The way Lake earns her money is as a marketing/PR consultant. Her current client is a Manhattan fertility clinic that needs an image overhaul, particularly since stories like OctoMom out in California make people distrust these types of places. While Lake is there, she meets Dr. Mark Keaton, a George Clooney-like playboy who flirts with Lake relentlessly. She gives in to Keaton’s advances (because hey, it’s been a while), and has sex with him at his apartment. Afterward, she heads out to the terrace to enjoy the view, where she promptly falls asleep until morning.

Upon returning to the bedroom, Lake discovers a ghastly scene: Mark has been brutally murdered. His throat was slashed and there is blood everywhere. Lake knows how this would look to the police, so instead of calling 911, she hightails it out of the place and hopes the cops won’t learn she was there.

The next day, news of Dr. Keaton’s murder circulates at the clinic, as investigators come in to question everyone. A paranoid Lake is convinced the cops will learn she was at Keaton’s apartment on the night he was murdered, so she decides the only way to save herself (and have a shot at maintaining custody of the kids) is to track down the murderer herself.

The rest of the novel then follows Lake as she digs into Keaton’s personal and professional lives, hoping to find something that can point her to the killer’s identity.

Liked:

• The basic setup had promise. To be honest, it reminded me a bit of the first season of the TV show Damages, where the heroine wakes up in an apartment with a dead body and doesn’t remember what happened. This book had the potential to be a good story.
• The reveal that the fertility clinic was basically giving away embryos without the parents’ consent was sufficiently chilling and creepy. Too bad the author DID NOTHING with that storyline and chose instead to make it one big red herring.

Disliked:

• I didn’t think White did a good job of building and maintaining tension throughout the book. It really felt as though Lake would have been safe if she simply left the whole thing alone. Someone shaved her cat… so what? If that was intended as a warning, then all she had to do was back off the investigation. It didn’t seem as though there was any pressure from the police, either. She was getting rattled by routine questions, but the cops never had anything concrete on her that would place her at the scene of the crime. Also, most writers add to the body count at some point (because doing so elevates the stakes), but White chose not to. Again, this was a mistake because I didn’t get the sense that Lake was truly in danger.
• The writing was downright amateurish at times, featuring godawful sentences like the following: “With her free hand, Lake ran her hand roughly through her hair.” Huh? How about a simple, “Lake ran her free hand roughly through her hair?” Where are the editors these days?
• While White did a relatively good job of masking the killer’s identity throughout, I felt cheated after learning that Rory was the culprit. Really? A woman in her fifth or sixth month of pregnancy did all that damage? I know women are still mobile at that stage, but let’s get real here. That final fight in Rory’s basement was particularly high on the ridiculousness scale. It was as though White deliberately chose the least likely person and thought to herself, “Oh, wouldn’t it be a great twist to make her the killer?!” Cue eyeroll.
• White didn’t do much to differentiate the various personalities at the clinic. I couldn’t tell one doctor from another even at the very end of the book, and had trouble keeping anyone’s name straight. They were all just random folks holding a variety of health care jobs at a fertility clinic as far as I was concerned. In other words, character development was severely lacking.
• I hated the detours that took Lake to the kids’ camp two or three times in the novel. Way to lose any momentum that might have been built in the main plot! When writers willingly wander off track like this, it’s a sign that they’re simply looking to beef up the page count because the main story isn’t solid enough to stand on its own.

Rating:

Hush by Kate White is something I just grabbed from the library one day because the blurb on the back sounded fairly interesting. However, I was disappointed by the lack of urgency and tension that are necessary to the success of a “thriller”, and won’t be checking out any of White’s other works any time soon. This book doesn’t even have enough entertainment value to warrant an average rating, so I give it 2 stars out of 5.

Poirot agrees, and after arriving at Nasse House begins to meet some of the residents, including George and Hattie (whom everyone except Mr. Stubbs’ personal secretary Mrs. Brewis thinks is “simple”), architect Michael Weyman, and Amy Folliat, an older renter on the grounds and whose family previously owned Nasse House. Also expected soon is Etienne de Sousa, Mrs. Stubbs’ cousin from Italy.

On the day of the fair and the murder hunt game, things get a bit crazy, as the grounds are opened up to the general public. For the murder hunt, someone at Nasse House recommend a local girl named Marlene Tucker play the victim in the boathouse. Once the game is underway, Mrs. Oliver starts to have some doubts as to whether or not anyone will actually solve the “crime”.

