Tuesday, 19 July 2011

Top Ten Tuesday

Tuesday is here and the week is crawling as slowly by as ever... This week is especially bad because I really want it to be Thursday because I'm going to see my Uni friends who I love and adore, but clearly that's not going to happen because THURSDAY IS NEVER GETTING HERE! Phew, sorry about that. Just... had to get it off my chest. So, there is one good thing about it being Tuesday, and that is, of course, Top Ten Tuesday, hosted by the lovely The Broke and the Bookish. This week, though, I'm definitely not getting to ten, because I'm not sure that requiring people to read things is really the best way to make them love them, and in my experience it makes me hate them from the off. That being said, there are a few things that I really think teenagers should read, mainly because they're awesome, rather than because of their 'life lesson' qualities. So, without any further ado, here are:

Top Ten Books That Should be Required Reading for Teens


1. The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky- This book was pretty helpful to me even now, so I can but imagine how much I would have loved it and needed it when I was a teenager. It's basically perfect, and if you're basically any kind of teenager you so need to read this now. It's beautiful and stays with you for a long time.

2. The Harry Potter Series by JK Rowling- I'm not sure if there's anything these books can't teach you, but I think the most important thing about them is that they are utterly fabulous and just make me want to dance a little bit with delight. Forget teenagers, these should really be required reading for all people (especially people who have only seen the films, because please, they don't even compare!)

3. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee- So I know that this is required reading for a lot of teens (in England, anyway) but I definitely think that it's status as such is completely justified. It's probably the only book I've read specifically for educational purposes that I've totally and unashamedly loved, and have really wanted to read rather than just having to read. So completely freaking amazing.

That's about all I have for you today folks! I know it may seem lazy, but really I just don't like to tell people what to read, in terms of making them do it. I think it's scarring to force people to read certain books, unless, that is, they're the books I've listed above. Double standards people, that's how I live!

Monday, 18 July 2011

Devouring Books: I Feel Bad About My Neck by Nora Ephron

Nora Ephron is probably one of the most hilarious women alive. If you haven't seen When Harry Met Sally, you're missing out on a vital life experience, and this book is almost as good an experience as that film (but not quite). I Feel Bad About My Neck is a collection of essays, some of which have been published in other places, some of which haven't, and pretty much all of which are hilariously entertaining. Nora, I do believe you are fabulous.

I'll let you discover your favourite essays on your own, but my personal love goes especially to Blind as a Bat, in which Ephron laments the deterioration of her eyesight as she has gotten older, and her inability to ever find anything, meaning that she can never find her glasses to read. As someone who has never been able to see, and who never loses her glasses because they are literally necessary for me to get on with my day, I couldn't really sympathise, until she said this, about reading:
"Reading is one of the main things I do. Reading is everything. Reading makes me feel I've accomplished something, learned something, become a better person. Reading makes me smarter. Reading gives me something to talk about later on... Reading is grist. Reading is bliss."
Yes. Just yes. I would just like to suggest to Ms Ephron that she keeps her glasses on a chain like a librarian or something, but something tells me that this is something that wouldn't necessarily appeal to her...

My other favourite essay was On Rapture, in which Ephron describes something that I think we all know only to well- the way she remembers reading the books that have made a massive, earth shattering impact on her life. I just loved it so much, especially the way she can remember exactly where she was the first time she read these books, as if they present an epiphany to her that is worthy of a flashbulb memory, and in a way they do. I loved this so much, because I can really do this with books I loved- I can remember reading almost all of Little Women on a car journey once, and reading The Perks of Being a Wallflower on two consecutive train journeys, and reading Angels in America in my second Uni bedroom. I suppose the point is that these books are so special, so earth-shattering, that they deserve your full recall, and the very very clear memory of their first readings. I definitely thought that this was something that only I did, so it makes me very happy to be in such fine company as I am with Nora Ephron.

The rest of the essays, more or less, deal with various aspects of Ephron's life, including her much loved New York apartment that ended up screwing with her, her internship at the Kennedy White House when, she laments, she must have been the only intern that Kennedy didn't make a pass at, and general other bits of hilarity that you really should check out. I must admit, however, that there was a certain point in these essays where I was getting slightly annoyed with Ephron, because she kept talking about her appearance, and trying to avoid ageing, and other things of a purely physical nature. Now, I'm not saying I want everyone to write about deeper political and social and philosophical issues, because, quite frankly, that would piss me off. But there was definitely a point in these essays where I thought 'can you please think about something other than your appearance or your skincare routine of whatever for one minute?'

