Book Review: 'Mary Poppins' by P.L. Travers

So I actually read the first two books of this series, Mary Poppins and Mary Poppins Comes Back, but I'm gonna share my thoughts collectively because they pretty much go hand in hand.

Before we begin, I must share a bit of my personal history with Mary Poppins. The 1964 live-action Disney musical, which was based off of these first two books in the series, was my absolute favorite childhood movie and is still at the top of my all-time favorite movies as an adult. At the risk of sounding a bit dramatic, I don't think I would be who I am today without Mary Poppins. Do you have any of those movies or books? Movies or books that are so heavily linked to parts of you or your life that they practically play a part in your current identity? I think I can only say I have two of those for sure: Mary Poppins and Matilda. I was obsessed with Mary Poppins as a kid. I didn't own my own VHS copy for awhile, and I must have borrowed it from my friends who lived across the street a million times (I eventually obtained my own copy, lest they kill me). In fact, one time when my parents had people come over to clean our chimney, I sat on our porch wondering why they weren't breaking out into song and dance. I was also confused when one of the guys called down and said, "Look! I'm Spider-Man!" Um no? In my head, you're Bert, and why aren't you singing "Step in Time"?

ANYWAY! Mary Poppins meant and still means a lot to me, so when the Disney movie based off of the making of the film adaption came out in 2013, Saving Mr. Banks, you best believe I was at the theatre opening weekend, and that movie definitely shed a lot of light on the story behind the world's most famous nanny. I don't think I've watched Mary Poppins the same way since I first saw Saving Mr. Banks, and I mean that in a good way. For those who aren't familiar with the movie about the making of a movie, it tells the story of Walt Disney's final successful attempt to obtain the film rights to the Mary Poppins books from author P.L. Travers, who was not interested in selling them for several years, much less seeing the story turned into an American musical with colorful animations. To make a long story short, the movie goes on to show that the apparent inspiration for the Mary Poppins books came from Travers' father, and that Mary Poppins never came to save the children; she came to save Mr. Banks. That little piece of knowledge changes the whole way you look at the Mary Poppins movie, trust me. If you've ever seen it, I recommend watching Saving Mr. Banks and then Mary Poppins again. Mind blown.

All this to say, I never read the Mary Poppins books as a kid, and in fact I don't think anybody I knew ever read them either. So the last time I watched Saving Mr. Banks (which was about a month ago), I thought I should check out the books that the movie that means so much to me was based on. I definitely enjoyed reading the first two books of the series. The writing style is top notch and reminds me of an old-time London fairytale or something. But the thing that surprised me the most about reading the first two Mary Poppins books for the first time? Mary Poppins in the books and Mary Poppins in the movie are almost nothing alike. Sure, they're both magical, and they're both typical British nannies. But when it comes to personality, they are complete opposites. Mary Poppins in the movie makes a point of saying that she's never cross when she first arrives in the Banks household. Mary Poppins in the books is not only usually cross, but she comes across as cruel, unloving, bitter and almost always grumpy. It was a bit of an eye-opener for me. It didn't change my feelings about the Mary Poppins in the movie; she will remain the same to me in my heart, but it was a strange feeling to meet the woman that the Mary Poppins in the movie was based off of. They're just very, very different.

Despite what is played out onscreen in Saving Mr. Banks, legend has it that Mr. Disney was somewhat of an asshole when it came to dealing with Mrs. Travers, even though she was incredibly demanding and often uncooperative (everything you see in the movie in that regard is said to be pretty spot on). Travers explicitly stated that she didn't want any animation in the movie, but Disney completely ignored that demand and went ahead and blended colorful animation into it. He didn't invite her to the movie's Los Angeles premiere, prompting her to go over his head and get an invitation from another executive, and at the premiere's after party, she reportedly said to him in front of several other people, "The first thing that has to go is the animation sequence." Disney promptly replied, "Pamela, the ship has sailed," and walked away, and the two apparently never spoke ever again. So as much as Disney seemed to be an asshole during that production, I have to at least point out that he added a lot of life to an otherwise simply whimsical children's story. Mary Poppins is extremely unlikeable in the books, yet the children (and their parents, most of the time) love her unconditionally. She continually plays with their minds, always making them believe they are crazy by claiming their magical adventures never happened (this does happen briefly in the movie, but not every single time like in the books). Disney made the character so much more likeable and loveable, making her into a figure that children, much like myself, would fall in love with and not want her to ever leave their screens or their lives. That's what a children's literature heroine should be. Someone children fall in love with and who go on to define much of their lives and identity. I didn't get much of that from the Mary Poppins in the books. Mr. and Mrs. Banks also play virtually no part in the story in the books, which is a downright oddity if you compare it to the movie. Not to mention that if what the story in Saving Mr. Banks tells is true, that the inspiration for Mary Poppins came from her stormy relationship with her father, absolutely none of that is felt in the books; Mr. Banks is barely a character. So if the story of the books' inspiration that the movie tells is mostly true, Disney added an entire new layer of emotional depth and complexity to the story that is felt nowhere in the books. Even if he was an asshole when dealing with the story's creator during production, we must applaud him for what he and his people did with the story. It is truly exceptional (look at me, I'm listing all the reasons the movie is better than the book? What is happening?!)

This review may seem somewhat negative, but rest assured: I enjoyed reading Mary Poppins. It was interesting to see the origin of my favorite movie of all-time. I do think the movie is better and takes the story a lot deeper, but that doesn't mean I don't think the books can stand alone as something enjoyable. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the Mary Poppins books weren't incredibly popular outside of England and perhaps Europe because Mary Poppins herself doesn't exactly hold the same values as North American families might. Even popular American children's books from the 1800s weren't as eye-opening as Mary Poppins' personality in 1930s London. I'm not saying I would stay away from reading this to my child, I think even American children could appreciate and enjoy it (she's not that awful), but I wouldn't recommend reading it to them if they've already fallen in love with the Mary Poppins from the movie. Children and parents might be in for a bit of a rude awakening. Nonetheless, apart from a few oddities, I did enjoy the first two Mary Poppins books. I might check out some of the other books in the series soon too, considering there's a new Mary Poppins movie due out from Disney in 2018, Mary Poppins Returns, that is supposedly based on adventures from the other books, so I'm gonna wanna be prepared for that! 4/5 stars.

12 Tragically Underrated Pop Albums You Should Go Listen To

Originally posted on the Kelly Alexander Show, which you can check out here!

People with good taste will appreciate these criminally underrated albums.

1. Ashley Tisdale – Guilty Pleasure (2009)

I mentioned this album in my list of underrated artists, but it deserves to be mentioned here too. This is possibly one of the best pop rock albums I’ve ever listened to and Ashley Tisdale got the image down really well (how beautiful is that album cover?) but apparently it didn’t do much for her or her label at the time because it’s not all that well known. Go listen to it.