Later in the afternoon, Mrs. Stubbs asks Mrs. Brewis to take a tea tray to the boathouse so Marlene can eat something. Once there, Mrs. Brewis discovers that Marlene has been murdered for real! The bad event that Mrs. Oliver feared really did happen after all. The question becomes: who would want to kill a 14-year-old girl? To make matters worse, no one can find Mrs. Stubbs either, and when her hat turns up floating in the river, everyone assumes the killer tallied two victims on that day.

Police investigators soon arrive to take over the case and question all suspects. They get nowhere, and even Poirot is unable to make headway. A full five weeks go by before he gets a flash of inspiration and figures out what went down at Nasse House.

Liked:

• I liked the setup and solution to this crime. Who knew that staged murder games were as popular back in Christie’s day as they are now? What an interesting way to frame the real murder
• The solution was very tricky, but fair. I was unable to guess that the current Hattie Stubbs wasn’t the real Hattie Stubbs, but the explanation — that George was already married when his mother Mrs. Folliat proposed Hattie as a wife — made sense, especially since the family was determined to keep hold of Nasse House. And killing the girl was necessary because the cousin was coming and would’ve spotted “Hattie” as a fraud? That was brilliant!
• I liked the reveal of the additional body under the folly (an architectural folly, I mean). After all, with “folly” being in the title, the reader expects it to play an important role in the story. That was the body of the original Hattie and was a nice touch.

Disliked:

• For some reason, this book seemed to progress at a snail’s pace for me. It took me an unusually long time to read it, and at no point in the story did I feel I was engrossed in a page-turner. In fact, I often found myself drifting off to sleep in the middle of reading it, and my Kindle took several tumbles to the mattress after falling from my senseless hands. That’s kind of disappointing for a murder mystery.
• There were too many characters in this novel, and they were not developed very well. I Besides the immediate residents of the house, I couldn’t keep anyone else straight because they had no distinguishing characteristics to make them memorable.
• Once again, Poirot didn’t narrate his investigation, so it was impossible for the reader to get clues from him about where to look for the solution. I miss having Hastings around, because he served as a sounding board for Poirot, thereby giving readers some insights into the detective’s thoughts.

Rating:

Dead Man’s Folly by Agatha Christie certainly isn’t the best book in her canon. The way was slow-going most of the time, but I think the solution made the journey well worth it. I give this book 3 stars out of 5.

Basically, Gladwell argues that epidemics hinge on the following three factors: Law of the Few, the Stickiness Factor, and the Power of Context. Law of the Few refers to how certain individuals seem to be responsible for great change. These individuals are connectors, mavens, and salesmen. They’re the ones that have the widest circle of acquaintances, have the most influence, and end up setting trends. They range from Paul Revere warning that the British are coming to Manhattan club kids wearing Hush Puppies and hip students using Acer Aspire netbooks. Epidemics don’t happen without their approval.

The Stickiness Factor refers to how well something stands out, its memorability. A midnight ride to alert folks of the Brits’ impending attack was more memorable than a midday one. Airwalk ads featuring kids using connecting with their shoes in odd ways were more memorable than traditional ads. Context refers to the external environment and how things must be aligned in just the right way for these epidemics to take hold. Cutting down on petty subway crimes in NYC, for instance, helped revitalize the entire transit system from the ground up.

Liked:

• Gladwell uses a number of interesting examples throughout the book. I enjoyed hearing about Airwalk, Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood, Hush Puppies, and the other success stories he highlighted.
• Gladwell presents this book in simple terms that laypeople can understand. I’m sure I could find a sociology textbook that addresses these very same issues, but that wouldn’t be half as fun to read, now would it?
• I think Gladwell was mostly spot-on with his arguments. It’s hard to disagree with the factors that combine to create that elusive tipping point.

Disliked:

• This book was so short that it’s kind of hard to find something worth disliking. If I had to pick, though, I’d say it’s the fact that Gladwell doesn’t really provide any earth-shattering insights here. I think most of what he says is merely common sense. Sure, he’s giving specific names and descriptors for these phenomena, but it’s not as though he’s the first one to “discover” the tipping point theory or put everything together like this.

Rating:

The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference by Malcolm Gladwell is an interesting enough read. I don’t think it’s the kind of book that will open many eyes, insofar as the information is basically commonsense stuff, but nevertheless it’s worth spending a few hours on. I give it 3 stars out of 5.

