Awhile ago, the lovely Helena sent me an email advising me that she thought I’d enjoy The Doomsday Book by Connie Willis. In a small world story, I got my copy from the fabulous Janelle through Paperback Swap.

It arrived and I just finished reading it. What was funny is that it has splashed on the cover “Hugo* and Nebula** Award Winning” – I grew up with a Sci-Fi reading mom, and Dh is certainly no stranger to the genre, so I know what those awards are, but I can probably count on one hand the number of Hugo and/or Nebula Award winners I’ve personally read.

Anyway, the book was very good – it was a time travel book between a time in the not to far future where people can be sent back in time (but the technology is pretty new) and the 14th Century. The 14th century part is what I think Helena specifically thought I’d relate to, and she was right. It was very well researched and the storyline was interesting.

However, it unfolded slowly. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it made me contemplate how some books read quickly and some don’t. Admittedly, I did have family visiting and not a lot of time to read, but it took me something like 10 days to read this 500 page book (which is definitely not the norm for me). What makes a book read quickly or slowly? Is it writing style? Font? Subject matter? Each idea I toss out there has something that makes me say, “no, that’s not quite it” – for example – War and Peace reads much quicker than the Brothers Karamazov. What do you think?

Anyway, thank you so much Helena for thinking of me, and Janelle for sending it to me. I enjoyed reading it – and now I can say “oh, yeah, I read Hugo Award winners”

*although, looking at that list – I’ve read the 2005, 2001, 1970, 1962, and 1954winners as well
**and Nebula – the 2007, 1969 and 1966.

(photo credit)