Best songs: “It’s Alright, It’s OK”, “Masquerade”, “Overrated” and “How Do You Love Someone”

2. Avril Lavigne – Avril Lavigne (2013)

Avril Lavigne’s self-titled fifth studio album is probably among her best (you might recall the popular lead single “Here’s to Never Growing Up” from the summer of 2013) but it’s not appreciated nearly as much as it should be. The media seems to remember the Avril Lavigne from the early 2000s the best, which is also good because she was just as iconic when she first came on the scene, but her more recent albums should also be receiving the same praise and mainstream exposure. My theory is that this album wasn’t as huge as it could have been because it was Lavigne’s first since parting ways with RCA Records after her 2011 album Goodbye Lullaby, and there’s always a bit of behind-the-scenes transition when that happens and, as a result, sometimes the music and its performance suffers the consequences.

Best songs: “Rock N Roll”, “Here’s to Never Growing Up”, “Bitchin’ Summer” and “Sippin’ on Sunshine”

3. Carly Rae Jepsen – Emotion (2015)

Any feelings or prejudices you have against Carly Rae Jepsen aside, her third studio album Emotion is her champion effort at an amazing pop album. It’s just a really good album: original, refreshing and catchy, depending on how you define catchy. But, as I outlined in Jepsen’s entry on my list of underrated artists, I think no one really takes her seriously now because she’s become typecast as solely a bubblegum pop starlet who sings only about getting guys to notice her. She’s actually matured as a singer and you can hear that very clearly on Emotion. I recommend putting your prejudices against Ms. Jepsen aside and opening your ears to this album, whether it’s the whole thing or just a few songs.

Best songs: all of it, but “Run Away With Me”, “I Really Like You”, “Gimmie Love”, “Your Type” and “Making the Most of the Night”

4. Natasha Bedingfield – Strip Me (2010)

You probably remember Natasha Bedingfield from the mid-2000s, when her radio-friendly and earworm singles like “These Words”, “Unwritten” and “Pocketful of Sunshine” were popular. But, I’m willing to bet you haven’t heard much of her third studio album Strip Me, which is definitely my favorite album of hers (my undying love for “These Words” and “Unwritten” aside). Neither the album nor its two singles, “Touch” and “Strip Me”, saw much success on the Billboard charts in the United States (which was a big difference from her second studio album, which debuted at number 3 on the Billboard 200 chart), but Strip Me did see moderate success on some European music charts. Some critics also found it unoriginal and said that Bedingfield failed to produce anything outstanding, but I respectfully disagree. In any event, this tragically underrated dance-pop album has some great tunes so if you jammed to “These Words” and “Unwritten” circa 2006, I highly recommend.

Best songs: “Touch”, “No Mozart”, “A Little Too Much” and “Weightless”

5. Hilary Duff – Breathe In. Breathe Out. (2015)

First of all, let me just say that I don’t understand why the music industry and we as a society decided to put artists like Hilary Duff on the backburner in favor of more problematic pop singers (*cough* Taylor Swift *cough*). In other words, Hilary Duff was always talented and is so unproblematic (e.g. never had to cause drama with other stars or invent an inappropriate dance move all to draw attention to herself), so it’s a shame we let her drift away from the music industry for almost a decade—Breathe In. Breathe Out. was her first album in 8 years, and the long-awaited follow-up to 2007’s Dignity. It’s such a catchy pop album with great performances as well as some folk-pop vibes thrown in there and it’s truly a travesty that Duff’s long-awaited comeback to music didn’t blow up like it should have. It wasn’t a flop in the charts, but that doesn’t mean it’s any less underrated and you should go listen to it and appreciate it and while you’re at it go download some of Duff’s older tunes and appreciate those too because clearly this generation is NOT what dreams are made of!

Best songs: all of it, but “Sparks”, “My Kind”, “Lies”, “One in a Million” and “Stay in Love”

6. Jennifer Lopez – Love? (2011)

Most probably J.Lo’s best pop album with the best singles since her 1999 debut, On the 6. Almost all of my favorite Jennifer Lopez songs come from this album and aside from “On the Floor” with Pitbull, none of the other songs or singles got much appreciation. Critics pounced on it as lacking personality and merely being a product of the pop music machine, but I think it’s good at what it’s doing. Love? isn’t exactly an album I would recommend regardless of whether or not you like J.Lo (you kind of have to like her at least a bit in order to appreciate it), but if you like the hits, I do recommend checking it out.

Best songs: “(What Is) Love?”, “On the Floor” and “Papi”

7. Kesha – Warrior (2012)

It’s a damn shame that Kesha’s second studio album didn’t get the appreciation it deserved. It didn’t have as many singles nor did it receive the same exposure as her 2010 debut, Animal. Kesha took a lot of heat from critics on her first album, who interpreted her frequent use of auto-tune in her music as a lack of genuine talent. Warrior was said to have revealed the authentic Kesha with less manipulated vocals, and regardless of whether or not that’s true, the album is still exceptional. How many artists do you know who have seamlessly blended electropop with rock? A part of me wonders if Kesha’s lawsuit against producer Dr. Luke (which followed in 2013) might have retroactively had a negative impact on Warrior’s exposure and chart performance, but that’s something we might never know. And just a reminder that Kesha’s third studio album and first in almost five years, Rainbow, is due out on August 11!

Best songs: all of it, but “Warrior”, “Die Young”, “C’Mon”, “Thinking of You”, “Wherever You Are” and “Dirty Love” (which features Iggy Pop!)

8. Jessica Sanchez – Me, You & the Music (2013)

It’s actually unforgivable that the music industry let Jessica Sanchez fade away. You may remember her as the runner-up from the eleventh season of American Idol in 2012, after which she began work on her debut studio album, Me, You & the Music, which followed in 2013. The album would not be considered the absolute best of all-time, but it was a good debut that left room to grow but apparently that won’t be happening anytime soon, considering she’s no longer associated with Interscope Records or 19 Entertainment, which were the labels associated with Idol at the time. It also wouldn’t be outrageous to assume that the labels weren’t all that interested in Sanchez for the long haul; it seems as though they were just fulfilling an obligation to Idol to sign her and produce an album and then once that was done, they were done. Sanchez isn’t up to much these days, apart from the occasional original song or cover released on YouTube or iTunes, but I feel like she really could have *happened* if anyone was actually invested in doing it. Sad!

