10 reasons why the Watch books are not like JK Rowling

The Watch series by Sergei Lukyanenko (The Night Watch, The Day Watch, The Twilight Watch & The Last Watch) is an excellent fantasy series and one which I recommend to anyone who like complex, exciting stories and new/different settings. The 2 films based on the the first two books are also good, with plenty of action, although they differ from the novels.

Here is the cover of the second book. It is an excellent example of the bollocks that gets written on book covers. The quote in the bottom left-hand corner seems to suggest that this book (and the 2 sequels, which have the same cover quote) is like the work of JK Rowling, except that it is Russian. It is a grossly misleading and unhelpful quote. These books are very different to Rowling's and while it's possible to enjoy the work of both authors I wouldn't recommend them to the same people. For example I wouldn't recommend Rowling to someone who enjoys dark fantasy, horror or thrillers, just as I wouldn't recommend Lukyanenko to a nine year old. Plus it's somewhat infuriating, as a fantasy fan, to see that apparently the entire genre can be summed up as 'like JK Rowling'.


10 commonly-known facts about the Harry Potter books and comparative facts about the Watch series:

The protagonist is a teenage wizard.	The main protagonist is an adult magician. The 2nd book features different protagonists, they are also adults, one is female.
The books are mostly set in a magical school, the entirety takes place in Britain.	Set in Moscow mostly, also Prague, Uzbekistan and Edinburgh. The closest thing to a school is a youth camp which is the setting for less than 9% of the series.
Most of the characters are children, the main adults are parents/guardians or teachers.	Almost all the characters are adults, some centuries old. There are 2 main teenage/young adult characters, and a toddler.
Magic exists but is practised in secret.	Ok yes that’s broadly the same, but it’s also true of dozens of things.*
Performing magic requires wand-waving, pseudo-Latin spells, potions, charms and magical artefacts.	Others perform magic as an act of will, usually without accoutrements. Although training improves their abilities, Others’ are limited by their magical ‘race’. Magic can involve formal processes and rituals. There are some magical artefacts.
Witches and Wizards fly around on broomsticks and owls deliver their post.	I’m almost certain there aren't any flying broomsticks in the books. One character does spend time in owl form, but I don’t think she delivers anything.
There are magical creatures including: centaurs, dragons, hippogriffs, giants, three-headed dogs and werewolves.	Some magical creatures (vampires, werewolves, shape-shifters, incubi/succubi) are actually different races of Others. There are a few creatures created by magicians, but there don’t seem to be any independent, non-humanoid magical creatures.
The main antagonist is a Great Evil who must be stopped at all costs.	There are Light Others (who tend to be selfless) and Dark Others (who tend to be self-serving), opposing sides that cannot win without wiping themselves out. Peace and balance are the most important things and they are maintained by the Watches and the Inquisition. Each side has their own opinions and philosophies which are explored in the books. On the surface the concept seems black and white, but there is a hell of a lot of grey (see next point).
A character who doesn’t like the hero and pretends to work for the bad-guys, whilst actually working for the good-guys is as morally grey and complex as it gets.	The Night Watch (Light Others who police Dark ones) track down Dark forces, they also issue them with licences. A licensed vampire can freely drink human blood. The Day Watch (Dark Others who police Light ones) have the same rights and responsibilities, and can legally stop an unlicensed Light magician from using magic to positively influence humans. Add to this that the Watch Directors use humans, Others and even their own Watch members as pawns in their plans –which frequently to involve deceit, misdirection and manipulation – and you have stories with complex moral greys.
After hardships and loss Good triumphs over Evil.	After some very serious challenges to the order of things, to magic and life itself,  the status quo and balance are preserved, meaning that humans and Others can continue existing. Although the Night Watch (in Russia at least) is left stronger than the Day Watch.

There you go 10 reasons and I didn't even include the obvious bit about one being an adult book and one being written for children.


* Admittedly it's more like 9 reasons why the Watch books aren't like JK Rowling. But pretty much every low, contemporary or historical primary-world fantasy has magic existing secretly among us.
You might as well say that Terry Brooks' Word & Void trilogy is 'JK Rowling, American style', or that Eoin Colfer's Artemis Fowl series is 'JK Rowling, Irish style', or perhaps that Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere is 'JK Rowling, British Jewish London style'. In fact I'm fairly sure that both Susan Cooper's The Dark Is Rising Sequence and Jill Murphy's Worst Witch series are 'JK Rowling, preceding-her-by-2-decades style'.
And you know what, I think all the above books have more in common with JK Rowling than the Watch series does.

