Live Blogs A return to ''The Room'' of kids' books - The Adventures of Archie Reynolds! - a truly special kind of awesome awfulness

BonsaiForest2014-11-05 20:24:53

I wrote a liveblog about this before, but it was deleted because I said some dodgy things about the author. So I'll be more careful with my language.

Annnd, for those who missed it the first time, I am revisiting one of the most gloriously awful books ever written. The Adventures of Archie Reynolds.

It sounds inoffensive enough. The concept combines Slice of Life comedy about a group of kids just doing kid stuff, and an adventure involving jewel thieves. Having enjoyed books such as A Spy in the Neighborhood when I was a kid, I was having to revisit this concept again. And besides, I am the person who started the Literature thread topic "Okay, admit it, who here reads kids' books?" I'm hoping I can one day pass off some of my favorite books to my nephew and niece when they're old enough for them. But this won't be one of them!

Now, A Spy in the Neighborhood is an example of how Slice of Life and adventure in the neighborhood can be done well. But... I'll get to that later. I'd rather talk about this book's sins first.

So, let's open up! Starting with the cover.

Wow. A lot of effort has clearly been put into this. It must have taken forever to get those kids together to photoshop them onto a generic green hill with no other features.

I can't tell what the boy in the dark blue shirt is resting his arm on. It's clearly not Archie (presumably the orange-haired kid front and center is Archie, since he's the main character after all), because if you look closely, his arm is behind Archie's shirt. Almost as if - wait for it - he was photoshopped in there and they tried their best to make it look as if he's resting his arm on Archie's shoulder.

The girl to the left of Archie is presumably Amanda, the most important of the female characters. I'll get to who the characters are later, but I'm going by placement here. Is she standing just to the left of Archie, or behind him? Judging by size, she should be standing just to the side of him. Judging by placement, she's standing behind him, but the perspective looks all wrong. It's almost as if she was photoshopped in or something.

The two boys in the background are probably the bullies. I can tell because... because they're in the distance, there's two of them, and they're vaguely threatening? One is pointing his fingers like a gun, the other holding a snowball. Or a baseball? In the book, he uses a snowball, and baseballs are mentioned nowhere.

So I at least figured out who Archie and Amanda are, and the two bullies. I see one other girl and three other boys. That doesn't add up. The main characters are Archie and his friends Billy and Hank, who are with him almost all the time, as we'll soon see. Amanda also has two friends who are girls. But unless one of the kids on the left is a baby butch, I don't see three girls; I see two.

I wonder if whoever slopped this cover together even bothered to read the story in detail? At least they made an effort to figure out who the most important characters are, but they didn't quite make it.

Let's check the back cover.

Sounds pretty standard. Again, I like the idea of mixing Slice of Life with local adventure a lot. I enjoyed books like My Teacher Is an Alien and Fourth-Grade Celebrity (yeah, I know it's meant for girls, and I'm a guy, but it's a pretty gender neutral story that anyone could enjoy) as a kid, and mixing the two together sounds like a great idea.

I wonder what the shocking, chilling answers are to the questions of who built the mysterious hidden tunnel, what's in it, and why it's there. And seeing Archie tangle with a neighborhood bully and his pal - wait, don't you mean two bullies? - and three flowering girls from the neighborhood. Flowering? What does that even mean? Hold on, lemme check a dictionary site:

Ah, I get it. So Amanda and her friends produce flowers of some specific type at a particular time of day. Except that they don't. And now my vocabulary has been increased.

I also note there are reviews of this book as well, right on the back cover. Let's take a look at them.

Nice! So many ringing endorsements from New Jersey-based school teachers and school administrators. This has gotta be good quality literature.

Well, soon we'll find out, as I take an in-depth look at the story. As the book lacks illustrations, I enlisted the help of Sam Pointon to bring some of its more visual scenes to life.

Comments

dreamedkestrel Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 1:01:55 PM

i think, and i am no expert on childrens narratives, but maybe having the bully stuff and even the girl antics have more to do with the main story than literally nothing would have helped. i feel like my time was wasted, or like my time was wasted through your time being wasted, or whatever.

maybe a gift from his grandpa could have helped them defeat the bad guys instead of the inconsequential bullies.

maybe they could have caved the tunnel in on the bad guys, hearing their cries of terror being muffled by dirt as they suffocated

or you know, whatever

Jinxmenow Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 12:55:50 PM

I feel like this author needs a copy of How Not To Write A Novel crushed on his head.