Best songs: “Tonight” (feat. Ne-Yo), “Crazy Glue”, “Don’t Come Around”, “No One Compares” and “Plastic Roses”

9. Lana Del Rey – Born to Die (2012)

How does one even begin to describe Lana Del Rey? She created something that was entirely original and unique; a style of music that combined baroque pop, dream pop and alternative music along with a deep, mature voice. While Born to Die, her major-label debut, received generally positive reviews, it also took heat from music critics for being immature, melodramatic and repetitive (because apparently we can’t have depressive but realistic lyrics and still call it pop music; we all have to produce upbeat, radio-friendly pop songs). Combined with a widely panned performance on Saturday Night Live after the album came out, people started to question Del Rey’s sincerity, but she still developed a passionate fan base. Born to Die is most definitely her best album that contains an incredibly original and unique sound that she has yet to replicate on her follow-up albums. Del Rey also invented this original pop sound that set the stage for artists like Lorde, who would come on the scene a mere year later and take credit for “revolutionizing” and “saving” pop music by breaking the mold (music critics are hypocritical that way). I didn’t really get the hype surrounding Lana Del Rey until recently, when I sat down and decided to open my ears to her music. If you’re looking to start listening to her, Born to Die is a must.

Best songs: “Born to Die”, “Video Games”, “Blue Jeans”, “Summertime Sadness” and “Dark Paradise”

10. The Veronicas – The Veronicas (2014)

One of the best pop rock albums ever. The Veronicas, an Australian duo, have been around since the mid-2000s, but their self-titled third studio album came after a 7-year hiatus and it was definitely worth the wait. Highly recommend. I also hope that The Veronicas are more popular in their native Australia than they are in North America because they’re super good. Their fourth studio album is supposedly due out sometime this year and I’M WAITING!

Best songs: all of it, but “Cruel”, “Born Bob Dylan”, “If You Love Someone” and “Cold”

11. Demi Lovato – Confident (2015)

“Well you say I’m complicated, but you’ve had me underrated.” The bridge of the title single, “Confident”, is the best way to describe this album as well as Demi’s entire career. I won’t get into all the reasons I think Lovato is underrated but I will say that Confident didn’t get the buzz that it deserved. If you listen to it in full and compare it to the lyrical content of her previous two albums, Unbroken (2011) and Demi (2013), there’s a definite sign of a maturing musical style and I’m excited for what the future holds.

Best songs: “Confident”, “Stone Cold”, “Lionheart”, “Stars”, “Mr. Hughes” and “Old Ways”

12. Britney Spears – Glory (2016)

It’s difficult to say that this album is technically underrated or more unknown than other albums, because Britney fans definitely took care of making sure people know how great Glory is, but I still feel like it didn’t get the mainstream attention it deserved. Glory is literally one of Britney’s best. To think that she went from the colossal flop of Britney Jean (2013) to this is revolutionary. She hasn’t been this musically inventive since the In the Zone days. Recommend!

Best songs: literally all of it. I’m not even exaggerating. It would actually be easier to list my least favorite songs, but why would I wanna do that?

Book Reviews: 'Last Night in Montreal' by Emily St. John Mandel and 'The Catcher in the Rye' by J.D. Salinger

1. Last Night in Montreal, by Emily St. John Mandel:

This book reminded me why I love reading. In expert hands, words take you prisoner and you become completely enveloped in the story they are telling, and that's how I felt with Last Night in Montreal. It was one of those reading experiences where you are so engaged with the story that it's as if you have put your entire heart in its hands, and I find those experiences are so rare. I came across Last Night in Montreal by fluke while scrolling through Literary Hub, one of my favorite literary sites, and the premise intrigued me, so I added it to my to-read list on Goodreads. My library happened to have it, so I figured I'd try it, and I'm so happy I did. Last Night in Montreal is about Lilia Albert, a young woman who has been leaving people behind her entire life. She spends her childhood and adolescence traveling constantly and changing identities. In adulthood, she finds it impossible to stop. Haunted by an inability to remember her early childhood, she moves restlessly from city to city, abandoning friends and lovers along the way, possibly still followed by a private detective who has pursued her for years. Then her latest lover, Eli, follows her from New York to Montreal, determined to learn her secrets and make sure she's safe. The book also becomes the story of the private detective, whose entire life becomes about solving Lilia's case, and the heartbreaking impact it has on his daughter, Michaela. Last Night in Montreal reads like a short story that just keeps going for 250 pages, and it's very well written. I'm not a huge fan of short stories, but I think Mandel's writing style works well here. As the dust jacket promises, Mandel's characters "will resonate with you long after the final page is turned," and that is very much true. All of her characters are extremely well written and well developed. She also captures her settings and atmospheres very well, especially what it's like to live in Montreal and French Canada. I was initially only going to give Last Night in Montreal 4 stars because it was a tad slow in the beginning and took a few chapters to get going for me, but ultimately I couldn't put it down and I loved every minute, so how could I not give it my highest rating? Definitely recommend. 5/5 stars.

2. The Catcher in the Rye, by J.D. Salinger:

I did it. I gave in and read one of literature's most famous and most controversial novels of all-time. Did I love it? No. Can I appreciate its literary and pop cultural significance? Definitely, and I think that's what I enjoyed most about reading The Catcher in the Rye. I've read in several other books that say any feeling you've ever had of teenage angst or rebellion, or the feeling that adults don't understand you, Holden Caulfield experienced it first, and that seems quite true after you've read the book. The Catcher in the Rye is very clearly ahead of its time and I spent most of the time reading it amazed that it was first published in 1951, at the beginning of a decade that would soon promote and praise conservative conformity. In a way, I almost feel like this book could be considered among the same level of rebellion as the literature of the Beat generation, like Kerouac's On the Road or Ginsberg's Howl. All of this to say is there are many things to appreciate about The Catcher in the Rye and, as a person interested in pop culture as well as a student of English literature, I picked up on a lot of it. 

But... there are some negatives I must mention. For starters, this book has very little plot. At first I thought it might be like The Bell Jar, which does have a plot but is very hard to follow and so it ultimately comes across as having very little plot. That wasn't the case here. The Catcher in the Rye was not hard for me to follow, so I was able to easily detect that it had very little plot. Holden gets expelled, mopes around New York City, expresses some pretty depressing thoughts and eventually deems himself as "the catcher in the rye": saving children from losing their innocence. That's all great and meaningful and everything, but didn't make up for much of a story for me. Also, I know I'm gonna sound like a teacher who thinks teenagers are dramatic and all adults are trying to ruin their lives, but Holden Caulfield annoyed me. We get very little information on why he thinks adults are "phonies" and don't understand him, or why he thinks the world sucks and society is against him. Don't get me wrong, those are all very valid emotions (maybe they wouldn't have thought so in 1951, again emphasizing that the book was ahead of its time), but in this case, it just seems like he's young and moody and, much like what the condescending eye-rolls of high school teachers say, thinks adults are destroying his life. Like, he was expelled from school with good reason, yet Holden acts as if everyone just hates him and, again, adults and the world are against him. EYE ROLL. He just bugged me. Maybe I would have felt more connection to Holden Caulfield if I had read this when I was in high school (which I didn't, I somehow was never in any of the English classes that read this book at my school), but now he's just annoying and unnecessarily moody and mopey. Also, a part of me felt distinctly uncomfortable reading The Catcher in the Rye with the knowledge that this book influenced several famous criminals, most notably Mark David Chapman, who had a copy of the book with him when he shot John Lennon and described the shooting as his "statement" towards Holden Caulfield. Yeah... I don't know how I feel about that. Anyway, I definitely appreciate the book for what it represents in the literary and pop cultural world, but I didn't personally enjoy it as much as I could have. 3/5 stars. 