Edwards begins by talking about her father, an ex-Marine and the strongest person she knew. The way he recovered from a stroke and lived 18 years after doctors gave him no chance at all was a lesson in resilience that Elizabeth never forgot — and one that would serve her well through later calamities.

Edwards then writes at length about the tragic death of 16-year-old son Wade in 1996. It was a freak auto accident as Wade was driving with a friend to the beach. The boy wasn’t speeding, wasn’t under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and wasn’t impaired by terrible weather. A sudden gust of wind stirred up that blew the car off the road and caused it to roll. Wade was killed instantly, but his passenger merely suffered a sprained ankle. Edwards goes into great detail about the grief she felt at losing a child, and these chapters are painful enough to make any parent tear up.

From there, Edwards shifts the focus to herself and writes about her battle with breast and bone cancer. She discusses how she felt upon first learning the diagnosis, and takes readers through the emotional roller coaster ride of having to deal with this ravishing disease — while her husband was in the midst of another national campaign.

And yes, Edwards touches very briefly upon her devastation at learning that John committed adultery. The way the book was marketed, it seemed that this subject would be the main focus of Edwards’ writing, but that wasn’t the case. She does not go into detail here, not even naming the other woman. So if you were looking for a tabloid account of the affair, you’ll be sorely disappointed.

Liked:

• I was surprised at how intimate this memoir was. Not in the details of the affair, as I said, but in how much of her grief Edwards shares with readers. Even after 13 years, it’s clear that Wade’s death weighs heavily on her heart every single day. As a mother myself, I could feel a little, tiny bit of her pain.
• Ditto about the details regarding cancer. Though the book was mostly about being resilient in the face of a child’s death, the fact of the matter is that Edwards is facing death herself. How she deals with that is amazing, and I have to admit that I teared up when I read the part about her welcoming death at least a bit because her faith tells her that she’ll be reunited with Wade in the afterlife. I don’t share Edwards’ faith, but I can imagine what a comfort that must be to her.

Disliked:

• I wish Edwards hadn’t been so…lenient with John about the affair. She repeatedly referred to it as his “indiscretion”, and seemingly went out of her way to minimize the active role her husband played in the adultery. Although she didn’t come right out and say so, it was easy to infer that Elizabeth put most of the blame on the other woman. The fact that Elizabeth chose to forgive John is her business; I’m perfectly ok with that. But again, she seemed very reluctant to blame him for his part in the affair.

Rating:

I was surprised at how much I came to care about Elizabeth Edwards and her situation while reading Resilience. I wasn’t much of a fan of hers before, but now that I’ve learned a bit about what she has gone through in her life and how truly resilient she is, I respect her and wish her all the best. I give Resilience 4 stars out of 5.

The book opens with “Blood Drive”, which I think was supposed to be a humorous look at the misadventures of a group of three men who venture to Nashville to donate blood for a friend who was in a construction accident. They get into a series of bad situations that include shootouts and chases with one of them hanging from the yakima rack on top of the vehicle. Next came “Fetching Raymond” about a family that goes to prison to see their son and brother before he is executed by the state. After that was “Fish Files”, an engaging story about a lawyer who, when a fat settlement essentially fall into his lap, decides to chuck it all — practice, family — and head to South America with the dough.

“Casino”, about a spurned husband who gets the ultimate revenge on his ex-wife’s new lover; “Michael’s Room”, about a lawyer who unexpectedly has to face the consequences of one of his cases; “Quiet Haven”, about a man with a penchant for nursing home scams; and “Funny Boy” about a gay Clanton man who returns from San Francisco to live out his final days as he’s ravaged by the AIDS virus round out the lineup.

Liked:

• I’ve always thought Grisham is a good storyteller. His work might never appear on a reading list for a college Lit class, but he’s entertaining enough for me.
• I enjoyed most of the stories, particularly “Fish Files” and “Quiet Haven”. I think the idea of forgetting everything and moving to paradise with a big mound of cash like the protag in “Fish Files” is attractive to most people. And I was intrigued by the scammer in “Quiet Haven”. I knew something was up with him right from the start, but couldn’t figure out his angle until it was spelled out for me.

Disliked:

• I listened to the audio version of this book, which was read by Grisham himself. His reading was completely flat and BORING! He barely brought any emotion to his own words. I mean, I didn’t figure out that “Blood Drive” was supposed to be a comedy until the very end because Grisham practically read it in a monotone the whole way through. I usually don’t notice readers unless they’re terrible. Grisham was pretty bad.
• Though I enjoyed the general idea — that of taking the house down — behind the story “Casino”, I have to call bullshit on this kind of thing ever happening for real. Not at Indian casinos, at any rate. Yes, people can count cards and win large amounts of money doing so. But not at Indian casinos, and not when table limits come into play. There’s no way in hell any Indian casino would allow someone to play six hands at $50,000 per. Those are Vegas numbers, not Mississippi numbers.

