Bitchin' Blog Posts

Midnight Brunch by Marta Acosta

by SB Sarah | August 15, 2007 | Wednesday at 2:35 pm | 6 Comments
B

Title: Midnight Brunch
Author: Marta Acosta
Publication Info: Pocket April 24, 2007
ISBN: 1416520392
Genre: Paranormal

Marta Acosta has been emailing me random bits of smartness she encounters online, and at one point she asked if I’d read her book, and what I thought. It was a rare moment for me, because usually I can ramble with the best of them.

And honestly, this is one of the more challenging reviews I’ve written because I do not know what to say.

Did I like the book? Yup.

Do I like Acosta’s writing? Yup. It’s witty and fast paced, and I never catch myself skimming. Acosta has mastered the fine art of plot that moves damn fast but doesn’t make you feel like you can’t keep up.

Do I like the heroine? Yup. Milagro is a puzzle but that’s one of the things that’s fascinating about her. She’s half-in and half-out of so many different opposing worlds that she doesn’t quite fit where she wants to fit in, and finds that she fits in more where she least expects it. She has to balance cultural prejudice against her while struggling to reveal and fulfill her own brilliance, dealing with people who dismiss her as another brainless, buxom Latina woman, even though she’s whip-smart and wicked funny.

Did I like the plot? Yup. Milagro finds herself in the midst of another adventure wherein she has to yet again choose between determining and fighting for her own path, or letting things happen to her and dealing with them with her standard flexibility or aplomb. She’s repeatedly confronted with evidence that she’s unique and certainly very, very special, yet she believes she’s ordinary.

The secondary characters introduced in the story were clever and interesting, innovative and not at all made of or resembling cardboard. The setting was very cool - Milagro finds herself living in a resort but somehow then finds herself working for a washed-up movie star IN the resort, putting her in the unenviable position of being the help and a guest at the same time. Yet again: Milagro has to balance between two opposites and find her way through.

While there were times I wanted to hit Milagro on the head for not seeing something obviously sinister or fishy about someone, I was willing to forgive her for missing what I thought was a big clue, because there’s a lot going on around her. Only a handful of times did I mark a page and leave myself a note, or rather, Milagro a note - “Come on, now. You know that’s rather ominous right there!” Milagro, I think, is written as one of those people who stumbles through an extraordinary life completely unintentionally. Her ambition isn’t to get involved with weird people, like bizarre movie stars or exceptionally wealthy families with “genetic autosomal recessive disorders” that cause them to like red a LOT, drink blood, eat rare meat, and avoid the sun. Yet she finds herself in the midst of these extraordinary people, and has to discover that she’s more extraordinary, even among these fascinating, unique people. I want to smack her on the head at times, but I like her.

So what’s the problem? I don’t know how to classify this book!
I had this problem with the last one, too. It’s not romance, but it’s got a very strong sexual and romantic plot. Her main squeeze, Oswald, is only present in the beginning and the ending, and most of the time they interact I was folding a corner of the page because the two of them tend to let the Big Misunderstanding move in and drink all their booze while it fucks with their relationship. Oswald and Milagro are both smart, brave people, so when they have fights based on unwillingness to say something, or fear of bringing up their true feelings, it is frustrating to say the least. On the other hand, it’s often realistic, because people who are brave everywhere else are often completely neurotic when it comes to the ones who mean the most to them emotionally.

But this book isn’t a romance, because the focus is Milagro and her continuing adventures among Oswald’s family and the others like them.

It’s not a mystery, though there is a series of curious events that need to be solved. It’s not what I would call “chick lit” or even “women’s fiction” because it doesn’t deal solely with Milagro’s issues. There’s, well, decidedly little angst to correctly call it “women’s fiction,” and not nearly enough shopping for shoes or clothing to be “chick lit.”

And this is where I have to address not the author but the publisher: Hi there. I’m Sarah. I try to write reviews. And I’m stumbling here because I don’t know what this book is. Is it “fiction?” I might as well call it “words on paper” because “fiction” doesn’t say much except that the author made it up and doesn’t have to cite any sources. If I were a bookseller I wouldn’t know where to shelve it! The first cover, for Happy Hour at Casa Dracula was a cartoon with sharp edges, and that more accurately depicts the book series than the current cover. I thought it was a cookbook when I first saw it. So what gives? Do you not know how to market this book? I mean, it’s clear that there’s no easy category to place this book, and fitting something new into existing categories is always a challenge. In that way, the book mimics Milagro herself- it is but it isn’t, in so many different ways.

The best part of reading this book, lest I turn you off with my “WTF-ing” is that this book is fun to read. It’s definitely a satire of the entire dark and angsty vampire genre, and it’s easy to get into and friendly in its prose and style. It’s funny with an edge, which is about my very favorite type of humor. But if I had to shelve my books by subgenre, I wouldn’t know where to put it. Better to shelve by grade, I think.

Filed:

| |
  1. BevQB said on 08.15.07 at 06:35 PM • [comment link]

    I feel so much better now, Sarah! I had the same problem when I recently wrote my commentary on Marta’s Milagro books. I couldn’t explain WHY I could NOT put these books down. All I knew was that I really enjoyed them, but saying more than “I liked - go read” was really tough. 