The Search for Pitch Perfect: Auto-Tune in the Pop Music Industry

I wrote this piece a few months ago and then I edited and rewrote it for the Kelly Alexander Show and I worked very hard on it so I thought I'd share it here, too. What's your take on auto-tune in pop music?

I think it is high time that we, as a society and culture, stop questioning a singer’s authenticity simply because they use auto-tune.
The year was 1998. Pop diva and icon Cher had just released her comeback single, “Believe”, which quickly abandoned the singer’s previous disco and pop rock-sounding style in favor of a club-friendly sound, in order to engage younger audiences with her music. “Do you believe in life after love?” The lyrics were catchy and became legendary, something Cher had already long since achieved. But there was also something legendary about the track in question: it was the first song to prominently feature a new technology known as auto-tune.
Auto-tune is a pitch-correcting tool and software that electronically alters the sound and pitch of a singer’s voice and, if used correctly, you can barely detect it. Andy Hildebrand, the software’s inventor, told CNN in 2010 that he didn’t think anyone “in their right mind” would ever use auto-tune, but it caught on quickly: the “Cher effect” was born.

And why wouldn’t it catch on quick? It was this new magic button that could alter one’s sound for a more vibrant, exuberant and, sometimes, robotic sound. Kanye West did an entire album with it. Madonna uses it, and so does Lady Gaga, Selena Gomez, Kelly Clarkson, Maroon 5, and countless others. “Within a year we had sold to every major studio in the world, and that was a year or two after Cher did her song “Believe,’” Hildebrand recalled. But as much as artists who could actually sing were beginning to use it to produce more vibrant, electronic, club-friendly songs that would sell big, it seems the software’s bad wrap is linked to the not-so-good singers who were now being presented with this tool that could make their voice sound ten times better. She has the look but not the voice? Not a problem, auto-tune to the rescue. In other words: a new and appealing way for record producers to make more money.

But as much as “Believe” achieved popularity and commercial success, its sound was not loved by all. Indie rock producer Steve Albini, who has worked with bands such as the Pixies and Nirvana, stated he thought the song was “mind-numbingly awful,” and was stunned see people he respected “seduced” by auto-tune.

So it seems the jury is still out on the use of auto-tune and pitch-correcting tools in today’s music industry. Time magazine included it on its list of the 50 Worst Inventions in 2010, calling it “a technology that can make bad singers sound good and really bad singers sound like robots.” Indie band Death Cab for Cutie even showed up to the 2009 Grammy Awards wearing blue ribbons to “raise awareness against auto-tune abuse.” Hildebrand thinks that his invention has become an addiction of sorts to some recording artists. “Singers learn about how it works and they kind of like it, but they have a love-hate relationship with it: they don’t want to let others know that they need it.” Lessley Anderson of The Verge says that, “Auto-tune has become bitchy shorthand for saying somebody can’t sing. But the diss isn’t fair, because everybody’s using it. Indeed, finding out that all the singers we listen to have been auto-tuned does feel like someone’s messing with us. As humans, we crave connection, not perfection. But we’re not the ones pulling the levers. What happens when an entire industry decides it’s safer to bet on the robot? Will we start to hate the sound of our own voices?”

Singer/songwriter Kesha is known for using
auto-tune to achieve a certain style of music,
but her use of the software often calls her singing
abilities and talent into question (Photo Credit:
PopCrush)

In this sense, it seems that auto-tune is not only used to make bad or just okay singers sound amazing and catchy, but also for already established singers to create certain types of music that will appeal to certain audiences and generate profit. If club-friendly, electronic dance music (EDM) is what the artist is going for, are we really in a position to judge their use of pitch-correcting tools like auto-tune, especially if we even enjoy the results? Are we even in a position to judge artists for using auto-tune whatsoever when we enjoy the results? As Anderson states, we as humans crave connection, not perfection, so if we’re enjoying what an artist is putting out and it’s generating crazy profits for them (as their record labels surely assured them it would), should we just shut up and listen?And that’s just it: it really isn’t fair anymore to side-eye an artist for using auto-tune because practically everyone uses it, and not all for the same reasons. But, as a result of the prejudices surrounding the technology, a singer’s use of auto-tune calls into question, by some, the authenticity of their vocals, ability to perform and, ultimately, their artistry. However, it seems the jury is still out on that debate as well. Many believe that just because one uses auto-tune does not necessarily mean they are unable to legitimately sing or perform. Kesha, singer/songwriter who rose to fame with club-friendly dance tracks such as “TiK ToK”, “Take It Off,” “Your Love is My Drug” and “Die Young”, is a known user of auto-tune, but is also known for having genuine talent and artistic ability. In an interview with the Today Show, she was told by host Savannah Guthrie that she actually has a beautiful voice. “People think they’ve heard the auto-tune, they’ve heard the dance hits, but [she] really [has] a great voice, too.” Kesha responded by saying that she gets “bummed out” when she hears that people think she has no talent or ability because all they’ve heard are her electro-pop dance tracks. “Because I really can sing,” she said. “It’s one of the few things I can do.” But simply because she uses auto-tune to produce a certain type of music that evidently sells, her ability to legitimately sing is called into question.
But time and time again, the use of auto-tune continues to call into question the singer’s authenticity as an artist. Taylor Swift is rumored to be a regular user of auto-tune as many believe her to be a tone-deaf, off-key performer. However, several record producers believe that it is simply naïve to think that just because an artist uses auto-tune, it means they have no integrity or ability as a singer or performer. Filip Nikolic, a Los Angeles-based singer and freelance record producer, says that “[truly] everyone uses it” and “it [just] saves a ton of time.” But, at the same time as people still believing that using it means the singer isn’t authentic, some producers and artists are hesitant to admit they use it. And as much as it may be naïve to think that one has no talent for using auto-tune, it also isn’t unreasonable to not want to admit to electronically processing your voice, often for the sake of a more modern, youth-oriented sound that will make you more money. No, that supposedly makes you sound shallow, but it doesn’t mean it’s not the truth, nor does it mean the singer has no talent or integrity. “Do you want to talk about how people think you are talentless because you are known for using auto-tune from time to time?” Would you answer that question? Not many would, because the idea that processed and manipulated vocals are inauthentic and fake are so ingrained into society’s mind that even artists who use it are hesitant to admit to it, even if it produces better results. Jeff Gitelman, member of the indie band The Stepkids, admitted, “For a long time we fought it, and we still are to a certain degree. But attention spans are a certain way, and that’s how it is. We just [want] to have a clean, modern sound.” I think it is high time we move past this way of thinking when, more times than not, the artists you love for their “integrity” have used pitch-correcting tools before, often solely in search for “perfect” vocals.