Rating:

Ford County by John Grisham was a rather enjoyable collection of stories that is worth reading, especially if you’re a Grisham fan. They don’t feature the gripping courtroom drama that Grisham is known for, but the characters and situations are interesting enough to draw you in for a fun weekend of reading. I give this book 4 stars out of 5.

Hardcover Fiction:
1. THE GIRL WHO KICKED THE HORNET’S NEST, by Stieg Larsson
2. TOUGH CUSTOMER, by Sandra Brown
3. THE HELP, by Kathryn Stockett
4. STAR ISLAND, by Carl Hiaasen
5. VEIL OF NIGHT, by Linda Howard

Hardcover Nonfiction:
1. _____ MY DAD SAYS, by Justin Halpern
2. THE OBAMA DIARIES, by Laura Ingraham
3. THE BIG SHORT, by Michael Lewis
4. EMPIRE OF THE SUMMER MOON, by S. C. Gwynne
5. CHELSEA CHELSEA BANG BANG, by Chelsea Handler

Paperback Trade Fiction:
1. THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, by Stieg Larsson
2. THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE, by Stieg Larsson
3. LITTLE BEE, by Chris Cleave
4. THE LACUNA, by Barbara Kingsolver
5. CUTTING FOR STONE, by Abraham Verghese

Paperback Mass-Market Fiction:
1. THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, by Stieg Larsson
2. THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE, by Stieg Larsson
3. SMASH CUT, by Sandra Brown
4. CHARLIE ST. CLOUD, by Ben Sherwood
5. WATER BOUND, by Christine Feehan

Paperback Nonfiction:
1. EAT, PRAY, LOVE, by Elizabeth Gilbert
2. THREE CUPS OF TEA, by Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin
3. THE GLASS CASTLE, by Jeannette Walls
4. WHERE MEN WIN GLORY, by Jon Krakauer
5. MY HORIZONTAL LIFE, by Chelsea Handler

The first case involves a man named Arthur Brinkley, who one day listens to the voices inside his head and opens fire on a crowded ferry. He ends up killing or injuring five people, including Chief Medical Examiner Claire Washburn. Claire takes a bullet to the chest, and while she suffers a collapsed lung and loses a lot of blood, she ends up surviving. Meanwhile, Brinkley turns himself in by showing up at Boxer’s doorstep one night, making this one of the easiest arrests in her career. Of course, putting Brinkley away will be tough, as he’ll clearly use the insanity defense. But Lindsay leaves that to Yuki the prosecutor.

The second case involves a series of kidnappings taking place in San Francisco and Los Angeles. It seems that someone is after child prodigies, but, surprisingly enough, the kidnappers don’t bother making ransom demands of the parents. What’s happening to the kids? Lindsay and her crew soon get to the bottom of that mystery as well after tracking down leads through a nanny service that all of the victims’ families had in common.

The third case had to do with a string of brutal attacks at Cindy Thomas’ new apartment building. A dog was bludgeoned to death, and then two residents were murdered. The only common link is that all of the victims were known to make excessive noise during the daytime. Boxer and Co. of course come through in finding the killer here as well.

Liked:

• Honestly I’m finding less and less to like about these Women’s Murder Club books. I’m going to finish the series (or at least get caught up to #9, which is the most current book), but I doubt I’ll go any further. The only reason I’ll continue is that I already have the audiobook versions loaded onto my iPod.

Disliked:

• Why were there so many damn storylines? It was hard to keep them all straight, and having three main plots just made each seem less important. Could it be that Maxine Paetro (let’s face it, she must be the one who’s really writing here) simply couldn’t puff up a single storyline enough to meet the minimum page requirements? It certainly seems so.
• I used to like Lindsay Boxer as a character, but I don’t anymore. She was so damned wishy-washy in this one regarding her personal life that it made me cringe. She was forever crying and going back and forth about whether or not she loved Joe. She hated being without him, but then when he moved to SF for her, that still wasn’t enough? WTF?? Women like that give us all a bad name!
• Again, this is not so much the Women’s Murder Club anymore as it is the Lindsay Boxer Show. I got hooked on these books because of the special club dynamic. If it’s just going to be Lindsay… well, that sucks.

