"Destry Rides Again" by Max Brand (1930)

 

OK so 2026 is definitely a year I started exploring a genre I have never ever even approached before and that is western. In the past, I associated it with a pulp novels my stepfather used to read and I guess it fits with his generation (he was post WW2 child, raised on John Wayne movies) - honestly, before 2026 the only western novel I ever read was "Betty Zane" by zane Grey. Funny enough, as I started my reading in January 2026, it was exactly revisit to that same "Betty Zane" (a few decades later) that gave me lots of joy and inspired me to explore the genre a bit more. Being systematic Virgo as I am, I made a list of what are classic examples of the genre (in chronological order) and carefully started exploring some more. I suffered a bit trough now extremely dated writing style of both "The Virginian" (1902) and "Hopalong Cassidy 1: Bar-20" (1906) although I enjoyed them both once I disciplined myself into reading - I simply knew that I have to continue until I reach something published in more recent times. So I totally skipped 1920s (something to explore?) and jumped straight to 1930 when this novel was published.

Just as I expected, writing is much more to my liking and to be honest, this might be one of the most enjoyable westerns I have read so far in 2026. Even though Owen Wister and Clarence Edward Mulford are celebrated as classics of the genre, I doubt that anyone reads them for pleasure these days. Max Brand (the pseudonym used by writer Frederick Schiller Faust) on the other hand, is a full blown western pulp fiction told in a exciting, much more modern language (I didn't get a headache like previously with above mentioned novels) and therefore easier to follow. In fact, it was just a perfect escapism, with lots of posturing, shooting, horse riding and all. 

Not to be confused with 1939. Hollywood movie of the same name, "Destry Rides Again" is basically a revenge novel, kind of western Count Monte Christo. At the very beginning we are introduced to swaggering and hotheaded Harrison Destry who is jailed for a crime he did not commit and the local jury of twelve men (all of them holding a grudge against him) sentence him to ten years in prison. Its clear they simply hate him for who he is and to be honest he was a troublemaker who loved to get drunk and fight, but surely this is not deserving ten years in prison. The novel really gets going when Destry gets out the jail and how he searches each single person from that jury to punish them for what they did to him. There is also a intriguing fact that the man he considers his best friend is secretly the main antagonist, so this works out very well. For once, we have no Indians, though they are some black slaves mentioned (in a extremely derogatory way that today we consider offensive, but it was obviously accepted in 1930). I enjoyed this a lot and read the book in a short period of time. I am also glad that I left the historical ancestors behind and now arrived at the point where I can easily follow the language. It's not a high literature, but a very very pleasant pulp fiction and a pure escapism. 

"The Hollow Man" by John Dickson Carr (1935)

While browsing excellent crime fiction guide "Crime fiction: A Reader's Guide" by Barry Forshaw I noticed the name John Dickson Carr mentioned in the same breath as Agatha Christie and other authors of the golden age of detective fiction - to be honest, I don't really know much about anybody else except Christie from that period (I have read one single novel by Ngaio Marsh) so this name got stuck in my brain + he was unusual as being perhaps the only American celebrated amongst his British colleagues - enough for me to become really curious and to give his most famous novel a try.

"The Hollow Man" (titled The Three Coffins" in US) is today his best known work and often mentioned as example of who Dickson Carr was as an author. It is also an example of so called "locked-room mystery" where detectives are facing a seemingly unsolvable crime and what at the first glance appears impossible case (no traces, no fingerprints, etc). I guess both Sherlock Holmes and Agatha Christie used this form, though Dickson Carr is the one mentioned as a prime example today. At first, I was intrigued - there is a murder in a house full of witnesses (but no one really saw what happened) and the policemen helped by sharp investigator Dr Gideon Fell are trying to connect the dots. The writing was solid, mysteries piled on top of mysteries and Dr.Gideon is entertaining as someone who often pulls conclusions out of the thin air. 