Beaton-tastic

I'm going to talk about the work of 2 women. They share a surname but as far as I know they aren't related -though it might be cool if they were (actually it'd be cooler if they teamed up somehow, relatives or not).


Kate Beaton
Kate Beaton is Canadian web-comic-maker (web-comicer? web-comictress? web-comictrix?) who is interested in history, just about ALL history. This in itself is impressive. The fact that she turns history, personal experience, pop-culture musings, nostalgia and vintage book covers into hilarious web comics is pretty bloody amazing. Thanks to Kate Beaton's line drawings I have giggled, laughed aloud, smiled and also learned some stuff.

Her website is called Hark! A Vagrant
She also has a blog at Livejournal
Some of my favourite comics:
Herodotus the Father of Lies - because let's face it writing about flying snakes, griffins and how to steal gold from giant ants is fun, but not historical.*
Sexy Tudors - because (if you believe television) history was very glamorous and sexy, and not at all full of dirt and disease. *nods*
Mystery Solving Teens - why did everyone believe those strange, hippy-van-driving kids over local adults?


Clare Beaton

Elusive Moose published by Barefoot Books

Clare Beaton is a British artist and illustrator who works mostly with felt. Her work is AMAZING! She has done a variety of things but I'm most fam,iliar with her work for Barefoot Books. These are very simple picture books that teach children about different animals and environments, but the pictures are so delightful and well done I find myself sitting and studying them.

The first Clare Beaton book I read was Elusive Moose. The eponymous moose wasn't blue, but the pictures and artwork were fantastic.
Further titles include Hidden Hippo, Secret Seahorse, Who are you, Baby Kangaroo? and One Moose and Twenty Mice. The latter book title includes two of my favourite animals. Clare has also written some informative books about working with felt, they too are for children, but it was still interesting.
Her website is simple, but features more fascinating and colourful artwork.


* I don't recommend reading Herodotus unless you are inclined to read historical writings (if so give him a try), but if you can find a good summary online it should be amusing.

More Tales of the City

After reading the first book in this series I thought I'd give the others a go, over time. Then I saw the television version -which helped me understand the book better- and prematurely discovered one character's secret. This meant, as I said in my post on 13th December, I had to read the next one. And now I have.

More Tales of the City by Armistead Maupin
I read this book very quickly. It isn't large and has fairly short chapters, plus the writing contains very little filler and is somehow conducive to quick reading. However the main reason I read the book so quickly, at times ignoring piles of comics to keep reading, is that it was just so compelling.

The story starts a couple of months after the end of the first book. The cast returns, and some new characters are introduced. Again I found that some of the US 70s references went over my head, but I think I'd picked up a reasonable amount from the previous book. Plus the writing is such that the tone of dialogue perfectly is clear even if the specific reference isn't familiar. At least I've heard of Candace Bergen and Eva Gabor, even if my idea of them is several decades ahead of that in the book. Given my lack of interest in celebrity culture I might be equally clueless reading a modern novel with too many contemporary references.*

Knowing part of the plot actually wasn't a problem. The reveal comes fairly early on, and knowing about it meant that I could see how the author built up certain situations and I could anticipate what would happen. If timed well anticipation of upcoming scenes or situations can be a powerful thing in a book, it's how a book retains its re-read value.
There were other mysterious plot elements. Most prominent was the one surrounding the missing memories of an amnesiac character, which led to some self-conscious, amateur detective work by some of the returning characters. There were also several fairly dramatic events, which I won't spoil, but which tugged at the emotions.

There didn't seem to be as many loose ends at the end of this book. I'm not sure how closely the next one will follow on, but as long as the characters and the writing remain at the same standard I'll be happy to read.


* Many adverts have 'famous' people in them, but half the time I assume they're ad actors because I don't recognise them. That group of mates playing together on the Wii ad, turns out they're a band! I also forget that a lot of music in adverts comes from popular songs, so then I get confused when I hear 'that ASDA song' playing on a pub jukebox.

The King's Speech

I'm back. My laptop has a new power supply and I don't have to use my husband's computer anymore.