Rating:

The 6th Target by James Patterson and Maxine Paetro suffers significantly from several problems that the writers simply weren’t able to overcome. There were too many plots to follow, there weren’t any “club” meetings or activities that led to the solutions of the crimes, and the characters are becoming less and less likable with each installment. I give this book 2 stars out of 5.

Basically, Wilkie Collins contends that it was in the immediate aftermath of the Staplehurst crash that Dickens met a mysterious figure known only by the surname Drood. Both Dickens and Drood went from passenger to passenger after the crash; but while Dickens tried helping everyone he encountered, Drood seemed to be sucking the very souls out of everyone he touched — or so says Dickens in relating the tale to Collins.

From there, the plot becomes extremely twisted and convoluted, as Dickens seems to grow increasingly obsessed with Dickens. By extension, Collins does as well. Collins comes to believe that Drood is some sort of mass murderer who has a dangerous hold of Dickens through the power of magnetism, and who is trying to use the “Inimitable” for some nefarious end.

It would be impossible for me to try to recount even just the major events that occur in this novel, which spans more than 800 pages. The best I can do is to say that Collins, an morphine and laudanum addict, is as unreliable a narrator as they come, so you can’t really trust anything he says!

Liked:

• There were lots of references to Dickens’s novels in this book, which I greatly appreciated. I especially liked learning how the various characters, settings, and events in The Mystery of Edwin Drood, Dickens’s unfinished work, might have come into being.
• Most of the scenes that featured Dickens were enjoyable to read. It was interesting to see the interactions between him and Wilkie Collins, especially when Collins’ jealousy of Dickens’s greater success bubbled to the surface.
• I enjoyed hearing about Dickens’s reading tours. I bet it would have been amazing to see one of these performances way back when!

Disliked:

• Why did the novel have to be so darn long? There were tons of boring parts that I could barely push my way through. Did we really have to know every detail of Collins’s household affairs with his two mistresses? Boring! Was it absolutely necessary to talk about the different plays that Collins wrote and the way the performances were received in London? Yawn. Those scenes, of which there were many, added nothing to the work as a whole and should have been cut.
• So Drood was nothing more than a hallucination, the result of an elaborate — and very unnecessary — scheme by Dickens to see if he could “mesmerize” someone for a long period of time? Collins was thus under the influence for four or five years??? Ugh, gimme a break. That’s as bad as the “it was all a dream” cop out on TV shows and movies. What a friggin’ waste of time!

Rating:

I decided to read Drood by Dan Simmons because I was very interested in The Mystery of Edwin Drood, and thought The Last Dickens by Matthew Pearl was somewhat fun. I’d read some reviews saying Simmons’s effort at reconstructing the final years of Dickens’s life was far superior to Pearl’s, but I did not find that to be the case at all. This novel was too long, there were too many nonessential scenes, and worst of all, the plot went absolutely nowhere. I give this book 2 stars out of 5.

At least, that’s what the general public thought. But some in the publishing world believe that Dickens might have written the novel backwards, meaning that the final chapters were still out there somewhere. James Osgood, an Boston book publisher, gets drawn into the mystery when Daniel Sand, a clerk at his firm, is murdered while out at the docks to retrieve some Drood chapters from London.

Osgood’s firm is in financial trouble and was counting on profits from Drood to bolster their bottom line. Without the manuscript, however, there’s a real chance the firm will fold. Therefore Osgood and Rebecca Sand, Daniel’s sister and fellow clerk at the firm, travel to London to try to track down the last Dickens. They soon become entangled with violent criminals seeking the same treasure, and must go escape from some harrowing situations before all is said and done.

There are two additional storylines in the book. One follows the adventures of Charles’s son Frank, who is a British officer stationed in India and is occupied with trying to track down opium thieves. The other storyline follows Charles Dickens on his farewell speaking tour in America in 1867, and details some of the troubles he and his extensive entourage had with fraudulent tax collectors and a female stalker.