However, at certain point I became a bit exhausted by Dr.Gideon - yes, he is sharp and yes he glances in the corners and suddenly realises how pieces of the puzzle fit in much bigger picture, but the plot is so ridiculously confusing that at certain point all these "red herrings" feel almost like a parody. Almost like Dickson Carr wanted to use every single locked room cliché there is. Tunnels! Chimneys! Masks! Ropes! In fact, at one point Dr.Gideon suddenly gives a lecture about locked room novels and usual possible solutions to mysteries. (Almost like turning to a reader and talking directly to us instead of his policemen friends) He notes that audience often gets upset when finding out how exactly they were cheated and I find this very interesting because it shows that Dickson Carr was very much aware of his public and what they expect. On one hand, they wanted to be entertained but they will get disappointed once they realise how it was done. And yes, correct, eventually I found myself thinking that the road to the mystery was actually more entertaining than the solution itself, which felt rushed up and clumsy. 

Another thing that bothered me was that (with exception of the victim and Dr.Gideon) I could simply not remember who is who. At first I found this embarrassing and blamed my own lack of attention, but later found out that many readers agree that characters and the names were simply there as props and there were absolutely no development that could help us remember or understand who is who and why are behaving the way they are. You know, servant comes in and out of the room, the end. Various characters are floating around without any real distinction between them and I had to even look up the list of characters online to check who is talking. 

"'I will now lecture,' said Dr Fell, inexorably, 'on the general mechanics and development of the situation which is known in detective fiction as the "hermetically sealed chamber. All those opposing can skip this chapter. To begin with, gentlemen! Having been improving my mind with sensational fiction for the last forty years, I can say -' 

'But, if you're going to analyse impossible situations,' interrupted Pettis, 'why discuss detective fiction?

'Because,' said the doctor, frankly, 'we're in a detective story, and we don't fool the reader by pretending we're not. Let's not invent elaborate excuses to drag in a discussion of detective stories. Let's candidly glory in the noblest pursuits possible to characters in a book."

"We Used to Live Here" by Marcus Kliewer (2024)

 

After satisfying but somewhat slow-burning double biography of Leonardo and Lisa Gherardini, I was ready for something lighter, shorter and more gripping. Something that would make me read passionately, with interest and excitement, not just enjoying historical trivia. Thanks to my ever-growing lists of "books to read" and the decision to focus on authors unknown to me, I picked up this debut novel by a Canadian writer Marcus Kliewer who was exactly what I needed.

"We Used to Live Here" is a spiritual descendant of Shirley Jackon's early 1960s horror novels (even its title refers to "We Have Always Lived in the Castle") - not by the story itself, as much as for the atmosphere of uneasiness and dread that slowly creeps into the pages and it grows stronger and stronger as we progress. It appears as a disturbing example of "house intruders" story with uninvited guests on one side and gay couple Eve and Charlie on the other. Eve is the paranoid one, always looking for (and expecting) troubles, while Charlie seems more solid and realistic. There are many things that go bump in the night, a horrifying basement that apparently goes on forever, spooky shed, weird neighbours, etc, etc, etc - one of those stories where couple who just moved in is totally unaware of what everybody in the neighbourhood knows. Even if the author decided to keep it all fairly unresolved and full of hints, I didn't mind - I don't need to have everything spelled to me and can easily appreciate psychological unraveling without neatly tied endings. It kept me very busy reading for a relatively short period of time and it was a joy to read during my lunch breaks at work & deep into the night. 

"Kiss Kiss" by Roald Dahl (1960)

While listening a podcast about supposed spying activities of famous British writer Roald Dahl, I suddenly realised that I have actually never read anything by him - his children's books were often made into films and quite a few of them were my old favourites, hence why I never went to the originals. But it made a perfect sense to include him into my 2026 reading list which consist of my first-time authors - the decision is to focus this year on authors I have never read before. So I gave some attention to Dahl and it was a blast. 

First, I don't know why it took me so long to step out of my comfort zone and approach short story collection, because I have quite a few. Maybe I expected that the frame of short story will not have urgency of regular novel, where reader is compelled to continue. Wrong. Short stories were actually perfect because I could pick them up anytime (during work lunch break for example) and not miss a beat. But it did mean that I did not feel the urge to continue with a cliffhanger, so the book was simmering a while in the background while I waited another chance to continue. I mean, seriously, I could have just read it all at once, but it took me two weeks instead. 