This when some of the negative consequences of using tools like auto-tune come into play. For some, auto-tune does seem to solve all sound problems, but Anderson writes that while everyone does use it and it’s unreasonable to continuously criticize an artist for using it, auto-tune also conditions listeners to start expecting perfect pitch and lead them to be surprised when that sometimes doesn’t happen, which is an unreasonable demand. Mick Jagger and Bob Dylan were never pitch perfect in their hay days, and people bowed at their feet. Conversely, John Lennon famously hated his singing voice, yet people loved him more than life itself. Time magazine wrote in 2009 that auto-tune has made all pop music sound the same, because “track after track has perfect pitch,” which is unrealistic. So as much as humans crave connection over perfection, it seems that auto-tune makes us start to expect perfection, but the truth is, no one is perfect, even our favorite singers, despite what their auto-tuned songs might make you think.

Pop icon Britney Spears takes a lot of heat
for using auto-tune and and lip-syncing during
live performances, despite no longer having
to prove her talent (Photo Credit: Jamie
McCarthy/Getty Images)

One of the best known users of auto-tune is perhaps Britney Spears, the pop singer who became iconic before the age of 20 for contributing to the revival of the teen pop genre in the late 1990s. Tracks like “…Baby One More Time” and “Oops!… I Did It Again” were risqué but somehow innocent, and largely successful; it became all about an image they were selling. Spears’ attempts at breaking free of that innocent yet not so innocent good-girl image they confined her in led to years of widely publicized personal problems, but was followed by a great musical comeback. But, as many point out, Spears was always more of an entertainer rather than a singer. If you’ve ever seen her perform a choreographed dance sequence, it’s undoubtedly impressive. Many believe her to be excellent at what she does, and that is not necessarily “singing.” She very clearly lip syncs during live performances, televised or otherwise, and was simply never known for being an outstanding vocalist. That does not, however, take away from her being a talented performer or artist, in the same vein as Kesha or Taylor Swift. So why was it when, in July 2014, Spears was the subject of controversy when a video leaked of her vocals for her track “Alien” without any pitch correction or auto-tune? Critics immediately pounced on her and her apparent inability to tackle the song’s high notes. CNN came to the singer and song’s defense, reminding everyone that Spears was simply never known for her outstanding vocal ability. Others were also quick to point out that when she was first signed to her record label, Spears was coached and conditioned to sing a certain way that may or may not have been her strong suit. Regardless, her talent, intrigue and appeal rely solely on her outstanding ability to entertain and perform, and produce music that is fun and often electronic-sounding. That’s just who she is and we have always known that, so for people to claim she has no talent is unfounded. Spears’ talent may not necessarily lie in her vocal abilities, but that does not mean she is unable to perform, entertain or produce music that is pleasing to the ear. We are all just so obsessed with these ideas of “authenticity” that the sound of processed vocals leads us to believe that an artist is untalented or just looking to make a quick buck with music they know will sell, when that is almost always largely false. In fact, Spears responded to criticism of her performing abilities in 2011, stating, “I don’t really have anything to prove at this point. I just do it for fun and see what happens.” William Orbit, producer of “Alien”, came to Spears’ defense thereafter as well, stating that the leaked video was never intended to be heard by the public and was a warm-up vocal take, something all artists do. “Whomever put this on the Internet must have done so in a spirit of unkindness, but it can in no way detract from the fact that Britney is and always will be beyond stellar! She is magnificent! And that’s that.”

Osvaldo Oyola of Sounding Out! argues that the use of auto-tune and the question of an artist’s authenticity have and always will be closely linked. “Do we consider how many takes were required for Patti LaBelle to record ‘Lady Marmalade’ when we listen?” he writes. “Do we speculate on whether spliced tape made up for the effects of a fatiguing day of recording? Chances are that even your favorite and most gifted singer has benefited from some form of technology in recording their work. When someone argues that auto-tune allows anyone to sing, what they are really complaining about is that an illusion of authenticity has been dispelled. So what? Why would it so bad if anyone could be a singer through auto-tuning technology? What is really so threatening about its use?” As scholar Walter Benjamin notes, auto-tune merely represents “just another step forward in undoing the illusion of art’s aura. It is not the quality of art that is endangered by mass access to its creation, but rather the authority of cultural arbiters and the ideological ends they serve.”

Put more plainly: music, even auto-tuned music, is a form of art, and repeatedly and endlessly calling into question the authenticity of artists who have electronically manipulated vocals is simply undoing the art form: it was made that way for a reason, whatever the reason, and I don’t think we are in a position to unravel the entire artistic process by uncovering apparent “flaws” in the system, moral or otherwise. Singers who do not need or want the use of auto-tune in their music are no more talented than those who use it regularly: music is about sound, and we must learn to appreciate what our ears are hearing. You don’t criticize an actor for using a body double for stunts, or pick apart a famous painting color by color looking for “authenticity,” do you? Music should be no different.

Book Review: 'When We Rise: My Life in the Movement' by Cleve Jones

Just a little PSA before we begin: this book ripped my heart from my chest and probably won't ever return it so apologies in advance if this review comes across as a little incoherent as I try to formulate somewhat coherent thoughts and feelings (but that's no different from my often bitter reviews of YA books, so on second thought, who cares!)

When We Rise is a memoir written by LGBT and human rights activist Cleve Jones, who essentially saw the gay liberation and rights movement from the very beginning. I first met Cleve when he was played by Emile Hirsch in the 2008 film Milk, which I actually only watched for the first time when I was home for the holidays last December and thought it would be a good time to watch some of the DVDs I own but have never watched, and Milk was one of them. I had always known the movie existed, but never got around to watching it and I so wish I had watched it when it came out. If you're not familiar with the movie, which won a few Oscars including Best Actor for Sean Penn and Best Original Screenplay for Dustin Lance Black, it's the story of Harvey Milk, who was the first openly gay man elected to public office in California. But it's also the story of Milk and the gay liberation movement; of the gay neighborhood in San Francisco in the 70s, "The Castro," at a time when counterculture was taking over the world and everyone dreamed of running away and being who they really were. Cleve was mentored by Milk and worked on his campaigns for a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, so he was a fairly important character in the movie.

