Book Reviews: A Blast from the Past

For Christmas of 2005, one of my then coworkers (and a fellow reader) gave me a journal and told me it was to keep track of what I read.  I recently pulled it out, with the intention of adding these into Good Reads as a kind of back up.

I wrote the date I finished, the title, the author, the page numbers, and then a 1-2 sentence review. I diligently logged books from 2006 through July of 2013, when I moved totally to Good Reads.

I thought I'd share some of these reviews; looking back they're hilarious, often in a "what was I thinking" kind of way :)

For example.  My thoughts on Twilight:  "An easy read, but a dumb book.  Like it's written for teenagers by teenagers. Grrrrr."

And, The Harlequin by Laurel K. Hamilton: "Actually not that bad. The psychobabble yapping did not totally dominate the book."

What was my obsession with the word dumb?  Here's The Secret Lives of Doctor's Wives: "A dumb book, but it's entertaining, which is actually pretty good for a dumb book."

I seemed to use the words excellent and incredible overly much.  But what can you do when you read a book like Making Money by Terry Pratchett:  "Excellent as always, and it's hard to say that about a book where the main character's first name is 'Moist!'"

One more, The Secret History by Donna Tartt (a generally well-liked book): "What is the point of great writing about dull people?  How does a genuine bacchanal turn into a yawn???"

I do still wonder about those questions, by the way.

I'm only through 2008, for tagging all the books in Good Reads and entering my reviews, and I can already see how my tastes have changed.  Less paranormal series now, less thrillers, more literary books and more of the classics I never picked up in high school or college.  More books, period.  About 10-15 more per year now!