However, when I disciplined myself into reading, I was enjoying it 100%. Dahl has a macabre sense of humour and brilliant imagination that fits me perfectly - I was hooked from a very first short story "The Landlady" (about young men falling victims to a supposedly harmless old lady) to the very last one ""The Champion of the World"  about pheasant poachers. Without exception, each single story was excellent and I loved them all - what I enjoyed the most was the way Dahl would abruptly finish the story, leading the readers to their own conclusions. It is too often now that people expect everything to be explained, but Dahl trusts his readers are adults and have intelligence to come to conclusion themselves. So when clueless locals decide to "help" antiques dealer, we don't get any detailed description what happened afterwards, only a tantalising sentence : "“We’re just in time!” Rummins called out. “Here he comes!”

There are stories about couples living in a long, loveless marriage, adultery, a mad beekeeper who is turning his baby into a queen bee, a neurotic and celibate vicar, parents fussing about sickly baby and praying to God that their little Adolf survives (!), mysterious cat who might be reincarnated Franz Liszt, and one about vegetarian boy who has never in his life tasted meat. Each of them is funny and bizarre in their own way and I absolutely loved the way Dahl weaves a tale - it fits with my own sense of humour, though I would never in a million years imagine this is the person who will find fame and success with children's novels. 

"Her husband closed the garden door behind him and walked across the room to get himself a cigarette. 

       “Edward, where is he?” 

       “Who?” 

       “You know who.” 

       “Ah, yes. Yes, that’s right. Well—I’ll tell you.” He was bending forward to light the cigarette, and his hands were cupped around the enormous patent lighter. He glanced up and saw Louisa looking at him—at his shoes and the bottoms of his khaki slacks, which were damp from walking in long grass. 

       “I just went out to see how the bonfire was going,” he said. 

       Her eyes travelled slowly upward and rested on his hands. 

       “It’s still burning fine,” he went on. “I think it’ll keep going all night.” 

       But the way she was staring made him uncomfortable. 

       “What is it?” he said, lowering the lighter. Then he looked down and noticed for the first time the long thin scratch that ran diagonally clear across the back of one hand, from the knuckle to the wrist. 

       “Edward!

“Yes,” he said, “I know. Those brambles are terrible. They tear you to pieces. Now, just a minute, Louisa. What’s the matter?” 

       “Edward!” 

       “Oh, for God’s sake, woman, sit down and keep calm. There’s nothing to get worked up about. Louisa! Louisa, sit down!”

"Hopalong Cassidy 1: Bar-20" by Clarence Edward Mulford (1906)

Because this is the year of "first time authors" and because I had enjoyed both Zane Grey and Owen Wister, I decided to go back to Westerns - a genre in which previously I had absolutely no interest - typically for me, I have to do things in some kind of order so I continued with reading Westerns by chronology and since both "Betty Zane" and "The Virginian" were published at the beginning of the century, I selected first novel about a extremely popular fictional character called Hopalong Cassidy : "Bar-20" was where he was first introduced to a wide audience and apparently this was a beginning of a phenomenon that later grew out into films and TV.

Here I must admit that this time I doubted my own decision, since 1906 novel was a bit of challenge, mostly because of the language: Mulford uses a lot of Western vernacular speech that gets tiresome and off-putting after a while. This is a perfect example:

"“Yu wants to keep yore busted-down cows on yore own side. They was all over us day afore yisterday. I'm goin' to salt any more what comes over, and don't yu fergit it, neither.”

It goes like this the whole time and it really depends on a reader, do you continue or leave the book completely. I persisted and eventually started to enjoy myself despite initial reservations (somehow I turned my brain inside out to understand what is going on) but I can understand this is not for everybody. That is why it took me three extremely long weeks to finish what is actually not a big volume - I had to be in the right mood to approach wrestling with strange words. 