BonsaiForest Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 1:15:59 PM

@dreamedkestrel: Caving the tunnel in on the bad guys makes me think of how, from what I'd read, early Nancy Drew books had Nancy using dynamite and blowing things up at times. Ah, the times when kids' books had balls...

What kind of gift from his grandpa could have helped him defeat the bad guys?

And I disagree about the bullies and girls having nothing to do with the story being a bad thing. I think the idea, to have the book be semi-episodic, was actually a decent one.

@Jinxmenow: If not for the authors saying that every part of How Not To Write A Novel was created by them specifically, I'd say they could use this book as a perfect example! Murphy's Law incarnate. Everything that could go wrong, went wrong.

MetaFour Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 1:54:31 PM

I'm not sure offhand how to have Archiebillyhank get the best of the jewel thieves without the Idiot Plot. How are a bunch of 12 year olds supposed to realistically outsmart adult criminals?

The kids ought to figure out on their own, a lot quicker, that they're dealing with thieves. That much is obvious. But then you need some plot contrivance to explain why the kids don't immediately go to their parents or the police.

Maybe the kids could discover the lock combination by eavesdropping on the thieves, rather than through that bizarre subplot with the gravestone.

BonsaiForest Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 1:58:45 PM

I agree that plot contrivances are usually needed for kids to defeat adults. We're talking about something that happens rarely (though it does happen on occasion) in real life, after all.

Eavesdropping would probably work best. Though when would they talk about the combination? I think instead, it would be better for the box to either not be locked (it's buried already!) or be locked in a different way. But how? If it has a keyhole, wouldn't the fact that it's buried result in dirt filling the keyhole? Come to think of it, how is it openable even now??

Valiona Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 3:31:36 PM

The conclusion seemed somewhat rushed, especially if they skip over so much of the talk with the cops.

I'm also autistic, and my style of writing differs from that of the author on some regards, while being similar on others.

• My language is often "matter of fact," and slightly "formal" (for example, one person took note of my using a salutation in a PM).
• I tend not to use exact time amounts, typically using "a few minutes," or "shortly after," among others.
• I try to be more self-aware, and have actually been told that Character Development and getting inside the heads of the characters I write are strong suits of mine.
• I tend to like to talk about interests of mine, and often make liveblogs for the purpose of discussing works that I find interesting for one reason or another.

I'm somewhat more hesitant to diagnose other autistic people by reading their writing, since I know that people with this condition can vary from one another.

It's nice to see you give this a two star rating in the end and acknowledge some of the things it did well.

As for fixing the Idiot Plot, eavesdropping might work well as a means of helping the heroes find out how to open the box, particularly if one of the thieves has to be reminded of the conversation. Granted, it's still somewhat contrived, but criminals generally have to be very stupid or very unlucky to lose against children.

All in all, despite not having read or heard of this series before, I enjoyed this liveblog pointing out the many things this story does wrong.

Ellowen Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 3:33:03 PM

to be fair, I know lots of guys who weren't into girls at age 12 for many reasons. And I would have called the fence hopping a secret passage—until I found the tunnel—but. I mean, I named paths in the forest near my house "tar monster trail" and "The birdnest" and uh..." the secret passage"( in my defense, it was a more hidden trail.) AND my city has an actual, on the maps pathway through the hills called "Covert Path" Covert meaning secret.

That said, yeah, so many issues. I do like that there is some closure though—it doesn't just end with them bursting into the police station or something. we find out the cops got arrested, and they get the reward money, and start to make friends with the girls. if it had been written better, it would have been a good ending.

also, as someone seriously into sending coded messages and vague information only someone in on whatever it was would be able to figure out, the fact that he spelled out his mom's name and stuff to be where the code was is just. so. stupid. maybe the crook's partners could never remember how to spell the last name? maybe they were out of town on a Job when he got the lock and...nah, I give up. but if he'd been smarter we wouldn't have had that much of a plot so. meh.

would have commented sooner but I had to go to a friend's because my internet is Spectacularly sucky today.

