Children's Fantasy, the Bartimaeus Trilogy

The Bartimaeus trilogy, by Jonathan Stroud, is children’s fantasy. Much like Harry Potter, however, it holds significant appeal for adults as well as children.
Unlike the earlier Harry Potter books, though , it is probably unsuitable for youngins, as its more gritty in its early stages.
The trilogy is set in an alternate British Empire. Magicians exist, and thus history is altered accordingly. Magicians, (the ruling class, much like the English nobility,) derive their power by summoning entities from another dimension, which because of the magic the magicians have mastered, are forced to do their bidding.
The magicians oppress a class of people called the commoners, but this underclass is growing increasingly discontent with its enforced servility, and a resistance is brewing.
The first book, (the Amulet of Simarkand,) opens with Bartimaeus, a mid level Genie or Jin, being summoned by a young boy named Nathaniel. He is charged with stealing a magical artifact for the boy, and due to the nature of the summons, is forced to obey.
Right away, the reader is thrust into a moral world where almost no one, with the possible exception of Bartimaeus, is a good person. Shades of muddy brown predominate.
The Amulet of Simarkand, and the next two books in the series, do not fulfill any of the arcatipal fantasy tropes. Most magicians, who draw their power by enslaving Demons like Bartimaeus are evil. Nathaniel, the boy who summoned Bartimius, is well on the way towards being evil, and, as his plans for the Amulet spiral out of control, leading to several deaths, he discovers, along with the reader that he’s not as cunning as he thinks he is.
Bartimaeus, who narrates half of the book with snarky snide first person narration, keeps the reader amused, despite the rather grim plot. Nathaniel, while evil, is still a likable enough character, acting in the best interest of his government. The amulet which he stole is stolen from him in turn, and Nathaniel, with the reluctant help of Bartimaeus, must get it back before it is used to destroy the Government.
A subplot involves the growing “resistance” a commoner organization determined to oust the magicians from power. Nathaniel, a magician, is disdainful of the resistance, and commoners in general, an attitude which never wavers during the Amulet of Simarkand. This is a good thing. An easy trope would have had Nathaniel soften towards the underclass, it would have him realize that they are just as good as he is. It’s a compliment to John Stroud that this in no way happens.
In the second book, The Gollum’s Eye, Nathaniel, (now rechristened with the magical name of John Mandrake,) is working for the British government as a mid-level employee of the Department of internal affairs, the equivalent of homeland security. He has become like the other magicians, arrogant and unfeeling. Only a ghost of his boyhood. . . idealism is almost but not quite too strong of a word remains. He summons Bartimaeus again, and uses him to try and ferret out the resistance, and to solve a mystery having to do with a golem.
In addition to Bartimaeus’s narration, chapters alternate between John and the leader of the resistance, Kitty Jones, introducing us to the only other person who can make a claim to decency in the series.
The third book sees john now in a high level government position, with Bartimaeus at his side again. John has taxed Bartimaeus to his limits, so that he’s virtually powerless, and this couldn’t have come at a worse time, for John needs Bartimaeus’s help to stay in power, and alive.
Kitty plays a prominent role in this novel as well.
The novels plot is interesting, and relatively unpredictable, especially if you go in expecting a conventional type of fantasy, boy comes of age, does most things right, and is a honorable descent person throughout, but the real interest lies in two things. Nathaniel and John’s moral journey from young boy to arrogant young man hungry for power and back again, and the narration of Bartimius.
Bartimius is constantly sarcastic, disinterested in the events around him, sardonically observing Nathaniel/John. All three books are peppered with footnotes, sometimes elaborating on a quip bartimius has made, (these quips keep the reader amused even in the darkest sections of the trilogy,) and sometimes elaborating on things bartimius did before the book began.
John’s struggle is the key joy of the books, and turns the trilogy into a quest for redemption. It’s no surprise that he finds this redemption, but watching it happen is a riveting experience, and makes all three books worth reading.
The book’s are gritty affairs. For one thing, Bartimaeus, and the spirits like him, are slaves. Stroud doesn’t dodge around this issue at all, and so even moderately likable magicians, (and there are few of those,) are still, with two notable exceptions, slave drivers.
The trilogy is still intended for children, so there is no hint of sex, no really extreme violence, but a grim Orwellian atmosphere pervades the second two books in particular.
In short, if you like your fantasy grim yet still moderately amusing at the same time, your characters complicated, read these books.

An Opinion on Michael Palmer's Second Opinion

After reading Look Me in The Eye a few weeks ago, I became interested in Asperger’s Syndrome. More spisificly, I became interested in fictional depictions of people with Asperger’s. I wondered how they matched up to Robison’s excellent description of himself.
That is why I read the Second Opinion, by Michael Palmer. The book jacket wasn’t very promising. Doctor with Asperger’s. Can you say House rip-off? Because I sure can.
The book was marginally better than I thought it would be.
Palmer is a slightly above average writer, whose strength isn’t the development of believable characters, but is instead the development of a plot that moves along in such a way as to keep my interest moderately sustained, enough to get me to finish the book, just to see how it turned out.
Thea Sperelakis, an Asperger, who is a moderately famous medical doctor is summoned back to Boston when her father is the victim of a hit and run accident. Only, and this is shocking, Thea begins to discover that her father’s accidental meeting with a car might not be an accident at all, and she egins to stumble, and this is also shocking, onto a wider conspiracy at the hospital in which her father worked.
With her father able to blink one eye, allowing Thea to communicate with him in short, criptic conversations, Thhea must figure out what’s going on in time to bring the victims of her father’s maiming to justice.
Spoiler, she does.
The book moves along at a good steady clip, rarely pausing for introspection, or for anything else. The conspiracy is sort of interesting. The books resolution is just satisfying enough to not leave me feeling too cheated, although it is slightly implausible. It’s either too obvious, or not obvious enough, who ends up being behind the conspiracy, depending on which way you look at it.
The Asperger’s is photogenic, as well. No weird rant’s on a mate with paws, unlike in Robison’s autobiography. It’s more of a quirky Temperance Brenin type of autism, for good or ill.
In short, if you like thriller’s this isn’t bad, and if you don’t like thrillers, and you’re stuck with this, it’ll get you through several hours.

How to Lose Friend's and Alienate People

I just watched How to Lose Friends and Alienate People, about a writer trying to make it as a celebrity reporter, and it's the best comedy I've seen in the last year. Its just slapstick humor, awkward situations, piled atop one another. I thought I was going to die laughing.
The main lead's struggle to get coke, his being kicked in his hurt leg by his romantic coestar, the meeting with his father, the landlord, all just so damn funny, and the jokes, most of them anyway, come at you at such an obleaque angle, I was laughing out loud.
Plus, the serious aspects, obvious in a hollywood film, work well. If I gave stars, I'd give this one four, or five, or whatever a perfect score is. Great film.