Not really a novel, more a short story collection, "Bar-20" is about cowboys working around ranch of the same name and their adventures - one of the characters is Hopalong Cassidy who eventually becomes the main character, but here is not just yet so. Guys ride their horses, drink, curse, sing dirty songs and alltogether behave like what now we expect cowboys to have been - as contrary to later, sanitised version created by Hollywood. The fact that there is almost no women at all in the book actually explains the lonely lives and camaraderie of the guys who are always ready to protect each other. Mind you, they are all very young guys and each time Hopalong Cassidy actually meets any woman, he behaves like a lovestruck teenager. 

"Bar-20" was the beginning of saga that produced more than 20 books, 66 movies and 6 seasons of TV show - Hopalong Cassidy became a hugely beloved character but it all started here, in this eccentric little book from 1906. It was not the best Western I read this year and to be honest, it deserves a solid 3 out of 5 stars - however, I did find myself enjoying the cowboys adventures, once I got over the strange language. The best of all was the description of cowboy's lives that totally lack any glamour - author lived with real life cowboys for a while and he knew what he was writing about.

"Ivanhoe" by Walter Scott (1819)

This has been on my to-read list forever and with some embarrassment I must admit that I don't recall ever actually reading Scott before. What I do remember is borrowing his "The Heart of Mid-Lothian" from my local public library as a teenager and bringing it back unread, so my initial introduction to this writer was not very impressive. Who knows was it a clumsy translation or simply the fact that I might have been too young for flowery and long-winded style of this author, but it left me a bit intimidated all these years until now. And since I decided that 2026 will be year of reading only writers I never read before, it came as completely spontaneous decision. Truth to be told, I always had soft spot for old classics and this year I already pushed myself trough experience of 1902 western "The Virginian" which was wonderful, though initially hard nut to crack - the more I persevered, the more I loved it. So perhaps unconsciously, I hoped for a similar experience. And I was 100% right.

First, a few words about Walter Scott - he was already a famous writer when he published "Ivanhoe" in 1819. He had enormous success with a series of historical novels set in 17th and 18th century Scotland, but with this next novel he decided to move plot in medieval England and there was something about the change of pace or perhaps he was simply inspired, in any case "Ivanhoe" became the biggest success of his professional life and turned thousands of readers to medieval history. This particular novel is the reason why they call Walter Scott "the father of historical fiction". Interestingly enough, everything we later accepted as a part of Robin Hood/Richard the Lionheart lore comes from this novel - all those legendary characters (Prince John, Friar Tuck, etc) they are all here and although they are supportive characters, they left such a strong impression on the readers that subsequent writers all use Scott as a inspiration. Another thing I must mention is Scott's writing style which is very, very old fashioned + he created his own version of old English language which is somewhere between poetic and annoying - first two chapters were incredibly hard to crack but as I continued, the magic happened and I started to actually enjoy the rhythm and the flow of the sentences. It felt as I am reading this forever but actually it was only 3 weeks. With all my proclaimed "suffering", when the end came I was sad to let the book go. Exactly like with above mentioned "The Virginian", it was at first difficult to read but than I got totally into it and at the end I loved it with all my heart. 

The novel itself is a curios combination of medieval knights adventure story and a highly researched historical novel, with some occasional moralising and a tons of sidetracking and detours that stop the plot dead in its tracks but also bring a real sense of author's thinking and his personality. Scott might not be really the first but he was certainly the first really widely read writer of historical fiction and very often this particular novel transport the reader into a completely different, medieval world - I was as enchanted as everybody else. From top of my head, I recall the description of funeral party after the passing of Saxon nobleman Athelstane and how all sorts of medieval folks crowded the Castle of Coningsburgh: 