And then I got to the last essay. And I found out that she could. In Considering the Alternative, Ephron talks candidly, and then heartbreakingly, about getting older and its realities. She talks about death- not in a funny way, but not in a morbid way either- just about facing up to it's existence, and the fact that it's going to happen to all of us one day. Except, as Ephron so brilliantly recognises:
"Death doesn't really feel eventual or inevitable. It still feels...avoidable somehow. But it's not. We know in one part of our brains that we are all going to die, but on some level we don't quite believe it."
I mean, can any of us argue with that. I suppose that when you're younger, you feel even more invincible, because death isn't really something that happens to our peers, and so it isn't something that we have to face up to, like Ephron does at the death of her best friend: "I want to talk to her. I want to have lunch with her. I want her to give me a book she just read and loved. She is my phantom limb, and I can't believe that I'm her without her." At these words, I knew that I could definitely forgive Ephron for her shallower moments, because she is so much more than the way she looks, and she knows that too. And, as she puts it herself, "What is to be done?" Because, when you really think about it, life's too precious not to write about what you want, do what you want, and be who you want. I'd like to thank Nora Ephron for helping me recognise that.

Also, she's really funny. Did I mention that?

Friday, 15 July 2011

Devouring TV: True Blood, Season 4 Episode 3

DISCLAIMER: This post is definitely going to contain spoilers. Massive soul shattering spoilers. So if you haven't seen this episode of True Blood (and you want to at some point) then come back and read this after that point. Because I'm not taking any responsibility for your disappointment and possible anger. Especially after I've written this massive disclaimer!


So, I'm not sure if I've even ever mentioned it on here, but I'm pretty much obsessed with True Blood. There are many many many reasons why it's basically my favourite TV programme (not least that Alan Ball, writer of American Beauty is the series creator) but, let's face it, Alexander Skarsgard being half naked for a good portion of screen time = not a bad thing at all.

And speaking of his half-nakedness, in the episode I want to talk about (which aired on 10th July), there was some pretty gratuitous Skarsgard-nakedness. Now, I would never look a gift horse in the mouth, so to speak, and a naked Eric is possibly one of life's greatest gifts, but did he really need to be topless? Let's consider- he is wandering along the roadside, sans his memory and his shirt. Now, we know from the previous episode where he lost his memory, but when he left the coven, he was clothed. Did he rip off his top in distress, or had we just not seen enough of his torso this season? Again, I'm not complaining about this. Just sayin'.
Why are you topless Eric? It makes no sense!! But I sure do like it...

Anyway, putting Eric and his torso to one side for a second, I'm going to try and say something intelligent about True Blood that doesn't even involve any sort of nudity (I KNOW! I'm growing!) But anyway, after I watched it on Tuesday (through what I can only assume is a legal avenue... ok, I'm sorry HBO! But I'm so going to buy the boxset, so don't worry!) I kept thinking about one particular thing that I'm sure my overdeveloped analytical, English degree side of my brain couldn't help thinking. What this episode was essentially all about, I think, was the self, and whether you can ever change or not, or if you can only give the illusion of change, while remaining essentially the same underneath.

I know what you're thinking. How can something that has been described as 'A soap opera with vampires and other supernatural shit' (I'm totally paraphrasing Alan Ball here) have any deeper things going on than just the surface (and admittedly very entertaining) stories? I'll tell you how- by having been seen through my crazy, analyse everything ever creatively written by anyone eyes. But I'm not just talking shit here, and hopefully you'll agree with that assessment when you read what I have to say about it! Or, you know, you will have just read a load of shit, but give me a chance, yeah? This is clearly going to be so good...