My first cinema outing of the new year was to see The King's Speech, which has won/been nominated for various awards, and which I've been looking forward to since before Christmas.

I am interested in history, this is no surprise to anyone who knows me. I've enjoyed studying all sorts of different historical periods, but by the time I was 16 I'd decided I wasn't that interested in modern history. Because modern history -as taught to me in both History and English lessons- was mostly World Wars. However over the last few years I've developed a growing interest in the bits of twentieth century history that aren't 1914-1918 and 1939-1945. In a way Downton Abbey and The King's Speech came along at just the right time for me.


The film was excellent. The look, the feel, the acting, the emotions, it all just worked.

I've always quite liked the quirkiness of Helena Bonham Carter and the characters she has played. Yet here she was returning to period-drama, which defined her early career. Instead of playing a waif or ingenue, or a quirky gothic type she played a woman who was at the very heart of the British upper-class/royal establishment. She was excellent. She really captured the polite iciness of Elizabeth towards Wallis Simpson.

Colin Firth was brilliant as well, something which came as a pleasant surprise. I tend to think of him as a romantic lead, with the exception of Shakespeare in Love, so I was interested to see what he would be like with such a strong character role. He was wonderful. Bertie (King George VI) was a challenging part and he really rose to the occasion. Going from a loving father, to a frustrated stammerer, to a formal prince and later reluctant king, Firth -well directed with a wonderful script- showed different facets of the man who never wanted to be king. The voice was obviously a major part of his performance, and Firth made those stutters and stammers feel real, as well as doing a good imitation of the posh but somehow small voice of the prince. It was interesting to see him play a character who was so lacking in charisma, but he always kept dignity in the role and never became ridiculous or bumbling.

Geoffrey Rush was excellent, but then I generally expect Geoffrey Rush to be excellent. He was excellent even in Pirates of the Caribbean 3 when he'd been given lines that didn't make any sense. So seeing him working with such a good script is a real treat.

I'd also like to take a moment to mention Timothy Spall in a supporting role playing Winston Churchill. Now Spall is an actor who has played a variety of parts, many of them comedic, some of them grotesque. However I've often felt that, though he's not a big name, he must be a good actor. Seeing him as Churchill (pre-WWII MP and newly-made Lord of the Admiralty Churchill) just felt like a good piece of the casting. In fact I'd quite like to see him play Churchill again. If any TV or film people could arrange it that'd be just lovely.


I knew various bits and pieces about the abdication, about Edward VIII's love for Wallis Simpson, about the horror the British establishment felt about the whole situation. I knew that the Queen Mother had never liked Mrs Simpson back when she was still the Duchess of York, and that when she was Queen she referred to her as "that woman". Then again apparently Wallis Simpson referred to her sister-in-law, the Queen of England, as "Cookie". Clearly these were two women who were never going to get along.
It was a constitutional crisis, the first one since the madness of George III. Personally I think the constitutional crises -historical ones at least- are interesting, which is probably why I love Stuart History so much.

I heartily recommend this film to anyone who enjoys drama and strong character-based story-telling.

Snow and technical difficulties

I don't think I have ever seen so much snow as I have in the past 3 days.

Well actually that's probably not totally true. On a family holiday I did go to the top of the tallest mountain in Europe for a few hours. Of course they had a glacier, which is probably cheating. Also it was hard to appreciate how much snow you were seeing as the entire view was mountains, snow, hillocks (which were actually slightly smaller mountains), and blue fog at the horizon.

It's the most snow I have been in for any length of time. I'm actually quite glad I don't have a car, walking is far quicker though it feels much more strenuous than usual.

Snow is actually not the cause of my current technical difficulties. My laptop's power supply has gone, meaning that I'm currently writing this on my husband's computer. This is fine, however the keyboard is unfamiliar and it does mean I have to remember all my passwords and bookmarked sites whenever I'm online.
Not sure how much I'll be posting until I get a new power supply, which hopefully won't be too long.

Tales of the City (again)

After reading Tales of the City last month, a colleague lent me his copy of the 4 episode mini-series made in the 90s. I've been watching it over the last couple of weeks.

