E-Readers or the Real Deal?

I know, I know, this post has been done before. Many times. I just can't help myself though. It's a real curiosity for me, how other avid readers feel about this topic. I have thought a lot about it over the years and at the risk of sounding like the mushy middle my conclusion for myself is this......they are both worthy of respect.  But the e-reader is just more practical. So I will elaborate and explain my thoughts.

I am a Gen Xer. That group who always has one foot in the technology world and one foot in the old school, 80's, had to use Encyclopedias for reports world. So it's no surprise that when e-readers came out I was hesitant. I actually remember the first time someone mentioned theirs to me that I was like, "what?  Who would even buy that thing? No pages to turn? No book smell? No going to the LIBRARY??? It was unthinkable. Then I bought a paperwhite during a Black Friday sale and oh my goodness....the possibilities. I could get any book I wanted immediately. You could access a definition with a fingertip. Want to see the sequels for the book? Done...just click on the digital bookstore. Want to know exactly how many minutes left until you finish the book, according to your reading speed? Right there on the screen. It was awesome.  Until one day I realized the e-book I really wanted to read was going to cost more than a used copy or getting it for free from the library. So I bought the paperback book. And I changed my mind again.

Sitting on the couch holding the book, turning the pages and getting lost in the writing was familiar. Flipping throughout the book easily back and forth was more convenient than having to scroll or try to bookmark everything I wanted to see. I'd missed real books. Having a smart phone with all the apps and texts and social media made online reading sometimes feel like just another screen. Not to mention the constant "suggestions" of what to read next gave me anxiety. So many books I hadn't read were just sitting there taunting me. I began to develop the worst case of fear of missing out for a book nerd. 

The book was comforting and soothing. Did I really want to keep my Kindle or not?  But by the time I finished the 700 page tome of small print I knew I just couldn't do this all the time again. Especially with my aging eyes. So I made a personal decision: most of the time I would choose to read on my Kindle. But when I was feeling nostalgic or when the book was not on sale for a reasonable online price, I would choose the real paper book. And this is how I've done it ever since. 

Truth be told I do miss books and libraries. I've posted before about how screen time is affecting our children's ability to read chapter books and to concentrate for long periods of time. But in reverse, I think screens are great for the older population who aren't struggling with beginner reading skills. Being able to have added light, increase text size, or change fonts when needed is invaluable. As I get older there are books I won't even attempt in paperback form because I have to read them with a giant book light draped around my neck or sit right next to a window. And don't even get me started on reading in bed at night. My husband (who hates reading books) wouldn't be able to sleep with the lamp on. When I'm on my e-reader he doesn't care because I use the dark light mode. It's a win win for us both. 

I hope libraries and bookstores never go away completely. I hope people will still be able to browse used bookstores looking for paper treasures. But for me it's just not practical anymore to only count on the real thing. Maybe some day they will make an e-reader that feels more like a real book. 

Which do you prefer? E-readers or the real deal? Why? I want to know!

 

To Hold the Crown by Jean Plaidy (Uneasy Lies the Head- UK Version)

 

Publication Date: September 28, 1984

Length: 416 pages

I just adore Jean Plaidy. Sometimes she gets a bad rap because her books are simplistic in dialogue and don't have much in the way of fictional characters. But these things are her strengths I say. When I was in high school I wanted to learn about The Tudors and her books were so good about combining accurate facts with the feel of a novel. I went away feeling entertained yet all of it was true so I was learning so much. She has covered so many Kings and Queens from England, France, and Italy it's hard to find someone royal she hasn't written about. For some reason I had never read this book before, I'd always started with Henry VIII or Elizabeth Tudor. There just aren't many historical fiction books on Henry VII, although that is changing recently. So this one was a must read for me this year.

The story begins in 1486 at the birth of Prince Arthur to Elizabeth of York, who is now Queen Elizabeth, wife of Henry Tudor. The two mothers-in-law, Margaret Beaufort and Elizabeth Woodville are not making life easy for poor Elizabeth. Their rivalry is evident as they vie for who is the dowager Mother deserving of the respect of the court. Elizabeth gives birth amid a cloud of insecurity as to her husband's grasp on the throne but having a boy solidifies his standing a bit more and everyone breathes a sigh of relief. 