" Numerous parties, therefore, were seen ascending and descending the hill on which the castle was situated; and when the King and his attendants entered the open and unguarded gates of the external barrier, the space within presented a scene not easily reconciled with the cause of the assemblage. In one place cooks were toiling to roast huge oxen and fat sheep; in another, hogsheads of ale were set abroach, to be drained at the freedom of all comers. Groups of every description were to be seen devouring the food and swallowing the liquor thus abandoned to their discretion. The naked Saxon serf was drowning the sense of his half-year’s hunger and thirst in one day of gluttony and drunkenness; the more pampered burgess and guild-brother was eating his morsel with gust, or curiously criticising the quantity of the malt and the skill of the brewer. Some few of the poorer Norman gentry might also be seen, distinguished by their shaven chins and short cloaks, and not less so by their keeping together, and looking with great scorn on the whole solemnity, even while condescending to avail themselves of the good cheer which was so liberally supplied.

Mendicants were, of course, assembled by the score, together with strolling soldiers returned from Palestine (according to their own account at least); pedlars were displaying their wares; travelling mechanics were inquiring after employment; and wandering palmers, hedge-priests, Saxon minstrels, and Welsh bards, were muttering prayers, and extracting mistuned dirges from their harps, crowds, and rotes. One sent forth the praises of Athelstane in a doleful panegyric; another, in a Saxon genealogical poem, rehearsed the uncouth and harsh names of his noble ancestry. Jesters and jugglers were not awanting, nor was the occasion of the assembly supposed to render the exercise of their profession indecorous or improper. Indeed, the ideas of the Saxons on these occasions were as natural as they were rude. If sorrow was thirsty, there was drink; if hungry, there was food; if it sunk down upon and saddened the heart, here were the means supplied of mirth, or at least of amusement. Nor did the assistants scorn to avail themselves of those means of consolation, although, every now and then, as if suddenly recollecting the cause which had brought them together, the men groaned in unison, while the females, of whom many were present, raised up their voices and shrieked for very woe." 

There is of course a story itself - about disinherited young knight Wilfred of Ivanhoe who is back from the crusade together with his lord Richard the Lionheart and how they had to fight back trough all the enemies surrounding the evil usurper Prince John, plus numerous complications concerning ladies (pretty but bland Saxon princess Rowena, who epitomises than current ideal of decorative and helpless beauty, the Jewish healer Rebecca who is far more interesting character), Robin Hood and his outlaws, countless servants, knights, abbots, etc. The novel is really a masterpiece and even though it was difficult to get into it, it gave me hours of joy and bliss. 

"The Big Sleep" by Raymond Chandler (1939)

 

While still on vacation, I randomly selected old fashioned noir detective story "The Big Sleep" because the beginning seemed nice, I loved the idea of reading a classic "hardboiled" novel and I have previously never read Chandler before, so it fits with my decision to devote 2026 to authors I am not really familiar with. To be honest, I am vaguely acquainted with the genre more trough the film noir that explored many of its famous novels - there was a time when I was totally on a roll with film noir and loved everything about it, but as novels go, I read maybe "The Postman Always Rings Twice", "Strangers on a Train" and just a handful more titles, but I know hardboiled detectives from the movies. Fast talking detectives, cops, journalists and sexy dame somewhere in the background - the cliché was well known and extremely entertaining, capable of creating literally countless hours of  pleasure. 

Well, initially I was amused with Chandler's style - he had a wonderfully witty way with words and it was clear from the start that this is someone original, someone with a very specific, naturally hip and sarcastic tone. The main character is a private detective Philip Marlowe, summoned by wealthy, dying general Sternwood who gives him task of dealing with a blackmailing bookseller. General also has two wild daughters, Vivian and Carmen who are both completely spoiled and unmanageable. So far, so good and first few chapters were wonderful, however very soon it became clear that Chandler is actually not interested in a plot itself, but he really loves and enjoys creating the atmosphere and toying with witty sentences. And before you know it, I became totally lost in the labyrinth of double crossings, cheating ladies, more and more characters who would come in shortly, just to never be seen or heard again. There were even murders that never got solved because Chandler forgot all about them. It became so complicated that I had to re-read some chapters just to remember who is who, until eventually it became really incoherent - I had to leave it aside for almost a month, to finally muster up the determination to finish the darn novel. I suspect that film version smoothes over all the rough edges and perhaps makes more sense, however as much as I admire Chandler's style, novel itself is a mess. 

