When I was younger, I was a very different reader than I am today. Today, I look for depth and read darker stories as well as fantasies. When I was younger though, I didn't want to read about problems. I wanted to dream about somewhere happy, where I could have a place.

I read a lot of books that are labelled "guilty pleasures". This can include so called "trashy" books like the cliched paranormals, and a lot of chick lit. You know, the type of books where everybody was rich and everybody was loved. The stories weren't about life changing things. Usually, they were very petty- it was about competition, jealousy, and there were often tonnes of designer brands.

Slowly, I evolved from those books. At some point, I had read every single Poppy book in existence, from Gossip Girl to the A-List, to Secrets of My Hollywood Life. I don't know what happened, but somehow I did a complete 180 and grew tired of those books.

Now, years later, when I look back at what I read as a tween, for some reason I feel a little embarrassed. These books were by no means classic. They weren't impactful or with exceptional writing. They were frankly, entertainment. And in some way, I feel a little embarrassed when I think of having read them, and other books like Twilight. Why was I so taken with something that was obviously unhealthy for me?

It was unhealthy. No, really. As if I'm not already an extremely competitive person. The books themselves were completely blameless, but I had these images of perfect and what life should be like and they were completely unrealistic. It wasn't like I needed a real book to show me reality; I needed a fantasy. Somewhere to escape to, sometimes. They were exactly what I needed, and I think they helped me a lot too. I learned pretty fast about the popularity/rumours scam, and my life has been very drama free maybe because I saw all the mistakes being made in those books and vowed never to make them myself.

The biggest issue I still have is why do I feel embarrassed for that? Why should I ever feel embarrassed for reading a book?

When I was younger, I used to read Warriors, this epic series about tribes of cats. It sounds a little out there, but I swear, it was brilliant. These books were both thrilling and heartbreaking. At some point, the quality of the series dropped a little and so my biggest memory of them is a conversation I had with my older cousin.

She was a teenager at that time and probably resented having to always entertain her younger cousin instead of hanging out with her older sisters. I was reading my book and she told me that one day, I would feel embarrassed for reading a book about warring cats. I told her I wouldn't- it was a legitimately good series.

To this day, I have never felt embarrassed about the cats, but again, why should anyone ever be embarrassed for reading?

There's a lot of snobbery that exists. I've heard stories of twenty-somethings being looked badly upon for reading YA. Hell, one of my friends even thinks YA is nothing but shallow romances. And these people are totally misinformed, but in a way it's hard to ignore them. I don't read classics, and I feel in some way I will be judged for that. Like, I'm supposed to be a bookworm so doesn't it make sense that I'd read the 'best' writing?

When I really think about it, I realize how wrong it is to be embarrassed for having read any book. Who gets to judge what book is classy and what isn't? Shouldn't I just read books based on what I like? At the end of the day, I read books based on my tastes for my own reasons, not so and so's reasons. So screw feeling guilty.

Don't. I know this problem also stems with me, because I can be an arrogant person, but I swear I'll try to stop it. We're allowed to have our own tastes, and I can't control if I don't like something, but I think the fact that someone is reading a book they enjoy should be encouraged, regardless of what it is.

Like people always say, insult the content, not the reader.

-P.E.

The word original is often used in a positive sense: it's the idea of something completely new. It goes along with phrases like, "Just be you!" and in general, our society outwardly preaches the importance of originality.

When a book is praised, words such as original and unique are not uncommon. It's been said sometimes, even by me, that being original is something to be applauded. Good for you. You didn't go with the trend. You did something completely different. You're special. 

I recently read a really good post by Icy Cold Reads about being original. She said something along the lines of traditionally published books being less original and out there than self-pubbed books. It's not something I completely agree with, but her discussion post fulfilled its purpose of starting discussion. 

It came again to me that original is always seen as this essential good thing. To be honest though, I can't think of any book that is completely original in any way, self published or not. So many stories and creations have been made that by this point, I don't know if you can add anything singularly new to a book. 

We all decry love triangles, but not writing a love triangle doesn't make you original.

The sexy jerk is well used in YA books, but so is the sweet guy, the best friend, the next door neighbour... pretty much every incarnation of romance. 

And while really wacky books like this but even weird erotica books are not as hard to find anymore. 

I don't believe in original anymore. I believe that stories are similar, every forbidden romance can be like Romeo and Juliet which was probably similar to some kind of myth that Shakespeare heard. You're never going to end up with something completely new. There are some stories that humanity has had for thousands of years. That's why there are things like the rule of three and the cycle of a tragic hero become so well known. They work, and they've existed for a really long time. 

This makes me reconsider all the times I used original in my reviews. When I really think about it, the story wasn't exactly original in the literal sense. I think the connotation of original is the one that makes more sense. 

Nothing is original, but what stops people from reading a book and realizing that at the end of the day, all stories follow a similar plotline? Even the ones that try not to, follow one. I think this is where talent and execution and the author come in. 

Nothing I read is brand new or revolutionary. It can feel that way though. 

It can feel that way because of my experiences. I can interpret meaning from words and combine it with my own experiences so that certain phrases or scenes can somehow mean something to me, and these scenes will remain original in my mind because they made me feel something and that doesn't always happen. We end up attributing originality as what makes a book special when maybe that's not it. 