I was pleasantly surprised to find that the first episode more or less is the start of the book. Obviously being television there is less inner monologue, so the thoughts of the characters aren't as obvious. However the actors very quickly came to inhabit the blurry-faced spaces that Armistead Maupin's characters occupy in my mind. I soon got over my 'Look it's Laura Linney' or 'Oh, it's that guy from Dharma and Greg' reactions.
There were large sections of dialogue and whole scenes that came straight from the book, making it a very faithful adaptation. I had expected that certain parts of the plot would get streamlined or certain scenes might be pruned, but there was only a little of that. The beginning of the book is mostly made up of encounters between both major and minor characters, which means that the plot doesn't seem to get going right away. It would have been easy to drop some of these scenes, but clearly the makers appreciated their importance in introducing the cast to the viewers.

Subsequent episodes changed a few things, though the bulk of the scenes were familiar, and much of the dialogue was the same. There were times when I couldn't quite remember what order certain scenes were in, and whether that bit actually had been in the book. After all I read the novel about a month ago, and it's not like I memorised it.

The most useful thing about seeing the TV version was that it helped me get more of a feel for the setting. As I said here after reading the book, I don't know much about 1970s San Francisco. The novel was very contemporary and contained a lot of references to things that I'm not familiar with. While I could generally infer the tone being used, I found that it was the main niggle I had about the story. On television I could see what the bars, clubs and houses looked like, and I could hear the disco music and the street noise. I could see the clip-on ties, the lacoste shirts with the tiny alligators (or are they crocodiles?), and the sideburns. It all helped me understand the time and setting, without me feeling distanced from it.

The events in the book and series are the same, however due to the difference in medium I think there were times when the character motivations were less obvious. The viewer doesn't have the same intimate relationship with characters as the reader does. However I don't think there are any barriers for viewers who haven't read the book. There isn't much direct exposition in the novel, and with the programme so close to the original there are no real gaps to fill in.
I'm told that the same cannot be said for a certain boy-wizard film franchise.

The series does give away something that isn't revealed in the book -that scene was definitely added in. Of course it would have been unfair on audiences to finish a TV show without giving away what a whole part of the plot was about. Actually it wasn't that fair on readers either, but at least I know I can get the next book. In fact now I think I have to.

Wicked Lovely

I read two books in a row with 'Wicked' in the title. If I was clever I could have posted at a different time and had a nice 'wicked' theme going. Although the two books are otherwise unconnected, so it might have been a little tenuous.


Wicked Lovely by Melissa Marr
Aislinn (shortened to Ash in case, like me, you aren't sure how it's pronounced) can see the cruel antics of invisible faeries. It's a family curse and Aislinn has been brought up strictly by her grandmother to ignore the faeries at all times, as attracting their attention is too dangerous. However powerful faeries are suddenly following her and she needs to listen to the whispers she normally ignores, because now they're about her.

I enjoyed this book and am looking forward to reading the sequels. It's part of the current surge of supernatural romances for teens, but I found that it bucked certain (annoying) trends. The faeries in this book are varied, but generally inhuman-looking and often rather nasty, I felt that the supernatural elements were well-used. Aislinn's fear and distrust of them is understandable and this attitude prevales even in the face of a handsome and mysterious stranger (let's face it, those guys are always trouble). The supernatural is not sprung on her as an amazing new world, it contains all the horrors she's witnessed in her life. The challenge in the book is not resisting the beguiling temptation of the supernatural, but working to try and accept it.

One thing I found very refreshing was the romantic plotline. The centuries-old, faery king Keenan does not successfully seduce the mortal girl (though it's something he's done numerous times in the past). In fact Aislinn can't stand Keenan, who follows her and hangs around her school, and she treats him with suspicion. This is understandable, there's really no good reason for anyone over a century old to hang around a school. It's also refreshing to read a story in which becoming a faery queen is actually the protagonist's idea of a complete nightmare. Melissa Marr cleverly twists fictional expectations with the situation and characters she has created.
The actual romantic lead is much more realistic and likeable. Seth is Aislinn's friend, but unknown to her -and completely out of character- he's interested in a serious relationship. I'm sure most female readers are impressed by the character's loyalty, concern, respect, caring and patience, I certainly was. And I've met other readers who feel similarly. It's wonderful to read a book for young women in which the ideal male is loving and respectful and sees the female lead as an equal partner. Seth is pulled into Aislinn's supernatural world, he helps her with her problems, and he trusts her to know her situation best and look after herself, even if he worries about her. This is the sort of relationship I think more people should be aiming for (but without the faeries, obviously).