Liked:

• I really enjoy the historical fiction genre and since Charles Dickens is one of my favorite writers, I guess I was predisposed to liking this book. I went into it not knowing anything about Dickens’s personal life, however, so I have no idea which parts were historical and which were fiction. Fortunately, that didn’t detract from my enjoyment of the story.
• I thought the main storyline — that of tracking down the ending to Drood in London — was very gripping and pretty exciting in some parts. The book would have rated 5 stars for me if Pearl had stuck to this track alone.
• James Osgood was a decent protagonist. He wasn’t as complete a hero as I had hoped, but then again, why should he be? He was, after all, just a book publisher, so the fact that he couldn’t fight or defeat the baddies without help shouldn’t be held against him.
• It was interesting to learn how much of a celebrity Charles Dickens was in his day. I knew he enjoyed massive popularity during his lifetime, but I had no idea that he was the object of such unabashed hero worship. People waiting in line for 10 hours or longer just to have a shot at getting tickets to his readings, mobs crowding around him everywhere he went, people grabbing at his clothes and tearing garments from his body… wow, that’s like a Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt reaction!

Disliked:

• What was the point of the India/Frank Dickens storyline? I have to admit that I ended up skimming over those pages, so I don’t even know if/how that plot tied into the main event. Meh.
• I could see from a mile away — even without the aid of a telescope, binocular, or similar instrument — that Rebecca Sand and James Osgood would fall in love. I knew it as soon as she was introduced as the murder victim’s sister. I hate predictable, totally contrived “romances” like that. Those two had zero chemistry in their interactions with each other, so I didn’t buy the love story at all.
• I thought the actual “explanation” of what might have happened to the final pages of Drood was kind of a letdown. Most of them were lost by the fictional fire during the fictional confrontation between Osgood and Marcus Wakefield, which is of course the author’s creation. That part needed some work. The other explanation that some of the surviving pages were deliberately suppressed by the London publisher to save money that would have been owed to the family makes sense. I wonder if that part was based on historical facts.

Rating:

I was pleasantly surprised by Matthew Pearl’s Last Dickens. I read this immediately after reading The Mystery of Edwin Drood, so all the elements of Dickens’s novel were fresh in my mind — which immensely enhanced my ability to enjoy Pearl’s work. I think this is a must-read for any Dickens lover, and though the book is not without a few flaws, I nevertheless give it 4 stars out of 5.

Captain Crewe is a rich man, and has made provisions for Sara to have everything she could ever want at Miss Minchin’s. She gets the best rooms, has them richly appointed with exquisite furniture, and also has nicer clothes and toys than any of the other girls. Sara, being the generous, good-natured, kind-hearted child that she is, willingly shares everything she has with the other girls — even the younger ones who are usually left out in the cold or bullied. Unfortunately, this willingness to share does nothing to stamp out the jealousy raging in a few of Sara’s classmates’ breasts, so it’s not long before Sara earns the nickname of “Little Princess”. Her friends use the term lovingly to describe how beautiful and thoughtful Sara is. Her enemies use the term derisively to point out that Sara lords her wealth over the others.

Disaster strikes when Captain Crewe invests his fortune with a friend who claims to have found a diamond mine. The friend thinks all is lost, and runs away rather than own up to the mistake. The Captain soon falls ill after hearing the devastating news and dies, thereby leaving Sara with no benefactor in all the world. Once Miss Minchin is apprised of this fact, she turns Sara into a servant, working her to the bone, putting her up in the cold, dingy attic, and practically starving her to death.

But Sara is the type of child who can bear anything. She uses her imagination to conquer her circumstances, forcing herself to believe that she is a princess wrongly subjected to the ill-treatment she is receiving. A true princess, she says, would accept the burden and show no outward sign of distress. This bearing impress a neighbor, Mr. Carrisford, and greatly outrages Miss Minchin, who would like nothing more than to see the child’s spirit broken.

By the novel’s end, Sara’s incredible patience is rewarded. With the help of a secret friend, her existence in the attic becomes bearable, and with the clearing up of a big misunderstanding, her wealth is restored, making her a little princess once again.

Liked:

• Little Sara was such a lovely character! My favorite characters in literature are those who, like this tremendous girl, have incredible inner strength and resolve, and can endure whatever the vicissitudes of life or the deliberate cruelties of others hurl their way.
• This was an encouraging story with important lessons for children. The author stresses the importance of sharing, of treating people as equals (Sara’s relationship with Becky the scullery maid is a prime example), and of making the most of whatever hand you’re dealt. These messages are as relevant today as they were in 1904, when this story was first published.

Disliked:

• How could I dislike anything in this book? I’d have to have a heart of stone to do that! That’s not to say it was perfect, but there’s nothing to actively dislike about it.

Rating:

A Little Princess is a gem of a children’s book. The story is interesting, the main character is exceptional, and everything works out for the best in the end — which is just the way most kids like it. I give this book 4 stars out of 5.