"The Andromeda Strain" by Michael Crichton (1969)

 

Boldly going where I have not been before and continuing with my decision that 2026 I will read authors that I never read before, after old fashioned 1902. western, I decided to check out something completely different and took The Andromeda Strain". It was not the first novel by Michael Crichton but first he published under his own name (until than he was publishing what he was calling "airport books" - "I write them fast and the reader reads them fast and I get things off my back."). There is also a movie, but I really wanted to read the novel. The change of pace was very welcome and it was so refreshing to switch from old fashioned western to something relatively modern - even though it was published in 1969, it was still super exciting.

In the middle of the night, group of scientists are quickly summoned to a secret place in Nevada desert where they have to research satellite that brought some kind of lethal microbes to earth. The little town where the satellite had landed was completely wiped out, except some crazy old man and a crying baby. It turns out the deaths were caused by an extraterrestrial microbe transported by a meteor that crashed into the satellite, knocking it from orbit. The miracle of all of this is that Crichton packs his novel full of technicality and medical jargon that would usually surely be boring but in his capable hands it somehow turns into extremely exciting thriller and I found myself totally immersed and reading it until 2:30 a.m. last night. Just briliant!

"The Virginian" by Owen Wister (1902)

 

Because I enjoyed "Betty Zane" so much, I got carried away with my enthusiasm for Western genre and decided to continue with more of the same - after some research, i found out that the very first best-seller in that genre and the one that inspired the countless authors who came after, was 1902 "The Virginian" so I gave it a try. To my biggest surprise, it was nothing like Zane Grey - in fact, it was extremely slow-burning, old fashioned and occasionally even flowery prose that had more in common with 19th century literature than action-fuelled Western. I even wondered what did I got myself into, but than something strange happened: once i got used to Wister's old fashioned style, I started to enjoy myself. It simply took some perseverance, discipline and curiosity, until I actually really liked it. Strangely, it is the only novel by this author that is still remembered and apparently, despite its huge success, he never continued in this genre. 

What I found here are many clichés used later in subsequent decades: a greenhorn who is new to all of this and tells the story from his perspective (“the Tenderfoot"), the silent and basically good cowboy ("The Virginian") in love with strong willed schoolteacher (Miss Molly), a bad guy ("Trampas") and the whole supporting cast of citizens, cowboys, etc. Since author had actually spend some time in the Western Frontier, his descriptions of rough lives these people lived sounds very authentic and I even got a kick out of descriptions how they bathed (using same pitcher of water and some rag, just like in documentaries about Tudor lives I have seen on TV). There are many interesting stories that sometimes feels like short story collection and that was not accidental - Wister initially wrote some short stories and than decided to put them together as a novel. There are cattle thieves, lynching, an duel and everything you could expect from a Western novel - once you get over the old fashioned style, it actually worked beautifully and I finished the novel with the greatest pleasure. 

"Betty Zane" by Zane Grey (1903)

 

For this year, I have created not one but two long lists "to read" with titles by the authors I have yet not read. I thought this might be a brilliant idea because it will force me to discover something outside of my usual reading choices and perhaps widen my perspective a little bit. So 2026 will be a year of discoveries and stretching to various genres I usually note but ignore. And than, just like that, I made a glorious mistake - from the top of my head, I said to myself "I never read Western fiction" and decided to go in that direction. Memories of my stepfather reading his beloved Western pulp novels published weekly came to my head - it was one of the rare things he ever read with passion and I have always subconsciously associated it with him. The only Western writer I have ever read was Zane Grey and actually it was "Betty Zane" that I remember reading as a teenager, decades ago. So I decided to re-visit it because after all these years, I only remember that the title character was running somewhere. 