Henry is always insecure about his power as King. And with good reason. At every turn it seems someone is waiting to insert an imposter into his court and to take the crown he so dearly clings to. Several subplots alternate with life at the court and include Lambert Simnel, a boy convinced he is the rightful heir, the Duke of Clarence, and Perkin Warbeck, claiming to be the long lost Richard Duke of York, one of the Princes in the Tower believed killed by his Uncle Richard. Henry is doubtful of each claimant but insecurities plague him enough to want them eradicated. While trying to rule his kingdom, fill his coffers, and convince everyone his is the rightful King he presents as a harsh, cold, distant man. Elizabeth dutifully plays her role as companion and mother to their four children and realizes her place is in supporting the joining of the Houses of Tudor and York. But she is not always happy in her new life. Her mother is always working behind the scenes to make sure their family is given their due respect.

We eventually meet Katherine of Aragon and experience life through her eyes at court as she struggles through the death of Arthur and the wooing by Young Henry Tudor. As they work to come to an understanding we see the twilight of Henry VII's reign and his life's work to hold the crown coming to fruition. 

I absolutely loved this book! It is one of my favorites by Plaidy. I knew the story of the Tudors well long before I read it but somehow she always manages to add little tidbits I hadn't heard before or to insert a twist I hadn't even thought of. When I first started reading it I assumed (based on the cover) it would focus heavily on Elizabeth of York and her viewpoint. It really doesn't. We are privy to the thoughts of Henry and Katherine much more than Elizabeth and she becomes more of a minor character as the story progresses. Plaidy manages to take a story that has been retold countless times and make it seem fresh. An amazing feat considering how much material there is out there about the Tudors. 

I read a review on Amazon that said though Plaidy will never be compared to a more detailed author like Sharon Penman, she has a style that is a comfortable read you can enjoy like putting on a pair of old sneakers. I couldn't agree more. 

Why I Love Historical Fiction

 

In my review of Gone With the Wind I stated that it was the greatest novel of all time. I read it (or at least tried to) for the first time when I was twelve years old and it really stuck with me. I was also just crazy about a series called Sunfire that featured different time periods with the main character living through an important event.  So it kind of surprises me that throughout my twenties and thirties I not only didn't read historical fiction, I actually loathed most of it. I recall searching for books and scorning the ones that weren't actual history books or biographies. I ate up true crime, politics, and courtroom dramas like the ones written by John Grisham. And I still think all of those books added deep knowledge and value to my life. But I just couldn't bring myself to read anything considered both historical and fiction. Fast forward fifteen to twenty years and now it is practically all I read. 

I used to think the dialogue and character interactions were cheesy. And sometimes in certain books they are. I also used to be frustrated with the idea that the historical figures didn't actually say or do some of the things in the book. The idea that real live human beings that lived years ago were talking to fictional characters drove me nuts! It just felt so.....wrong. I mean, if it wasn't all true then what on earth was the point? Wasn't I reading to learn something? The "fiction" part of historical fiction was what made me ignore the genre for years. I just couldn't accept the idea that something in the book didn't really happen. When I started reading Outlander that all changed because I'd finally found a book that incorporated history with characters that were compelling enough on their own to make me want to see what happened to them.

And that is the key I think to good historical fiction. It's that perfect balance between using the backdrop of a real historical event to plop down people (real or otherwise) who are themselves engaged in interesting enough drama to want to know their story as well as the history they are living through. If either one of these elements are out of balance, it ruins the book. But when an author does this dance well it is the best kind of book.

Sometimes I've tried an historical fiction book and it is masquerading as a book set in a time period with almost nothing to distinguish it from the present day. Sure there are bits of language, culture, and scenery thrown in but very little. The characters often do things or say things no one would have said or done and it just comes off as insincere. When done well, good historical fiction transports you to the time in a way no non fiction history book can. And that is how I started to transform my dislike of historical fiction. I found that even if I knew a time period well through facts, I didn't really feel immersed in the era. Knowing someone behaved a certain way is very different than hearing it through created conversations, or becoming attached to characters as people instead of the subject of a biography. 

The irony of it all is that now I find it hard to go back to straight history books. I still enjoy "just the facts" but it feels kind of boring. I've let my imagination run free with historical fiction and now I can't get enough of it. The biggest problem I face is that there are so many books with so many sequels in this genre I will die before I read them all. I guess that's not a bad thing....I'll never run out of something great to read!  What do you think? Is historical fiction your favorite genre? Has the answer to this question changed over time for you too?