So, yes, I thought that in this week's episode, the self was up for debate. There was a scene where Sam and Tara, ex-lovers and now good friends, talk about whether one can essentially change or not. Tara thanks Sam for giving her the push she needed to go and change herself, whereas Sam, feeling that he now knows better, argues that people can't really ever change, and that your old self always keeps catching up with you. This is something that Tara disagrees with, and having seen her exploits in the last two episodes, it is tempting to think that she really has changed- but has she actually just changed the way she lives, and not herself? And are the two interchangable? It's an interesting question, and one which I think we might get answered as the season progresses.

There is a sense in which the humans who live with vampires (and I'm particularly thinking of Hoyt here) never get to fully be themselves, because there is always the opportunity for them to be glamoured and made to believe different things than they actually feel, or rather did feel. This gives vampires, already pretty superior to humans, the opportunity to essentially control them as they see fit. This is something that Jessica did out of love rather than malice, but it's still an unfair way to treat someone you love. In a way then, in this series, you could say that vampires are more themselves than humans are, because there is literally no one who can manipulate them, or make them anything other than what they are.

That is, except for poor Eric, who knows exactly what he is, but not who he is. Having had his entire memory wiped by the witches (who I can't help but think of as evil because I am so strongly on Eric's side), he is suffering an identity crisis of epic proportions- everything he was, as he says, has been taken from him. While this offers the viewer some amusing sweetness from him, it is still a heartbreaking scenario to see him in, and one which raises questions about the self- If someone takes all your memories from you, then who do you get to be? Someone else whose self is in a transitional phase is Jason, being held captive by the now seemingly deranged Crystal and her husband/brother/whatever, who may soon have to identify himself as a panther rather than a mere police officer. The implication seems to be, with these two, that the self is something that can be forcibly taken from you, making you something completely different than who (or what) you used to be. It's a pretty frightening thought, and one which adds depth to the perilous situations that both men find themselves in.

Another candidate for change is Debbie Pelt, last seen beating the crap out of Sookie, but now back in Alcide's bed, supposedly clean and sober. It's yet to be seen whether she really has changed (or, indeed, whether anyone can actually change) and I was quite surprised that we didn't have Sookie reading her mind to try and ascertain just that in this episode. Because of this, I'd imagine that we're meant to think that Debbie has changed, but that maybe she hasn't quite... This is of course just speculation, since Debbie's recovery at all is unprecedented from the source material- who the heck knows what she's going to do next?!

One last person I want to talk about with regards to the self is Sookie herself. Whereas everyone else seems to be changing (to the extent that anyone can change, alright Sam), Sookie is almost doing the opposite- she is exactly the same as she was a year ago, but everything around her has changed. This means that she has to adapt quickly to get any kind of foothold on what has been happening around Bon Temps, which requires a sort of change in itself- being ready for any kind of news, and bracing oneself for it's unrelenting onslaught (things she's had to deal with: Tara's leaving, Bill being King, Eric buying her house, the fact that she's meant to be dead, the whole Debbie and Alcide thing... I could probably go on, but I won't). The fact that so much can change in a year practically confirms the idea that people can and do change, because they have to adapt to things being different all the time; but this everyday changing is not really the same as the kind of radical change that means one person acts completely differently to how they once did. Are they really different, or are they just play-acting because they want the life that being this other person provides? And is there really a difference between the two? Maybe not.

So these are just some thoughts I had about just one episode of this unbelievably moreish series. It's definitely my English training coming into play to some degree, but it's also the hold that the series has on my imagination, forcing me to think about it for much longer than I probably should, which makes me see much more about it than I do while I'm watching it (those thoughts consisting mainly of shirtless Eric, and then, when is shirtless Eric going to be on again?!). This is not at all a bad thing, on the contrary it gives me something to blog about, but it's just a slight indication of my obsession. I am Laura, and I'm a True Blood-aholic. Anyone else out there want to join me?

Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Devouring Stephen King: Firestarter

Ah, Firestarter. Well, the clue to the plot of this book is in the title (why yes, it does involve a firestarter!), but it's sort of included in an interesting way so that the book is not so much a horror title as a thriller, kind of in the same vein as The Dead Zone, and this is definitely something that I wasn't expecting from it. It's interesting that, upon starting this King challenge of mine, I thought that I would be scared a lot, and while I have been mildly scared, what I've actually got from the books I've read so far is actually a lot better than mere shocks. This book was no exception, and it's possibly my favourite of the King books that I hadn't read when starting this challenge. There is, of course, still a long way to go, so maybe I shouldn't say such things yet. I'll just try to explain exactly what I liked about it.