Then, a few months later, I heard that there was going to be a new miniseries on ABC about the gay liberation and rights movement called When We Rise that was written by the same guy who wrote Milk and won an Oscar for it, so I was immediately intrigued and, let me just tell you, those four two-hour episodes WRECKED me. After I finished watching it, I discovered that the miniseries was partially inspired by Cleve Jones' memoir, also called When We Rise, so I just knew it was going to be a book I would be buying on my next trip to the bookstore. The memoir is essentially an extension of the story that is told in Milk, but so much more. It's Cleve's story, and it's the story of a movement, from the very beginning to the present day. It is about a boy discovering his identity in a time when people's reaction to anything other than heterosexuality was to treat them for what they saw as a mental illness. It is about that boy deciding to take to the road and eventually make it to San Francisco, where he realized he wasn't alone. He was never alone. Gay people existed and were coming together without shame for the first time. It's about the people he fell in love with along the way, the hitchhiking to other parts of the country and journeys to other parts of the world and his adventures there. It's about what it was like to be mentored by one of the first ever openly gay politicians with whom he was able to take part in several victories. It's about what it was like to be one of the first people to see that politician's body after he was assassinated. It's about what it was like to see a disease first known as "Gay Cancer" start from the very beginning, which would soon kill almost everyone he knew in his area, and almost killed him a few years later. It's about the continuing fight for gay rights and equality that still goes on today. If anything, it's a portrait of an American life and I'm so, so, so glad he wrote it down and I had the privilege to read it.

I liked so many things about When We Rise, but one of the things that made it so great was the way it was written. It's SO well written and is hands down one of the best written memoirs I've ever read. I know that often times celebrities and just people in general collaborate with professional writers to help them write their biographies and memoirs (the outstanding ability of being able to string words together doesn't come naturally to everyone), and I don't know if Jones had help with writing this, but it's pretty much irrelevant because it's just so top notch (I like to think he wrote this without help, because he included speeches that he wrote for gay rights rallies and marches over the years and they too were superbly written, so that tells me this book was all him). Often times, I forgot I was reading a memoir because I was so engrossed in the story, but more so the history: gay history that is out there, but doesn't get told nearly enough. That's a large part of what makes this book so great. It's a portrait of an American life, but an American life that was sidelined as a minority who was and still is often misunderstood. So the fact that Jones was able to write this and have it published makes me want him to shout his story from the rooftops, because it's so relevant and necessary. Jones and a large part of his friends were in the fight for gay rights, liberation and equality from day one. Day one. That story and history is unbelievably important and it needs to be known.

Also, on that note, there seems to be talk online that When We Rise is merely a memoir of all the men Cleve Jones had sex with during his youth and people who wrote that on Goodreads just make me want to bang my head against a table. Yes, Jones does tell the stories of the men he encountered and later slept with and looking back there are a lot of them, but some of them are relevant and part of the overall story of the gay rights movement that he is telling. Some of them aren't necessarily related to the gay rights movement story, but this is also his memoir and he's allowed to tell his story how he sees fit. Not to mention the fact that there were times when it wouldn't have been possible for Jones to talk about the men he had sex with back in his youth as openly as he does in this book, which just emphasizes the importance and relevance of this story. I'm sure you wouldn't be complaining nearly as much if some straight woman wrote a memoir with details of all the men she's slept with. If you're going to go on Goodreads and say you enjoy the story about what it was like in the early days of the gay rights movement but then say you can't get through it because Jones talks too much about the men he had sex with, maybe don't read a gay book. Maybe don't read a book about the liberation movement of gay people if you're homophobic. Just a thought.

The miniseries was excellent, but it doesn't even begin to do the story and history justice and I would sooner recommend you read Jones' book instead, just because he's so damn great and interesting and empowering and did I mention great? It was one of those reading experiences where you want to read it fast, but you have to slow yourself down because it's such an intricate story that you need to be sure to take your time to comprehend and savior every word. As much as I wanted to finish it, I realized after finishing it that I really didn't want it to end! My heart is gone! This book has taken it from me! I don't think I'll ever get it back! Absolutely heart wrenching but oh so relevant and necessary. Oh so highly recommend. 5/5 stars.

10 Underrated Artists Who Deserve More Appreciation

I've been doing some blogging for the Kelly Alexander Show during the past month, which is an amazing entertainment show that gets up close and personal with your favorite stars and since you're already reading this why don't you go be a dear and follow us across your social media and subscribe to our YouTube channel! I'm totally not biased here at all, can't you tell?! Anyway, this was a piece I wrote a few weeks over there, and I thought I'd share it here too because I love these artists and you should go support them and that's just that! Enjoy.

Do you ever hear a song that you think is really, really good and say to yourself, "This must be such a hit," and then go online to find out that nobody is talking about this song or, often times, the artist, and you're just sitting there in front of your computer screen yelling out loud, "Why is nobody appreciating [insert artist's name here]?! They SOOO deserve it!" This happens to me all the time. All. The. Time. I'll be playing some music for someone and then they'll say, "Wow this is really good. Who sings this?" And I'll be shouting their name and yelling, "THEY'RE SO GOOD! GO DOWNLOAD THEIR MUSIC! AHHH!"

But, even then, those artists seldom receive the appreciation and attention they deserve (fine, more for me). If you happen to be in the market for new music, or just something nice to listen to, might I recommend these 10 underrated artists whose music deserve more respect and appreciation, and you should go support them right this minute.

1. Alessia Cara
Usually people know the name, because she has had a few singles that have been heavy in radio play ("Here", "Scars to Your Beautiful", and "Stay") but Alessia Cara is one of those artists whose songs you may know, but you don't take the time to download her album and listen to the rest of her music. That is a MISTAKE. I admit that I only got into Ms. Cara a few months ago, but that's only because I tend to procrastinate when it comes to downloading new artists and in this case I have been kicking myself that I didn't get into her when her debut album came out in 2015. In any event, Alessia Cara is definitely worth listening to all of her music and I'm willing to bet you haven't, so get to it. I'll wait. And I'm also willing to bet that, within a short time from now, Cara will be much bigger. Just a prediction of mine. Also, be sure to check out her interview with the Kelly Alexander Show here.