When I say my decision was a glorious mistake, I mean it turned out not to be a classic Western Fiction because actually it was more a combination of Historical Fiction and Romance (true Western should probably be about cowboys and Indians, this one is about a siege of Fort West). However, it was apparently exactly what I needed at this moment, a brilliant escapism from the reality and for a few days of feverish reading I was transported in another time, mad adventures and genuine thrill of reading about likeable characters in a mortal danger. Betty Zane was a real historical character, remembered for her bravery during the siege, when she run out of Fort West into a nearby blockhouse of her brother to collect gunpowder needed for the weapons and back to Fort West, while combined forced of Indian tribes and British army shot at her. Now, Zane Grey (himself a descendant of Betty) had to built a story around this historical frame so he created a whole world with many exciting characters that builds and builds until it culminates in a siege. 

Honestly, I don't remember when was the last time I enjoyed reading as much - it might have simply have been a perfect choice to forget everything around me, the state of the world and alarming politics, I could not put the book down. There was of course element of romance (after all, the main character is a beautiful and headstrong girl) but it didn't bother me at all. Yes, there were also some elements that could be perceived as not politically correct nowadays, but gimme a break, the book was published in 1903. and it reflects its time in dealing with race, etc. - the very ending explains that author was very much aware of injustice: "Sad, too, is the thought that the poor Indian is unmourned. He is almost forgotten; he is in the shadow; his songs are sung; no more will he sing to his dusky bride: his deeds are done; no more will he boast of his all-conquering arm or of his speed like the Northwind; no more will his heart bound at the whistle of the stag, for he sleeps in the shade of the oaks, under the moss and the ferns."

Another example of Zane Grey's writing style, the moment he describes return of traitor Miller into Fort West and how he was closely watched by the hunter Wetzel: "At the arrival of Miller on the scene Wetzel had changed his position to one nearer the crowd. The dog, Tige, trotted closely at his heels. No one heard Tige's low growl or Wetzel's stern word to silence him. Throwing his arm over Betty's pony, Wetzel apparently watched the shooters. In reality he studied intently Miller's every movement." 

I absolutely loved everything about this book and for the sheer pleasure it gave me, I give it five stars, although it should probably be four (it was Zane Grey's first novel, after all) - just found out there is a sequel, so must definitely check it out! 

"Wolf Hall" by Hilary Mantel (2009)

 

The most unusual historic fiction book, in a sense that despite its obvious brilliance (Hilary Mantel is excellent writer) it felt like a task, rather than a pleasure - I was initially annoyed with the novel's density and verbosity - until I noticed that the book simply demanded attention. It didn't work if I read a chapter here and there, but it actually paid off if I focused and read properly, with attention. The more I dived into it, the more I enjoyed it, but it still felt like a hard work.

Mantel reconstructs the often-told chapter in a British history and bravely twists some perspectives upside down: until now, it was accepted that Sir Thomas More was a saintly chancellor and Thomas Cromwell an ambitious upstart in the orbit of notorious Henry VIII - Mantel toys with these perceptions and pose a question, what if More was actually a zealot, while Cromwell an silent manipulator? Along the way, she re-builds the whole court, together with hundreds of real life historical characters and its quite exciting up to the point BUT one must really focus hard on who is who and who said what. You see, Mantel loves using "he" often and gladly - there are many instances where this "he" is not clear and it makes you mad with irritation to question who "he" is, since there are usually several male characters involved simultaneously (at the end its just easier to assume "he" is Cromwell. Or Henry. Or one of the hundreds other Thomases.). 

To be honest, at this point I feel like I already read too much about Tudors - there is a whole publishing industry behind Henry VIII and his wives - Mantel did a great job by changing the perspective and poking at the characters in the background: yes, we deal with the king and his first two wives, but its all about Cromwell and his manipulations that catches our attention. Strangely, it does not make exciting reading, because it is so damn difficult to get into it - I literary struggled trough it and not so sure that I want to continue with the sequels. 

Many lives of The Wicked Witch of West

 

The original was of course the fictional character from the beloved children’s book published in 1900. Because the 1939 film adaption became so ubiquitous, we all tend to go back to that  movie over and over again, so to be honest I am not even 100% sure that I ever read the original book - if I did, it was decades ago and probably the time is ripe to re-read it again. I probably should, as the author created the whole fantasy world that continues into other sequels that I am not familiar with. I read somewhere that it might count as the first originally American fairy tale.