All the same, it's a compliment to the author, but I think maybe when we say it's original, we're not just praising the idea. That shouldn't be the focus. I think "original" is more a testament to an author's ability to execute; to write an evocative story that can draw a reader in so much that they forget every other similar story. To get people to worry about this story and happy endings- like, let's be honest, how often are there unhappy endings? Yet I worry SO much about the characters I care about anyway, even knowing the odds. 

Every author interprets basic stories and puts their own spin on them. Even then, their story may not be completely "original" but it doesn't have to be for me to enjoy it. That's the reason I can enjoy authors like Simone Elkeles. Her Perfect Chemistry series was nothing ground shaking. All the books in the trilogy were pretty formulaic, but I still enjoyed them every single time because she has the talent to get me to care about characters and lose myself in a story. 

A lot of talents and good execution can go into making a story original. I think though, that the next time I use the word original, I might pause a little and try to determine an exact meaning. Through Cappies Critic training, I learned that being specific is one of the most important things in any review. Original can mean so much and authors deserve to be applauded when a reviewer thinks they did it right. 

-P.E.

Sorry cookies. You know I love you guys. 

I'm not joking. I love cookies, but if I had to pick between an amazing cookie and an amazing comment, the comment totally wins.

Blogging can sometimes be a very selfish hobby. It's about what I feel about a book, or what book I'm waiting for, or what I think about something. It's very easy and even relaxing to blog in a bubble. When it's only about you, you have more energy. You post what you want when you want to.

I've been there and I've done that. When I first started blogging at Tantalizing Illusions, I wanted so badly to be successful. I did the popular memes, reviews and I tried to find a pretty blog design. I also did my best to know about all YA trends. I was a little insane that year. I read over 300 books. I would have sixty library books checked out at once, all stacked in precarious piles near my bed. Needless to say, I exhausted myself and didn't get the results I was looking for.

The truth, or at least what is true for me, is that pageviews matter, but in a small way compared to comments. Comments show me that someone read something and cared enough to tell me they did so. Even the shortest comment is validation because it's too easy to get fake pageviews through spam bots. 

A comment can brighten my day like nothing else in the world. It's a little bit of validation for the hours I put in to the blog. It's like, "Hey there, I'm listening. I care about what you have to say." That matters a lot to me because I have a lot of interests and likes that maybe some of my friends don't understand. I don't want to bore them with book talk, so I go to a place that appreciates my nerdiness.

I understand blogging is hard. It's the comments that always renew my interest in blogging. The little tokens of people's attention. That's why I try to comment on every blog I visit. 90% of the time, I will comment if I visit a blog because I want the blogger to know that I thought their post was interesting and worth a read. 

It's so important to me that I've tried to incorporate it into day-to-day blogging life. Right after writing/scheduling a post, editing the slider, checking the blog's Twitter account, I also make sure to visit the community. I try to comment on at least five other blogs. I try to leave meaningful comments.

I think it's up to every single blogger to help support the community and share the love of YA. Comments mean a lot to me, so I try to make sure I show some love for other bloggers too. Share the love, y'know?

Blogging can be so competitive, but the more you comment*, literally everyone wins because the community grows stronger.

*real comments. Not spam.

What do you think? How high on your list of priorities is commenting on other people's blogs? 

-P.E.

Melina Marchetta is one of my favourite authors. I very rarely single out an author, but I'm so impressed with Marchetta's work from her contemporary books to her fantasy reads.

Let's first look at all the awesome books Melina has written. 

* click on the covers to be redirected to Goodreads. 

Of all the books here, there are only two I haven't read: Looking for Alibrandi, which I'll be searching for soon, and Quintana of Charyn, which is probably one of my most awaited books ever. I'm currently reading The Piper's Son. As you can see, Marchetta is a very well established author who has branched out, successfully, to different genres. 

Why she is awesome

Melina Marchetta has this talent of making me connect to her characters. I've spent several days in dark moods when reading of her characters' suffering. It's strange; somehow, some authors are just able to write stories that speak to you. Melina Marchetta is like that. Her stories are different from what I read. It's pretty well known by now that I don't consider myself very into contemporary, but somehow that doesn't stop me from loving her books.

Her books all feature pain. Sometimes crushing pain, but often the pain that lingers. That keeps punishing, one blow at a time. It can be the pain that comes from a broken family; the pain that comes from loss; the pain that comes from duty. It's there though, and the way it's written is incredible. 

Melina Marchetta has a very distinct writing style. Her books are not meant to be fun or easy reads. You need to think. Sometimes I need to reread and remember some important details. The writing jumps around a lot. There are flashbacks and scene changes. There are scenes that make me want to cry because the world is just so awful, and within the sadness there are these completely ordinary moments that are like epiphanies. Like, gee, life can suck sometimes, but there's this: laughing with your friends even when you're not happy. The ridiculous things your sisters say. The people that care about you, always there. These little moments of sunshine and it's borderline insane because I eat it all up. 

It's even the same in her fantasy novels. They're so dark, but completely engrossing. The characterization is so fantastic. I can clearly imagine every one of her characters as people. They're real to me and I think that's an awesome power for an author like her to have. It's also terrifying because for some reason, I'm always extra empathetic towards her characters and it's hard to feel that much hurt. 

As an author, she impresses me. While her books do hurt, they're also journeys. They make me feel like I'm growing up and learning something. They're worth it. 

I know everyone has this type of author. Someone who's stories you know you will always read because their writing speaks to you. Melina Marchetta is mine. Who's yours?

-P.E.