BonsaiForest Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 8th 2014 at 5:47:30 PM

@Valiona: I like being honest with reviews. Even stuff that's considered great has flaws, and stuff that's considered awful sometimes did do some things right. And honestly, it's refreshing that the pacing in this book keeps things happening when so many other books can't manage even that.

I'm sure almost no-one has ever heard of this book before! I wanted to share this little "treasure" I'd discovered with everyone, which is why I made this liveblog.

I'm thinking my next book liveblog will be an obscure gem called Samantha Stone and the Mermaid's Quest. It's really weird, but I enjoyed it. Rather than mocking it, I'd likely be pointing out its weirdness while being much more positive.

@Ellowen: I would have thought that at least one of the three boys would have been interested in girls. But it's possible. Named paths does make sense, but I think it would have worked better if the book had gone into more detail about other named paths. It did actually mention an alleyway known as "the minefield" due to all its, uh, dog doo. Like the two separate piles of doo that Jeffrey slipped and fell in, defeating him.

I agree about the closure. That's another thing I can say about the author; while he fails on so many of the basics and all of the specifics of writing a story, he actually got some of the basics done very well. The pacing, and the fact that there's a real conclusion. So more congratulations are genuinely in order.

It really sucks that an Idiot Plot was the only way this could work. It's hard to come up with believable ways to make the major story events happen. They're either based on people being dumb or the world being unrealistic. How did no-one discover that tunnel in the backyard of that house when the slate covering it is bright as day and made of stone? There's got to be a better way of covering it up. I'll at least buy the idea of a tunnel being built under a home if it was handled more plausibly.

Tuckerscreator Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 10th 2014 at 11:24:41 AM

I'd argue the thieves should have been present in person earlier and been more dangerous. It'd make a nice contrast from idyllic suburban kid to fun to suddenly turning more serious and scary. The kids didn't feel like they were in any danger during this.

BonsaiForest Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 10th 2014 at 11:39:13 AM

Good point, Tuckerscreator. The closest we got to the feeling of danger was the boat scene (which is entirely the kids' own fault for being dumbasses). The bullies were more of a threat than the kidnappers were. And that's taking into account what happened to poor Amanda, which isn't something the heroes ever had to experience.

So the threats we got were:

• The bullies
• Amanda's big brother, Jeffrey
• The dangerous storm on the river while they ride the inflatable boat
• The actual bad guys

And yet, despite Amanda's ordeal, the actual bad guys feel like a more abstract concept than a real upfront threat. The river scene was killed through awful writing. Well, the whole story was, but honestly, the suburban mean people feel like the biggest threat in the story.

MetaFour Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 10th 2014 at 1:59:43 PM

Here's an idea that might spice up the story a bit: The kids discover the buried jewels before they learn about any thieves. I think that would make it more believable that they would conclude that these jewels don't belong to anyone. (Maybe you could work the pirate theme back into the story by making Billy or Hank obsessed with pirates—and he convinces the others that this must be buried pirate treasure!)

Only after hauling the loot back to his garage does Archie hear about the thieves. He puts two and two together immediately—and realizes that he's in big trouble. The thieves might know who he is, and that he has their loot. But if he goes to the police, the police might decide that he's the thief, since he has all the stolen jewels! (A mistake on Archie's part, but a believable mistake, I think.) Archie has to sneak back to thieves' base again, either to gather more incriminating evidence, or to return the jewels.

And if the thieves aren't idiots, then they've beefed up their security since Archie stole their loot... or it's a trap, and Archie winds up captured.

BonsaiForest Since: Dec, 1969

Dec 10th 2014 at 4:13:10 PM

I love all these ideas! They'd really improve the story a lot. Having only Billy or Hank be into pirates would be one thing to differentiate their personalities.

Instead of Archie rescuing Amanda, him getting captured would add the story some much needed genuine threat to the protagonists that it was lacking.

I think these ideas would do great to change the flow of the story into something workable, while keeping its main elements. Ziggy and Huie would presumably become more regular bullies, and I wonder what would happen to the subplot with Amanda, Janet, Cindy, and Jeffrey.