2. Carly Rae Jepsen

One might not describe her as exactly underrated, as I'm sure "Call Me Maybe" (AKA one of the most overplayed songs of all-time) comes to mind just at the mention of her name, but I will go to my grave informing people that Carly Rae Jepsen existed LONG BEFORE that song. Something people never seem to know is that, 10 years ago, Jepsen was on this Canadian reality competition series known as Canadian Idol and released a debut album called Tug of War in 2008. Its title single was on the radio all the time and I remember it being the only song of hers in my iTunes until 2011 rolled around and "Call Me Maybe" was everything anyone could talk about. I remember thinking, "Huh, she has new music now." But everyone else had never heard of her before and were floored by her. People thought (and still think) that Justin Bieber discovered her. Um, no. I'm here to tell you that Jepsen did exist before "Call Me Maybe" and she has always been talented. Mind you, I just found recently that Tug of War was originally only released in Canada (and even then, it was still an independent release) which could *technically* explain why the rest of the world had never heard of her but that's STILL no excuse, because her beautiful, folk-pop debut album has been on the American iTunes since 2013 so you've had all that time to discover for yourselves that she existed before she released what would become the best-selling single of 2012 that reached number one in 18 countries. Anyway, I still think that Carly Rae Jepsen is unfortunately underrated because even as "Call Me Maybe" achieved immense popularity and was sky high in sales, the song typecast her as a solely mainstream, bubblegum pop artist when that is very untrue. Sure, her second studio album, Kiss (2012), is pretty sunshine-and-roses pop music (and still good TBH), but her third studio album, Emotion (2015), is hands down her best. It's heavily influenced by 80s music sounds and I'm a sucker for 80s music so I might be biased here but even then, it's a more matured sound compared to Kiss and it sounds more uniquely and authentically Jepsen. I feel like all of her music post-"Call Me Maybe" doesn't get the appreciation it deserves because no one believed she had more to offer than bubblegum-sunshine pop. So, I'm here to remind you that a) she DID exist before "Call Me Maybe" and you now have no excuse to believe otherwise and b) her more recent music is amazing and you need to go download it.

3. Christina Perri

Christina Perri is just so damn flawless and I can't deal. You may remember her from 2010 when her debut single "Jar of Hearts" was significantly popular (as it should have been), but she's also had two albums since then and they are both great. Find me another artist who manages to blend pop rock and folk together as flawlessly as Christina Perri. I'm not even gonna wait for an answer there because there are no other artists. She's the kind of singer who will make you miss a significant other that never even existed. You may also remember her as the singer and songwriter of "A Thousand Years", the heart-wrenchingly beautiful love theme for the final Twilight film. UGH. SO GREAT. Her albums, Lovestrong (2011) and Head or Heart (2014), are available on iTunes and elsewhere. I've also been waiting for her third album for 3 YEARS now and I really hope it happens soon.

4. Hailee Steinfeld

Hailee Steinfeld is one of the most criminally underrated artists of all-time and I'm waiting for the day that the world will just LET. HER. HAPPEN. Before she broke into the music industry, she was primarily an actress, scoring an Oscar nomination for her performance in True Grit (2010), with other notable appearances in Begin Again (2013) and Ender's Game (2013) before debuting her hidden musical talent as Emily Junk in Pitch Perfect 2 (2015), in which she performed the song "Flashlight." After releasing a cover version of the song, Steinfeld scored a record deal with Republic Records and her debut single, "Love Myself", followed soon after. Her debut EP, Haiz, came out later that year and included 4 new songs, all of which display her obvious talent and flawless look. Her second single was an artistically beautiful collaboration with DNCE called "Rock Bottom", which was also criminally underrated and you should go listen to it now. But if that wasn't enough to convince you (and clearly it wasn't, seeing as how "Rock Bottom" did NOT get the respect it deserved), Steinfeld released a standalone single with Zedd and Grey last summer called "Starving", which became her biggest success yet and was also the best song of 2016 in case you weren't already aware (where was their Grammy nomination for that?) Her most recent single dropped this spring, "Most Girls", which is an upbeat, feminist bop that is so underrated it actually physically hurts me a bit so do yourselves a favor and go listen to that too. Her music videos are also top notch: add the videos for "Starving" and "Most Girls" to your to-watch list on YouTube. You also must listen to a virtually unknown and unappreciated collaboration she did with a DJ known as Prince Fox called "Fragile"; your ears will never be the same. I've read that "Most Girls" is supposedly the lead single from her forthcoming debut album which is apparently due out LATER THIS YEAR and I really hope that's true because it is about time Queen Steinfeld got the appreciation and respect she deserves.

5. La Roux

La Roux's entire discography is probably the definition of underrated, honestly. You probably remember the synthpop duo from their breakout hit, "Bulletproof", which was quite popular in North America around 2010 and was even featured in several mashups in the musical comedy film Pitch Perfect (2012). Their self-titled debut album is pretty much composed of the same unique, synthpop kind of bops that you hear in "Bulletproof", but I will admit their style in that album was a little *out there* so I won't blame anyone too harshly for that album's descent into the unknown. However, their second studio album, Trouble in Paradise (2014), combines their trademark synthpop sound with a disco-like version of mainstream pop and I will never understand why we stopped talking about it. It's so unique and great, even though it's only 9 songs. I definitely recommend both of their albums but if I were to give an edge to one of them, it would be Trouble in Paradise, which deserves more appreciation.

6. Victoria Duffield

It is a true crime against nature that Victoria Duffield flopped and I think they should revive that Unsolved Mysteries show again just to investigate this huge question mark. You may recall the young Canadian star from her days as a contestant on the YTV teen reality series The Next Star, where she was a finalist in 2010. Her debut single came the following year, “Shut Up and Dance”, was pretty successful on the Canadian Hot 100 chart, as was her debut album of the same name (which followed in 2012), but she never really caught on anywhere outside of Canada. This is quite a shame, considering that if you watch any of her music videos, she dances like Britney Spears and looks like redheaded Lindsay Lohan meets Bella Thorne, so I’m really, really surprised no record executive stumbled upon her and made her happen the way she could have. And if you look in the comments section of any of her music videos on YouTube, the top comment is usually something like, “It bothers me that she never blew up the way she should have.” I AGREE. She’s super talented and 99% of her music is mainstream catchy, especially “More Than Friends”, the lead single from her second studio album from 3 years ago that I only discovered a few weeks ago. It’s SO GOOD and I actually don’t understand how she literally flopped… I’m not even exaggerating: her second album from 2014, Accelerate, failed to chart in any countries. That’s a true flop if I’ve ever seen one. I mean, there’s nothing truly *special* or unique about her two albums, but it’s still good, catchy pop music that totally sounds like it could be largely successful…but it just wasn’t. Possibly one of the greatest mysteries of our time.

7. Tegan and Sara

This duo falls under the same category of Alessia Cara and Carly Rae Jepsen: you may know them, but you don’t know or haven’t heard 95% of their music. Tegan and Sara first started off as indie rockers in the late 90s and early 2000s and it is understandable how their first few albums didn’t yield any mainstream success, because indie music is indie music for a reason and some of it is just a little…weird. There’s no exception here. A lot of Tegan and Sara’s early music is very out there, but that’s kind of the whole point. They’re unique and spend time finding a sound that’s all their own. Their seventh studio album, Heartthrob (2013), is their first with a more mainstream, alternative pop sound and it’s definitely among their best (if not their best album), but their indie rock from earlier on is good too and anyone who have heard a few of their hits and liked them, such as "Closer" or "Boyfriend", you might like their earlier stuff too. Some of it is really funky, unique rock. So Jealous (2004) and Sainthood (2009) are required listens. So underrated, *sigh*. Tegan and Sara are also strong allies for the LGBTQ community and are both openly gay which has led many to theorize that they are not more popular because society is threatened by two badass queer rockers, but that’s probably a discussion for another day.