So, the thing with Firestarter is that the mystical power, like in The Dead Zone, the mystical powers (pyrokinesis and psychic manipulation, in this case) belong to the protagonists, and you would think that this would give them the power and control in the story. But no. Instead, they are being chased down by the evil forces of a sinister government branch called the Shop, Andy's mind control power is giving him what seem to be mini-strokes, and Charlie, our little firestarter, is too brainwashed and terrified to use her powers to protect herself and her father. This gives a government that gave Andy (and his deceased wife) their powers, license to think that they can take them, along with an arrogant belief that, because the powers given to Andy belong to them, that he, and his subsequent offspring, belong to them too. What a bunch of pricks.

So I really really really enjoyed this book, as I might have mentioned, possibly because it was a new one for me so it was extra exciting, but even then, it was much better than The Dead Zone, which I hadn't read before either. I think the key to this was that there was a lot more chasing and running and generally more action in Firestarter than The Dead Zone (which basically outlined a man's sedentary recovery, let's face it), including a probably 20 page long part of a chapter that was so thrilling and exciting and tense that I swear I didn't breathe at all while I was reading it! In the storytelling respect, then, I think this is King really coming into his own as a writer of thrillers rather than horror, and it is something that he doesn't necessarily use that often, but also something that he is enviably good at. And, I think we can all enjoy a story of the little guy trying to overcome evil government agencies, can we not?

Aside from that, the characters in Firestarter are by turns adorable, courageous, and downright creepy. Charlie, as an innocent looking girl with enormous hidden potential, shows such vulnerability that you will want to adopt her and make sure that no one can ever hurt her ever (even though, as you will be made completely aware, she's more than capable of looking after herself, and anyone else who comes along). Andy is also incredibly well-drawn, as a desperate but incredibly brave man, just trying to do the best he can for his daughter, and trying to keep both of them safe and free. You will be rooting for them throughout the entire book. And then, there is Rainbird, an incredibly creepy Native American hitman, who, we find out, is essentially dead inside (isn't that a treat?!) and who wants more than anything to see Charlie die, so that he can get a greater idea of death. He's a pretty messed up dude, and I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't want to mess with him. Just a thought.

So, what more can I say to convince you that you need to read this book? There are so many finer plot points that I haven't included because I didn't want to ruin anything, and they're probably more interesting than anything I have written here, so go and read the book! I have to say that pretty much nothing I was expecting to happen happened (I was picturing more a little girl terrorising an entire town a la Carrie at the end of Carrie) so the whole book was really a pleasant surprise for me! If you have anarchist-style leanings, then this is probably a good book for you to read too.

Next up in the old King challenge is another Bachman book. I feel a tiny bit like whining 'aren't these done with yet?!' but I shall persevere because that is what I do. Just... don't expect me to read it too soon, ok?

Tuesday, 12 July 2011

Top Ten Tuesday

Oh wow, it's that time again, and I didn't even realise! This is what readathoning all day on a Sunday does to you! So, this week's top ten may possibly be my most favouritest yet, and that's really not something I say every week (mostly because 'favouritest' isn't a word, and, you know, I like to use real words mostly). But anyway, here it is!

Top Ten Authors I'd DIE to Meet
(Disclaimer: there probably aren't any authors, or indeed people, that I would actually die to meet, because that would pretty much defeat the object of meeting them, because I wouldn't be able to, because I'd be dead. Just pointing out the metaphysical impossibility of the premise, but now that that's done...)

1. Stephen King- Admit it, you knew this was coming. As soon as you saw this week's top ten, and saw that I was participating in it, the first thought that came into your brain was 'Laura's going to say Stephen King, isn't she?' And you were so right. Mostly I want to meet him after I've read everything he's written, so that I have something to tell him and impress him with; and I would literally subject myself to the kind of torture seen in Misery to meet him (well, probably not. But maybe.)

