA book? @realjohngreen @maureenjohnson @barryhutchison - a book I'm reading says 35000 words.

Ken Armstrong's response: It's a piece of string question - 35k sounds awful short to me. Would guess 50-60k min. I know nothing obv. You could flog that length as a novella perhaps

Barry Hutchison’s response: As long as it needs to be. Fiends are all about 45k. Horseman is 60k. Think Dept 19 is 120k+. Depends on the story.

John Green’s response: I'd say 60-100 thousand. (Alaska is 228 pages--very short--and it's 65,000 I think.)

Maureen Johnson’s (hilarious) response: YOUR BOOK IS WRONG!

So, that was kind of vital. Hutchison’s books are aimed at slightly younger readers, hence the lower word count on the Invisible Fiends books when compared to John Green’s book (Looking For Alaska). If someone followed Cleaver’s advise, the result would be a book that is far too short for publication. Do not follow her advice. Mine is clearly better (and that is to listen to Hutchison, Green and Johnson, even if the latter isn’t so much helpful as comical – that’s helpful in its own way!)

But Cleaver wasn’t done ruining your career. So, without further introduction:

My problem, in tweet form: On submitting the MSS: book suggest putting the copyright notice at the end. Thoughts? @realjohngreen @maureenjohnson @barryhutchison

Barry Hutchison’s response: I've never done that. The fact you wrote it means you have copyright and pub knows that.

Brendan McLoughlin’s* response: I think if u [sic] submit to agents, they'll be able to make the copywrite [sic] decisions

Maureen Johnson’s (hilarious) response: Okay, what is this crazy book?

*Brendan went on to make the point of this all being pretentious, particularly for unknown authors such as myself and him. The last thing we need is to insult the publishers we're submitting to.

Again, follow my advice: leave out that nasty copyright symbol (©). Publishers are not thieves nor are they stupid. If you really feel that insecure about your work, you shouldn’t be submitting it anywhere. Get over your insecurities about someone stealing your work by doing the smart thing: print a copy for yourself and put it in an envelope. Go to the post office, a very old form of email for those of you who find the concept alien in its entirety, and send that envelope with your complete book (and your name, details, etc...) to yourself or a trusted friend. Hold on, we’re not done. When it arrives, DO NOT OPEN IT. Look at the top of the envelope. There is a postage date. This is government approved. This is guaranteed, 100%, proof that this envelope was in existence at this date. When you submit, no one can steal your work, because if they do they’ll have a nasty law suit on their hands for breaching copyright – you have a date to prove when you had it, they don’t. No matter how big they are, you win.

A word on that, before you go mad: ideas can’t be copyrighted, and someone may have had an idea very similar to yours that was accepted when yours wasn’t. This does not mean the publisher stole your work. Do not sue everyone who publishes something similar to what you wrote. Do the mature and smart thing: write a book that is even more unique and amazing than your other book, and keep writing to get both published.

A further note on copyright: once you write it, it’s yours. The copyright symbol (©) is just clarification of the year of copyright. The envelope in the post is just your proof that you are the author. They do not seal the deal. They are essentially irrelevant, until someone challenges the authorship of the book. (This also applies to music, paintings, and pretty much everything that people create, though products require patents to prevent theft – I am not a patent expert, ask me no questions on it.)

So, what next?

Again, lots of reviews to come from me. And lots of writing. I have to catch up on Camp NaNoWriMo. It’s not a children’s book, though. I couldn’t figure out how to start Brilliant Idea 1 or Brilliant Idea 2. I’ll figure them out while I’m writing my fantastic Science Fiction novel. (They say self-praise is no praise. That’s stupid. It’s just not worth anything to anyone else, which is why modesty is preferable.)

Review - The Age of Apocalypse (X-Men)

One thing quite a few people know about me is that I have a lot of interest in comics. Truth be told, I know more about them than I have right to: I never really read them. I decided to change that, and ignoring my reading list altogether I read The Age of Apocalypse epic in the X-Men series of comics from Marvel, including the Prelude. Originally I had planned to review each of the four volumes in turn, until I realised that they were almost impossible to distinguish between.