Tangential note: For ages I thought I'd read this book already. Whenever someone mentioned it I'd be all 'yeah, yeah, I've read that'. What I actually read was Wondrous Strange, a different book with a similar premise -dangerous, ancient faeries causing havoc in modern day US cities. Also they both start with W, so you can understand my confusion.

Something Wicked This Way Comes

Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury

I've been meaning to read this book for a while. It's being reviewed by Dan Abnett as part of the SFX Book Club next month, so I thought I'd read it before Issue 204 is out.

The book starts in late October with a lightening rod salesman racing through a small-town in advance of a storm. He meets two 13 year old boys -neighbours, best friends, born a few minutes apart, totally different. Will Halloway - blond, pale, patient and uncertain about the world, and Jim Nightshade - dark in complexion, impetuous and impatient with life. The salesman, with his years of experience, predicts a storm will strike Jim's house. But what arrives is not rain or thunder, but a supernatural torrent in the form of a sinister carnival. Arriving in the dead of night, in the wake of eerie calliope music, it brings rides and freak-filled side shows. Only the boys, spying from bushes and trees, see the true nature of the carnival freaks and their unnatural rides. While the townsfolk enjoy the rides and entertainment there are those among them that will be forever changed.

Age is a major theme of the story, and is the subject of the only blatant supernatural element. The journey from childhood to adulthood is exemplified by the two boys, while an adult's nostalgia for childhood is embodied by Will's father, Charles Halloway.
The book was written in the 60s when 13 year olds were probably expected to behave more childishly than today. The boys race each other down the streets and sneak out at night to steal fruit or explore the town. They are on the cusp of adulthood, something that is hinted at as both promising and scary. The sinister side of adulthood is seen in the Theatre. A house a few streets away where the boys peer through the window to see naked performances of animal nature. Jim is enthralled by this, but Will unsure about these illicit sights.
Charles Halloway is described as being a particularly old father, although again I reckon this is a standard that's changed in the decades since the book was published. As far as I can tell he's 41 years older than his son, which is not unheard of nowadays.While Will and Jim are divided over whether childhood is something to be enjoyed or endured, Mr. Halloway feels regret for his lost youth and for starting a family later in life. There's a definite sense of distance between father and son, the age gap has become the excuse for a gap in understanding between them. Jim is keen to cast off childish things, and could be tempted by what the supernatural has to offer. However when they have to face the mysterious and elusive 'autumn people' all three unite and must put away their regrets, fears and temptations to triumph.

This book is gothic, melodic and lyrical. Written almost like poetry the book describes how places, characters and events feel rather than exactly how they are. It's writing that goes straight for your emotions spending little time in the logical part of your brain. There is a lot of symbolism here -age is a more obvious theme- most of which I probably missed as this was my first reading. The pace is not particularly quick and the plot -in terms of action- can be summed up fairly quickly. That said, there are some pretty cool moments (including a boy killing a hot air balloon and a witch being attacked by laughter), but the story is about a sense of place, the feelings of the characters (their hopes, fears and regrets), and the creeping fear that comes when the sinister invades the mundane.
I recommend this book for its sense of atmosphere and Bradbury's ability to bring out the hidden qualities -both sinister and hopeful- in everyday life.

3 Teenage Books

I read teenage books for work. I read them for my own enjoyment too, but I read them more regularly than I might otherwise because of work.


Go Ask Alice by Anonymous
This book, published in the early 70s, claims to be the diary of a teenage girl who got into drugs and ran away from home. The unnamed narrator starts out fairly naive then, after unintentionally taking LSD at a party, gets into harder drugs incredibly quickly. There follows various phases of getting stoned, dealing drugs, running away from home and trying to get clean.

I doubted the veracity of the diary fairly early on. The vocabulary and tone didn't ring true. While a narrative character was firmly established, there were times when the writing was strangely emotionless. My first feeling was that the story of the narrator -and some of the other troubled kids she encounters- was a little over the top. I suspected someone was making a point. As I said in my previous post I don't know much about 70s America, but even so some parts of it just seemed unlikely. It occurred to me that this wasn't the actual diary of a real girl, but it could be based on a true story, or else a mixture of things that happened to various people. The book was clearly published to condemn/warn about youthful drug culture. However I find it hard to feel positive about that when it's claims are misleading.