2. John Steinbeck- The second thing that probably crossed your mind was 'hmm, she goes on about The Grapes of Wrath and Of Mice and Men a lot in these top ten posts. I bet she's going to say Steinbeck!' and oh my gosh, look at that, you're right again! Aren't you the clever one?! I would so massively love to meet Steinbeck and tell him that he utterly rocks my world. Reading his Life in Letters, and the East of Eden Letters, is almost like having a real connection with him, but is not quite good enough... Someone invent a time machine, now!

3. Margaret Atwood- This woman clearly rules, and following her on Twitter is sort of almost like meeting at least a tiny bit of her. Now if only I had the courage to actually talk to her on there, we might actually get somewhere! I like to imagine that we could be best friends and have all night long discussions about feminism and stuff. It's an awesome imaginary life I have...

4. Sylvia Plath- Yeah, I know. That would be a pretty depressing person to meet. But I would like to think that I could get all psychoanalytical on her, and try to make her happy, or at least keep her under constant supervision so that she didn't do anything silly. Then she could write some probably cutting and amazing prose about being kept captive and of her evil captors, and we'd all have something else to read and worship as teenagers. Also, I love her.

5. Tony Kushner- I doubt this meeting would consist of anything more than me telling Kushner about 80,000 times how much I love Angels in America, quoting my absolute favourite bits to him, and then sitting him down and forcing him to tell me how to write like someone who is absolutely amazing at writing. Also, I might then stop talking about Angels in America and talk about how I met its writer instead (but probably not. In fact, I'd probably just talk about both!)

6. George Orwell- I'd like to think that me and George could make a big difference to the world together, so I'd love to get him into today's world and make him Prime Minister, or possibly just the cutting allegorist and social commenter that he was for communism, but, you know, for today. Also, I'll bet he was just amazing. Just a hunch.

7. Stephen Chbosky- I would love to meet Chbosky, and just thank him for writing The Perks of Being a Wallflower, because really, it's just wonderful. If you haven't read it yet, just go and do it now. you can thank me later.

8. Jane Austen- I think we'd all like to meet Ms Austen, am I right? We could have a bitch about the neighbours over tea (or, you know, not tea if you're me) and then I could watch her write and just be all awed and stuff by her fabulousness. I have been to her house in Chawton, and that's probably about as close to her as I'm going to get *sniff*. Unless, you know, we invent that time machine I was talking about earlier...

9. Julie Powell- This is a bit of a random one, but since I've recently read (and LOVED!) Julie and Julia, I think it's fair to say that I'm pretty much in love with Julie, and I'd love to meet her, hang out with her, and have her cook nice things for me and generally corrupt my innocent young mind (anyone who knows me just snorted at that last bit). I will find you and meet you one day Julie!

10. Kerouac, Ginsberg, Burroughs- This is not so much an author to hang out with, but more of a group to be in. The Beat Generation is something that is just so appealing to me that I would have love love loved to be part of their group, bouncing creative ideas off of one another, and just generally soaking up each others awesomeness (but, you know, in a less awful way). So yes, I'd like to meet them, be in their gang, and life off the fact that I'd been a part of that group for the rest of my life. That's how these things work, right?

So, I realise that I've just made these people major parts of my life, rather than just meeting them and shaking their hands and telling them that they write good things and stuff. But really, wouldn't we all rather have a fulfilling relationship with these people that goes beyond merely telling them that they rock (which is probably something they already know)? I think so! I'm looking forward to reading all about the authors you would all like to meet, and hopefully some hypothetical scenarios played out with them too!

Monday, 11 July 2011

Summer Mini-Readathon: The Aftermath

So yesterday I read and I read and I read like never before (or, at least, like I haven't done in a while) and it was awesome, except that I was exhausted by the end of it and couldn't really figure out why until I thought about all the mental effort that I put into it, and then thought, yeah, actually, that was pretty exhausting! So, I know you're all just dying to hear what I got up to, and so, without any ado at all, here's what I got read:
Firestarter by Stephen King
I Feel Bad About My Neck by Nora Ephron
Oranges are not the Only Fruit by Jeanette Winterson
AND about half of Everything is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer
I was pretty pleased with this, especially as I really did just do constant reading, few breaks, and a hellueva lot of gummy bears. What I was quite sad about was not taking part in any of the mini-challenges, so i'm going to try and make amends for it now, slightly.

Sooo, starting with Jenn's challenge...