They’re broken down into individual stories, following the likes of Cyclops, Havock and Sinister, Magneto and Rouge, Gambit and the Xternals, and a whole cast of characters taken from the comics and thrown into a new story. Everything changes in these comics, the logic behind it all explained in the Prelude. Introduce time travel and things are bound to change. And in the words of my fellow comic book nerd from college, ‘This is their masterpiece.’

How did you find reading comics to reading regular fiction?

It was...different. Essentially, the storytelling falls into two categories: the dialogue and the pictures. It’s literally a case of showing and not telling (except when dialogue and narration has to fill in the gaps for readers). One of the hardest things is getting used to looking at everything on the page in different orders – some scenes spread over two pages, the images being that big, so the whole layout of the comic changes.

As well as that, there’s the issue with reading dialogue and following what’s actually going on. It took me a while to get used to reading what was being said in the right order. This is no fault of the people who wrote the comics, of course; I’m just not that used to reading them. For me, the writing goes right across the page, no pictures.

What did you think of the story?

As I’ve said, this is their masterpiece. Each of the books (Prelude, and Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4) fills us in on the little details: what caused the Age of Apocalypse to come about, how the X-Men planned to stop it, once and for all, what Apocalypse was doing to the world, what was happening to the universe and how they ultimately hoped to stop that, too. I won’t drop spoilers. For fans of X-Men, this is the must-read series of comics. They break open the whole world of X-Men and answer the question: What would happen if Charles Xavier never formed the X-Men?

This really is the ultimate ‘What if...’ story, and it certainly let down a lot less people than House of M and its particular affect on the Marvel universe...

What was your favourite arc, and what was your least favourite?

My favourite would have to have been that which followed Rouge. She was always one of my favourite characters (I know, the outsider being my favourite character... har har har). Again, no spoilers, but there’s a whole new set of stories being told in this group (which still keeps the old favourites around, too, like Storm).

My least favourite... Wolverine. My experience with Wolverine – known in these comics as Weapon X, I might point out – is that he’s the angry, distant type. He fights and he’s looking for answers and God help anyone who tries to get in his way. Well, with certain changes that still follow his character’s general story, he’s a bit annoying in how much he gets down in himself. And he’s missing a hand. That may have attributed to it all (because, you know, his hand is supposed to grow back..?).

Whose story were you happiest with?

This one is difficult... Cyclops has an interesting story, but he still maintains a lot of his usual morals and all that stuff that eventually wears him out. Beast is even more...delightful, we’ll say. I think they did a great job with him in these comics, taking him to an extreme they couldn’t have gotten away with in a different reality. Best of all, though, was Nate Grey. I stumbled across Nate in my extensive reading about X-Men a few years ago and never really understood where he came into the story. Well, AoA answers the very important question of his origins, and goes into some detail on his powers, his life and his personality. And he’s one of the coolest looking characters that isn’t grossly mutated beyond recognition as a human. (The white flick in his hair and the glowing eye certainly did the trick!)

Saddest part of the whole series?

This one would call for a spoiler. No spoilers. Just wait until you get to Volume 4 and you’ll see it all happening. You just have to wonder what made them do it. Then you realise it’s genius, if a little too tragic. You’ll see!

Who would you recommend this series to?

A few groups... firstly, if you like X-Men but haven’t read this series yet: this is for you. Do I have to say it again: It’s their masterpiece! Secondly, to people who generally like comics and haven’t read this series, even if you’re not especially a fan of X-Men. Thirdly, if you like a good story and think you can manage the images (and, can I just say, the artwork is brilliant, so it’s totally worth it), then you should give this series a try.

What’s next?

Well, I can’t possibly answer that for Marvel... they have the most convoluted plots in the world that I will forever be out of my comfort zone with them. I can only hope to catch up on some of the amazing stories they tell. As for me, I’ve got reviews coming up of a children’s book, a graphic novel, a Young Adult novel and a book about writing for children, none of which were on my list. (I think the list is cursed, because I chose too many big books and started reading too many of them at once...)