Cuckoo in the Nest by Michele Magorian
Set in 1946 as England recovers from World War Two. It's about Ralph Hollis who was evacuated to a middle class family, went to Grammar school and loves the theatre, none of which sits well with his working class father. But Ralph is as stubborn as his dad and he won't abandon his dream of becoming an actor.

I first read this book about 10 years ago when I was a teenager. I was attended a Youth Theatre group and the theatre-based bits stuck in my mind. Rereading I found the whole thing excellent. Michelle Magorian is most famous for Goodnight Mister Tom and this book has the same high-standard of writing. The best part is the characters. It's wonderful that they all have their own views and perspectives, each of which is valid and understandable, even as they come into conflict. As Ralph is the main character the reader generally sympathises with him, even though he can be short-sighted (in an emotional sense -though there's also a minor plot-point involving specs). The subject matter is not as serious as Magorian's most famous book, making it a happier read, but there is plenty of emotion to get stuck into. There are also some wonderful comedic moments, some of which involved the transportation of a large stuffed bear - intrigued now, aren't you?

Magorian is very skilled at showing how the Second World War pulled families apart, and how the subsequent reunions, far from being joyful, could be complicated and difficult for all involved. Her book Back Home is another excellent example of this theme. Cuckoo in the Nest is full of different family relationships; Ralph's crowded family, his wealthy employer's bereaved family and the non-related family of actors and backstage workers that Ralph gradually becomes a part of. I could go on at greater length about the virtues of this book -and why the cover isn't good enough- but I shall restrain myself


What I Saw and How I Lied by Judy Blundell
This recently published book is set in 1940s US and shows a time when America was getting back to normal after WWII. Evie, her mother and her step-father, Joe, go on a spontaneous holiday to Florida. While there they meet Peter, who served with Joe in the army, and Evie falls in love for the first time. However there are secrets and passions bubbling under the surface. Emotions run high and Evie's desire for independence conflicts with her parents' desire to keep her safe.

Told in the first person by Evie, we are initially presented with the viewpoint of a girl who isn't yet an adult. Evie's grows up in stages: at first she's attracted to an older man and wishes to be seen as grown up. She starts to buy into the suddenly-accessible world of adult glamour as exemplified by her mother. Then Evie -and the reader- starts to notice tension and unpleasant undercurrents between the other characters. It's clear that each adult is hiding something, but we are left to speculate until Evie figures things out. By the end of the book Evie must decide what to believe -the whole truth being unknown -and acts way that suggests an adult level of cynicism and practicality. In a way she triumphs, but it's also a shame as the innocent girl we met at the start of the book has gone. The tension build subtly but palpably throughout the book. By skillfully giving small events significance, and twisting character perceptions Judy Blundell has created a gripping read and a solid, low-key thriller that will appeal to young women.


I know it seems very well-timed, but I didn't mean to read 2 postwar books in November, it was a coincidence. I didn't even realise What I Saw and How I Lied was set in the 40s until I started reading, I just liked the title. It was interesting to read two books set in the same period on different sides of the Atlantic. Cuckoo in the Nest was full of rationing, power cuts, awful weather and families of seven crammed in small houses in bombed out streets. Whereas Blundell's book shows the US more or less recovered as businesses flourish, investments are made, and people buy houses, cars and long dresses again. Much of the book takes place in a hotel which is occupied by only a dozen people. There's a sense of space and renewal and aspiration. It's not hard to see why the US was so appealing and why people on both sides of the pond bought into Hollywood's glamour.

Tales of the City

I've always been a reader. As a teen I used to sit in bookshops just reading blurbs, deciding what to buy. Often I read a blurb a few times before I actually bought the book. Despite being a natural saver (or possibly just really cheap) I used to buy plenty of books. Working in a library really helps bring my spending down. It also means I've read plenty of books I might not have expected to read.

Tales of the City by Armistead Maupin
I read about this on Neil Gaiman's blog. Then a colleague told me about the TV series.
I thought that it was a good story full of interesting and memorable characters. I liked the way that the plot built up through a series of encounters between an expanding cast of characters. My knowledge of San Francisco in the 70s isn't brilliant. There were a lot of contemporary references, but the author's skill meant that I got the context and the tone, even if I didn't always know the specifics.
I expect I'll keep reading the series, but I'll have to wait for the pile of books on my coffee table to go down.