This is the cover that I have for Everything is Illuminated, (except it's the slightly more updated Penguin version, which I couldn't find a picture of!) and it also happens to be my favourite one, because really, I just love those covers.
I found this cover for the book online, and, I dunno, it's not exactly the nicest cover ever... In fact, looking at it makes me want to yawn. Quite a lot. It's probably the worst one I found, it's not disgusting or anything but, you know, it does nothing for me really.

I really wanted to take part in the 4th mini-challenge (showing off where I read and stuff) but alas, I can't find my camera! This makes me very sad and stuff, so I'll describe it to you instead (you're gonna love this, trust me!) I did most of my reading on my bed which is only a week and 2 days old (awwww!) and I lay my head at the wrong end because that's nearest the windows so it meant I got the most light. The rest of the time, I read on a beanbag at my nan's house that is about my favourite thing in the world to sit on- it's HUGE, so you can just curl up inside in and lay your head back and basically be a little reading foetus (ok, gross analogy. But you get my point.) So yeah, that's pretty much where I was yesterday!

And now, for the closing ceremony (I definitely just awarded myself the gold for the reading olympics in my brain):

1. How many books and or pages were you able to read?
I read, I guess, basically three books, since I was halfway through Firestarter, and then got halfway through Everything is Illuminated. I would say, without actually checking because I'm lazy, that I must have read about 800 pages? That's just a guesstimate, but I'm gonna say that it's pretty close...

2. How many hours were you able to read for? (Were there many distractions, breaks, etc?)
I pretty much read for the whole 12 hours- I stopped for meals, and also to have a shower, but other than that, it was basically read, read read! I would say that, at the most, I lost 1 and 1/2 hours, and probably actually less than that- go me! Hehe

3. Do you have any likes/dislikes about the 12-hour readathon, compared to the 24-hour readathon?
Having not yet taken part in my first 24 hour readathon, I'm going to say that the 12 hour one was pretty amazing! I do think that 24 hours would probably be too long for me to read, since after 12 I was flagging somewhat... but then I think that the sense of achievement might be slightly more with a 24 hour readathon, because I'm thinking now 'well, 3 books doesn't seem that many' which is a pretty messed up way to look at it!

4. Favourite and Least Favourite books you read?
This is tricky! I really liked all of them! I guess, if forced, I would choose 'I Feel Bad About My Neck' as my favourite, and my least favourite would probably be 'Everything is Illuminated', only because I haven't quite figured it out fully yet. But I am still enjoying it!

5. Suggestions of things to do differently?
I really can't think of anything! I think it was a really well hosted readathon, and I really enjoyed following along on twitter! I know there are some things that I would do differently (eat less sugar, be better prepared, figure out a stack of books beforehand, blog more during etc.) but the hosting was really top notch, I thought!

And so, yes. That was my readathon. If you took part, I hope you had as good a time as me, and if not then stay tuned and maybe we can readathon together some day! You know you want to...

Saturday, 9 July 2011

Summer Mini-Readathon Plannage

Soooo, tomorrow is my first (proper) readathon, and I am a little bit excited (now that I've remembered it... I went to London today and M&Ms World was exciting enough to drive all rational thought from my brain, but I am so on the readathon track now). So, the right thing to do now seems to be to make some kind of plan, although I'd probably work better without one considering my complete inability to do anything I'm supposed to...

But anyway, that aside, I'm going to make a rough plan, and not beat myself up too much if I don't follow it completely. I'm going to read from around 10am BST, although it may be slightly later depending on what time I wake up, and, apart from a break for lunch at my nan's house (cause that's how I roll on Sundays), I'm basically going to read all day (yay!)

But, the question on almost nobody's lips is, what am I going to read?! Well, I'm going to finish Firestarter by Stephen King, and I Feel Bad About My Neck by Nora Ephron, and then after that, who knows? I probably should, I guess... So I'm going to say I'll go for Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen, OR The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, depending on my mood (the right mood for each of these is radically different, trust me!) This could all change by tomorrow though, so I guess we'll all have to wait and see with baited breath which books I review after tomorrow!

As for updates during, I'm probably not going to do many (or possibly not any!) but I'm sure I'll be tweeting my way through my reads, which definitely won't be annoying! But I am basically pretty excited to read away my Sunday!