This book had some great, intense and harrowing action scenes. And I really like that it centered around four women. This team of four are athletic, attractive women that were recruited by the military to do covert counterterrorism operations in situations where men would not be given access or whatever. Neat concept, I thought. And Thor executes it pretty well.
A couple issues I had right away though were the women's characterizations and the jumpiness of the novel. The reader is introduced to these four women and a paragraph for each summarizes their character and appearance. While reading it, I thought this approach was a little heavy handed and too much info at one time. Although, later I referred back to it to keep the four women straight. (Oh, and I should note these characters have been in another book, so maybe these descriptions were just to get me up to speed.)
Another issue was that in only a couple chapters in we switch locations to follow a new cast of characters. My initial reaction was, What the hell? Go back to the chicks in Venice kicking ass and taking prisoners! I don't care what these new people are doing in a top secret military meeting. No one is getting thrown out of windows here! Later, I understood that we needed to get some of that background from the people in the meeting, but I still didn't like the interruption in the flow of action. This jumpiness continued throughout the book.
Part of the problem with switching between three to four different places with completely different characters is all of the names. I don't know what the appeal is, but Thor loves using first and last names. I understand using both names when introducing new characters, but constantly referring to all characters by either their first or last name when you have so many characters in various places around the world doing completely different things, I get confused. It interrupts flow and brings me out of the book when I have to go searching through what I've already read to figure out who I'm reading about now.
Another glaring issue within this same idea: Thor opens the book with some doctor rooting around in the jungles of Paraguay. We don't get back to the jungle until page 200. Eh. I'm not sure that's okay with me. I understand his reasoning; we need some significant background and things to happen before we can fully understand what the doctor found in the jungle. But still, 200 pages seemed a little too long to keep us hanging. Though I could see how this opening (if speeded up) would be a good opening in a movie.
In fact, his writing seems kind of cinematic in scope. I could picture all of the things that happened and all of the amazing stunts the women pulled off like it was a movie. Although the terrifying Nazi machine they find might be a bit graphic for PG-13...
Anyway, there were some clear problems I had with it, but overall The Athena Project was an enjoyable action thriller worth looking in to, if you're into that sort of thing.
Why Allya, I AM into that sort of thing. How did you know?
ReplyDeleteThis sounds interesting. It's too bad the structure is kind of inconsistent. So my question for you is this, how would you fix that problem? The cinematic action and feel of the book is probably enjoyable, but I can see why it would be a little jumpy. What would be a way to keep the exciting feel but have it flow better?
I have the same question for the way the characters are described once in quick succession and then never again, which is a problem I come across ESPECIALLY when you're writing something with a team of characters or an ensemble piece.
Otherwise, I might have to check this book out (along with the 18,000 other books I've promised myself I will read). YAY LITERARY ANALYSIS.
I like the title of the book. It almost made me think that someone was creating a group of Athenas and kicking ass. Oh wait...
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the author intended it to, potentially, be a film? Problem is, I have that issue sometimes too, where when I write a story, sometimes I see it clearer as a piece of video, rather than a piece of fiction, which is always difficult to balance and distinguish.
I never really know how to deal with onslaught of character profiles. I like them, but I also dislike them because they're not going to get sucked into my mind that quickly, you know? But it's nice when you can refer back to them when you feel lost. I did like the way Amy Tan did it when she wrote "Joy Luck Club". She gave just enough information at the beginning, and then expanded on their characters throughout the book. But, again, it was kind of annoying to have to keep flipping back and forth between the story and the character profiles.
Perhaps we should try to find various ways to work around that. Theme for next month?
To answer your question about jumpiness, Cerasi, I think switching place/cast of characters would have to be done a little more strategically. Like at breaks in the action, after the women have accomplished an objective, before they embark on a new one. Not that Thor didn't ever do this, I just think it could have been done more consistently.
ReplyDeleteSpecifically for this book, maybe not leaving the Athena team after only a few chapters. This could translate to longer blocks in each place following the different people. Or one chapter in Venice then the next at Langley (though for this book I don't think enough went on at Langley to sustain that kind of pattern.)
As far as block descriptions.. they serve their purpose but they get annoying. I think you want the reader to remember certain things about each character. But a better way to do this is to show (sometimes). They will probably remember it better and then you're following the old adage SHOW DONT TELL. Except sometimes. One of my writing teachers always said as long as you balance the two, you should be fine. (Because sometimes showing takes too long and is boring.)
So for this case, I don't know. There were some things in the descriptions that we needed to know. (Like one was divorced and had a terrible time with men. This precludes her having a terrible time with men in the book. Okay, now we understand why.) But another one was immediately described as shy. And then later we see her being shy. Not okay. We see that, we don't need to be told that.
I like this as a theme for October: Introduce characters with/without a block of description; or introduce characters well, in keeping with how the story flows. Thoughts?
This may be jumping the gun and being a reverse sort of misogyny, but it was written by a guy. That is not to say men cannot write women characters, ala Joss Whedon, but they have a bad track records. Men seem to be more involved with the beauty and prowess of the women rather than their actual characters.
ReplyDeleteWomen sometimes do this with their female characters too, but a team of attractive women kicking butt always reminds me of Charlie's Angels. That is barely a bastian of feminism even though they are awesome ladies, but in the original show THEY WERE ENCOURAGED NOT TO WEAR BRAS.