[DWJ] Doctor Who and DWJ's non-family books (was Venus As A Boy)
Elizabeth G. Holtrop
elizabeth at bouma-holtrop.com
Thu Apr 19 13:44:41 EDT 2007
> And, apart
> from *Archer's Goon*, I think I like the non-family books better than
> the family books (that actually might be one of the reasons I don't
> like *Black Maria* as much as I could. Hmmm) - Or maybe I mean I
> prefer the books where there's either no family, or the family are the
> *problem* and the solution comes from outside the family: *Eight Days
> of Luke*, *Charmed Life*, *LoCC*... I quite like *Dark Lord of
> Derkholm*, though, but I suppose the family is split up/
> non-functioning throughout the course of the narrative.
> Does this make any sense to anyone else?
>It does, actually, with the Archer's Goon caveat, as I find that
>book immensely satisfying. I tend to be a sucker for "family of
>choice" stories in my fiction anyway (which is maybe my excuse
>for being addicted to Grey's Anatomy?), so a world like Deep
>Secret's or even A Sudden Wild Magic's with this chaotic horde of
>people who just have to function together does give me a lot of
>satisfaction. Dark Lord might do it for me, too, partly because
>Derk's family almost is a family of choice, as he brings the
>non-human kids into it. Though certainly Chrestomanci Castle
>falls within those boundaries as well, so I don't think we're
>experiencing quite the same reaction.
I haven't read all of DWJ's books (I only became a fan two years ago and I'm trying to ration the remaining unread ones so I have a few to read each summer after hectic school semesters), so I can't comment on Archer's Goon. However, I also prefer the non-family-based stories. A Sudden Wild Magic, Deep Secret, Merlin Conspiracy, and Dark Lord are my favorites. I count Dark Lord as non-family because, as both Ika and Deborah have said, it's not a usual sort of family.
However, since these books all seem aimed at a slightly older audience, I assumed that to be the reason I preferred them. I confess (for the first time, hoping not to be tarred and feathered) that the Chrestomanci books are definitely not my favorite. I find them entertaining but not fascinating. I do find the ones I've listed to be fascinating.
Fire and Hemlock, I should note, does not go on my favorites list simply because I haven't had a chance to re-read it since the first time, when it blew me away but left me ultimately confused. I loved it but I can't say it's a favorite yet.
More information about the Dwj