    Among other things, I ended up comparing their pace to the first seasons of the TV shows E.R. and Lost. Random analogy, but it was the closest I could get.

    BevL(QB)

  2. Marta Acosta said on 08.15.07 at 09:40 PM • [comment link]

    Thanks for the review, Sarah!  My book is fiction, but it you must put it in a category, it would be in the spanking new funny fiction by women category, Bitch-Lit.  And, yes, I will be starting my www.bitchlit.com site soon!

  3. fiveandfour said on 08.15.07 at 10:27 PM • [comment link]

    While I totally get the problem with classifying some books (music that crosses predetermined boundaries has the same problem - no one knows how to classify it, thus they have no idea how to sell it), as a lover of books in other genres I have to take exception to the implication that chick lit is about little more than shopping.

    There are some  damn  fine  books  out  there that focus on more than what the genre gets credit for. 

    I find the parallels between how the romance genre is viewed and how the chick lit genre is viewed by those who don’t read them very interesting.  Of course, part of chick lit’s image issue has to do with the fact that when the genre was getting started, so many of the books did have a huge focus on clothes and shoes and shopping and image.  But it matured relatively quickly, I think, into a genre that explores so many sides of life that women can identify with: what it’s like to be a cheater or cheated on, what it’s like to have grown up believing in a religion you can’t believe in any more, what it’s like to deal with grief, with growing up, with realizing you’ve let the world determine your level of self-esteem, with the variety of the kinds of friendships you have over the course of your life.

    There’s a rich vein of life experiences being tapped, but because the books are written by women with female leads there’s an automatic “less than” status conferred on them.  I think men could identify, too, but there seems to be a barrier against men reading books with female leads (they can’t relate? they don’t want to relate?) that doesn’t exist when it comes to women reading books with male leads.  (It’s further interesting that when those books are made into movies, men will watch them when they wouldn’t be caught dead reading the book.  My husband thought In Her Shoes was a good story.  Would he ever read a book by Jennifer Weiner?  Hell no!  Same deal applies with The Devil Wears Prada, though I wouldn’t recommend that book anyway - it needed an editor but bad.) 

    Anyway, all that was beside my main point which is that I’ve seen chick lit as a genre dismissed as nothing more than books about shopping in many, many places where people bemoan the misconceptions befalling their own favorite genre(s).  And the irony, it burns.

    [P.S. the Casa Dracula book is in my TBR pile…sounds like I need to dig that sucker out.]

  4. Marta Acosta said on 08.15.07 at 11:19 PM • [comment link]

    And I’ll have to pick up a copy of FRENEMIES!

    Re: chick lit, after the success of Bridget Jones’s Diary, publishers flooded the market with crap, thereby tainting by association all the amusing, well-written books about women going through a coming-of-age crisis.

    Chick Lit was created as a marketing label.  Right now the label isn’t working to market any books as clever, smart stories with a female protagonist.  Can the label be rehabilitated?

  5. fiveandfour said on 08.16.07 at 12:49 AM • [comment link]

    Can the label be rehabilitated?

    I don’t know.  There’s a hint - ok,  more than a hint - of condescension built into the moniker “chick lit” to start with, and maybe books with the kind of tone and style of the early books fit the label.  Which is not to say I don’t think there’s a place for books like that or that there’s anything inherently wrong with their existence, only that the label does seem to fit books of that early type pretty well and doesn’t fit a later book along the lines of Anybody Out There.  With books like that or Rachel’s Holiday I’ve long surmised that were they marketed with different covers no one would think “chick lit” for a moment if they read them. 

    So perhaps it’s time to think of these later generations of books in some other way, with some other label.  As far as I can tell, it’s just been this term that has stuck around long after it fit in any real way for lack of anything else. 

    (Though I suspect there might also be a display of defiance at work for some people in keeping the term while writing books that are so much more than the term implies.  Like one big middle finger gesture to the condescenders.)

    Yes, do read Frenemies (and Megan’s other books, too - I recommend all of them). 

    Speaking of Megan, I know she’s doing an east coast book tour right now and if I recall correctly, there’s something around this time of month in New York that’s happening at an outside venue.  If you’re the hardy sort and can take the heat, check out her website for details and go meet her - especially if you (I mean the general “you”, I’m not picking on you, Marta!) don’t know what to think of chick lit or have never been able to get into it.  It could show you in a more definitive way what the genre is like today.

  6. SB Sarah said on 08.16.07 at 01:36 AM • [comment link]

    re: chick lit

    I’m sure I didn’t make this clear, but I wasn’t talking about my perceptions of “chick lit” (hence the quotes) but the market perception of “chick lit” - which unfortunately, as you mentioned, is a category glutted with shopping and shoes books. I was speaking in terms of how to categorize this particular book, were I a bookseller.

    I’m well aware that there’s some great “chick lit” (Gawl-durn how I hate that term) and women’s fiction out there. The development of the “chick lit” genre alone is as frustrating as trying to fit Midnight Brunch into a category other than fiction. There’s a lot of varied types of books that get shelved under “chick lit” and there’s a lot of varied types of fiction that have little in common except that there was no other moniker to bestow upon them.

  7. Add a Comment

    Sorry, comments are now closed for this post.

  • Looking for a book?
    View our past advertisements!
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...