Than came the 1995 book “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West “ which I bought, read, loved and talked to everybody all the time - it was the success of this book that catapulted Gregory Maguire to fame and he continued mining similar ideas ever since, with the books like “Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister” and “Mirror, Mirror”. It was a wonderful idea to re-invent a famous children’s story and approach it from a different perspective, simultaneously pondering some interesting ideas about the origin of good and evil, etc. The point is (as much as I remember), once you come closer to evil, you understand the behaviour, logic and the reasons - one of the most feared characters in the children’s literature might simply have been misunderstood. 

One way or the other, somebody thought it might make a great musical. Perhaps the shadow of the beloved 1939. movie looms so mighty over the horizon, it looked as a safer bet. The musical turned out to be surprisingly successful but to me it feels more because Broadway is starving for original story and fresh blood, instead of old American Songbook repertoire - I listened the cast recording twice and could not find anything memorable about it.

Than came the movies. 

The director Jon M. Chu explained that the script is so rich, powerful and amazing that it can’t be done in simply one movie, he needed to make two parts. OK, but honestly neither script or musical are such masterpieces that they deserve five hours in the cinema. I watched “Wicked: Part I” (2024) only mildly amused and noted that both Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo were good, but everything else was bombastic, pneumatic and overblown. A friend who was sitting next to me loved it, but I was not convinced. Something about this version struck me as totally wrong and I missed the childlike sense of wonder that the original story/film had - this was all like 1930s Busby Berkeley big production, with things whirling around and Witch not riding her broom but running like a formula one, giving me vertigo. “Wicked: For Good” (2025) stumbles really badly, because a) the rest of the story is really not so interesting to need another full-blown movie sequel, b) depressing and darker sequel does not give anything funny to Ariana Grande to do (in the first part, at least she was funny, here the script goes dark so she can’t be) c) both main characters work very well together but second part keeps them separated. So it was two and half hours of same stuff we saw previously, with even more forgettable music. I had a very strange experience of noticing that people on the screen are singing, but was completely unable to remember one single song - and left the cinema wondering how is that even possible? Apparently movie is still very successful anyway and I have feeling they might continue to milk that idea in some more sequels and prequels, kind of Marvel Universe. Long live bombastic CGI and mediocre music that breezes through your head without leaving a trace. 

“The Murders in the Rue Morgue” by Edgar Allan Poe (1841)

I have not forgotten my old plan to read at least one classic per month. Sure, I get distracted from time to time, but here I am, adding another classic to my collection. The inspiration for this came completely accidentally, because I was listening a podcast “Unsolved murders: True Crime Stories” and they had a two-part series about the death of Edgar Allan Poe who might very possibly have been a victim of kidnapping and murder. This was so interesting that it stayed somewhere at the back of my mind, until I decided to read this short story, later immortalised in wonderful 1932. black & white movie with Bela Lugosi. 

Today we remember Edgar Allan Poe mostly as a ghost of forgotten 19th century America and his reputation is based exclusively on posthumous myth that somehow makes him a dark, sinister and supposedly alcoholic literary predecessor of later horror writers. According to this podcast that I have been listening, it is probably just a stupid story that people made after his death and poor guy was possibly just unfortunate soul who struggled to make any money at all and lived his 40 years in hunger & poverty, before he disappeared and was found unconscious on the street (very probably kidnapped and forced to vote, as it all happened during early electoral fraud). There is a very interesting book written about this, that I might even check out in the future. I would not be surprised if the whole myth about a sinister and mysterious writer is just a legend.

Well, I was familiar with Bela Lugosi movie but this was actually better - it precedes Sherlock Holmes so its very important as a one of the very first detective stories and Auguste Dupin clearly works very much like Holmes will do in the future, by paying attention to the smallest details and connecting the dots that lead him to the final conclusion. Its all very clever and enjoyable, I might read more about Dupin (there are apparently three finalised stories).