8. Ashley Tisdale
My dying words will probably be, “Why was Ashley Tisdale’s second album so underrated and why did she let her music career wither and die…” Tisdale, a former Disney child star who turned out to be quite musically inclined after starring as Sharpay Evans in the High School Musical film series, had two studio albums, the second of which, Guilty Pleasure, was just…so unappreciated. The pop rock record was just so well put together but no one ever seemed too blown away by it. That was 2009, and we haven’t heard anything from the singer music-wise since then. She said in 2013 that she was working on her third album, but that was already 4 years ago. C’mon, girl. Guilty Pleasure was also from an era when it seemed like the music industry was pushing female young adult stars in the pop rock direction; something that is completely foreign in 2017. They did the same thing with Emily Osment from Hannah Montana; a good singer who went in the pop rock direction around the same time and nothing has been heard from her music-wise since. WHY DID YOU LET THESE GIRLS FLOP, DEAR WORLD?!

9. Tinashe

It’s somewhat of a nightmare that Tinashe hasn’t happened yet. She’s had two albums so far, Aquarius (2014) and Nightride (2016), and her third, Joyride, is due out later this year. If you haven’t heard her latest single yet, “Flame”, then you can’t possibly understand what I mean when I say it’s a nightmare she hasn’t happened yet. Also, check out Tinashe’s interview with the Kelly Alexander Show here.

10. Ellie Goulding

It would be inaccurate to say that Ellie Goulding is necessarily without respect or appreciation, because she’s had several hits and is fairly well known, but she’s definitely so underrated. I wasn’t huge fan of her earlier albums, except for songs like “Burn” or her best-selling collaboration with Calvin Harris, “I Need Your Love”, but Goulding’s third studio album, Delirium (2015), is pure pop gold and I’m really surprised there wasn’t more buzz about it. Tracks like “Something in the Way You Move” and “Don’t Panic” are A+ and definitely deserve more appreciation. I highly recommend downloading Delirium if you’re looking for new music because it is very much top notch.

Book Reviews: 'Lady Midnight' by Cassandra Clare and 'The Serpent King' by Jeff Zentner

1. Lady Midnight, by Cassandra Clare:

I did enjoy this, and it did manage to get me out of the worst reading slump I've ever been in, which you can read about in my previous post. Lady Midnight confirms what I always knew to be true: Cassandra Clare is a good writer. A lot of people think otherwise and believe other YA fantasy authors like Sarah J. Maas to be better, but I have to disagree. Clare is in fact very good at what she does. If anything, Lady Midnight also confirms that she is exquisitely skilled at creating her characters and her world, so much so that I think she got lost in it a bit in this one. What I'm trying to say here is: this book did NOT need to be 700 pages. I know I said I don't like long books and that might make me a little biased here, but I'm sorry, Lady Midnight was way too damn long. It seems the actual plot of the story encompassed no more than 250 pages and the rest was Clare creating people and having fun with that. Don't get me wrong; like I said, she's good at that and it's nice to read. But it also got to the point where it was like, "Okay... PLEASE GET ON WITH IT." I did enjoy Lady Midnight and I think it ended on a nice cliffhanger that does make me want to pick up the sequel at some point, but Jesus Christ. Unnecessarily long. I'm a little surprised her editors didn't make her cut some of the fluff. Some of it is important and it's just me, but there's other stuff that really play no part in the actual plot of the story and just aren't needed, at least in my opinion. That does worry me for the fact that the sequel is just as long if not longer, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Other than finding it too long, I did enjoy it, though. I really wanted more of Julian and Emma, because there a lot of unanswered questions concerning them, but I'll just keep my mouth shut and read Lord of Shadows. 4/5 stars.

2. The Serpent King, by Jeff Zentner:
On my Goodreads profile and in the book ratings section of this blog, I explain my rationale for rating a book out of 5 stars. For 4 stars, I explain it as "enjoyed it except for a few things here and there," which is exactly how I can describe how I enjoyed The Serpent King. I very much enjoyed it except for a few things that made me either raise an eyebrow or do a tiny eye roll. But, as a whole, I did enjoy it and if you enjoy most YA books, I do recommend it. I do think I'm unfortunately starting to outgrow these kind of YA books, though. Even if a part of me likes it, another part of me is looking for something that is missing; something I just can't put my finger on, and I've decided it's just a sign that some (not all, at least not yet) YA books are getting a little too young for me. Sigh. Anyway.

The Serpent King is about three friends who are all outcasts in their extremely backwoods Tennessee town. The author did a good job at creating environment and atmosphere; Zentner does paint quite the picture of what it's like to live in a (excuse my potentially offensive slang) hick/white trash, southern, religious-extremist small town. Dill has been essentially shunned by everyone in town ever since his pastor father was sent to prison for possession of child pornography. His extremely religious mother, who would prefer to stick her head in the sand and relate literally everything to God and Jesus, quietly blames Dill for his father being sent to prison. Travis is a fantasy book nerd which makes him an eccentric stuck in a dead-end family with an abusive father who will never understand him and a mother who wants to, but is ultimately unable to. And then there's Lydia, who's father is a dentist and as a result their family is viewed as more upper-class than anyone in town, but she's an outcast because she runs a fashion blog and dreams of college and life in New York City, away from Jesus freaks and people stuck in mud that is their small town, going nowhere. Zentner was good at painting a picture of their reality, but some things were still left up to the imagination. I've read other books and seen movies that are set in small southern towns that are inescapably conservative and religious so I could paint a bit of my own picture, but Zentner's setting of the scene wasn't as good as, say, Shine by Lauren Myracle. So it was good, but not amazing or breathtaking, y'know? Also, Lydia was kind of an asshole. Dill and Travis are doubtful that they will ever attend college, just because it's not ever presented as an attainable goal to them; Dill lives in a house where his mother promotes leaving high school because he already has a job at the grocery store and Jesus will apparently take care of the rest, and Travis is in a similar dead-end situation. Dill is worried about Lydia leaving them and never looking back and then Lydia gets mad at him for saying that because he could "easily" attend college, which he couldn't. If he was really dedicated to getting to college, he could, but it wasn't as easy as Lydia was making it out to be. Anyway, she bothered me. But like I said, all in all, a good read. Some parts bothered me. Others were good. 4/5 stars.